Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Okenido]

Why is it always level 30 Soulwynd?

[Keiseth]

Yeah, sidekick is mostly for covering a small gap. 5 levels, maybe? Though it's still an awesome future. Exemplaring (the opposite- leveling down) is great too.

The bases are extraordinary. I thought they were silly at first, but I just saw one of such exquisite detail-- floating platforms, apartment complexes, hidden doorways. It was a testament to creativity.

It's a shame, a while back a group was trying to buy Ryzom and open-source it. Make a community MMO. It would have been awesome.

[Soulwynd]

Why is it always level 30 Soulwynd?

I have no idea. Might be a trend amongst mmos that have about 50 levels? Once you hit slightly above half, you really have to pay to work if you want levels.

[Virex]

So have you played State of Emergency?


Uru Live is an MMO without grind(actually, that's supposed to go open-source soon, if not already.  I shall have to check this...), but partly because it's so incredibly different from most MMO games.

Another option is the Monster Hunter model.  There are no levels, but you can upgrade your armor with loot.  I don't know how Frontier works, but there's a reason Freedom 2 was the best-selling PSP game until FF7:Crisis Core was released.

I'm really looking forward to Monster Hunter Freedom Unite, and hoping that Frontier gets a stateside release.


Actually, a friend of mine was trying to design an MMO recently, and he would pitch ideas back and forth with me.  He kept saying "but you've gotta have grind," and I'd respond with "No, do this instead."  I tended to take the Monster Hunter model to a logical extreme.

Excuse me for asking a potentialy very stupid question, but doesn't the monster hunter model essentialy mean you have to grind for loot? Or does it work in such a way that you can get the good stuff without doing a lot? If so, doesn't the game stop being interesting quickly?

[Yanlin]

Here's my idea.

Everyone starts at the max level. Everyone can do everything. Let them fight it out.

[Chutney]

Here's my idea.

Everyone starts at the max level. Everyone can do everything. Let them fight it out.

Public test realms on WoW?

[Yanlin]

No. I mean a complete sandbox. Everyone can do whatever and the only thing holding it together are alliances.

[Rhodan]

Then you won't have an MMORPG, which is the whole point I think.

[Yanlin]

Why not? Massively multiplayer? Check. Online? Check. Role playing? User dependent. Game? Check.

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

No. I mean a complete sandbox. Everyone can do whatever and the only thing holding it together are alliances.

And hilarity CRASH ensued!

Truely, this idea could marvel, but only in a limited number. There has not a number-processor in the world that could hold a GOOD simulator for 1000 ++ people AT THE SAME TIME with NO RESTRAINS

If you have less than 100 people, it's not MMORPG anymore.

[Rhodan]

Why not? Massively multiplayer? Check. Online? Check. Role playing? User dependent. Game? Check.

That's exactly what I mean.  If the role playing is purely done by the players, it's not an RPG.  RPGs are supposed to have stats and skills or similar character development mechanics.  It's the name of the genre, so you can't just take the acronym literally.
If everyone on WoW decides to see who can run from A to B fastest, WoW doesn't suddenly become a racing game. (Would be more fun though)

And IndonesiaWarMinister, I don't think Yanlin's idea also included building.  He just means max levels and skills for everyone, so the amount of players could still be in the thousands.  The minimum amount of players needed for an MMO of any kind is probably as soon as a single person can't oversee the entire social network.

[Okenido]

What makes a RPG a RPG is still under debate.

[Rhodan]

Probably, but that doesn't change anything.

In order for a video game to be an RPG, it has to provide RPG gameplay mechanics.  If the people themselves provide it, the game itself is not an RPG, just a virtual world in which people are RP'ing.
And the only kind of RP a computer can provide at the moment uses skill points or similar mechanics, unless computers can tell stories and decide what's fair play by now.  And if they did, they'd still secretly do it by numbers so meh.

[Soulwynd]

You can have stats and numbers and still be effective at end game. Or rather, be effecting through all the game, even if your character is new.

I think the diversity of what you can do is way more important, in order to have fun, than having just one skill or ability that is better than the next one. At least that's my opinion.

[Yanlin]

Why not? Massively multiplayer? Check. Online? Check. Role playing? User dependent. Game? Check.

That's exactly what I mean.  If the role playing is purely done by the players, it's not an RPG.  RPGs are supposed to have stats and skills or similar character development mechanics.  It's the name of the genre, so you can't just take the acronym literally.
If everyone on WoW decides to see who can run from A to B fastest, WoW doesn't suddenly become a racing game. (Would be more fun though)

And IndonesiaWarMinister, I don't think Yanlin's idea also included building.  He just means max levels and skills for everyone, so the amount of players could still be in the thousands.  The minimum amount of players needed for an MMO of any kind is probably as soon as a single person can't oversee the entire social network.

Uh... Role playing is about being in character.

Not about having various customizable stats.