Goblin Squad Member
|
Neverwinter is a crappy game that is acting deceitful saying it is in "open beta" not actually launched, but....
the foundry which allows you to make pve quests and campaigns is amazing and awesome
So, I know GW said down the road they may add a foundry, but since this is "pathfinder" (I know, before the flames, it is pathfinder in name only), can we raise some money to have a foundry earlier? How much would it take?
Are any of you making awesome foundry quests in neverwinter? BEING???? is there a Being foundry quest line yet?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have one begun. Having some issues with the mechanism, but I am building one.
I'll be publishing as pocketcoppers (my NW handle). I can PM you the 'short tag' here once I publish one, and it will form part of a campaign I have in mind.
But the tool is still a bit obscure and limited.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well we might be able to crowdforge it's priority? I mean the main area of demand I can think of, off-hand, would be the random generated dungeons for adventurer size parties of player's daily bread & butter fun/pve-resource interaction? So devs should be creating those with player modification tools in mind. May even be faster than what they could churn out?! But I still still think it's sort of going down a rabbit-hole too soon given their current plan?!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I would prefer they focus on other systems first. The ability for the community at large to create "theme park" content is great, but I'm not really planning to play PFO for the "theme park" content. I very much want them to make the Market rock-solid, and deliver on their Escalations, Unit Combat, and Siege Warfare promises first.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Personally, I would prefer they focus on other systems first. The ability for the community at large to create "theme park" content is great, but I'm not really planning to play PFO for the "theme park" content. I very much want them to make the Market rock-solid, and deliver on their Escalations, Unit Combat, and Siege Warfare promises first.
That is what we all gave a lot of money for!
What I was asking is how much more would we need to raise to do a foundry at launch or soon thereafter. I am referring to raising additional resources to hire some additional folks to add this. From a role players perspective, the foundry can make PFO at lot more fun.
Creatively, GW can incorporate sand box features into their foundry. For example, when a foundry quest is finally published by a player, it could require resources be spent just like crafting any other big ticket item. Players could be charged an entry fee to try the content if the author liked. But costing in-game resources to craft a quest would prevent a lot of junk quests from being made and keep the foundry tied into the actual economy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Also, GW could require player authors to choose entry point locations in monster hexes.
Or require them to be put inside settlements. So to enter the player created "roller coaster" you have to physically travel to the players city. So if your settlement gets wiped out, you lose your foundry quest and all the resources you spent crafting it...
my point is, with some creative thought, a foundry can be incorporated with sand box elements...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... costing in-game resources to craft a quest would prevent a lot of junk quests from being made...
I really like that idea :)
And I'm actually extremely excited about what the Foundry portends for the future of the genre. I would love to see MMOs as a Cottage Industry, where "amateurs" can create them in their spare time. I think Foundries are a very important step in that direction.
But, from a purely self-interested perspective, I don't intend to create Foundry Quests, nor do I intend to consume them very much...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would say a foundry at launch, will be beyond impossible. Designing the world etc... as ryan has mentioned, has at least a few components that just take time, and no amount of money, or even staff can make go faster.
The concept of a foundry, until the world is in, balancing can't start, without balancing of abilities etc... instances can't really be developed.
One thing also worth pointing out, a foundry in the context of PFO... will be far less popular than it is in a game like NWO.
Why? quite simple, the reward factor. In neverwinter, the foundry quests etc... had comperable in game rewards to the remainder of the game. XP loot etc...
PFO... it can't, shouldn't and won't have anything comparable to the other activities that are already implimented. (considering every other activity involves, finding a site, passing through wildernesses, of which the value of the rewards will usually be scaled within the risk of PVP and enemies just to get there), as well every other aspect of the game is designed to dry up, vanish, move etc...
The key is, the category of things that "modules" are mentioned to be in, in order to not margionalize and destroy the rest of the game, will have to fall into 2 possibilities.
1. Items that are exclusive to modules, possibly used as a piece for certain items/equipment to be crafted with, but it cannot replace the materials needed from the actual sandbox side of the game.
2. Negligible/no reward. or entirely social structure based reward. (IE settlements/CC's may use these as enrollment tests)
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The true opportunity cost of a foundry would be the content and structure that could have been created with the same time and money. While is might not be impossible to add people and get the existing goals completed on time, the same resources could be used to either improve the existing content or add new features and systems, both of which are closer to the goal of releasing the minimum viable product and then iterating on it .
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The true opportunity cost of a foundry would be the content and structure that could have been created with the same time and money. While is might not be impossible to add people and get the existing goals completed on time, the same resources could be used to either improve the existing content or add new features and systems, both of which are closer to the goal of releasing the minimum viable product and then iterating on it .
Indeed, having a minimum viable product is IMO a pre-req for even starting development on a foundry... Meaning the resources needed for such at launch... is the same as the resources to launch 6 months ahead of goal... of which if possible, would probably be done (launching 6 months early)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really do not expect such a foundry to be there at launch and certainly it should not supplant anything in GW's design. Other hand they have to have a fully developed tool to build the environment. It should not be terribly difficult to adapt a scaled down version for content creators to begin building with. What would take time and effort to implement I think is integration of approved content into the common game world, devising a good system to satisfactorily review and evaluate player generated content, and to fashion a way to make that content available to players. It seems obvious to me that all these taken together will necessarily cause its realization to be well after launch, really.
I don't doubt GW realizes the potential attractiveness of such a system when we have so many creative and conscientious players interested. I just think project management will be wisely skeptical of anything that would increase the scope of the project so significantly until the game is in place and ready and the necessary assets already have a process by which to handle other development tasks, such as increasing the playable area to match an expected influx of new players. I would project, then, that once the game is up and running and GW has its development systems percolating in whatever their post-release 'normal' will be, then they will be able to consider what it will take and conduct the necessary cost/benefit analysis before making a substantial move.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope that the city building, politics, trade, PvP, RP and other player interactions will be deep and interesting enough to hold players' interest for a long time.
Once GW starts to profit from purchases and subscription fees and start planning their next steps, I hope to see further improvements to the systems and activities already in place as well as adding other features that stimulate "meaningful player interactions" in the open world.
On the other hand, if a foundry would eventually provide them with more money than it would cost do develop then I would be all for it since it would mean more of the stuff I am interested in the long run.
I'm not too sure they could compete well in that area with Neverwinter Online though, considering the development resources available to the respective development teams.
|
This especially excites me thinking we can use Foundry like tools to make real lasting, and semi-permanent changes to the actual persistent world.
I imagine someone with the skill, resources, and time being able to help create something wholly unique, I imagine at least the level of detail seen in the Environmental Experience. These tools can be used to create systems that let us physically shape the world around us.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This especially excites me thinking we can use Foundry like tools to make real lasting, and semi-permanent changes to the actual persistent world.
I imagine someone with the skill, resources, and time being able to help create something wholly unique, I imagine at least the level of detail seen in the Environmental Experience. These tools can be used to create systems that let us physically shape the world around us.
I'm still thinking creatively here, so bear with me...
Why not use the foundry to let player's craft and publish the interiors of their player owned structures? So you use the foundry to design your house, guild hall, shop, etc.... when you publish it you have to spend the in-game resources, like metals and lumbers, etc to add it.
The foundry doesn't have to just create PvE quests. So I go to your settlement and you invite inside your home. I enter your instance and its a fully decorated place designed to look and feel exactly the way you want it to.
Now, if I want to make a dungeon I pay the resources required to add the mobs, etc...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
GW hasn't suggested player generated permanent content is acceptable, but I don't know that it wouldn't be found so.
Attend to scope creep, however. We are creatively pushing the scope beyond making ephemeral dungeons into something else again. Are we going to suggest they allow us to build their new hexes?
We should define the scope, or limits, on what we are asking of the developer. It is vastly easier for us to imagine possibilities than it will be for them to practically manage the realization of those possibilities.
To exceed what they are prepared to allow is to endanger the prospects of what we already can hope for. Self-moderation in these things will be better in the end than getting a big fat 'NO' at the end of the dreaming.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is a very good question. I wish I had an answer. I lik the idea of going to the community to fund things like this - essentially parallel projects to the primary project. This could be something we explore in more detail once we get to Early Enrollment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
EE sounds like a very good time to consider another crowdfunding project. If GW, or any company crowdfunding a new project, were to ask for more funds before that stage, it would run the risk of donor fatigue ("I gave all I could a couple of months ago. I can't give more yet.") and uncomfortable but sometimes justified questions ("I still haven't seen a project come from my last pledge. Why should I pledge again sight unseen?").
Note: The statements and questions above are hypothetical. I trust that Ryan and the GW crew will deliver. Please put down the feathers, and step away from the hot tar.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I thought that Unity had a feature that basically allowed people to make things that were very easy for developers to import; the bar to creating content might be pretty high (since it basically involves learning most of the skills required of the artists), but I suspect that the resources required to evaluate and incorporate a new guild hall would be pretty low.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Are any of you making awesome foundry quests in neverwinter? BEING???? is there a Being foundry quest line yet?
First chapter has been submitted for publishing. It isn't terribly difficult, entitled 'A Circumspect Strength' by @pocketcoppers, short tag is NW-DHDXPT9WB. It has to be vetted by the devs and I don't know how long it will be before it is available.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First - my apologies for the wall of text.
As someone who loves to make player created story arcs, I think a foundry system might be very handy. However, my plots/stories have always been open-ended and as unscripted as possible, while also allowing for anyone who stumbles across them to join in. That is, if you spontaneously find yourself involved in them, and choose to continue as a participant, you're welcome to do so and add your voice to the story - thus creating a very inclusive experience. But too often in theme park games, such story-crafting is a very insulated affair, occurring only within a given guild, which further divides the community. For this reason, I have several reservations about player created foundry missions, at least as I understand them.
1. Time Away from the Regular World
If we increase the number of randomly occurring, instanced dungeons or adventures, or make them something you purchase in a game store for repeated consumption, I am concerned that a growing number of players will be removed from the regular, fully interactive world. I would hate to see PFO's fully interactive world turning into a ghost town because everyone is busy searching for and being isolated within their pocket adventures.
2. Too Much Theme Park in the Sandbox
In theme parks, the same things happen over and over. Not only do the vast majority of quests exist for every character to experience exactly the same way, but some even exist for you to experience them multiple times. In a sandbox, where our genuine, often spontaneous interactions create the content, each interaction and event happens once, free of the monotony and predictability of traditional game provided content. I recall in Rift when, one of the few times I ever went in a dungeon, the leader of our party explained where we had to stand and when we had to attack to kill the boss "just so". It occurred to me how often this guy must have run this same dungeon to know all this, and though he seemed to be enjoying doing the same thing for perhaps the twentieth time, just once was enough to make feel like I was in some fantasy version of "Groundhog Day".
My concern here is that quests/stories/dungeons provided in continual loop really break the immersion of a sandbox world. In a sandbox, everything seems more unique - even the persistent parts like settlements can change or even be destroyed. Conversations occur once. That awesome battle won't be replayed. The phrase, "You should have been there," has real meaning and thereby creates events of memorable, even epic proportion...the stuff of in-game legend. This might seem exclusive if you actually couldn't be there, but that's another way sandbox games are more "real" than theme parks - their events are unique occurrences.
Perhaps that's one of the reasons we won't see many NPCs (besides the stress on servers to keep track of them all) - to reduce the number of characters that don't really live in the moment like real player characters do...no programmed people doing the same thing over and over again.
So how would I like to see a foundry used in the game?
What I think would be interesting is if you could use such a system to add content to your own settlement or points of interest, whether as parts of your player-made story-arc or just to offer something unique to passersby. That is, make the foundry a tool for augmenting RP in the fully interactive, regular world rather than as a side form of entertainment which may prove distracting from the regular world. For instance...
1. Could you create something like your own NPCs and change the coding for them frequently enough to move a plot line along and then remove them when that storyline is finished? Could these NPCs drop plot clues when asked the right questions or given the right item? Could they be the target of an assassination or bounty contract, but well hidden or protected to make it challenging?
2. Could you have preset spawn points for certain mobs, such as a bunch of mobs crawling out of your settlement sewer if the right manhole cover is located, or maybe even a mini-dungeon sewer system that once cleaned out, is walled up and removed from the settlement.
3. Could you have your NPC priest at your point of interest alter send those of the proper alignment on a quest and reward them with a token that reduces training costs from your cleric trainer in your settlement (or some other reward that your settlement provides)?
In these ways, player generated foundry content augments the existing game rather than potentially distracting players from it. It becomes a tool that allows us to further manipulate the world in which we all interact, rather than create extensions of the world for a select few.
In theme parks, the same things happen over and over.
I would argue that too much in life things happen over and over that shouldn't. Wars, carbon copies of WOW being made over and over, traffic accidents... the list is endless.
not to detract from your point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
First - my apologies for the wall of text.
Obviously speaking only for myself, I don't mind at all a lengthy read where is has ideas present, and yours has.
As someone who loves to make player created story arcs, I think a foundry system might be very handy. However, my plots/stories have always been open-ended and as unscripted as possible, while also allowing for anyone who stumbles across them to join in. That is, if you spontaneously find yourself involved in them, and choose to continue as a participant, you're welcome to do so and add your voice to the story - thus creating a very inclusive experience. But too often in theme park games, such story-crafting is a very insulated affair, occurring only within a given guild, which further divides the community. For this reason, I have several reservations about player created foundry missions, at least as I understand them.
From what little I have heard these would be one shot deals the player can purchase on the Goblinworks in-game store. That means, I think, someone would really have to like your dungeon quite a lot to buy it more than once.
Your point about removing players form the shared gameworld: it shouldn't be a concern in my view because it takes a tremendous amount of content to fill 45 player minutes. The dungeon ceases to exist once it is run. That leaves 23 hours 15 minutes in that day, and subtracts none from any other day.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Being, testing out the quest now.
Thank you, each, for the encouragement and positive reviews. Handsome of you to even think to leave a tip!
Carbon I appreciate your thoughts in your review re: the need for stealth. I really want to have stealth be integral to the design but other than trying to suggest the player should try and avoid gaining aggro (other than the spiders which I put in as a freebie fight) I'm at a loss to devise a way to incorporate stealth in the story and have it consequential either way, other than just relying on the player to RP. Now, I could make it so that you can only get out undetected is if you actually were a rogue with stealth activated. Unfortunately that would not work well for the Cleric layer, so I settled for making it so if the character sped through that portcullis where the guards are on either side they shouldn't often detect you.
If you think of a way to incorporate stealth more effectively I would sure like to hear your idea. I'd credit you in the quest design for your idea, if that is any sort of reward.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Being, testing out the quest now.Thank you, each, for the encouragement and positive reviews. Handsome of you to even think to leave a tip!
Carbon I appreciate your thoughts in your review re: the need for stealth. I really want to have stealth be integral to the design but other than trying to suggest the player should try and avoid gaining aggro (other than the spiders which I put in as a freebie fight) I'm at a loss to devise a way to incorporate stealth in the story and have it consequential either way, other than just relying on the player to RP. Now, I could make it so that you can only get out undetected is if you actually were a rogue with stealth activated. Unfortunately that would not work well for the Cleric layer, so I settled for making it so if the character sped through that portcullis where the guards are on either side they shouldn't often detect you.
If you think of a way to incorporate stealth more effectively I would sure like to hear your idea. I'd credit you in the quest design for your idea, if that is any sort of reward.
Being, I am a CW and I did not fight a single mob completing it. I thought I played it as intended. When I came in the dungeon part, I followed the right wall until I found the furthest portcullis. I entered and found the drow assassin.
If you intended for me to go through one of the earlier portcullis, I suggest putting a quest objective there.
I liked not having to fight to complete it and I thought your dialogue was better than anything the Devs did in any of their quests.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No no you did exactly as I would have done. Carbon D. Metric in his review expressed a desire for consequential stealth, so I wanted to hear if he had any ideas how I could have done it better.
I do indeed appreciate the encouragement and will try and get a significantly expanded version out there, hopefully this week.
|
|
I'd say in terms of alerting the guards it should alert the NPC's you are there to investigate. In fact when I went through I killed about a dozen guards thinking I had to slough my way through, then was surprised when the person I was there to investigate didn't react to my presence in the room.
Perhaps some dialogue the player overhears from the next room over instead of having direct access would flow a little more naturally. Sorry if the feedback wasn't enough I capped off my character limit in foundry as it was lol
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So far I have not found a way to script an NPC so that he will become aggressive. I think I need to find a way at that point to prevent the player from trying to interact, yet be able to identify The Adder because it isn't yet time in the storyline to have a chat with him, especially while engaged in conversation with the Drow. The developer over there appears reluctant to let us 'build' bosses or script any NPCs for anything but conversation and dropping things into the players' inventory. Really the Foundry there is quite limited currently. A good thing, probably, except it does impede really interesting efforts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So far I have not found a way to script an NPC so that he will become aggressive. I think I need to find a way at that point to prevent the player from trying to interact, yet be able to identify The Adder because it isn't yet time in the storyline to have a chat with him, especially while engaged in conversation with the Drow. The developer over there appears reluctant to let us 'build' bosses or script any NPCs for anything but conversation and dropping things into the players' inventory. Really the Foundry there is quite limited currently. A good thing, probably, except it does impede really interesting efforts.
Being, is there a way to make branching quest objectives? Can you have a set of prior interactions lead to a "boss" fight with the drow assassin or else a more tame encounter could spawn if different choices are made?
|
|
So far I have not found a way to script an NPC so that he will become aggressive. I think I need to find a way at that point to prevent the player from trying to interact, yet be able to identify The Adder because it isn't yet time in the storyline to have a chat with him, especially while engaged in conversation with the Drow. The developer over there appears reluctant to let us 'build' bosses or script any NPCs for anything but conversation and dropping things into the players' inventory. Really the Foundry there is quite limited currently. A good thing, probably, except it does impede really interesting efforts.
Perhaps the two NPCs that are speaking should run off when the non-stealthed character gets within range and drops some sort of incriminating document which you can use?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Being, is there a way to make branching quest objectives? Can you have a set of prior interactions lead to a "boss" fight with the drow assassin or else a more tame encounter could spawn if different choices are made?
You can cause the objectives to run in parallel but cannot 'nest' plot lines. In other words I can set it up so you have to recover note 'A', interact with object 'B', and defeat an encounter before a key event happens.
However I cannot convert an NPC into a boss you can fight. I could possibly make the NPCs disappear and replace them with 'encounter' mobs but those will be run of the mill encounters incapable of discourse. Thinking about it I might be able to have the NPCs reappear interactable once you defeat their 'encounter mob' alter egos... I'll look into that.
I don't want to give away the story line I have in mind or I could give you more examples. Maybe once the campaign is published I can reveal what I am thinking.
Given my schedule and a couple of RL obligations it looks like I won't be able to publish a finished product this week. Maybe next I can hope.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Perhaps the two NPCs that are speaking should run off when the non-stealthed character gets within range and drops some sort of incriminating document which you can use?
Yes that would be do-able except there is something they 'drop' there later in the story already. Good thinking though! Thank you
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Is it possible to have 'recover item A' be the actual objective, and then have multiple wildly different ways to recover the quest token? If you sneak through the area you can steal the document or key, if you fight you can loot it, or if you take a different path you can get a copy from someone in exchange for a 'favor'.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Branching lines of story/plot logic are a bit problematic. We can do multiple branches in parallel but they all have to result in the same end state. Worse, while you can achieve three objectives in parallel you have to attain all three: leaving one or two out is a show stopper in such a scenario. So it is very linear. I can't nest a loop. I haven't yet found a way to set up an if...then...else condition either.
There may be a solution similar to what you suggest, Decius, using the skill conditional feature. If I have Arcane Mastery for example I can notice something I would not have noticed without arcane mastery. I might be able to use that to jury-rig a conditional.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I was suggesting having one objective (acquire plot token A), but several different ways by which that objective could be met-
If there is an NPC that on a successful diplomacy check gives you the plot token A and C (along with a lead to a segment that provides B), and on a failed dip check despawns and an enemy with the same name and appearance spawns on his location, who drops plot tokens A and B and a lead to a segment that provides C.
I guess it might fail to make sense to the player if you can't prevent someone from accidentally or intentionally traversing the 'diplomacy' path after taking the 'murder' choice.