|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| Mortal Online Discussions Discussions about Mortal Online. Official web site: MortalOnline.com |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 647
Rep Power: 2
|
The topic has been discussed every now and then, but I don't think we have one dedicated for it. I wasn't sure where to put this thread, so it went here. It's also probably my longest post so far, and I'm sorry for that, if it troubles you.
To the point: I would like to ask you, especially the MO devs, what's your take on artificial restrictions in a mmorpg. Are they necessary, and if so, why? In case you're quite not following what I mean by Artificial Restrictions in a mmorpg, here's a clue: Levels. Levels are by far the biggest artificial restriction ever introduced in rpgs. Funny enough, they're kinda like the biggest thing rpg's generally are known for, and also the biggest artificial restriction. Some things cannot be represented realistically without adding some artifical restrictions, but they can sure be masked pretty well. For example, any open world game in general always has borders somwhere. Take Oblivion e.g., you had these invisible walls at some point, and you just got a text saying "you can't go this way!" etc. if you tried - another major example of an artificial restriction. Many games try masking this restriction, by using a natural restriction, like an unpassable mountain area. That's a lot better already, but if you have a "rather large" area which is clearly inside a fence made of impassable mountains, it also seems pretty annoying. I understand most of those restrictions, which are due to technical issues, such as, you cannot dive in a game, because it would've taken too much time to add the feature - and there wasn't underwater content planned. Ok, sad, but not a big loss. However, when you find a place surrounded with a tiny little moat, which you could walk through, but you can't because it's water, and apparently swimming wasn't on the feature list, it gets a little annoying. Basically, while the above mentioned restrictions and similar are annoying, i'm happy to say that they are becoming the rarity, and instead you see very believable worlds today. However, what bugs me the most are artificial restrictions that are not technical, as in graphical or world-related, but gameplay related. These restrictions ruin the fun for me, most of the time. A simple example: An iron broadsword requires strength of 10 and skill 10 to wield, while a steel broadsword magically requires strength of 15 and skill of 15. I.e. restricting content and/or "balancing" the content according to how powerful the character is - regardless of if you use levels or not. Anyone with even a quarter brain lobe working should realize how dumb that is. I know similar approach has been the norm for who knows how long, and I know exactly why it has been made so: Having an equipment-centralized approach with the idea that you must gather more and more powerful equipment which deal more and more damage so you can bash more and more powerful creatures (which magically are only so much more powerful than you compared to your level). So while restricting where your character can go, and if can he dive or not, is due to technical reasons, having those same reasons in gameplay mechanics actually has no valid reasons at all. I honestly believe that we could get rid of 95% of the artificial gameplay restrictions and still have a good game which would feel balanced. Most artificial restrictions are applied because of introducing artificial game mechanics that need such restrictions to make them actually work (in balance with other features). For instance, the beforementioned level/stat requirements for equipment are needed only because the equipment get increasingly and significantly more powerful. This means that while you can barely kill a rat with you shoddy iron shortsword, you can easily slay a troll with your über sword of leetness (rats can't even damage you at that point, and they're BIG rats you know). Instead of having 10 000% damage difference, the two weapons could only have a rather minor difference in damage, some stat requirements based on weapon size/weight, not their überness, and maybe the most significant effect could be the durability. This said, a good quality weapon would last longer than a shoddy one, hence making it more valuable in combat. And of course, when you introduce character skill affecting how well you can swing the weapon, plus player skill, it wouldn't make a big difference even if someone gave a newbie a good quality sword - you'd most likely just get your ass kicked and your nice sword stolen. I'm under the impression, that MO intends to take a similar approach to equipment, like I just described, which I truly, honestly hope. But this isn't just about items, it's about every single restriction you can find in a game: -You can only drink a potion x every 30 seconds - Why? -You can only climb ladder type y with skill level 30 - Why?! -You're unable to draw a weapon in a city - WHY?!! Those are very simple and minor things, yet they're all huge artificial restrictions. Instead of artificial restrictions presented, you could try something like this: -Alchemical potions are poisonous, so if you drink them too often, you'll risk an overdose, which is bad. -Your chances of falling is 5% and your climbing rate is pretty slow with ladder y at skill 30, but sure, give it a go!. -You can draw a weapon in a city, but it's a criminal offense, hence you risk getting punished if you do so. The effect is equally the same, but the restriction is no longer artificial, but an integral and logical part of the game. There's a valid reason for it, other than "this just needs to be like this, so it's balanced... uknow"! So with a little bit more work, could it be possible to get rid of most of gameplay related artificial restrictions. Those dependant on hardware issues are a whole another thing, and there isn't much to do about them, but gameplay issues mostly aren't. So what's the problem here? Why not? Thank you for reading this far. Arigato. Kiitos.
__________________
Judgement and Perserverance "There's more to the picture, than meets the eye" ESAK: Achiever 33.33%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 26.67%, Socializer 60.00% Questions about MO? Try this info summary! Follower of the Great Cat God Felissos |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
|
Read all your post, and I agree. It really enhence the immersion into the game and its true that there's never a big difference to make less artificial.
I dont believe that we can get rid of everything, but major stuff like invisible walls and the ones u said should be doable. According to what I've read around the forum, I think its the direction the game is taking. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kansas
Age: 24
Posts: 446
Rep Power: 1
|
Well said Catmorbid,
This is one of the things that I really try and push for in a lot of posts dealing with how "unbalanced" things can be or those people that say that something is outright a gamebreaker. It just takes a little thought into the issue to find out how it could feasibly work without saying it -has- to be this way. I was glad to see your example of the potions, I had actually used that one, hehe. Another example is the bandaging that so many people want. Yes, you can bandage, but why in the world would you be able to do it while engaged in active combat? You have clothing and armor in the way, you need some time to get to the wound and apply the bandage. If you need instant healing, use something magical or alchemical like a potion. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 210
Rep Power: 1
|
Quote:
But I really like your post. But I guess the real question is where would you say those things. Like the ladder for example, where would it say that you have a high chance of falling and you're not that good at climbing but give it a shot? on a sign next to the ladder? At first I was thinking maybe a thought bubble appears on your screen but then again I though, why do I have to think? Why can't I just act? The potion is a different story, you could simply put it in the tooltip.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,926
Rep Power: 8
|
very interesting choice of topic catmorbid.
firs off, let's define artificial restrictions. most people do not gravity as an artificial restriction, even if it's coded, though they may see it as such if their avatar has wings and they couldn't counter affect gravity. so artificial has nothing to do with code or the fact everything in a software is technically artificial: a restriction feels artificial when we don't expect it to be there. it is not even our freedom that we demand - while less artifical restrictions give us more freedom to have a chance of breaking them, in fact the same rule can also be applied towards the positive - nobody complains about flying in a sci-fi space opera game with spaceships, we'd expect it, but being able to walk in the air in mount & blade would be seeing as an exploit: an advantage feels like an exploit when we don't expect it to be there. it is those things which break your expectations and remind you that "this is just a game", your expectations of it as a world shouldn't be followed, that make us cry "artificial" or "bug exploit". if you think about it, most game companies are just more honest. this is just a game, and their throwing it right in our faces: so what? why should you expect otherwise? do you complain you can't pick fruits from a panting of a tree? here's the catch though: just like human avatars have an uncanny valley when they start to resamble too much 'real humans' graphically and we start to notice all the little differences, so can gaming environmnets aproach their own uncany valley in terms of reliability, and this doesn't need to have anything to do with graphics: how do we normally convince ourselves something is real in real life? while avoiding the deep philosophical discussion over it's legitimacy, the most common answer is public aproval & repeatition: we know it's real because other people see it too. so in our mind, when we share an expirience with others, and we can close our eyes, open them, and it will stil be there. we become much more confident about it being real. our logic tells us it isn't real, but this very instinct in us tells us it is. the result is that MMOs are by their very essance as multiplayer persistent worlds are inhabitants of the environmental uncanny valley, and where so from the age of MUDS. we share our expiriences in them with others, we can log off and log on, and the world would still be there. this triggers our instincts that this might very well be real, and conflicts with our knowledge telling us that it isn't: we want to solve that internal conflict, we want it to be real. and it's a vicious unforgiving circle, because as we push on the uncanny valley of environments, more and more things disturb us. the more realistic it gets, the more realism we demand, the less forgiving we become. we very comfortably put things on a scale between "emulation" and "simulation": emulation replicates the phenomena, simulation replicates the circumstances. for example not being able to pull a weapon in cities is emulation, guards forcing you to put it back is more of a simulation. but then we'd find guards "mind control" over our characters even more immersion breaking, and ask for a guard warning/threatening/fighting us to do so. we'd find guards instant knowledge that we took out a weapon even more immersion breaking, and ask for a witness and patrol system, and eventually we'd dig into the immersion breaking of their bad AI compared to our human mind. in truth there is no clear line which defines a difference between emulation and simulation: it is an endless dig into the chains of cause and affect, and with each step we'd take more simulations for granted and call it emulation, and want the causes of those circumstances to be simulated, again and again. do not underastimate the extant of human intiution to detect inconsistencies beyond the sensual perception: there is no finale MMO which would give us an "eternal bliss" of satisfaction, the more realism we eat the more hungry we get, and reality itself is one thing a game can never be. does that mean immersion is a fool's errend? possibly, but it doesn't have to be: immersion might very well be a balancing act, and we who demand it right now know only one factor (realism) and want it in the extreme, without knowing against what factor should it need to be balanced. IMO we are lacking something basic in our equasion, something we haven't realized or thought of yet. it clearly isn't "game", because any course of gameplay or game style could be lead my immersionist systems - for example even leveled items could make sense if items where sunctioned by ruling factions and your reputation with them, classes could make sense in a world where local guilds enforced a monopoly over their trade and tried to kill those who broke it... it might become harder, but you can push any gameplay formula into any level of immersion based systems. so if it isn't against gameplay, then what is it? we just don't know. but without that balance, peace & satisfaction in the uncanny valley will never be found.
__________________
stop looking at my post count!it's not a habit, it's cool, i feel alive.... welcome to the TBC!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||
|
Developer
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 249
Rep Power: 8
|
I get what you are saying, catmorbid, but I can only guess what kind of answer or elaboration you are looking for. You are giving most answers yourself and yet don't seem to realize where they take you
I'll run them through in split-personality-mode, just for the fun of it: Quote:
Hey, Benny, what do you think of levels? A MMO without levels? Benny: What? No levels? Ffs, how would I know how 1337-skilled I am without Levels? What would I aim for? How would I know which monsters to attack? Which quests I can take? Come on! Quote:
Some games "repeat" the map, making you enter from left when going right. Are you saying every game must "repeat" in this way, which of course will have severe impact on the entire layout of the game map? Or should the whole terrain engine be redesigned, making a spherical heightmap solution (that would need looots of work) to form a confined planet (that would need looots of work), not to mention a lot of custom inhouse-tools for editing (that would need loots of work)? Benny: Hey, look! I found this weird bug over here. It's like a big glitch in the ground and I'm like almost stuck. Cool. Hey? Where did that mob go? Wtf am I doing here out in nowhere? Better run back. Quote:
Benny: Yeah, sure would be cool to see what's behind those mountains, but there's a 60+ cave over here with rare spawns. gtg. Quote:
Benny:? Quote:
Benny: I actually agree with you Camorri, I would like to be able to use any sword whenever I want.. Like I found this lvl 80 sword the other day but had to put it on AH as I'm Paladin-Ranger and cannot use it. That sucks. Quote:
Benny: Ha lol noob, run to mommy and commplain I ganked you lilltle lvl 30 lowbe wimp. roflmao. ..what? Quote:
Benny: I've played Fligh Stimulator, but it was buggy and the plane couldn't take off. Quote:
Benny: lol Why choose to play a game with a dull steel brodsword doing 12.5 damage cause it's crafted by some "mastersmith" (yeah, right) whan you can play this fancy game where you get the 4.5 meter, neon-glowing Godslayer of Hitpoints +50k DMG? Quote:
Benny: Sux Quote:
Benny: How do i do petticion? Quote:
Benny: Ye I find that frustrating too but you get used to it. Quote:
- Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
OOC: lfg TI grind lvl75 tank just bosses btw wts epic 66 [Unhallowed Bloodzombie Claymore] /tell Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) | |||
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 647
Rep Power: 2
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Well, I say we go and buy ourselves an island and plot a plan for world domination. We'd probably be plotting forever, but hey it's fun!
__________________
Judgement and Perserverance "There's more to the picture, than meets the eye" ESAK: Achiever 33.33%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 26.67%, Socializer 60.00% Questions about MO? Try this info summary! Follower of the Great Cat God Felissos |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SC, United States Guild: Aegis Imperium Playstyle: PK/PvP
Age: 22
Posts: 2,275
Rep Power: 6
|
i couldn't agree with you more. i just don't like anything artificial being added to games where it doesn't absolutely need to be. which is the main reason i'm against something like random crits.
as far as geographical restrictions go, something about the invisible walls just takes away a lot from the immersion and realism from a game. here's a solution: instead of creating an invisible boundary or natural boundary (like a mountain range), if the world is basically on an island, just put a huge creature way out in the ocean, and if anyone attempts to go that far to see what's out there, one of these creatures will spawn and it can just insta-kill him. after the first time, they'll learn to just not go out that far anymore. as for the weapons. i agree that it's dumb for certain weapons/armor to have level requirements. anyone should be able to use a sword, but if they aren't strong enough to use it, maybe they could hold it, but they couldn't swing it at all. instead of requiring a skill to use certain weapons, the uber sword of leetness should just do minimal damage at an insufficient skill level. sure, it will still do slightly more damage than a normal weapon, but in the hands of a noob it won't reach it's full potential. then as your skill increases, the damage done by the uber sword of leetness will reach that potential, and it will be well beyond the damage done by the noober sword of lameness. your other suggestions are great too. you should be able to drink 10 potions in a row if you want to, but either they won't be effective after the first one, or you'll OD and die. same thing with harvesting resources. you should be able to at least attempt to harvest anything you want. in UO you could mine anywhere, but if your skill was low, you wouldn't be successful. i think since MO has done away with levels, that's a huge step in the right direction. although, i'm afraid some artificialness probably just can't be taken out without causing some other bigger problems.
__________________
/thread I'm putting every one of you that thinks I'm a girl on my KoS list come release... ________________________________________________ Killer 100.00%, Achiever 46.67%, Explorer 46.67%, Socializer 6.67% |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 (permalink) | |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Estonia
Age: 21
Posts: 1,209
Rep Power: 4
|
Great thread catmorbid and valid points made by all.
Mats, I think that while Benny does represent quite a big part of the MMO players, I feel there's also a lot of players who think Benny's rather clueless. Now whether SV decides to go after Benny and his friends or cater more to the "dying species", is of course up to you. Quote:
__________________
Killer: 93% / Achiever: 60% / Socializer: 40% / Explorer: 7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 49
Rep Power: 1
|
I agree, catmorbid did a great job with this topic. Though I think it may be possible to put some restrictions ( not that I want them ) without breaking immersion. What do I mean is all in all we are talking mostly about games in fantasy settings, so who says that the world of such game couldn't be flat supported by few giant turtles, there would be an edge of such world where you can actually fall off.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 (permalink) |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 647
Rep Power: 2
|
I personally completely understand and accept every restriction, albeit artificial ones that are due to technical reasons to make the game more fluent and allow for better playability. But if the end product is an over-simplified crap, I'm not liking it... So compromises are acceptable, and even obligatory. But the more one would be able to hide, mask or remove any artificial restrictions, the better. But, total absence of any artificial restrictions, should be a goal, and I still believe that when technical reasons are put aside, it's a realistic one.
__________________
Judgement and Perserverance "There's more to the picture, than meets the eye" ESAK: Achiever 33.33%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 26.67%, Socializer 60.00% Questions about MO? Try this info summary! Follower of the Great Cat God Felissos |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Age: 19
Posts: 67
Rep Power: 1
|
I like Benny ... reminds me of too many people
OT: Yes, having no restrictions would be _THE_ ultimate game. But...as Mats said, that would be a virtual world simulator more than a fantasy game tbh. And.... for it to work the technology would have to be a little better, not by much, even with this engine they could do it, but as they said, it would take a lot. Maybe, UT4 engine when it comes out(if) will make it possible, who knows ? again... nice one mats with benny
__________________
My opinions on: Economy - Naval Warfare- My Article about Mortal Online If you like it, +rep it |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,926
Rep Power: 8
|
what's wrong with virtual fantasy world simulators? people say this like it's a bad thing, like "it would not be a game so it won't be fun", and that's BS IMO:
it includes games within it: battles are games. crafting can be a game. negotiation and maneuvering in the player market could be a game. that Atzec/Maia game with bowling balls being thrown like basketballs could be a game. but all the games would be emergent from the simulator.
__________________
stop looking at my post count!it's not a habit, it's cool, i feel alive.... welcome to the TBC!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 (permalink) | |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 72
Rep Power: 1
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 (permalink) | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 647
Rep Power: 2
|
Quote:
Anyway, there's nothing bad with virtual fantasy world simulators. I'd certainly play such
__________________
Judgement and Perserverance "There's more to the picture, than meets the eye" ESAK: Achiever 33.33%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 26.67%, Socializer 60.00% Questions about MO? Try this info summary! Follower of the Great Cat God Felissos |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Spain
Posts: 66
Rep Power: 1
|
I´m totally agree with the first post, and althought there´s a lot of Bennys in the world (of warcraft), i really think that there´s a lots of people that don´t have started to play any mmorpg because of they don´t have found a game that gives them what they really want: feel free and alive in that world.
So , i think that a game with those kind of concepts and ideas will atract lots off people, like me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 (permalink) |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lund, Sweden
Posts: 257
Rep Power: 1
|
As I pointed out in another thread, there are more FPSers and Action/Rpgers out there than there is MMOers.
The devs should not be afraid to try to aim for more realism, immersion etc... Look what happened to AoC, they dumbed it down to an WoW clone, cry and dismay emerged on the beta forums, they banned many of their beta players that strongly opposed their changes and shortly after they released their game... their unfinished game let me add. Nonetheless, if I were a MMO dev, I would stay the hell away from generic MMO concepts and implement more features that can be found in FPS' and Action/RPGs. Because there is a larger market out there, and to be honest, if you can still appeal to the MMOers and also the larger gaming crowds, then you have a win win scenario. To be perfectly honest, I believe Benny is in the minority. |
|
|
|