collapse

Author [EN] [PL] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: End-game, or the lack thereof  (Read 20230 times)

Offline VampireBill

  • Neonate
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Reputation: +0/-0
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #30 on: March 04, 2013, 09:04:14 PM »
I wanted to make a post to address the original post per se;

Daylight; won't be an issue in a permanight setting, but obviously the upside of it not being an issue is that they wont have to introduce elements that would water down the lore for playability. That one is well handled.

Cure; I'm pretty sure that's never going to happen too, since mortals are essentially tutorial-like characters which can be permakilled to boot. Emergent roleplay dictates that the player's and his character's interests will be aligned here, neither would want to be cured of what makes him powerful. As for lore, its pretty consistent on the idea that a real cure doesn't exist; making peace with, and mastering what you are is as good as it gets.

Originals death killing bloodlines: again not a WOD concept, no chance we'd have to deal with that. Plenty of OWoD canon deaths as evidence. OTOH, as long as they live, the oldest elders can certainly have alot of influence over their bloodlines. Probably not something that will get translated mechanically.

Being able to contend with the beast; sure. Frenzies can be cool, but nobody likes loosing control of their characters too often. Thats why the mechanic is avoidable through humanity. Surely they'll make it so you only have real beast issues if you played dumb or wasted your humanity/played low-on-blood; then it's a consequence for your actions, which is OK.

Yeah, I was basically just using those examples to preface how the WoD avoids most of the problematic "end-game" lore that exists in a lot of other vampire universes, aside from arguably the biggest one... Gehenna, basically the end of the world, ha (which I find fairly annoying, but it sounds like it shouldn't be an issue for the MMO). The lack of the other ones allows a player to accept being a vampire and create their own story from there, without worrying so much about being pushed along with some pre-fabricated motivation towards a pre-fabricated goal. Unique, personal character progression can be a lot more enjoyable than the "epic" storylines that don't feel so epic when you know every other player is doing the exact same thing. If you're doing that, making the game into an MMO is... pointless, other than to milk players of their money continually (*cough* SWTOR *cough*).

Also, Valamyr, your last post is basically exactly how I feel about how it should be. An "end-game" can be circumvented by keeping power dynamic, with not only personal actions, but associations as well being important in both gaining and maintaining power. And with this, just like in real life, not everyone will desire the greatest reaches of power, but choose to pursue other avenues of entertainment, because of the risks or any number of other personal reasons, and that should be a perfectly acceptable play-style as well. Almost every other MMO ultimately turns into a race to the level cap, where you then just raid for the best gear and flex your e-peen. The only sacrifice of getting to the top is your time and money, and once you're at the top there's nowhere to go, up *or* down. You're just there. And so is everyone else who plays enough. Until new stuff gets released. Then you grind some more with the rest of the previously max-level players.

Offline Rick Gentle

  • Gangrel Playboy
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 3057
  • Reputation: +595/-19
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #31 on: March 04, 2013, 11:15:05 PM »
I don't mind end-game-type-content so much as the fact that in a lot of games, they don't know when to stop. End-game-level-content is fine - it is THE FINAL BATTLE FOR EXISTENCE ON THIS PLANE!!!!!11!!! - which can be great and epic and awesome.
But then what the game designers do is retconn shit or pull plot devices out of their ass so there can be THE FINAL BATTLE FOR EXISTENCE ON THIS PLANE!!!!!!11!!! +1. You see this a lot in the comics, too. Everything gets so uber-epic and earth-shattering that the next thing has to be even more overpowered. Then things get ridiculous. Honestly, in World of WarCraft alone, how many gods do you and your raid-mates kill? Three or four by now? How many times is Deathwing going to come back from the dead? If Azeroth is really causing this much trouble for the Burning Legion, why hasn't Sargeras taken a personal interest by now?
VampireBill has an excellent point about how worthless the whole experience is when thousands of other players can save the world in the exact same way.

So in other words, end-game content is fine... as long as it's the END of the GAME. The fight with the Sheriff at the end of Bloodlines is super-epic, and he's easily the single biggest boss you fight (in good old gaming tradition, the size of the boss is directly proportional to his power). But then the game ends, and you get the satisfaction if that being THE final boss fight. That's why end-game content doesn't work really well in MMOs - they always have to think up something more, because they want more money, or higher ratings, or because they shoot themselves in the foot by making story and roleplaying worthless and prohibitive.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2013, 01:10:45 AM by Rick Gentle »
Remember: It's not the size of your fangs that matters; it's what you stick them in.

Offline Valamyr

  • Kindred
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 1321
  • Reputation: +395/-17
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #32 on: March 05, 2013, 12:41:31 AM »
Sure, raiding content in a PvE game always has to be one-upped. Why hasnt Sargeras taken interest yet? Because he's scheduled for two expansions from now on, after which you'll battle his ghost in the next. :p

But nobody expects WOD to become a PvE, raid-centric MMO, I hope? Because I can have fun playing those, but all signs point to WOD adhering to a PvP template. So if anything, its the flaws of playing in Nullsec in EVE or games like Shadowbane and such that we ought to be debating. The issues with THAT type of gameplay are those were going to face. Griefing, whining, frustrated players, an ever dwindling playerbase, a negative and childish community; those are the flaws that are typically brought up whenever you look at PvP centric MMOs.

I'm not saying we'll face those issues. But if they develop the sort of endgame I was talking about in my previous post, we gotta expect a sudden influx of major douchebags in the community as soon as word gets out officially, in the pre-launch hyping phase.

Offline Rick Gentle

  • Gangrel Playboy
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 3057
  • Reputation: +595/-19
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #33 on: March 05, 2013, 01:24:05 AM »
I have always admired CCP's mature stance on player griefing and whining, and it basically boils down to: "Suck it up". They can get away with that because all player-on-player action where there is a chance to risk a LOT of money and power is 99% voluntary (barring those assholes who have fast ships that can destroy you in high-sec space and get away before CONCORD drops in). You can get "gear" and money and "experience" and rewards through lots of other avenues than PvP - and the best part is that you can use the hardcore PvPers to gain power and wealth without ever going below .5-sec.
I'm hoping to see a repeat attitude in the WODMMO - but if that's to happen, then there need to be ways to earn power, respect, and wealth without engaging in hardcore PvP. Towards this end, I think we're going to have to see a progression scheme similar to that of EVE Online's: a time-based progression. A time-based progression eliminates the need for grinding experience and gear, because you'll gain power just by having an account active. We'll also need to see a plethora of different kinds of skills that lead to different kinds of play. Right now I'm a little worried about that aspect for two reasons:
Firstly, it will be a total batch to try to "balance" social play, which forms a large part of the Worlds of Darkness setting and rules, as well as EVE Online (where players can give contracts to each other, and stats like Charisma have an effect on how your trade and corporation skills work). I've already proposed an idea or two about this, as have quite a few other people... In the end, though, it's up to CCP, and EVE Online doesn't even compare to the Worlds of Darkness in the Social rules and mechanics sphere.
Secondly, they've already said there's not going to be any real sort of crafting system. Resource collecting and crafting are HUUUUUUUUUUUGE aspects of EVE Online, and one of the best ways to capitalize on the raging PvP without ever actually engaging in PvP yourself. Sell ships to replace the ones the losers lost, sell resources to the victors who are now building space stations, and act as the middle-man for trading between the two sides. How well can vampiric prestation and blood-trading replace this, especially in what looks to be a finite playing field? (I.e. all domain is going to get parceled up sooner or later.)
Remember: It's not the size of your fangs that matters; it's what you stick them in.

Offline Radical21

  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 3023
  • Reputation: +-1344/-52
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #34 on: March 05, 2013, 02:48:27 AM »
Sure, raiding content in a PvE game always has to be one-upped. Why hasnt Sargeras taken interest yet? Because he's scheduled for two expansions from now on, after which you'll battle his ghost in the next. :p

But nobody expects WOD to become a PvE, raid-centric MMO, I hope? Because I can have fun playing those, but all signs point to WOD adhering to a PvP template. So if anything, its the flaws of playing in Nullsec in EVE or games like Shadowbane and such that we ought to be debating. The issues with THAT type of gameplay are those were going to face. Griefing, whining, frustrated players, an ever dwindling playerbase, a negative and childish community; those are the flaws that are typically brought up whenever you look at PvP centric MMOs.

I'm not saying we'll face those issues. But if they develop the sort of endgame I was talking about in my previous post, we gotta expect a sudden influx of major douchebags in the community as soon as word gets out officially, in the pre-launch hyping phase.

I think in the beginning of development there were voices here of people who desperately desired WoDMMO to be PvE centeric with fear that focus on PvP content would have players whining and staying away from the game entirely.
(you know, the "all FFA PvP MMORPGs are broken/niche/bankrupt" , cliche argument that PvE gamers like to put up whenever it looks like a game isn't going to be the traditional PvE grindfest).


About Douchebags:
WoD as an IP was always full of douchebags, So as long as they cannot break the game rule-set why not? it may keep things interesting depending how the game is designed.
(if you examine the effect of Douchebags in standard games, they are only hindering when the game overall is built in a very limiting fashion and they exploit on these limitations).

Technically proper Game Design is by a great part about balance: if you have creation there should also be destruction, if you want to allow players to build, run and advance the game-world you also need a mechanism that actively maintain the challenge and offers greater risk in doing so.
Just as characters can be elevated to affect the game-world for everyone, they can also be brought down(perma-death? Xp loss? assets loss?) to maintain balance so at one point you wont have players just spamming and undermining the power of things(the result in many carebear MMORPGs) and Developers must neutralize players ability to affect the game world otherwise it would quickly derail out of control.

If you have Elders that cannot be killed( or cannot suffer significant XP loss), pretty soon you have thousands of these running around, their ability and impact become insignificant and Elder becomes the new Neonate because to do otherwise breaks the game.(the 'then what scenario').

The Elder Game

Continuing from what described above
What I like for "End game" then is that Characters can Enter Elder Game Mode, they have the ability to dramatically and permanently affect the game-world in a way the Elders in P&P can but the sacrifice they can also be perma-killed by others who have enabled the same high-stakes perma-death mode. (noobs can only perma-kill Elders via risky diablery move, otherwise it is just xp loss) . Needless to say Elders can't just quit after they enable this mode, it is Cydonia or Bust for them.
What they gain in the metagame is the ability to set better grounds for their next character and perhaps unlock advanced features on their next character creation.
This also serves to preserve the Paranoia Elder vampires are described to have.

The other advantage to making it a 'greater risk- greater reward' thing is that you won't have players whining about getting killed , they know what they are getting into and they know it is not meant to be easy.

So there could be several optional modes a character can choose at character creation:
Neonate = PvP has 0 effect on your character, your character has 0 effect on the game world or other players(can't embrace or be accountable for child either), the perfect mode for PvE Co-op players who do not care for anything else about the game but want to play a vampire character for the sake of playing a vampire character. Other titles are nothing more than a placeholder with no meaning
Ancilla = PvP Death leads to XP loss, your character has the ability to intervene in the affairs of others and moderate ability to start things.
Elder =  as described, unlimited ability(can't perma-kill Neonate and Anchilla modes still, but doesn't have to since they are peons of other elders) but character can be perma-killed by compatible modes.

Demi-Anthediluvian = Only unlocks after lasting for more than two months(or a year IDK) in-game time as Elder, allows to sire a custom bloodline in accord to WoD rules. can only embrace characters who can be perma-killed into the new bloodline.(maintaining the principle of Creation vs Destruction balance)
This enforces the foundation of clan into something that is more 'real' to the players, they have a Bloodline with its own principles that is really powerful social gimmick for creating a tight knit group but it can also be wiped out completely by  Tremere or other Vampires who diablerize these for their power.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2013, 03:20:43 AM by Radical21 »

Offline Valamyr

  • Kindred
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 1321
  • Reputation: +395/-17
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #35 on: March 05, 2013, 04:59:17 AM »
I'm sure having an high end game where permadeath is downright likely could be fun for a few but I dont think thats wise game design. I'd allow players to risk limited permadeath with consent but only within defined rules. Perhaps manumission, a fight to the death between two foes, or a broader conflict in which a group of kindred gain the ability to permakill the other in any fashion and at any time in exchange for risking the same, alright. But a permanent flag saying 'from this point, there's no way back'? I dont think that feature deserves significant development time, because I don't think it would be sufficiently enjoyed to warrant it. But I could be wrong.

My ideal design has always been the old idea of three parrallel spheres of gameplay, the PvP sandbox, the mostly PvE themepark and the social / physically safe Coffee shop. I think it could have given them the broadest customer base possible, even though of course naturally the end game would have tended to drift towards the sandbox (because you run out of theme content, and because eventually you want to spice things up). Its clear they're now putting the sandbox front and center, and hopefully they'll do it well. Like I said, I can totally have fun with that, but I also want the game to have mass appeal, not just being seen as a grief house. That will require some safer zones and activities to ease newcomers into the game. They did "ok" at best at providing this in EVE, and I'm hoping they go further the broaden the appeal. You can't build a game like this with us as the sole demographic.

One thing I liked in your plan Rad is rewarding players who manage to stay in dangerous positions for an extended amount of time. Now, I dont see dangerous as meaning permadeath, but simply holding high offices or being prince will clearly be difficult, and how long you can cling to such positions should be a way to measure how successful you are. If you manage to stay, say, Sabbat Archbishop of Montreal for over a year, it'd be nice for that to leave a permanent mark on your character. That'd be a much cooler badge of honor than sinking X starships as far as I'm concerned. High-end power should be in flux, and a powerful reward, but it's very easy to go too far, by either giving the 'princes' too much power for instance or OTOH by requiring sacrifices so excessive for the value that nobody wants to go there. That system can only work if it's carefully balanced.

I'm also totally cool with 'thousands of elders running around', because like i said in a previous post, my vision is to largely separate the personal powers of characters (placing it on a EVE-like slow climb ever upwards), and their political positions (constantly in flux and being fought over; can lose it all or win it all. And then lose it again and find yourself back plotting for scraps). In this system, the personal power of characters is relevant in the sense that it may help or hinder (if lacking) their ability to play at Jihad. The only ways I'd see permadeath (resetting the characters themselves) would be through largely consensual systems (agreed upon fights to the death, etc) or through sheer stupidity (losing all Humanity) or through a massive and difficult process to remove specifically bothersome players (A blood hunt, that can only be called by the Prince if a qualified majority of the power players in a City agree). Even this last one I'd temper with a warning to hunted; giving him a short window to leave the City where he is hunted, never to return unless he wants to be permakillable and red-flagged to all. That is, unless the current government collapses and the new one cancels the hunt. As you can see, I'm not willing to go too far with this permadeath deal. It's too much of a risk for too little reward. It should be implemented with multiple safeguards. Still, this last ability for the government of cities to call blood hunts, even if the hunted as a way to flee, would act as a meaningful way to enforce the peace in domains for a time. I think it's worth having to fulfill that role.
Quote
Secondly, they've already said there's not going to be any real sort of crafting system. Resource collecting and crafting are HUUUUUUUUUUUGE aspects of EVE Online, and one of the best ways to capitalize on the raging PvP without ever actually engaging in PvP yourself. Sell ships to replace the ones the losers lost, sell resources to the victors who are now building space stations, and act as the middle-man for trading between the two sides. How well can vampiric prestation and blood-trading replace this, especially in what looks to be a finite playing field? (I.e. all domain is going to get parceled up sooner or later.)

Thats a very interesting topic, deserves its own thread really, but sadly we can only speculate right now about this. Personally, I don't think the playing field will be entirely finite. It's already been suggested (notably in 'Fearless') that every player will have at least one haven and a ghoul/blooddoll that they probably can't lose / will likely be 'safe', so the door's open to the idea that resources to some extent scale with the amount of players. Obviously one of the reasons they're doing that is because they hope they can RMT-fleece us into buying numerous home improvements and upgrades for the arm candy. But the concept could apply in a broader way; the total amount of resources would be based on the population of each city, but averaged in a way that makes sure that there will be fatcats and bottomfeeders because distribution is uneven. Just like in real life; more people help economies grow, but unevenly as hell, and typically in favor of those already on top. And even though 'crafting' may be out, an in-game economy is definitely in, because they'll want to tie it to their RMT shenanigans. They've already promised that just like in EVE, a player could attain everything sold via RMT through the normal market. And that implies an AH-like mechanic.

About crafting, I'm hoping everyone can play a role in city affairs even if they aren't frontline fighters or top plotters, but the contribution you make is of course proportional to what you bring to the table. A very rich vampire with lots of feeding rights granted to him for redistribution should be someone the Prince wants on his side, somehow. Its going to be harder to translate this to practice than collective mining and shipbuilding, for sure. Cant wait to see how they handle it.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2013, 05:18:24 AM by Valamyr »

Offline Radical21

  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 3023
  • Reputation: +-1344/-52
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #36 on: March 06, 2013, 06:31:41 AM »
About crafting, I'm hoping everyone can play a role in city affairs even if they aren't frontline fighters or top plotters, but the contribution you make is of course proportional to what you bring to the table. A very rich vampire with lots of feeding rights granted to him for redistribution should be someone the Prince wants on his side, somehow. Its going to be harder to translate this to practice than collective mining and shipbuilding, for sure. Cant wait to see how they handle it.

I still think Crafting is stupid in this settings( M16A4 of Marksmenship sounds really retarded for example) and also the concept of Best Ideal character in the game = Very rich Vampire.

Tell me is Beckett very rich? Are Lucita, Jack, Christoph Romould and Sacha Vykos all swimming in cash carefully milk their victims into blood bags so they can trade these later for uber gear? 

Seriously all the makings of a grind MMO D&D based rpg that you and rick are imagining look so wrong on this IP.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2013, 06:37:28 AM by Radical21 »

Offline Valamyr

  • Kindred
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 1321
  • Reputation: +395/-17
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #37 on: March 06, 2013, 09:01:53 AM »
I laughed pretty hard at "you and Rick", no offense. I mean, I always felt YOU and Rick had visions pretty much in synch and that I was the odd man out at the theorycraft table :p But I guess it's all in the eye of the Beholder.

As for the substance of the post, the core difference between our views will always remain. As far as I'm concerned, no MMO will ever be a strict port of P&P, and the best route IMO is to embrace the difference and replace traditional roleplaying with emergent roleplaying (which is certainly a compromise, but is eminently practical). That requires accepting that the experience will be -substantially- different from a P&P game. As long as we don't accept that premise, we can of course exchange ideas about what we want to see, but we won't get anywhere nearly close to how devs think; it's essential to value commercial success in the original design, too. The premise of an online game is that there's no pressure forcing everyone to conform, nor any common experience or expectation, so 'pure' tabletop experiences won't work. Every plan, goal and design should take that into account... preferably by taking into account the hard-earned lessons of a fifteen year old industry with unprecedented success in the gaming world. Only then can you attend to reality and make the best of it.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2013, 09:22:18 AM by Valamyr »

Offline Radical21

  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 3023
  • Reputation: +-1344/-52
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #38 on: March 06, 2013, 02:40:08 PM »
Im not even talking about a strict port of the P&P, Im talking about basic handling of stuff like Economy and Progression that are at the core of the game.

You talk about forcing players to do stuff they don't want, How many players really love to grind for items and xp? how many players can pretend they find grinding for items,resources and xp mentally stimulating?

I can tell you one thing for sure, there are many games that offer these exact grind mechanics and reward system you are suggesting and if players really dig that so much they probably wouldn't go out of that game to realize that WoDMMO existed.

Ill grant you that XP progression is tricky business and I prefer that it would be handled like in EVE Online(in short, allowing you to choose the path you want to progress in without having to bother with grinding for it because it simply takes time).

For the rest are you telling me you really can't think of anything else interesting enough to do in game besides farming for Blood, Cash,"Quests" and Items? (cause there are already a few Facebook games that do just that)  Cause if you can't then you are forcing the players to engage in that fluff to get at any good redeeming aspects of the game if there are and that is as bad, no even worse than, forcing them to engage in PvP.


Offline Valamyr

  • Kindred
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 1321
  • Reputation: +395/-17
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #39 on: March 06, 2013, 04:49:52 PM »
You talk about forcing players to do stuff they don't want

Says the guy who wants permadeath for every character who wants to participate in the core sandbox content :p
Quote
For the rest are you telling me you really can't think of anything else interesting enough to do

Did you already forget all the sandbox high end possibilities I described in my last few posts, and would deny that such a system would be revolutionary? So yes I have plenty of new ideas, but what I'm telling you is that I ALSO like some of the things you find boring and feel some of them are mandatory and/or already confirmed to be in.

I believe you should have to put in some work in a character being able to engage in high end content. I have no qualms about 'forcing' you to invest time on 'progression' type content, though I'd certainly make it fun, and offer different paths of progression, including PvP paths. Furthermore, I'd include EVE-like time-based progression as part of a 'Blood Potency'-like mechanic parallel to experience. You should ideally strengthen your blood and your abilities both before you can have the power to directly challenge elders and play on their turf. This does not mean I wouldnt find way to allow younger characters to participate in sandbox-type gameplay early on and learn from it, but nobody can start with maxed stats.

Neonates have to work up the ladder, its a part of both P&P and MMORPGs that most players are happy with. As far as I'm concerned it falls under the "if it's not broken" umbrella. Furthermore, the Fearless leak implicitly confirmed progression is in by highlighting 'progression gap-bridgers' as something they felt should be marketed. (Not that I agree with that) Among other virtues, progression ensures everyone has a minimal grasp of their characters and the game by the time they reach high end content (say, being strong enough to fight to gain and hold office in vampire politics), it makes people who reach it feel proud and different from those who aren't there yet, and most importantly, it ensures that your character's name has value to you; you're not in a position to ruin your name lightly, nor risk blood hunts or permadeath duels lightly, and nor should you. Things that happen to you during this time are your character's history. It's not just a 'grind'; you meet and play with others, make allies and memories. It's not just about the end game, the journey there matters too.

To me, the concept of an economy goes beyond progression, though. Its almost a game within a game. Going through progression content isn't mandatory to be an economic power, though it may help raise startup capital. I'm just hoping WOD goes further than Dollars and Aurums here. These things would matter to a Vampire, but only to a limited extent. Still, devs insisted on the fact that a core principle of all their RMT plans was that all Aurum content would be purchasable within the normal market, so such a thing will exist. Whether it will play a role as large as it does in EVE in shaping end sandbox content, I dont know. EVE's economy is often described as 'spreadsheety', and that's not WOD. But I damn well hope it has a meaningful impact and offers a way for players to have influence without being directly in the thick and thin.

Without progression and without economy, a sandbox PvP game is a deathmatch where you meaninglessly jump in, where 'permadeath' doesn't mean anything at all, in the same way I don't care when I have to respawn in Quake and have to run back to the action. Progression builds attachment. A balanced approach to design delivers the best sandbox MMO in the end; it caters to a broad range of play styles, and offers activities that range from safe to living on the edge. It lets people have to shine according to their strengths. This is all smart design; you don't want to narrow your game to a single thing, much less destroy it's longevity by making it a glorified FPS. You want people spending all their lives in their virtual worlds, so you gotta make it appealing in multiple ways, and rewarding investment is at the core of the model.

I'm not expecting you to suddenly agree Rad, because as I think you know yourself, you hate MMORPGs. You're hoping that this game is radically different than anything on the market, to the point of being unrecognizable as a MMORPG. I'm sorry, but even if the devs have been tight-lipped, enough has slipped through the cracks to demonstrate that this ship has sailed. I'm sure there will be things I won't be thrilled about in the end design too, and that's fine. For very different reasons, neither of us are the core demographic by any stretch of the imagination.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2013, 05:29:59 PM by Valamyr »

Offline Nigama

  • Dead
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 1883
  • Reputation: +383/-7
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #40 on: March 06, 2013, 06:12:42 PM »
I'm not expecting you to suddenly agree Rad, because as I think you know yourself, you hate MMORPGs. You're hoping that this game is radically different than anything on the market, to the point of being unrecognizable as a MMORPG. I'm sorry, but even if the devs have been tight-lipped, enough has slipped through the cracks to demonstrate that this ship has sailed. I'm sure there will be things I won't be thrilled about in the end design too, and that's fine. For very different reasons, neither of us are the core demographic by any stretch of the imagination.

First, let me preface this by saying that I DO want the WoD MMO to be radically different from traditional MMOs, but I do understand that there some things that traditional format MMO's have done well and I wouldn't hate seeing those incorporated.  I've been a long time player of WoW and have tried other MMO's and had fun.  What always ends up killing the fun for me is that no matter how much money I acquire or quests I do, I can't affect the game world.  I can't even knock over a tree, let alone affect the scope and reality of other players.  That was always a bummer.  That and knowing that every epic quest I completed were being completed by everyone else on every server.  That and the fact it just because a rat race of grinding JUST TO KEEP UP.  I couldn't even stop to enjoy it, or set up some RP "mechanics" of my own.  It was keep up by grinding, or fall behind in power and new kewl stuffs. 

In THOSE respects especially, I hope the WoD MMO will be RADICALLY DIFFERENT.  I also hope the team is willing to take risks and try new ideas out, let the players see what they like in Alpha/Beta maybe. 

At the same time, I do have fun playing with economies and I hope the MMO has a robust ecomony, and I could easily see "crafting" being in the game, but maybe not in the ways we've previously seen in other MMOs.  I certainly expect PvP to be in the game, but I'd like it to be meaningful.  Nothing risked means nothing gained.  I'd be perfectly happy if they had a "practice" or "tourny" mode where you could play capture the flag or capping bases tho, that wouldn't hurt me at all and would prolly draw more people to the game, which isn't a bad thing.  And I'd play it, too! 

But yeah... I don't just want the same tired model copied for the WoD MMO and I DO NOT think that ship has sailed.  Will they use features that have worked for other MMO's?  Certainly, they'd be fools not to.  Are they going to create a unique and fresh MMO experience in the WoD MMO?  Certainly, they'd be fools not to!


Nigama
Look at all the other WoW clones come and gone, they are but memories and dust in this society of darkest night... damnit all, now I'm doing it, too!
« Last Edit: March 06, 2013, 06:15:08 PM by Nigama »
"You may not remember us, but we may be responsible for your lack of memory."

Offline Valamyr

  • Kindred
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 1321
  • Reputation: +395/-17
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #41 on: March 06, 2013, 08:43:31 PM »
Quote
But yeah... I don't just want the same tired model copied for the WoD MMO and I DO NOT think that ship has sailed.

Absolutely, I agree. I think the game will be innovative in many ways, and no reason to fear it wont be.

What I was saying was that it'll still have many defining features of the genre, including progression and economic aspects, though how central or complex they will be remains to be seen.

Offline Radical21

  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 3023
  • Reputation: +-1344/-52
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #42 on: March 06, 2013, 09:56:14 PM »
I'm not expecting you to suddenly agree Rad, because as I think you know yourself, you hate MMORPGs.

Can you please stop saying I hate MMORPGs , That would like me saying you hate MMORPGs because you hate PvP MMORPGs.
Im only going to say this only one more time : WoW is not the only MMORPG model out there.

You like to do some extra work after your actual job ends, good for you, but not everyone finds it fun, I rather put on a botting program to avoid it as do many other people (if they can) , you know why? it is a huge waste of time and it isn't fun or meaningful ,these tasks are typically repeating and could be performed by a mindless drone. Also if a person actually works for a living, trying to keep up with some stay at home mom or a kid who only grinds on the MMORPG 24/7 would be a real challenge.
This is why EVE Online's progression is good and even people who are busy businessmen can afford to play it without being left out, what is missing from it is the ability to lose progression ,which is why CCP adds boosts and all sorts of attempts  to make it seem like new players could catch up.

As for you saying socializing to justify grind , that is rather weak since grind parties are just about one thing, grinding, they are no where near as social as PvP for example are not really a topic for conversation since at best you can say 'hey lets grind elsewhere where there is better xp,loot/hr' or start douchy arguments about who is entitled to what loot which ultimately leads to resentment.

Economy:
My issue with the traditional MMO economy is that as I already mentioned, it doesn't work with the settings. it works with D&D and EVE because they are heavily item based.
Vampires however are primarily power based:
A Ventrue can easily obtain money by hypnotizing mortals to give it to him.
A Gangrel can all the same bury himself in the earth instead of buying a haven.
So while a vampire does need some amount of resources, it is usually not as hard to come by and a vampire can also do with little or none and suffer no setbacks , so it is not worth changing the settings to force the gameplay to center around such economy.

Vampires trade system is more like the feudal era, they trade favors and boons of various sorts on a very local peer-to-peer level, there is no blood stock exchange/market rates or vampire e-bay, these things are just too public and impersonal.
For example it is pretty silly to mass market contact details of your shady undercover contact, s/he is not a department store and just by sending out their details to someone else you should be risking them deciding to cut off contact with you.
If you can simply buy/sell so many feeding rights  the value , meaning and maintaining these rights drops to insignificance especially since feeding ground is something that should be contested rather than taken for granted.

Crafting is more tricky, I prefer crafting as a survival mechanism that allows to rig useful stuff from otherwise useless items found around kitchen (like in JA2 RPG) to improve chances of survival when resources are scarce, for example making a Molotov cocktail when you cant afford or don't know anyone that can hook you up with military grade stuff.
it could also be interesting in respect of Viccitude.

Crafting in the sense of upgrading weapons as a trade card seems too unrealistic. also weapons are not really what vampires depend upon to be dangerous and I always liked that part about Owod. Vampires care more about disciplines and ability.

If the MMO map has a finite amount of resources that only replenish sporadically it could introduce a more competitive and rewarding element around finding or trading items and hopefully abolish the very tackey Auction House where you see hundreds of copies of the same "rare" items.

« Last Edit: March 06, 2013, 09:58:45 PM by Radical21 »

Offline Valamyr

  • Kindred
  • Antediluvian
  • *****
  • Posts: 1321
  • Reputation: +395/-17
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #43 on: March 06, 2013, 11:44:28 PM »
I'm not expecting you to suddenly agree Rad, because as I think you know yourself, you hate MMORPGs.

Can you please stop saying I hate MMORPG

Alright, I will. It was honestly the impression I got from what I read from you, but it's really for you to say either way.
Quote
That would like me saying you hate MMORPGs because you hate PvP MMORPGs.

I actually dont. I played ALOT of MMOs and I was always most disapointed by those that offered no PvP at all. I got very much into several PvP MMOs like Shadowbane back in the day. I loved DAoC RvR to death. Even in MMOs where PvP was an afterthought like in LOTRO, I PvPd alot. I definitely enjoy PvP, but I like variety also, and sure, I like games that forces you to put in an extra effort; It makes success extra rewarding.

I will add that I work 37 hours a week, and still find quite easy to play MMOs in my spare time.  Like any hobby, sure, it takes time, and not everyone will be able to put in the same hours. But I don't get that "god thats boring and I'm wasting my time" vibe from games I like, though. There again, some people will get bored more easily than others, but I believe proper game design leaves plenty of room to non-boring content.

This being said, well, the discussion has gotten a bit circular so I think I'll bow out for now because I have nothing to add besides rehashing the same points. It's also a bit pointless, it's not like the devs don't have a precise game plan by now. And we just need to wait a few more years to find out :p

Offline VampireBill

  • Neonate
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Reputation: +0/-0
Re: End-game, or the lack thereof
« Reply #44 on: March 07, 2013, 05:11:58 AM »
I still think Crafting is stupid in this settings( M16A4 of Marksmenship sounds really retarded for example) and also the concept of Best Ideal character in the game = Very rich Vampire.

Tell me is Beckett very rich? Are Lucita, Jack, Christoph Romould and Sacha Vykos all swimming in cash carefully milk their victims into blood bags so they can trade these later for uber gear? 

Seriously all the makings of a grind MMO D&D based rpg that you and rick are imagining look so wrong on this IP.

One of the most interesting parts about vampires to me is that they live amongst human society, but they don't have to abide by its rules. Vampire society (clan, Cam or Sabbat, etc) are what matters and are "real", interacting with human society is more of a game. You can be successful and wealthy with lots of cool toys among humans and still a nobody among your own kind. Kind of like... being a level 60 paladin in a fantasy mmo while being a grocery store clerk in RL.

To that end, there should be 2 different kinds of wealth/power, and it sounds like there could be that with their proposed "blood economy". And of course, there are quite a few ways for a vampire to get what he/she wants in the human world, especially considering he/she is an immortal with supernatural abilities... (need I spell out the possibilities?) At the same time, there's the handy-dandy humanity system to balance out the likelihood of everyone just taking the easy/supernatural/ethically-challenged route to goal attainment every time.

So basically I'll be annoyed as hell if blood is just the substitute for ISK/gold, and you run up to every vendor to buy every item with it, and buying or looting is the only way to get items.

 

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2020, SimplePortal