I see so many MMO i have played over the years button mash and skill trees.Why not just use actual pathfinder mechanics and rulesets. This in turn will increase book sales and keep it true to the game.
Now i know alot are going to rant..you cannot do that..what about my button mashing and skill trees.The game will not convert well etc. Well if it works on tabletop why not in a game doing all the calulations for you.After all isn't a convention or table with 2-12 players sorta a mmo with all the gm run npc's as well.
You have feats and skills..make the character look like the game stats in the tabletop.Hell if you wanted to make a import for the pathfinder society characters.
As for the imports you could do a NWN or Elder scroll type import maybe have a section players could run thier group thru a premade dungeon.
For building Age of Conan had a guild building and Vanguard and Darkfall both had incredible player villages and forts etc.
It would be nice to be similar to rulesets in books so one could look at the classes and go okay i know what i am doing or going for.
|
I see so many MMO i have played over the years button mash and skill trees.Why not just use actual pathfinder mechanics and rulesets. This in turn will increase book sales and keep it true to the game.
Now i know alot are going to rant..you cannot do that..what about my button mashing and skill trees.The game will not convert well etc. Well if it works on tabletop why not in a game doing all the calulations for you.After all isn't a convention or table with 2-12 players sorta a mmo with all the gm run npc's as well.
You have feats and skills..make the character look like the game stats in the tabletop.Hell if you wanted to make a import for the pathfinder society characters.
As for the imports you could do a NWN or Elder scroll type import maybe have a section players could run thier group thru a premade dungeon.
For building Age of Conan had a guild building and Vanguard and Darkfall both had incredible player villages and forts etc.
It would be nice to be similar to rulesets in books so one could look at the classes and go okay i know what i am doing or going for.
Because using d20 rules via OGL in a video game isn't quite possible/
Now i know alot are going to rant..you cannot do that..what about my button mashing and skill trees.
You'll find that if you don't insult the people answering to your post - especially before they even answered - you'll much more likely get an actual discussion going and are much less likely to be called a troll.
Especially with that spelling. :P
And the rules do perform poorly with a MMORPG. They were created with pen and paper roleplaying and its strengths in mind: The rules only have to fit onto paper and there are actual, thinking humans in control of everything.
Once you try to force the whole thing into a computer arbitrating the rules and take away the human looking for loophole exploits, the system works a lot less well.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
As would I. I would love to see the Pathfinder game translated as closely as possible to a computer game.
One of Pathfinders big selling points was its backward's compatibility with 3.5 D&D.
One of Pathfinder Onlines big selling points could be it's ease of play if you already know Pathfinder.
Scot Betts, if i may ask, why would it be a horrible idea to translate the Pathfinder game into a computer game? I am curious.
Gorbacz, thank you for providing the link. Yes i have to sadly agree, those are valid reasons for the company going with something different.
Well, it is something i still would like to see.
Scot Betts, if i may ask, why would it be a horrible idea to translate the Pathfinder game into a computer game? I am curious.
I know I'm not Scott but I'll toss out the first thing that comes to mind.
MMO's are meant to be played 24/7 usually. The idea being that you can log in whenever you want and immediately jump into the action. I don't see that working too well for Casters that have a limited amount of spells per day. I just couldn't see someone saying "Sorry, guys, I'd love to come with you but I still have 4 hours left to rest before I get my spells back."
The same goes for Resting for HP's back and more rules I don't feel like typing out.
Goblin Squad Member
|
One of Pathfinders big selling points was its backward's compatibility with 3.5 D&D.
Which makes sense, given people's reluctance to re-purchase entire shelves of books.
One of Pathfinder Onlines big selling points could be it's ease of play if you already know Pathfinder.
If your game isn't easy enough for someone who's never played an MMO or tabletop game before to pick up and learn, you've done something terribly wrong.
Scot Betts, if i may ask, why would it be a horrible idea to translate the Pathfinder game into a computer game? I am curious.
Tabletop roleplaying games are designed with a tabletop play experience involving 5 players (4 adventurers and a DM) in mind. That's the format. The further you deviate from that intended format, the less ideal the rules become. An online, massively-multiplayer game is very far from that intended format. You don't have a DM. You have thousands of players. You don't have face-to-face interaction. Any one of these things by itself is a good argument for discarding the original rules in favor of something that suits the format better. Combined, they make up a pretty rock-solid case for throwing out most (if not all) of the tabletop mechanics.
Goblinworks Founder
|
...
Who would have thought I'd agree to two of Scotts posts in one day.
As much as I would love to see an exact replica of the rules in a isometric, turn-based game, it does not translate well to an MMO or even a real-time MOG.
Here are a few examples of why it doesn't translate
- You play a wizard. When you start the game with four hit points and a great axe does 1d12+modifiers.
- You have a 25 percent chance to hit a target in medium armor. (BAB+0 vs AC 15)
- You can cast Magic Missle once before you need to rest for eight hours. If your lucky you can cast it a few more times.
- Magic Missle does not do enough damage to kill a goblin on full health.
- The computer will not fudge a dice roll to ensure the story continues unhindered.
- Fireballs can and will kill your allies if you drop one in the middle of melee.
That's but a few of the things you could expect to face.
Personally I think it would be hardcore and I would definitely buy a game that provided that much challenge. I would expect to be rerolling my characters quite a lot considering nobody can resurrect below level 10. Again this doesn't phase me personally but your every day consumer would not find this acceptable.
- You play a wizard. When you start the game with four hit pointsAssuming you weren't implying starting with 6 or 7 Con, I am not going to take anything you say about Pathfinder into account. :)
Even with a 12 con and 7 hp a 16 str guy with a greatsword does a average of 8.5 damage thats still one and out if he crits its even worse.
|
Goblinworks Founder
|
- You play a wizard. When you start the game with four hit pointsAssuming you weren't implying starting with 6 or 7 Con, I am not going to take anything you say about Pathfinder into account. :)
I'm sorry. Sometimes I find it hard to remember the rule changes over the past seven incarnations of the dungeons and dragons rule set :P
It doesn't change the fact that you would be one shot and bleeding to death with one hit.
You'll find that if you don't insult the people answering to your post - especially before they even answered - you'll much more likely get an actual discussion going and are much less likely to be called a troll.
He actually didn't insult anyone. He just said "a lot" of people might think like that...
Now if you happen to feel like you're one of them that's another story...
Tabletop roleplaying games are designed with a tabletop play experience involving 5 players (4 adventurers and a DM) in mind. That's the format. The further you deviate from that intended format, the less ideal the rules become. An online, massively-multiplayer game is very far from that intended format. You don't have a DM. You have thousands of players. You don't have face-to-face interaction. Any one of these things by itself is a good argument for discarding the original rules in favor of something that suits the format better. Combined, they make up a pretty rock-solid case for throwing out most (if not all) of the tabletop mechanics.
I don't know why when most hear the word "MMO" they instantly think about a stereotype full-out MMO.
Even if there well might be thousands online you wont be playing with all of them at the same time but parties of 2-6 players might be the way the game developers want people to play this game...that ever crossed your mind?
However the history of computer games is sad in this sense. Boardgames that would work EXCELLENT as computer games never made it over in good shape.
Look att Battletech...every time you hear about a new Battletech game...guess what...its a shooter game...instead of actually implementing the actual rules exactly...which would work great.
The same with D&D. The only problem with this (if you see it as a problem) is that everything becomes turn-based.
Neverwinter Nights 1 (NWN) has a very good solution which offers the best of two worlds while still staying true to the core rules. A phased turn-based system or timelimit turns or whatever you want to call it.
I think who-ever wants to make a D&D:ish MMO today should think NWN persistent world servers...but bigger...instead of thinking stereotype MMO...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't know why everyone hears the word "MMO" they instantly think about a stereotype full-out MMO.Even if there well might be thousands online you wont be playing with all of them at the same time but parties of 2-6 players might be the way the game developers want people to play this game...that ever crossed your mind?
It certainly is a valid position to make a game with that style, and we more or less have one, Dungeons and dragons online, a fairly good system full of 1 shot short adventures and some rather effective tools for finding groups quickly, and voice chat to link them all up.
However that is not what the developers have been proposing for pathfinder online. Very large portions of what they are explaining is involving creating kingdoms, political struggles, focus on the overall structure of the world, the big picture influenced by thousands, rather then a bunch of short stories about small groups back to back. At least that is the point of view I have gotten from just about everything I have heard developers talk about when they have given their glimmers into the plans for the game.
Dude, I know your comment was meant to agree with me...but please don't drag DDO into this. DDO is more of a shooter game than an RPG...at least the way I see it...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know why when most hear the word "MMO" they instantly think about a stereotype full-out MMO.
As far as Scott is concerned, if it doesn't look, feel and play to the specifications of the typical MMORPG gamer (brain damaged frog), it is an inferior product. In business terms he has a point and we can give him a gold star, but it is still dictating a brain dead product. Such a discussion as to how to try make your themepark less brain dead is a debate for the MMORPG.com forums.
Guild Wars is a living example of a game in which an MMORPG game was played in small parties. Cities would act as quest hubs/player hubs and parties would be created and venture out into the instanced world.
NwN is a living example of D&D rules integrated into a game which flawlessly produces an enjoyable TTRPG adaptation in a small scale MMORPG-esque persistent world. Paired with the system of Guild Wars, I fail to see how you have not brought Pathfinder to the MMORPG platform in it's majority.
There is such a wealth of possible ways in which an MMORPG could be designed and played that the idea that anything must be reproduced from a single title is insane. We're literally at a junction in this industry where gaming companies dare go as far as adding voice acting and story driven quests whilst leaving every single feature intact else untouched.
The debate should be regarding how we go from the OGL to the MMORPG, not from the MMORPG to the OGL. Such a movement would not be 'a terrible idea'.
I don't know why when most hear the word "MMO" they instantly think about a stereotype full-out MMO.As far as Scott is concerned, if it doesn't look, feel and play to the specifications of the typical MMORPG gamer (brain damaged frog), it is an inferior product. In business terms he has a point and we can give him a gold star, but it is still dictating a brain dead product. Such a discussion as to how to try make your themepark less brain dead is a debate for the MMORPG.com forums.
Guild Wars is a living example of a game in which an MMORPG game was played in small parties. Cities would act as quest hubs/player hubs and parties would be created and venture out into the instanced world.
NwN is a living example of D&D rules integrated into a game which flawlessly produces an enjoyable TTRPG adaptation in a small scale MMORPG-esque persistent world. Paired with the system of Guild Wars, I fail to see how you have not brought Pathfinder to the MMORPG platform in it's majority.
There is such a wealth of possible ways in which an MMORPG could be designed and played that the idea that anything must be reproduced from a single title is insane. We're literally at a junction in this industry where gaming companies dare go as far as adding voice acting and story driven quests whilst leaving every single feature intact else untouched.
The debate should be regarding how we go from the OGL to the MMORPG, not from the MMORPG to the OGL. Such a movement would not be 'a terrible idea'.
I am not a programmer, but I imagine the PF rules would be too limited for the scope of the MMO. Bioware advised Green Ronin NOT to use the computer conflict resolution system, so they came up with AGE. Many feel that Dragon Age should have mimicked the video game, but Bioware themselves said the conflict resolution would translate miserably.
You cannot play Dragon Age the video game, and go into Dragon Age the (AGE) system and know anything about playing it other than fluff if you are using Bioware's world.
|
Goblinworks Founder
|
I don't know why when most hear the word "MMO" they instantly think about a stereotype full-out MMO.As far as Scott is concerned, if it doesn't look, feel and play to the specifications of the typical MMORPG gamer (brain damaged frog), it is an inferior product. In business terms he has a point and we can give him a gold star, but it is still dictating a brain dead product. Such a discussion as to how to try make your themepark less brain dead is a debate for the MMORPG.com forums.
Guild Wars is a living example of a game in which an MMORPG game was played in small parties. Cities would act as quest hubs/player hubs and parties would be created and venture out into the instanced world.
NwN is a living example of D&D rules integrated into a game which flawlessly produces an enjoyable TTRPG adaptation in a small scale MMORPG-esque persistent world. Paired with the system of Guild Wars, I fail to see how you have not brought Pathfinder to the MMORPG platform in it's majority.
There is such a wealth of possible ways in which an MMORPG could be designed and played that the idea that anything must be reproduced from a single title is insane. We're literally at a junction in this industry where gaming companies dare go as far as adding voice acting and story driven quests whilst leaving every single feature intact else untouched.
The debate should be regarding how we go from the OGL to the MMORPG, not from the MMORPG to the OGL. Such a movement would not be 'a terrible idea'.
I know it's not multiplayer and has nothing to do with MMORPGs but the best representation I have ever seen of the d20 3.5e rules was Troika's Temple of Elemental Evil. For pure interpretation of the rulebook it trumps both Baldurs gate and Neverwinter nights in execution. It was bugged at launch but patch fixed within a month. The rules can be done. Whether they can be done for an MMO will probably never be determined. I do know that if Paizo and Hasbro were approached by a company that wanted to make a Cooperative Multi-player Online Game with a system that represented the rulebook verbatim, I would not think twice about buying it.
Guild Wars is no different. It's a straight out MMO stereotype with ONLY change that it focuses more on playing as a team...so please...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Guild Wars is no different. It's a straight out MMO stereotype with ONLY change that it focuses more on playing as a team...so please...
I was referring to the game being an MMORPG in which players interacted in small parties ala the TTRPG. Scott mentioned that no element of the tabletop game was transferable to the massively multiplayer game, when in fact most MMORPGs streamline the 'massively' element out in terms of instancing a substantial amount of content.
If PFO were to follow the same party/team system as Guild wars, gameplay mechanics of NwN...etc.
|
It would be nice to be similar to rulesets in books so one could look at the classes and go okay i know what i am doing or going for.
I for one agree that making the mmo resemble the I.P. it is based on is a good idea. People are going to want to play Pathfinder Online because they had played Pathfinder. Making the game a fantasy version of Eve Online (which is kind of what looks like is happening) isn't a way to provide fan service.
Tabletop RPGs use a turn-based system to model real-time combat in a manageable way.
Don't base a real-time MMO's game system on a turn-based model of real-time interactions.
A real-time game doesn't need AOOs and immediate actions because those mechanics exist to help model real-time actions in a turn-based game. In a real-time game, they're unnecessary--instead, your character would have instant (0 casting time) actions that you could trigger in response to the actions of other creatures in the game.
I was a designer on Baldur's Gate III. We were trying to model AOOs in realtime combat by creating "ghosts" of your character that would strike out automatically when someone provoked an AOO. Then we realized that in a realtime game, the player could just click the target as it passed him, and shift his character's attacks to that target, no separate mechanic or animation needed.
Part of being a good licensed computer game designer is knowing where the line is between "this makes it feel like the licensed content" and "this is an artifact of the licensed content that doesn't add to actual gameplay in our game."
I remember arguing with a licensor who wanted the massive damage rule in our computer game. We finally won out when we explained that when Timmy the Gamer's fighter character has 100 health and is fighting a dragon, and the dragon "hits" him for 60 health, Timmy expects that he'll still be alive with 40 health, rather than having a chance of instantly dying from "massive damage" even though he should have 40 health left.
Duplicate the fun of the game experience, but don't be enslaved to the constraints of the original game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't know why when most hear the word "MMO" they instantly think about a stereotype full-out MMO.
Because we're in a forum talking about designing a full-out MMO.
Even if there well might be thousands online you wont be playing with all of them at the same time but parties of 2-6 players might be the way the game developers want people to play this game...that ever crossed your mind?
No. I expect the developers believe that interactions between players will take place on multiple different levels - solo, two players, five players, twenty players, a hundred players, and so on.
However the history of computer games is sad in this sense. Boardgames that would work EXCELLENT as computer games never made it over in good shape.
That may well be true.
Look att Battletech...every time you hear about a new Battletech game...guess what...its a shooter game...instead of actually implementing the actual rules exactly...which would work great.
You can go out and download a play-the-Battletech-board-game-on-your-computer application, with full rules and tech readout support, and with support for multiplayer. And, just like the board game, it takes forever.
The reason they don't make the Battletech board game on computers when you hear about a Battletech game being made is because no one would play it. What people will play is a game where you can shoot giant robots with lasers and missiles.
The same with D&D.
Yes. The same with D&D.
The only problem with this (if you see it as a problem) is that everything becomes turn-based.
Yep, that's a problem.
Neverwinter Nights 1 (NWN) has a very good solution which offers the best of two worlds while still staying true to the core rules. A phased turn-based system or timelimit turns or whatever you want to call it.
But we don't have to worry about that, because this game won't be staying true to the core rules.
He actually didn't insult anyone. He just said "a lot" of people might think like that...
Now if you happen to feel like you're one of them that's another story...
Do you believe what you say or are you being facetious?
"I'll say 'some people who disagree with this are idiots' and legally there's nothing you can do, and if you disagree with me you admit to being an idiot." Is the oldest trick in the book.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Dude, I know your comment was meant to agree with me...but please don't drag DDO into this. DDO is more of a shooter game than an RPG...at least the way I see it...
There it is. The reason trying to build an MMO off the ruleset is pointless anyway. They already built that game and voila, still not happy.
Fans think they know what they want, but often aren't happy when they get it.
I hate to break it to you all but when it comes to multiplayer online the age of the game almost seem not to matter.
I'll just draw a parellell to the shooters scene. So...we have a 15+ year old game that totally dominates it. CS. I mean thats like ancient. Still it is the standard.
People (like me) quit playing Battlefield 2 only when BF3 came. Just before that also playing a really old shooter.
Now...speaking RPG's....there are a lot of people still playing NWN1...as well as its uglier cousin NWN2...
I hate to mention a game that sucks (to me) here but you know, WoW aint a youngster as well...
You can go out and download a play-the-Battletech-board-game-on-your-computer application, with full rules and tech readout support, and with support for multiplayer. And, just like the board game, it takes forever.
The reason they don't make the Battletech board game on computers when you hear about a Battletech game being made is because no one would play it. What people will play is a game where you can shoot giant robots with lasers and missiles.
Where? There are almost no nearly such good games. Only a couple of "garage" made versions.
The best version i know was made for the Amiga computer and was called Mechforce....and yes, I still play it on an Amiga emulator...
...and no, I don't want to shoot giants robots with laser missiles...
Maybe it takes forever...BUT it takes a HELL OF A LOT of shorter time than actually doing the got damn calculations, dicerolls and filling out the forms when you can instead let the computer to what it is supposed to do...calculate...while you can just play the game.
Battletech was an enough successful merchandise so that we should have EXACTLY that. Believe it or not but people where actually doing all that manually....and that my friend is slow...
You know the reason for it never making it over to a computer game? In this case it was because FASA thought that this would make their boardgame obsolete...so they forbid it. Brain-dead shooters with Battletech theme was totally ok though...
This guy who made the Amiga game even aproached FASA and said hey lets do this...and he was abruptly turned down...I think the reason was that they didn't want a competitor to the board game.
You know the scary fact...what if the reason they never make an exact boardgame simulation of anything D&D cause they are actually afraid of the same?
I mean you DO know that people still play D&D pen and paper right? Where everything is slooooow...and theese forums are even all about that...doh...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Where? There are almost no nearly such good games. Only a couple of "garage" made versions.
MegaMek is the most popular and well-developed platform.
The best version i know was made for the Amiga computer and was called Mechforce....and yes, I still play it on an Amiga emulator...
Yep, I think that's probably a little out of date.
...and no, I don't want to shoot giants robots with laser missiles...
Well, I mean, you do, right? That's what Battletech is. You shoot giant robots with lasers and missiles. But you want a very specific, and not terribly popular version of shooting giant robots with lasers and missiles - the kind where you make them shoot lasers and missiles from your position hovering above the battlefield and micromanaging your army's every action.
Maybe it takes forever...BUT it takes a HELL OF A LOT of shorter time than actually doing the got damn calculations, dicerolls and filling out the forms when you can instead let the computer to what it is supposed to do...calculate...while you can just play the game.
That's not the point. It takes longer than clicking the mouse button to fire your PPC in MW4, and that's what matters.
Battletech was an enough successful merchandise so that we should have EXACTLY that. Believe it or not but people where actually doing all that manually....and that my friend is slow...
They were. And for a while it was successful. But then it wasn't, because you can't make money like that with such an incredibly niche hobby. They weren't asking for enough money from each of their (small handful of) customers. Games Workshop did something similar, except they knew how to get their customers to spend money.
You know the reason for it never making it over to a computer game? In this case it was because FASA thought that this would make their boardgame obsolete...so they forbid it. Brain-dead shooters with Battletech theme was totally ok though...
Good lord, the elitism.
This guy who made the Amiga game even aproached FASA and said hey lets do this...and he was abruptly turned down...I think the reason was that they didn't want a competitor to the board game.
You know the scary fact...what if the reason they never make an exact boardgame simulation of anything D&D cause they are actually afraid of the same?
I mean you DO know that people still play D&D pen and paper right? Where everything is slooooow...and theese forums are even all about that...doh...
Yeah, you got me. Despite my crazy-person level of dedication to tabletop roleplaying games, I completely forgot about tabletop D&D.
Counter-Strike hasn't been the standard for years. The Halo series redefined the shooter standard. Then CoD:MW redefined it. The current generation of shooters (MW3 and BF3) are wildly different from Counter-Strike.
There is the definition about what "standard" is....but when it comes to gaming legues or "e-sports" if you will it pretty much is still...
Halo? Dude...I'm talking MULTIPLAYER here...
And no BF3 does not WILDLY differ from CS. Sure the graphics are a bit better...but even BF3 has a (in my mind poor) a gameplay-mode called "rush" that is kind of CS:esque.
Oh god, Neverwinter Nights 2 is uglier than Neverwinter Nights 1?What world do you post from? Every single thing you say lowers your credibility in my eyes.
I hate to break it to you again but the interpretation of beauty consists of everything you see pretty much. Sure NWN2 can blast of lovely 3D screenshots but its when you start playing the game that you understand how ugly it is...with clunky controls and camera...non-existing animations...an UI that makes you wanna puke...and theres more...
Obsidian didn't make a disaster game...they just didn't do it nearly as good as it was supposed to for NWN1 players to want to change to it.
The final verdict is when we have many times more people still playing the lot older NWN1 than NWN2, online....despite new sales efforts on the NWN2 side.
I didn't want to necro this old discussion really...but you asked...
You're right! Neverwinter Nights is only two years older than WoW! And it wishes it had the sort of active player base WoW will have in two years.
I hope you're not saying that the more players a game has, the better it is...and that all of us actually should be playing the game that has the most players caues all the other games are failiures?
I hope you didn't mean that.
Anyway, I'm not going to discuss things like WoW vs NWN...I'll just let you win that...
If Bioware (at that time) had made NWN2 instead AND they'd put the developing time on multiplayer instead of stupid single player I think the "MMO-scene" could have been looking very different today...
Instead Bioware went on and made SP after SP game. SWToR is actually their first MP game after NWN1 but its way too late now and all they have is a stereotype MMO to show...
If Bioware would have concentrated on MP instead of abanoning it I think things might have looked different by now. One big thing with NWN was that they WHEREN'T charging the customers more money for the game. Well actually the two expansions brought something but the bulk of their patching and additions work was more of a "good-will"....hence they didn't have nearly enough development money to make something substantial...leading to one of the biggest modding communities the world has ever seen...(the NWN1 modding community).
Why using OGL in an MMO is a bad idea.
Please note that I don't want to beat a dead horse with the "caster limitations" or "legal ambiguity" argument. Although, both are correct and valid.
Reason #1 – 3.5 OGL rules are complex.
MMOs should have simple mechanics (but with great versatility) so that anyone can pick it up and play it right out of the box. We may like reading a bunch of books to understand how the rules work (and that is fine – that’s part of what makes us gamers) BUT most people do not. The rules of an MMO need to be simple so that everyone – even non-gamers – can play and enjoy the game.
Please note that “simple mechanics” does not translate to “few character options” or “limited immersion”
Reason #2 – Using 3.5 OGL rules in PFO will not increase book sales.
WOtC tried to “increase sales” by having a required online subscription for 4th edition character creation. Every rule was online which meant that nobody had to buy the books if they had an online subscription. What happened? 4e hardcovers did not sell and WOtC is now having big financial troubles as compared to pre-4th edition sales. Even the newer soft cover “essentials” line is not selling.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is the definition about what "standard" is....but when it comes to gaming legues or "e-sports" if you will it pretty much is still...
It pretty much is Halo, CoD, SC2, and LoL.
Halo? Dude...I'm talking MULTIPLAYER here...
WHAT UNIVERSE ARE YOU FROM
And no BF3 does not WILDLY differ from CS. Sure the graphics are a bit better...but even BF3 has a (in my mind poor) a gameplay-mode called "rush" that is kind of CS:esque.
Sure, I mean, aside from being a decade newer, featuring different game modes, non-round-based respawning, no weapon purchasing, persistent stat and advancement tracking, air, water, and land-based vehicles as important gameplay features, and about fifty other major differences that aren't really worth anyone's time to go over, they're exactly the same.
I hate to break it to you again
I don't think I've seen you say "I hate to break it to you" followed by anything that was remotely true.
but the interpretation of beauty consists of everything you see pretty much. Sure NWN2 can blast of lovely 3D screenshots but its when you start playing the game that you understand how ugly it is...with clunky controls and camera...non-existing animations...an UI that makes you wanna puke...and theres more...
Good lord.
Obsidian didn't make a disaster game...they just didn't do it nearly as good as it was supposed to for NWN1 players to want to change to it.
The final verdict is when we have many times more people still playing the lot older NWN1 than NWN2, online....despite new sales efforts on the NWN2 side.
I didn't want to necro this old discussion really...but you asked...
In no way do I care about which Neverwinter Nights is getting more play. I don't care. It has no bearing on this discussion.
I hope you're not saying that the more players a game has, the better it is...
Nope. What I am saying is that WoW is making a ton of money, and Neverwinter Nights is making basically none.
and that all of us actually should be playing the game that has the most players caues all the other games are failiures?
You sure like to say things.
I hope you didn't mean that.
Yeah, because if I did, you'd be forced to laugh at me.
Anyway, I'm not going to discuss things like WoW vs NWN...I'll just let you win that...
Cool.
If Bioware (at that time) had made NWN2 instead AND they'd put the developing time on multiplayer instead of stupid single player I think the "MMO-scene" could have been looking very different today...
"Stupid single player." Goldmine.
Instead Bioware went on and made SP after SP game. SWToR is actually their first MP game after NWN1 but its way to late now and all the have is a stereotype MMO to show...
I've played The Old Republic. It is very good. They should be proud of what they've put together, and they will be very successful. You're bitter, fine. Go be bitter somewhere else, and stop letting your overwhelming bitterness and ignorance dictate how you demand someone else's game be made.
MegaMek is the most popular and well-developed platform
Dude....Megamek sucks. I'll stick to my ol' Amiga Mechforce game...but thanks...
I completely forgot about tabletop D&D.
Oh...so you do admit to playing tabletop...must be an awfully slow game for you...
MMOs should have simple mechanics (but with great versatility) so that anyone can pick it up and play it right out of the box.
I know and I didn't say that you will all not get what you want...because you will...again...
WHAT UNIVERSE ARE YOU FROM
Hehe, ok its a bit parellell :-P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Reason #2 – Using 3.5 OGL rules in PFO will not increase book sales.
WOtC tried to “increase sales” by having a required online subscription for 4th edition character creation. Every rule was online which meant that nobody had to buy the books if they had an online subscription. What happened? 4e hardcovers did not sell and WOtC is now having big financial troubles as compared to pre-4th edition sales. Even the newer soft cover “essentials” line is not selling.
You don't really have any support for this. Let's not pretend that you do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Dude....Megamek sucks. I'll stick to my ol' Amiga Mechforce game...but thanks...
Okay. MegaMek is a pretty solid platform, though.
Oh...so you do admit to playing tabletop...must be an awfully slow game for you...
I like tabletop gaming. I don't pretend that my desires generalize to the overall population.
What I am saying is that WoW is making a ton of money, and Neverwinter Nights is making basically none.
It is nice you are touching this important topic yourself. As I mentioned this is huge reason for that NWN is not EVEN bigger today...because they didn't realise they could charge more for making stuff for multiplayer NWN...
That would have kept the game up-to date..add A LOT of stuff instead of a little. Maybe they would have had servers hosted by Bioware...bigger ones...bye-bye WoW basically...
I've played The Old Republic. It is very good
I'm not saying its bad. I played it also. After all...it IS Biowares first multiplayer game since NWN. A wait for like 10+ years. I had to try it. Just to realise my fears if nothing else.
Sure...its kinda cool. Good map design. Solid engine. Cool story choices..but it really brings NOTHING new to the table.
It is just another stereotype MMO and the similarities to WoW are so many that it scared me even if I was prepared for it...
I'll agree to being a bit bitter on the cause of not seeing a replacement for NWN in such a long time. I recon much of the custom content that we see still made for NWN1 until this day is to some extent because of frustration...
I don't make custom content for NWN myself but I have been hosting servers myself and bulilding some. I might even release a PW built from scratch...who knows :-P I just need half a year of free time lol...
You can go out and download a play-the-Battletech-board-game-on-your-computer application, with full rules and tech readout support, and with support for multiplayer. And, just like the board game, it takes forever.
The reason they don't make the Battletech board game on computers when you hear about a Battletech game being made is because no one would play it. What people will play is a game where you can shoot giant robots with lasers and missiles.
Can I have links? I want this.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It is nice you are touching this important topic yourself. As I mentioned this is huge reason for that NWN is not EVEN bigger today...because they didn't realise they could charge more for making stuff for multiplayer NWN...
What?
People can already make stuff for multiplayer NWN. That they don't have to buy. It's free. Other people make it and put it online. Free. Freeeeeeeeee.
You're saying that if they made you pay money to get that new stuff instead, more people would play the game?
Really?
That would have kept the game up-to date..add A LOT of stuff instead of a little. Maybe they would have had servers hosted by Bioware...bigger ones...bye-bye WoW basically...
No.
I'm not saying its bad. I played it also. After all...it IS Biowares first multiplayer game since NWN. A wait for like 10+ years. I had to try it. Just to realise my fears if nothing else.
Sure...its kinda cool. Good map design. Solid engine. Cool story choices..but it really brings NOTHING new to the table.
Aside from full voice-acting, flashpoints, shared conversations, roleplaying encounters that matter, and like eight other big things.
It is just another stereotype MMO and the similarities to WoW are so many that it scared me even if I was prepared for it...
Boo.
I'll agree to being a bit bitter on the cause of not seeing a replacement for NWN in such a long time. I recon much of the custom content that we see still made for NWN1 until this day is to some extent because of frustration...
You need to accept that there aren't that enough people aching for a new Neverwinter Nights-style game to justify the tremendous investment it would require. If there were, someone probably would have made it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Can I have links? I want this.
I posted it a few posts back, but here's the link again: MegaMek
I removed some condescension. Behave. (And hiding it in a meme image doesn't make it less insulting.)
People can already make stuff for multiplayer NWN. That they don't have to buy. It's free. Other people make it and put it online. Free. Freeeeeeeeee.You're saying that if they made you pay money to get that new stuff instead, more people would play the game?
You're not understanding me. I know its free...but I said WHAT IF there would be payed professionals working on the game instead of happy amateurs like you and me with a small amount of free time avaliable trying to scramble somehting together.
So its not about me having to pay for the game as much as the developers getting payed for extra work.
You know about the time when NWN was released there still was VERY few games that went on subscription or at least it was a very small piece of the market. It was still box sales.
The idea that you could release most of the game content post release and get payed, a lot, did really not exist....hence the way to make the game became inhibited.
However...another thing is that Bioware maybe didn't WANT to make that kind of game. That might be so...
The fact still remains that NWN is the best D&D-"simulator" still...
Oh...I didn't know they where working on Megamek...the new version actually looks a lot better. Maybe I should try it...