Print

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

[smigenboger]

Then there's Vanguard's crafting style, making skills specialized, so you must go to a crafter to get good gear, and you can't make both your weapons and your armor

[zwei]

A MMO-design guy here:

People hate it when you nulify their achievment. It is about perception: If it feels like developer taking away stuff from them, then it is not really fun to acquire new item; If player obtains "cool sword" and it will decay and he has to replace it with "less cool sword" or "cool sword, same grind again", well, he is going to be unhappy. Loosing few pieces of equipment at same time can be devastating as he realizes that "there is no point, i will have to regrind it over and over again."

Last thing you want to make player feel that he has to grind to just maintain status quo. There is nothing more demotivating than that.

You want player to feel he is getting something "extra" if you want to support crafting. Consumables, for example. Say, player has "cool sword" that will be his forever, but he can buy "sword ballance kit" made by swordsmith that will modify his sword with some extra properties for few hours.

Now, perception is shifted: he is not battling game system to keep his equipment in working order, instead he is getting something "extra" that he will want to replenish every so often and thus create market for such upgrades. Most players will pay this "crafter tax" and be happy.

Decay is always way cooler on paper than in subscription-killing reality.

[Pathos]

A MMO-design guy here:

People hate it when you nulify their achievment. It is about perception: If it feels like developer taking away stuff from them, then it is not really fun to acquire new item; If player obtains "cool sword" and it will decay and he has to replace it with "less cool sword" or "cool sword, same grind again", well, he is going to be unhappy. Loosing few pieces of equipment at same time can be devastating as he realizes that "there is no point, i will have to regrind it over and over again."

Last thing you want to make player feel that he has to grind to just maintain status quo. There is nothing more demotivating than that.

You want player to feel he is getting something "extra" if you want to support crafting. Consumables, for example. Say, player has "cool sword" that will be his forever, but he can buy "sword ballance kit" made by swordsmith that will modify his sword with some extra properties for few hours.

Now, perception is shifted: he is not battling game system to keep his equipment in working order, instead he is getting something "extra" that he will want to replenish every so often and thus create market for such upgrades. Most players will pay this "crafter tax" and be happy.

Decay is always way cooler on paper than in subscription-killing reality.

See, the idea is that it's only a grind at the start ( and even then it shouldn't be, he should just be gradually going from less expensive to more expensive swords as he kills things out in the world, the jump in quality between swords shouldn't be massive, either ) as the player makes money from using his tools ( weapons etc ) and higher quality ones give you more usage / more capability to kill creatures.

If you're stated in your design statement ( and it's open to the public or in a features list ) that you want a decay system, players complaining about it should be ignored. They are not the target audience you're looking for, whilst there IS a target audience who want decay to fund a crafter economy.

Basically, you should get more money out of a set of equipment than you put into it, players shouldn't expect to keep everything forever and everything should be able to be resold. Certain things ( lacquered wooden furniture, artifacts etc ) shouldn't decay, however, but should be hard to obtain and mostly useless.

[fenrif]

A MMO-design guy here:

People hate it when you nulify their achievment. It is about perception: If it feels like developer taking away stuff from them, then it is not really fun to acquire new item; If player obtains "cool sword" and it will decay and he has to replace it with "less cool sword" or "cool sword, same grind again", well, he is going to be unhappy. Loosing few pieces of equipment at same time can be devastating as he realizes that "there is no point, i will have to regrind it over and over again."

Last thing you want to make player feel that he has to grind to just maintain status quo. There is nothing more demotivating than that.

You want player to feel he is getting something "extra" if you want to support crafting. Consumables, for example. Say, player has "cool sword" that will be his forever, but he can buy "sword ballance kit" made by swordsmith that will modify his sword with some extra properties for few hours.

Now, perception is shifted: he is not battling game system to keep his equipment in working order, instead he is getting something "extra" that he will want to replenish every so often and thus create market for such upgrades. Most players will pay this "crafter tax" and be happy.

Decay is always way cooler on paper than in subscription-killing reality.

That's only really a problem if you make the game both extremely loot-focused and extremely grind-heavy. Sure in a game like WoW, where every item is super awesomely cool, with hundreds of bonuses and so forth, and can only be obtained by a rare drop from some 25 man dungeon, decay would piss people off.

The problem is that you're making the sword itself a huge achievement. Getting it is an achievement, walking around town with your cool glowey-blue custom model sword is an achievement. And then assuming the player wont want to carry on getting new swords, and new items. In a game focused on diablo-style loot grabbing the player is going to be constantly getting new swords. If he gets a sword and it decays in a week of play-time it shouldn't matter, because by the end of the week (assuming it only tics down while he's in-game) he'll have a new sword and wont care.

[eerr]

If you can't keep the sword then why did you want the sword in the first place?

[Pathos]

If you can't keep the sword then why did you want the sword in the first place?

The same reason you buy clothes. Or tools. Convenience, usefulness, ability to gain more time / money from it's use.

[alfie275]

Wurm.

[Pathos]

Wurm.

The trouble with WurmOnline is the sheer amount of disgusting grinding you have to do.

I mean, DIGGING is a skill.

[zwei]

...

That's only really a problem if you make the game both extremely loot-focused and extremely grind-heavy. Sure in a game like WoW, where every item is super awesomely cool, with hundreds of bonuses and so forth, and can only be obtained by a rare drop from some 25 man dungeon, decay would piss people off.

The problem is that you're making the sword itself a huge achievement. Getting it is an achievement, walking around town with your cool glowey-blue custom model sword is an achievement. And then assuming the player wont want to carry on getting new swords, and new items. In a game focused on diablo-style loot grabbing the player is going to be constantly getting new swords. If he gets a sword and it decays in a week of play-time it shouldn't matter, because by the end of the week (assuming it only tics down while he's in-game) he'll have a new sword and wont care.

There is more than highend drops when we consider achievment.

For example, if player character starts naked with several empty inventory slots, just act of filling one of them is achievment of its own kind.

Many players are collectors, collecting for example one of each sword design (or all stat permutations of one design).

Then you have people who are simply attached to one item (propably every mmo player has few memoralibia stashed)

As for having new sword by time you run out of it. Sure, but it would bug people. For first few swords, it could be even exciting to carry spare with you to have weapon when your current "runs out", but when it is X-th one? It just turns to managing shopping list. "my wednesdays groceries are, hmm, sword, chainmail shirt and left leather glove."

It does not even have to be grind as in thast you have spend hours killing same mob to get gold for it. Grind here is that you are going to do exactly same thing (buy new stuff on shopping list) over and over each week.

[qwertyuiopas]

What about a maximum decay of only a few levels, only decays as part of an attack? Combined with semi-easy repairs(mid-level crafters could repair even upper-level gear, but only the upper levels can *make* that gear), it might not be as much of a problem.

[alway]

I would like crafting which actually involves crafting. Most use a stupid little progress bar which you just sit through. I would prefer if you are making, say, a sword, that you would have to aim each and every hammer strike. Do away with stupid pre-defined items and skills, make everything procedural, and then make the player actually make it. In reality, swords and armor were family heirlooms which were passed down through generations, not mass produced things which poured out of the orifaces of every dead boar. Get the player involved in the creation of the items, make them take time and real effort on the part of the player, and when they finish, they will have a product which they themselves put value in and has a finished style unique to them.

Will this ever happen? Maybe. But not any time soon.

[qwertyuiopas]

Problem with that: It replaces a slow waiting grind where they go do something else with an *interactive* grind that takes similar time, but forces the user to put in effort and occupies the keyboard so that they can't simply also have a chat program so that they can at least talk with friends at the same time.

Demand will far outpace supply, and all players will thus take intrest in crafting making it *very* hard for dedicated crafter players to start, and the "masterwork" items will still remain in such short supply...

There could be a solution in putting in a minimum and maximum quality cap that the minigame decides where it falls, allow the user to simply skip/automate the game for a constant 33% bonus rather than playing for better, and do *not* ask them with a dialogue each and every time, just have an option that sits subtly in a corner while the user is in an applicable situation and otherwise lurks on a menu where it won't get in the way unless wanted by the player.
The very best items will have a larger quality gap between poor and best quality, but both could rise with their in-game skill, while still ensuring that the absolute best items are interactive-mode by a skilled player but making "automation" of simpler orders possible without requiring that they invest too much effort by forcing them to play every single time.

[sonerohi]

I'm actually interested in (and acquiring the knowledge and skill for) making that game. All actions are player controlled. Want a tree felled? Swing that axe yourself. Players can use a sort of recording feature and save processes to their computer, so that they can create their own generic chopping action. It won't always be the best technique to apply type though. Like, you may make a perfect sword in bronze and have that as your recorded sword making, but then iron might react to the hammerings differently and not turn out so great.

[Dave Mongoose]

A MMO-design guy here:

People hate it when you nulify their achievment. It is about perception: If it feels like developer taking away stuff from them, then it is not really fun to acquire new item; If player obtains "cool sword" and it will decay and he has to replace it with "less cool sword" or "cool sword, same grind again", well, he is going to be unhappy. Loosing few pieces of equipment at same time can be devastating as he realizes that "there is no point, i will have to regrind it over and over again."

Last thing you want to make player feel that he has to grind to just maintain status quo. There is nothing more demotivating than that.

You want player to feel he is getting something "extra" if you want to support crafting. Consumables, for example. Say, player has "cool sword" that will be his forever, but he can buy "sword ballance kit" made by swordsmith that will modify his sword with some extra properties for few hours.

Now, perception is shifted: he is not battling game system to keep his equipment in working order, instead he is getting something "extra" that he will want to replenish every so often and thus create market for such upgrades. Most players will pay this "crafter tax" and be happy.

Decay is always way cooler on paper than in subscription-killing reality.

I agree with this: I personally hate decay in games and it often puts me off using my best equipment.

A further problem with having gear supplied by crafters is that it creates a reliance on another player. Since 85% of your players (by the numbers you suggested) will not be dedicated crafters, you'll run into problems:
- Players who want to advance quickly will need to 'go shopping' very frequently, and (in the early life of the game) may overshoot the crafters and need to wait for someone to be able to produce what they need.
- Crafters will control prices, since the number of non-crafters is much higher and so demand will always be high.

I think the idea of consumables is a good one, but they need to be easy and cheap to produce. In the MMOs I've played, I usually ignore buff items because they don't seem to be good value for money. An example of this is Lord Of The Rings Online, which tries to use it's health restoration crafted items as a money sink (potions need you to buy vials, and food requires you to buy the seeds or the meat): this ends up putting a minimum price on the items which is more than they are worth until you're approaching the level cap.

[Gradir]

I would like crafting which actually involves crafting. Most use a stupid little progress bar which you just sit through. I would prefer if you are making, say, a sword, that you would have to aim each and every hammer strike. Do away with stupid pre-defined items and skills, make everything procedural, and then make the player actually make it. In reality, swords and armor were family heirlooms which were passed down through generations, not mass produced things which poured out of the orifaces of every dead boar. Get the player involved in the creation of the items, make them take time and real effort on the part of the player, and when they finish, they will have a product which they themselves put value in and has a finished style unique to them.

Will this ever happen? Maybe. But not any time soon.

Indeed, these are the types of RPG games that are yet to come as I see. But why not any time soon?

I'm actually interested in (and acquiring the knowledge and skill for) making that game. All actions are player controlled. Want a tree felled? Swing that axe yourself. Players can use a sort of recording feature and save processes to their computer, so that they can create their own generic chopping action. It won't always be the best technique to apply type though. Like, you may make a perfect sword in bronze and have that as your recorded sword making, but then iron might react to the hammerings differently and not turn out so great.

Yes, well in fact bronze weaponry isn't actually made by hammering, because bronze same as copper is reacting totally differently than iron. Bronze weapons were being cast using different forms (made of clay etc) and in fact they were using up rather fast. But in the Bronze Age they were really prestigious items tho