"Games must kill their kings!" Raph Koster (UO lead Designer, SWG Art Director)

I would agree as long as it is not released. But many games rush the release for money and this fires back. There are games out there who had 2 years after release the same stupid old bugs and balance problems and people wonder why they fail?
And most of the time you have no idea if stuff gets done or the game is already over cause the devs dont give any Informations to the players anymore.
And this might be the fault of the publisher cause they decide to no longer invest into the game.

 

Absolutely agree.

 

I read this article too... and exactly this is why SotA has zero appeal anymore. The Kings can't be destoyed. In this game they even can buy to be kings.

I know you only see player level in that regard... but truth is killing any high level player is easy if your group plays better or outnumbers them. But this never happens in SotA because there is no possibility and no mechanic that encourages this. Only ganking. No Pot gets challenged... nothing matters a very good read indeed.

 

.... So much for glorious exits from the forums

 

If a tree falls in the forest but no one was there to see it, did it fall? Yes. If a person hits 194 GMs but I was not there to see it, did it affect my game? No. Can I 'sacrifice' my knowledge that someone has 194 GMs so I can focus on my own game play. Yes. If I didn't, I would be 'covetous'. To covet leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. And that leads to the dark side. But I agree it can seem ridiculous - given the advertised intent of it being hard to maintain many GMs - that I can grind in a 5-tier zone for days and not GM a skill, while we have 194 GM players out there still running around. So I get that topics like this are about the principle of the matter. But I do think those players still put in time to earn that though. Now, back to my game.

 

Uhm... good sire... thats not how this philosophysical question is presented, at all

You also misquoted Yogurt

 

I admire the players what can easily refuse sone aspects of the game.
Ahu once said we didnt pay for the whole road, but i disagree, i want to use the whole road, i dont want it to own or just for myself, i dont want to be the fastest on that road, but i want to drive it from start to end and want all aspects of the road to be ready for driving to me...
And now the important part...
If PvP is part of this Road i dont want people neither in Trabbis nor in Henessey Venoms.
The vehicles what are choosable to compete with schould be more or less equal strong.
End of story, and i give a **** on spent time and reward.
That's the lamest and most antisocial statement i've ever heard.
The poor are poor because they didnt work hard enough right?
Their poverty is self inflicted right?
If one hitch up ones knickers he can do it all, but they just dont work hard enough.
Right?!
Yeah i know where you are coming from.
Have Fun.
This game will fail, if they dont balance it.
And it will maybe even then fail because of pricing and many other things.
The game has already failed in some way, although i can have fun and still playing it and be able to immerse etc... To make it a RPG for me and my friends.

What this game will never be is a MMORPG or a general enlived rpg environment, it will allways only be a private bubble game, where likeminded play together, maybe they will fight each other in pvp scenes or Tournaments, but there will be no sandbox PvP in large scales or for a lot of players.
Nobody will play in pvp scenes unless he's a hardcore pvper and has grinded all you need to have skills and gear etc...
Why?
Because a group of level 80 with mediocre gear cannot fight a single level 100.
And it takes a special approach to grind to high levels and gear or it takes many years.
The Game fails imho for a typical american attitude.
Work hard = reward, Meritocracy!
The American Dream what is unfortunately a Hollywood lie.
And it has less to do with gaming imo, it's not about relaxing and competing for fun in the first place it's about who has more and who is able to work harder, to obtain more and spent more.

Most of you would say money and p2w (and the game has ofc p2w) is bad and wealth shouldnt be the matter about strength and power.
But it seems most people are ok that more spent time and hard work is rewarded at best no matter if this imbalances the gameworld like it would if money were the first and more important factor.

All who think that gaming and playing games need this survival of the fittest attitude and are convinced that work hard = reward is the key for gaming
have fun doing whatever you do.
I play a different game than you.
i have more fun playing games without any ratings, levels, grades...
And these games can also be very funny and competetive. But its less about climbing ladders or hard working to show what your potential is.

 

google translate:

A sage of the MMORPG scene explains why it is clever when games kill their kings. As an example of what happens when you don't do it, he calls professional tennis or Amazon.

Raph Koster is considered one of the great MMORPG thinkers of the last 20 years. He is a designer of gaming systems, was involved in MMORPG milestones such as Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies lead.

Currently, Koster advises the indie-MMORPG Crow's and gives them feedback on their gaming systems.

In his private blog, Koster now explains why MMORPGs have to kill their kings and why gaming systems should not be based on stability, but on decay and change.

Professional tennis shows the problems with "strong becoming stronger"

As proof of his theory, Koster takes an article about the professional tennis of the media page.

In professional tennis, it is now the case that the champions are getting older because they can buy benefits and optimal conditions through previous prize money. Young, financially weak professionals cannot afford these benefits, and therefore do not win tournaments and remain financially weak.

Therefore, the statistics show that the top-100 tennis players in the world are much older today than they used to.

So were the 100 best male tennis players in the world:

1990 on average 24.6 years old – only 6% of the top players were over 30
2017 Are you 28.6 years old – 40% of the top players are over 30

This means: The strongest climb the ladder of success up to the top and then throw the ladder around so that no one can follow them.

The fact that the prize money in tennis was getting higher and older players had a long time to collect prize money, the elite can buy enormous benefits:

A star like Roger Federer is doing a huge coaching staff to be optimally prepared for every game.
Novak Djokovic sleeps in a hypobarischen chamber.
Andy Murray indulges in a personal diet where he daily 50 different types of sushi munching.

"Young professionals" cannot afford all of this. For them it becomes more and more difficult to win tournaments and to break into the top 100 of the world, according to the medium.

According to Koster, MMORPG systems have the same problems: a system in which the strong are rewarded leads to the strong becoming stronger. This makes it more difficult for everyone else to unlock them. The strong increase the "price" that new numbers need to enter into the elitist circle.

So if a MMORPG system has the best PVP players, they're getting stronger and it's getting harder to beat or catch them.

No one can be so close to the strongest. The typical player will fall below the average that is driven up by the super-strong. This leads to stagnation and backward progress. There is a cartel at the top, perhaps even a monopoly. The system dies.

This is true not only for tennis stars or PvP systems in MMORPGs. According to Koster, it also applies to Amazon or supermarkets. It's true for Facebook or the MMORPGs: The biggest MMORPGs have the most revenue, so they can grow the strongest and expand their supremacy.

When the strong become stronger, they turn off the competition and the system dies.

According to Koster, each system is based, which does not regularly destroy its kings.

Koster says: You need some inequality, that leads to teams and cities, to competition and cohesion. But too much inequality leads to stagnation and centralism, to the loss of freedom.

A game designer must constantly learn: build your systems so that they ferment and bubbling, do not put on stability and the Unausweichbare.

 

The context maybe got lost in translation, but indeed it was because someone said we are taxed in this game and compared it to real life. I said well its not like in real life because with all the taxes I pay in my entire life, I have financed a few kilometers of road + its upkeep + perhaps a few lamp posts So I get a FREAKIN good deal out of it

The combination of all our taxes allow you to feel secure in the fact you can take all roads and they will be ready

In game well that is another story, and we were talking about death decay, not sure you want to open that can of worms again ?

You've been harping about that for a while but I didn't really get what you mean, this is clearer now where your confusion stems from :

True RPGs are more or less based on D&D, and in D&D the best example that is similar to our situation is a LARP.

How boring would a LARP be if everyone was the same level, there would be no reason to form certain alliances to overcome your shortcomings It would also be mindlessly violent : there is no chaos in social dynamics that prevents a LOT of violence because people take time to be diplomatic, to form stronger relations and think about what they do.

Yes its a recipe that invites elitism and oligarchy lol... but thats why the GMs are there for.

I plug back in the OP with this remark, we have created a system where people would be offended and feel enraged if we changed the rules of the game on the fly like any GM would do in a LARP to balance things for everyone.

It requires a human to do this, with empathy and a great listening ability, patience and perseverance.

wow ok... now you come out of the closet, pretty violent analysis, I don't disagree in essence.

However, never say never, you do not know... what we know is that King Gariott hopes for true gameplay, however if you start that before the game is almost flawless, you have unresolvable drama to constantly monitor, and we've seen what that does to devs and event moderators.

The part I agree with is that the game was designed with hints of that elitist mentality that obviously needs to be balanced with a human factor. Portalarium is making a BIG error indeed and we've been blowing the whistle since around R11, when it became obvious where we were heading.

Sure some people will fall into the trap, was it intentional, we know King Gariott is shady (yes I said that) and almost machiavelic in his social experiments sometimes. But those people competing about who has more will not affect your game... there will always be us like minded players, mature enough to overlook the handicaps of the game, and honestly having a dozen of them as close friends would probably suffice me to have a fun multiplayer game experience.

Sure large wars that weren't arbitrarily started and rather forced themselves upon people would be amazing, sure open world pvp could be amazing with certain story arches.

But not without a true to the ultima legacy skill system, as you insist upon when I read between the lines of your political cauldron

 

@Ahuaeynjgkxs

1:50 about LARP and Games

3:50 also an important thesis

If you want watch the whole docu ;-)

 

Nice video, reminds me of fond memories...

 

Must say it's good to have this talked out so much. I have been a large supporter of the hard cap system change in the past. Still am truth be told but do understand that SOTA is not that kind of game. I respect players like @Mac2 his view for the future of the game is not wrong. Even if I would prefer it be different. SOTA to me stands out from the "NORM" in mmorpgs and it's strange to many players. I keep updating myself on the game in hopes it does become something I can put my time into. The community here has PASSION to see SOTA become all it can be. What it will take to make this into a multi million player base game? No one can truly say they have the answer. Just seeing that people still care so much to try and bring the community closer in understanding each other is great.

I'm getting away from the OP. (sorry)

I would still like to see hard caps but keep in mind the people who got to where they are now did so though hard work grinding for untold hours. I would like to see hard caps. I don't know how to do this without destroying the fairly gathered time investment people have put in.

 

Just joining the conversation here, so this has likely already been said...

To me, the OP excerpt suggests that no matter how long the player plays the game, the bonuses given to items should never become so utterly great or unattainable that newer players have to play for years upon years to obtain that level of in game power. That skill (in choosing which talents to learn and setup) and timing should be more important, all the way into the "Seasoned Veteran" level of game play.

I'm good with that. It felt quite a bit like that in UO and in early SWG, for the longest time, Pre-Combat Upgrade, even into the Jump to Lightspeed expansion.

 

Id vote Irksome.