MMORPG

BornToDie said:

I am assuming that they would like to make it MMORPG.

Click to expand...

BornToDie said:

Ultimate goal for gaming are virtual worlds.
Everything else is bad approximation hindered by what technology allows us to do.

Click to expand...

So says you. Why is the ultimate goal a massively multiplayer world? What magical benefit does scale alone add to anything? Ignoring technological hurdles and limitations, what's to be gained from, say, 250 vs 250 player fights? Why are they so much better than 25 vs 25? What about 8v8, which is about the competitive standard right now? What I find interesting is that the Warband competitive scene started with tournaments of 10v10 or more. I've played in matches from 15v15 down to 4v4, and the current preference for 8v8 has persisted the longest and shows no sign of stopping. Why would we, after trying double the current size and finding it not to our taste, consider thirty times the current size to be ideal? Hell, I recall a while back there was a negative response to the idea of going up to 10v10 again. That's a 25% increase in players and even that wasn't accepted! So, I ask you, why do you think bigger is better?

Don't you say "it's the ultimate goal, it's what all games want to be, the only reason all games aren't MMOs is because of technical limitations," because that's demonstrably false. Counter-example: Counter-Strike. Wildly successful over a long period of time and backed by one of the biggest companies in PC gaming, yet it's not an MMO and probably never will be.

I already mentioned that in M&B MMORGP you could have arena fights between teams.
I also participated in 8v8 tournaments and it is great fun.
Having a football match 100 vs 100 would be no fun.
But having 100 v 100 siege is a lot of fun.
I am just saying that such fights are just a small part of what you could have in an MMORPG.
In MMORPG you could have small team fights, huge sieges and people doing all sort of other stuff.
And all this stuff could be more meaningful.
People could bet on the teams and make in game money of of it.
Sieges would impact kingdoms.
MMORPG wouldn't take away anything we have today but it could give so much more.
People could still choose how to play and what to do but it would give them more options, and for those who want more meaning to their action.
You could participate in a siege and not care a bit how that impacts the kingdom which gained or lost the castle. While others could feel strongly related to their kingdom resulting in a stronger emotions when you take or loose a castle.
You guys that enjoy what we have now wouldn't loose anything by making M&B MMORPG but those who enyoj real RPG could gain a lot.

So you basically want a map to travel around with some persistence to your items and character instead of a server browser. Well technology might not be standing in the way, but the time to develop it is. You also may potentially lose out one of the main strengths of the game which is customisation, at the moment server owners can make custom mods and add features server side. You would have to isolate public servers from official ones.

MMO's usually have an ongoing system of payment to help cover the larger ongoing costs of hosting servers, so subscription or F2P with DLC, both of which have their problems and are likely to end up shooting the game in the foot as the developers try to wring out money to cover those costs.

Nothing is stopping anyone from making a mod with persistence and MMO elements, CRPG and PW both approach that. Leave it as a mod and let the game come out sometime this century.

It's a case of "just because you can doesn't mean you should." The technology is there, but as Rich said it could have a serious negative impact on multiplayer mods and there would be a very significant added expense on TaleWorlds' part to maintain the servers. As Rich said, they would have to find some way to raise that money, and subscriptions, paid DLCs, and/or microtransactions are the usual methods. That also means that they would then be able to pull the plug once they move on to another game or if it was no longer profitable. They are a business, you know.

Which is why I started my thread with this kickstarter crowdfunding thingy as an example for raising money
http://www.kingdomcomerpg.com/?page_id=378.

If other companies can run successful MMORPG and other kind of multiplier servers why couldn't they.
Your comments are like no comapny ever could finance MMORPG.

Scifi is more advanced that medieval, so therefore the coming MMORPG should be in scifi setting and not medieval like M&B games has been this far.

I kind of would like to see a M&B MMORPG sometime in the future, where you could do all the stuff you described, like producing weapons and such for wars and farming tools during peacetime for example.
These things would have an influence on how wars are waged and if a kingdom prospers in peacetime or not. So a game with a player influenced economy.

But, I think there are too many technical limitations at the moment that would make a proper M&B MMORPG possible (especially network related limitations).

Or, if you would really like to overcome those limitations and make a high quality M&B MMORPG, it would require people to have a very fast internet connection.
Not everyone has a super high speed internet connection.
And even a current super high speed internet connection, does not solve the problem with latency (as far as I understand this).
So you would also need a different or better network/internet infrastructure and this is something that is up to the governments or telecommunications companies of the world and not something, a game developer could change.

What good would a game like that be if it would require that you have something like a 10 MB/s download speed internet connection, if the infrastructure is not there and only few people could play it?

Additionally, to solve all the network related issues, you would probably have to throw a gazillion moneys at it.
I don't think a Kickstarter would be enough to finance such an undertaking.
I don't think two million moneys for example, would be enough to solve all the technical problems.

Just my 2 cents.

in MnB its already punishing enough to have a ping over 80ms

the nice thing is having servers all over the world to pick from.

if you try and put everyone onto a mega server the ping would be **** for everyone at which point the game is unplayable

this isnt WoW where ping doesnt make a difference until like 150+

the gameplay of MnB just doesn't logically fit into have a massive amount of people doing things.

BornToDie said:

Which is why I started my thread with this kickstarter crowdfunding thingy as an example for raising money
http://www.kingdomcomerpg.com/?page_id=378

Click to expand...

Which is a single-player only game and won't have the long-term maintenance costs of an MMORPG. Also, short-term fundraising doesn't cover long-term, high-cost maintenance which MMO servers require.

If other companies can run successful MMORPG and other kind of multiplier servers why couldn't they.
Your comments are like no comapny ever could finance MMORPG.

Click to expand...

If you believe that then you haven't read a word I said, and that's very disrespectful. Allow me to quote:

[quote author=Orion]they would have to find some way to raise that money, and subscriptions, paid DLCs, and/or microtransactions are the usual methods.[/quote]These are the usual methods that other companies use to maintain servers. There is literally no way in which you could misconstrue my statement in the way you said unless you neglected to read it in the first place. Since you're obviously not holding up your end of the discussion and I find that disrespectful, I would like to say that you've done nothing but recycle the same statements since this thread began and have not sufficiently answered any questions posed to you. Your position is based entirely on the assumption that all games want to be/should be MMOs which has no objective basis. You clearly don't understand game development as a business or you would realize the implications that adding a massive, ongoing expense to TaleWorlds would have with regards to access to content for the lifetime of the game. You do not recognize the difficulty this would create for community content creators who most likely wouldn't have the means to provide servers for their own content but, if they did, would place TaleWorlds in a situation where their content is pay-to-play in some aspect or another while mod content would be free-to-play, thus they could potentially lose subscribers or DLC/microtransaction customers, potentially making it even less profitable.

If you want a lesson in making assumptions, modding is a good example. TaleWorlds has a long history of supporting community content, and it's no coincidence that the first significant footage we have of Bannerlord is in its scene editor. TaleWorlds thinks mods and modders are important, so it's safe to assume they will support modders in their future games. Thus, the issue regarding mod content in a hypothetical MMO scenario is entirely valid and must be addressed, but you haven't yet done that. It is not safe to assume that all games want or should be MMOs because there is no evidence to support this, and never will be considering it is an assumption of the subjective (thus non-quantifiable) beliefs and feelings of others.

I dont fell like turning mount and blade into a mmorpg its a good idea.

Mount and blade is all about making your character and creating his own history,army,dynasty, kingdom while having fun. Warband did that correctly its  so good

the most mmorpg-ish thing you will get with MnB is Persistent World, with too be honest when i downloaded it i had the time of my life joined one of the best pw clan around and it was awesome. But turning the game into a mmorpg is just wrong, having the multiplayer mode around its fine but turning the entire game into a mmorpg its just wrong, it would turn into a dull boring game really fast and it  would take all the modding community away ( with to be honest it's one of the best things that makes warband a great game )

The only thing, I hope for MnB is multiplayer its that they improve it and make it more playable at high pings, since i am a South American player i cant do much at meele at 150+ ping ( lesser than that i can do just fine ) so i usually just play as an archer or a horseman.

Amaranth the Druid said:

in MnB its already punishing enough to have a ping over 80ms

the nice thing is having servers all over the world to pick from.

if you try and put everyone onto a mega server the ping would be **** for everyone at which point the game is unplayable

this isnt WoW where ping doesnt make a difference until like 150+

the gameplay of MnB just doesn't logically fit into have a massive amount of people doing things.

Click to expand...

this, that's why don't see competitive systems in MMOs.

Not put everyone into mega server, but 2.000 people would be pretty fine with150-200km^2 map

I want bannerlord to be singleplayer, not a MMO.

agoden said:

I want bannerlord to be singleplayer, not a MMO.

Click to expand...

We all want that too.

But don't you want to see a "PW" mod with huge map ? or a MMORPG game "Based" on a PW mod of Bannerlord ?

Varrak said:

agoden said:

I want bannerlord to be singleplayer, not a MMO.

Click to expand...

We all want that too.

But don't you want to see a "PW" mod with huge map ? or a MMORPG game "Based" on a PW mod of Bannerlord ?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind seeing a version where we're each a Lord commanding an AI army, but I'd really dislike that entire army being players, i personally never enjoyed mount & blades standard multiplayer setting, it requires tons of skill that i dont have, and that would turn off many other players, which in turn would break the MMO aspect.

I don't really see each individual player controlling an army working, it would require some pretty crazy servers.

Even in instanced battles, AI would have to be handled serverside to prevent the hacking of them, which i don't think a company like blizzard could even pull off.

Imagine a hundred thousand players, each participating in a 100 man battle.
The technology just isn't there yet. ( i think, pretty clueless )

Yeah i get it you don't like multiplayer fights  But some of us like that. Also some Modders have to do some stuff like cRPG (Please far way better then cRPG, if it is possible make a server like Bannerlord version of "Persistent World")

I did not mean players controls ai armies.

Hmm.. But.. Actually it would be fun if there is a PW mod of Bannerlord, and only Kings/Khans of 6 faction can control 50-100 ai for safety of their kingdom or Khaganate cities' steets. It will be fun.

the question is, why should it be an "either/or" choice? Why can't Bannerlord offer both a single-player game, AND an MMO game (like, for instance, Shroud of the Avatar does). I'm not suggesting the game should be like SoA, but the concept could serve as an example of offering SPG and MMORPG at the same time.

@Galadourn: yeah...
my question is: why can't it be a strategic/platform/turn based/ mmo/ rpg/ singleplayer/ multiplayer/ coop/ 2 players only/ real time/ racing game?

The same question applies to chess: why can't it be a racing game? or why don't we have a choice?

ANSWER: because that is how the game is...
...
.
...
....


The same logic: why do we have to choose between opening a door or letting it closed? why can't we do both in the same time?

In regards to everyone's speculation about M&B's potential to be an MMORPG. There is already a game a lot similar that many of you have described, I suggest you all look up life is Feudal.

The_dragon said:

@Galadourn: yeah...
my question is: why can't it be a strategic/platform/turn based/ mmo/ rpg/ singleplayer/ multiplayer/ coop/ 2 players only/ real time/ racing game?

The same question applies to chess: why can't it be a racing game? or why don't we have a choice?

ANSWER: because that is how the game is...
...
.
...
....


The same logic: why do we have to choose between opening a door or letting it closed? why can't we do both in the same time?

Click to expand...

sorry, but that's stretching it by a mile; as far as I know, Bannerlord is still in the design stage. It's up to TW to decide whether they want to make it into an MMO or only a SPG.

Anyway, I hope TW are smart enough (they are, by the looks of it so far) and will realize that MMO is the way to go at some point. Even the Elder Scrolls went MMO (a lousy implementation though), I can't imagine why TW wouldn't.