Dygz wrote: » Well, also, interestingly... we have seen nothing of the Underrealm, yet. All we've seen so far has been fairly generic MMORPG fare.
NiKr wrote: » Otr wrote: » I wouldn't cover the map with so many floating islands to say that they doubled the map size. Else they would cover the sky completely. Let's say there's a massive tower dungeon that also has underground lvls. At its base it has the area of 1 sq km. So on the map it would take up 1 sq km of horizontal space in some field or forest or whatever. And let's say that tower has 10 floors up and 10 down. That's 19 more sq kms of space, while the horizontal footprint didn't change at all. Those 19 sq km can have all the content variance that the base has (and even more), so we have now multiplied the amount of content a part of the map has by a ton. And like I said, Intrepid could add air flows that let us travel upwards in a quicker manner (either craftable at a high cost or magical at a high number of players required, or quest-related from an npc), and after we're done doing some quests or just have some proper tool - we could find a shaft that lets us glide down to the very bottom of the underground part really quickly (gliding done in-between the floors, so you could exit at any one). This is the "small world, but ton of content" that I think akabear was talking about. And travel times in this situation would be WAY shorter than if those 19 sq km were laid out horizontally. Also, I'm assuming that Intrepid would give us those methods of quick vertical travel, because as quite a few people here like to say "that's what smart designers would do". If a place that you've visited and "beaten" once needs revisiting for whatever reason - it's only logical to provide a way to travel there faster. The obvious "abuse" of the tower having great content at the top and the players just gliding down with the loot from there (hence avoiding any potential PKing for it) can be addressed by having internal stares and no passable windows, so you'd need to go down a few lvls to jump off.
Otr wrote: » I wouldn't cover the map with so many floating islands to say that they doubled the map size. Else they would cover the sky completely.
Otr wrote: » I do not deny that a certain type of content can be added by layering vertically. But that content takes away from exploration. I am not a fan of fast travel or teleportation. Even New World being changed at the outcry of players calling it a walking simulator and asking for mounts made the game worse for me as they increased the number of teleportation points. Having vertical currents, cutscenes or a loading screen is equally bad for me. I don't mind looking to a "Loading..." text but I mind that the walking part through a nice environment is missing. A cutscene showing that nice environment is just a nicer "Loading...".
NiKr wrote: » Otr wrote: » I do not deny that a certain type of content can be added by layering vertically. But that content takes away from exploration. I am not a fan of fast travel or teleportation. Even New World being changed at the outcry of players calling it a walking simulator and asking for mounts made the game worse for me as they increased the number of teleportation points. Having vertical currents, cutscenes or a loading screen is equally bad for me. I don't mind looking to a "Loading..." text but I mind that the walking part through a nice environment is missing. A cutscene showing that nice environment is just a nicer "Loading...". Which is why I said that this faster mode of travel should be available once you've "completed" the location once (meaning, you've explored it all and done quests and shit) and then, if you need to revisit it - you have a faster way. Imo there's no point in making repetitive actions a chore. Or at least more of a chore than they will already be seen as. That is, probably, partially why NW players hated the running. Cause you would've explored the tiny map really quickly, but the quest/farming/gathering would have you run through the same location over and over and over and OVER again. This is almost most likely why we'll have location-linked quest events in Ashes, where you can just farm a spot and get random quest-like things along the way.
NiKr wrote: » Noaani wrote: » In other words, your example tower is only a little over 5% of what you were talking about. Yes, I already admitted that 1 sq km was a bad example to give. My point was - you multiply horizontal area by the amount of floors/layers and you then give players the ability to traverse vertically in a faster fashion, which means that you're traveling big walkable distances faster w/o really traveling further away from your initial point.
Noaani wrote: » In other words, your example tower is only a little over 5% of what you were talking about.
Noaani wrote: » And my point is, taking a small game world for an MMORPG of 10km² (10,000,000m²) and adding a tower like you are talking about that adds 227,500m² isn't early as effective as adding instancing (which could be 227,500m² * 10), making your world 150km² (150,000,000m²) or making your world 50km³ (50,000,000,000m³).
NiKr wrote: » Noaani wrote: » And my point is, taking a small game world for an MMORPG of 10km² (10,000,000m²) and adding a tower like you are talking about that adds 227,500m² isn't early as effective as adding instancing (which could be 227,500m² * 10), making your world 150km² (150,000,000m²) or making your world 50km³ (50,000,000,000m³). But is it all unique instances at that scale or is it the stuff like the cove, where it's simply different content in the same place?
You are, seemingly, proposing creation of unique content in not-so unique spaces.
Noaani wrote: » How is it any different to a tower that uses the same textures throughout?
Noaani wrote: » I mean, when I go in to a piece of content, I am not fighting the wall or the roof. I'm fighting the mobs. The zone in question here had a skeleton boss, an octopus boss, a dragon boss and a giant boss between the four versions I showed you. That is four distinct and different pieces of content as far as I am concerned.
Noaani wrote: » It is a fact that a game with a small world can't have as much content as a game with a large world can have, unless the game with the smaller world uses instancing. No proposals, no nothing. Just that basic fact.
Xeeg wrote: » If its something like more than 70% of time spent is travelling rather than combat, then travelling MUST be fun somehow. Otherwise most of the game time is spent doing something considered a punishment lol. Our whole progression paths and MMO efforts are spent on things we are only doing 30% of the time or whatever.
Otr wrote: » You want spoilers? Or Alpha 2 started only after those area are available? We will get all biomes gradually. I think we will not even have both continents when Alpha 2 starts.
Otr wrote: » The risk vs reward can spice thing up. If that is missing then the game is boring anyway.
Dygz wrote: » Otr wrote: » The risk vs reward can spice thing up. If that is missing then the game is boring anyway. Poor game design if an MMORPG is boring without PvP. PvP should be icing on an already good cake.
Myosotys wrote: » I don't agree with the idea that travel is a punishment. If you get killed and you want to get back to a place in a specific time for a specific purpose, and the travel time prevents you from achieving that purpose, then yes that can be considered punishment.
Otr wrote: » Even though PvP is the cheapest way to obtain the risk vs reward feeling and AoC is relying on it extensively, that is not necessarily the only way. Probably IS will not alter their their design but assuming they can do some changes (because everything is subject to change) would you like a game-play with NPCs which trigger a "risk vs reward" feeling? I guess you wouldn't. Anyway, even without risk vs reward, I prefer to walk to a place than fast travel to that place. That is my preference and I know and said it before that we will actually travel quite fast in AoC. Only resources and materials will travel slowly. We will not be able to cheat and avoid the caravan system where it is intended.
Xeeg wrote: » That's basically all I meant from that comment. When you die you need to run back to your body, typically the minimum punishment for most games on death.
Xeeg wrote: » This thread is not about travelling for new explorations, its about the repetitive travel back and forth along the same trails over and over during both the levelling and post levelling experience. It can get tedious after a while. The whole reason games like WOW migrated to queued dungeon teleports is because the players didn't want to be spending most of their game time travelling and trying to make groups rather than actually just playing the game. Especially after doing it for the 5th time.
Xeeg wrote: » By the time the game launches, most of the Alpha 2 people will have explored half of Verra, so if exploration is their primary motive for playing, they will be lucky to get their 6 months worth before they aren't going anywhere "new" on a regular basis. All that will be left is how good the game feels to play in a regular session.
Xeeg wrote: » The PVP aspect does help this a bit. For example, you can spend 10 minutes running across a map in Rust, and be on the edge of your seat the entire time because of PVP or even the potential for PVP. This is a big reason for why Ashes has to have PVP in their PVX game play, because otherwise this stuff gets too boring and predictable.
Dygz wrote: » Otr wrote: » Even though PvP is the cheapest way to obtain the risk vs reward feeling and AoC is relying on it extensively, that is not necessarily the only way. Probably IS will not alter their their design but assuming they can do some changes (because everything is subject to change) would you like a game-play with NPCs which trigger a "risk vs reward" feeling? I guess you wouldn't. Anyway, even without risk vs reward, I prefer to walk to a place than fast travel to that place. That is my preference and I know and said it before that we will actually travel quite fast in AoC. Only resources and materials will travel slowly. We will not be able to cheat and avoid the caravan system where it is intended. Quests should have some interesting stuff to do. It's nice when Quests also have rewards.
