Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Question about mmo vs singleplayer rpg questing
VekoKrava
Member
Are there ways to make mmo questing similar to singleplayer quests, specificly Skyrim. I didnt play singleplayer games a lot (Skyrim 5h, assasins creed odyssey 10h and little bit of witcher 3).
Recently I started Skyrim and for 5hours I have been surprised for 5 times st least by game design. I play 1h daily and every playtrough Ive been surprised at least once.
Today I was on quest about temple of Mirak (of I pronounced that name right) and I took quest and I didnt go for it immediately, so I went roaming in this area to search side quests since they are hidden (no npc pointers above their heads) andI stumbled upon some elf miner, when I finished speaking to him I found bed near him, so I went to rest to regain magicka (I am playing on survival mode), then when I woke up I found myself in temple of Mirak with some other nord femaleand we got ambushed. I saved game and quit because I want to play Skyrim daily for longer period of time.
I am asking this out of curiocity,can something similar be done in MMO games? Is it too complex to codeand if it is not, why are devs not stealing ideas from this masterpiece of game?
Recently I started Skyrim and for 5hours I have been surprised for 5 times st least by game design. I play 1h daily and every playtrough Ive been surprised at least once.
Today I was on quest about temple of Mirak (of I pronounced that name right) and I took quest and I didnt go for it immediately, so I went roaming in this area to search side quests since they are hidden (no npc pointers above their heads) andI stumbled upon some elf miner, when I finished speaking to him I found bed near him, so I went to rest to regain magicka (I am playing on survival mode), then when I woke up I found myself in temple of Mirak with some other nord femaleand we got ambushed. I saved game and quit because I want to play Skyrim daily for longer period of time.
I am asking this out of curiocity,can something similar be done in MMO games? Is it too complex to codeand if it is not, why are devs not stealing ideas from this masterpiece of game?
0
Comments
There are many MMOs with quests on the level of Skyrim.
You probably don't hear as much about them because they are old, or other strangeness.
I'll give you an example from a game that is otherwise generally 'quite bad' and doesn't even HAVE a lot of decent quests.
Black Desert Online, for whatever reason, concluded that players care about sidequests SO LITTLE, that they have an option to turn off EVERY quest but the mainline story quests.
Not turn off the MARKERS... Turn off the QUESTS. If you talk to the NPC for the quest the Quest will not be available.
And for reasons that are probably related to the metrics of player styles... this option is ON BY DEFAULT.
Someone out there has concluded 'MMO players just don't care, so don't bother unless you have to'.
Ashes is pulling largely from that same subsection of the MMO playerbase as BDO is, however.
Certainly, some MMOs are better than others in terms of questing content (e.g. Final Fantasy XIV, Elder Scrolls Online).
But at the end of the day, they're still MMOs.
Intrepid has been in a habit of under-promising and over-delivering on game systems lately, however. We'll see how the questing plays out in Alpha-2.
for me, when i hear MMORPG
I hear a world filled with players and a game where I must be A PART of a society.
I don't think of Lone wolf, so I usually HATE seeing solo players and not a big fan of players acting as lone wolf in a social game, in a team work based game.
I would assume, devs when making a mmorpg would be coming from a design to encourage and create group content. Not just a mega lobby for you to interact as a single player able to see other single players.
MMOs has changed vastly, principles and philosophies has evolved and agenda. (cough corporations focus on $/Subs)
UO - you can attempt to be a lone wolf, lots of solo content but because of the open world PVP with FULL LOOT - almost no-one ever wandered alone. This forced, encouraged groups to hit up dungeons. Dungeons eventually were controlled by guilds. Groups of 2-4 were gated out, now they join a guild and able to do dungeons. But everything revolved around PvP threat constantly.
EverQuest - During it's prime - there were very little solo players. Nowadays people figured out everything, and learned to truly min/max that some classes are capable of soloing to max level on specific routes. But during it's prime this wasn't the case.
Killing mobs were slow, even as a group. XP was slow and you gained more as a group vs a solo player. Dungeons were impossible for solo players. All big item drops from named mobs were also impossible for solo players. A lot of things would consistently funnel solo players to groups in order to progress.
The pacing was another thing that added layers. Downtime is a real thing in EQ and honestly a important mechanics IMHO. People conversated in EQ. So now, you are slowly learning and record your experience and interaction with players. Learning who is who. Performance matters, because DYING IS VERY VERY BAD. Almost everyone began to remember everyone name. Imagine playing in a 3k server and knowing 1900 players. REPUTATION mattered and holy hell it was a game career ender if you were listed as a asshole, ninja looter, griefer, BAD Healer, BAD Tank. Everyone held everyone accountable and changed how we played.
That to me is an MMORPG - we are a unit, a team, a society that works together and holds each other accountable.
MMORPG is like moving to a new neighborhood, one that we seen in the movies, in the 60s, where you introduce yourself or your neighbors introduce themselves to you. Everyone in the gated community knows each other, trust each other, watches out for all kids. It is moving to a 30 unit apt complex and getting to know and have all your neighbors phone numbers. Everyone watching out for one another. We are a society, working together. That is an MMORPG to me.
Not the loner who moves in, keeps to himself.
EQ 99 is a game that fits for me and I wanted to try it out for so long, since I am not computer guh, I couldnt join servers.
I want game like that but so far what ive seen AoC wont be like EQ 99... we cannot change that, they want millions, mainstream always sucked...i know...
I don't know why you think that AoC won't be like that?
Do you mean that it won't be 'efficient enough' so you won't be able to find other people who also want to play that way?
It's true that most games will not FORCE people to slow down or pay attention to complex quests, but AoC has a lot of the required bases.
MMOs are also trying to capture more of the market of players who play Single Player games. They're not GOOD at it yet, but they are learning, so maybe in a few years you will see something from one of the upcoming MMOs?
there is a setup guide on the p99 forums. The Green Server is still active, peaking 1800-2200 during peak hours. Lots of Low level activites still and depending where you start, ppl will give you decent loot to hold you off until mid 20s if you accept it.
It is not very hard to get p99 going, there are YT vids too.
I mean that it wont have strong mobs like EQ99. Not even like Vanilla WoW where you can die if you pull 2 mobs. I have seen videos in open world leveling, it will be soft compared to these games.
@novercalis thanks, didnt think of that. I will look at it.
Oh. No, it has those.
As of Alpha-1, it has those.
It also uses the system where you get additional exp rewards for the gap between your level and the enemy, rather than getting some base exp value.
So in Alpha-1 I would kill Crabs 6-7 levels above me so that I could get 500 xp per kill instead of 100.
They also don't spawn in 'packs' as often, and they use decent abilities. The PvE design is not the part of Ashes I would be concerned about, if I were in your position.
EDIT: You probably just saw a lot of players who are more used to fighting weaker enemies. Perhaps we should have made Alpha-1 content after all...
https://wiki.project1999.com/Experience_table
https://wiki.project1999.com/Experience
Would also be nice to see Zone experience Modifier errrr Node experience modifiers...interacting with leveling the nodes themselves up.
Say 3 nodes next to each other. Their levels are 5,4,3
it will be a lot harder / slower for 5 to hit 6 obvious, but node 4 will get a XP bonus, giving a boost for it to hit 5 and begin a conflict with node 5.
Same is true for node 3, even greater boost of xp thus in turn allowing it to hit node 4 quicker.
Players action on where they decide to level affects a node, and players needs to dictate do I want to level node 5 to 6 or get the better XP for selfish needs at Node 3, thus slowing or preventing node 5 to ever becoming 6. Maybe Node 3 ends up leveling to 6 - but because of player migration - at some point, they need to coordinate to push a node to leveling up.
It encourages catch up mechanics for new players and even vets/alts to play / assist a lower level node. Content all around.
This is also how it worked in Ashes Alpha-1:
The Baseline exp for defeating an enemy of equal level to yourself and 'normal' was 100.
For every level the enemy was above you, there was a multiplier, which scaled slightly differently than just '1x, 2x, etc'. Same for enemies below you.
So if you are level 10 and you defeat a level 6 enemy, you still get something (either 23 or 33 exp as I remember it).
If you are level 10 and defeat a level 14 enemy, you get either 300 or 325 (I'd have to dig up video to check).
I think the cap was something like 550, which I got from defeating level 15 enemies at level 8, I think. I distinctly remember going 'oh, there's a cap? sad', because I accidentally pulled something stronger than that and barely managed to beat it but still got the same exp, but I don't remember which test that was on.
So the system is 'defeat enemies that are stronger relative to yourself, to get more exp'. It also has the 'standard' multipliers for group that the Lineage II people know.
Best of both worlds if you ask me, but my bias is obvious.
EQ system used a color system
Grey = no XP, so eazy to kill
Light Blue = 4-6 levels below you
Dark Blue 1-3 levels below you
White = equal level
Yellow = 1-2 levels above
Red = 3+ level above
Trying to kill an equal level npc for most classes was near fatal.
Almost everyone killed light blues solo wise, some classes risking dark blues.
Groups would pull yellows. Never a red. Whomever is the highest level player in the group, if it cons red to them, it was a no go.
The only exception to that rule is, if you know 100% sure the mobs level (another EQ thing, you dont know what level they are!) and the avg level of the group is very close, then the risk is worth. But if not, you risk players unable to beat it's AC to deal dmg other than your highest lvl player, whom hopefully better be a DPS at this point.
No matter what you do, short of 'basically making them instantly kill you for no reason' there will always be players who do this.
You're not SUPPOSED to be able to fight them efficiently, you should always group.
But some people set out to challenge themselves to do things alone or in smaller groups, that are supposed to take large groups. They might just take very long to do so, and that's the balance for it.
Just don't give them any additional rewards other than personal satisfaction, and it's fine.
You can't make mobs that the average group can fight, but the highest grade of player can't solo, without basically giving them a 'delete this person because they are not in a group' button.
Not necessarily, they gave an example, I probably just haven't seen the video they are referring to for Ashes.
@VekoCrnogorac I would appreciate a link to that video when you have time. If you don't want to go looking for it, maybe you can just tell me which content creator made it, and I'll probably find it myself.
If you're referring to recent videos from Intrepid themselves, I agree with you, I've seen multiple movements toward the other style since I played in Alpha-1. This is why I believe that Ashes may be losing its FFXI/EQ influence and moving more toward Lineage/BDO in terms of how it handles mobs.
I'm saying that in Alpha-1, it worked like that. If I was confusing in my example, that's a slight difference between EQ and FFXI/Ashes difficulty.
In EQ I guess you can't go even 4 levels over. In FFXI you can probably figure out how to go up to 6 levels over on a 'favored enemy' after practicing a lot and getting good gear, because mobs are not usually split by 'solo/raid' or anything like that.
But this applies to all games, I think, if you understand your build well enough. So I just offer this to consider, only in the example I gave. If average players in average gear can take on Blue enemies in EQ, then I would expect that average players in good gear can take on Dark Blue enemies, and very skilled players can take on White and maybe Yellow enemies.
Is that not how it works? I'm glad to learn about the differences between the oldschool game that I DID play and the one that I didn't. I've never thought to ask the EQ players I know about stuff like this, it wouldn't have come up. So I'm taking that chance now.
I consider a mob 'hard' when 'it will kill you in 10-15 seconds or so if your keyboard/mouse/whatever stop working mid-fight. Is that a fair definition to use, when discussing this with you?
Oh, one of the Wand User videos?
Well, unfortunately if you are willing to disregard what I say due to that (and I don't blame you, one is evidence, one is not), I can't really do much, I didn't personally record my Alpha-1 gameplay.
That's kind of sad, because you ARE talking about the same thing I am used to, and experience, but you got the 'mage spam' version, and it's true that mages have a particularly silly effectiveness in certain parts of Alpha-1.
There's also another reason, which honestly means I should agree with you more. Intrepid has said that they specifically intend to avoid 'your abilities being scaled based on level difference'. I don't know how they intend to make a game that doesn't get cheesed while still doing this, but it is another indicator that you are going to be right, in the long run.
Mobs need to have so much HP in that system, that I don't even want to think about the balance requirements.
But an at-level mob leaving you at 50% HP is still not very different from what I'm talking about. Ashes had this, the enemies just had to be 1-2 levels above you instead. I can see how this would have 'fallen apart' at higher levels, though, specifically BECAUSE of the lack of scaling and the gear-level jumps.
So, assume I am conceding the point. Ashes open world might, in fact, either be weak mobs or mobs that are easy to exploit even if they're not directly weak. We'll have to see which design model 'wins' in the end. Given everything else about the game, I think you have better odds of being right than me.
Just going to sprinkle a little bit of salt from my own experience... I was soloing white and some yellow with my shadow knight. I've soloed a yellow cyclops with my ranger too. It wasn't efficient, but it was doable, just needed room to kite and it resulted in long downtime. I didn't even had particularly strong gear.
Although I never witnessed it personally, some bards could apparently kite impressively higher level mobs.
Groups were much more efficient for xp, but many classes could solo rather well. Druids, Shamans, Necro, Magician. I remember regaining my lost xp on a naked wizard waiting for the boat back to my corpse.
Groups allowed to survive pulls with multiple mobs and to chain pull, with almost no total downtime.
During it's prime days - that probably didnt happen much and most importantly inefficient. which is okay.
Yea nowadays in P99, the math has been out and everything got min/max.
But also realize many of them are starting off with lvl 1 classes twinked the fuck out.
Second p99 doesnt have the entire EQ code correct. They made modification, thus it's not a 1:1 perfect recreation of EQ. Stamina/Energy isnt even there. When they released the equations, the community dissected everything and min/max to new heights. Bards and Necros are S tier solo classes in p99. This wasn't true in EQ, only mages and Enchanters were somewhat capable of soloing during Live at the time of equal level.
But these classes that were able to solo still fought below their levels, only necro fought equal level and bards were just broken, kiting things above their weight class in masses. I dont know much about SK, but a twinked out SK is a scary thing. Most of the kiting could have been patched via Live by devs introducing range npc or abilities to end that from happening, and there goes the solo capabilities
Yeah in Everquest, during it's first 3-4 expansions. 90% of the population couldnt fight something of their same level.
Level 20 player would normally kill level 16-19 mobs.
Almost no-one would fight whites unless your a duo, enchanter, or have a pet class or potential kiting 1 target. These fights took 1-3 minutes and draining you of all your resources and having to sit down and regen everything back.
Group content, a party of 6 level 20 would still only fight mobs 18-24.
They can easily handle one 24. If Two 24 arrive - if you don't have CC or off-tank, it's a wipe. If you do have CC or off-tank it becomes a DPS check, cause clerics mana pool is very small, you don't want him to go OOM (out of Mana) by the time you guys begin to kill the 2nd one, and if an add comes - that is usually a wipe, even if you were able to CC, people would retreat cause the cleric wont have enough mana to heal.
Clerics with full mana is capable of casting 6-8 of their strongest heal. Most of the time, they never have full mana on them, as every 20 min, he needs to rebuff himself and the tank. So tension always keep rising in a room. There is a innate DPS check to control a single dungeon room. Party make up also mattered greatly.
My only point is that FFXI works almost exactly like this, so I wanted to have OP understand that, yes, I ALSO have this same game experience.
It is, again, close to what I experienced in Ashes Alpha-1 if you put the levels up by just one or two. The systems are the same and I've been playing FFXI since I was little, basically.
But it's also true that fully geared on a solo class meant I could fight a 45 at level 40. I'd nearly die sometimes, and I'd have to tweak the whole kit and gear and never get a link, but that was the fun part.
I was able to have this same fun in Ashes, but I accept that with the whole 'We're not scaling anything' and the way Wand worked in Alpha-1, it could easily have just NOT worked like that for a level 10 wand user vs higher level mobs.
There are also situations where raw player skill DOES cause this on solo classes. So, I'm familiar, I'm just ALSO aware of flexibility and skill levels high enough for it to matter. I don't know how to confirm that without 'bragging' or 'going to play EQ2' though, I would expect to get just the 'well FFXI must have been easier' response from OP at this point.
We're working on making questing in Ashes of Creation an immersive and unique experience, full of wonder, intrigue, and adventure! ^_^
I'd love to hear more about all of your favorite quests, whether they're from MMORPGs or just RPGs! What can you share from your memories?
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/54441/best-in-slot-epic-quest-line-core-class#latest