That's the question, what should an online RPG have for players to do... Suppose one player logs in, no one else is around, no admin, no GMs, no anybody. What is there for the player to do? Of course the common answer is, "go kill stuff", since that's what RPGs are all about right? (sarcasm)
But what if your character is a maxed out uber-|337 warrior who could cut a dragon in two with a glance? Combat poses no challenge to him, or her, and killing monsters is one of those things they've been doing for a long time, now they're sick of it. What ELSE is there for them to do?
Just an innocent little question, what should players have to do - baring combat - when there is no one else to interact with? What kind of things could there be to keep a single player occupied?
ID:153563
 Sep 25 2003, 1:59 am
|
|
Why not make an area called /area/outside/wilderness
now, take this area, randomize a location from the turfs held in it, and then have it decide that is where your treasure is... the player's lookingfor variable changes, and if he digs in that spot, he finds the treasure... But then clues and such become tough to make... just have some guys follow the player around for gold, then you can place them in three locations and have them scan for buried treasure, (like in FF7) and they all say what direction, relative to them, it is in. Also, before that, people will give you clues as to where the recent treasure is located "it is southeast of Torham Village" | |
But what if your character is a maxed out uber-|337 warrior who could cut a dragon in two with a glance? Combat poses no challenge to him, or her, and killing monsters is one of those things they've been doing for a long time, now they're sick of it. What ELSE is there for them to do? That player should either start a new different type of character or find something else to play :P. Just an innocent little question, what should players have to do - baring combat - when there is no one else to interact with? What kind of things could there be to keep a single player occupied? Good luck at this all attempts I've seen at providing something not related to combat tended to pretty boring. | |
Not sure but I think this is the element that makes or breaks a game. For example, I played GemstoneIII for 6 years in spite of being a Lady and having all spells (an empath) could get. I only quit because they started charging so much monthly. On the other hand, I tried RoK last year and am bored--fighting is all there is there is no social norms and PKing is rampant..only fun for bashing types. Puzzles and building a social structure seem to be crucial--but thats just mho
Good luck. | |
Foomer wrote:
What did GemStoneIII have to do besides killing things? Social interaction was and is GS3's biggest selling point. Everything you do that's not combat-related is something to do with social interaction -- carving ice, etc. Plus it has a lot of great minds (q.v. Zilal/Juspera) who devise ways of using already-existing game features to create sorts of "minigames". I should mention that minigames are a great way to make a game fun, but if they are involved in the game, they should take a more direct role. For example, Final Fantasy VII had simply awesome minigames -- most of those would've made great unique games all on their own! -- but they were one-shot, making people feel a little gypped. | |
The card game in FFIII was also a great example of a mini-game slipped in. You never had to play it, but if you wanted to it provided a great sub-game.
| |
Final Fantasy 8's "Triple Triad" was such a great game it spawned a set of three website dedicated to TT players - I was an oldbie in that community when it sadly closed down last year due to lack of funding (they would rather have gone down than charged to play!). When it closed, TripleTriadX.com had over 40000 active users! Card games like that can be a really fun part of the game - and if having special cards gives you special powers out-of-game, it's all the better! Just make sure cards can easily be won and lost!
| |
Lord of Water wrote:
Final Fantasy 8's "Triple Triad" was such a great game it spawned a set of three website dedicated to TT players - I was an oldbie in that community when it sadly closed down last year due to lack of funding (they would rather have gone down than charged to play!). When it closed, TripleTriadX.com had over 40000 active users! Card games like that can be a really fun part of the game - and if having special cards gives you special powers out-of-game, it's all the better! Just make sure cards can easily be won and lost! Not to mention spawning an actual Triple Triad TCG(Trading Card Game). | |
Foomer wrote:
That's the question, what should an online RPG have for players to do... Suppose one player logs in, no one else is around, no admin, no GMs, no anybody. What is there for the player to do? Of course the common answer is, "go kill stuff", since that's what RPGs are all about right? (sarcasm) Pokemon has a related problem like this.. yea yea I know pokemon[...]... but before you say that pokemon could have easly been made into an adult show. Just add blood, swearing, nudity and you have a great show :). At least I think. Pokemon just seems to be stuck to much on the fact of catching all the pokemon and then training them to be the best. There is no side theme. Maybe if you would make a story line where some pokemon have become evil and killed most of the trainers at the pokemon league. Going from one dead town to another dead city. Editing a new story line in an chain of events to alow new things for the player too do. | |
Pokemon has a related problem like this.. yea yea I know pokemon[...]... but before you say that pokemon could have easly been made into an adult show. Just add blood, swearing, nudity and you have a great show :). At least I think. Well, two things. One; blood, nudity, and swearing do not a great series make. Star Trek probably has the least amounts of each for a live-action sci-fi series, yet it draws in the largest demographics of male viewers. If that show lacks blood, nudity, and swearing, it shouldn't be popular by that logic. However, it is popular, so that logic is wrong. =) Two; Pokémon would absolutely suck as an adult series. It's a show for viewers under an age bracket of about 13. The whole point is for kids to see cute little monsters whacking on each other. (It's beside the point that Pokémon sucks as a kids series, too.) | |
Spuzzum wrote:
Pokemon has a related problem like this.. yea yea I know pokemon[...]... but before you say that pokemon could have easly been made into an adult show. Just add blood, swearing, nudity and you have a great show :). At least I think. *hisses at spuzzum and jumps into the bushes* Yea thats right spuzzum your mean. Taking my thoughts like that and ripping them to shreads not caring. O.o I wasnt trying to stab people in the face and claw them in their ribs. But if thats what you seen in my last post? I guess you did the right thing... [edit] Hmmmm.. .I was just trying to answer your question in the first post. To edit a story line to make it more responsive under a one player view. While still supporting a multi player view. All that pokemon shiz was just to give an example. | |
*hisses at spuzzum and jumps into the bushes* Yea thats right spuzzum your mean. Taking my thoughts like that and ripping them to shreads not caring. O.o I wasnt trying to stab people in the face and claw them in their ribs. But if thats what you seen in my last post? I guess you did the right thing... Not sure where you're getting the mean part from. I summarily slaughtered your statements, that's all. No bad blood towards you. ;-) | |
Spuzzum wrote:
(It's beside the point that Pokémon sucks as a kids series, too.) I never thought I'd say this, but Pokemon doesn't suck. They changed the focus of the series from fighting to "dealing with real life problems" when all the kids had sezuires, but both versions worked. The game was entertaining in that it was a classic style RPG, but you got to pick what character you wanted to use. It also has the bonus of having to hunt down and capture 150 monsters before you could truely say you've finished the game. Although that sounds really mindless it was an entertaining way to add replay value. Anyway, in short, Pokemon was great. | |
I actually bought and enjoyed pokemon silver. The games arent bad, its just the whole marketing scheme I don't like.
| |
DarkView wrote:
Spuzzum wrote: Hey, no hijacking my thread! Just because someone posts their opinion, doesn't mean you have to argue it! | |
Anyway, back on topic...
World design is crucial for an RPG to be fun, but sadly, that's exactly what many MMO's lack. The linearity of many maps is boring. Why not have several dungeons or lands to find and explore, with levelling up occuring naturally? Sure, wandering around shouldn't be the whole premise of the game either, but exploration mixed with combat sure beats linearity. Once a person is at level 100 with nothing left to do, perhaps going back to previous dungeons to receive items previously unattainable would work (for a while, anyway). Of course, a side games help with social interaction, too. Like FF Legacy's chocobo racing or some kind of Colloseum battles with huge teams. Or even tournaments. | |
World design is crucial for an RPG to be fun, but sadly, that's exactly what many MMO's lack. The linearity of many maps is boring. Why not have several dungeons or lands to find and explore, with levelling up occuring naturally? Sure, wandering around shouldn't be the whole premise of the game either, but exploration mixed with combat sure beats linearity. Once a person is at level 100 with nothing left to do, perhaps going back to previous dungeons to receive items previously unattainable would work (for a while, anyway). Yeah, that brings up a good example -- The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. Some of the heart containers, for example, were only available if you went back with Bombchus to places you had cleared out. Likewise for the golden skulltula medallions. | |
Spuzzum wrote:
Yeah, that brings up a good example -- The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. Some of the heart containers, for example, were only available if you went back with Bombchus to places you had cleared out. Likewise for the golden skulltula medallions. And that was half the fun of Metroid games. | |
-They have a "level radius" sceme happening. You start walking away from the starting point, and the enemies get harder and harder. If you ask me it should be easier enemies around the "safe spots" (Ie, Towns), and then the enemies get harder as you move into differnt "dungeon areas".
-They don't have any content. Something is either a town or a forest (Sadly thats usually litteral). You don't run into anything.
-Lack of change in maps. There can be 50 differnt locations, but if they all use the same icons then it doesn't mean squat.
Also there is never any reason to explore. I was actually pondering a "Treasure Hunter" sub-quest the other day.
Basically it's a rip off of the "Old Cave" in Lufia, but rather then going down to a level of the cave and getting an item, you have to search the world for it.
Summery:
You go to the "Treasure Master". He then gives you the name of an artifact (There are 99 of them scatter around the world), and a clue.
You have to decipher the clue, find the artifact, get the artifact, then get it back to the treasure master.
The only problem is that you have to have a LOT of artifacts or else people just ask the players who hang out at the Treasure Masters place where to find the artifacts.
Also you have to make it so you can only get the artifact while looking for it, and you can't drop/sell/trade them.