Hi. I would like to get your opinions on multi-player and MMO game features and a few other ideas.

[Eudaimon]

There's a lot of questions so I don't expect all of them to be answered but I'll take what I can get. This will be a really big help for me as I move onto a multi-player system.

Chat:
1. How important is chat to you?
2. Aside from global, local, friends, guild, group, role-play, mature, private and NPC is there any channel I'm missing? (Trading and combat log are excluded intentionally.)
3. If ignoring a player prevents you both from seeing each others messages or typing names and a request to un-ignore player is agreed on by both parties; would this be a good enough measure for dealing with chat problems?
4. If detection or reports of profanity sends you to unrestricted chat channels instead of the normal chat channels; would that be a good enough measure for dealing with profanity?
5. Would including a mature channel so people can do their more adult role play be a good enough measure to deal with the more perverted, creepy or sex obsessed members of the community?
6. Would it be okay to send perverted, creepy or sex obsessed players to unrestricted chat channels if they are reported for sexual harassment or stalking or should they have another channel?

Grouping:
1. Would you play a game that doesn't have friendly fire proof armor for either you or your opposition but a way to simulate it if invested in?
2. Would you play a multi-player game that neither forces you to do a set role or need others to do a set role in order to be successful?
3. What are the top 2 best things about grouping up for you?
4. Would showing what quest your friends are doing by their name make it so you're more likely to help?
5. What would be the best way to make helping others rewarding in your opinion?

Gameplay:
1. What is your preferred pace for combat game play?
2. If the distance between players can be opened or closed with multiple attack types but they are regulated by the cast time or cool down is that enough to balance melee vs ranged?
3. If you can only see friends, group or guild members as allies and everyone else is either neutral or hostile unless in a battlefield or quest would it bother you?

PvE:
1. If you lose against an NPC below elite, how much does it effect you?
2. If you lose against an elite or above NPC, how much does it effect you?
3. Would you consider it a bad thing if you can't see the data of characters you are not questing for and how would you react to such a system?
4. How important are corridor/dungeon style instances for you?
5. Would open world content (outside of terrain) that is evolving and dynamic be good or annoying in your opinion?
6. Would having believable rewards and consequences for your actions drive you away from the game?
7. What's your favorite PvE events/quest?
8. What's the best part of PvE for you?

Pvp:
1. Do you feel it's necessary to have names and level over your head while in PvP? (Mainly to prevent griefing.)
2. Do you consider uncommon attacks with utility or other unique properties over powered if used creatively?
3. What are your favorite PvP events/arenas?
4. What's the best part of PvP for you?

General:
1. Would you play a single player game that's multi-player has the above features?
2. Would having player generated content help the wait between DLC's and updates significantly?
3. What are your favorite story lines in games?
4. Would you play a game without a main character if it has a large cast, multiple story-lines and engaging game play if it's not fully complete?
5. What is the minimum amount of cut scenes you would tolerate in your game?
6. What ideas do you have that could make the online gaming community better?


Thanks for any help you guys can give. I'm just trying to gauge what features people like the most about MMO's and multi-player and how they would respond to these ideas. The majority of these ideas are just to make the online experience better for all involved.

 

[Anathrax]

Answers:
Chat:
1- Very important. Whether it be communication or idle chat for those solo dungeons, I live on it.
2- Not at all.
3- Yes.
4- I love an unrestricted channel. I want to say anything without asterisks being spammed because "THINK OF DA KIDS". Screw the kids. Yes to this idea.
5- Dealing with the preverted no, having a chat for mature chat, yes.
6- I'd rather they get muted or banned, a game shouldn't encourage this. No.

Grouping:
1- No to friendly fire, it'd only cause trolling and I'd rather not keep saying "Sorry" whenever I heavily telegraph a massive AoE spell and shout EVERYONE GET OUT OF THE DAMNED WAY and someone doesn't listen.
2- I like having set roles. I don't like dealing with a lot of stats, which is why I shunned Path of Exile in favor of Spiral Knights.
3- A) I get to make friends. B) I don't get the same sense of loneliness as soloing something.
4- Yes, but if that friend has already agreed to preview the quest and is asking for help.
5- I don't know really. As long as it's cosmetic(and only cosmetic) it's good.

Gameplay:
1- I hate having anything with the click on something and watch the animations work its magic, with some ability input from your side. I want to dodge, block and attack on my own terms. But I don't want blocking or dodging to give you invincibility frames for eternity. Dodging and blocking should have some degree of skill, dodging too late or too early will get you screwed.
2- Perhaps, but ranged classes should have some sort of distance opener. Because once the gap is closed that melee class will be on you 24/7. Maybe some traps, roots or perhaps even have the melee classes a slower base speed. I don't know really.
3- Not at all.

PvE:
1- I'm a bit ashamed. But it doesn't bother me that much.
2- Not at all, I guess I just need to level up a bit or go with a team.
3- Again, I don't like dealing with stats. Just be straight forward and tell me what this thing is weak to rather than going it has 3.5% vulnerability to air and 60% resistance to air.
4- They're good as long as it's not the same thing just copy pasted in a different order.
5- It would be good as long as it resets or isn't drastic. I don't want to miss the razing of Lumbridge by the rabbit pirates because I wasn't on at that time.
6- Not really, but it has a small chance. As long as it's a story aspect and not a gameplay aspect I'd dig it. No super armor of funkyness +1 for people who chose the blue pill.
7- Mine has to be Monkey Madness and While Guthix Sleeps from Runescape. These really long, fun and diverse quests that don't bore you unless you have to grind for a required stat. If there was one thing that was truly worth it to be a member, it was these two quests.
8-(You typed 7 twice)Rewards, closure, opening of more fun quests and areas.

PvP:
I don't PvP. I leave that to MoBAs and FPSs and the such.

General:
1- No, then we'd end up with something like Kingdoms of Amalur that'd be boring as heck with a massive yet hollow world to explore.
2- As long as it's quality controlled to hell and done by community members I and many others trust. Other than that, not a chance.
3- I... don't notice the story that much. I will say this, I'm currently in my first Psychonauts playthrough and it's fantastic trying to deduce who's evil and who isn't. So I'd say something Unpredictable but subtle. Not something pulled out of someone's butt.
4- If most of the cast is likable, I'm on board. If the playstyles are different, I'd play it.
5- I'd tolerate any cutscenes if: A) They are skipabble. B) They aren't long as hell. C) They don't take up 75% of the game(Final Fantasy, debatable Max Payne 3) If none of these are fullfilled, I'd tolerate only one. The opening splash screens.
6- Let me think of something and I'll come back to you.

 

[Eudaimon]

snip

Chat:
6- I agree. The idea is similar to the profanity detection one but I just couldn't see a way to get the trigger set up without reporting them. I wasn't trying to encourage it and am setting it so the reported and issuer are mutually ignored.

Grouping:
4- Will it be okay to color code the quest name if they want help?


PvE:
6- More like getting caught killing the guards can make you a fugitive but bribing the officials or taking over by force gets you out of it but has their own consequences as a usurper or needing to pay them multiple times. Saving a royals life can make you be branded a hero and gain discounts at shops, get you pardons from past crimes, get you knighted etc. Of course it wouldn't be any fun if you couldn't manipulate these events as well.
7- I'll look into those.
8-(Fixed, thank you)

PvP:
K.

General:
6- Looking forward to it.

Thanks for responding.

 

[Anathrax]

6- Looking forward to it.

Thanks for responding.

Your welcome. The problem is I have no idea how you can weed out a toxic portion of a playerbase. First idea that comes to mind is having the game on a subscription fee, or any type of payment. Call of Duty and WoW prove this useless.
Second idea is having a buttload of moderation. Then you could probably end up with a lot of power happy mods(Runescape) or so much moderation no one dares to speak, lest they get ban hammered. You could have the playerbase moderate itself with a report system but that could also be negated since some of the more popular players can get a free pass because their popular.(Smite's HiRezBart)

Color coding a quest is what I had in mind. Of course I'd rather have a text saying "Need help" to avoid having alternate colours for our colourblinded fellows.

 

[Savagezion]

I don't answer the chat questions because I am the type that never ignores and never reports as I think it is better that a community comes to an understanding rather than trying to get people kicked out or drop all communication. I actually think /ignore and /report encourage this behavior more than discourage it. Chat is very important to me though. A bad chat system will ruin a good multiplayer game for me.

Grouping:
1. If you can balance it within character building. I think it is a weak idea if it is merely a ladder of progression and overpowered. FOr instance if you sacrificed max damage output considerably to have your attack not harm friendlies or something like that.
2. Yeah, I have before
3. Having people to talk with on missions or other (usually boring) content. I don't see another reason really. If you are a teammate who doesn't want to talk, I don't really care if you are on my team.
4. No.
5. The best way is probably a way for the community to recognize those that do and those that don't. I think it is better to offer a way for players to see who has a track record of helping others and who doesn't. I often help complete strangers in games for no other reason than to help. Being able to advertise that fact would steer players that need help to people like me rather than have some dick get mad because "they arent learning right" and the vet wants his reward for helping this worthless noob.

Gameplay:
1. Varies. I like fast paced action or tactical turn based.
2. I would have to see it in action as the description is vague. It could work in theory but it isnt guaranteed in practice.
3. No.

PvE:
1. Not at all. Shit happens.
2. Ditto.
3. Eh, I would prefer the game be designed to either show NO data on enemies or do.
4. So long as they are fun, I love em. As soon as I find them monorail experiences, I prefer to just explore the overworld.
5. Depends, GW2 has a neat idea but they cycle way too often with far too few events. its like every 10-15 mins the next dynamic quest is triggering. I like their system but think it should be a few hours in between many of the quests but have the rewards for thos ebe greater.
6. Nope, the opposite in fact.
7. Dont really have one.
8. Exploration. A good map makes it worthwhile.

Pvp:
1. Not neccessarily. I have played some MMOs that hide it and all you know is that they are over a certrain level cap. This actually promotes griefing as they have no way to tell and thus it is usually a good idea to be offensive or defensive based on enemy numbers. IMO Griefing is part of PvP, it is in its nature. The best bet is trying to figure out a risk/reward situation for PVP if you arent going to try and make everyone's skills balanced.
2. Depends on if they are overpowered or not. A combo isnt overpowered unless it is overpowered, not in how the combo works necessarily.
3. Actual PvE areas and not sectioned off sections. When pvp is set aside from the main game, it almost aways makes pvp something to do rather than something exciting.
4. The challenge other players provide. Sometimes people come up with some really tricky crap. I like seeing real tactics at work. Sucks when you fall right for someone's crap too.

General:
1. Probably.
2. Yep.
3. Good ones, as vague as that answer is. Ones that aren't overplayed.
4. Definitely.
5. I have no minimum or maximum.
6. Yeah, you won't like my ideas. I'll just leave this. Crybabies get picked on more than anyone else because it isnt as fun to pick on someone that you can't get the best of. I have been trolled more times than I can count. (9 times out of 10, I end up befriending and playing with said troll) Sometimes all it takes is a simple "you got me pretty good there" and problem solved, new friend. Instead, people get whiny and start ignoring and reporting or slandering which is clear evidence the troll got the best of them.

 

[Eudaimon]

Your welcome. The problem is I have no idea how you can weed out a toxic portion of a playerbase. First idea that comes to mind is having the game on a subscription fee, or any type of payment. Call of Duty and WoW prove this useless.
Second idea is having a buttload of moderation. Then you could probably end up with a lot of power happy mods(Runescape) or so much moderation no one dares to speak, lest they get ban hammered. You could have the playerbase moderate itself with a report system but that could also be negated since some of the more popular players can get a free pass because their popular.(Smite's HiRezBart)

Color coding a quest is what I had in mind. Of course I'd rather have a text saying "Need help" to avoid having alternate colours for our colourblinded fellows.

That's actually a really good point and I like your suggestion how that system works.

I know what you mean. For the most part I don't think it's possible to fully weed the bad apples out and pretty much any system used will be vulnerable.

 

[Eudaimon]

snip

Chat:
5. Good point. What does he mean by inappropriate forums though?

6. Okay, the general consensus is to ban them then.

General:
6. I'm okay with harsh penalties in single player mode but not in multiplayer.

 

[Eudaimon]

snip

Do you mean you prefer unregulated chat like in call of duty and online fighting games?

Grouping:
1. Well the idea is for a system that doesn't use a faction system and is based upon the actions you do rather then red = dead.
5. I think keeping a record for how many times you help others is a wonderful idea.

PvE:
3. What about colored outlines to indicate if hostile, allied etc, using a pointer system and including the option to display the stats for those who want it
5. I'll look into it.

Thanks for responding everyone, it's been really helpful.

 

[Savagezion]

snip

Do you mean you prefer unregulated chat like in call of duty and online fighting games?

Well, I honestly don't play those much lately, but when I do, the only people I will mute is people that insist on having music blaring while they play as they clearly aren't interested in chat anyways. But yeah, same thing, however I was mostly referring to MMOs and many PC games. I don't use /ignore or /report. The only time I mute is if you insist on blaring music or something while you play as I see that as a disinterest on actual in-game sound/chat. I figure if you need music on, you are probably listening to it moreso than the game and your teammates.

Grouping:
1. Well the idea is for a system that doesn't use a faction system and is based upon the actions you do rather then red = dead.
5. I think keeping a record for how many times you help others is a wonderful idea.

The friendly fire idea isn't inherently bad - just that I personally would prefer, in a system like that, if it were a matter of build and it came with consequences in other areas. This could be hard to balance though as you are weighting an idea vs a stat or another idea. If going off of a faction type system as you say, it makes more sense than having level 20s be able to do it but say a level 15 can't. I think in the end, I would have to see what all weighs in on it to tell whether I like the idea or not. As I said, it isn't inherently bad, but allowing some players friendly fire and not others, at its base seems like a consequence should come in with it too. Perhaps you take more damage from opposing factions or something, I don't know. Too many unknowns from my hypothetical situation. I ain't trying to pee on anyone's idea I just don't know enough. I can see how it could go wrong but am aware there are multiple ways it could go right.

Glad you like the "helper tally" idea. It has always confused me why games haven't really done this in the past but instead encourage people that don't want to help, to go for the prize of being a helper. In the end being a helper is its own reward or bother based on your perspective. Many players are willing to help for no other reason than they would like to.

PvE:
3. What about colored outlines to indicate if hostile, allied etc, using a pointer system and including the option to display the stats for those who want it
5. I'll look into it.

3. I'd be cool with that so long as it is across the board.
5. Sorry, don't mean to bring up another game into it but wanted to use an example. Dynamic systems are great, however, when you can sit on the server and watch a fort get taken back and forth about 4 times in the 3 hours you have been online, it is a little crazy and actually takes weight away from the world. Say, for instance, some centaurs attack a fort and succeed. I should be able to play for 10 hours before I see another attack get mounted against that fort by centaurs, not 20-60 minutes. Suddenly, it doesn't feel like a living world so much as a world on a loop that it actually is. An attack on a fort should devastate the attacking forces otherwise, why didn't they send more? Imagine the centaurs win, I could understand a immediate attack from a nearby outpost or stronghold within 20-30 mins but if they lose that counterattack, it should be at least 10 hours again. Honestly, I think it would be better if you allowed 20-30 hrs to pass between it. That way if I log in today, help take the fort, I can log in tomorrow and know that the fort is ours because we took it yesterday.

Dynamic events are good if they have actual weight to them. Make them harder, less frequent, and more rewarding for participating. This will make the world feel more alive which is kinda the entire point of dynamic content.