• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

145 Neutral

About JigokuSenshi

  • Rank
  1. [quote name='CommanderZorvox' timestamp='1347916663' post='4981027'] Allot of people seem to be stuck on the idea of “how can we make the story more interesting”, but that 1: Isn’t what this thread was about, and 2: Wont fundamentally change anything about the task at hand. So…if your focus is mixing up the task at hand, then the simple answer would be to create new, more original tasks (gee, what a surprise). When I think about this, my mind immediately goes to mini-games. But, lets get into quests that have relevance to the game’s combat…I would recommend battles with alternate goals and stakes (some cliché examples of these type of missions might be; “protect the king from enemies”, “survive a huge wave of enemies”, “escape from the enemy”, “defeat the enemy within a narrow time limit” and other scenarios where the player’s offensive, defensive and terrene/mobile objectives stray from the norm...be creative). I’m personally one of those players who couldn’t care less about the plot/story of a quest. I play games for gameplay, if I wanted to be invested more in lore, then I’d read a book. Of course, the reason that quests in MMOs are so similar and repetitive is because MMOs are all about making as much content as possible; as quickly as possible (hence, fulfilling the word “massive“). Rehashing the same quest concepts then slapping a different story on them saves development time (precious, precious development time!)…If you want your game to see the light of day within the next 10 years, then you too should master the art of cutting corners. I know my rambling is becoming a bit off-topic [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/happy.png[/img], but in conclusion: you probably shouldn’t be making completely original concepts for each and every quest, but rather; rely on a handful of unique concepts. [/quote] Thank you, thats what I was asking from the beginning. Seems people don't understand that quite a lot of players really don't care about the story for every single quest or even the main storyline for a lot of games. It does suck that developers need to rehash ideas and tasks in order to keep players busy, takes too much time and money to come up with all unique content.
  2. Thanks Xoyo for replying so much [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.png[/img] . It's nice to talk about these kinds of topics. I do agree with a lot of what you have said. One thing though that I still have to argue with is the fact that yes, the player that choses to take a player posted quest might have a lot of fun going through the quest. It won't be fun at all for the person posting the quest though. The only way to get around that would be to give the players incentive to create quests, but in a way that is forcing them to do that in order to have the full game experience. It would be much better to find a way to create player quests that would coexist with many of the basic game mechanics in games today instead of removing a lot of game mechanics just to get one mechanic to work. I think thats why this type of system doesn't exist yet, because no one can find a way of placing it in the game without making it worthless, unless they get rid of some other game mechanic.
  3. [quote name='sunandshadow' timestamp='1347744656' post='4980481'] [quote name='bwight' timestamp='1347726864' post='4980418'] I think i'll answer your question with another question. Why does everyone feel the need for so many quests anyways? We all agree that quests are boring and repetitive [/quote] Uh, we do? Personally, I think quests are a system of directing the player's gameplay, framing it with story to make it more meaningful and the world more real. Well-written quests are not at all boring or repetitive. If quests are boring and repetitive that's either because they are badly-written, or because the player is of a type who doesn't like reading or having their actions within the game directed. [/quote] Quests are only repetitive if the game play is repetitive. You can dress up any quest by giving it an amazing storyline and choices, but the game play is what makes the player coming back for more or getting bored. Skyrim was an awesome game, but even they have quest after quest with repetitive game play. Most of them being go to cave and kill the monsters. I've played games before where the only reason I kept playing was the storyline was interesting, but the game play just got boring and repetitive. Thats just sad to make a game like that.
  4. [quote name='bwight' timestamp='1347726864' post='4980418'] I think i'll answer your question with another question. Why does everyone feel the need for so many quests anyways? We all agree that quests are boring and repetitive so why are we trying to fix the boring repetitive parts of the game and try to make them interesting? Why can't we just get rid of 80% of all quests? The ones that are left are purely optional to the player with huge rewards. I think its a great idea to make the quests puzzles and with more lore but if the quest doesn't have something rewarding at the end then nobody will be motivated to do it. In the early days of EQ quests were very special the rewards were unique items that either looked really cool or had special non-combat uses. Some examples were a pair of boots that make you run slightly quicker, a shield that made you invisible, items that allowed you to return to you're bind location. At higher levels classes got excellent items for very difficult quests that could take weeks and weeks to complete. By turning quests into a leveling mechanic instead of an optional game play feature you force the player to play the game through the eyes of a developer. Now you don't even have to explore the world, I find myself looking at the map half the time playing to make sure my character is running to the right place where the items are marked on the map. To make quests more interesting... get rid of all the filler quests that are just there for experience. Work hard on just a few quests and people will love them. [/quote] I'm not saying that there has to be quests and wasn't necessarily saying that quests are a must, but quests are just a way of getting a reward for what you would normally do anyways. Just with a story and objective. Every game needs some sort of objective system whether they are labeled as quests, missions, tasks, etc. it doesn't matter. One big reason they make so many filler quests is to keep the player playing the game. If you were to take out all the filler quests from Skyrim or any MMO the game would be over before you knew it and also leveling would take much longer and players would need to "grind" much more to reach level up. What I wish is that we would be able to fix quests by creating new ways of accomplishing things by adding new game play and mechanics. Not just adding a small short detailed story on why we should "go to some cave and kill the trolls living there" or "finding the sacred herb to heal the sick person". There will always be filler quests in RPG's and MMO's because the developers want players to stay playing their game longer, while not having the time to make every single quest amazingly epic and awesome. I totally agree that having filler quests just to keep people occupied is ruining a lot of games and looking at the map is something I do a lot also, even in new games like Guild Wars 2. They need to find a way to fix stuff like that. One things GW2 is doing right, is that they make the player want to explore the world itself, while having fun doing so and not going to an area JUST to finish a quest.
  5. [quote name='MichaelRPennington' timestamp='1347684115' post='4980288'] Yeh, then I guess in that case it would be a matter of, I believe it was mentioned before, removing the in-game player market. Well, at least that would be the simple solution. Another solution would be to have an in-game appraisal system that will reference what monster the item came from and the difficulty of obtaining said item, cross referencing it with current economic state, and the current Supply/Demand for that item, and setting the appropriate price for the item. Let the user toggle a 5% difference in lowest/highest current market value, down/up, but let no one go below/above 15% from the standard current market value. Just a thought. [/quote] Yeah, I've got a system similar to that with the in game market, but you brought up a nice point on how it should work, thanks. Back to player given quests though. Even if the in game market is removed like I said before people will just resort to player to player trade and people will set up forums to post items and prices instead of taking the long route and questing for it. Also if you really want something in game wouldn't you just go get it yourself since it would take up the same amount of time for you minus the expense. People will almost always go for the fastest route to get things done. Don't get my wrong I would love to have player given quests, I'm just arguing every single problem I have though of on why it wouldn't work. If all my problems on how the system works are resolved, that will be great!
  6. [quote name='jefferytitan' timestamp='1347680229' post='4980280'] My view is that not all items should be easily available on the market (I'm not sure whether you're referring to an NPC market or real money auctions or what). If the market is flooded with horns from a level 99 demon... uh, who exactly is going out there harvesting them?? I think that some items should only be available in tiny quantities in the market, or not at all. The reason could be that the source is incredibly tough, incredibly rare (e.g. a non-instanced demon), or that 99% of people would have no use for it's horns (too low level, not specialized right, don't have the recipe scroll, don't have the other ingredients). [/quote] Yes this is how it should be, but paying someone to find it is just the same as buying it at the market no matter how rare an item is. Also if everyone can post quests there will be thousands upon thousands of quests available probably with many of them being very similar.
  7. [quote name='MichaelRPennington' timestamp='1347679140' post='4980276'] I'm not saying it would be easy by any means. Something like this would be extremely complex, and balances would have to be put in place, but as it says in my signature, nothing is impossible. You can always find a way to do something. I know the way I posted it was kind of restrictive and lack luster, but it was just an example. [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.png[/img] Oof, I don't know how to make it any better for people that don't want to get involved in the game at its core... I've always been one to get immersed. [/quote] Yeah there is ALWAYS a way. Just saying why do an action that takes 30 minutes to get a specific item when you could do a different action that would only take 1 minute with the same end result. Paying for something in the market would also probably be cheaper than paying someone to take the 30 minutes to go out and find it.
  8. [quote name='MichaelRPennington' timestamp='1347675969' post='4980262'] Oh, and if you removed all story-telling elements of a quest, then it would lose its relevance to the player. There has to be a reason why the player is doing what he/she is doing. Without reason, why do? [/quote] [quote name='jefferytitan' timestamp='1347676453' post='4980264'] Hmm, if that's your view on it, it seems to me that you're limited by the verbs available. If your verbs are move, fight, get, put... that's what your quests will involve. I was trying to work within the typical known mechanics. You could add puzzle elements, or persuasion, or minecraft style building/destroying. For example, there could be an unkillable demon that comes through a portal on a regular basis, and the only permanent solution is to dig a channel from a volcano leading to the portal, do a puzzle to open the portal, then flood the portal with lava and use a cold spell to set the lava so the portal is permanently sealed with rock. [/quote] My view isn't that the story elements of a game need to be taken out because most games wouldn't exist without them. What I'm saying is that a lot of players would like to enjoy a game without having to put time and effort to become emotionally attached and to have a relationship with the characters. Lots of people just want to get into a game and play with friends and kill monsters and go on adventures together. I'm just trying to figure out new ways to make quests more entertaining to those types of people.
  9. [quote name='MichaelRPennington' timestamp='1347675969' post='4980262'] I'm not sure if this could be considered on-topic, but, going off of this NPC talk we're getting into, the delivery of the quest is also important. As Servant of the Lord said, adding depth and character to our NPCs could not only enhance the player experience, but open a gateway to allow ourselves to expand upon the content of the quests and the player's immersion into the game. Most RPGs contain several cookie-cutter NPCs that look alike and spout useless information. This is an attempt to fill space; to give an illusion of life to the scene. What if we cut this out? What if we only had unique NPCs? What if we took the time to give every NPC a personality? What if we let the character get know these NPCs and grow an affection for or hate these NPCs. Then, we have created this relationship between the player and the game that will cause the quests that they give to the player have more of an impact on their emotional state while experiencing the game. The idea of creating a relationship between in-game characters and the player is by no way a new concept, but is one that is for the most part lost in online RPGs. If you could add in these relationships, then a whole new world of deep and meaningful quests (as well as relevant to the player as he/she now feels like she knows them) will open to you. I hope this rant helps [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img] On the topic of player created quests: I believe it is entirely possible. This could be carried out in contracts. Simply, you could set the type of quest - Hunt, Gather, Explore, whatever - then set the requirements then the rewards, have the player post them, and then someone would come along, accept the quest, complete it, and turn in the contract. This could be easily achieved through a central hub, such as a location in your game called something like the 'Adventurer's Guild'. Anything will do along these lines. This is only one idea, I'm sure there are tons of other options to choose from if you just sit and ponder it a bit more. I also noticed you were looking for an incentive for players to provide/use the quest service. Well, you could have a point system associated with the quest system. EXAMPLE: You have a quest system comprising of quests given by NPCs. Upon completion of these quests, you are given your reward and a number of what we will call Quest Tokens (QT), dependent upon the difficulty of the quest. Once you have built up enough of these Quest Tokens, you may post a quest in the Guild's Contract Board, and offer these QT as a reward. One could trade these QT for other items from this Adventurer's Guild, or for gold, etc. The possibilities are endless.' Oh, and if you removed all story-telling elements of a quest, then it would lose its relevance to the player. There has to be a reason why the player is doing what he/she is doing. Without reason, why do? [/quote] Yes I totally agree with what your saying, but based on people it wont work as well as you think. (Awesome that you brought up contracts because thats exactly how I picture everything. Every deal, trade, quest, etc). Lets say I post a quest asking another player to gather specific items from a specific monster. Again this brings up "items" and with items why not just go to the market and buy it instead of paying someone to go get it and have to wait when you could get it instantly. It would only work if it was out of stock or something. Lets say a player chooses to participate in the quest. Is that the only player that can participate in that quest? Is it up to the player that gave out the quest to choose the player amount? Okay lets say the player that took the quest begins the quest and then stops halfway and logs off the game. Does the quest automatically becoming void? Will every contract need to have a time limit? Lets say that every player given quest will require a time limit. What if 3 players all fail before they finish, they player that gave out the quest will have to wait for the 4th player to finally finish to get what he wants. What if you give out a quest and a player takes it and then you find out halfway through that you don't want those items and don't want to pay the player for finishing the quest. Will you be able to cancel the quest halfway through making the player that took the quest angry that what he did was for nothing? Will the player that gave the quest just be screwed and have to pay the player anyways? I've thought this through a lot and the only way to do it is to make it simple like I said before. A way to make it work better would be to not have an in game market at all, and I'm sure players would hate that. Even then players would just trade personally and go onto forums and the like in order to trade instead of dealing with quests. Everyone wants instant satisfaction instead of having to wait for what they want. EDIT: I guess I'm not saying that there isn't a way it could be implemented in game, just that there is no point in implementing it when there are much easier and quicker ways of getting the item.
  10. Thanks for the ideas, grateful for the replies. I got replies I expected. I love the idea of having players give out quests/tasks, but I have thought of what you could do with that and there are so many things that would limit the possibilities of player created quests. When you receive a quest from an NPC you can just drop it at any time or go back and finish it later. Say a player puts a quest that anyone can pick up and do. How many players can participate? How do they get experience like normal NPC quests? What happens if they just stop in the middle of a quest or just log off? The only way I see player created quests being added is something like a player posting a need for some item and that player would pay each player a specific amount for each of the items, allowing many players to participate in the quest, but it would be like a first come first serve type of thing. But even with this type of quest, the game being an MMO there will of course be an in game item shop. Why put a quest up for other players to participate in if you could simply go purchase the items you need instantly. In order to have in game player created quests the game would need to have that game mechanic in mind before even starting to make the game. I know that menial tasks can become more thrilling with a back story which can create emotion with specific options and choices, but many people skip over the story. Once they do this it just becomes the same old quests again. It's like telling the player that if they don't read through the story then they are screwed and will get bored quickly. That in no way is a good game. Maybe a good story, but not a good game. If you were to exclude all story telling elements for a quest and had to rely solely on game animations, mechanics, and game play, what would you make then?
  11. I've been trying to think of new ways to make quests, missions, tasks, or whatever you want to call them, more unique and fun. Most MMO games and RPG's always end up having too many boring quests like - collect this item, pick up this item, take this item to this person, kill this monster, collect this many items by killing this specific monster, get to this point by jumping on these rocks till you reach a point, kill this boss monster, talk to this NPC, now talk to "THIS" NPC, etc. It's actually really hard to make new variations of these "quests" because MMO's and RPG's always seems to have the same type of game mechanics in some way or variation like crafting, farming, killing monsters, etc. So my question is, if you could make a quest of your own and had to make it in a game with the same type of game play and mechanics used in most games today what would you require the player to accomplish or do? (This includes any sort of task any NPC would require the player to do, big or small, story related or not). What kind of new game mechanic or new twist would you like to introduce to make quests different? Would be great if you could detail your answer as much as possible so we can all understand what you are trying to imagine.
  12. Weekly Community Concept

    [quote name='AltarofScience' timestamp='1327277315' post='4905258'] What is the purpose of being secretive about ones ideas? No one is out their waiting to steal some random person's not even prototyped or tested or fleshed out idea. [/quote] If you hear a good idea you will automatically remember it and incorporate it into one of your own ideas and you might not even know it. You will also never achieve anything by telling random people on the internet all your ideas.
  13. Weekly Community Concept

    [quote name='Bigdeadbug' timestamp='1327234452' post='4905082'] An example would go a long way if you have time to make one. Are you looking to make a full game design document or something more akin to a concept document? The latter I can imagine doing in a week easily enough, the former not so much. In my own opinion designing a game by committee (which I think is what you are aiming for) tends to result in uninspired games. Part of the reason for that is there is obviously a lot of clashing of egos (designers do tend to have rather big ones at times) which inevitably result in compromise. I can imagine that over the internet these issues would be magnified. I would favour a competition similar to the one held over on the writing forums by Sun. A basic idea is put forward with a set of requirements then everyone is required to design a game following these requirements and then submit it to you. Everyone then reads through them and gives feedback. Another thing that you need to keep in mind (and sorry if you knew this already) is that a lot of designers jealously guard their ideas out of fear of them being stolen. I have seen in a few times on this forum as well as plenty of other times in real life/other sites. This just means that you may very well get little in terms of response to such a competition. [/quote] I'm not asking for something as complicated as you guys are thinking. I'm talking about a very simple easy theme and then everyone just thinks up simple game mechanics they would add pertaining to that theme. Then everyone can read other peoples ideas for that theme and add small notes to them on what they think would make that idea better. So really the longest someones idea would have to be is a paragraph. I'll make one on google docs soon as an example and post it here. I am also very secretive about my ideas just like everyone else, but if there is a random theme that will most likely not have anything to do with their own ideas, they will probably be more likely to contribute.
  14. Weekly Community Concept

    [quote name='ShawnCowles' timestamp='1327157952' post='4904824'] Personally, I have enough half-finished designs and ideas sitting around. The thought of collaborating to make more doesn't really appeal to me. [/quote] I'm not trying to have people create an official game concept. Its more like having a simple game theme and everyone contributing their own ideas and small game mechanics to it. People can write down outrageous or simple things. I think that would be neat. Should I make one as an example? I also have quite a lot of half finished and just started ideas too.