Nazrix, I''m serious. When the "Anonymous Poster" website goes up, and the "Anonymous Poster" game development company takes off, you are coming to work for me. You have no choice. =)

LoL, as long as I don''t have to work for that Landfish guy...

You are so much on the right track here...

I want to comment further when I am at work tomrrow, and evading actually working

"The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." --William Blake

BTW, I noticed that when you quoted me above in your other post, you changed the title to "Original Post by Landfish". I want to publicly state that I am offended by being confused with that anarchist ruffian. You, Nazrix! I Challenge you to a duel, sir! =)

No, really, I''m not landfish...

Hey, Anon and Nazrix. If you actually have a duel, can you do it on a HalfLife deathmatch? I wanna watch.

- DarkMage139
"Real game developers don't change the rules. Real game developers don't break the rules. Real game developers make the rules!"
"Originality (in games) is the spice of life!"

quote: Original post by Landfish

BTW, I noticed that when you quoted me above in your other post, you changed the title to "Original Post by Landfish". I want to publicly state that I am offended by being confused with that anarchist ruffian. You, Nazrix! I Challenge you to a duel, sir! =)

No, really, I'm not landfish...

Uh-Huh! You just admitted that you were the so-called landfish!

Do you know why? Do you?

Because no one except for the Landfish would be so observant as to notice such a subtle detail.

Although, the real Landfish would have foreseen the fact that was the perfect setup...

Hmmmmm...This will work:



Holds up the Landfish Picture to Anon to see if it scares him away

quote:
Hey, Anon and Nazrix. If you actually have a duel, can you do it on a HalfLife deathmatch? I wanna watch.

- DarkMage139
"Real game developers don't change the rules. Real game developers don't break the rules. Real game developers make the rules!"
"Originality (in games) is the spice of life!"

I don't have HL, but I'll smack his fishy arse around in Quake



"The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." --William Blake



Edited by - Nazrix on July 9, 2000 10:05:19 AM

Whatever happened to one gentleman removing his glove and smacking another gentleman, and then they engaged in a gunfight duel: Take ten paces, turn around, and FIRE!

Now we just turn to the unrealistic gore of first-person shooters ... I think someone should make a FPS for just such occasions as this one ... one that''s more elegant in nature.

------------------------------
Changing the future of adventure gaming...
Atypical Interactive

I have a few questions Landf...err...I mean Anonymous Poster:

Have you decided upon how people's social status would be determined?

Would some start as aristocrats while others start as peasants?

quote:
#3. Smart goblins. If they can build a shelter, they can build a fortress. No spcies on earth (or anywhere) is suicidal enough to charge at you with axes and NOT run away when you kill half thier raiding party in one blow. I say: "A player to every character!" and this includes goblins. (note: Not really a player to every character... but in accordance with NPCs are people too!, NPCs should be Nigh indistinguishable from PCs. so there.)

I'd like to extend upon this just by saying all "goblins" should have a rich background of who they are, whether they a social race or loners...etc...Probably goes w/out saying...

quote: Original post by Landfish the Anonymous Poster (How's that?)
#5 Realism. Most designers think it would suck. Why? Because most designers are lazy. Think about the ACTUAL CONSEQUENCES of a realistic physical setting. Why does everyone think that players will lose motivation? We're still offering them the chance to live out thier dreams collectively with sh!tload of other people. Realism can only add to the exhiliration of performing the impossible. Stop frightening yourself.

Again I'd like to add by just saying that rational realism is good, and when something "supernatural" happens, it will have that much more of an impact.

And, of course, I like the permanent death idea.


I really think this would work well...I would love to see a MMORPG with more political intrigue, and such things...

All these Landfishian ideas sounded interesting before but a little off the wall at times...now they're coming together I believe...That Lan...I did it again...Anonymous Poster is brainwashing me.



"The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." --William Blake

Edited by - Nazrix on July 9, 2000 11:57:14 AM

Hmmm, an elegant dueling game... what would we call it? Real Tournament?

Well Nazzlie, I haven''t quite sorted it out yet. There are a variety of non-traditional character creation systems that could apply here, but the most obvious one is to let the players choose thier social standing from a menu at character creation. If they choose a Royal position, there are only a small number of spaces, so they might get bumbed down or sent to the menu.

This ensures that there are a lot of people who *want* to be king! =) And have some of the means to get there. Meanwhile, those of us with an interest in playing "smaller" people can go straight to the bottom of the pile if we wish. First come first serve... not the system I would use myself, but I can imagine it working.

As for smart goblins, one might be tempted to give them a tribal or low tech society. I am dubious about this. If what I''ve seen in current games is any indication, players may not even notice the irony as they plow through stealing goblin land, destroying goblin settlements, and killing goblin women and children. I don''t want to willingly expose such disgusting behavior, I''d rather not give them the opportunity. I don''t feel goblins, or any non-human creatures should have a major part in day to day life, if they exist at all. They just don''t have the meaning they used to, so why bother with them at all?

The important thing to remember about intrigue with real life situations is DON''T force it! If something bad is ALWAYS happening, no one will care. Just plop one player down as "
king" and give him some NPCs/Admins to order around, and watch him give people orders. Have other in cognito admins spread the notion that the king can be displaced. Have them act as evil viziers, seeking out those who have royal blood and hatching assasination schemes with them. The King will be alerted by his "spies" and start acting paranoid. It''s perfect, and the players don''t even know you''ve planned it! Doesn''t that beat just plopping an NPC tyrant on the throne and saying "Look, tyrant! Tyrant bad! Go get ''im! Good adventurers, good boy..."

quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster

#5 Realism. Most designers think it would suck. Why? Because most designers are lazy. Think about the ACTUAL CONSEQUENCES of a realistic physical setting. Why does everyone think that players will lose motivation? We''re still offering them the chance to live out thier dreams collectively with sh!tload of other people. Realism can only add to the exhiliration of performing the impossible. Stop frightening yourself.

You mean I never get to play that powerfull mage I always wanted to be? Will I never be able to hurl fireball at my enemies, move items with pure willpower and teleport across the room? And will I never have the oppertunity to fly on the back of a dragon?

Aww, that sucks!

quote:

#6 Absolute character death. Everything i''ve heard so far leads me to believe this system is inherently balanced. The reason so many are opposed to it is FEAR. Little do they know, FEAR is what make the system work. Everything that applies to one player applies to everyone when it comes to absolute death. None of them wants to lose their character! But we digress. What do you think? Do you dare to dream the impossible dream?

You mean no epic battles between entire armies? No one acting out the role as the kings brave knight because everybody is too scared to loose their character? No one spying in the royal court? No one plotting against each other becaus they are to afraid to loose and be killed?

I agree that there must be a very real punishment for dying as to discourage people to take on hopeless fights and to encourage them into working together to beat larger enemies. Or to use stealth and cunning in a more "political" type of game spying and plotting against each other. But I think "Absolute character death" is too much.

I think the "fear" element would be too great and not only discourage mindless killing but also any other form of action.
People will then just go around doing mostly nothing. Only acting when they are absolutely sure of sucess or are forced by fear for loosing their own character.

I grant you that this type of gameplay would be very realistic but I don''t think it would be quite so fun (or even interesting) to play. We (or at least I) play computer games to get to do things I can''t do in reality: Be mighty hero on dangerous adventures play the role of a thief climbing the rooftops, a hacker in the future or just a pilot flying an airplane or a driver driving a racecar.

All those things I cannot do in reality. But the computer lets me live out those roles by removing or reducing the risk. I can still fail, but the setback is never greater than my last saved game. The saved games act as my resurrection spell and if you remove it from the game, most game will be boring and tedious.

Regards

nicba

Ahh, geez, nicba, you missed my point entirely! Environmental realism doesn''t mean you can''t play a mage! If that is what''s realistic within the rules of the setting, it can and should happen! My point is: wouldn''t being a mage be so much more fun if people reacted in TERROR every time you hurled a firebolt?

As for the death thing, it serves primarily to dicourage combat for combat''s sake. Perhaps cowardly weaklings will no loger become kings and knights, because they won''t want to take the risk, but if un-needed combat becomes scares, so will the threat of death. Follow?