One year - Changes and lack of changes WTF

[rothimar]

(But I agree, dont make the game quest driven, the way you decribe it above.)

This... I completely agree with.

I would much prefer the encylopedia line, where the quests give the player lore, and the quests aren't breaking realism as described in one of the posts above.

I don't mind quests, missions, tasks... it's the lack of originality, lack of realism, and innapropriate rewards that usually bring me down. No quest should offer something better than what a player can craft.

[xolghost]

Just picking up another point here... Sorry, but your quote drove me to think the following.

I am happy they stopped that at least and finish what they start nowadays (like EP2, outposts, ROS and R2, even if those werent what I hoped those things would be...)

They stopped another thing they promised to improve not too long ago and of which I dearly hope they'll pick up again: communication... just news and decreasing prospects are not enough.

btt?....
Integrating "quests" into Ryzom, OK... driving SoR by "quests"? No, thanks...
Silan is the perfect example of why you both, Jy & Raynes, are right somehow.
I wouldn't mind "quests", or pompous missions, if you like that better, nobody would mind more rites filling our enyclopedias with more lore. Still, rewarding these tasks with items that surpass any item a crafter could provide you with is perverting one of Ryzom's prime mechanics. Providing comparable stuff to higher level players will ruin complete crafter's branches, driving them away faster than you could ask where they went. If done without uber loot or XP rewards will not harm as long as these missions don't pretend to move the main story onward. (Maybe a chance to introduce new clothing, as clothing only, or dancing moves, drinks, food...?)
Jy is right in saying that Atys' character should not be touched (by mainstream), Raynes in saying that Atys needs more Homins and, IMO, in saying there's not enough movement or movement in sight (which we mainly judge by the bones given to us dogs...well see the top of this post for that *g*).

[raynes]

Except it has cut it for the population for two years and now they've got the tools to do more with it.

But it hasn't. That's where I think you are missing the point. Ryzom has not been able to pull in the number of players it needs to become a huge success. And of the players that it did pull in, most of them get bored after awhile and move on. If it had cut it with the population for two years, you wouldn't of had entire large established guilds like Infinity up and leave.

Zanthar makes the best example I can think of. SWG had a loyal playerbase, a sandboxish game system, a living world with a lot of acclaim and they tossed it all away to pursue the WoW buck. Now their servers are gutted, they have the enmity of their entire old playerbase constantly churning bad publicity - not only for the game, but for the company.

You are wrong about SWG. Star Wars is a huge license. It's one of the few things that pretty much the entire world know, likes, and understands. When you create a MMO from that license you should have huge populations and legions of fans. SWG never had that. They had a niche game. That is why they gutted it. I remember reading a coment from a person at SOE concerning the game and it was so very true. It was something like this "SWG was a great game where you could roleplay living on a sandfarm. The problem is that no one really want to do that. They want action like in the movies. That is where SWG failed."

[raynes]

This is true, but only if you look at the games that are totally quest-driven.

In the past I played 2 games that had some kind of episodes, where you could do a certain quest for the storyline. Sure it was the same quest for all players, although there were different choices you could make for them.
The total amount of players that did the quest for side a and for side b, gave the direction of the next episode. This way, I really felt involved in the story.

(But I agree, dont make the game quest driven, the way you decribe it above.)

I agree with this also. I was never saying that Ryzom should be changed to a game where it's completely quest driven. That would be a horrible thing to do. I don't feel that is how any mmo should force a player into doing any one activity. What Ryzom currently has is the exact opposite, that being no quests at all (or very few) which is no better.

There needs to be a balance.

[raynes]

Just picking up another point here... Sorry, but your quote drove me to think the following.They stopped another thing they promised to improve not too long ago and of which I dearly hope they'll pick up again: communication... just news and decreasing prospects are not enough.

btt?....
Integrating "quests" into Ryzom, OK... driving SoR by "quests"? No, thanks...
Silan is the perfect example of why you both, Jy & Raynes, are right somehow.
I wouldn't mind "quests", or pompous missions, if you like that better, nobody would mind more rites filling our enyclopedias with more lore. Still, rewarding these tasks with items that surpass any item a crafter could provide you with is perverting one of Ryzom's prime mechanics. Providing comparable stuff to higher level players will ruin complete crafter's branches, driving them away faster than you could ask where they went. If done without uber loot or XP rewards will not harm as long as these missions don't pretend to move the main story onward. (Maybe a chance to introduce new clothing, as clothing only, or dancing moves, drinks, food...?)
Jy is right in saying that Atys' character should not be touched (by mainstream), Raynes in saying that Atys needs more Homins and, IMO, in saying there's not enough movement or movement in sight (which we mainly judge by the bones given to us dogs...well see the top of this post for that *g*).

You solve the problem of looted items being better than crafted items by awarding items that do things that crafters can not make or items that improve crafted items. For example you beat a boss and get a recipie that give mount food a speed boost, increasing the speed of mounts as you ride them. Or you award a sword handle that improves the standard swords sharpness. That way the item is no good alone, yet you still need crafted items.

[archaeos]

-Sigh-
Like someone posted allready ...the same ranting continues...

But consider this :

Some people here made some really intresting theories,and prolly they are pretty right about some things.eg:

Time:Everything points it out that some of the contents were just merely launched cause of the pressure of time ...bugs and half finished stuff,to be able to compete with other games for not seeing all the people go to the other games,to show results towards their investors,...
as a former betaplayer u should KNOW a lot has changed..We had EP1 &,EP 2,Kitin lair,adaptations of personages,Outposts,RoS and also the patches between.If u know something about programming u should be aware that each of these 'projects' ask a **** of time.Not only for creating it but also for testing ...keep it bugfree (and in my opinion;yes we had a few bugs ,but not like hundreds ,and not of that kind that u weren't able to play the game due to your hardware was incompatible or what the heck else,and if it was like that don't tell me the GG's & GM's weren't there to help u out!If u posted a problem,u ever noticed the speed they answered it, with a solution?)

Money:Why would a company launch new contents to attract new players,Why would they cut on the budgets in their devteam,etc,why would they merge servers,...
Why on earth u think they launched R2????In my opinion R2 is a perfect solution to all the players that are complaining about the lack of new ideas,of new contents and also a perfect solution for the devs to work on the missing parts and promises while keeping the investors happy and players playing with the ideas they have of the game.Show your creativity and helptowards the evolution of Ryzom..U can take part in it as an investor,if u sit aside and start complaining well.....-cough-

As for me ...I am in Ryzom for a nice time...and still in it ...why ?For the content,because it looks like other games?Nah
Because I had a certain idea what the base was and the possibilities it had.

I think we all play MMORPG's because we can communicate with others,form teams, work together and create your own content in a way,as a group,I think even without missions,rites,etc
I would have fun in this game even without it's content ...If I do missions or stuff in the encyclopedia it is mainly because I am playing alone.
This is what I liked so much about Ryzom ...U have the total freedom in it .
If I want a complete game and finish it's story as soon as possible ,I would probably opt for a soloplaying game where I don't have towatch around about who can't follow,players,devs or whoever.
What on earth is so difficult about Roleplaying in this game and what would be wrong with doing it filling your time while awaiting new contents...

Ofcourse I also understand your frustration as an 'investor' and not finding the things u want ...If u played for some years(like many of us), u also allready put a certain amount of money in it...And it is your right also to see results.But I think it is impossible to keep EVERYONE happy,make huge profits,make loads of people join and not loosing the originality and the true idea behind Ryzom we all chose for when we started to play.
The Playerbase is increasing and that's a good thing,but on the other hand it could also decrease the quality of the community.So what's more apealing for u:Quick results or a solid game that still have all the nice aspects we choose for.
But these are my theories

We all have different expectations ,diffferent theories and different ideas about how the content should look like.And as in RL,as in most communities and most companies,the decisions aren't taken by the base.And if u can't adapt to it ,u will get left behind .Take this as an advize of someone who works for one of the biggest multinationals of his country ( Arc are u really defending them ....GAH ..What happened to your rebelling feelings...hits some sense in her brain while bashing head against PC-screen)

(I have to admit this thread is getting more and more intresting ..even if I really didn't like the first post and It took me to long to reply cuz we allready passed on to the next subject ....raaaah...hits her head again...wake up People ...end of this post...)
(SORRY RUSHIN!!!-grin-I couldn't resist posting ...Madposting disease)

[grimjim]

But it hasn't. That's where I think you are missing the point. Ryzom has not been able to pull in the number of players it needs to become a huge success. And of the players that it did pull in, most of them get bored after awhile and move on. If it had cut it with the population for two years, you wouldn't of had entire large established guilds like Infinity up and leave.

Here's where you're missing the point.
Ryzom doesn't need to be a huge success, it just needs to be a success. To be a huge success it would have to compromise everything that makes it good and it would need a massive cash injection. It partly depends on how you measure success as well. Is success solely measured in cash terms and subscribers or can it also be measured in innovation, artistic merit and other factors?

If Ryzom had ever been intended to be a massive commercial game it would have been fantasy, it would have been class/level based, it wouldn't have been anything it currently is and odds are it would have already gone down the tubes without a great deal of luck.

The biggest loss of playerbase we've had were with patch 1 mangling the system and then being straightened out. Personally I think that people were stupid for not having enough patience to wait two weeks for it to get ironed out, but them's the breaks. The second biggest loss was the abrupt introduction of wholesale PvP contradicting the mood and culture that had developed in the game. The interesting part was that amongst those losses - once that got as far as outposts - were the people who'd been clamouring for PvP and ended up unsatisfied with the result.

You are wrong about SWG. Star Wars is a huge license. It's one of the few things that pretty much the entire world know, likes, and understands. When you create a MMO from that license you should have huge populations and legions of fans. SWG never had that. They had a niche game. That is why they gutted it. I remember reading a coment from a person at SOE concerning the game and it was so very true. It was something like this "SWG was a great game where you could roleplay living on a sandfarm. The problem is that no one really want to do that. They want action like in the movies. That is where SWG failed."

I remember that comment too, but consider this. Before WoW and after WoW the climate was extremely different. Before WoW SWG was considered a pretty good success and had lots of critical acclaim. After WoW we have a paradigm shift of expectation, suddenly 100,000 players isn't considered a success story, a million is. SWG was not a failure by any stretch of the imagination what changed was the climate and people's expectations - which became unrealistic.

As it has turned out, people don't want to play a shallow, empty shell of a game compared to living in a world so much and SWG is gutted. Virtual worlds (as many MMORPGs are) are not the same as other computer games. Moisture farming and living in the world is what a lot of people want to do, apparently.

If I can (slightly) digress for a moment...

This brings up two issues from my business, tabletop gaming, and I think the problems cross-pollinate to a pretty good extent.

1. 'Fantasy Heartbreakers'. Computer games are a little different than TTRPGs in that graphics and computer power develop quickly so the obsolescence factor kicks in in much faster cycles. Still, this applies. A fantasy heartbreaker is what we call it when someone tries to make 'D&D only better'. D&D is the big game in the TTRPG world and nothing can touch it, it had a dark patch in the 90's when TSR started going under but apart from that it has always been the granddaddy RPG. It has been updated a few times but is still the same basic thing. Everyone, everyone who has tried to do 'D&D only better' has failed and the landscape is littered with those failed games. Some of them did do stuff better, a lot better, but the fact of the matter was that people who liked those sorts of games had D&D and were perfectly happy with it. A few fantasy games have found niches in which they're successful, but nothing like the scale of D&D which defines TTRPGs in most people's minds. You've got your RuneQuest and your Rolemaster and then its hard to think of any others that are still active and successful.

WoW is the current D&D of the MMORPG world and trying to imitate it and leach off its success will only lead to fantasy heartbreaker territory. Some players will 'graduate' from WoW in the same way some people went onto more mature games from D&D but to expect WoW like success from doing WoW - only better - will likely spell doom.

2. Licences - Since you bring it up... everyone always thinks licences are going to make the huge difference in my industry, they don't and if you look at computer game history it rarely works out there either. I can count the decent Star Trek or Star Wars licensed games on the fingers of one foot. In the TTRPG world the most successful licensed games were, probably, Buffy/Angel and Babylon 5. Other than that I'm hard pressed to think of any you'd even see in a games shop.

There's a lot of debate about the reasons for this but the general consensus seems to be that it is because established setting characters tend to overshadow anything a player might do. In a Star Wars setting you'll never be Luke, or Han, or Obi Wan for example. The experience of the game is not that of the movie.

SWG sidestepped that issue by going for the living world approach and it WAS successful. They gambled a successful and happy playerbase on getting a piece of the WoW pie and they screwed up.

[zanthar]

This... I completely agree with.

I would much prefer the encylopedia line, where the quests give the player lore, and the quests aren't breaking realism as described in one of the posts above.

I don't mind quests, missions, tasks... it's the lack of originality, lack of realism, and innapropriate rewards that usually bring me down. No quest should offer something better than what a player can craft.

Rothimar hit the nail on the head with this post! When the game offers better eqiupment than a player can craft it destroys the economy because then you have players just hunting these uber weapons or components to make uber weapons as in SWG where the chu gon dar cube makes better weapons than any player can craft and certain boss NPCs drop better equipment too! And I hope that the Devs here NEVER and I MEAN NEVER take away decay because that completely destroys a player based economy and runs prices of equipment through the roof!

[archaeos]

Hey Grim ..what about logging in game

[grimjim]

Hey Grim ..what about logging in game

I was logged in when I was writing a lot of this, running from town to town (dear devs, please restore town TPs for neutrals... my legs are tired). Then I had to go and cook, Kos is a slavedriver

See you in game in a few.