Power Point Poll **PPP**

[VerbalTachi]

Originally Posted by xpiher

I'm just curious how much money they have for their servers since mounts aren't "pocketable" and how mounts will work when you log of. Are players going to be forced to create houses if they want a mount, will there be rentable stables, will stables be free, etc I ask because thats a lot of stuff for servers to handle.



Currently playing DFO. Its fun and not nearly as bad as the "trailers" which are from 2006/7 make it look. The major complaint I have with DFO is grind, and I'm afraid that MO may have the same type of grind, although they are doing the skill system differently.

Well if they are not aiming for 10k players all online in one server then it should be possible to have all these features.

I think that's the mistake that AV made when creating DF.

[Syn]

Originally Posted by Mats Persson

Pwn

And the clouds did open and the smackethdown was laid.

I loved the ppp. I'm tired of quest-grinding and everything that goes with it. I'm looking to MO to take me in a new and bold direction.

[Victor]

Very good posts Mats...

Now I am just eagerly awaiting information concerning injuries, healing, how that will be treated, in-combat or out of combat etc.... I don't want another *In Vas Mani* the player I was fighting just got his full health back because a magician ran past and casted ranged healing.

You never got around to reply/comment on the thread I made concerning this issue. http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/2...ge-better.html

And now it's too late, since the mods closed the thread down.

Nonetheless, care to share SV's design ideas concerning this?

[Resin]

Complete and utter Awesome Rulage!

They took every awesome idea posted on these forums and somehow managed to travel back in time and start implementing them before we even gave them the ideas! That is Amazing!

Rhino armor looks sweet! Entire game theory is the ruler of all!
Drool...stammer...want...

StarVault are just so good, the way you interact with the community alone is revolutionary IMO, but this design...oh, this is going to be good.

Quite frankly any features that prove themselves to be unfeasible for some reason or other is secondary to the greater vision and direction that this game has. It has vision and direction that in itself is awesome. The features are like the pieces of the puzzle or ingredients for the cake, but starvault know what they are making and if one ingredient needs to be replaced with another, it is quite clear this will be delicious!

Still I need a new computer. I suggest you all delay the game until I can get some cash together. Let's not forget what's really important here (me).

[monstruo696]

We need moar verbal pwnage, pl0x.

[Shinimas]

I'm curious how they plan on having mounts not pocketable. I guess the mount would log off when you log off.

It will be just a mob you can ride. You log off, your horse goes away to eat some grass.

[Rene]

Originally Posted by Guru Mats

I absolutely hate being forced to follow a set path, especially when the game is trying to convince me that I'm the chosen one - together with all the million other chosen ones running around in the world.

It's a dream comes true! I absolutely hate when some stupid old man tells me that I'm a legendary hero, or a recruit who will be some day a legendary hero and by that reason I got to help him. Whatever he wants (kill boars/orks/birds etc, or defend his village, or strip naked and sing him a song), I dont want to do that, I want to rob his house and ran away and shout dirty words. I absolutly tired of being a good person (or absolutly bad). I do want to do things myself.

[Traceur]

Originally Posted by Mats Persson

Blocking is done by actually blocking the incoming blow. If you hold up your sword to block, but miss to meet your opponents sword, he will hit you and the block will fail.

didn't you say in the alpha combat review that due to ping reaction-time a block will still count when it doesn't hit the weapon but not as affectively?

Originally Posted by Mats Persson

Now isn't this, in fact, revolutionary for a MMO?

MO is like bird-kind: it is evolutionary but it seems revolutionary because all the common ancestors have gone extinct.

seriously though, i agree with him on this one for a different reason:
a friend linked me on youtube a game trailer for a regular themepark game declaring itself revolutionery for - wait for it - not having auto lock in combat! the revolution of hack & slash themeparking...
see, it doesn't matter whether MO fits the semantical definition of revolutionary, but the fact is it's not revolutionary to call yourself revolutionary. you may not copy common gameplay, but by using a common PR slogans you have subjected yourself to it's associations.
when it comes to the feeling that a word conveys, psychology will always win over semantics.

Originally Posted by Mats Persson

...

the rest is golden.

[monstruo696]

rev⋅o⋅lu⋅tion⋅ar⋅y

  /ˌrɛvəˈluʃəˌnɛri/ [rev-uh-loo-shuh-ner-ee] adjective, noun, plural -ar⋅ies. –adjective

1. of, pertaining to, characterized by, or of the nature of a revolution, or a sudden, complete, or marked change: a revolutionary junta.

2. radically new or innovative; outside or beyond established procedure, principles, etc.: a revolutionary discovery.

I'll just leave this right here.

(read: MO = Revolutionary.)

[Lingxiaoyu]

Just giving my daily opinion that housing and crafting need to be fully in for release or else things will go sour.

Carry on.

[Septus]

Originally Posted by Mats Persson

It will probably be a combination of pre-existant and post-generated. I'm afraid there's really no good solution to this problem.

Just an idea, but it'd be nice if you patched new content into the existing story lines.

For example, if you've already implemented the political intrigue of the Tindremene (ie. the various NPC leaders of the empire, the half blood brother who seeks the throne, etc etc) and you now want to patch in some ruins near the Tindremene capital, try making it believable.

Don't just have ruins that come out of nowhere. Have a small group of Tindremene archaelogists who are at work excavating the ruins, now littered with dug out areas, survey tools, etc.

If you're going to patch in a village of NPC's, make it believable... Make the village seem still in the process of being built, with the residents (refugees from a nearby war?) living mostly out of tents in the meantime.

Edit: It'd also be nice if there were some recurring characters in the new content; would feel a lot more like an RPG imo. You may meet a scholar NPC in an obscure library in Tindrem... It'd be nice to run into the same NPC at the ruins near Tindrem (perhaps the guards don't let you near the ruins unless you've spoken with the scholar before & he lets you through). Personally, I feel like characters are what make RPG's, and MMO's are notorious for having very static NPC's. Even if the dialogue changes, they never seem to be living. They're just standing in the library (or at the forge, or whatever) no matter how many years you play.


You get new content that doesn't break immersion (as opposed to content magically appearing out of nowhere) and ties into the story.

I won't pretend to know what kind of epic stories you're going to be giving us, but it doesn't take much of a twist to account for the fact that yesterday, there was no giant city there.

An alternative, when it's simply unavoidable (ie. the epic story needs a city, not a village of refugees), is to have the areas pre-placed while adding in clues littered across the world on what this area might be.

You have a giant city... and it's empty... That's a pretty giant gorilla in the room for players, and it gives a very obvious feel of "not implemented yet, check back later." Instead, leak information. Who built the city? When? Why? And why is it empty? As these clues disseminate, players will piece together their own theories; and since you're writing the story, you can give meaningful clues, giving you time to make the epic, and PLAYERS time to decide what side they would be on, try and keep it a secret, etc. All the stuff about dynamic player vs. player quests that make it fun.

This, I think, was one of Darkfall's monumental failures. Instead of making a world, they made a map with 1000000 unique landmarks with zero explanations. They would have done a lot better with a few landmarks with stories behind them, and a world that actually served the purpose it was supposed to - a world that would allow for grandiose battles. There are no huge mountains, no narrow passes, no natural barriers of any kind. It's just a flat, round table.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, something as simple as a mountain range with a single manageable pass can add a lot more to the game world than the billion ruins you could add in & tack quests onto later. Take your time with the unique spots, and make them just that. Unique.

[Mortician]

All I can say is omg loving MO and especially the Devs. Everything this gamer wants! It's absolutely great.

Now, is this an error or intentional: Player Housing. The world of Mortal Online, Nave, might seem a bit empty and uninhibited from start -

I'm thinking it should say, a bit empty and uninhabited from the start? although it could be uninhibited...

Anyway, appreciate all the information given in the presentation. Thank you, guys.

[Galadourn]

Originally Posted by Mats Persson

We have chosen to not have quests for several reasons. We have chosen to not have all those features and we have our reasons for it. I didn't think I would have to tell "mature, adult MMO players" about the implications of not having this or that, but now I'm starting to change my mind.

Mats, I can understand why quests in the traditional sense would detract from MO, but what about implementing a dynamic quest-generating system that would make the NPCs of the world more interactive and less static?

Relying strictly on player generated content usually becomes the nemesis of sandbox gameplay, since everyone want's to play hero and there is no sense of "common, everyday life" to be had from interacting with the NPCs.

Just my view on this. It could potentially get boring.

EDIT: Having the same NPC hand out the same quest to everyone is, ofc, ridiculous. But there could be randomly generated NPC "requests/ambitions" (to veer away a bit from traditional terminology) where a player, if he happens to interact with the particular NPC within that window, could be helpful, gaining in return "something" (I live that to you, since I don't know how the game mechanics work).

[Septus]

Originally Posted by Galadourn

Relying strictly on player generated content usually becomes the nemesis of sandbox gameplay, since everyone want's to play hero and there is no sense of "common, everyday life" to be had from interacting with the NPCs.

You need only look to UO to be proven wrong. Absolutely zero quests (unless you call a random human NPC spawning amidst the normal orc spawn yelling "Help!" a quest), yet one of the richest gameplay experiences I can remember.

Despite what you think, not everyone wants to be the "hero," in the traditional sense. Just the main character in their own story. You can be heroic, many others would much rather be vile, cowardly, mischievous, etc. In fact, traditionally speaking, I'd say heroes are in short supply.

And if that's what you're after, have at it. Become a hero, protect the weak and innocent, and you will actually build that reputation - and not just because elf #23456 said you were for giving him the goblin's tooth.

PS: I believe there is a "quest" system according to the PPT, but they were hesitant to call them quests because of the stigma associated with them (find something, give it to some one, get a prize). The quests in MO seem to be stories you can choose to be a part of, with the ending depending on not only your own ability, but the very social fabric of the game.

[stromgale]

Originally Posted by Septus

PS: I believe there is a "quest" system according to the PPT, but they were hesitant to call them quests because of the stigma associated with them (find something, give it to some one, get a prize). The quests in MO seem to be stories you can choose to be a part of, with the ending depending on not only your own ability, but the very social fabric of the game.

True this.

The whole issue here is misconception. Mats is trying to explain that quests as they have become commonly known are not in the game. It's clear from the PPP and prior information that the kind of "questing" mentioned in the above posts is in.

Also, Septus, your views on implementing content are very interesting. I remember the first time i came to Westfall in WoW and they we're building the outpost at sentinel hill. I thought it was so awesome. Seems it's quite a troublesome roof on that inn, seing as they haven't been able to finish it in four years.

[NetSkay]

Seriously guys 5/5? What the fuck?
What exactly did we learn from PP that we didn't already know? Blood Mixing and Weapons combinations?? Woooow!!

[Galadourn]

Originally Posted by Septus

You need only look to UO to be proven wrong. Absolutely zero quests (unless you call a random human NPC spawning amidst the normal orc spawn yelling "Help!" a quest), yet one of the richest gameplay experiences I can remember.

This isn't 1997; this is 2009. Not all people have played UO, care to inquire about it, or would even go as far as to try to understand how to play a game - each one of us has a life, and doesn't need to play one virtually.

That aside, standards in gaming have changed dramatically. What was break-through approach to online gaming back in 1997, might seem ridiculous nowadays.

I'm not saying MO should spoon feed content to each one; but if NPCs are just wandering objects without anything to do with them, the world will begin to feel empty. Look at that other game.

That being said, and since I have not had hands on experience on MO, I of course prudently reserve judgment on the actual PVE content untli I have had the chance to test it firsthand, or at least see others testing it.

[Galadourn]

Originally Posted by Septus

PS: I believe there is a "quest" system according to the PPT, but they were hesitant to call them quests because of the stigma associated with them (find something, give it to some one, get a prize). The quests in MO seem to be stories you can choose to be a part of, with the ending depending on not only your own ability, but the very social fabric of the game.

That should be enough then. Damn, useless typing above

[Giubba]

Originally Posted by Septus

You need only look to UO to be proven wrong. Absolutely zero quests (unless you call a random human NPC spawning amidst the normal orc spawn yelling "Help!" a quest), yet one of the richest gameplay experiences I can remember.

AH?!

That should be the best PvE gameplay ever made?!

Are you insane?

[Septus]

Originally Posted by Giubba

AH?!

That should be the best PvE gameplay ever made?!

Are you insane?

Uh, no I was saying how player-generated content (the kind Galadourn was saying will kill the game) can create a compelling experience so long as you give the players tools to use.

Homes, clan stones, territorial conquest (let players lay down their own destructible outposts w/ X respawns + resupply before self destructing?), mercantilism (trade, vendors, *localized resources*) and the conflict that ensues from all of these moving parts.

That's not to say PvE is irrelevant, but I don't think it's the mobs that make up the bulk of what is cool about PvE. It is the *environment.* Like Galadourn said, "mobs just sitting there are boring." But have those same mobs appear out of a gate from hell that you opened, and all of a sudden it's fucking epic.

[Galadourn]

Originally Posted by Septus

(the kind the OP was saying will kill the game)

I'm not the OP...

[Giubba]

Uh, no I was saying how player-generated content (the kind the OP was saying will kill the game) can create a compelling experience so long as you give the players tools to use.

Which tool? Again with the fairy tale of the players that made their own adventure?

That's not to say PvE is irrelevant, but I don't think it's the mobs that make up the bulk of what is cool about PvE. It is the *environment.* Like Galadourn said, "mobs just sitting there are boring." But have those same mobs appear out of a gate from hell that you opened, and all of a sudden it's fucking epic.

Explain better, your example is far from being epic is simply lame. They can appear from wherever you want even from the ass of a dragon but without a story behind they are simple other mob to frag.

[Septus]

Originally Posted by Giubba

Which tool? Again with the fairy tale of the players that made their own adventure?

Which tools? Refer to the middle paragraph you completely omitted from your quote.

Originally Posted by Giubba

Explain better, your example is far from being epic is simply lame. They can appear from wherever you want even from the ass of a dragon but without a story behind they are simple other mob to frag.

Do you speaka any engrish?!!!

[Cairn]

It was epic but 4/5

It should have kept me reading until i get a beta invite or the release date. Just my opinion.

[Giubba]

Originally Posted by Septus

Which tools? Refer to the middle paragraph you completely omitted from your quote.

I omitted it because i didn't understand what was the attinence with the discussion.
We are speaking about PvE content and you report a list of PvP feature?
They could be funny, they could be great but they don't have a slighest connection with the Player VS Environment.

Do you speaka any engrish?!!!

engrish no, english maybe (i know i don't speak it very well) .

Let me try again.

What so epic in a bunch of mob that spawn from a hell's gate? What is the difference with the bear that i've killed 10 min before in a cave?Or the bandits of the other day?Or the dragon that i've killed with other guild mates 2 days ago?

What is the drammatic difference that it seem you have discovered that make those econunter something different from a mob farming for increasing your skills or for finding some crafting resource?

[Shinzon]

There are people coming in here non-stop with only face value analysis of the entire game. They are frozen by the possibility of there being absolutely nothing to guide or help them through. No quests to lead you along a chain of areas until you are ready to take down a huge dragon. Mortal Online is not like this, throw away all your previous experiences with MMO's, and use them only for contrasting, forget who failed forget who is sting; Mortal Online is a different beast.

What does sandbox mean? Ultimately it means that everything you do in the game is because of other players. Every single action is a reaction to another player, the defense of a town, the forging of new weapons; whether you know it or not, you are reacting to a ripple created by another player, on the other side of the game world; everything is connected. Politics, City Building, Armor Forging, And PvP battles of strategic resources; that is the merit of sandbox game play.

You are free to do whatever you want, to fill whatever niche the server requires, want to be a "rouge" go buy the right daggers, some leather armor and head out and kill people in the wilderness, on the outside of the law. Want to be a scholar? Go study the ancient ruin from a rumor you heard from an NPC. These are your quests; and these are your epic encounters, they are results of a player's direct actions and investigations. There are no exclamation marks, there are no mini map pointers leading you like a sheep from A to B.

Player generated content means the diversity and flow equivalent to that of the real world; if you say that the real world becomes stale and is not dynamic, I will laugh you out the door this very instance. Because people are the source of conflict in Mortal Online and sandbox games in general; you will ALWAYS have something to do; as we all are capable of getting jobs in the real world since a service is needed, so can we in Mortal.

[Galadourn]

Originally Posted by Shinzon

Player gereated content means the diversity and flow equivelent to that of the real world; if you say that the real world becomes stale and is not dynamic, I will laugh you out the door this very instance. Because people are the source of conflict in Mortal Online and sandbox games in general; you will ALWAYS have something to do; as we all are capable of getting jobs in the real world since a service is needed, so can we in Mortal.

And that is the wrong stance I was talking about; I have a life already, I don't need a second one. But some apparently do...

Plus, I want a fictional world, not a RL copy to have fun in; If you made a realistic medieval setting, taking into consideration all the limitations of the era, it would hardly be any fun as a game - perhaps very educational as an interactive experience, but certainly not something I would be anxious to get back home from work to play in.
A game is a game because it neglects certain rules of reality and allows for fun. Take the fun away, and you lose the game.

Or, to put it differently; every game must have some rules against which players pit themselves (aka PvE aspect). Otherwise it's not a game, it's just a social experience.

[Shinzon]

Originally Posted by Galadourn

And that is the wrong stance I was talking about; I have a life already, I don't need a second one. But some apparently do...

Plus, I want a fictional world, not a RL copy to have fun in; If you made a realistic medieval setting, taking into consideration all the limitations of the era, it would hardly be any fun as a game - perhaps very educational as an interactive experience, but certainly not something I would be anxious to get back home from work to play in.
A game is a game because it neglects certain rules of reality and allows for fun. Take the fun away, and you lose the game.

You have the wrong stance. There are things that I will do in Mortal that I can never do in real life. Slay a Dragon? Fight the King? Wage war against a rival nation? I am sorry, those are things that I would never would want to see or do in real life, for the sake of other people and myself. The players act as an ever lasting Engine, creating conflict, intrigue and things to do. MMO's are driven by conflict, and what other way to generate conflict but to get people involved.

[Traceur]

Originally Posted by Mats Persson

It will probably be a combination of pre-existant and post-generated. I'm afraid there's really no good solution to this problem.

the sandbox ideal of emergent player ruins scenarios is problematic:

while you can enable natural pillage-favoring situations through limiting instant travel (territories need logistic interconnectivity a small population can't spread too thin through focusing on hot spots) leading to situations where it doesn't make sense to keep hold of a territory, and while you could create natural disasters (controversially when it comes to player cities) or enable it to be a form of attack via magic/religion... in all these situations players will come back to rebuild. PD won't help too - players will still create new characters to rebuild there lost cities. it is impossible to destroy a player made city without holding on to the territories (& thus maintaining them).

the only scenario where ruins emerge from player cities is if an area either stopped being economically viable or becomes uninhabitable from climate change leading to mass migrations.
ofcourse intervening directly carries a harsh judgment when it comes to player cities & guild politics, causing a lot controversy and gradually loosing the player's trust, harming the community.
so you need to do it indirectly, via coded but dynamic systems for resource distribution & scarity or climate changes. for this topic in specific, it doesn't matter if it's an actual simulation or random, but it needs to be dynamic to change the viability of locations.
...and on top of all that comes the job of making it feel like ruins.

so if you want emergent ruins you need:
1. a dynamic system for resource distribution and/or climate.
2. house decay, creaturs taking over, visual cues, etc'...

those would probably be very hard to code in an MMO, aspecially with the problems of changing the environment in real time while players are logged in. but it's theoretically possible, so i suppose there's some hope.

[Zenir]

http://www.engrish.com/

Originally Posted by xpiher

So Mats, when you say no quest at all does this mean you aren't doing Questing like most MMOs instead you are going the the PnP/DnD route where you talk to an NPC and they tell you a rumor they heard of werewolf stalking the lands to the east, and once you investiagate find and kill the wearwolf the town then talks about you and your group killing the wearwolf and saving them?

I think it would be more like you hear a noob saying that he was killed by a werewolf in the woods near the city and you think that the werewolf could have some nice ingredients. After you killed he werewolf you can tell the noob / people that the werewolf is that and he now safe can go into the woods.

That the npcs know that you killed the werewolf right after you did it seem unreasonable anyways...

Originally Posted by Galadourn

And that is the wrong stance I was talking about; I have a life already, I don't need a second one. But some apparently do...

Plus, I want a fictional world, not a RL copy to have fun in; If you made a realistic medieval setting, taking into consideration all the limitations of the era, it would hardly be any fun as a game - perhaps very educational as an interactive experience, but certainly not something I would be anxious to get back home from work to play in.
A game is a game because it neglects certain rules of reality and allows for fun. Take the fun away, and you lose the game.

Or, to put it differently; every game must have some rules against which players pit themselves (aka PvE aspect). Otherwise it's not a game, it's just a social experience.

The is a reason why it is called Role-playing game, because you play the role of a character in a different world. It is kind of a second life, but not a second life you have but rather you can take over the life of that character and do with it what you want.

[Hertix]

Its weird how narrow the focus is of some people. What happens is people take a feature, say no global chat for instance, and apply it to games they have played in the past and think well thats just annoying or monotonous and doesnt really contribute to the game but rather takes away from it. Not having a map on a quest oriented game such as wow would make the experience quite obnoxious or atleast moreso than it already is. Not every feature is going to be revolutionary in that noone has ever heard or seen anything like it, I mean we all do want to explore with our sword and shield and not a gummy bear shooting gumball machine right? It is the culmination of all these features into one game that is going to make the experience so great.

Its like mats talking about the fun and skill based fighting system enhancing the rest of the experience and most people glossing right over the subject. I think one person even said that a clever combat system is useless without x feature and y feature being released with the game. Almost anything you do ranging from pvping, defending a guild city or your house, raiding, robbing, fighting over resources, killing monsters, and exploring the player will almost always have to use that combat system, and if the system is fun and hard to master, all of those experiences just became twice as rewarding as they are in other mmos. In other games I always find myself "working" towards a goal or looking for more visually appealing monsters or areas, but all that working is or fighting is almost always boring and repetitive. Just by adding the fps excitement into every battle scenario MO can achieve the adrenaline rush of a fps and the satisfaction of accomplishment in an rpg all in one game.

Another example of the features working together is the first person view. In a lot of other mmos running around in first person sucks a big one, but MO is not other mmos. Not only is MO geared to run well in first person, but the collective power of all the other features: full loot, advanced combat, next gen graphics makes the first person experience really come together to produce a stunning experience. I think what Im trying to say is don't point out features and think, well shit that wouldnt work in any rpg ive played because MO is not any rpg you or I have played. Think big picture and how all the features will work together to produce an experience greater than any single one can provide. My 2 cents.

[Slann]

Originally Posted by monstruo696

I'll just leave this right here.

(read: MO = Revolutionary.)

3. Mortal Online

Well, perhaps MO inst revolutionary at 100%, but are the little details, much little details that define MO as revolutionary, i think

[Galadourn]

Originally Posted by Shinzon

You have the wrong stance. There are things that I will do in Mortal that I can never do in real life. Slay a Dragon? Fight the King? Wage war against a rival nation? I am sorry, those are things that I would never would want to see or do in real life, for the sake of other people and myself. The players act as an ever lasting Engine, creating conflict, intrigue and things to do. MMO's are driven by conflict, and what other way to generate conflict but to get people involved.

Why do you take for granted that MMOs are driven by conflict? If anything, I would understand MMOs - like our world as you say- to be driven by goals and ambitions, with conflict occurring where individual ambitions clash.

Since conflict is, therefore, not innate to player interaction, there have to be "mundane" aspects of the game which could never be served by the players. Can you imagine a game where you are forced to play as a post office clerk and deliver player mail (for example)? How fun would that be to you?

PvE content (in any way it can be present) is unavoidable in a computer game. It's not unavoidable in online human interaction in general, but that is an entirely different thing.

[Shinzon]

Originally Posted by Galadourn

Why do you take for granted that MMOs are driven by conflict? If anything, I would understand MMOs - like our world as you say- to be driven by goals and ambitions, with conflict occurring where individual ambitions clash.

Since conflict is, therefore, not innate to player interaction, there have to be "mundane" aspects of the game which could never be served by the players. Can you imagine a game where you are forced to play as a post office clerk and deliver player mail (for example)? How fun would that be to you?

PvE content (in any way it can be present) is unavoidable in a computer game. It's not unavoidable in online human interaction in general, but that is an entirely different thing.

You are perfectly correct; the causes might differ, it might be ambition or it might be an aspiration, but sooner or later the things that drive us will collide with another's, often though it does not end positively, the are often opposite ambitions that are destructive to each other, and from those conflict arises, it's human nature and it's unavoidable, on that we can agree.

As for the office clerk analogy, there is a game already which supports this "Mundane" job, and it's EvE Online, the economy is run by players, and there have to be players which act as funnels within the organization. With large Corporations and Alliances someone has to do the paperwork. Call them Guild Masters, call them Officers or call them Clerks, it's up to you.

The point though is that option is available to you, if you find self fulfillment from the mundane, then I would never stand in your way; people have different tastes, and different things they gravitate towards. Something you might find attractive, might be absolutely revolting to others.

[Galadourn]

Originally Posted by Shinzon

You are perfectly correct; the causes might differ, it might be ambition or it might be an aspiration, but sooner or later the things that drive us will collide with another's, often though it does not end positively, the are often opposite ambitions that are destructive to each other, and from those conflict arises, it's human nature and it's unavoidable, on that we can agree.

So all MO has to do is give each one of us the "tools" to follow our ambition. And don't say that PvP is an ambition, because that should be the end conflict resulting from clashing ambitions.

These "tools" need to incorporate PvE mechanics in some way.

[Zenir]

Originally Posted by Galadourn

Why do you take for granted that MMOs are driven by conflict? If anything, I would understand MMOs - like our world as you say- to be driven by goals and ambitions, with conflict occurring where individual ambitions clash.

Since conflict is, therefore, not innate to player interaction, there have to be "mundane" aspects of the game which could never be served by the players.

MMOs are played by humans, humans tend to have conflicts as you said. Why should there not be such conflicts, in every pvp based mmo you have those conflicts..

Originally Posted by Galadourn

Can you imagine a game where you are forced to play as a post office clerk and deliver player mail (for example)? How fun would that be to you?

PvE content (in any way it can be present) is unavoidable in a computer game. It's not unavoidable in online human interaction in general, but that is an entirely different thing.

Thats why we got this as game and we play games, things are easier in a game and you can play what you want only with the limitation that you it is nonsense to do things which are already handled by the system (mostly because the common sense say noone wants to do that), like your example the post office clerk. (You still can try to be that, but probably no1 will use you.... )

[Shinzon]

Originally Posted by Galadourn

So all MO has to do is give each one of us the "tools" to follow our ambition. And don't say that PvP is an ambition, because that should be the end conflict resulting from clashing ambitions.

These "tools" need to incorporate PvE mechanics in some way.

You hit the nail straight on the head, and that is why I follow MO; because I believe that no matter what you want to do within the game, Mortal Online will offer the tools necessary to build towards that. It doesn't matter if it is PvP, RP, PvE or anything else. As long as a diverse tool set is present to build a fully diverse world, where each can find his own niche. Then I am happy, and MO has fulfilled it's purpose.

[Galadourn]

Originally Posted by Shinzon

You hit the nail straight on the head, and that is why I follow MO; because I believe that no matter what you want to do within the game, Mortal Online will offer the tools necessary to build towards that. It doesn't matter if it is PvP, RP, PvE or anything else. As long as a diverse tool set is present to build a fully diverse world, where each can find his own niche. Then I am happy, and MO has fulfilled it's purpose.

Then we've been agreeing all along...

[Java]

Originally Posted by Mats Persson

[...]

What an epic! Thanks Mats for taking the time again (I guess you must be kind of fed up to have to explain all this stuff since months ...) to describe what MO is about, although I think if ppl were reading the ppt openminded it should be clear that for example it is a feature to NOT HAVE auto-loot, and not a step backwards im MMO-history ...

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Galadourn

And that is the wrong stance I was talking about; I have a life already, I don't need a second one. But some apparently do...

Noone is forcing you to leave WOW to play this game, you know?

You have to understand, that MMO is a different beast, much similar to Ultima Online, did you ever play that game? If not, it's hard to understand how the changes Mats are talking about impact the game-play.

For an example, no global chat, promotes a more social game-play experience, where you need to go to the local blacksmith and talk to him and order your stuff. This was extremely fun in UO, there were Grand Master Blacksmiths known for their just businesses and top quality stuff. These were rich bastards that had devoted their characters to mine ore and craft weapons for the community; in return, they bathed in gold, owned a Castle/Keep which they adorned with quality stuff, which a simple adventurer could only dream of.

And they were quite content with that.

Plus, I want a fictional world, not a RL copy to have fun in; If you made a realistic medieval setting, taking into consideration all the limitations of the era, it would hardly be any fun as a game - perhaps very educational as an interactive experience, but certainly not something I would be anxious to get back home from work to play in.
A game is a game because it neglects certain rules of reality and allows for fun. Take the fun away, and you lose the game.

UO was a fictional game. It was mystical, magical and full of life. Some players conquered the trading aspects of the game, some exploring, some specialized in monster hunting, some were simple lumberjacks, miners, fishermen, and then the murderers came and made their daily life a living hell.

Or, to put it differently; every game must have some rules against which players pit themselves (aka PvE aspect). Otherwise it's not a game, it's just a social experience.

There will still be PvE, that's the main source of gathering resources, much like UO. A Fletcher would hunt birds for feathers to his arrows, a tanner deer for skins. A miner would probably encounter goblins while mining deep in the caves. A fisherman would probably be attacked by some sea serpent at times. An explorer would probably run into a pack of of wolves, bandits, maybe a Troll while he is out exploring...
etc etc..

The thing is in UO, you made your own Quests, you don't go to a Quest giver. You simply log on and go "Hmmm, what do I want to do today, explore that cave I saw last night or make some furniture for my house while I wait for my buddy to log on?"

In the end, a game like this, is a lot more social than the current MMOs on the market.