Yeah I think I should have also stated "Find what is bad about these games, and replace it with a better mechanism."Ukerric said:That"s mainly how World of Warcraft "won". No revolution, all evolution, lovingly polished, pruned. No Vision? to meddle: if it"s not really fun for most, redo it.
Nice Post. I"d give my left nut to play in a game with this immersion.Grave said:I"m going to go with more dynamic content as well, though I disagree with Gecko"s extreme version. What he describes would never work in an MMO.
I"d like to see things like the world changing based on day/night, season, and so on. Weather changing as the season does, complete with snowfall during the winter, etc. would be really cool and immersive. A lot of work too, though, admittedly. From a gameplay standpoint, maybe certain events or quests are only running during a certain season. Maybe certain tradeskill goods become more or less valuable depending on the season. Stuff like that.
The Day/night cycle could effect anything from what creatures are roaming at what time of day to certain quests only being available or doable at certain times. You could have a graveyard area that might be graverobbers and cultists during the day, but at night the dead rise out of their graves and roam around. Or, maybe there"s a quest to slay vampires and collect a certain type of dust from their remains, but the catch is the dust is only valuable if the vampire is awake and active when killed. The player would need to wait until nightfall to find the active vampires and fight them. Probably very simple to do, and yet it would add a lot of interest and replayability to the world.
I"d like to see NPCs actually going about their daily activities during the day, and going to sleep at night. A city could change completely in the hours of the night as the rogues and assassins make it their own.
Speaking of that, in a similar vein I just want to see city life be more interesting in general. In a next-gen game, I want to see huge sweeping cities that I can explore. I want to be able to actually sit down and just "play" without ever leaving the city if I want to. Give me an assassin"s guild to join and some "daily quests" that give me marks to track down within the city and eliminate without getting caught, Assassin"s Creed style. You could easily come up with various other little mini-games for other types of characters that would give players something fun to do in between adventuring. You could simply ensure that everything the player needs is easy to get to (AH, Bank, etc all close together in a place that they can reach easily, the rest of the city can be for other things) and the size of the city would never be a hindrance to people who aren"t interested in the other stuff.
If you implemented a system like this you could also take it to another level and actually track time as it goes by. Let"s say a year in game was 3-4 months, so 3 times per RL year you could patch in a little update that represents this passage of time. Maybe new structures are erected, or new leaders appointed, new events take place, wars reach a conclusion, etc. This could be sort of like the monthly content update that Asheron"s Call always had (very cool) except you don"t need to do it quite that often.
It depends on what you"re talking about, and also how you handle your variability. I have to respond with there"s always a solution again (that is, for the bigger scripted variability/events and possible town events).Ngruk said:at the end of the day the bottom line is if 1-2 people are "enjoying" something and the other 8 out of ten are not, that sucks for 80% of the people "experiencing" that "cool thing".
I hear you. I think there"s a certain psychological value to realism in a fake world though, something that wecan"tdiscredit, especially in something that truly innovates itself from the pack. In EQ how many nights did you leave your computer on, character near the water while people ran from BoT to PoK book? Not to mention with the PoTranquility sound still on.Ngruk said:I mean Boston runs just fine without me, people, and lots of them, are ALL busy and going from here to there and NONE of them need me to quest for them. Having said that I don"t drive into the city to sit back and watch it happen.... I might, I don"t know, but certainly not more than once
Sadly that reminds me of EQ2...I remember in Qeynos that girl that always would run around chasing her cat and crying.Ngruk said:People aren"t always "home" or "in distress" or "at work" but there is at least an appearance that they are "living" beyond standing around with a yellow ! above their heads waiting for the next "hero" to come along and save their lost cat.
I love this idea too. The main frustration from something like this for me would be wanting to finish that quest so that you could make room in your quest log to pick up someting else. Managing the number of quests you have, having to decide which to delete here and there to make room and whatnot, is simply tedious. Its tedious in Warhammer, it was tedious in WoW, it was tedious in EQ2, and there"s simply nothing fun about it. I"d like to see the whole "limited quest log" done away with. Then make an unlimited quest item inventory like Warhammer has (WoW should steal this, and probably will), cause managing your inventory to make room for quest items is just as tedious. The problem is mostly solved for me with those two things. I wouldn"t feel the need to wait around for a quest NPC, because I don"t have to free up quest space or get rid of the item. And I know I"d run into the NPC eventually. And then once you did turn it in, it"d feel like more of an accomplishment somehow.Ngruk said:Ya that"s a great idea! I love the thought of quest givers not always standing in their same location, handing out the same quests. But how much do I like it when I"m "second man in"? And that quest I needed to progress a quest line has an NPC who"s "not home"? I have to wait 45 minutes of game time for him to "come home"? Huh? Ok that sucks....
And yet, your actions, as well as those of your "allies" have had profound impact on Boston, both in terms of its prominence, economy, discord, and how other "NPCs" behave. Don"t tell me you"d forgotten about "04 so soon!Ngruk said:Ok, I get it, once maybe. How cool would it be if Freeport ran itself and everyone had things "to do", the NPC"s that is. Man that would be cool, sort of. I mean Boston runs just fine without me, people, and lots of them, are ALL busy and going from here to there and NONE of them need me to quest for them. Having said that I don"t drive into the city to sit back and watch it happen.
This goes back to what I was saying about making quests more heroic.Ngruk said:Ya that"s a great idea! I love the thought of quest givers not always standing in their same location, handing out the same quests. But how much do I like it when I"m "second man in"? And that quest I needed to progress a quest line has an NPC who"s "not home"? I have to wait 45 minutes of game time for him to "come home"? Huh? Ok that sucks....
Precisely. And as long as the player is receiving XP / some reward whenever they complete a major objective, they"ll still feel that sense of accomplishment even if they don"t happen to finish the entire chain in one sitting. You still keep the benefit of WoW"s quick questing, which is allowing people to play for very short sessions if they need to, but you don"t need to dumb down the quests as a result.Kuro said:Fewer, Longer quests is something I can totally get behind.
The new generation of MMOs has killed Quests. They"re Errands.
Stories are good but I would imagine it would take to much development time and effort to maintain that continually. I would think if your game consists of community driven events it will go a long way into creating this effect. Think of the War Effort for AQ in WOW, or what may be the Territory Control mechanic in WAR to siege capitol cities.Ngruk said:So maybe you mean something like a story, that had players involved directly in the outcome? And maybe that outcome had a tangible meaningful effect for the winners? And maybe a tangible meaningful butdifferenteffect for the losers?
Interesting.
A Tale in the Desert.Apostle said:I cannot, off the top of my head, remember what the mmo was, but there was one that had community projects.
Are we talking about a DIKU kind of game? Larger servers for one. Also flexible content which means scaling of dungeons etc. I don"t think we have the tech for truly dynamic content in MMOs yet.Ngruk said:One thing, that has not been done, but you feel is either a must in next gen or a serious differentiator that could set a game apart.
I like this line of thinking, and it sounds somewhat like what was announced from the Bioware people for their SW:TOR MMO.Grave said:This goes back to what I was saying about making quests more heroic.
If you"re thinking about this in WoW terms, yeah it would never work and it would just annoy your players when they couldn"t go round up all the quests they wanted to do at once. Like others have said, they"d want to get it out of their quest log and move on or something like that.
Let"s instead assume we have a game that has fewer overall quests, but these quests have multiple objectives and "mini-quests" built in to them that automatically update as you progress through them. The individual quests are larger in scope, feel more important to the player, and take about as long to fully complete as a couple of WoW-style quests combined. Each step would award XP and some steps would even give rewards, depending on how long of a quest chain we"re talking about here.
The end result would be players would move out of the WoW mentality of just grabbing every "!" they see and moving on. Instead, what quests they take on might be different from player to player, or even from character to character if you"re playing an alt. Rather than a linear line of progression that you follow, you wouldn"t exactly know what the story of your character"s life would be like. You don"t know exactly who you will run into or what adventure you might find. Of course, if the player knew ahead of time what quest they wanted to take, they could always ask a guard or something where a particular NPC was at the moment. You could implement some system that allowed players to track down NPCs no matter where they were in the city.
My point I"m getting at is in answer to how much you"d like it the second time around. You could have a completely different experience on an alt than your main character had just because you took a few different quests that led you to different areas or told a different story. You could even deliberately try to find a different path than you previously took by visiting different locations, maybe going to the tavern to find a quest or two rather than the local temple.
As for the waiting 45 minutes to progress your quest: like I mentioned above, we"d need some sort of system that allows us to find NPCs at anytime. I realize most MMO players are all about instant gratification these days, so I"m not trying to condone too much "realism" in the sense that a player actually needs to wait all night for an NPC. We need a good mix of immersion and fun. So, if the NPC is about his business in the city, visiting the market square or something, just let us ask people if they"ve seen them. Or, just implement a QuestHelper type addon into the default UI. Sure seems like enough players want it as it is consistently the most downloaded add-on in WoW. If the NPC is asleep or something, you could allow players to wake them up with a knock at the door, though ideally they would want to be grabbing some quests that are only available at night and wouldn"t mind waiting until morning.
Larger servers would be awesome if the world could accommodate it. I like having a HUGE community to play with.Draegan said:Are we talking about a DIKU kind of game? Larger servers for one. Also flexible content which means scaling of dungeons etc. I don"t think we have the tech for truly dynamic content in MMOs yet.
The problem of fewer/longer quests is that, quite simply, you play even less in groups. Having lots of quests in progress allows you to team with other players, to advance them. If you have 20 quests in progress, your same-level friend may have 6 or 7 in common with you. If you have 3 quests in progress, the odds of having any common ground is close to zero, which makes grouping... more and more irrelevant.Kuro said:Fewer, Longer quests is something I can totally get behind.