“About half our player base is more interested in playing through the story than playing online!”

I wouldn't need player created items. I would be totally ok with dev-made items.
I want to play cooperatively with friends in great fantasy world, adventuring together, hunting monsters together, doing quests together, exploring together - if I want to. If I don't want to then I play alone. I wouldn't need any player created things - except for when playing in the open online mode. If I would want to play in this mode to participate in some event etc. then I would accept player created content.

 

Great! So here's where I think people that have problems with multiplayer influence should simply be saying "Can I please play friends only mode in a static world?" I think that's a fair request. But instead, people are saying "please let me turn off all the multiplayer stuff I don't like but still be inside the world of the muliplayer" and that's where I think the line is crossed. That's where I get frustrated because it's like people want the benefits of a dynamic world but they want to be able to block out anything that might upset their RP sensibilities which would already happen in a co-op environment, but is an unreasonable request in a multiplayer environment.

So why not just ask for a co-op environment in the segmented world of single player offline?

 

Aren't most NPC towns even build yet? So we remove the player housing from those NPC towns that already have them and shrink them in size or build some wheat fields on the lots and NPC towns that are not built yet don't even get lots
As a substitution there are a few more player towns created where everyone can buy a lot and house

 

The issue with this is you want people to be recognized....what rules allow that to happen? Why should one be chosen over the other? The chance for abuse/favoritism here would be immense and though it would make some players happy(for obvious reasons) it would also make other players feel like they have to win the lottery to get any recognition.

For instance in the past you said you wanted Rat's nest to be in cannon etc, why? I understand why you would want it, but why would the rest of the world want that? I personally don't have any connection to your city...why should it be part of the world lore?

My dragon example was just a simple example...not meant to be said hey look at this.

Pretty sure people have asked and said not in scope. I don't want to turn things off, I just want established rules....even sandboxes have those.

 

I'm not following the difference. Are you saying you want 100% ownership of the world as you would in offline mode when you know it's online? These POTs are highly optional, you never need to step foot into them to follow any story. That was just reaffirmed by Lum a few posts ago.

The fact that a POT exists and it's not designed in a way you see fitting has zero impact on the immersion of the game. Sorry, that's way too much demand on a shared online persistent world. I don't like saying "go play in X mode" or "go play X game" but what you are asking is to shut out the rest of the world from your SPO. That's in no way the way it works. Only in offline will that be possible.

 

You know as well as I do...that won't happen. I have a lot and hope to have a place in a NPC town.....I have no interest in PoT where I can be booted at the will of the creator with no say.

 

Seriously....that's exactly what I'm saying....what lum said and agreed with.

I'm saying that Lum made the right decision....that they shouldn't be part of lore.

I'm not really demanding anything.

 

This could be a solution I could agree on.

It was more of a joke. I know that it will not happen and that many plan on living in a NPC town.

 

I think my Ready Player One example was a good one. The quests were quantifiable, challenging, and worthy of recognition.

As for Rats Nest, I don't think I (or we) have done anything as of yet to be worthy of being in the game's canon. I do however think Pax Lair has. They're an established community with deep roots in Ultima Online, and they've made a unique social impact on New Britannia thus far during testing. So working the existence of the town and the "key" players into the historic lore seems like a no brainer to me. It doesn't matter if every player has been impacted by Pax Lair, it only matters if a significant contribution to the game has been made.

When I look at Owl's Head or Ardoris, how have they impacted the game in a possible way? To me they haven't. To me, Pax Lair has done more than either of those towns, in fact if it wasn't for players I don't think those towns would have much meaning at all. And this is where I think other games have failed the most. They put such an emphasis on canon that they almost forget they have players. I would think we could treat them equally if we really tried.

 

I think you inadvertently brought up a problem we have all been saying, that NPC cities are not good enough yet. They have nothing that sets them apart and that's what we have been saying needs work.

 

No offense

 

I can't imagine an RPG where this isn't the case.

I would say the exact same thing about Skyrim. The NPC's are stupid, the AI is stupid, the game is lifeless without other players.

 

NPC AI and schedules are coming.

I'm doing my part to help with NPC dialogue.

 

Actually at this point I find skyrim's cities way beyond this games cities...They obviously won't be as random as people but they are quite well laid out.

 

In the old Ultimas every city was unique and interesting and had its own theme.

Also I would take stupid NPCs over a "Leetmasta327" jumping around all the time in dungeons with a pumpkin mask on

 

Yeah I know, I'm not saying I'm disappointed with the direction, I'm not. It's just that I can play a fully finished game like Skyrim which is considered by many to be the gold standard of NPC sandbox worlds (Pillars of Eternity is a great standard for non-sandbox) and really I can't stand the game. I play Skyrim for about 20 minutes and just throw my hands in the air. It's boring, it's stupid, it's a colossal waste of money and time (to me).

So if that's the gold standard, I don't think we're ever going to do better than that and so I don't really care about NPC's and what they do or say or whatever so long as it advances or enhances my multiplayer experience. And I think that's where the two camps in this discussion probably don't see eye to eye. As much as I feel like this, you guys probably feel the opposite.

Desolis is a great example in our own game. I think that's really cool scene, but the NPC's actually take away from it. They prevent me from exploring in peace, and even when I kill them they respawn and ruin my fun by forcing me to deal with them all over again (for what purpose I have no idea).

So I'm not sure any amount of dialogue or AI schedules is likely to change that. It's just too static. In many ways I wish we didn't have any NPC's in the game. That's not to say that I can't appreciate well written dialogue or interesting interactions, I can. But it's always going to be a shadow of what players can do.

 

If They want to go down the MMO route leave out the Story & Lore in it.
Give them a spiritual UO, a sandbox in the hands of the Players, then they can do anything they want it doesn't make any difference, a world of Chaos and manic stacking that the 10% Land owners will love but the other 90% of players will have no say in the matter except like it or leave.

@Lum Just create a single player story driven game as a stand alone with the 5 episode. So I can decide when I'm buying for $35 I get a single player RPG, nothing else, but for $45 I get a single player RPG plus sandbox world extra.
edit: prices quoted not set in stone

 

I think Skyrim is an example of a great looking game with good world design, decent exploration and fun combat. The background lore and writing in the in game books is always fantastic.

But Bethesda games always have lifeless NPCs. I really don't understand how they drop the ball so hard here.

 

So my city is fairly unique, at the moment. No one has attempted to copy it that I'm aware of. But I'm sure I'll have quite a few leetmaster's running around in it once we get closer to launch.

Years ago I used to really have a problem with this, the same as you. But then I realized that if you want the dynamic sophistication of multiplayer roleplaying, you're going to have to accept that some people are just really bad players. And just like I might goto a local basketball court and play with strangers, you never really know what you're going to get. Is playing basketball better when you have 10 people playing verses 1? I think so. And that's why I've had the pleasure of playing with and against pro athletes, because I was willing to take what I could get and sometimes the people on the court were amazing, and other times they barely knew how to dribble the ball.

So as I look forward towards the chaotic soup that Rats Nest will likely be, I'm not worried about roleplaying with people that can't dribble. I just won't throw them the ball.