Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 58 of 58
  1. #41

  2. #42
    Community Member sephiroth1084's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Staten Island, NY
    Posts
    12,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sha123 View Post
    Some stuff that will make the game more interesting.

    1) proper pvp system, where players can compete to earn points and trade points for pvp gears.
    NO! No! no! NOOOO!
    2) New exp sharing system that will make it more fun to play new builds. Heroic exp being shared for heroic lvs only and epic exp being shared for epic levels only.For example, introducing cash shop item that stores exp in a bag then u can pass that bag to another toon n gain the exp. Different bag size having diff amount of exp cap.

    Another thing that makes grinding for epic destiny extremely boring is that you need to play a much weaker epic destiny then what it yours. For example monk playing fate singer is extremely boring. Instead allow players to farm using their main destiny and then xfer the collected exp to other toon using the bag.
    Buy an Otto's Box. Give XP Stone to someone. Done.
    3) Start a foundry system.
    Eh. Would be nice, but it's never going to happen.
    Useful links: A Guide to Using a Gamepad w/ DDO / All Caster Shroud, Hard Shroud, VoD, ToD Einhander, Elochka, Ferrumrym, Ferrumdermis, Ferrumshot, Ferrumblood, Ferrumender, Ferrumshadow, Ferrumschtik All proud officers of The Loreseekers. Except Bruucelee, he's a Sentinel!

  3. #43
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Ottos box and a shared exp system are two completely different things. Ottos box is where you literally buy experience points, whereas in a shared exp system, you actually have to play your toons to earn the exp, then stock it up and pass it over to a desired toon. It is very much similar to the Tring system, where you can have multiple toons farming for shards, or valor then converge them to use it on a desired toon. There is nothing lazy about this system, it simply adds even more flexibility in how each player can earn their exp points. More flexibility means you can use your solid built toons to farm for experience then use that experience to experiment new interesting builds. There is no negative aspects of this system, instead it encourages players into creating new builds. After all ddo is all about making special unique builds, which you cant do in other mmorpgs. That is just for heroic aspect of the game. Plus, turbine can also make extra cash by selling exp storing bags.

    As for Epic content, you can play your main epic destiny then share that exp with the other destines to earn the required fate points or unlock new epic destiny abilities. That way you don't need to stay on an epic destiny that does not suit your character to earn experience for it. Once again there is nothing lazy about this system as every point of experience is earned. Instead it makes your game play more interesting.

    As for the pvp system, if the balance is made when the character is transfered to the actual battlefield, then the fear of messing up pve builds while attempting to balance the pvp aspect goes away, and it will not end up like in Neverwinter.
    Last edited by sha123; 12-30-2013 at 08:24 AM.

  4. #44
    The Mad Multiclasser Failedlegend's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Canada,Ontario, GTA
    Posts
    6,863

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sha123 View Post
    Some stuff that will make the game more interesting.

    1) proper pvp system, where players can compete to earn points and trade points for pvp gears.
    No, PvP ruins PvE and DnD is not designed for it there's are classes that have VERY distinct advantages in PvP.

    Quote Originally Posted by sha123 View Post
    2) New exp sharing system that will make it more fun to play new builds. Heroic exp being shared for heroic lvs only and epic exp being shared for epic levels only.For example, introducing cash shop item that stores exp in a bag then u can pass that bag to another toon n gain the exp. Different bag size having diff amount of exp cap.
    Sounds cool but it would be a disaster, some guy does all his leveling as a cleric than tries to do a raid on his newly level 20 highly ungeared Barbarian completely different play style...leveling is a learning experience and frankly i think Lvl 7 vet status was pushing it already.

    Quote Originally Posted by sha123 View Post
    Another thing that makes grinding for epic destiny extremely boring is that you need to play a much weaker epic destiny then what it yours.
    No you don't even if your current destiny is at max xp you still gain karma, if your complaining about not being able to get karma for other spheres than all I can say is...Really? thats like complaining that your lvl 20 wizard can't have the cleric past life.

    Quote Originally Posted by sha123 View Post
    3) Start a foundry system.
    This I can 100% agree with, it's the only reason I downloaded Neverwinter...hell its the only reason I played till level 10 (I think I stop playing around Level 30 when I realized "no it's doesn't" get better) I probably logged at least 40 hours into the foundry but after making a few quests and stuff I just couldn't be motivated to do more because whilst I loved using the foudry the game sucked and I'd rather spend time working on say RPG Maker or something.

    So basically what I saying is if Turbine introduced a foundry system (with a good way to weed out the bad stuff,etc.) I would probably never log off
    Quote Originally Posted by Cordovan
    There is little value in getting into an edition debate; as with anything, we create what we believe works best for DDO.

  5. #45
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sha123 View Post
    As for the pvp system, if the balance is made when the character is transfered to the actual battlefield, then the fear of messing up pve builds while attempting to balance the pvp aspect goes away, and it will not end up like in Neverwinter.
    Ask the developers at WoW how that went.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ancient View Post
    Yes, we all know you were right back in 2009 before you took an arrow to the knee.
    Quote Originally Posted by Coyopa View Post
    I wish there were a way to never see any of your posts.

  6. #46
    Community Member sephiroth1084's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Staten Island, NY
    Posts
    12,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sha123 View Post
    Ottos box and a shared exp system are two completely different things. Ottos box is where you literally buy experience points, whereas in a shared exp system, you actually have to play your toons to earn the exp, then stock it up and pass it over to a desired toon. It is very much similar to the Tring system, where you can have multiple toons farming for shards, or valor then converge them to use it on a desired toon. There is nothing lazy about this system, it simply adds even more flexibility in how each player can earn their exp points. More flexibility means you can use your solid built toons to farm for experience then use that experience to experiment new interesting builds. There is no negative aspects of this system, instead it encourages players into creating new builds. After all ddo is all about making special unique builds, which you cant do in other mmorpgs. That is just for heroic aspect of the game. Plus, turbine can also make extra cash by selling exp storing bags.
    Again, no. Level your characters. It's already trivially easy for people to level in DDO without learning how to play their character. Plus, farming epic XP on a level 25 character hitting VoN 3 every day, would make TRing take about 5 minutes--TR, transfer XP, level to 20. No need for that. I think the Otto's XP stones are a stupid enough idea already, without making the idea even easier to obtain.

    As for Epic content, you can play your main epic destiny then share that exp with the other destines to earn the required fate points or unlock new epic destiny abilities. That way you don't need to stay on an epic destiny that does not suit your character to earn experience for it. Once again there is nothing lazy about this system as every point of experience is earned. Instead it makes your game play more interesting.
    This idea has been suggested in other ways that feel like they would work better.

    As for the pvp system, if the balance is made when the character is transfered to the actual battlefield, then the fear of messing up pve builds while attempting to balance the pvp aspect goes away, and it will not end up like in Neverwinter.
    Find me an MMO with a PvP game that offers valuable rewards that has not ended up changing mechanics in PvE as a result. NO!
    Useful links: A Guide to Using a Gamepad w/ DDO / All Caster Shroud, Hard Shroud, VoD, ToD Einhander, Elochka, Ferrumrym, Ferrumdermis, Ferrumshot, Ferrumblood, Ferrumender, Ferrumshadow, Ferrumschtik All proud officers of The Loreseekers. Except Bruucelee, he's a Sentinel!

  7. #47
    Community Member Annex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shorlong View Post
    3) As much as I would love this, I mean, absolutely LOVE this.....no. Multiple reasons. Since the game wasn't designed with this in mind to begin with, it will have so many issues. I mean, look, I am typically one of the first people to defend Turbine on just about everything, but I have seen enough simple systems mess up that I wouldn't want to entrust them with something as huge as this. Not to mention the other issues. People will exploit it, people will cheese it, and the amount of terrible quests will overshadow the small handful of good quests.

    I went to Neverwinter for 6 months this past year, even though the game itself failed to impress me, simply because they have a Foundry. I got up with a good guild that was focused on making quality, story driven, challenging dungeons. There were five of us that were considered the best of the best. I myself took 3 months to build my one and only quest, which made several lists after the first initial reviews were weak and I reworked many of the mechanics. We even had a weekly twitch show where we went through player content and critiqued it, told them how to improve it, and ensured that quests would get more playtime.

    So, what happened? Well....exploits. First it was xp. They nerfed the xp because people were making the 50 ogre quests, where 50 ogres were put on a platform where they couldn't even reach you. As long as you had a class with a push back attack (which, all but one class had) you just simply walked to the edge of your platform and hit that attack, and the ogres would fly off and die. People were leveling to cap within hours. Or, the quests where you loaded in, hit a lever, got a chest and got some xp. So, xp was nerfed. Even then, there were plenty of short, quick xp exploit maps that clogged up the best of list, while the quality quests never showed up on any of the lists.

    Then, items. Purples were dropping all the time, blues were dropping even more. This was unbalanced. So they changed it, nothing above green, nothing. No crafting ingredients, just plain, basic loot. No one wanted to run your finely crafted, every detail accounted for, well written but still challenging quest if there was no reward at the end. Don't believe me? Look at DDO as it stands now. How many times have you seen on the forums someone say "Yeah, the quest is amazing. Really fun. Unfortunately, the loot is boring at best, and I just don't see me running this more than once a life because as it stands, it has no loot to make it worth it."

    Same thing happened in Neverwinter. Then, after all of that, you would give solid feedback on someone's quest, show them how to make it better. Make the rooms stand out, add some trees so it doesn't look so barren, make the dialogue more colorful, don't make it a book, but still give it substance. And everyone complains that you aren't giving their poorly written and badly designed quest rave reviews.

    So no, please, just no, no foundry style system in ddo.
    Another company implemented a custom scenario system badly, therefore Turbine should not attempt to build such a system for Dungeons and Dragons Online. Have I adequately summarized your argument? If so, I am not buying it.

    Many, many games have included custom scenario systems, starting long before computer games even existed. Some worked very well. Many failed because the game designer(s) did not to adequately account for player behavior.

    Designing game scenarios is a lot like art--many people enjoy trying but few have any talent for it. Any game designer undertaking the task must account for this.

    A certain kind of player will use custom scenarios to give themselves an advantage, if possible. Again, the game designer must account for this.

    Players will attempt to use a custom scenario system in unexpected ways. Once implemented, the designer must watch for these emergent behaviors, decide if they add to or detract from the game, and modify the system accordingly. It often takes quite a bit of time for the designer to see just how the system will get used and adjust it to work smoothly over the long haul.

    Obviously, in the example you site above, the game developers lacked sufficient experience and fell into very obvious design traps. Once there, they washed their hands of the whole thing, effectively killing the tool they built. I find that tragic, but it hardly warrants abandonment of the concept.

    Dungeons and Dragons has a very long history of players, especially dungeon masters, wishing for better and more powerful tools to craft dungeons for their friends. Groups of friends playing the game have long sought a way to stay together and keep playing as life pulls them apart. Dungeons and Dragons Online really bridges those gaps in many ways, but it suffers from a limiting problem--it essentially removes the dungeon master from the equation. Players spread far apart may get together and play through the dungeons provided, but they cannot "go off the map".

    A custom scenario system tacked on to this game would largely bridge that gap. Dungeon masters could build their dungeons as desired and then easily play them out with friends at a set time. These dungeons could also be made available to others, if desired, but I see that as a happy dividend, not the point.

    Of course, if custom scenarios award experience or treasure, a certain kind of player will exploit the feature. Most games with custom scenario tools lack persistent units (characters) that advance in power as they move from scenario to scenario (dungeons), so "experience" and "treasure" are not issues. Simply leaving experience and treasure out of custom scenarios would prevent such abuse, and short circuit the creation of "exploit" scenarios. When playing such a scenario, the player(s) would do so for the challenge and story, nothing more. Another option involves locking a character to a campaign. That is, you can play character X in Eberon OR you can play character X in Susan's Awesome Campaign, but not both. Once a character embarks upon one path, forever will it dominate her destiny. In this case, Dungeon Masters and Players could build whole exploit campaigns, if desired, and it would have absolutely zero impact on the game as we currently know it.

    Other design solutions certainly exist for custom scenario systems with persistent units that advance in ability through scenarios. I merely offer two obvious ones. Some players would accept play with no experience or treasure. Some would not. Some would accept locking characters to specific campaigns. Some would not. A creative team of developers armed with a good game, knowledge of what failed in the past, some experience with what worked before, and a healthy dose of creativity, could solve the problem. I say encourage the Turbine team to take a shot. In a worse case scenario, dungeon masters would end up with a system for building and conducting campaigns online, but without any mechanism to award experience or treasure. That would not be so bad, in my opinion.

    Edit: I wish to add one caveat, the same one I add to many of my posts. The steady delivery of content must always take precedence over the development of new systems. First priority should stay solidly focused on maintaining core fundamentals and keeping loyal customers happy.
    Last edited by Annex; 12-31-2013 at 06:45 AM.

  8. #48
    Community Member Talon_Moonshadow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seminole, FL
    Posts
    10,637

    Default

    I am not totally against a PvP pass....

    But NOT the pits.
    They are stupid.

    PvP Dungeons is what I want.

    PvP Raids.

    Two groups competing for completion.... and loot.

    With other obstacles besides each other.
    Monsters, traps.... teleporting traps to isolate players....

    Choices... fight each other or team up to kill the monsters.....

    But only one team can win and get the loot.



    Anyway, I am for interesting PvP... not the stupid pits showoff areas we have now.

    (The arenas are not bad.... but seldom used.... which is a good argument not to invest in PvP I guess....)

    BTW... stealth needs to work in PvP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jandric View Post
    ..., but I honestly think the solution is to group with less whiny people.

  9. #49
    Community Member Hendrik's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bell's Brewery, MI.
    Posts
    10,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sha123 View Post
    Some stuff that will make the game more interesting.

    1) proper pvp system, where players can compete to earn points and trade points for pvp gears.

    2) New exp sharing system that will make it more fun to play new builds. Heroic exp being shared for heroic lvs only and epic exp being shared for epic levels only.For example, introducing cash shop item that stores exp in a bag then u can pass that bag to another toon n gain the exp. Different bag size having diff amount of exp cap.

    Another thing that makes grinding for epic destiny extremely boring is that you need to play a much weaker epic destiny then what it yours. For example monk playing fate singer is extremely boring. Instead allow players to farm using their main destiny and then xfer the collected exp to other toon using the bag.

    3) Start a foundry system.
    So, in other words, turn DDO into NWO - here is a new acronym for you NWIH (No Way In He*#)

    I have a better idea, leave DDO alone and do NOT change it into another game, but if you like those features from said game, GO PLAY THAT GAME!

    Quote Originally Posted by hsinclair
    I heard the devs hate all wizards, bards, clerics, fighters, and fuzzy bunnies and only want us to play halfling barbarian/paladin shuriken specialists!

    It's totally true, I have a reliable source. You better reroll now.
    Adventurer, Bug Reporter, Mournlander.

  10. #50
    Community Member Ungood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    7,154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    A certain kind of player will use custom scenarios to give themselves an advantage, if possible. Again, the game designer must account for this.
    This is where your entire premise dies in a horrible never-ending painful fire.

    It's the internet, you think anyone who fancies themselves an artist of Dungeons or content is going to "accommodate" for anything short of the unwashed masses singing their praise at how amazing they are for anything and everything they have done.. then you're kidding yourself.

    and that is why these ideas fail, not because the mechanics fail, but when you the unbridled endless egotism and vanity of internet gaming jocks and allow them to create content, it's a recipe for problems right out the door.

  11. #51
    Community Member Shorlong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    996

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    Another company implemented a custom scenario system badly, therefore Turbine should not attempt to build such a system for Dungeons and Dragons Online. Have I adequately summarized your argument? If so, I am not buying it.
    No, that isn't my argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    Many, many games have included custom scenario systems, starting long before computer games even existed. Some worked very well. Many failed because the game designer(s) did not to adequately account for player behavior.

    Designing game scenarios is a lot like art--many people enjoy trying but few have any talent for it. Any game designer undertaking the task must account for this.

    A certain kind of player will use custom scenarios to give themselves an advantage, if possible. Again, the game designer must account for this.

    Players will attempt to use a custom scenario system in unexpected ways. Once implemented, the designer must watch for these emergent behaviors, decide if they add to or detract from the game, and modify the system accordingly. It often takes quite a bit of time for the designer to see just how the system will get used and adjust it to work smoothly over the long haul.

    Obviously, in the example you site above, the game developers lacked sufficient experience and fell into very obvious design traps. Once there, they washed their hands of the whole thing, effectively killing the tool they built. I find that tragic, but it hardly warrants abandonment of the concept.
    Actually, the example I used above, the developer DOES have sufficient experience. They have two other MMOs that have the Foundry system, and had implemented it long before Neverwinter was coming around. City of Heroes had that system, and it ended up the exact same way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    Dungeons and Dragons has a very long history of players, especially dungeon masters, wishing for better and more powerful tools to craft dungeons for their friends. Groups of friends playing the game have long sought a way to stay together and keep playing as life pulls them apart. Dungeons and Dragons Online really bridges those gaps in many ways, but it suffers from a limiting problem--it essentially removes the dungeon master from the equation. Players spread far apart may get together and play through the dungeons provided, but they cannot "go off the map".

    A custom scenario system tacked on to this game would largely bridge that gap. Dungeon masters could build their dungeons as desired and then easily play them out with friends at a set time. These dungeons could also be made available to others, if desired, but I see that as a happy dividend, not the point.
    And, again, I would love to have something like this, but it would be a failed implementation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    Of course, if custom scenarios award experience or treasure, a certain kind of player will exploit the feature. Most games with custom scenario tools lack persistent units (characters) that advance in power as they move from scenario to scenario (dungeons), so "experience" and "treasure" are not issues. Simply leaving experience and treasure out of custom scenarios would prevent such abuse, and short circuit the creation of "exploit" scenarios. When playing such a scenario, the player(s) would do so for the challenge and story, nothing more.
    And therein lies the problem. Take out xp, take out items, and I guarantee you no one would ever run it. Sure, you may get a couple friends to run it, but who wants to spend months working by themselves to make one 15 minute quest that their friends will probably run one time? Nobody. I am guessing, and please correct me if I am wrong, but you haven't used even the simplest of Foundry systems? Even in something like Neverwinter were it is all laid out and no coding whatsoever is needed, to design a quality dungeon that takes around 15 minutes and offers some form of challenge is an undertaking. Sure, I can use pre-built maps or pre-designed rooms and build a quest in a day or so. But to really utilize the tool, you want to put effort into it. It's what we started doing in Neverwinter with our podcast. We had insane attention to detail, and they looked like they were made by the professionals. Then you went to play the normal Foundry quests someone threw up in a day, and they were very noticeably barren.

    So, we either will have our friends running through poorly written, poorly thought and, poorly designed dungeons that are bland, boring and unimaginative, but it only took us one day to make four quests. OR, we will have ONLY our friends running through an intricately designed, challenging, well written and well designed dungeon with great attention to detail, items that help create immersion, lots of imagination used, but it took us two months to build one dungeon and they cheese through it in 15 minutes, and they are the only ones who will ever play it because it has no loot and no xp.

    If you think that any average player who isn't a good friend of yours is going to run through your average quest (which, yes, most quests made will not have the insane attention to detail and will be second rate to the quests currently in game) when there is no loot or xp to gain, you are blind to the state of the player base. Look at some of the awesome quests we have in game right now. Some great, challenging quests that are really fun to play, and yet if they don't have the xp or loot to back them up, no one wants to run them. Imagine if Crucible had a guarantee +4 tome drop in one of the end chests for at least one person in the quest...how many people would be farming Crucible on a daily basis? I bet the traffic would increase for that quest 200%, even though it is a quest 90% of people dislike. Now, take a quest that most people have nothing but good things to say about, Shroud. So, let's take the Shroud, a well designed quest that I would say around 90% of the player base feels to be the best designed raid in the game. Let's drop it down to two chests at the end, but only a .05% chance at dropping any type of ingredients. How soon do you think that raid would completely die?

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    Another option involves locking a character to a campaign. That is, you can play character X in Eberon OR you can play character X in Susan's Awesome Campaign, but not both. Once a character embarks upon one path, forever will it dominate her destiny. In this case, Dungeon Masters and Players could build whole exploit campaigns, if desired, and it would have absolutely zero impact on the game as we currently know it.
    This would create a dead system. No one is going to want to roll up a new toon to just go through custom content, especially when they get through around three quests and find that 95% of them are really not that good or fun.

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    Other design solutions certainly exist for custom scenario systems with persistent units that advance in ability through scenarios. I merely offer two obvious ones. Some players would accept play with no experience or treasure. Some would not. Some would accept locking characters to specific campaigns. Some would not.
    As stated above, I would put money on the line and say that, based on what I have read on these forums, what I have seen in game, you would maybe get around 1% of the player base who would go along with either of those two scenarios, and I can say with full confidence that they wouldn't stick around for long.

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    A creative team of developers armed with a good game, knowledge of what failed in the past, some experience with what worked before, and a healthy dose of creativity, could solve the problem. I say encourage the Turbine team to take a shot. In a worse case scenario, dungeon masters would end up with a system for building and conducting campaigns online, but without any mechanism to award experience or treasure. That would not be so bad, in my opinion.
    In your opinion, no. I would love to create content using this game. The unfortunate thing is, in order to make content that is actually good, you would spend so much time doing it, only to have around 10 people give it a try. I'm not lying when I say that without a team of people working on it, one 15 minute quest, if well designed and given some sufficient challenge, will take a month or so to complete.

    Quote Originally Posted by Annex View Post
    Edit: I wish to add one caveat, the same one I add to many of my posts. The steady delivery of content must always take precedence over the development of new systems. First priority should stay solidly focused on maintaining core fundamentals and keeping loyal customers happy.
    I agree with this. To create a Foundry system would take so much effort on the part of the devs, we would have to go months and months and months with no new content at all. It just wouldn't be worth it for them, or for us.
    Shorlong - Pale Master, Cevon - Druid Archer, Gorgnak - Barbarian, Addanc - Bear Tank, Juristash - Shadar Kai Assassin, Treiah - Morninglord Tempest Ranger, Baylfyre - CC Bard, Deimanus - Bladeforged Melee Arti, Daerian - Healing Cleric Morninglord, Krazig - Pally Tank, Veriste - Shadar Kai Death Knight, Xanapheia - TWF FVS, Helainia - Shadar Kai Henshin-Theif

    Leader of The Dark Creed

  12. #52
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Talon_Moonshadow View Post
    I am not totally against a PvP pass....

    But NOT the pits.
    They are stupid.

    PvP Dungeons is what I want.

    PvP Raids.

    Two groups competing for completion.... and loot.

    With other obstacles besides each other.
    Monsters, traps.... teleporting traps to isolate players....

    Choices... fight each other or team up to kill the monsters.....

    But only one team can win and get the loot.



    Anyway, I am for interesting PvP... not the stupid pits showoff areas we have now.

    (The arenas are not bad.... but seldom used.... which is a good argument not to invest in PvP I guess....)

    BTW... stealth needs to work in PvP.
    Yup those 2 are pretty good ideas too. Competitive pve content, where 2 parties challenging each other to reach the end first and claim the prize. This could be both pvp and pve.

    The current pvp is just to chill, its not based on any form of competition, roles, rewards etc. If they want to start a pvp system, they need to pretty much start from scratch. The good thing is there are plenty of examples on how pvp can screw up the game and how they can avoid it. Turbine can use those as a guideline to implement their own original pvp system.
    Last edited by sha123; 12-31-2013 at 12:32 PM.

  13. #53
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shorlong View Post
    No, that isn't my argument.



    Actually, the example I used above, the developer DOES have sufficient experience. They have two other MMOs that have the Foundry system, and had implemented it long before Neverwinter was coming around. City of Heroes had that system, and it ended up the exact same way.



    And, again, I would love to have something like this, but it would be a failed implementation.



    And therein lies the problem. Take out xp, take out items, and I guarantee you no one would ever run it. Sure, you may get a couple friends to run it, but who wants to spend months working by themselves to make one 15 minute quest that their friends will probably run one time? Nobody. I am guessing, and please correct me if I am wrong, but you haven't used even the simplest of Foundry systems? Even in something like Neverwinter were it is all laid out and no coding whatsoever is needed, to design a quality dungeon that takes around 15 minutes and offers some form of challenge is an undertaking. Sure, I can use pre-built maps or pre-designed rooms and build a quest in a day or so. But to really utilize the tool, you want to put effort into it. It's what we started doing in Neverwinter with our podcast. We had insane attention to detail, and they looked like they were made by the professionals. Then you went to play the normal Foundry quests someone threw up in a day, and they were very noticeably barren.

    So, we either will have our friends running through poorly written, poorly thought and, poorly designed dungeons that are bland, boring and unimaginative, but it only took us one day to make four quests. OR, we will have ONLY our friends running through an intricately designed, challenging, well written and well designed dungeon with great attention to detail, items that help create immersion, lots of imagination used, but it took us two months to build one dungeon and they cheese through it in 15 minutes, and they are the only ones who will ever play it because it has no loot and no xp.

    If you think that any average player who isn't a good friend of yours is going to run through your average quest (which, yes, most quests made will not have the insane attention to detail and will be second rate to the quests currently in game) when there is no loot or xp to gain, you are blind to the state of the player base. Look at some of the awesome quests we have in game right now. Some great, challenging quests that are really fun to play, and yet if they don't have the xp or loot to back them up, no one wants to run them. Imagine if Crucible had a guarantee +4 tome drop in one of the end chests for at least one person in the quest...how many people would be farming Crucible on a daily basis? I bet the traffic would increase for that quest 200%, even though it is a quest 90% of people dislike. Now, take a quest that most people have nothing but good things to say about, Shroud. So, let's take the Shroud, a well designed quest that I would say around 90% of the player base feels to be the best designed raid in the game. Let's drop it down to two chests at the end, but only a .05% chance at dropping any type of ingredients. How soon do you think that raid would completely die?



    This would create a dead system. No one is going to want to roll up a new toon to just go through custom content, especially when they get through around three quests and find that 95% of them are really not that good or fun.



    As stated above, I would put money on the line and say that, based on what I have read on these forums, what I have seen in game, you would maybe get around 1% of the player base who would go along with either of those two scenarios, and I can say with full confidence that they wouldn't stick around for long.



    In your opinion, no. I would love to create content using this game. The unfortunate thing is, in order to make content that is actually good, you would spend so much time doing it, only to have around 10 people give it a try. I'm not lying when I say that without a team of people working on it, one 15 minute quest, if well designed and given some sufficient challenge, will take a month or so to complete.



    I agree with this. To create a Foundry system would take so much effort on the part of the devs, we would have to go months and months and months with no new content at all. It just wouldn't be worth it for them, or for us.
    I do get the general idea your trying to get across which is it will run wild without much regulations. Taking out rewards also defeats the purpose of making a foundry system, as there is not much incentive to actually run the quest. The designing of the mechanics is a different matter entirely though which will be decided by Turbine, should they choose to develop it. As for the matter of exploit, it seems the only logical way so far is to have a team approve it manually, or part manual and part automated mechanisms to approve it, and they set the respective rewards or adjust the rewards suggested by the editors of those maps. It could be from time duration of average players who needs to complete the dungeon, the type of monsters involved, level of dungeon etc.

  14. #54
    The Mad Multiclasser Failedlegend's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Canada,Ontario, GTA
    Posts
    6,863

    Default

    I really do think a foundry would be way better in DDO than any other MMO simply because the main audience for DDO is PnP players, people used to crafting and participating in stories (not to mention games like NWN1/2) as opposed to the lowest common denominator of other MMOs.

    As for "DMs breaking systems",etc. its fairly easy to have mobs and loot scale with the dungeons level...only allow random loot in foundry quests and maybe if a single quest or quest line gets enough prestige the devs could add named loot but that would be a VERY rare occurrence.

    Now there's no doubt that some people who have no idea what their doing will make some pretty bad drek...easily solved bi a rating system...it works fine for LBP it should work fine here.

    Also this feature should NOT be available to F2P...being VIP or becoming premium unlocks it. (and NO it should not be VIP only)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cordovan
    There is little value in getting into an edition debate; as with anything, we create what we believe works best for DDO.

  15. #55

    Default

    Another company implemented a custom scenario system badly, therefore Turbine should not attempt to build such a system for Dungeons and Dragons Online. Have I adequately summarized your argument? If so, I am not buying it.
    Every company implements the custom scenario badly, because there will ALWAYS be players who want to cheat the system, and the developers cannot possibly keep up.

    Many, many games have included custom scenario systems, starting long before computer games even existed. Some worked very well. Many failed because the game designer(s) did not to adequately account for player behavior.
    Those games had one very crucial difference: It was not a 1000:1 ratio of content makers vs content approvers. You also didn't tend to have people who would deliberately game the system for preposterous advantage...and if you did, you had someone else who could arbitrarily (and without spending 2 weeks on a patch) cut it off at the knees.

    Even in games (like Neverwinter Nights - not NWO) where you had scads of people creating their own content...that content only affected a tiny number of players. If you didn't want an uber-cheese module, you just didn't participate in it. Don't download it, or decline to utilize the uber-cheese. Even if you did use the uber-cheese, it had no impact on anyone else. Feel free to screw around with your single player experience just as much as you want. But in an MMO? That won't fly.
    I am the 'Who' In the call "Who's there!?"
    I am the wind blowing through your hair.
    I am the shadow on the moon at night, filling your dreams to the brim with fright.

  16. #56
    Community Member bartharok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Far beyond the ravens gate
    Posts
    6,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matuse View Post
    Every company implements the custom scenario badly, because there will ALWAYS be players who want to cheat the system, and the developers cannot possibly keep up.



    Those games had one very crucial difference: It was not a 1000:1 ratio of content makers vs content approvers. You also didn't tend to have people who would deliberately game the system for preposterous advantage...and if you did, you had someone else who could arbitrarily (and without spending 2 weeks on a patch) cut it off at the knees.

    Even in games (like Neverwinter Nights - not NWO) where you had scads of people creating their own content...that content only affected a tiny number of players. If you didn't want an uber-cheese module, you just didn't participate in it. Don't download it, or decline to utilize the uber-cheese. Even if you did use the uber-cheese, it had no impact on anyone else. Feel free to screw around with your single player experience just as much as you want. But in an MMO? That won't fly.
    Hmmm... make it pay-to-create. That would reduce the amount, and make it something that must be approved in addition. Though that would mean that the amount of quests made would be so low as to be almost non-existent.
    Dystopia = utopia achieved

  17. #57
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bartharok View Post
    Hmmm... make it pay-to-create. That would reduce the amount, and make it something that must be approved in addition. Though that would mean that the amount of quests made would be so low as to be almost non-existent.
    Well if they make it such that there is no rewards until approved, then they can still play it, even the ones being intended for cheating. For example, in the previous post one person mentioned something like making a pit and throwing in a bunch of 1 hp dragons then farming rewards. Stuff like these will be avoided. It will certainly be slow in the implementation process, but more creative dungeons can be created in the process.

  18. #58
    The Mad Multiclasser Failedlegend's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Canada,Ontario, GTA
    Posts
    6,863

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bartharok View Post
    Hmmm... make it pay-to-create. That would reduce the amount, and make it something that must be approved in addition. Though that would mean that the amount of quests made would be so low as to be almost non-existent.
    Nobody is going to spend money to make quests unless they get something for it which is a whole nother can of worms to open. Just make it so you have to be a premium or VIP member to use it

    Also the need to be approved defeats the purpose of the foundry which is to require minimal dev involvement...the apporval should be handled by the community.

    As for loot issues the best bet is to remove the control from the DM have X amount of treasure and xp based on mobs, traps etc.
    Last edited by Failedlegend; 12-31-2013 at 03:44 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cordovan
    There is little value in getting into an edition debate; as with anything, we create what we believe works best for DDO.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload