Lyion wrote:
He was a second LT when he recieved his CMOH. Reread about his life. And you don't need much training to be useful with a Machine Gun. His courage and lack of fear were what exemplified him moreso than training.
He was a private in the US Army when he performed the deed that earned him his CMH, he was also wounded in that battle and as a result of that engagement was later medically retired from the military. He was given a battlefield promotion to LT. before he got his CMH while he was in the Hospital.
Lyion wrote:Basic ascenion in rank is a matter of time. You do not need a degree to make E7. I know several Master Chiefs in the Navy with ZERO college, so your statement is total bullshit.
Senior ranks take time, due to billets opening up via people retiring. Still, it's not a matter of skill. I have met many, many moronic senior NCOs, and even more idiot officers.
Heh, there are moronic people all over the world that get into positions of authority that leave people (that just met them) wondering how the hell they got there. However, they usually earned the right to be there, whether or not you think they happened to be a moron. Senior rank advancement is independent of the service branch, IE, each branch has its own way of advancement. In the Army you need a 4 year degree to get past e-6.
Lyion wrote:What branch were you in? The Air Force? What did you do in the Gulf War?
Special Forces. Scud recon.
Lyion wrote:Sounds like you're from the Air Force. Being in my mind thats as close to the Military as the Peace Corps, I can understand your confusion!
Um. No.
Lyion wrote:But thats all we have now in all MMORPGS. Clones. A level 65 EQ cleric is a level 65 EQ Cleric. Sure, you can differentiate from gear, but that is just another time sink, and not a true change of character.
Roles = TRUE clones. Abilities equate to more options. Give me probable roles over forced setups any day and twice on Sunday.
Also, I mentioned the UO model was flawed. Even so, it is still more advanced than EQ, in that there are more options, even if there are particular combo's that attract the powergamers. SWG is a better choice, but again it still is not a well done implementation.
Your point is good, though. How do you create a pure skills system without a cookie cutter single powerful setup many will use . I think thats what SWG and UO are doing, but its definitely still a problem. its very doable though.
Actually, no it isnt possible. And trust me, these arguements have been flown around the discussion groups many many many times before, and yes the same conclusion was formed.
Examples:
Your example of Clones: A 65 cleric is a 65 cleric is a 65 cleric. However, with my 2 years in a raiding guild I know this to be false. People have varying degrees of inherent skill within a class. For example, I have a 65 cleric that was given to me, I can play him in groups and have gotten good enough to be able to play a cleric in GoD and still be able to keep the group alive during trials. However, in comparison to inherent skill I suck compared to the original owner and I have upgraded the gear quite a bit since then as well. So, we can discount your gear is everything comment. Spells are also a time sink, as they should be. In fact, it is spells that are permanant increases in utility and power, depending on class. Getting these SHOULD BE hard. You should have to spend time and effort in getting them, they shouldnt be handed to you because you dont want to do a timesink.
If the skill based tree system was perfect and flawless then everyone would do it. Hell, the only reason why people choose to be an entertainer in SWG is because they might need it to become a Jedi. Other than that, there really isnt any point to making a charcter, clicking on the dance key on your keyboard and then... walking away from the computer so your toon can sing and dance for hours on end. While similar to the trading feature in everquest, you are not advancing your character while trading... you are advancing while afk with SWG.
Positives for a class based system (Feel free to disagree) if balanced properly:
Each person has a role to fill. Healers are healers, warriors are warriors, etc.
Each role is important. You need a healer for the tank, etc..
You have class dependency (This is just too important to ignore).
All of this forces: Cooperation and community.
These four single things are the very essence of a "successful" game. Why? While people are pigeon holed into a role, it is well defined and some people will be better suited than others at them. Excellent examples of "Roles/Classes" Merlin, Charlemagne, King Arthur, Sinbadd, Aladin, Achilles, etc...
Positives for Skill based systems:
Fully custimizable
Allows you to change "profession".
Negatives for Class based systems:
Locked into role, unless there is some way to change profession (Wizardry series, D&D, others allow this)
Class dependency (notice, it is a positive and a negative)
Solo classes tend to get over looked
Negatives for Skill bases systems:
Not very realistic. Even when someone changes a job in real life they dont lose the skills they acquired in the previous job.
Does not foster a strong community because there is no real interdependence among the people playing.
No Class dependency
Lots more
Each one has its pluses and minuses, but in the end, the class based system wins (Probably why WoW is classed based? Hmmm)
Lyion wrote:Morgreth wrote:You will have to fogive me, but to be honest I have no idea who you are. I joined Euphoria two years ago when Dirth was guildleader and had been for some time. This of course was the time of Velious and the game has changed on many levels since then. .
Understandable. I was before your time, and long gone from EQ when you joined Euph. I am an EQ geezer. :D
I have been playing since 1999... Before Dirth being guildleader there was Arshesnei (who founded the guild)... I know most of the original founding members of Euphoria... Still drawing a blank with you.
Lyion wrote:The reason EQ is/was successful is due to the attachment people have to their characters, due to the time sinks. Also, EQ released at the right time, and that has a lot to do with its success. Realise, EQ is MILDLY successful. It has had heavy turnover, and is not in my mind close to a 'perfect' game. It was revolutionary for the time, and yes people feel beholden to a character they spent so much time with.
Ok, this paragraph makes me laugh. Why? You just said why EQ is so popular. "EQ released at the right time.." WTF? Hello? EQ was ground breaking for its time. It was the first real immersive 3D world. It may not be what you consider to be immersive now, but when it was released it most certainly was. It is a success because it was NEW for its Genre. It has become the very standard of MMORPGs. Also, your first sentence seems to contradict everything you said up to this point and support the very reason why games will be like EQ in the future. When you have time invested in something, you are less willing to give it up. Since TIME = MONEY. Sounds like a smart, savy and winning business practice to me. And if a company is going to invest Millions of dollars to make a game you can bet your bottom dollar they will want you to play for a long time.
Remember: The ultimate time sink is: Character Development. If you dont care about your character, then you dont care about the game and you will want to move on.
Lyion wrote:I want an IMMERSIVE, FUN, DANGEROUS, SOCIAL game. I think time sinks suck. I think respawns suck. I dislike the treadmill that is the cause of EQs success, but also the bane that drove people away in droves and prevented a cool AD&D world from becoming a million plus subscriber game.
Ok, everquest never was and has never been a cool AD&D Game. It had elements that were like AD&D but it was never an AD&D game. AD&D does not translate well into a MMORPG Game. But for stand alone games it can rock (Baldur's Gate).
Lyion wrote:I disagree in that EQ is NOT challenging. Character development takes time because of the nasty EXP requirements SOLELY.
All role playing games have exp requirements, even Skill-tree based games do. State an alternative.
Lyion wrote:EQ is also pretty much a single player game with a few thousand people in it. There are respawns, and NOTHING changes. Explain to me how its any different from Morrowind, save the fact there is a chat system in place, and the item database resides in Sony HQ versus on your HDD?
Competition.
Lyion wrote:At the end of the day, it should not be a treadmill. I believe a game that has character development and real danger does not need time sinks to survive. I also think that if a game comes along where ones actions have meaning in the world, and with true immersion, it'll be a homerun.
AD&D did that. It was a homerun. But it didnt have mass appeal. In fact, lots of people hated it. But, it did all of what you asked for. Translating AD&D into a MMORPG is not at this time possible.
This isnt to say that you can not make a MMORPG falsely dynamic. IE: If you complete a quest you can not do it again, but you could help others do theirs. Or you can kill the sleeper once, but you cant do it again, but another guild can... etc... These sorts of things could be done.
BUT
You run into the whole problem of: We killed the sleeper, we all get loot now? While very AD&Dish it... AD&D was essentially a simple game with a very simple combat system. Once you killed the dragon in AD&D, the adventure was over. With Everquest the adventure is not over. It continues. Making fresh new finely tuned content for 5000+ people every month requires a level of work that is somewhat mind boggling especially if you want it to be good well put together content.
Lyion wrote:Star Wars Galaxies allows one to max their character in a month, Morgreth. Their 300,000 subscribers prove a non treadmill game can indeed be successful.
Ummm, their numbers vanished with the release of CoH. The mark of a successful game is and always has been: Longevity. I was one of those SWG subscribers, I cancelled my account after a month (and had mastered 3 professions) because it was too easy in comparison to the treadmill of EQ.
Lyion wrote:If someone were to get the formula right, with the factors that I *as well as Toss and a few others* listed then it would get the 1 million+ subscribers the treadmill powergamer catering AD&D/Diku MUD clones will never see.
You want the pen and paper AD&D in computer form, but want to have it be massively multiplayer. That can not happen because AD&D at its core was never designed for more than 12 people to play at any one time. The things you want, can not happen. Why? Well its not fair that you get to Kill Nagafen and I dont, ad infinitum. Your AD&D Campaign can not be played in a Massively Multiplayer On Line Role Playing Game. (And to your anti level but wanna be AD&D stance: Last I checked, AD&D was all about levels and was from the first day it started).