|
Zaphod42 posted:In Everquest items last forever and can be infinitely traded, so there's constant inflation. World of Warcraft side-steps that by making most things bind-on-equip so they can't be traded, but that then makes the economy weirdly artificial. I thought WOW was mostly BOP (for armor/weapons)? If it's BOE then that's a little more interesting. Didn't EVE have a full time economist on staff at one point? An MMO with no gear drops, only player crafted gear would be novel. Like have rare crafting mats be RNG from raids etc. to feed the gamblers, but actually have someone qualified be monitoring the economy and poking it like the fed changing interest rates or something.
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 01:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
video games are bad and for children I think
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 01:43
|
|
|
Ossipago posted:I thought WOW was mostly BOP (for armor/weapons)? If it's BOE then that's a little more interesting. I think mudflation really comes into play here too with games like EQ(at least versions I'm familiar with, like Project 1999) not having a good way to suck money back out of the economy. Essentially you have .. crafting skill grind, some really limited instances of gambling, purchasing supplies like food and drink, and players becoming dormant as the only way currency ever exits the economy. I think a straight up gambling vendor a la Diablo 2 would really help suck some of the fun money out of the economy. Another topic that may be of interest: Apparently Raph Koster of SWG, UO fame is building a new MMO focused on, apparently, more of the social aspects of his previous games. The announcement stuff happened in October but I don't recall seeing anything here.. Gamasutra article and interview: https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/351629/Raph_Kosters_new_MMO_studio_Playable_Worlds_raises_27_million.php https://answers.thenextweb.com/s/raph-koster-O48rnG
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 04:32
|
|
|
Ossipago posted:
He still gives quarterly reports last I checked. I met him in Iceland some years back and he was rather cool to talk to. One of the best aspects of EvE was that expensive builds most of the time did not drive up the tier of what a ship could do. At the same time you had some level of rock paper scissors spock going on where most ships fitted weapons for their mirror Tier. Frigates could easily fight Frigates and harass Cruisers. Battleships could hit Cruisers but there weapons had a hard time tracking Frigates much less getting a direct hit. Some people might mount lower tier weapons and a few special classes of ships could fit much higher tier weapons (Stealth Bombers come to mind) in general you could not "Stomp" noobs and fight your own tier at the same time in a fair fight. In a Fantasy game you could do this with armor types (leather armor fast weapons might poke a knight to death while the knight can never land a blow using a big heavy claymore). The only real question I have is how to deal with the Zerg. Games like this fail because 300 on 300 fights slow down to a crawl and in general are not a lot of fun. Instance combat means "fair" combat but that breaks so much of what we're trying to do with a game like this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 04:56
|
|
|
cmdrk posted:I think mudflation really comes into play here too with games like EQ(at least versions I'm familiar with, like Project 1999) not having a good way to suck money back out of the economy. Essentially you have .. crafting skill grind, some really limited instances of gambling, purchasing supplies like food and drink, and players becoming dormant as the only way currency ever exits the economy. I think a straight up gambling vendor a la Diablo 2 would really help suck some of the fun money out of the economy. Is that Crowfall? I backed it years ago at a very very high tier. Got nothing playable yet. Just a bunch of basically unity demos and weekly emails asking for more crowdfunding rounds off-kickstarter
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 05:36
|
|
|
PyRosflam posted:The only real question I have is how to deal with the Zerg. Games like this fail because 300 on 300 fights slow down to a crawl and in general are not a lot of fun. Instance combat means "fair" combat but that breaks so much of what we're trying to do with a game like this. Yeah, this is a problem. Still, the novelty of being in a 300v300 fight makes people do it in EVE even if it is a shitshow. I think getting to roleplay out Braveheart would be pretty wild and attract lots of people even if they just charge and then slowly die. But designing a game that incorporates that, is fun, is balanced, and doesn't use instances... that's legit hard game design. And most people aren't even trying new game design, just repeating fps and rpg game models with new paint.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 09:02
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Yeah, this is a problem. Still, the novelty of being in a 300v300 fight makes people do it in EVE even if it is a shitshow. I think getting to roleplay out Braveheart would be pretty wild and attract lots of people even if they just charge and then slowly die. The most fun I’ve ever had in large scale pvp has to have been at the height of planetside 2’s popularity. Having close to 1000 people in a three way brawl was a lot of fun. The game had enough depth that the people who liked applying strategy, tactics and leadership could get what they wanted out of it, while remaining dynamic enough that a single player good or creative enough could shift a battle. Eve is a different kind of fun. In those big battles time dilation slows stuff down to a crawl. You may be in the fight, but you are even more of a spectator. Large eve fights create the same kind of fun that watching “your” team in a football or basketball game, you just have slightly more influence on the outcome. There’s only a few individuals that have a true impact in those fights.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 15:45
|
|
|
andromache posted:The most fun I’ve ever had in large scale pvp has to have been at the height of planetside 2’s popularity. Having close to 1000 people in a three way brawl was a lot of fun. The game had enough depth that the people who liked applying strategy, tactics and leadership could get what they wanted out of it, while remaining dynamic enough that a single player good or creative enough could shift a battle. Planetside 2 is the closest we've come to pulling off a massive scale action game, so its the best model. But I don't know, so much of PS2 was a massive slog, where you'd just kamikaze death run zerg over and over and over into the trenches, all to capture some base that 30 minutes later would be recaptured back. Planetside 1 felt a lot more meaningful to me in a lot of ways, I stopped playing PS2 so maybe it got better, but it just felt like it was always such a brutal footslog in PS2. Where PS1 felt like the battles ranged across the terrain in better ways and you had more strategic options. But then maybe that's rose tinted glasses for PS1's hayday. And that's an oversimplification. The game rules in EVE don't change in massive battles just because they slow down. Its the same game. Yes, in a 300v300 battle, you the little 1 guy are not going to be significant. That's inherent and true of Planetside and any other game with armies that big. It has to be, by definition. You can't have 300 people who are all the hero. But to say that you're simply a spectator in EVE is wrong; no more so than you are a spectator in Planetside. Similarly, most people in Planetside matches just die and don't have any influence on the outcome. But they're still having fun, you can't say they aren't. And also to say that they have no impact at all is wrong; the aggregate is everything. If you think that people who own Titans get everything done in EVE, you don't know how EVE combat works. The little ships add up in a huge way and are actually integral, even if each individual small ship could get blasted at any moment, many of them will survive for much of the battle and will contribute. Like I said, people enjoy being part of the big show. Maybe you don't, but others do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
I don't see how you interpreted that he doesn't enjoy being a part of a big show
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
Glenn Quebec posted:I don't see how you interpreted that he doesn't enjoy being a part of a big show Read the rest of my post for context and don't hyper focus on that last line?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
I did? Why am I not allowed to comment on the strange sign off?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
Glenn Quebec posted:I did? Why am I not allowed to comment on the strange sign off? You're allowed to comment on it, it just feels like you kinda missed the point when I wrote so many words to explain my point. His point was that its not just enough to be a foot troop in a big battle if you have no agency over the outcome of the battle. My point was some people will enjoy it even if they don't have that kind of world-changing power. So in that context, I'm saying more than just "being a part of a big show" but instead "JUST being a PART of a big show" Yeah?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 18:16
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:You're allowed to comment on it, it just feels like you kinda missed the point when I wrote so many words to explain my point. It's not even really that. I mean, I'm the reimbursement director for GSF. I've been in the alliance since 2010, and in leadership since 2011, had a titan and all the toys since 2012. I egged DBRB into dropping supers at Asakai and I've been in most of the major fleet actions since. That rush of adrenaline you experience when you realize "it's happening!" I can tell you, it's not there after the 10th or 11th hour of a tidi fight. The big fleet actions that get everyone excited and draw people into eve, they only happen a couple times a year, and the truly large ones that mobilize the entire playerbase, that's a couple times a decade. I was at BR-5. The first few hours were exciting and after that it was chained to the computer with almost everyone other than a couple FCs muted because I hated humanity. Those truly big fleet fights are not fun and I'd challenge anyone besides DBRB to say otherwise. What's fun is the boost you feel when your "tribe" wins and you get to talk poo poo on the other tribe. In those big fights it's truly a spectator sport with the little bit of extra "I was there (little tear)" and stories about how you pushed F1 and the strange rituals you performed to your diety of choice to get your guns to cycle. We have learned since then. Instead of piling all the nerds into one point now, we'll spread out forces, such as having blackops do a bubble trail of tears on enemy reinforcements. That helps give people a sense of agency and avoid the 99.9% tidi conditions that drag a fight out through the night. But yeah, the actual operation sucks rear end. The feeling after the fight, the stories you told, the group narratives built after, that's the fun. And really, if you are looking for that, there's a lot of venues outside of games for that. Intramural sports, hell, even the military. Maybe I've got a different rememberance of PS2. I started with the SA goons in NC but then after some weird schism/dramabomb I don't remember the details on went Vanu with most of the eve goons. Yeah, we had our fair share of Lasher/Lancer spam across the night sky, but the people I mostly ran with liked to attack the flanks. I got a lot of satisfaction from blowing up the right Sunderer at the right time to cause an entire defense to collapse. I generally avoided the slog side of things. Which maybe it just took me a few extra years to figure that out in Eve.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
I was there for the great BOB war. One of the best things we did in that war was break the fighting over a large area since BOB had a huge amount of space to cover and still used Zerg doctrine. Turned into a trail of tears as BOB players made for low sec. My small part was shutting down a few outposts with stealth bombers, which was a ton of fun back then. I can think of a few anti Zerg mechanics for a fantasy style game: Make some/most attacks AE type - This forces both sides to spread out since interlocking fields of fire will bring down a zerg fairly easily. Friendly fire - Ranged attacks and spells are not as good when hitting the backs of your melee. (Same for AE healing). Require simultaneous objectives - Fairly easy way to ensure teams are somewhat split up instead of standing on each other. DOTA style assistance on front lines - Each team gets NPC soldiers who make raiding parties and push forward into the other sides area (Only during wars of course) Theft of resources - Mining should take time and be done by NPCs (and player miners). Allow for theft of resources, NPC guards can and should have a fairly robust programmable AI system for guarding resources as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
PyRosflam posted:I was there for the great BOB war. One of the best things we did in that war was break the fighting over a large area since BOB had a huge amount of space to cover and still used Zerg doctrine. Turned into a trail of tears as BOB players made for low sec. My small part was shutting down a few outposts with stealth bombers, which was a ton of fun back then. I remember it more as the first few nights BOB tried to fight. Shrike lost another Titan, their fleet got smashed and they turtled in NPC stations, camped by Goons, while we chewed up their sov. Then they became the clown alliance and were real bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
I may not enjoy most pvp mmos, but I do like reading about them when goons are on the scene. The BOB war had my attention for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 03:50
|
|
|
Are there any open world MMOFPS games on the horizon? I really loved WW2 Online and wanted to like Planetside 2 but found it to be too much of an arcade game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 06:23
|
|
|
just another posted:Are there any open world MMOFPS games on the horizon? I really loved WW2 Online and wanted to like Planetside 2 but found it to be too much of an arcade game. SOMEHOW WW2OL still exists and apparently they are just about to release player trenches?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 08:22
|
|
|
tarkov is kind of an mmofps if you're into the dayz esque type of game- (mmo features such as singular AuctionHouse system and the ability to join games with other people, and the loss/acquisition of loot being a big part of it)
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 10:19
|
|
|
Erev posted:SOMEHOW WW2OL still exists and apparently they are just about to release player trenches? I resubscribe every now and then but it's just not the same with such a small player base. All the battles feel small and static.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 22:31
|
|
|
just another posted:I resubscribe every now and then but it's just not the same with such a small player base. All the battles feel small and static. I mean, true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
just another posted:I resubscribe every now and then but it's just not the same with such a small player base. All the battles feel small and static. I remember downloading this onto my iMac in 2003/4 and thinking this exact thing as a teenager. It's astonishing to me that it's still going and they haven't attempted to modernize it somehow, but I suspect that they'd bump up against engine limitations / impossible starting costs that a tiny company like them could never afford if they attempted to do so. Shame, though, because I loved the dynamism and the few times I did get into battles over the years when I sporadically played they were fun, but by modern standards it's basically a blurry incomprehensible mess with baffling mechanics. ed: lol it's on steam now and it's aggressively bad monetization has resulted in a deluge of negative reviews, even from people who have a personal nostalgic fondness for the game. RIP Frog Act fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Jan 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2020 01:12
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:But I don't know, so much of PS2 was a massive slog, where you'd just kamikaze death run zerg over and over and over into the trenches, all to capture some base that 30 minutes later would be recaptured back. Yeah this is what made me give up on it. I played from beta to launch for a while but the heartbreak of spending hours and hours to cap a base only for another faction to just zerg it ruined the game for me. Looking back though that was easily some of the most fun ive ever had playing an MMO. If you played PS2 at peak population, you're one of fortunate ones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
I feel like planetside 1 had a much better balance and didn't turn into a slog as much, but its probably just rose tinted glasses. I think the vehicle balance was waaaay different in ps1 though, which changed things a lot...
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 19:34
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:I feel like planetside 1 had a much better balance and didn't turn into a slog as much, but its probably just rose tinted glasses. the caves were kinda cool but seemed kinda half-baked, also. BFRs felt really dumb, to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
just another posted:I resubscribe every now and then but it's just not the same with such a small player base. All the battles feel small and static. I would probably play World War II Online if it had AI you can also shoot at, because of the mentioned small player base.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 22:13
|
|
|
I hate that shooters don't have sort-of dangerous mooks to fight alongside player enemies. Like, grunts and marines in Halo should just be shooting inaccurately all the time during invasion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2020 05:23
|
|
|
Not only should Korean War Online be tidied up by now, but Vietnam Online should be in alpha.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2020 07:41
|
|
|
jokes posted:I hate that shooters don't have sort-of dangerous mooks to fight alongside player enemies. Like, grunts and marines in Halo should just be shooting inaccurately all the time during invasion. You should check out Titanfall2 and Escape from Tarkov then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 02:49
|
|
|
Do any games exist with large scale faction based open world sandbox style siege warfare like what used to happen in Dark Age of Camelot. But with a 100% player run economy like Star Wars Galaxies and a total lose raid/loot system similar to Rust for example where you can steal everything that has been stockpiled in other peoples bases? Been playing games that seem to only have one of these aspects at a time... the siege warfare like in Mordhau becomes stale with its lobbied servers with its 20v20s or what ever or other games when its just 2 zergs beating each other down, a 3rd faction would make things much more interesting. Hardly any games i've seen lately even have player based economies... its all bind on pick up poo poo and grinding 50 hours just so a mob has a chance to drop that 1 decent item (maybe it drops next time reeee) And obviously there is no point in pvp if you cant steal things from those you dominate...
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
These games take effort that no one seems able or willing to put it in, so I'm afraid we'll only see those flash in the pan games that last a few months before burning out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2020 06:02
|
|
|
Gloria Victis sounds a little bit like what you're looking for. Its got Mount and Blade style combat, 3 factions, the economy is entirely player run with deep crafting and you can loot other players (with limitations). Its also not a great game, but its decent enough that its worth checking out when it goes on sale, which it does pretty regularly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2020 19:46
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0117 posted:Gloria Victis sounds a little bit like what you're looking for. Its got Mount and Blade style combat, 3 factions, the economy is entirely player run with deep crafting and you can loot other players (with limitations). I want to like Gloria Victis so much more than I do and I don't know what it is that its quite missing. It comes drat close though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
I played gloria victis with some pubbies a while ago, but is there a goon guild or something for it or just random goons that play a few days a year?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
Glenn Quebec posted:I want to like Gloria Victis so much more than I do and I don't know what it is that its quite missing. It comes drat close though. Its a lot of "good idea, bad implementation" which is probably going to govern the game's future, since its going to be in early access forever. Its not "bad" but after playing it for any period of time, you realize what could change for the better, but it never really does.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2020 22:48
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0117 posted:Its a lot of "good idea, bad implementation" which is probably going to govern the game's future, since its going to be in early access forever. tbh that's pretty much every mmo forever. I find that I just prefer to take breaks each time when I run out of activities to do other than grind until the end of the world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2020 16:24
|
|
|
Here's an MMO BR called Hunter's Arena: Legends. 60 people, 3 man teams, PvE element for gear and level ups. https://store.steampowered.com/app/1061100/Hunters_Arena_Legends/ Go ham.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2020 14:24
|
|
|
jokes posted:Sucks telling people, and truly meaning it, that FFXIV is the best Final Fantasy ever made except for the first 60 hours of the game, lol. Hmm I'm having the desire to play this on PS4. Should I wait until this previously mentioned patch to pick it up at all, and is the console version as good as PC? Still always have desire to play an MMO anytime I pickup other video games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2020 03:05
|
|
|
There are like no details on what the ARR questing streamlining is actually going to be, and it's going to be months off either way. You can be long past the point that it's relevant by then. Lots of people play on console. You miss out on a few TOS breaking mods but PS4 is otherwise fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2020 03:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
Jebediah posted:Here's an MMO BR called Hunter's Arena: Legends. 60 people, 3 man teams, PvE element for gear and level ups. nice battle royale game not mmo
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2020 03:24
|
|
