Quoting: Kimyrielle

Quoting: Ser Eduardo MogambroWell, to some extent, I actually do, because as I said, if the whole economy is player driven you need something to sustain demand for the goods produced, else everybody will have the best armor for his playstyle in a few months and the economy would be dead.

So the pkers are what make the smiths and merchants and all the other player-types relevant. If there is no dead, there is no "always growing market".

I agree with most things you said, but this statement is economically spoken, not correct. Lootable corpses do nothing to create additional demand, as the items taken from your corpse remain in circulation and can be sold or used by the looter. The only things that actually create demand for new items in MMO is either a) growth in players, b) gear obsolescence (e.g. due to levelling) and c) item degradation/destruction.

Wouldn't this depend on the implementation (when/how fast do corpses and with them the loot disappear?) and on the scale of the battle + the inventory size of the winning people among other factors?

I mean, if 5 people pk 2 people and they have enough room in their inventory and the loot is interesting, they will probably take it with them, so nothing "gained" here (economy-wise). On the other hand, it depends on what they do with the loot. If they only "bank" it for harder times (like when they die) it's out of the economy and the dead one has to buy new armor.

If a huge armies fight against each other chances are that people won't have enough inventory space or just fight for the fun and let (part of) the loot rotting and disappearing.

Another thing is: if you can destroy player-made-structures you add to the economy again, because there is constant need for certain materials.

What I want to say: You're generally right that if person A kills person B and takes it's loot the economy doesn't gain anything, because person B may need a new set of armor, but person A now has 2.

But there are many things to be taken into account.

Compare it to a real-world-war. (Today) They are often fought for economical reasons, one being that the winner can rebuild a whole country, making a lot of profit doing this and that's because it's good for the economy if people die and their belongings are destroyed.

For an economy to sustain itself you need some kind of "make things obsolete" mechanism. (*) In themeparks that is the item-spiral (not sure if you call it that in English), it's the way that World of Warcraft does it, by creating higher and higher item-levels that you need to reach as to be able to get to an even higher level.

(*) It's the same as in the real-world, again. Many people keep telling us that the economy needs to grow, but where would it grow? At some point the market would be saturated, everyone would have a certain product. So you need to make them break, you need to make better ones, so people keep pursuing them, wanting to get the best item.

Or you fight some wars, destroy everything and then there can be growth, because you just burned everything down.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I would not consider myself "hardcore" by any means. I'm just your average gamer, but I do enjoy a challenge. Although I, myself, have never played a criminal, I do have helped in hunting them down.

Quoting: KimyrielleHowever, I don't think that sandbox games automatically imply having a total focus on PK gameplay any more than themepark games would need to be focused exclusively on raids.

Well, to some extent, I actually do, because as I said, if the whole economy is player driven you need something to sustain demand for the goods produced, else everybody will have the best armor for his playstyle in a few months and the economy would be dead.

So the pkers are what make the smiths and merchants and all the other player-types relevant. If there is no dead, there is no "always growing market".

Quoting: KimyrielleI rather blame that on MMOs being a segment that's generally not very innovative (to phrase it politely). Most themepark games -are- WoW clones despite there is no god-given reason for that, and most sandbox games are perfectly interchangeable as well. Tbh, having read Albions' feature list, there is not a single idea in there that we haven't seen in another game before, and the only reason we we're even talking about it here in the first place is that it will have Linux support. Other than that, there seem to be at least a half dozen games exactly like it out there already.

I agree, but I see many technical reasons (lag, scale...) for this, among financial ones. A MMORPG most likely is much more expensive than the average singleplayer (or even multiplayer - we are talking scale here!) game, so they (developers/publishers) want it to be a save bet.

An regarding that: Apart from the story (which is different in most franchises, and be it just little details) and a few mechanics a shooter is a shooter too. I don't see much experiments there. I do see some, but most of these fail, which brings me back to the point: A mmorpg is not cheap to produce, so most will try a safe bet.

That being said: I absolutely understand you. In the past I've played a lot of themeparks as well and it was annoying as hell when we had organized an RP-event and suddenly some jerks started to dance naked on the tables (or worse, began slaughtering) while we could do nothing to stop them, being it by game-mechanics (pve-zone/realm) or because we didn't wear our fighting clothes.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Kels

Quoting: Ser Eduardo MogambroWell, I don't want to argue, but then you're simply not the target audience.

You seem to be looking to build a very small, specialized player base, then. Strange decision from a business standpoint but who am I to judge?

I am not a developer (of Albion Online), but I guess they're aware of that, although they surely hope to get a broader audience to try it out. Mortal Online was said to be a success if it hit 10.000 (subscribing) members, so I guess they are aware that the market for such truly-hardcore-pvp games is a very small one. Still, it is an existing market.

So, ya, if they wanted to do another themepark the target audience would be much broader, but they would also have many more competitors fishing in the same river.

Quoting: Kels

Quoting: Ser Eduardo MogambroYou could only hinder that by Themepark mechanics such as adding new dungeons over and over with a higher item level. Only that way you could ensure that players keep on playing, even though the have the best items now.
. . .
If you're not into that kind of game, fine, the majority of games is themeparks and more or less WoW-clones anyway.

There's that "themepark" thing again, without bothering to explain what that is or why it's bad. It's clearly meant to be something bad, but the closest I can get from your comments and the OP is "wussy" or "not hardcore" which ends up just sounding like bravado. Can you explain exactly what you mean by "themepark"?

It's not exactly something I mean and it's not anything bad at all! It's simply something different, like apples and bananas. Both are fruit, some people may enjoy both, while others prefer apples and some hate apples and only eat bananas.

There is nothing wrong with this.

The term itself is not well-defined, but basically: A themepark is just like the reallife counterpart. You go into a themepark to have fun (nothing wrong with this, you see?). There are different attractions and different areas and you go by and queue yourself for the attractions you want to see/ride.

A themepark MMORPG is just that, you start leveling your character in a certain area, then move on to the next one. At some point you go into a dungeon, later you're too strong and move to another one.

Too keep you coming back, the owners/developers have to provide you with new attractions.

It all comes down to: linear progression. After you've left a certain area there is basically nothing for you to go back for, apart from memories.

In a sandbox this is different. You get the tools (a shovel, bucket, whatever) and start to shape the world yourself. If they feel like it, they add more sand to the box, meaning that you get another continent and stuff like that.

There are other explanations around the web: Themepark vs. Sandbox [External Link]

I'm sorry I didn't explain the terms, I wasn't thinking about that being rather specialized terminology, since I've been accustomed to (using) them for many years and I thought games like Minecraft and Co. would've had an impact regarding that. But of course there are few mmorpgs out there for Linux, so my bad!

Quoting: Kels

Quoting: Ser Eduardo MogambroI personally love nothing more than losing all my stuff upon death. It really adds to the thrill. Of course it can be totally frustrating. When I started Mortal Online back in 2010 it took me three evenings (real time) to get a horse from one point to another because I was killed on every route I took. But it was so incredibly much fun fighting these highwaymen.

Now there is another feature, your banks are not global. If you store your valuables in city A and you wander to city B and want to grab them, they are not there (how should they?). You have to hire a caravan or protection or try to stealthily make your way with all your precious goods. But you could be killed and robbed on the way.

This game is sounding less and less fun and more like a chore all the time. So not only do you have aggravation and frustration due to PKers, you also have aggravation and frustration due to sheer inconvenience. Sounds like a fantastic combination, this'll be a smash hit!

As I said, you're simply not (part of) the target audience (again, that is not an attack or anything the like!).

Before Everquest and World of Warcraft started to dominate the market, there was a game called Ultima Online and many more games like it. They used to be sandboxes and many people enjoyed them. Then came a huge boom and suddenly there was only Star Wars Galaxies (Pre NGE) that could be called a sandbox.

If it's not your game, absolutely fine by me. I don't like every AAA-game out there and we could probably argue about a lot of games you like that I wouldn't touch and vice versa, but where is the point in that?

I personally dislike games like World of Warcraft although I've played loads of them in the past. I've also played many sandboxes and that's where I find joy. So let's just agree that you're simply not the target audience, just as we both are probably not the target audience for "Barbie's and Ken's Dreamhouse" ;)

I hope that my explanation helped you to get a little insight regarding the terminology, but please refrain from trying to argue about personal taste. The game is not what you desire, right, but it is indeed what I wish for. If this sounds stupid to you, so be it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

If you're more into videos and a bit of actual gameplay, be my guest:
View video on youtube.com

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Kimyrielle

Quoting: Ignis>plus if you die you lose everything on you

Seriously? Pass…

oO

Seriously???, indeed.
Lootable corpses is probably one of the more silly ideas ever brought to MMOs. I guess if that's a feature of that game, I shall pass, too.

Well, I don't want to argue, but then you're simply not the target audience.

Imagine if you didn't lose anything if you'd die (like in real life, eh? ;)) at some point there would simply be no need to get better weapons and stuff. We are talking player made economy here!

You could only hinder that by Themepark mechanics such as adding new dungeons over and over with a higher item level. Only that way you could ensure that players keep on playing, even though the have the best items now.

I personally love nothing more than losing all my stuff upon death. It really adds to the thrill. Of course it can be totally frustrating. When I started Mortal Online back in 2010 it took me three evenings (real time) to get a horse from one point to another because I was killed on every route I took. But it was so incredibly much fun fighting these highwaymen.

Now there is another feature, your banks are not global. If you store your valuables in city A and you wander to city B and want to grab them, they are not there (how should they?). You have to hire a caravan or protection or try to stealthily make your way with all your precious goods. But you could be killed and robbed on the way.

This is what makes a sandbox. You have a shovel, you can do pretty much everything, but there are other people trying to throw a bucket of sand in your eyes ;)

But I want to stretch this once more. In contrary to Mortal Online there are way more "safe-zones" meaning no-pvp possible in there.

If you're not into that kind of game, fine, the majority of games is themeparks and more or less WoW-clones anyway.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: boomanAgreed! I hope we can accumulate materials by killing monsters PVE or cutting down trees and mining silver/iron. Then spend a lot of time building weapons, accessories and homes. That way we don't have to spend a lot of time trying to survive in a PVP world and yet we get to help the PVP players.
Imaging leveling up a weapon by improving it as a blacksmith, then PVP players come to buy it for their next battle.

You can definitely do the first, meaning you can spend all your time cutting down tress and harvesting other resources and killing monsters in PVE.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Personally I often see F2P only as a hook to get people into the game or to let them stay in the game when they have no money left to spend on the game (for whatever reason) but want to login to keep contact with some people.

For example in Mortal Online if you don't have an active subscription you have access to less of the skillpool, meaning you can't really pvp and stuff, but you can keep contact with your friends.

A "pay once" model seems to be a nice model from a customer point of view, but as I said, if you have a (huge or low but steady) decline in new players you must think about a way to finance the game.

Vanity items like in Guild Wars 2... not sure about how well they would sell in Albion Online.

Regarding PVP: I personally love PVP, but I do understand that others don't. In contrary to Mortal Online there are more save-zones in Albion where PVP is not possible.

If you can bear a non-native-speaker talking I may upload a few videos, but let's see about that :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdaweI have been seriously on the fence about this, and I really want it to be good.

The premium account system has me worried, since it gives people who pay monthly a silver and fame boost, that to me says P2W, but it depends how it's done exactly.

Personally I've played lots of MMORPGs, especially back in the day, and I think that a system with a premium account is the most fair of them all. Why you might ask.

Well, somehow the development has to be paid AND the server costs AND the support. I mean for a FPS you may pay only once and then be done, because in most FPS (at least those for PC only) you can host your own servers, so that is the community's business. And they are "done" at a certain point, while a MMORPG has to be supported for a much longer period. Even in a sandbox people would like to get more sand after all, like a new continent and stuff like that.

Even if you have to make an initial payment, like buying a boxed version, this can't sustain all the costs for long, especially if there is a decline in new players (which will surely come after a certain amount of time)

Now if they would go the other f2p road and sell ingame items I'd see this more problematic, because for most games it simply doesn't pay off. Either you sell weapons and game-changing items, or you only sell cosmetic stuff like e.g. Guild Wars 2. For the latter I personally think that Albion is not the right game, because it's not 3d, so you can't show off your awesome items that easily (plus if you die you lose everything on you, so they either have to add an exception for that kind of items or some people would cry out very, very loud!)

If they'd sell stuff like weapons and armory then I'd personally not support the game, because this is capitalistic nonsense in pure culture. People with more money would automatically have a huge advantage over people not willing/or able to pay as much.

A fixed fee on the other hand is fair to me. It gives the devs an easier way to predict income and calculate investments and for the player it's way easier to manage and take that into account for his own wallet.

But I must admit, I'm heavily biased in that case, because I've always supported monthly-fee models over f2p, because I personally see it like:

Everyone has to pay the same money and therefore everyone has the same rights and abilities. The only deciding factor is time, but depending on the game that is not really a problem for non-hardcore-players, because the skill may decide. (This is not a themepark after all, where all that counts is the items you wear)

But ya, I agree with you: It depends on how it's done and time will tell, so there is nothing but waiting for now.

Personally I'm still glad that there is a (sandbox) MMORPG available on Linux natively. :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments