Camelot Unchained MMO

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,775
640
Hartsman seems less of a creative influence and more of a nuts and bolts sort of guy. He seems to pull it in and be a tad too risk averse. Overly cautious, maybe. But that's a good thing. Projects NEED that to be more than pipe dreams or they need it when shit is so unfocused that it's jumped off the rails in completely uninteresting ways.

They do also need something else. Maybe he needs a partner to offset him, I dunno. But I honestly do think he needs someone around to tell him that there's probably a better way to go about QA on his content. That shit they pulled in rift was way too god damn wet towel locker room for me. That shit was straight up adolescent. I'm not sure why anyone thought that was a good idea.

I'm not taking his poster off the ceiling above my bed just yet. Rift had its flaws but I didn't feel like he stole my money.
This is kind of how I've always felt about the guy.. When Rift was in production I remember his blog about how outdoor dungeons were a waste of Dev time. Mainly because people tend not to revisit them once they level up. For a player like me who enjoys outdoor dungeons, I found that cringe worthy and my expectations for Rift were lowered because I wondering what else did he think was a waste of time? I think the game would of been better served utilizing the dynamic content they came up with and dealing with the dungeons that way. Playing Rift it was obvious that they designed the leveling process/most of the game to basically not inconvenience players in anyway. In theory designing on the side of player caution/convenience sounds great, but it doesn't really hook you long term. I think Scott has the ability to make some quality games in the future but his thoughts are probably more aimed towards the mass markets as opposed to mine which are more niche. I doubt he would ever come up with something that would keep me interested long term.
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
Outdoor dungeons are a waste of dev time though, at least non-max level ones, in Rift's context. Most leveling dungeons are.
 

Muligan

Trakanon Raider
3,242
913
Actually Scott did not start from the beginning with Rift. He came in and saved Heroes of Telara that was in dev hell and launched it. He has yet to be the head guy from the beginning on any project.
True... how soon I forget about HoT. Well, I guess even more so Scott has made a good living being a clean up guy. I would say then his next move is to be involved with a project since infancy. Unless he wants a piece of EQNext....
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
I would be very interested in a Hartsman production that was his from the beginning. I still don't know what kind of game he would make. All I know is that he's pretty amazing at running a team and getting content out there.
 

Denaut

Trump's Staff
2,739
1,279
This is kind of how I've always felt about the guy.. When Rift was in production I remember his blog about how outdoor dungeons were a waste of Dev time. Mainly because people tend not to revisit them once they level up. For a player like me who enjoys outdoor dungeons, I found that cringe worthy and my expectations for Rift were lowered because I wondering what else did he think was a waste of time? I think the game would of been better served utilizing the dynamic content they came up with and dealing with the dungeons that way. Playing Rift it was obvious that they designed the leveling process/most of the game to basically not inconvenience players in anyway. In theory designing on the side of player caution/convenience sounds great, but it doesn't really hook you long term. I think Scott has the ability to make some quality games in the future but his thoughts are probably more aimed towards the mass markets as opposed to mine which are more niche. I doubt he would ever come up with something that would keep me interested long term.
It is all about cost-benefit. Non-endgame dungeons have a high cost compared to their benefit. If things are going well then you can do things that aren't efficient, because they will improve the game and you have some time/money to burn. However, if things AREN'T going well and you really need to cut costs, then the things that provide the least benefit for the most cost are cut first. What gets cut is highly project and time-frame dependent, but I can see these being among the first to go when a project needs saving.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,775
640
I would be very interested in a Hartsman production that was his from the beginning. I still don't know what kind of game he would make. All I know is that he's pretty amazing at running a team and getting content out there.
It's true.. I wonder how VG would of turned out had he ran the show.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,775
640
It is all about cost-benefit. Non-endgame dungeons have a high cost compared to their benefit. If things are going well then you can do things that aren't efficient, because they will improve the game and you have some time/money to burn. However, if things AREN'T going well and you really need to cut costs, then the things that provide the least benefit for the most cost are cut first. What gets cut is highly project and time-frame dependent, but I can see these being among the first to go when a project needs saving.
I understand the financial aspect of it. I don't recall if what he wrote was in context to Rift or not. I don't think it was. My thing and again I'm not a Dev but instead of saying it's a waste of time, why not come up with ways of making the content stay relevant? They already had dynamic content and it's my understanding the system was capable of a lot more. So why not use it inside some outdoor dungeons? The trade off for me who enjoys group content were sub par rifts and a few instance dungeons. Not to say the outdoor stuff would of been better but what we got wasnt exactly great either.
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
I understand the financial aspect of it. I don't recall if what he wrote was in context to Rift or not. I don't think it was. My thing and again I'm not a Dev but instead of saying it's a waste of time, why not come up with ways of making the content stay relevant? They already had dynamic content and it's my understanding the system was capable of a lot more. So why not use it inside some outdoor dungeons? The trade off for me who enjoys group content were sub par rifts and a few instance dungeons. Not to say the outdoor stuff would of been better but what we got wasnt exactly great either.
It was in context with rift, because all the eq neckbeards were screaming for non instances and open world dungeons at that time of development.
 

Denaut

Trump's Staff
2,739
1,279
I understand the financial aspect of it. I don't recall if what he wrote was in context to Rift or not. I don't think it was. My thing and again I'm not a Dev but instead of saying it's a waste of time, why not come up with ways of making the content stay relevant? They already had dynamic content and it's my understanding the system was capable of a lot more. So why not use it inside some outdoor dungeons? The trade off for me who enjoys group content were sub par rifts and a few instance dungeons. Not to say the outdoor stuff would of been better but what we got wasnt exactly great either.
I suspect that is what the Rift system did. I didn't play Rift so I don't know much about it, but from a surface understanding it seems like a pretty good compromise between the cost of doing a dungeon vs. the cost of doing a rift, with them both bringing roughly the same benefit of outdoor non-instanced group content.

I don't know Scott and never worked with him, but from what I've seen he seems like a pretty sharp guy that understands how to make an MMORPG with all the constraints and problems such games are faced with.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,775
640
I suspect that is what the Rift system did. I didn't play Rift so I don't know much about it, but from a surface understanding it seems like a pretty good compromise between the cost of doing a dungeon vs. the cost of doing a rift, with them both bringing roughly the same benefit of outdoor non-instanced group content.

I don't know Scott and never worked with him, but from what I've seen he seems like a pretty sharp guy that understands how to make an MMORPG with all the constraints and problems such games are faced with.
The rift system was basically a public quest but not as good imo.
 

Lost Ranger_sl

shitlord
1,027
4
The rift system was made to address what became a glaring problem with public quests in Warhammer. Public quests were a fantastic idea, but after only a few weeks it became hard to find anyone willing to go do them. The ones closest to towns could see some action, but anything that was a bit out of the way was a ghost town shortly after launch. Rifts didn't eliminate this problem by any means, but because people didn't want their quest hubs/towns taken over it encouraged people to fight back against invasions. Even higher ups would help out in younger areas.

It is actually the biggest problem with non-instanced dungeons too. They are fun for a short time and then they become wasted content. Places like Sol Ro, Guk, and Seb were all awesome content when they were relevant. Then they became museums that only saw use when someone was feeling nostalgic with a Alt. Compare it to dungeons like Wailing Caverns in WoW which still get run dozens of times a day because of the dungeon finder/cross server system. That is almost 9 year old content STILL getting used. Say what you will about instancing, and WoW, but that is pretty damn efficient work.

I think that is why the open dungeon model is likely dead and gone. No one can really make a good argument to justify it. Why make something that will be a ghost town in a year when you can make something that will see constant activity for the better part of a decade? Unfortunately "but I prefer it!" doesn't count for anything when they are looking at the numbers.
 

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,908
6,897
The rift system was made to address what became a glaring problem with public quests in Warhammer. Public quests were a fantastic idea, but after only a few weeks it became hard to find anyone willing to go do them. The ones closest to towns could see some action, but anything that was a bit out of the way was a ghost town shortly after launch. Rifts didn't eliminate this problem by any means, but because people didn't want their quest hubs/towns taken over it encouraged people to fight back against invasions. Even higher ups would help out in younger areas.

It is actually the biggest problem with non-instanced dungeons too. They are fun for a short time and then they become wasted content. Places like Sol Ro, Guk, and Seb were all awesome content when they were relevant. Then they became museums that only saw use when someone was feeling nostalgic with a Alt. Compare it to dungeons like Wailing Caverns in WoW which still get run dozens of times a day because of the dungeon finder/cross server system. That is almost 9 year old content STILL getting used. Say what you will about instancing, and WoW, but that is pretty damn efficient work.

I think that is why the open dungeon model is likely dead and gone. No one can really make a good argument to justify it. Why make something that will be a ghost town in a year when you can make something that will see constant activity for the better part of a decade? Unfortunately "but I prefer it!" doesn't count for anything when they are looking at the numbers.
Open dungeons are not the problem, the leveling model is. ALL leveling content becomes a ghost town after a couple of months. Especially now with max level being so easy and fast to get to in modern mmos. EQ's low level dungeons only lasted as long as they did because leveling was so brutal back then. Slowing down leveling can make low level areas relevant for a longer period, but it only forestalls the inevitable.

GW2's deleveling system is one way to deal with it, but they haven't done a very good job of it yet. Being deleveled isn't enough to entice players back to forgotten area's. They need a carrot too (gear, abilities, quest objectives, etc).
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,775
640
The rift system was made to address what became a glaring problem with public quests in Warhammer. Public quests were a fantastic idea, but after only a few weeks it became hard to find anyone willing to go do them. The ones closest to towns could see some action, but anything that was a bit out of the way was a ghost town shortly after launch. Rifts didn't eliminate this problem by any means, but because people didn't want their quest hubs/towns taken over it encouraged people to fight back against invasions. Even higher ups would help out in younger areas.

It is actually the biggest problem with non-instanced dungeons too. They are fun for a short time and then they become wasted content. Places like Sol Ro, Guk, and Seb were all awesome content when they were relevant. Then they became museums that only saw use when someone was feeling nostalgic with a Alt. Compare it to dungeons like Wailing Caverns in WoW which still get run dozens of times a day because of the dungeon finder/cross server system. That is almost 9 year old content STILL getting used. Say what you will about instancing, and WoW, but that is pretty damn efficient work.

I think that is why the open dungeon model is likely dead and gone. No one can really make a good argument to justify it. Why make something that will be a ghost town in a year when you can make something that will see constant activity for the better part of a decade? Unfortunately "but I prefer it!" doesn't count for anything when they are looking at the numbers.
That's why you get creative and allow the unused dungeons to grow/change the longer they sit there unexplored. Why can't a level 10 dungeon grow to a level 50 dungeon over time with the use of dynamic content? When players defeat whatever it is that grew the dungeon it goes back to it's original form and begins to grow a new form.
 

Tearofsoul

Ancient MMO noob
1,791
1,257
That's why you get creative and allow the unused dungeons to grow/change the longer they sit there unexplored. Why can't a level 10 dungeon grow to a level 50 dungeon over time with the use of dynamic content? When players defeat whatever it is that grew the dungeon it goes back to it's original form and begins to grow a new form.
That would be cool
 

Lost Ranger_sl

shitlord
1,027
4
Both of your ideas sound great for a sandbox game like UO/EVE. If that is what you envision as your ideal MMO then I completely agree. If you are talking about DIKU style games like EQ though then that is just not going to happen. A dungeon growing in power sounds fun for a sandbox. A dungeon that grows in level does not. You run into itemization problems, that can only really be fixed with generic +5% better! boring design. Focus would need to be taken off loot/leveling and put on challenge like it was in UO. Which I am all for.

I'd love to see developers stop hugging level systems like a security blanket. I personally find small skill increases, and skill caps to be a more enjoyable system. Training with friends to get +.5 increases in skills felt more immersive to me then "DING!!!!!!".
 

Fogel

Mr. Poopybutthole
13,436
53,438
That would have to be some crazy dynamic content design to be worth it. Otherwise instead of the zone filled with level 10 gnolls lead by fippy darkpaw that you've already done 3 times, its the same zone except filled with level 50 gnolls lead by fippy darkpaw's grandfather.
 

Pyksel

Rasterizing . . .
840
284
Keep in mind that the only way to level in this game is going to be through RvR, at least that's what's being sold. Now whether that means PvE based quests in PvP/RvR or simply RvR related quests is beyond me.
 

Abefroman

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
12,594
11,938
http://www.gamebreaker.tv/mmorpg/mar...w-kickstarter/

TrainWreck1.gif


TrainWreck1.gif