Ryzom

vguerin wrote:The SoR gamebox mentions PvP as well as key outposts...

erm, not to disagree with the rest of your post, but my box does not mention outposts in any way and only talks about pvp as challenges mixed in with "epic real time battles". granted i have a german box, but please take a look, does it really say outposts?

The vast majority of my online gaming experience (more then a decade) has been team-based FPS games.

The best thing about these types of games is the rush you experience when you find yourself as part of a group that communicates and strategizes to beat another group of online gamers that are every bit as skilled and determined as you are. Some of my fondest gaming memories were in a game called Day of Defeat (a mod for halflife) which is a team based FPS with a WW2 theme. Nothing beats supporting a team with an MG42 and denying the enemy the opportunity to flank your group, while your group is taking full advantage of your covering fire, keeping you supplied with ammo, and pushing forward to accomplish the objective.

This kind of thing can give you a real ardreniline rush and have you leaping out of your chair cheering and laughing like a madman.

But that doesn't happen very often unless you're a member of a clan that competes with other clans in tournaments.

MMORPG's offer something else. They offer character developement and a persistent community, unlike the FPS games, where you're deeds are forgotten once the round is over and you have no attachment to your character at all. That fantastic victory your team pulled off against all odds doesn't mean squat once the round is over.

The thing that bugs me about MMOG's though, is that the common consensus seems to be that the 2 markets are completely different and that there seems to be little effort of trying to duplicate the competitive nature of team-based FPS in a MMOG.

In addition to character development and a persistent world, MMOG's can make team-work the rule rather then exception. Now if only they could duplicate the competition as well, they could tap into a HUGE market of online gamers that have thus far resisted the urge to play MMOG on a regular basis.

The simple fact is, MMOG players and FPS players all have a lot in common. The difference is that some people prefer competition, and others prefer co-operation. The VAST majority of online gamers however, would prefer to have both. FPS games like CS, DoD and BF1942 CANNOT offer the co-operation, community and character developement that an MMOG can offer due to technological constraints, although Battlefield 2 is trying pretty damn hard to do just that.

The only thing preventing a MMOG from offering all that online FPS games can offer, and then some, are the preconceptions of the developers and their most vocal customers. The current MMOG community seems to be stuck in it's own little echo chamber that prevents the genre from taking over the entire online market as it rightfully should.

All you need to do to make PVP work in MMOG's is have it as a fundamental part of character developement rather then a diversion or obstacle. You need people to lose something if they are defeated, and gain something when they are victorious. If you make safe areas for people, you need to make sure that these sanctuaries descriminate against PKer's, rather then keep them safe from the people seeking vengenace (either that, or get rid of safe zones altogether).

And above all, you need to play on the strengths of the MMOG genre: Teamwork and community. You need to give people a reason to drop what they are doing and rush to the aid of a team-mate in trouble. You need to encourage people to defend vunerable players. And punish guilds that do not protect resource gatherer's, crafters, and trader's by reducing the arms and supplies available to them, and making them ripe for conquest by guilds that do defend their vunerable members.

And you need to make important objectives for guilds to compete over: stuff like resources and territory.

Instead of keeping competition in MMOG's as some sort of little side show to character development, it should be every bit as important as co-operation in the player's gaming experience.

The only reason the markets of FPS games and MMOG's are apples and oranges is because developer's like Jessica treat them as such instead of understanding that everyone is fundamentally just an online gamer and that the differences in the markets are mostly due to preconvieved notions of what people want.

hecubis wrote:The only reason the markets of FPS games and MMOG's are apples and oranges is because developer's like Jessica treat them as such instead of understanding that everyone is fundamentally just an online gamer and that the differences in the markets are mostly due to preconvieved notions of what people want.

I couldn't disagree with you more fundamentally or completely, for reasons which should be clear enough from my other posts and shouldn't need re-expressing here.

The markets are different, even if some people like both. The mistake from my POV is the MMORPGs trying to appeal to the FPS crowd, assuming that all online gaming is the same.

Way back, like in the manual that came with the game, they said we could acquire Outposts peacefully, by doing quests for the Outpost Officer (or something). Got your hopes up you non PvP lot? Well, not so long ago, I remember Nevrax saying they were only offering the fight-for-Outposts option now. Darn it!

You all probly knew that anyway.

vguerin wrote:Verdant Heights alone has 32 Outposts... It seems apparent that there is not going to be any conflict that folks do not knowingly walk into ??? There should be any number of ways to acquire an Outpost... but how can you defend it without conflict ? I am having a Monty Python flashback here

I had formulated an entirely different idea of how they planned to introduce outposts. Rather than anyone being able to build an outpost on any old ruin spot, I thought that they would have just 2 outposts, one in each of the new FvF areas in Matis and Fyros lands. I assume there will be some major storyline to go with them. These two outposts would have some to be announced tangible benefits. With only two outposts, I assume the competition to control them would be fierce. They could introduce more outposts and FvF areas as needed.

Just as a random idea on the benefit of control, what if an outpost controlled the path to an entirely new continent?

xenofur wrote:erm, not to disagree with the rest of your post, but my box does not mention outposts in any way and only talks about pvp as challenges mixed in with "epic real time battles". granted i have a german box, but please take a look, does it really say outposts?

Well the word 'outposts' is in it but...



Massive Territorial Invasions
Ryzom's RAID Engine delivers excitement on a large scale, as hordes of creatures assault key outposts, invade territories, and decimate entire regions if left unchecked.


I guess we can see what we want to see.
I want to see the hordes of creatures.

grimjim wrote:I couldn't disagree with you more fundamentally or completely, for reasons which should be clear enough from my other posts and shouldn't need re-expressing here.

The markets are different, even if some people like both. The mistake from my POV is the MMORPGs trying to appeal to the FPS crowd, assuming that all online gaming is the same.

MMOG's can take all the aspects of FPS games and improve on them substantially. There is no reason why a MMOG, done properly, couldn't absord the majority of the FPS market by giving them character developement and persistent communities in which their deeds and accomplishments matter, all while giving them all the white knuckle excitement of team-based combat. You dont even need FPS combat really, you just need to put a premium on competition as well as co-operation, community and character building.

The only real question is whether or not competition and teambased combat would bring something new and fun to the MMOG crowd. I think it would. Not only would it enhance MMOG's by bringing another important element to the game, it would also help the sense of community substantially.

Nothing brings people together like a common enemy made up of real people rather then AI.

hecubis, I found myself agreeing with you somewhat, but I think you might have it backward. We shouldn't try to change mmorpg to bring in FPS play style, but instead change FPS to bring in mmorpgs play style. i.e. we shouldn't try to take a game like Ryzom or EQ and add FPS elements to it, we should take games like counterstrike and days of defeat and add mmorpgs element to them (e.g. persistancy). Persistant counterstrike gameplay would rock!

trenker wrote:Way back, like in the manual that came with the game, they said we could acquire Outposts peacefully, by doing quests for the Outpost Officer (or something). Got your hopes up you non PvP lot? Well, not so long ago, I remember Nevrax saying they were only offering the fight-for-Outposts option now. Darn it!

You all probly knew that anyway.

just one single question: if outposts can only and exclusively gained by pvp, how will you then gain an outpost if it is not in the posession of someone else?

@kazuki: thanks for clearing that up, i always wondered why people kept on saying that :/

vinnyq wrote:hecubis, I found myself agreeing with you somewhat, but I think you might have it backward. We shouldn't try to change mmorpg to bring in FPS play style, but FPS to mmorpg play style. i.e. we shouldn't try to take a game like Ryzom or EQ and add FPS elements to it, we should take games like counterstrike and days of defeat and add mmorpgs element to them (e.g. persistancy). Persistant counterstrike gameplay would rock!

I was simply refering to the team based combat present in online FPS games. There's no reason to bring a first person view and a focus on ranged combat to MMORPG's as well.