Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Role Playing (Games)

RPG Devs Should Beware MMOGs 258

Posted by Zonk from the going-to-eat-your-lunch dept.
CVG is reporting on comments made by Obsidian CEO Feargus Urquhart. In an interview with the site, he points out that traditional PC RPG developers are in danger of permanently losing out to the developers of Massively Multiplayer Online Games. "He believes it's key that developers of non-MMO RPGs look closely at what the genre offers over MMORPGs to ensure the RPG genre doesn't lose out to the increasingly popular massively multiplayer online world. 'I think those of us that make non-MMO RPGs need to look at what a single-player/small multiplayer RPG can do that MMOs can't and spend our time and effort on those things', Urquhart said. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RPG Devs Should Beware MMOGs More

RPG Devs Should Beware MMOGs

Comments Filter:

  • Not the same market! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mishotaki ( 957104 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:35PM (#19313811)
    The MMORPG and the RPG genre are completely different, one is for socialising with people in a vast world with only a backstory guiding them while the other is more oriented to dicovering a story by yourself....

    • Re:Not the same market! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 7Prime ( 871679 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:46PM (#19313991) Homepage Journal
      *PC* RPG, not console RPGs. That's the point. A lot of American made, PC RPGs are basically MMORPGs without the MMO part... they have very little story, and are so obsessed with non-linearity and the "make your own character" bullshit that they absolutely refuse to do so.

      jRPGs/console RPGs are a different genre and a different market. aRPGs either need to either jump onboard with the MMO stuff, or learn a few things about story and character development from their friends across the Pacific. Both genres have merrit and a strong future, single-player, non-linear RPGs, however, do not. Elder Scrolls, I'm looking at YOU!

      • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:20PM (#19314497)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re:Not the same market! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by blincoln ( 592401 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:27PM (#19314587) Homepage Journal
        single-player, non-linear RPGs, however, do not. Elder Scrolls, I'm looking at YOU!

        That's an interesting statement, given how successful Oblivion was.

        I liked Oblivion, but I hate online games. I can't be the only one. I like having a sandbox to play in that has no connection to anyone else. I don't want to have to worry about people cheating, or bad behaviour from other people. Conversely, I want to be able to cheat and use the world editor to change or screw things up as much as I like without causing problems for other people. I also want to be able to install the game at some date in the indeterminate future and have it still work.

        • Re:Not the same market! (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Uniquitous ( 1037394 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @05:04PM (#19315065)
          You're certainly not the only one. I prefer the "solitude" of single player RPGs, as they provide some great benefits over MMO's. Just off the top of my head: I only have to pay for it once, I don't get nerfed, I don't have obligations to a gaming clan to run an instance for the thousandth time so the noobs can level, and I can pick it back up in 2 years and not play in a ghost town. MMO's have their place, but it's no place I want to be.
        • "I liked Oblivion, but I hate online games. I can't be the only one. I like having a sandbox to play in that has no connection to anyone else."

          I agree with this sentiment as well but the major disappointment i have with games like Oblivion is I would like SOME multiplayer, like over a lan, or over TCP/IP with a remote friend... in cases like these I don't have to worry about cheaters or behaviour because i know who i'm playing with...

          NWN was fun because you could play both single and multiplayer and I reall
          • Why does every game have to have a multiplayer aspect to it? It seems like every since online play exploded, every game is expected to have any online portion to it. Oblivion is a single player game, and multiplayer has no place in it. If you want to play with friends, other games such as NWN are available.

            Remember, the developers have limited resources. If they spend time creating network code and making the game multiplayer, that's less effort making the game world more detailed, or improving some g

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Sj0 ( 472011 )
              Your rant is noted, but TES is one of the worlds I really would have liked to have multi-player as even a hack-ish option in. If the engine is designed right (And I'm positive it is), it probably isn't that tough to implement, comparatively speaking, and the thought of travelling through Morrowind or the imperial province with a friend at my side is pretty nifty.

        • Oblivion is illustration of the bad state of RPGs (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @10:25PM (#19317629)
          Oblivion barely qualifies as an RPG. The skills and armor sets were drastically reduced from Morrowind, and the combat was morphed into a Quake-like first-person twitchfest rather than a stat-based combat system. Classes don't matter, because you can do anything anyway. You can be the Arena Champion as a level 1 warrior, and then join the Mage's Guild and work your way to the top without ever actually using magic. The world and most of its quests (especially the main quest) are totally bland and meaningless.

          It's endemic of the "next-gen" hype that leads to budgets spent on crap like SpeedTree and FaceGen rather than making the fucking game.

      • Re:Not the same market! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by edremy ( 36408 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:32PM (#19314645) Journal
        jRPGs/console RPGs are a different genre and a different market. aRPGs either need to either jump onboard with the MMO stuff, or learn a few things about story and character development from their friends across the Pacific. Both genres have merrit and a strong future, single-player, non-linear RPGs, however, do not. Elder Scrolls, I'm looking at YOU!

        Yeah, I mean, Oblivion only sold 3M copies, it's obvious that the single player non-linear RPG is doomed!

        I must admit I'm a bit confused why you think Morrowind/Oblivion don't have strong stories. They do. In fact, most of the single-player "western" RPGs I can think of have *better* stories than the jRPGs I can think of- Fallout, Planetscape Torment, Icewind dale, etc. There aren't a lot of them since they are hard to make- the people who like them demand massive amounts of content, multiple plot lines and actual (re)playability, and sales figures for those that don't measure up suck. jRPGs don't have to worry about most of that- it's much more canned. You don't have to figure out six different ways to finish every questline to avoid pissing off the guy who went stealth and couldn't steal the Frobizz of Justice- you're just going to watch the pretty graphics and develop your character into the same one everyone else has.

        • You have a point, but so does the GP. Notice that all but one of the games you mention are really rather long in the tooth by now. Now, if you look at a list of some of the Western story-driven single-player RPGs of the last decade that, I think, most would agree are classics --

          • Daggerfall (1996)
          • Baldur's Gate (1998, 1999)
          • Planescape: Torment (1999)
          • Deus Ex (2000)
          • Baldur's Gate II (2000, 2001)
          • Morrowind (2002, 2003)
          • Neverwinter Nights (2002, 2003)
          • Knights of the Old Republic (2003)
          • Oblivion (2006, 2007)

          -

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by skam240 ( 789197 )
            Why won't KOTOR2 be remembered fondly? It certainly scored well on gamespot (http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/rpg/kotor2/review.ht ml) and I thought it was perfectly enjoyable.

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by Petrushka ( 815171 )
              I liked it too -- in many ways I liked it much more than the original --, but still, it's widely remembered as "the game that could have been great", rather than a game that actually was great. Yes, the ending is the main problem, as your sibling poster remarked; knowing that an anticlimax like that was awaiting me has put me off replaying it, I'm afraid.
          • The sad thing is that had Obsidian been allowed to actually finish KotOR2 it would have definitely been remembered fondly. It has a much stronger storyline and the characters are a lot deeper and better written than they were in the original. The problem is that you have to use your imagination a bit to figure them all out, since whole chunks of what they planned were dumped due to Lucasarts forcing them to push it out the door for Christmas.

          • Daggerfall !?! (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Henry V .009 ( 518000 )
            Daggerfall can only be considered a classic by those who never actually played it. It was a buggy mess. The only people who enjoyed it were obsessive-compulsive types.
            • Yes, it was a mess. But Morrowind is a bit of a mess on my machine too; doesn't stop it from being one of my favourite games of all time :-) -- it takes a lot of love for me to keep on playing a game that crashes every third time I quickload. Anyway, I remember Daggerfall fondly mainly because it was such a huge step forward. Obviously, given the games that have come out since then, I'd rather play BG (1 or 2) any day ...
          • 4 of the games on that list are Canadian (specifically bioware). Perhaps you all should throw more money northward and a good stream of story driven RPGs will come back down.

      • Re:Not the same market! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @05:19PM (#19315229)
        aRPGs either need to either jump onboard with the MMO stuff, or learn a few things about story and character development from their friends across the Pacific.

        Are you kidding me? American RPGs need to stay the fuck away from JRPGs as much as possible. Most of us don't want to watch a linear emo-anime story unfold in the exact same way no matter what we do about it. I hate that there were almost no good RPGs on the PS2, a console supposedly lauded for them. Yeah, if you like spiky blue haired androgynous protagonists with gigantic swords and cute poses you're in luck. But if you like meaty stories that aren't aimed at Japanese teenagers, and those fanboys who emulate them, you're out of luck.

        Bring back RPGs of the 80's. Oblivion is a good start, but it had some killer flaws (I must admit it tried too hard to be non-linear). Neverwinter Nights is a even better one. NWN2 was a big step backwards.

        You know what the best old-school RPG was last generation? Gladius. Especially with the swing meter turned off. Good old fashioned party-based RPG goodness.

      • Wrong (Score:2)

        by Rix ( 54095 )
        Non-linearity is the point of role playing games. If the storyline is too constrictive, as it is in most Asian RPGs, the presence of the player is superfluous, and it may as well be made into a movie.

        Elder Scrolls games are not RPGs, they're action games in a fantasy environment.

        • Re:Wrong (Score:4, Interesting)

          by 7Prime ( 871679 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @06:11PM (#19315713) Homepage Journal
          But movies aren't interactive... why must something be either one extreme (interactive) or another (non-interactive). I crave a movie where I can float around in the story, choose my own camera angles, talk to various secondary characters about what they feel about what's going on, and explore the surrounding area a little.

          Where am I going to find that opportunity? Obviously not on the big screen!

          The bottom line is that computers allow for a variety of different story telling opportunities. Story-telling, in all its linear, pre-composed glory, has existed for thousands of years. I, personally, as an artist, am a lot more comfortable with a distinct "author/audience" separation. I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of "lack of author", it scares me a little... as a creative person. I want to hear what other people have to say, and be able to interpret that for myself... not the other way around.

          I know I'm just one opinion, but I think there's room for both. And A LOT of people out there crave a story where they have the interactivity to simply be immersed in it, but not neccessarilly control it. I find this desire for complete control a bit eerie, to say the least. A certain amount of it may be healthy, and there is a place for open-ended story-telling, but I certainly don't think it should be required.
          • But movies aren't interactive... why must something be either one extreme (interactive) or another (non-interactive). I crave a movie where I can float around in the story, choose my own camera angles, talk to various secondary characters about what they feel about what's going on, and explore the surrounding area a little.

            That's not truly interactive. Everything still comes out the same way, all you did was activate some DVD special features. What you've described is all possible with current-gen DVD t

          • You're thinking of adventure games (ie, Monkey Island, Day of the Tenticle, Sam & Max, The Dig, et cetera). Those exist to tell a story with a little bit of freedom to explore and interact with the characters.

            RPGs on the other hand present a universe for the players to interact with, not a story. Traditionally the universe is controlled by one specific player, who can construct a story around what the players do, rather than the other way around. This isn't as possible in CRPGs, and so the story to them
          • The bottom line is that computers allow for a variety of different story telling opportunities.

            Yes if you want a story told to you. If you actually want to have influence and be a part of the creation of the story, you need something both, non-linear and plot driven. Give me a RPG where I really have an effect on the game world. I want my in game actions in to influence the game world in the same way that Spore promises to have my choices effect the sim. Single player RPGs need procedural plot generation.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by aichpvee ( 631243 )
        Dude, I won't speak for Oblivion since I didn't like it that much, but Morrowind crushes most Japanese RPGs in terms of story. It just doesn't present the story through long, usually boring cutscenes the way so many post-FF7 jRPGs do. You usually have to do a lot of reading, but that's kind of what's neat about it. It lets you really feel like you're a part of the story and discovering it while you play instead of having it shown to you like a movie. And don't get me wrong, I love jRPGs. But that doesn
      • Fallout?
        Baldur's Gate?
        Ultima series?

        All of these are american made rpg's, and they all have excellent stories while being generally non-linear. When you speak of jRPG's one can almost assume you are thinking of final fantasy. I admit that I'm not a huge fan, but it seems like every final fantasy story has very similar story elements, plot characteristics, etc. I don't even consider them to be in the RPG genera, they are more like adventure games.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skam240 ( 789197 )
        On the other hand jRPGs could learn a thing or two about UI from American developers. I can't stand all of those menus I have to go through to do anything in a jRPG like Final Fantasy. Sure aRPGs have some menu navigation in the game play but nothing like jRPGs. A good example of aRPG UI at work is Kights of the Old Republic for the xbox.

      • Re:Not the same market! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by MBGMorden ( 803437 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @11:23PM (#19317963)
        American RPG's have no story? You just have to look at the Bioware/Black Isle games to be convinced otherwise.

        Planescape Torment
        Baldur's Gate 1/2
        Neverwinter Nights
        Star Wars: KOTOR
        Jade Empire

        Now, Bioware is admittedly a Canadian company, but they're still "over here". That aside though, the above games were every bit, if not more story-driven and engrossing than any console RPG I've played, and there are some things that I like more about a western RPG story - namely that just culturally, some things that the Japanese can accept and have fun with, just seems out of place to many westerners (I made it half-way through Final Fantasy X-2 before I was getting nauseous at the "kiddy" factor).

        That's not to say I don't enjoy a good console RPG either - I like story driven content. I'm just saying that there is some good stuff from this side of the ocean too.
    • Well, to a point. Yes, but not always. While it is true that the vast ammount of current MMORPGs usually have little active storyline, some have vast storyline/quest systems which in essence create the story. Take "Guild Wars" for example. While some may argue how much of a MMORPG it truly is (no monthly fees, just the upfront game costs), it does have a story line that you follow along with many of the more traditional RPG elements.

      That said, traditional RPGs have a huge advantage over any of the MMORPGs
    • After looking at my options for RPGs on the DS, 360, and the PC. I wanted something with a ton of depth, lots of lore, single player, and decent graphics and music. I picked up Eterian Odessey for the DS and was impressed with the graphics and music, and the return to the old school first person dungeon crawl. But it was missing a story! It was missing all the puzzles that classics like M&M, EotB, Dungeon Master, etc all had! It was nothing more than a grind.

      I went back to look at what else the DS offer

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hpavc ( 129350 )
      Before WoW I bought a game and a dvd every two weeks when I got paid, maybe two -- pc / console whatever, the chances of be buying a game now are so slim. Some of the new games look pretty cool, but I will beat the game and be done with it in a few days and be out $50. Most likely the game will suck with some horrid unplayable flaw.

  • Advantage (Score:5, Insightful)

    by laffer1 ( 701823 ) <<moc.semaghsiloof> <ta> <ekul>> on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:36PM (#19313833) Homepage Journal
    The biggest advantage is the lack of 13 year olds whining and asking for help. Just focus on games targeted to mature gamers.

  • Might be hard to do (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MontyApollo ( 849862 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:36PM (#19313835)
    After playing my first MMO, a non MMO seems rather "lonely" and "empty", and I am not even that social. I think that will be hard to overcome.
    • This really comes into play with guild wars. A busy town feels too busy, it's full to the brim of people and you feel kinda lonely in the crowd. Where as in a small town you feel part of a small community and have an identity, you notice others. It's very strange to exprience, since right after you're going to be in a very small party or alone with bots.

      It's something I feel everyone should exprience.
    • This was my problem w/ Oblivion. I tried playing it and realized it was like I was playing an MMO that no one played anymore. Kind of like when I tried DAoC and everyone on the server was already level 50, so I never saw another soul. I have plenty of games where I can be antisocial... I don't need an open ended RPG to be anti-social in, as well.

    • I Agree! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Senjutsu ( 614542 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @06:11PM (#19315719)

      After playing my first MMO, a non MMO seems rather "lonely" and "empty", and I am not even that social. I think that will be hard to overcome.
      Why, just the other day I was playing Final Fantasy XII, but had to shut it off out of sheer loneliness. It just felt so empty; whither the naked people running around and dancing for no discernible reason? Whither the messages asking me "u want 2 bai goldz"? Whither the people 40-levels above me challenging me to duels every 3.5 seconds in between inquiries into whether or not I am "sum kinda fag"?
       
      Without those things it hardly felt like any kind of immersive story-telling experience at all.
      • Most of my MMO experience is with Lord of the Rings Online, and I haven't experienced any of the juvenile stuff yet. Maybe with more time. I have only had one gold spammer message so far. I do look forward to the dancing naked elf chicks though.

  • RGP vs MMOG (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bobo mahoney ( 1098593 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:36PM (#19313839) Homepage
    For me the biggest reason to play a single player/ small group games vs. an MMOG is that I can play in smaller bouts. It is a bit of a waste to play an MMOG for 20 minutes, yet it works OK to play 20 minutes at a time in a single player game. Two year olds tend to dictate when you can and can't play.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by andi75 ( 84413 )
      2 year old? I think you can play from 8 p.m. until 6 a.m. :-)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by SABME ( 524360 )
        Yeah, most parents have enough energy to stay awake for at least 40 minutes after they put their kids to bed :-) (before you ask, I have twins who are four years old).
    • I'm playing Zelda: Twilight Princess right now, and I'm finding it hard to play in less than 1 hour chunks and make any kind of progress. I wish that you could save at arbitrary points, it would make playing in shorter spurts a lot easier. I have the same problem you do, except it's with a 1 year old.
      • I just started twilight princess today, so maybe I've not made it to a restricted area yet, but at least in the village you can save at any point. I think it's button 2 that brings up the menu.
        • Well I'm playing on the GC, but while you can save it at any point, saving in a dungeon always starts you back at the beginning of the dungeon. If you get certain items, beat boss characters, or unlock doors then those tasks still stay completely, but you still have to walk all the way back through the dungeon.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Drantin ( 569921 ) *
            1. Find Ooccoo in current dungeon
            2. Use Ooccoo
            3. Save
            4. Turn off NGC/Wii
            5. Do stuff
            6. Turn on NGC/Wii
            7. Load game
            8. Use Ooccoo
            9. ????
            10. Profit

            Now if I could just fill in step 9...
  • ...I remember when Oblivion came out, many people referred to it as a "single-player mmo". Ignoring the inherint oxymoron in such a statement, perhaps that is something game developers should attempt to do?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DCheesi ( 150068 )
      Sounds like they've already done it. There is some value there, mostly for anti-social bums like me :) I like the flexibility and expansive world of MMOs, but I hate the people and I hate logging on. And at some level, I like the idea that my character will become "somebody" in the game world, even if it doesn't start out that way. The Elder Scrolls games fit me almost perfectly...

  • One of these days someone is going to come up with a game that both supports MMOG play but also has a single player campaign running on a mini-server. This title will rule the RPG world until someone brings out one that lets you run your own server, and create a portal from the mmog to your server (the portal simply doesn't appear unless your server is up; it could even be flickery if you have a poor history of uptime.)

    One thing that we have all learned from the mod communities in this world is that players want open-ended, customizable games.

    I can't speak for anyone else, but many people have told me that they won't pay for the client for an MMOG because it could become useless in the future, and they're offended by having to pay for a client AND pay a monthly fee anyway - this is precisely where I stand on the issue.

    • I predict a huge success for the game which fuses the concepts of World of Warcraft and Second Life.

    • One of these days someone is going to come up with a game that both supports MMOG play but also has a single player campaign running on a mini-server. This title will rule the RPG world until someone brings out one that lets you run your own server, and create a portal from the mmog to your server (the portal simply doesn't appear unless your server is up; it could even be flickery if you have a poor history of uptime.)

      One thing that we have all learned from the mod communities in this world is that player

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by drinkypoo ( 153816 )

        think of the possibilities for hacking and duping that would exist if an MMO publisher let character data get off of its server onto a server controlled by a player and then accepted it back again. The rapidity with which unscrupulous players would have their characters off to custom hackservers to get outfitted with all the 'phat lewt' would make your head spin.

        It's not really that hard to handle, and there are several solutions for handling it.

        One possible solution is to simply restrict the player from

        • This is actually exactly what the E Programming Language was designed for:

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_programming_languag e [wikipedia.org]

          Back in the mid-nineties, Electric Communities wrote E, and a product in E ("Microcosm"), which was designed for exactly this: secure online distributed worlds. Microcosm was, in some respects, a distributed Second Life, written in the days before the Pentium 2 was released. Everyone ran their own little server on their desktop, and you could create and trade objects securely.

          The c

    • Already been done (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Rix ( 54095 )
      NeverWinter Nights allowed you to have persistent multiplayer servers as well as single player campaigns and let you run your own servers.

    • One of these days someone is going to come up with a game that both supports MMOG play but also has a single player campaign running on a mini-server. This title will rule the RPG world until someone brings out one that lets you run your own server, and create a portal from the mmog to your server (the portal simply doesn't appear unless your server is up; it could even be flickery if you have a poor history of uptime.)

      This reminds me a lot of Blizzard's Diablo. It was fairly ground-breaking when it came out, and it had a good run. It may even still be running.

  • Coming from OBSIDIAN!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SpeedyDX ( 1014595 ) <speedyphoenixNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:49PM (#19314041)
    NWN2 and KotOR2?

    I think it's key for Obsidian to develop games that don't have 50 bugs around every corner. I started the first act of NWN2 5 times, and they all ended up with corrupted save files after crashing, before I gave up on it. For KotOR2, I lost both my main save and my back up save to some weird bug.

    Maybe they should worry about ironing out their bugs before they worry about competing with MMOs.

    • Re:Coming from OBSIDIAN!? (Score:5, Funny)

      by lawpoop ( 604919 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:43PM (#19314803) Homepage Journal

      I think it's key for Obsidian to develop games that don't have 50 bugs around every corner.
      If you don't want to deal with killing spiders, scorpions, and the occasional rat for the first few levels your character, try a sci-fi themed game.
      • I know you are joking, and I laughed -- that is funny.

        But in all seriousness, there are no modern sci-fi single-player CRPGS. None. Go ahead, name one. It doesn't exist. The last good one I played was "Fallout II," and that's several generations behind the modern technology. You can't say "Knights of the Old Republic II" because frankly, the Star Wars Universe is tired (and besides, it's still all swords. Light-saber? Gimmeabreak.) Plus, it wasn't a good, open-ended RPG. I want Oblivion with laser

  • You mean, like, telling stories? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LionKimbro ( 200000 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:49PM (#19314045) Homepage
    Single-Player RPG's have always excelled, and will always excel, at what they do: They tell stories.

    Like books, before them.

    I don't see any danger here to the RPG.

    That said, it might be fun to read a book (play an RPG) with others some time, and if they made it possible in the game, that might be neat, if it worked out.

    Perhaps you get cues, on what to say and act, but you do it in your own words, with language tips to the side, and briefings before-hand? (Like a computer-mediated LARP?) Could be neat.
    • Amen to that. And some folks (like me) are fond of the stories that single-player RPGs, Interactive Fiction, and so forth tell, but refuse to get sucked in to the time and money sink that is an MMORPG. (Besides, after all the time I spent on text-based MUSHes in the early 90s, I think I've used up my lifetime quota.)

      • Re:Mod parent up... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Compholio ( 770966 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:51PM (#19314895)

        ...but refuse to get sucked in to the time and money sink that is an MMORPG...
        And that's exactly why the game producers don't care about people like you or I anymore. Everything's about maximizing profits and the game studios can make more money off of people who pay a monthly fee for their games. That's not to say they don't make a profit off of traditional games but they don't make as much profit.

    • Todays analogue (Score:2, Interesting)

      by SuperKendall ( 25149 )
      That said, it might be fun to read a book (play an RPG) with others some time

      Isn't that (shared experience of enjoying a story) called a Movie today?

      The gaming equivalent closest to this is actually online co-op play I think since the storytelling aspect is more direct...

      MMORPG's are more like virtual workplaces, where you log in and go about your daily chores in the context of a larger and slower moving story that unfolds around you even as you perform your menial tasks. A companies day to day workings ar
    • You might want to check out Uru Live. Cyan seems to be on track for making a successful MMO with a good plot behind it. It's too soon to tell how it will work out in the long run, but it does seem that they are breaking new ground. It also isn't really an RPG, but Cyan is at least proving that online games can be driven by the story. That can have repercussions for any wannabe WoW killer.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Mard ( 614649 )
      There have been multiplayer story-oriented RPGs before that were extremely successful, though I wonder if many took advantage of the multiplayer option. One success that comes to mind is Secret of Mana. I have played this online through an emulator with a friend, and it is loads of fun. Coordinating playing times to complete a long story-based RPG can be difficult, but we had a blast finishing the game. To a degree, I believe FF6 (FF3 US) had multiplayer capability, too. I remember being able to set the 2P

  • He makes a good point (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Nymz ( 905908 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:54PM (#19314115) Journal
    A RPG should focus more on a dynamically changing storyline that gives the player a real sense of interaction, power, and accomplishment. Where as the MMO player will get those from interactions with other live players, but the world will remain static and respawn again.

    One example I can think of would be Gothic 2 & Gothic 3. Gothic 2 gave players a real choice about how they would... role-play, being good, or bad, or neutral. Where as Gothic 3 felt like a single player MMO, runnig around killing things, only without the respawns.

  • Quick tips for Obsidian (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wooden pickle ( 1006975 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @03:57PM (#19314155)
    Probably the first things Obsidian should worry about are: 1) Releasing products that are finished. Hi KOTOR2 2) Releasing products with an adequate amount of performance optimization. You shouldn't have to turn NWN 2 settings down to the point of making the game look 6 years old in order to make it playable.

  • I think the answer would be obvious... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Cadallin ( 863437 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:05PM (#19314261)
    Just look at what the most successful Single Player RPGs are and then see what differentiates them from MMORPGs. The best selling single player RPGs in recent years have been in no particular order:

    Oblivion - 3 million, Baldur's Gate 1&2 - 2 million each, and the various Kingdom Hearts and Final Fantasy Games from Square - Around 3 million each

    How are these games different from the most successful Fantasy MMO, WoW? Depth and immersiveness of combat comes immediately to mind. Also Story, all of these games have a much more cohesive story than WoW itself (whose story is mostly conveyed reading background information on the WoW website. To be honest, that really ought to be enough to build games around. Create a game with a solid combat system and a story, and you've got the basis for a solid single player RPG. The trick really, is not to be misled into thinking you can build a WoW-killer. You can't. Blizzard has the budget and the installed base to bury you. So don't even try.

  • Regardless of the possibilities in MMORPGs, fact is they boil down to grindfests. When have you ever played a "grind" style in single player CRPG? Diablo? Not an actual roleplaying game (a level system and a sword doesn't make it an RPG). MMORPGs have never been created as RPGs, though they took the name to lend credibility to what they are. I don't see single player RPGs being threatened by them at all.

  • Didn't know there was one... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by r_naked ( 150044 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:10PM (#19314363) Homepage
    'I think those of us that make non-MMO RPGs need to look at what a single-player/small multiplayer RPG can do that MMOs can't and spend our time and effort on those things', Urquhart said.

    Granted it was a WHILE back that I looked for (S)mallMORPG, but I didn't find anything so I eventually setup a MaNGOS server. Blizzard is missing out BIG TIME. If they were to release a version of WoW that was scaled for personal use, they would make a killing. I would have no problem paying $120.00+ US for something like that (PLUS a yearly fee for content updates). Obviously there are people out there that want / need the "massiveness" of the MMORPG, but there are others (like me) that just want to play the game. Granted I have kinda gotten into the aspect of developing the game (the database not the core), but at times it would be nice to just PLAY and know that things work, not have to hunt down why a particular quest is bugged.

    For those that don't know MaNGOS is the Massive Network Game Object Server. It isn't being developed for any one client, it just HAPPENS to work with the World of Warcraft client. In addition to the MaNGOS core, you need a backend database that drives the world. There are several out there that are being actively developed, but I prefer SDB.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by AlXtreme ( 223728 )
      I've come across MaNGOS a few times. Have people forgotten the bnetd-drama this soon? I assume MaNGOS has adopted a low-profile because of this, Blizzard/Vivendi would stomp them out as quick as you can say "Zug-Zug".


      BTW, an incompatible EULA [mangosproject.org] for a GPL-project? Yikes, and small chance it'll stop the onslaught of Vivendi lawyers. We'll see...

  • NWN as a model (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MattW ( 97290 ) <matt@ender.com> on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:13PM (#19314401) Homepage
    Fearghus is a good person to be talking about this, since his Obsidian Studios is the developer of NWN2 and its upcoming expansion.

    NWN and NWN2 are games designed with multiplayer in mind. The original spawned hundreds, if not thousands, of "persistent worlds", which were mini-MMOs. Some linked servers ended up supporting hundreds of simultaneous players, and individual popular servers handled 50-95 simultaneous users, often stopping only at the limit of the hardware and the engine (as an NWN PW developer, and experienced sysadmin, it seemed very much to me that the engine had some sort of O(n squared) cost associated with users; going from 1 to 35 would barely dent a server, but going 35 to 55 could bring the same server practically to its knees).

    Imagine if WoW supported user mods. There could be an "official server" and any number of player servers. The people setting up a player server could allow a player joining there to import their character in from the official server (not the other way around, of course). The people on the player servers would start with a base world, but have tools to add, remove, and modify the content. Add in a scripting language and a way to distribute customized art assets (models, animations, etc), and you have something like Quake 3 w/autodownload, but applied to an RPG instead of an FPS.

    Bioware began to hook into another possibility when they started offering their "digital distribution" modules for NWN. For some small amount ($4-$12 depending on the module), you got an add-on game experience for NWN; a sort of new official campaign to play through. Imagine if a game like NWN or NWN2 had an "NWN live" service you could subscribe to. You pay $8 a month or something, and it gives you access to some cooler online features, as well as content updates. New models, new portraits, new adventures, etc. Bioware seemed to indicate they were pleasantly surprised with the reception of DD modules for NWN1.

    One of the things about NWN and its expansions was that each expansion featured a bunch of new things (new classes, support for prestige classes, new models, new spells, new voices, new vfx and sfx). These were featured in a new official campaign adventure - one you could play through - but they were also remixable into a lot of new user adventures, and also could be combined with custom content for more possibilities. And a nice toolset to tie it all together.

    A game that was gorgeous and easy to use and fun like City of Heroes could have reached its true potential with a scripting language and a toolset and a way to use that end-user content, because hobby content creators would have come up with enough refreshing content to avoid the "gets dull" label CoH earned for its repetitive missions.
  • Urquhart raises some good points on how to design a top-notch RPG (he's perhaps the kick-assest RPG producer in the western world, after all), but even in the absence of MMORPGs, those points would still be just as important.

    The real difference that puts RPGs at such a disadvantage isn't playability or content - it's money. MMOGs are the gift that keeps on taking, and financiers are increasingly interested in funding a multi-bazillion dollar MMOG in hopes that five years down the road, they'll still be rak
  • Story. Suspension of Disbeliev. In RGPs you can be THE ONE - the hero who saves the world from the brink of destruction, you can be the one to beat the ULTIMATE EVIL. In MMOGs its either not really feasible or not really good for the suspension of disbeliev.
    So, you and your party comes up to the castle of the EVIL OVERLORD, to defeat him. Just like the guys that are following behind you, the guys who are currently inside and the guys who are currently on the way out and maybe give you the hint "watch out f
    • The more interesting case is where the difficulty is tuned such that there really is only one group capable of tackling said challenge on each server.

  • Some things that MMOs can't match (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mr_eX9 ( 800448 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @04:45PM (#19314825) Homepage
    You, the player and your character/party, are the only important part of a single-player RPG. The game revolves around you and you goals and whatever characters, locales, etc. that your goals entail. This provides the opportunity for creating a truly unique character that actually stands out in the game world. An MMO, where you're just another level x [insert class here], can never touch that.

    Also, in a single-player RPG, there are no griefing assholes out there to camp your corpse or talk smack about how you're a n00b or spam the chat. Some people are willing to put up with the grief or find ways to avoid it cuz they like a world filled with people, and that's why MMOs are so popular these days. But there are people who don't and need to get their RPG fix in a non-MMO form.

    Personally, until there's a massive paradigm shift in the general attitude of MMO communities and people start playing nice with each other, I'll just stick to Star Wars: KotOR, The Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, and the like for my RPG needs.

    • in a single-player RPG, there are no griefing assholes out there to camp your corpse or talk smack about how you're a n00b or spam the chat... until there's a massive paradigm shift in the general attitude of MMO communities and people start playing nice with each other, I'll just stick to Star Wars: KotOR, The Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, and the like for my RPG needs.

      general asshattery is not why i stopped playing Asheron's Call... grinding was. it was annoying being called a noob by level 100 macroers

    • Also, in a single-player RPG, there are no griefing assholes out there to camp your corpse or talk smack about how you're a n00b or spam the chat.

      Sometimes griefers can be annoying, but it can be immensely satisfying in those cases where you're able to beat their ass (whether it's because you were able to log into a more powerful alt, your guild buddies come to your aid, or you just get a lucky outcome). I know everybody's got their own preferences, but mine is to put up with the minor inconvenience of

  • The one thing the RPG can do that a MMO can never do is have an ending. Therefore, they can tell a story. After a while, even a well done MMO feels like a Lethal Weapon marathon.

    Also, in an RPG you can really be the hero and effect your world. In an MMO you're just one of a gazillion heros/villians and can never truely effect your world.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vux984 ( 928602 )
      The one thing the RPG can do that a MMO can never do is have an ending.

      Why not? Why can't the game be won or lost? Why can't you, after winning or losing, play it again? A lot of these games claim to have over-arching story arcs -- why can't the story end?

      And when they do, ease players into the next arc, do a server reset, and start the world anew, and let players take it down a different road. When you do the reset don't completely wipe the characters, let them pass a selection of equipment or attributes t
      • Sounds like a sequel to me. You have the same identity, equipment/attributes or whatever but in a brand new story right? Sure, you could have server resets but knowing the MMO mobs like most do, I can never imagine a world where players would be OK starting over again from scratch (ie the farm boy with nothing turned to RPG hero).

        Furthermore, how do you end this story arc? When the super guild destroys the super villain? How do you appease players in the "massive" multiplayer environment? I can see

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by vux984 ( 928602 )
          Sounds like a sequel to me.

          Only as much as playing CIV again is a sequel to your last game.

          You have the same identity, equipment/attributes or whatever but in a brand new story right?

          Some stuff is carried over, most isn't.

          Sure, you could have server resets but knowing the MMO mobs like most do, I can never imagine a world where players would be OK starting over again from scratch (ie the farm boy with nothing turned to RPG hero).

          I disagree. How many of us have replayed a single player RPG with a different c

  • some differences (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Atreide ( 16473 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2007 @05:08PM (#19315091)
    Solo RPG video games give you sense of being unique.
    You are Neo or Luke Skywalker and noone else can have that power.
                Only you can save the world.
                            No MMO gives that today.
    Even super heroes games like http://www.cityofheroes.com/ [cityofheroes.com] have so many heroes that you dont have the sensation of being so marvelous.
                You spend your time harvesting missions, badges and now crafting.
                            Not very heroic !

    MMO RPG (or so called) emphaze on the community experience.
    You share stories with others,
    you show your achievements to others,
    you develop your character with others.
    You oppose and win against others.
    These "others" are people,
                and this is important.
    Even though oponents were bots with behaviour no different that humans,
    knowning they are bots would render them not as interesting as humans.
                After all I prefer to chat a girl than a bot and
                I prefer to constantly win and humiliate another player rather than a mob.
    OK, some would prefer chatting a bot...

    Last comment, MMO RPG are no RPG.
    I spent a tremendous amount of days playing table top RPG when I were young.
    And the experiment is no comparison with computer RPG.
                Compared, computer RPG are really flat and
                MMO RPG are event flatter than solo RPG.
    There is only basic heroism, limited sense of achievement and
                no way to come with innovative solution that game author did not imagine.

    The killer game will provide real freedom and content ,
    the sense of being unique and
    still experiencing with tons of other players.
    • I generally agree with your comment, and so have nothing to add except - I really liked the way you formatted that message. No joke! It was very pleasing to read.
  • 1) Scale. An MMO is limited in how many units can be operating in a single battle. Network limitations are the reason World of Warcraft couldn't deliver on its promise of world pvp. Dunno if anyone knows what happened in the old "world pvp" days of Tarren Mill... but the general problem was once enough people showed up it became so laggy that it was unplayable. That really sucked. Talk about destroying immersion.

    2) Continuity of Storyline. Look at Matrix Online. Everyone wants to be Neo, but nobody can. Look at SWG. Everyone wanted to be a Jedi. But nobody could be Luke Skywalker. Not true in an offline RPG. You can literally live the storyline of your favorite character.

    3) User created content. Look at Morrowind for example. The game came with a construction set. You could build your own world. You were the god of that world you created. Now shift to WoW. You're a peon, and if you're lucky you can get 24 other people together to take down raid mobs. But you'll never be able to do it solo. You'll never BE that raid mob.

    When the day comes that they give a player the chance to control a raid mob (with their current abilities and hitpoints) that's the day a raid wipes every time on that mob, forever. The AI on those mobs is particularly stupid. Tactically, if I were said mob, I would immediately kill all the healers, then the DPS. Which would leave the tank beating on me with his sword 'n board. To which I would let loose a huge laugh, do a /golfclap, and walk away.

    TLF
  • MMOG: Focus on building environments and tasks that encourage and in some cases require cooperation between individuals or groups. Characters should be powerful enough to have an effect on the world, but not so powerful as to usurp the storyline characters. There should be lots of replayable content, and a great deal of customization.

    RPG: Focus on building environments and tasks that make the player the superhero of the story. Instead of goals that are so difficult that only a group of people could c
  • Or at least that's how I see it. I admit I haven't been able to MMO for a couple of years since moving out to the back of beyond in and not having broadband - I'm not sure I miss it.

    See, I enjoy the role-play. I used to do the old "sitting in a darkened room" roleplay games - the entire attraction is playing the ROLE ( I know, repeating the concept, but it seems to me that lately the 'RP' has vanished from 'RPG' ).

    The problem that I see online, is that most of the players I've come across in various

Slashdot Top Deals

When you are working hard, get up and retch every so often.

Close