Housing is ruining the game

Discussion in 'Housing & Lots' started by Lord_Darkmoon, Nov 12, 2016.

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

    redfish Avatar

    Messages:
    11,366
    Likes Received:
    27,673
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Come to think of it, couldn't you probably generate a "burning" version of a town by just ignoring player decorations and not showing them at all in the copy but copying the homes and replacing them with burning versions of the homes that are boarded up or otherwise not accessible ? (And maybe do something with fences/walls and trees as exceptions to no decoration)

    And then just have the normal version of the scene reskinned to show sooty houses for a while after the siege.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2016
    Elfenwahn, majoria70 and Kaisa like this.
  2. Swan

    Swan Avatar

    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    157
    Trophy Points:
    8
    i think those towns with "electric field" things surrounding it couldnt be sieged, all others could be was picture i got from KS
    so poor dont have any defence and rich just can smoke theyr pipe in hot tub (more you pay to live in safe = more bored you are)
    KS times that picture i got, i was like "im surely gonna live one of those villages withouth defence grid".

    i agree about how bad is punishing players that doesnt play or taking some holiday.
    then again if you wanna see this game complete different game then what is out there.. there need to be some things that never been done before, not about *please everyone
    Howabout trust your guild protect town or hire one! to protect while youre gone.

    Yes for everything destroyed if youve been gone and didnt socialize to keep it protected =D
     
  3. redfish

    redfish Avatar

    Messages:
    11,366
    Likes Received:
    27,673
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Oh yea I definitely agree the devs should not be going for a theme park model of gameplay, which by necessity will mean inconveniencing players sometimes and not trying to please the type of player who always wants everything convenient for them. That's why I have no problems with the idea of sieges making housing inaccessible for a time. Someone might complain "hey I can't access my house!" But that's online gameplay.

    I just think its crossing a different line when you go into punishing people for being offline. I don't even think its a good way to model a mmo to expect a certain server population; ie that there will even be functioning guilds or the population will be low. I was thinking that players might pay insurance ahead of time just like they pay taxes, but you might as well assume they're part of the tax value.
     
    Ahuaeynjgkxs likes this.
  4. Beaumaris

    Beaumaris Avatar

    Messages:
    4,289
    Likes Received:
    7,415
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Caladruin
    I disagree with the OP. It seems quite possible to play this game without ever spending a dime on housing. If I didn't care about housing, it would not affect my game play one bit.
     
    Hornpipe likes this.
  5. meadmoon

    meadmoon Avatar

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I really don't think that's going to change. If Portalarium introduced a lot of the things we are discussing in this thread to make the world more dynamic, I suspect many POT owners would just stay in their POTs and have their friends join them there. The world would be dead with small pockets of players in their own little worlds. This is what many people were afraid of when POTs were added and it looks like that fear is not so unrealistic. The ship has sailed and the only resolution for those who want anything more is to find another game that has those features.

    IMO, SotA is a hybrid housing simulator and IRC with some PvE thrown in for effect. I'll still play but let's face it -- this is Second Life without all the sex.

    I will however go on record as stating that POTs are the worst thing to happen to SotA. I believe that 100%. Even the awful combat is more palatable.
     
    Kambrius and Sir_Hemlock like this.
  6. Sir_Hemlock

    Sir_Hemlock Avatar

    Messages:
    1,194
    Likes Received:
    2,292
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Very very well said + right
     
  7. marthos

    marthos Avatar

    Messages:
    371
    Likes Received:
    616
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Yes, they are already in the game. Solace Bridge for example.

    Sure. This has nothing to do with houses, and entirely with how the developers want to treat NPCs while giving every player a similar experience. If a quest has two outcomes, one where the NPC lives and one where the NPC actually, really, dies, then the first player to complete the quest could have the option to kill off the NPC, depriving other players of the quest (or alternatively, you get into player specific instances but I argue that isn't really killing the NPCs as your choice to kill the NPC doesn't impact anyone else).

    Yes, but it runs into the same problem as above. Player specific instances can give the illusion of your choice burning down the village, but if I choose differently and the village is still there for me, what is reality?

    Sure, the devs can destroy every city. Do they want to? Probably not.

    What the game needs, and what most MMOs lack, are multi player quests that have global impact. For example, town sieges. If left unchecked, there is a chance that the town falls and is destroyed. When in this destroyed state, anyone entering the town will go into a different scene where the survivors are desperately trying to rebuild. You cannot access the bank, your house, or anything else - the town is gone, its just the survivors trying to rebuild. Instead, the survivors are asking you for donations of lumber, wood, crafted fences, stone walls, etc. Once the players complete 50, 100, 1000 of these quests, the town is rebuilt and goes back to its prior state. Maybe they offer to rename the town in honor of the player or guild that helped the most. I don't lose my house, but I lose access to it temporarily. This creates a very interesting turn of events and a dynamic living breathing world that will bring people together to solve the problem as a group, and bring everyone together to stop the sieges in the first place.

    The fetch quest, as well, can be turned around to make it fit in a multi player game. Traditionally an NPC loses a precious ring and a player returns it, only to have that NPC immediately lose it again in the exact same place so another player can find it. I get it, it's simple but tiresome. Flip the quest around 180 degrees and it makes more sense. You first find a random item with a random NPCs name on it in some random scene. If you return it to him, he gives you an award (you can scale the reward based on how fast you return it to him and such). You can trade it to someone who knows where the guy is too. Found and lost instead of lost and found. Maybe, but unlikely, you'll find someone who recovered the same item lost by the same NPC, or you might be the only guy in the world who ever recovered Gomer's lost wheel of cheese from the kobolds of the Elysium Mines.
     
    Lord Ravnos, Kambrius and Hornpipe like this.
  8. redfish

    redfish Avatar

    Messages:
    11,366
    Likes Received:
    27,673
    Trophy Points:
    165
    It also needs PvP that has global impact, IMO; but that's a different topic.
     
    marthos and Hornpipe like this.
  9. lollie

    lollie Avatar

    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    1,552
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Brittany
    This is roughly what we'll be getting with the incoming town sieges - but with a separate staging area and no town destruction.

    I don't see much fun in having to repair my house, so this incoming mechanic seems perfectly acceptable.
     
  10. Ashlynn [Pax]

    Ashlynn [Pax] Avatar

    Messages:
    995
    Likes Received:
    2,242
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Female
    I think Darkmoon's issue is the ephemeral and meaningless nature of the sieges because they can't really make any changes (certainly not permanent) to the town that is under siege. I'm sure the siege scenes will be fun the first few times but I get the impression the siege part will be going on while everyone in the town itself is blissfully unaware. And I suspect after the sieges lose their novelty, they'll just become one more loading screen you have to navigate before entering town.
     
    Hornpipe, meadmoon and Kaisa like this.
  11. meadmoon

    meadmoon Avatar

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Such is the fate of most cookie-cutter MMOs.
     
  12. Lord_Darkmoon

    Lord_Darkmoon Avatar

    Messages:
    4,350
    Likes Received:
    14,680
    Trophy Points:
    153
    And that is one of the problems, as initially SotA wasn't a MMO. It evens says exactly that on the Kickstarter website. Yet it more and more became a MMO after the Kickstarter, after people had given next to two million dollar for the initial concept. A concept that focused more on single player type of quests with real choices and visible consequences.
    There was even talk about "telling a single player story in a multiplayer environment in a new and unique way". What happened to that? What we have now is a run of the mill MMO with quests like in any other MMO and no real consequences but with a focus on housing.
    The Elder Scrolls Online shows that it is possible to show real consequences and tell a single player story in a multiplayer game. It can work. Yet in SotA for some reason all of this doesn't have focus or priority anymore although SotA is a advertised as a "story-driven RPG". The whole quest, choices and consequences and story parts seem to be rushed in so that this promise can at least somehow be fulfilled... But in the end this will be where SotA will be judged. Any "story-driven" RPG lives by the quests, how they are presented and implemented, how much fun they are, how NPCs react and are affected by the choices the player makes and how the consequences play out. If SotA fails in this regard, I doubt that the reviews will be very favorable... no matter how good the housing will be.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2016
    Hornpipe, majoria70 and Kambrius like this.
  13. Ashlynn [Pax]

    Ashlynn [Pax] Avatar

    Messages:
    995
    Likes Received:
    2,242
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Female
    It is one of the reasons I have always been skeptical about a game that is both an MMO and a rich single player RPG as was proposed. You can't have permanent changes to the game world based on your individual actions. It's just a limitation of there being one protagonist versus hundreds. The housing has certainly made things difficult too - that is why we have cloned scenes where they can't change the house lot layouts, only the things around them - a pretty terrible idea but then they needed to get all those lots in game for persistence. There is no denying that some aspects of the game have suffered due to the focus on housing.
     
    Lord_Darkmoon and Kambrius like this.
  14. Liz

    Liz Avatar

    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    204
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    I strongly disagree with "in the first place". This game was funded by many Ultima fans, not just the housing crowd. Housing might however be the main reason why more money came AFTER the kickstarter. The question is: will housing also keep it alive.
     
  15. Liz

    Liz Avatar

    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    204
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Spot on :D
     
  16. majoria70

    majoria70 Avatar

    Messages:
    10,347
    Likes Received:
    24,869
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    United States
    I think at this point we have to be 'a some thing for everyone type of game'. Still im only talking about multiplayer. I'm sure Richard will make a fantastic single player offline game as he is famous for when they get to that part of development. :) For people who are against pots or down on pots, they are people who perhaps have had no experience with them. They are not the evil devil, perhaps an unknown entity might look that way;). Anytime whisper Majoria in game I would gladly give anyone a place to stay.

    For me, I live in a pot, help manage a pot, and play every part of this game. I hang out with other players, explore the world etc. This game is missing terrific components that would make it a more fun experience atm.

    I don't necessarilly think we would have to jump in and cause damage to houses, although I like the smoke lingering effects showing after the siege is over that were mentioned, to have fun town sieges. There are so many towns and with randomness added to town sieges, one town wouldn't see a siege all that often. It could be such fun if done right.

    My opinion of course is that this game is so lacking in things for us to do, it is crazy. Our npcs surely need us to do some things for them, and also the game needs to change so we can and need to do work orders for each other. We may just be asking for 5 blue dresses and blue accessories, but please add the bulletin boards and changes to make people want to play this game. There doesn't have 2 be markers above Npc heads but talking to them could lead to you knowing they really need 2 bearskin rugs. Don't make me get out and hit the pocket lines. @DarkStarr @Lord British2, @Lum the Mad. Please give in a little on this. Then we could take our time releasing and have tons to do. We can be the best game. If you Check out things to do in the game Project Gorgon, it is also in development. In that game's early development you won't run out of things to do, they have made sure of that. We will be such an awesome game when we are done, but atm we need stuff to do.
    edited
    sorry edited again, I do need to sleep ;)
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2016
    Budner likes this.
  17. meadmoon

    meadmoon Avatar

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    18
    @majoria70 That is precisely what kills games. The only exception I can think of is World of Warcraft.

    Trying to be all things to everyone winds up being not much of anything to anyone.

    The devs should just pick a side and build the game they envisioned. This constant catering to players just has to stop.
     
    Kaisa and Fister Magee like this.
  18. majoria70

    majoria70 Avatar

    Messages:
    10,347
    Likes Received:
    24,869
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    United States
    Too late for that, sorry to say. They did not pick a side lol . We are already at the something for everyone type of game. This game has grown way out of the scope of picking a side lol. But oh well as long as what comes in is fantastic when completed then, we will see. ;)

    So I say we are something for everyone for these reasons:

    Ok we are a social game,

    we will be a little or lot of pvp that verdict is still out since it is not fully in the game,

    we have role-playing and story

    lots of pve areas and pvp areas with more coming in,

    we have pvp arenas but more is coming to pvp of course,

    treasure hunting will come in later,

    thievery in small is here like pick pockets can be found in small doses and areas ;)

    boating will come in later,

    mounts will be coming in

    crafting and harvesting is a big part of this game,

    we have the ability to play music and sync music with tons of kinds of instruments, we even have sheet music for convenience that needs no music download,

    and we have housing and player generated ability to create quest, run towns, renting property will be coming in later,yes housing is a big part of this game too,

    we have gardening and agriculture that is in early stages

    The Devs mentioned animal husbandry will come in,

    taming is here in fairly early stages

    fishing is here and will be expanded upon when they get a minute

    combat,sieges, wars, dungeons oh my. and who knows what else will come in later ;)

    I'm sure I left out things that are here. Nothing is done yet and much is not in yet. ;). I was just voicing my opinion, I am a big supporter of this game for over 3 years, and lately I am wishing for some things to get added in to connect the world and give us goals and achievements and reasons that matter while testing out the game. I still play almost daily and hangout with friends of course, I'm am rallying for some fun stuff right now, even though I love seeing the new stuff come in, it is just not tied in together, and yes true duh because we are in development, just wishing lately for something to tie it all together. ;) I'm trying to find my patiences ;)
     
    Hornpipe likes this.
  19. meadmoon

    meadmoon Avatar

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Yes, that has seriously hurt the game.

    All this reasons..."coming in later", "will come in", "not fully in yet"...they sound like mantras.

    You think many of us feel POTs are "evil" (from your earlier post), but that's not the issue nor has it ever been the issue. The issue is POTs are what keep those mantras going. Many of the things you listed should have been in the game from day one: Seriously, who puts out an alpha or beta without PvP, mounts, or fishing? None of those but hey, fully-functioning POTs for anyone who can cough up $750+.

    The priorities were wrong and it's going to cost them in player base.

    TBH, I'm really glad I bought in late because if I had a pledge that paid for later episodes I would be unhappy because I really don't believe there will be any more episodes.

    Unless they can pull off a Final Fantasy XIV miracle. (which BTW, cost SE a fortune)
     
    Kaisa likes this.
  20. mass

    mass Avatar

    Messages:
    1,223
    Likes Received:
    2,513
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I always read your posts and I want a lot of the same things that you want (although I want some of the multiplayer aspects, too). The problem with judging quests and story right now is that it is simply, largely not implemented yet. I agree that what's there is not inspired. I still think RG is trying to do, in general, what they talked about in kickstarter. It probably isn't exactly what they envisioned, but unfortunately, I don't think there's enough finalized story product there to actually judge. You've seen the recent videos where Richard talks about doing QA for a quest line and seems mostly unhappy with where it's at right now. I think we really have to wait until he says, 'This one's done; has my final stamp of approval' for some quest to see if it lives up to expectations or not. I can't imagine they underestimate the importance of immersive questing in this game. Without it, they will never expand the player base. We have a handful of people playing regularly that are ok with the sort of generic sandbox grinder game that is the current state. If the game is engaging from a quest perspective, I think you'll see players that come for that aspect and then stay for some multiplayer. If all they ever get are a handful of people that are willing to grind stuff and decorate their house, the playerbase will probably erode over time. If all episode 2 had to offer was new mines to grind, new mobs to grind, new recipes to grind, and new gear to get, why would anyone play that game considering there are hundreds already that offer the same thing?

    But I have no problem keeping these topics on the discussion boards as keen reminder :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.