Bro, do you even Role Play???

Discussion in 'PvP Gameplay' started by Owain, Aug 9, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TemplarAssassin

    TemplarAssassin Avatar

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    RUSSIA
    You guys really overestimate your role in the development process, don't you...

    What someone from blizzard said once: "Wanna make a great game? Never listen to the fans".
     
    Bulveigh likes this.
  2. Violation Clauth

    Violation Clauth Avatar

    Messages:
    3,247
    Likes Received:
    7,594
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    And this is another great reason why I hate blizzard and refuse to play any more of their games! :)

    I know what they are/were trying to say but their gross neglect of paying attention to the consumer when your entire purpose is to be consumed has caused so many bad/mediocre games to come in the last five to ten years that it is extremely painful. They lead the charge as they have been the most profitable so they continue to be the "golden standard" for other devs who want to make money... it's a sad state.

    LONG LIVE LORD BRITISH!
     
    blaquerogue likes this.
  3. Silent Strider

    Silent Strider Avatar

    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    1,343
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You got what a themepark game is completely wrong.

    A themepark game is one where there are "rides," predetermined paths through the game that were created by the devs and can't be modified by the players. A sandbox is a game where the players make their own toys, where they modify the details, and some times even the nature, of the activities they are playing.

    Granted, PvP tends to more easily fit the sandbox mold because the interactions with opposing players aren't scheduled, but even open loot PvP can feel themepark-ish, like in DayZ; that one feels like a sandbox without the sand, just like many other FPS PvP games.

    By the same token, being a sandbox does not require full loot, PvP, or even a combat system. Simcity is one of the prime examples of a sandbox, so much that back then part of the specialized press even questioned if it was a game after all, and it does not have any kind of combat system. Star Wars Galaxies is still held as one of the main examples of sandbox MMO; it never had player looting, and the PvP was completely optional. UO is the other game that people think when they speak about sandbox MMOs, and it allowed players to opt out of PvP nearly 15 years ago, and allows players to insure their items to avoid losing them for over a decade now.

    SotA is not going to be a pure sandbox, of course; it has a main quest, with a crafted story. But it will have many sandbox elements, whether the player opts into PvP or not.
     
    Xandra7 and Rampage202 like this.
  4. Silent Strider

    Silent Strider Avatar

    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    1,343
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Both, in a way: it's about the game that the player wants to play.

    A Sims game, being exceptionally open ended and allowing players to set their own objectives, is a very good example here. Pick a dozen Sims players and you are likely to find thirteen ways to play, with different requirements when it comes to which aspect of realism enhance each play style. You will find some of the players using the in-game systems to downplay or emphasize a given feature, or even using mods or cheats to completely change or remove it, or to add a completely new feature the devs didn't think to include. The appeal of modding — or, in other words, changing the rules of the game — was so strong with Sims 3 that Maxis is adding official modding support to Sims 4.

    MMOs, being fairly open ended, are similar. After all, in most MMOs, most of the player base never bothers doing what is often considered end-game activities; I'm going to be playing SotA as a different game than you, as will a player that just wants to focus on housing, or a hardcore roleplayer that mostly wants to organize and enact events without unwanted interference, or a PvE-exclusive raider that just plays to tackle the most challenging group PvE content and couldn't care less for the PvP, and any of a wide number of different players with wildly varying motivations. The aspects of realism that each of those players consider beneficial to their game, and those that they consider either just a distraction or a downright issue, are going to differ.

    I group potty breaks in the same place, as far as the realism to convenience graph goes, as the character having to eat or drink; it's just somewhat more gross, and invokes the issue of nudity.
    (Incidentally, Sims does not require the character to drink, water or otherwise. The devs likely had a list of how much they could annoy the player in the name of realism, and drinking water didn't make the cut.)

    BTW, I consider SotA to have a narrower focus than a Sims game. Sims does not have a meaningful combat system, but it has systems for a lot of things that SotA (or any other "conventional" computer RPG, for what matters) lacks. The Sims is one of the best examples of sandbox games ever made, together with such gems as Simcity and Minecraft.

    I think you meant immersion when you said realism. Intentionally leaving things out is always going to reduce realism, but in many cases intentionally breaking realism can increase immersion.

    Physiological necessities are one such example. They might increase realism, but in many (most?) genres they are a really bad match and, instead, reduce immersion if added.

    It's why I think realism for realism's sake is dumb, counterproductive. If something is being made more complex to bring realism, then the devs should ask how it improves the player's experience. What is the balance between what is gained — immersion, extra depth, whatever — and the frustration induced by the extra complexity? If the positive aspects don't, at least, match the intensity of the negative aspects, then adding that specific bit of realism is a bad idea, or at least adding that realism in a mandatory way.

    "With the depth it warrants"... that is awfully vague, and will vary wildly from player to player. Take the elements related to wilderness survival, for example; is the "depth it warrants" going to be the same to a common gamer whose only contact with them is through Discovery Channel, and to someone that spent a decade or two as a Scout?

    Not a bad idea — I love a fair number of (single player) games where travel is more than just waiting to get someplace — but not always a good match for a game. For games meant to be played with friends, specifically, I see meaningful travel time as nearly always a bad idea, because it's one more barrier preventing players from getting together to start playing. Thus, it ends either preventing friends from playing together when they want to, or forces them to restrict their in-game travels to be able to join their friends when needed.
     
  5. redfish

    redfish Avatar

    Messages:
    11,366
    Likes Received:
    27,673
    Trophy Points:
    165
    They probably thought adding a separate meter for water would just be unnecessary, like adding a separate meter for urination/defecation would also be unnecessary, since it doesn't really matter in the end, and people will eat and drink at the same time in their daily routine. There are no foot races or hiking or desert treks in the game, where a water meter might be more meaningful.

    Broader as in dealing with a more wide range of experiences. They've added some things like vacation and work scenarios in some Sims DLCs, but mostly its just about a daily routine, and most of your time is at home or in some public social area. When you deal with a wider range of experiences some elements are going to be simplified I think for complexity's sake.


    No, I don't think it necessarily breaks realism either. If you have a RPG that doesn't give you a choice to pick your nose, its not less realistic for not giving you that choice, simply because people pick their nose in real life. Even games that are about realism specifically will simplify things. Pick your simulation game and you'll see it there. I also don't think requiring you to take a potty break would necessarily decrease immersion, its just not necessarily something you want to have a player to do when the point of a game is a heroic quest because it changes the tone and focus of the game.

    That's fine.. and someone else can play SoTA just to go play a simulated version of poker with their friends in a tavern instead of just using a real poker app. But it would also be missing the point of the bigger game. The question to me is how to make all of these elements more meaningful to the bigger game. Is housing just about cutesy decorating? Is crafting just about getting gold? Is PvP just about having strategic card battles? The thing that happens when you reduce these elements is your reduce their actual meaning in the game.

    What I feel has been happening with The Sims development, is they're paying too much attention to the modding community, and on releasing DLCs, and they're neglecting the core of the game, and the core of the game is suffering because of that. But, yea, at least it can be modded.

    My point about travel was just if travel is meaningless -- and it isn't a good match for a game -- take it out altogether. No need for fast travel. SoTA btw I feel has a nice compromise on travel, which is the dual scale map system. It doesn't make travel meaningless, theyre'll be random encounters. But it also prevents it from being a burden. I personally think that being able to be separated from your friends in a multiplayer game can be meaningful gameplay, though. In fact, I believe in parts of the plot in SoTA you'll be purposely split from your party to make decisions on your own. In most games, it takes at most a few minutes to meet up your friends, and the adventures you have on your way can be part of the fun ,too.
     
  6. rune_74

    rune_74 Avatar

    Messages:
    4,786
    Likes Received:
    8,324
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Um no. You don't understand what a theme park game is.

    A theme park is a game like wow where you go from event to event and there is very little interaction other then go here do this, like get on this ride. Hence why they call it a themepark ride.

    Full loot has nothing at all to do with that classification...PVP either....because.....themepark games have PVP.

    Your ignorant statement about sickly needs really comes across as rude and crass, which really shows that you don't understand others and what they may want. It's this weird need to classify things to somehow make your arguement have merit, which it really doesn't. I realize you say these things trying to get a rise out of people, but whatever.

    You can have a sandbox without pvp adn full loot! Imagine that....it's just one bucket not in that sandbox.
     
  7. TemplarAssassin

    TemplarAssassin Avatar

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    RUSSIA
    Good job at descibing the post-trammel Ultima Online!

    Also, I don't need a clear wikipedia explanation of what a theme park is.

    I call a theme park everything that strays from the old UO model, as every single game that does it is equally disgusting and not worth playing under any circumstances.
    Sorry for loving beauty and immersion, I'm probably a horrible person xD
     
  8. baronandy

    baronandy Avatar

    Messages:
    384
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    43
    this game wont be for pvp players, fire lotus answered that the inovative selectice multiplayer hex system , isnt be planned to give us freedom to get metched up with pvp players only
    im very sad to hear that i cant even beleave it is developed from lord british i mean like 2 poeple out of 10 look for this game because of ultima 1-3 singleplayer games and like 90 percent got interested becuase ultima online , nobody even know them before ultima online got released just my 2 cents
    maybe i will take a look for this game a year from now maybe they changed there minds after having bad success
     
  9. Owain

    Owain Avatar

    Messages:
    3,513
    Likes Received:
    3,463
    Trophy Points:
    153
    If PvP zones are filled with people, what difference does it make? You will still have a full meaningful PvP experience. Can you personally interact with 100,000 players? 500,000? More?

    Other games handle that using separate servers, where you absolutely will never see them unless you roll a character on each and every server, and then you STILL will never see more than a fraction of the player base.
     
  10. Owain

    Owain Avatar

    Messages:
    3,513
    Likes Received:
    3,463
    Trophy Points:
    153
    If a lot of people try it and say they hate it, that would mitigate the risk of a false positive. If a lot of people try it and say they like it, as many non PvPers who tried PvP in R8 and reported that they had a blast, then that is useful data to have when determining whether a full loot feature is viable or not.
     
    blaquerogue likes this.
  11. Ned888

    Ned888 Avatar

    Messages:
    788
    Likes Received:
    1,152
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Sure they liked it! No consequences, no looting, almost nothing else to do....

    Once the plot is fully online and people have their stuff PVP will become much more real for them.
     
    Silent Strider and Margard like this.
  12. Duke Death-Knell

    Duke Death-Knell Avatar

    Messages:
    1,751
    Likes Received:
    1,825
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Philadelphia PA area

    But there is no way to tell whose who. The first time I did PVP I was forced to, as soon as you turned 25th level you were fresh meat. And the vultures just waiting in that area to kill newbs made it less fun. It took a lot of pain and suffering to get through that time. I came to enjoy PVP as the game was coded properly and most people didn't PVP much except the vultures. I had one nemesis and he and I had fun, well him mostly.
    But it really depends on how they code it for the game. But full loot certainly doesn't encourage newbs, especially with affinity equipment. You can't just replace that.
     
  13. Owain

    Owain Avatar

    Messages:
    3,513
    Likes Received:
    3,463
    Trophy Points:
    153
    And yet, the devs tell us as a result of community reports from R8, they are highly encouraged, and will devote R9 and R10 to further PvP testing.

    The devs certainly pay a lot of attention to the results of the pre Alpha release testing. Be sure to tell them they are making a mistake, why don't you?
     
  14. sn0tub

    sn0tub Avatar

    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    330
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Having no consequences for killing (good or bad) is the reason why arsehats hit easy people. Your point is mute

    But if you bothered to read the whole thread you would of seen that
     
  15. Ned888

    Ned888 Avatar

    Messages:
    788
    Likes Received:
    1,152
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    They are highly encouraged that their original plan was accepted after all the BS posting about hating it.

    I wasn't talking about the devs, I was talking about players. Just because people liked the mechanics of PVP in pre-alpha, that doesn't mean that they will like it when it's integrated with all the other systems in the game.
     
    Logain, Silent Strider and Xandra7 like this.
  16. Duke Death-Knell

    Duke Death-Knell Avatar

    Messages:
    1,751
    Likes Received:
    1,825
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Philadelphia PA area

    A) it's moot
    B) It is highly relevant as those of us who hunt and kill do it for the thrill, for the fun. To hone our abilities.
    Experience and the kill that's what matters.

    Doing it for a rare or unique ingredient would be another good reason. Like their nightshade example. Taking your stuff, won't do it unless it's to take something of mine back.
     
    TemplarAssassin likes this.
  17. Mercyful Fate

    Mercyful Fate Avatar

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    554
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    US East Coast
    This line or reasoning needs to stop. There will be PvP. The question is whether SotA PvP will be competitive or whether it's just watered down. I will play it hard-core and expect to encounter others that do the same. Story-driven is only half the equation despite the protests of non-PvPers. This game will live or die by its PvP and Garriot knows that.
     
  18. Owain

    Owain Avatar

    Messages:
    3,513
    Likes Received:
    3,463
    Trophy Points:
    153
    This game is very much for PvP players. It's also for PvE players, solo players, small group players, open players, offline players, online players, crafters, warriors, actors, musicians, poets, drunks, villains, heroes, the Virtuous, the craven, cannibals, thieves... the list is endless.

    It would seem that you are a person of small vision.
     
    Logain likes this.
  19. TemplarAssassin

    TemplarAssassin Avatar

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    RUSSIA
    Maybe it won't make any difference. Maybe it will.
    We still need to know what will be the final state of the looting system.
     
  20. TemplarAssassin

    TemplarAssassin Avatar

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    RUSSIA
    I'll tell you more. If full loot and meaningful open PvP are not intruduced, there will be even more vultures.
    Just like in WoW. With no serious consequences to death and PvP people just got bored and resskilled each other all the time.
    In UO, on the other hand, resskilling was much more rare. And the dynamics of the world were such that if you were a PKer and spent too much time in one place without enough manpower to hold your ground, someone would inevitably call the "police" and some guys like Owain would rush in and punish you.

    I remember I once played on a small bulgarian AoS shard. The [UPD] (Ultima Police Department) gave the reds a hard time all over the map. As soon as some PvEer got killed he'd call for help on IRC.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.