SPO and SP Offline

I would just like to re-iterate that many of us who want more information about single player do NOT want story spoilers. There is a substantial group who have faith in RG and Tracy's story, but are worried about the game-play and ambiance related mechanics that make a single player different from an mmo. I'd hate for that message to get lost in all this story/spoiler talk.

Thanks.

 

You must of course realize that such a statement has to be nuanced right? For two reasons: one - he has released some story elements, two - he has changed his mind on things.
Plus, when has a "no" ever stopped the discussion on the forum? This is for opinions right?

 

Quite true. I fear I am distracting from rune's original post. I may just be a wierd offshoot in that I don't care about receiving story spoilers early because the enjoyment will still be there, either in a game playing way or a crowdsourcing way.

 

Prowse knew it was a possibility long before TESB showed in theaters. He spilled the beans at a small party about a year after A New Hope. That's actually the reason Lucas had him deliver a fake line--because Prowse was an infamously bad keeper of secrets. Hammilton and Jones both knew what was happening during recording (though they had only been told the night before).

Silly, though. I truly believe the films could have had a much stronger story arc if the line had stayed, "No. Obi Wan killed your father." And honestly, Prowse knew that Lucas would be dubbing over his read lines anyway with the readings of James Earl Jones. I'm sure he and the rest of the cast and crew were perfectly aware that the simple fact that he had read a line didn't make it canon.

 

I haven't read a lot of people telling you to be quiet. Have all the opinions you want. Yes, that's what the forums are for.

I'm a firm believer that people should sound off on whatever they feel is important. But sometimes that means people are going to sound off in their disagreement of what you may feel is important too.

If someone is specifically saying "You should just be quiet and wait it out" then ok, use the "isn't this forum for discussion?" line. I do that all the time. But when people are just disagreeing with you...that's their opinion.

 

Ok.

Trenyc, I'm sure you're correct to varying degrees about all of that. But if you don't mind, I'm going to be on the side of George Lucas and what is arguably the best movie ever made. You can be on the side of "I would've done it this way" and "I'm going to second guess everything in retrospect". That's your choice.

 

The Star Wars movies were amazing for their time. We have the benefit of thirty years of hindsight now. There's no harm in saying it could have been better. Most things in all the history of ever could have been.

 

You can add to that list, "RG said..." and a host of other non-opinions. Anyway, don't want to belabor the point.

 

I didn't read anything that suggested RG was saying "be quiet". If anything he was trying to say we'll get there when we get there. Which seems likely to begin around R11.

I don't want you to belabor the point either, but I'd love to know exactly where you think RG said your feedback isn't valuable and you shouldn't be giving it. I'm not talking about direct words, I'd be happy to see something where you could even attempt to interpret it that way.

 

I don't think he meant to criticize RG. Rather, there are some forum members who tend to take RG's word as some cosmic temporal force that will positively produce a specific outcome in the future. It's those forum member Vyrinor means to criticize--not Garriott.

 

Captain Jack thinks that more people should be, only slightly, more educated... Captain Jack thinks we should be honest here when talking about Lucas' genius, or really the lack there of, especially since the literal meaning of the word vader is father...

In any case, Captain Jack does not wish to join the Twosome of the Baron and Owain and believes that perhaps Fire Lotus may have a spare room for them in her tavern to work all this out?

On topic, Captain Jack is not quite sure what some were worried about is disclosing the plot spoilers, no, just the lack of single player elements in this not strictly a "traditional solo player game" as RG himself has put it. If it is not either MMO or SPRPG, then who is to tell whom not to ask for what.

Ask for anything and everything you want Captain Jack says! But perhaps if your goal is to jump on features for PvP, one might refrain from... how should we say, living under the bridges of other peoples threads which aren't related to your "style"?...

 

I am a big advocate of sending a clear message when you are asking for something. Generically asking for more attention to the single player aspect is not clear.

What specifics would you like to see in for testing. Know that "I want more story" is likely to go no where.

Companions? What can you foresee as complications with companions and where would you put this on the development timeline.
Starting tutorial zone? Anything to do with zone building is tricky to do early. This is the build things stage (pre-alpha) the game can make some drastic changes that would show in the zone build process. Example: If they built a tutorial zone for R1 then added jumping. It would be very clear that jumping was not taken into account.

 

I feel like we've been very clear about most of this and that the OP and several others have repeatedly said "we do not mean story" when we say single player.

One important thing is a more intimate convo interface (there is now a thread discussing possibilities and RG said they were looking into it) as mmo chat does not convey the intimacy you get from a standard single player rpg. Possible ways to increase that sense of intimacy are: portraits, fixed close up camera of who you are talking to, voice acting (not in SoTA for numerous reasons, just a standard one).

Another as you mentioned, is companions. We're asking for living, breathing companions with opinions and a place in the story line. Companions who react to story events and offer advice/opinions. Companions who might change the flow of a scene by being present.

As a non-mmo player, I don't know what is being sacrificed for single player options (if anything), but the single player experience seems to be forced to give up some important mechanics in order to make it work in multi-player. No save mechanic that we know of (or loading; both pretty standard on the SP front). No camping, sleeping, or passing time (also standard in SP rpgs), etc. These are thing we have to give up in order for it to work on both scales: I would say they're pretty non-negotiable. Having already "given these things up," we're going to give our best shot at getting the other things that make it feel like a single player game.

 

Your post is what I feared would happen based on my digression about the story. Sorry about that. The thread is about the entirety of solo player as @docdoom77 says well.

To your point even though it may go nowhere, it can still be said. It is just like people saying "I want full loot, open PvP" or "I want to play dwarves." I still don't get why people have a problem with me expressing an opinion that they could release more of the story. If you see my other posts, you know story is very important to me. I may be unusual in that regard, and I've already said I don't care if it goes nowhere, so can I please just have my opinion. Thanks.

 

Something that's come up a few times has been the concern that towns in single-player, or player owned towns in multiplayer, will appear empty. Now I think that if you go out into a lot of neighborhoods during the work week (IRL), you'd have a similar experience. However, this did bring up a couple ideas in my head:

• NPCs will be running on a schedule of activities befitting their station in life & their part of the story. We Outlanders will be running around adventuring and crafting and all that at all sorts of hours. Firstly, I must imagine that most shops will close at night. Some may not. Will our vendors be able to work 24 hours straight, or will we need to fit their non-vending activities into our schedule? IE will we need multiple vendors to keep a shop up and running? Competition during certain hours, or the availability of goods at midnight might actually add an interesting twist to the economy. Likewise, certain gathering places will be open late night & others will not. I think this would add some real character to the game and to player perception of the world. So, do the New Britannians think it's odd that we Outlanders keep all types of strange hours? Seems like this would be another clue pointing to our Other-ness.
• Furthermore, will there be restrictions in towns on say, the public crafting area? IE Will a guard be all "Hey there Chief, you can't be banging with that hammer at 3am, cut it out!" - I don't mean to argue for this particular restriction, only wondering what the restrictions will be on player activity. For instance, will some cities close their gates at certain hours? We've heard about the Tesla Towers and how they are used to repel invasions - seems that towns under constant threat from the undead or bandits or whatnot might want to take some additional security precautions.
• While you might not see a ton of adults during the workday, one would expect to see children playing in the streets, or serving as apprentices to craftsmen, farmers, and workers of all types. I hope we will see more children in New Britannia. This would help with the feeling of emptiness. If I were walking through Braemar and an errant ball came rolling past me, this would feel very real-world. Maybe I could pick it up and toss it back to the kids, thereby opening a quest line, or simply making an acquaintance who remembers me and is of some help later (more of a virtue-system effect), or a combination of those things.

On Companions: One of the issues with using companions in SPO is the desire to maintain their uniqueness. As was mentioned earlier, we (or at least some of us) want to feel that our actions make a meaningful and lasting impact on the world and its inhabitants (see the earlier example about the wounded guard). What I mean is, is Dupre is out adventuring with Vyrinor, how can he also be adventuring with me? Does this mean we need the ability for ALL NPCs to be companions? A daunting task indeed! Could our peer-to-peer instancing be used in a way that would allow a story-relevant companion to exist only once per instance? Seems like there are some difficult things to manage with Companions in multiplayer.

 

Knock yourself out. How many times you want to say it?

My point was if all you want to do is say "give me the story" you have your answer. If you want to be productive and get some specifics about single player and not be so generic about wanting more single player.

Difference here is chanting a mantra versus a well thought of set of ideas that can be addressed. Just as it is for the full loot crowd.

 

I don't know if this can be done but maybe the companions that are traveling with you are only visible to you?
This way there would be no multiple Dupres running around.
Problem with this: How can they help in combat if they are not visible to others?

What if companions can join you in single player only? In single player they travel with you and fight alongside you whereas in multiplayer they stay at their campfire or tavern etc. Yet they still help you, you can talk to them, you learn more about their backstory, they give hints and you can send them on missions for example to retrieve some information for you.
So the dialogue with the companions would be the same in single and multiplayer, the only difference would be that in single player they join you, fight with you and you can manage their gear and skills.

 

It would be very disruptive if you were to be talking to invisible companions, but maybe if Dupre appears on your client, and a random npc appears on mine, that might work. Then you could have multiple dupres on screen, but the only one who appears as Dupre to me is the one I'm with.

 

Did you miss my first post in the thread? I suggested a few things there. I would never say just give me the story.

I like to engage actual opinions, defend them. When someone tells me it will go nowhere, you really can't discuss that.

If you have points you want to make about my original suggestions, or want to discuss the pros and cons of releasing story early, I'm all ears. I would enjoy that more that people trying to tell me my idea is going nowhere. At this point I agree with you!

 

@Vyrinor I was going to respond to your PM but for the same reason I don't post on the Dev plus forums I am going to post this here. (I believe in open conversation)

First, full disclosure: I am from the no spoilers camp. I have not even read the Blade of the Avatar. I will wait till launch.

With that out of the way. My post was an open statement, even open to other topics. It was not directed to you . If you would like to hone in on the one statement then lets go down that topic a little.

My specific comment on the story element of single player comes from this:

Richard and Tracy are masters of the art of story craft. They going to want it to unfold in a way they can control.

You have a valid point that the story should be tested just as everything else. But there is a new aspect that SotA brings that no other game has had to deal with. SotA is a progressing story arc.

On the day of the launch we will have a portion of the story. The rest will unfold over the course of the episode. They will want to keep the story close and tight lipped. Also, parts of that story will spark to life due to player actions and interests. Those parts of the story are unknown and could never possibly be tested.

The next part is where I think a lot of contention comes from. The pre alpha stage is not something any of the people here are likely to have ever been a part of for any game. It's the "build" stage. Everything is on paper, they have lots of red ink and have erasers stockpiled so they can get things right while they build. But we have to let them actually build things before we can change their minds.

Now, since I like to be productive. If you want to help test story. How about a suggestion that we get some story building tools we can test. Such as GM or player tools that allow someone to set up events and engage players in a community driven event.

This would be useful for testing the dev's ability to introduce a story element on the fly without actually revealing parts of the story they do not wish to put out there at this time.

My post was not meant to be an attack on your desire to help get things right. It's only a suggestion on having more than a mantra of what you want and finding specifics that you can sell as valuable.