I can't help noticing Brad looks more and more like Mark Hamill everytime I see him. No offence :p
Nephele said:I've been thinking about the whole world vs. game thing a bit recently and so, selfishly, I wanted to sort of restart this discussion.
In another MMO that I play (which shall remain nameless), I was recently very dismayed when some of my own guildmates complained about how they wanted to just skip the story and lore bits of some recent content and get to the fight at the end so that they could "do the fun part", which for them was the fight. It made me wonder, what's wrong with me that I care so much about the integrity of the game world, about immersion, about lore and story, when most other players I meet just care about bashing monsters and getting shiny loots?
What made the situation even more confusing was that I recently ran an event in that same game, and some of those same people were involved. In that event, we simply walked from one side of the game world to the other on a sightseeing trip. There was no gameplay objective. No prizes. No incentive to do it. I just did it to make a statement about the world mattering, and to take time out and appreciate it. And you know what? People came along with me for five hours of that. They even had fun, lining up for pictures along the way, commenting on the cool things they'd never noticed before. A few of them streamed it.
I think I might need a degree in psychology to really understand how that could happen. But what it has made me realize is that a great many people playing MMOs don't currently appreciate the larger context of the world they're playing in - and that's probably because they're not forced to. They focus on the immediate goal. The fight, the loot, the dungeon, the quest. They miss the larger narrative being spun around them. Even when another player points it out, it's just a distraction. It's background, not foreground. It's not important.
I would really like to see Pantheon change that paradigm somehow. I think it has the opportunity. I do not want to see the entire experience revolve around simply bashing monsters and getting loot. There needs to be far more to it than that. When we talk about our memories of Pantheon 10 or 20 years from now, I want to be able to tell stories about the amazing places I saw, the amazing people that I met, the stories I was a part of, and the epic quests and struggles that took place - not simply anecdotes about how this or that fight was super hard or super fun.
I am not saying that gameplay isn't important - it absolutely is. A world without gameplay aspects isn't very exciting. But to take a narrow scope, to focus on gameplay and nothing else, is to lose the essence of what makes an MMORPG unique and special. One of my great fears for Pantheon is that we will focus so much on challenge and progression and making things "fun" that we will forget that sometimes the "fun" is in simply being able to go spend time in a fully realized virtual world.
A game is something that I eventually finish. A world is a place where I live.
Because of my recent experience, I would like to see us talking more about how to make Terminus feel like a real, living world for everyone, and still provide fun gameplay experiences, and I hope that people will indulge me.
I think a lot of this has to do with the inevitable "Rail Monster" that has been surgically implanted into the MMO experience for the last decade plus. Gone are the days where you can simply start a character in a new foreign world and then try to find your way. The beginning of every journey thrusts you into the middle of an ongoing story. You're a recruit ... fresh off the boat, and you need training. You're surrounded by helpful NPC's that are eager to teach you how to survive. They have a vested interest in you because there is a war raging on around you from all fronts. Your faction is struggling to endure the brunt of that chaos and so they need you to help restore order to the land.
One NPC in particular takes a liking to you. They see something special. They are your friend. They help guide you in the right direction until you get your bearings ... and as soon as you do, your status is elevated. You're no longer a fresh recruit ... you're a handi-capable adventurer, now. This is generally where the story transitions to phase 2. You have completed all of the starter tasks in the area. You have basic armor and weaponry and have proven that you can best the entry-level evildoers of the rival faction in combat. You're advised that there are bigger challenges ahead ... follow the road until you get to the next destination ... your friend has another friend that they want you to meet.
And so you do ... you continue the journey, following the path that has been prescribed to you. Once you get to the next area, you meet your next friend. They have been waiting for you. They want to tell you about a more imminent threat ... a new curve to the story ... one filled with intrigue and adventure. The stakes are raised, now. Not just any adventurer is capable of overcoming this next challenge ... only the select few. Now you get new tasks ... ones that are shared by other worthy adventurers. This is generally when you start "needing" other real players. But why do you need them, exactly? It's because this next challenge is tuned for such. Rather than players having common interests or challenges, they might share the same temporary goal, depending on what step of the quest they are on.
I could go on and on with how that story continues to evolve but the common theme that takes up the entire background of your journey is the abominable "Rail Monster." You're an indoctrinated member of this new society that sees anybody and everybody following the same golden path that leads them to their next lunch card. Sometimes you might run into people who are trying to cash in on their breakfast card and sometimes you see people who are getting ready to leave school a few hours early. Your presence in this world and the potential interactions with other real players are governed by the rail monster. You can veer off if you want to but you might miss something critically important along the way. If you don't fulfill every task in the order that has been predetermined, you might not qualify for a new task in the next phase of your journey.
The reason that your friends had such a great time sight-seeing with you is because you took the initiative to create your own story, and your own quest. You detracted from the impossible grip that the world typically has fastened around our neck and ankles. You and your real friends set your sights on something taboo ... a goal that wasn't hard-coded into the "Progress on Rails" chip that your fake friends (NPC's) surgically implanted inside of you back when your journey first started. You probably forgot about that, but you signed a waiver. You pledged your life and allegiance to that NPC when you agreed to help them overcome the challenges in their story. Any deviation from that is considered blasphemy because they (and their NPC allies) are the sole provider of your meal ticket.
I am a firm believer that what I have described in these few paragraphs is a big part of the underlying problem. I remember back in the good old days when challenge and difficulty helped build community. Where players had no golden path or meal ticket ... where the world was dangerous in every direction, and where doing things alone was a real risk to your time. I remember when players had no idea where to go, what to do, or how to survive. Some would struggle while they tried to figure all of that out. Others would solicit the aid of fellow adventurers ... and many times, their call would be answered. Rather than having an NPC (fake friend) guide you around and help you realize your potential, real players (potential real friends) would take on the role of mentor.
They went through the same struggle. They have empathy for your situation, and this is incredibly important. You can't code in "empathy" as an NPC behavior or feeling. All of this ultimately lead to organic relationship building. Players weren't grouping up because they were working on the same step of the same quest, as instructed. They were trying to find their way. This reminds me of an old Chinese proverb that I have cited a couple other times in recent days. "If you want to find out about the road ahead, then ask about it from those coming back." You aren't guaranteed to have your call answered. You might have to be patient and spend some time trying to figure things out on your own until you eventually get a response. But when you do ... it will be so much more meaningful. Your character will grow and your "journey" will really start to blossom.
In other words ... if players start out being pampered and nursed by their adoptive rail parent, they will grow accustomed to that. They will grow up and follow the path of least resistance that has been laid out for them, eager to please the support structure that was so heavily invested in their growth and development. I think the nursery act needs to be abolished by level 5, tops. If it's necessary to give newborns a single boost of colostrum to jumpstart their immune system ... that's fine, but don't get them addicted to the nipple and then think about weaning them off later. Insert players into an unforgiving world where player interdependence is key. Rather than forcing players to follow the same timeline, which can often become jumbled (and serve as more of a deterrent to player interaction than catalyst) -- unleash players into an open world that is built from the ground up to create opportunities that allow interactions to happen.
I absolutely positively abhor the "Rail Monster" in MMO gaming. It's my mortal enemy as a player. I want the world to be extremely dangerous. I want exploration to matter. I want travel to matter. I want mistakes to be punished and I want to be consistently challenged rather than rewarded. If these basic principles are followed at all times then we may see a return to the roots of what made MMO's great. Every server would have it's own emergent community. Our journey would be fostered by the relationships we make with real people rather than the constant pat-on-the-back we get from our virtual adoptive parents. Remove the rails ... allow freedom ... and bash players on the head every now and then when they get too big for their britches. Remind them that the World is majestic and that content is King. The overarching story doesn't revolve around us. We should forge our own path and create our own stories. If that becomes the rule, rather than the exception, the world would be much more conducive to the type of positive experience that you alluded to.
oneADseven said:I think a lot of this has to do with the inevitable "Rail Monster" that has been surgically implanted into the MMO experience for the last decade plus. Gone are the days where you can simply start a character in a new foreign world and then try to find your way. The beginning of every journey thrusts you into the middle of an ongoing story. You're a recruit ... fresh off the boat, and you need training. You're surrounded by helpful NPC's that are eager to teach you how to survive. They have a vested interest in you because there is a war raging on around you from all fronts. Your faction is struggling to endure the brunt of that chaos and so they need you to help restore order to the land.
I don't disagree about on-rails content throughout the game being bad, but:
In Vanguard, which was very much a sandbox experience, Nephele was a half-elf disciple, which means she started in Kojan (the eastern themed continent). When I began her adventure, she was a recruit in the Emperor's army, attacking a village of treasonous monks with her fellows. Her NPC squad leader gave her specific objectives to fulfill which (as a tutorial) taught me, the player, the basics of the game. Eventually the mission led to the inner chamber of the monastery, where I fought the monk leader - and lost. After defeating me, he reached into my mind and broke the emperor's hold on me. The screen faded to black, and I woke on a hill outside Tanvu, no longer an imperial soldier - now a deserter.
Contrived? Yes. On rails? Yes. But an effective tutorial that also did a good job at introducing the lore of that particular part of the world? Yes. It was a *very* different tutorial than my Thestran ranger (save the town from the undead), or my High Elf Paladin (investigate the attack by the dark fey) or my Varanthari Warrior (coming of age and taming my first horse). All of those tutorial experiences were designed however to introduce the world, and give you, as the player, a bit of background on where your character came from based on race/class selection - and then they cut you loose.
So, I don't actually think it's a bad thing to give new players some direction early on - especially not if it also helps introduce the lore and backstory of the world and helps them establish an RP identity for their race choice. Ideally, a series of tutorial quests or whatever would be completely optional, and should peter out after a few levels, leaving the player to figure out their next steps for themselves through exploration. But giving people an initial push and guidance may actually help a lot of people, especially people new to MMOs, to get their feet under them and figure out what they want to do.
Thus, I personally take a more nuanced view. Putting a person on a content path in the very early levels, to help them learn the game and their class, may not be a bad thing. Maintaining that content path until max level (or even mid levels) defeats the point of giving them choices however. We should remember that in order for Pantheon to truly have the success we all want, it's going to need to attract and retain players who have only ever known the games we love to hate - and then show them (gently) why the Pantheon way is better. The game probably won't accomplish by tossing them into the middle of the sandbox and saying "have fun!" right off the bat.
All that said, while I think the early game experience is important, I think it takes more than that to continually reinforce to players that the world matters. Otherwise everything just devolves into a progression game where you're just chasing that next gear upgrade or status upgrade. Some thoughts I have:
1) Factions should really be a big deal, and should be more than just a static table for determining who's KOS to who. They should also affect the opportunities available to you as a player, and to your guild. They should have needs that can be fulfilled based on their current situation, and that have a visible impact. Make armor for the guards, and gain some standing - and the guards gain some toughness. But now armored, something needs to be done about the food supply. Being highly regarded by a specific faction might mean that they entrust you with special tasks, or secrets.
2) Things should be *happening* in the world that adventurers are caught up in the middle of. Perhaps the orc tribes decide that it's time to deal with all those annoying human settlers. Or an ancient evil is inadvertently set loose on Reignfall by a band of ratkin scavengers, of a group of dark mages gathers in a remote part of Whitethaw for a ritual of some sort. Sometimes, these dynamic events should just be flashes in the pan - they happen, they're done, and everything is back to normal. Other times, however, they should leave a mark on the game world - a permanent change of some sort. It could be as big as an entire zone being permanently changed, or as small as a new NPC rising to prominence in the court of the Queen, that changes some of the quests available to players.
3) There needs to be a sense of history to the world. We should find that our races and civilizations are not the first to come to Terminus. And piecing together the clues and remnants left behind should lead us somewhere. This is one of the things that EQ did extremely well that almost no one talks about, oddly - but Pantheon should go even further, by insuring that the lore leads to tangible gameplay. If you can decipher what those ancient monuments scattered around the world mean, you not only learn some lore, but you gain access to something that others may not have seen.
Those are just a few thoughts on making the world actually matter. At the core of it though, what I think it means is that we need to be able to affect the world (in small ways), and it, in turn, needs to change and affect us as a result.
Sorry for the ramble, but hoping it moves the discussion forward.
Saicred said:Link provided here: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-09-28-brad-mcquaid-i-want-to-make-worlds-not-games
Yes good read. it gives me hope. Now to just wait for beta.
Is the necro out yet?(JK LOL)
Anyhoo, I think making a world has two aspects, the player mentality and the gameplay design. EQ felt very much like a world because MMOs in general were a very new concept, and that brought a lot of mystery. The game design philosophy,which was accidently a great thing for an MMO, was time sinks. This was because they wanted people to pay by the hour at first, so they made things tedious and hard to do for that purpose. They later decided not to do the pay per hour and did a monthly pay, but the concept of the time sinks were still there. There wasn't even suppose to be raiding in EQ, but people found ways to defeat these dragons and insanely strong monsters. So the game design was making a very long, tedious game, which is why grouping was integrated so heavily because it took time to network, make friends, and put groups together.
This brings in player mentality. A lot of players didn't care, or even knew about what end game is. They just played the game. Player mentality now are guides to everything, and raids. I personally like raids, but I am also not a poopsocker to try and do world firsts anymore like I use to try to do. There is a really interesting mind set with the Classic WoW community. There are the usual guilds going for fast progression and stuff like that, but for every poopsocker there are probably 100 people who are going to play casually and enjoy the game without feeling rushed. Why? Becuase it was stated that it is a classic server and not a progression server into Burning Crusade. So a lot of people don't feel rushed at all in downing the end content and anticipating anymore content. So the pressure of trying to get to the end game and do everything before the next expansion is gone basically.
I find myself in that same mentality now where I want to experience every type of boss fight/raid fight in era and experience all the content before something new comes out and takes the charm away from the old content when everyone moves onto the new content. This pressures me into playing longer hours and not enjoying the game as much because I want to see everything.
Maybe one way to make the world feel like a world is to not put that pressure on players to do everything within a years time until newer stuff comes out and give a lot of time to casually enjoy the world and still be able to do everything in era.
If you want to make compelling Worlds, start with compelling Game Play.
As long as the Game Play is there, people will explore your Game World. If its not there, it doesn't matter how good your world is, your Game will fall flat on its face.
The beating heart of EQ1 was never the zones or the graphics(which were always fairly weak), it was the solid player mechanics and combat system(both melee and spell) that were like no other, before or since.
If you don't recognize this, you really don't know much about Everquest, even if you've been known for it for 20+ years.
Game play has to be at least good - ideally very good or great - for a MMO to succeed. Crappy game play with great graphics or wonderful nostalgia may attract people but it will not keep them long. Even I didn't spend more than hours with Wizardry Online and not that many people on the planet spent more time playing every single Wizardry game from Wizardry 1 to Wizardry 8 over and over. I don't think EQ nostalgia with a crappy game will do any better.
But, and this is a *large* but, you also need a game world that is at least good - ideally very good or great. And by this I include graphics as well as the contents of the world. Without a world to play in that people care about seeing they won't give a rodent's hindquarters about how well done the game playing mechanics are.
It isn't a balance where crappy world and great mechanics are just as good as good world and good mechanics. History shows that you need to reach at least a minimum level at each to succeed. A "fail" at either and the game will not last long.
Once you hit good or better at both there is room for endless debate about which is more important in terms of devoting the time to reach "great". If you cannot get both of them there.
The beating heart of EQ was that it was new and exciting and gave us a chance to walk in a distant universe where no man (or woman) had ever gone before - and to do it in a way that was better than offered by competing distant universes such as UO.
You can't go home again. Nothing will ever be quite as new and shiny and different to us after years or decades in various MMO worlds. Nostalgia from those two games yes. Easter eggs from them yes. Outright imitiation - no.
Using gameplay systems that are 20 years old is a guaranteed recipe for failure. Not that many of us will play just for nostalgia and those who do, most will tire of it soon. We want and Pantheon needs modern graphics and modern gameplay systems. Not necessarily bleeding edge - not necessarily the best out there - but good by today's standards.
We need to look to EQ and Vanguard for inspiration - totally agreed. On an overall basis of what we are trying to accomplish they are wonderful examples. Complexity in crafting and harvesting, slow progress, focus on group content not soloing to maximum level. danger, penalties for dying etc.
But in terms of *how* we get there - no, not at all. Let us get there using what computers can do *today* so that we relight the torch of inspration for the next 20 years. Let us be inspired by the past but work in the present and look towards the future.
Over 10 years ago I was playing EQ2 and tried EQ. My conclusion - EQ was a better game as a game but *so* outdated with crappy graphics, enough slash commands to crush an elephant instead of menus, etc. etc. We want the better game - oh with certainty - but not to force players to spend weeks forcing themselves past the armour of outdated systems and mechanics. Because they won't.
I differ from Quillim in regards to EQ1 not having good zones or a well made world. I think EQ1 did an excellent job in that regard, but I strongly agree gameplay is king and that it is gameplay that leads to the longevity of a game since graphics will always age over the years.
Nephele really gets what worked in Vanguard:SOH. The tutorial/newbie areas were very well done and while it was "on rails" it was a great way to ease players into the world. Just dropping a player into a random zone with a rusty sword, some food/water and a note was bad design...it was a mistake that likely drove tens of thousands of players from the game. The player is just starting out yet they have no sense of direction (sense heading almost never works) no idea where their class trainer is or where to buy spells, no clue how to do anything unless they read the game manual (I love reading manuals but know many gamers who never read them). The real contention is where do you draw the line and stop holding the newbie's hand? I don't want any quest hubs and I want mobs to be able to actually kill players even at the lowest level content...I don't want people feeling completely safe and then getting a shock as they step out of the newbie zone. The early levels set the overall tone of the game experience so while I want newbs to get shown the ropes I don't want them coddled during that process.
Dorotea I understand what you are saying about nostalgia, but I still greatly enjoy the original EQ, the original WoW, and would love to play Vanguard again. EQ was my first MMO yet I still greatly enjoyed WoW, GuildWars 1 and 2, EvE Online, etc. It wasn't as though because I played EQ I couldn't fall in love with other MMORPGs. I've been playing videogames a long time now, over 30 years. I know what I like! EQ and Vanguard are the style of game design I enjoy the most for MMORPGs. While I enjoy some modern gameplay systems there are several that turn me off completely. It's not so much that I want to relive the past but that I enjoy a particular style of game. On the topics of graphics and UI, I agree UI is one of those things that is in my opinion a no brainer, no excuse for a bad UI these days. Players expect to have a good visual interface and not need to use a dozen slash commands as you mentioned. But on graphics...we have a disagreement here. You see a big part of what hurt EQ2 and Vanguard:SOH was the very high graphics requirements and the inability of low-mid range systems to run those games smoothly. Graphics should take a back seat to gameplay!! And the graphics settings need to have options for low end systems! I would venture that a huge part of WoW's success was due to most people being able to run the game on their machine. On the topic of EQ1 being ugly keep in mind in 1999 many people didn't even have a dedicated graphics card on their PC back then. The old marble UI was a lifesaver for me because the game ran better with the smaller screen! 1999 was PS1 and N64 graphics so EQ really didn't look bad in comparison. PS2 didn't come out til 2000.
Actually Ziegfried I don't think we disagree at all.
Gameplay is more important than graphics and Pantheon cannot make the error Vanguard did and be too limiting for average or even lower end machines. But I think it does need to be at least *decent* in its looks or it won't get past people like us to a wider audience. I doubt you disagree there.
dorotea said:Actually Ziegfried I don't think we disagree at all.
Gameplay is more important than graphics and Pantheon cannot make the error Vanguard did and be too limiting for average or even lower end machines. But I think it does need to be at least *decent* in its looks or it won't get past people like us to a wider audience. I doubt you disagree there.
Just to sort of broadly agree on the graphics having to meet a minimum bar: I left EQ around the time that EQ2 launched because EQ had started to become too focused on raiding and that just didn't work for my playstyle and play schedule at the time. I moved over to EQ2 which I enjoyed immensely, for a few years, but eventually some changes to that game soured me on it a bit, and I found myself missing old EQ. So, I tried to go back and pick up the original game again. When I did that, what I found was that I really just couldn't get immersed anymore, because my "bar" for graphical quality was higher (as a result of playing EQ2 for so long).
So, while fun and enjoyable gameplay is absolutely critical, it's really important that the graphics are good enough that people coming from other games are willing to give the gameplay a chance.
oneADseven said:... if players start out being pampered and nursed by their adoptive rail parent, they will grow accustomed to that. They will grow up and follow the path of least resistance that has been laid out for them, eager to please the support structure that was so heavily invested in their growth and development. I think the nursery act needs to be abolished by level 5, tops. If it's necessary to give newborns a single boost of colostrum to jumpstart their immune system ... that's fine, but don't get them addicted to the nipple and then think about weaning them off later. Insert players into an unforgiving world where player interdependence is key. Rather than forcing players to follow the same timeline, which can often become jumbled (and serve as more of a deterrent to player interaction than catalyst) -- unleash players into an open world that is built from the ground up to create opportunities that allow interactions to happen.
I absolutely positively abhor the "Rail Monster" in MMO gaming. It's my mortal enemy as a player. I want the world to be extremely dangerous. I want exploration to matter. I want travel to matter. I want mistakes to be punished and I want to be consistently challenged rather than rewarded. If these basic principles are followed at all times then we may see a return to the roots of what made MMO's great. Every server would have it's own emergent community. Our journey would be fostered by the relationships we make with real people rather than the constant pat-on-the-back we get from our virtual adoptive parents. Remove the rails ... allow freedom ... and bash players on the head every now and then when they get too big for their britches. Remind them that the World is majestic and that content is King. The overarching story doesn't revolve around us. We should forge our own path and create our own stories. If that becomes the rule, rather than the exception, the world would be much more conducive to the type of positive experience that you alluded to.
Well Said.
My love of EQ stems from a confluence of factors - the game itself, the world design , the state of the internet and gaming more broadly, my age that, when combined with a liberal sprinkling of nostalgia, make the experience one of a kind.
really hope pantheon could be release asap
dorotea said:You can't go home again.
First of all; I hope that Pantheon and VR don't feel restricted by the existence of older games. It doesn't have to and shouldn't be a clone.
But maaaaan, this whole "its just nostalgia"-card is definitely not the reason people like EQ (or indeed the Wizardry series which is awesome). I personally have great nostalgia for vanilla WoW and I love that game but I never played Wizardry 1-8 or EQ back when they came out and I still find them to be great games, 20 years or indeed... almost 40? years later. Wizardry came out a decade before I was born and I had a blast with it so it can hardly be nostalgia. A great game is timeless.
Idk, maybe this argument exists only because graphical fidelity increases so fast in computer games? Nobody would say something like this about a board game or any other art form like movies, books or music. Wouldn't it be absurd to say you shouldn't make a rock album because its only 60s nostalgia and it'll never fly today?
Spluffen said:dorotea said:You can't go home again.
First of all; I hope that Pantheon and VR don't feel restricted by the existence of older games. It doesn't have to and shouldn't be a clone.
But maaaaan, this whole "its just nostalgia"-card is definitely not the reason people like EQ (or indeed the Wizardry series which is awesome). I personally have great nostalgia for vanilla WoW and I love that game but I never played Wizardry 1-8 or EQ back when they came out and I still find them to be great games, 20 years or indeed... almost 40? years later. Wizardry came out a decade before I was born and I had a blast with it so it can hardly be nostalgia. A great game is timeless.
Idk, maybe this argument exists only because graphical fidelity increases so fast in computer games? Nobody would say something like this about a board game or any other art form like movies, books or music. Wouldn't it be absurd to say you shouldn't make a rock album because its only 60s nostalgia and it'll never fly today?
Yep - in full agreement. The whole ‘clone wars’ thing is outright stupid. When I see a few people pull the clone card on forums, I think said person is delusional and must be living in his or her own world. As for music, hell, my favorite bands now are alternative/rock. Much inspired from the 60s & 90s to an extent. It’s the best right now. Is it ‘mainstream?’ No, it’s not. But we all know mainstream SUX at the moment. :)
((Plot and stories are for single player video games, not virtual worlds. ))
If you are saying that a plot or story centered on the character is a bad idea I agree. I can enjoy games like LOTRO or SWTOR where your character is forced into playing a major role in a world or galaxy spanning saga - for good or for evil - but that isn't what I want for Pantheon either. Not being shoehorned into established lore makes things far more flexible for VR than has been the case for some other major MMOs.
If you are saying that there should be no plots or stories that the character can interreact with I do not agree. I hope Pantheon will have many stories and plot lines which our characters can interact with - to support or oppose the many communities or factions that we will meet. For those that may say that if this is what I want I should go play WoW let me emphasize how my view of the ideal Pantheon is far different than what we are stuck with in other MMOs.
1. Stories should be local or peripheral. No one story should dominate our adventures as in LOTRO or SWTOR or Rift. When we get to the thriving town of Butt Cheeks locals should have backstories and problems and we should be able to learn about these and play a role for good or ill. Not as the world or galaxy spanning great hero or villain so common in most MMOs but as a passing adventurer who can help out a bit - or hinder a bit - for a few hours or days or weeks.
2.. Stories should not put us on rails - we should not be guided from location to location to location by a story. When we finish killing the wolves in Butt Cheeks - or the farmers for that matter - we are on our own until we find the next of hundreds of communities that have their own backstories and problems.
3. Stories should not give excessive rewards. They should be there for those of us that like an interactive world with colour and "real" communities and things to do for causes, other than pure selfish focus on gaining loot and experience. Years of things to do and learn and factions to help or oppose. My good character traveling the world and trying to help every hamlet and city she encounters should not get to maximum level in a month any more than the less ...socialized .... character that spends her life going from dungeon to dungeon grinding for kill experience and drops.
dorotea said:((Plot and stories are for single player video games, not virtual worlds. ))
If you are saying that a plot or story centered on the character is a bad idea I agree. I can enjoy games like LOTRO or SWTOR where your character is forced into playing a major role in a world or galaxy spanning saga - for good or for evil - but that isn't what I want for Pantheon either. Not being shoehorned into established lore makes things far more flexible for VR than has been the case for some other major MMOs.
If you are saying that there should be no plots or stories that the character can interreact with I do not agree. I hope Pantheon will have many stories and plot lines which our characters can interact with - to support or oppose the many communities or factions that we will meet. For those that may say that if this is what I want I should go play WoW let me emphasize how my view of the ideal Pantheon is far different than what we are stuck with in other MMOs.
1. Stories should be local or peripheral. No one story should dominate our adventures as in LOTRO or SWTOR or Rift. When we get to the thriving town of Butt Cheeks locals should have backstories and problems and we should be able to learn about these and play a role for good or ill. Not as the world or galaxy spanning great hero or villain so common in most MMOs but as a passing adventurer who can help out a bit - or hinder a bit - for a few hours or days or weeks.
2.. Stories should not put us on rails - we should not be guided from location to location to location by a story. When we finish killing the wolves in Butt Cheeks - or the farmers for that matter - we are on our own until we find the next of hundreds of communities that have their own backstories and problems.
3. Stories should not give excessive rewards. They should be there for those of us that like an interactive world with colour and "real" communities and things to do for causes, other than pure selfish focus on gaining loot and experience. Years of things to do and learn and factions to help or oppose. My good character traveling the world and trying to help every hamlet and city she encounters should not get to maximum level in a month any more than the less ...socialized .... character that spends her life going from dungeon to dungeon grinding for kill experience and drops.
I mostly agree with everything you're saying in this response dorotea. However, I think there is absolutely room for larger storylines (multiple) to exist within the world as well. The way I think about it is that it's a world, full of NPCs, who have their own motives, desires, organizations, even nations. There absolutely should be plots, subplots, and things afoot within that world. For example, i you were to go talk to the leaders of Thronefast or Faerthale about their problems, I think you'd get something much bigger than "wolves in the farmer's field". We players should see evidence of those things within the world as well, and be able to participate in those plotlines to some degree.
The trick, is that that these plots and stories should be something that we can choose to explore rather than a path that we are driven down. Do we stop to ask the guards how we can help, or do we walk on by and head to the next nation (and the next nation's problems)? Either should be a viable path for us to choose.
A final thought: One of the things that I loved very much about EQ was that narrative presentation and lore was not exposed only through quests. I don't think I ever did a quest (at least, not before Luclin) that specifically dealt with the Combine Empire. But by the time I stopped playing EQ, I knew quite a lot about the Combine Empire - through NPC dialogues, and through things I found and saw in the world. Too many of us tend to think that story == quest when that doesn't have to be the case at all. A story could be told solely through NPC behaviors ("did you listen to the Queen's speech? I can't believe what she said!") or through the way that different events and content relate to each other. ("Hey, I recognize these orcs! These are the same ones that attacked the village two weeks ago!")
Either way though, I'm with you - I think there absolutely is a place for plot and story within a virtual world. We just need to let ourselves think of that world as a tapestry of lots of different threads, rather than a single painting.