Physics and Punishment in games.

[stormlord]

No, this is not about gravity or Einstein or prisons or criminals.

Go here:
http://forums.station.sony.com/eq/posts/list.m?topic_id=181573

That's about one of the many things I could link from live.

Push is a kind of physics. Done right, you can work around it, most of the time. Done wrong, it can be annoying. It reminds me of adventuring in Velketor's Labyrinth on the (sometimes icy) twisting turns which rise far above the entrance from outside. Done right, you can navigate it most of the time without falling down or getting lost. Done wrong, it can be a source of annoyance, especially for new players.

Generally, most of these things require you to be AT YOUR KEYBOARD. You have to pay attention. It can be very twitch-like and/or reliant on your knowledge as a player. These things are indifferent in how they punish. They don't care if you're a veteran or a noob. They will kill you regardless.

Some players feel these things are old fashioned and don't belong in modern games. Most modern games don't punish you unnecessarily. They have in-game maps and radars (for tracking nearby creatures) and creatures that don't aggro unless attacked and creatures that won't assist their friends and cliffs that you cannot fall off and fire that doesn't burn you. Broadly, they attempt to avoid punishing players for something they might not know. They (mostly) resort to punishment only after generous amounts of forewarning.

I like choice-oriented gameplay and worlds with physics. I like to be punished for things I am unaware of. It gives me a goal and makes me feel like the world is worth conquering. I hate to enter a world that's too touchy feely. I like it when I have to pay attention. What I hate most of all is when I feel I have no control. A game that cannot bite me doesn't give me any feeling of reward even if it gives me the ability to control everything.

I've made a couple posts already relating to this. Like htis for example:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=51520

[Daldaen]

Lol....

Play on live. Then talk to me about push.

[stormlord]

Lol....

Play on live. Then talk to me about push.I did play on live, all the way up to 2010. I even participated in SOF/SOD raids. I understand how bad push is during those instances. I recall us using corners to keep a mob in position. And there were those raids where the leader would say "No pets!" That's why I stated that in the current game -as is- I think that push is broke.

Don't mistake me for something I'm not. I'm not a punishment fanatic.

I am, however, fanatical about wanting a game that doesn't put me to sleep. I think the most important thing, though, is to give players TIME to correct their mistakes. EQ was never good at that.

[Humerox]

Here's (http://www.eldergame.com/2010/09/being-aware-of-genre-conventions/) an interesting article covering some of that.

[stormlord]

Here's (http://www.eldergame.com/2010/09/being-aware-of-genre-conventions/) an interesting article covering some of that.
Nice link and on target.

Basically, the ideas that players have of physics and punishment will change over time. So what might work in one "generation" won't work in the next. It continually reshapes itself into something new.

I still think there's a niche for realism in RPGs. But it'll never be mainstream.

Sometimes I think it's my programming background that makes me interested in realism. I think my personality fits an engineer more than anything else. I'm always wondernig how things work. When I see a game that's too "abstracted" I get bored with it because it's not nearly as interesting as a simulation might be.

I mean, when you boil down most RPGs, it could be just HP and DAMAGE and LEVEL. You don't need much more than that because these sum it up. That's heavily abstracted. In fact, you could just have a LEVEL and nothing else. So a level 2 would beat a level 1 dependent on the formula that's used.

How about:
Sword A (highly abstracted) - Damage: 2
Sword A (less abstracted) - Damage: 2, Type: Slashing, Weight: 4
Sword A (much less abstracted) - Damage: 2, Type: Slashing, Weight: 4, Quality: Poor, Material: Demium, Magical Properties: None, Length: Short

A highly detailed RPG can take dozens of properties and combine them in different ways in different skills. A highly abstracted game greatly reduces these things to make it more understandable and fluid.

If you abstract a game enough then there's nothing left to keep anyone interested, imho. So, another words, you cannot abstract forever. There's a limit. It's about finding hte right balance.

This all reminds me of the battle between realism and impressionism in art history.

[Autotune]

is push leaving us? what is the point of this thread? what the fuck is going on here? I need answers.

[Mcbard]

is push leaving us? what is the point of this thread? what the fuck is going on here? I need answers.

Read.

I personally like push. I think without it, certain fights could turn on auto attack, and come back minutes later to find out whether certain things died or lived. Push gives you something to manage, and keeps you attentive for the encounters. Since we're still stuck with the 32k hp cap it's not as big of a deal now as it will be later (AoW) since most fights end so quickly, but I like having to coordinate mob locations with push. It adds a new element to an already terribly simple, and archaic combat system that involves turning on auto attack, letting the RNG do it's job, clicking the 1/2 melee skills you have and then having the monster fall over and give you loot. It's also nice on certain fights where it completely benefits you such as Vox, where when she begins trying to CH herself you can move her in order to interrupt it.

tl;dr (for stealin)
1. I think EQ combat is entirely too simple, and push is a nice mechanic
2. Push is a 2 way street, and it sometimes benefits people who use it well

Edit: As for the argument about punishment... well.. I'm all for it. If I didn't like punishment in my games, the rewards would feel that much worse, and I probably wouldn't be playing a 13 year old emulated MMO and my Nintendo all the time. I would buy an X-box 360 and go get yelled at by 17 year old virgins playing Call of Duty or something.

[Messianic]

It's also nice on certain fights where it completely benefits you such as Vox, where when she begins trying to CH herself you can move her in order to interrupt it.

I was wondering if my memory of push stopping CH's was wrong...I seem to remember push as being critical to stopping CH's in Kael, and one of my zam posts from long ago (Madmmiller) seems to corroborate that:

http://eqbeastiary.allakhazam.com/search.shtml?id=5700&mid=101350540691812#msg101365961938183

So I like push. I think it actually had a function in the game.

[Autotune]

Read.

I personally like push. I think without it, certain fights could turn on auto attack, and come back minutes later to find out whether certain things died or lived. Push gives you something to manage, and keeps you attentive for the encounters. Since we're still stuck with the 32k hp cap it's not as big of a deal now as it will be later (AoW) since most fights end so quickly, but I like having to coordinate mob locations with push. It adds a new element to an already terribly simple, and archaic combat system that involves turning on auto attack, letting the RNG do it's job, clicking the 1/2 melee skills you have and then having the monster fall over and give you loot. It's also nice on certain fights where it completely benefits you such as Vox, where when she begins trying to CH herself you can move her in order to interrupt it.

tl;dr (for stealin)
1. I think EQ combat is entirely too simple, and push is a nice mechanic
2. Push is a 2 way street, and it sometimes benefits people who use it well

Edit: As for the argument about punishment... well.. I'm all for it. If I didn't like punishment in my games, the rewards would feel that much worse, and I probably wouldn't be playing a 13 year old emulated MMO and my Nintendo all the time. I would buy an X-box 360 and go get yelled at by 17 year old virgins playing Call of Duty or something.

i figured this had nothing to do with our server and that it was about a live server. lame.

[Lucidus]

I was wondering if my memory of push stopping CH's was wrong...I seem to remember push as being critical to stopping CH's in Kael.

Your memory is serving you well. It was the most practical of two options, the other being mana sieve.

[Daldaen]

On P99 keep push, people aren't swinging all that often (there aren't Flurries or many classes with Tripple attack or swarm pets here).

On live however it is a different story (which is why I made my original post). I take a very different stance regarding push on there. With soo many different hits coming in to a mob at a time (between aformentioned methods), push is absolutely fucking ridiculous on live... not so much on P99 though its more feasible and manageable.

For the lolz: http://forums.station.sony.com/eq/posts/list.m?topic_id=181573

[Nirgon]

If push is a classic element, and it is, it should stay. Stay on the door says Project 1999 Classic Everquest.

[Daldaen]

If push is a classic element, and it is, it should stay. Stay on the door says Project 1999 Classic Everquest.

WTB charming of Sirran!

[Autotune]

WTB charming of Sirran!

you can.

[stormlord]

Your memory is serving you well. It was the most practical of two options, the other being mana sieve.
Too bad that kind of thing couldn't have been used more. I didn't even know it was possible. Insofar as I have played EQ over the years, push was only something I payed attention to when I didn't want the opponent to fall off a ledge or I just wanted to try to keep it in one place so I'd maneuver myself in an attempt to equalize its movement (stop it from moving). That was what happened hte vast majority of time. It was only in late 2009 and early 2010 when I started doing raids that I noticed how much push impacts raids.

I really wish games would make me think more about the environment when I'm playing. In a lot of em, you just rush through and kill whatever it's you're going to kill and then move on. That's not the level of involvement I'm looking for. I'm looking for dangerous cliffs and swinging bridges and slippery things and roots/rocks that snare you and ropes and climbable things and raging fires that burn both opponent/player and so on. I know that WoW has used the environment in some of its instances. So it's not an old idea.

I was thinking earlier about how we struggle so hard to get new weapons and new armor so that we can kill things better but the idea of trying to get weight reduction bags so that we can carry heavier things doesn't seem to interest as many people. I think part of that reason is because loot in EQ didn't scale with each expansion. In expansions the cash loot was mostly gems/ingredients/etc, not heavy things. There were some places where there were heavy things. Killing hill giants in rathe mountains would benefit those who had weight reduction and coin purses (WR), for example. But most of the game, especially at the higher levels, did not benefit those with WR. It was only rare, specific cases. Additionally, I did not ever have much luck in finding WR bags. In all the years I played, I might have only found a couple on loot. Over 95% of the WR bags I got were from bazaar or in trade. In fact, I actually didn't get any WR bags for the first several years. I rarely ever needed them. The question is if EQ had had more heavy cash items in-game would it have made WR more interesting? Could WR have been a more important part of the game? Or is the whole idea somehow not something most players are interested in? Do they like non-combat things to be abstracted?

I think the reason these kinds of things always interest me is because i'm an engineer (software). I look at systems as things to overcome. It's fun. But non-engineers are bored to death when they see detailed systems. This is especially true if it's not combat-related, but evne then it's unwanted. They just wnat to skip it. It makes me feel alone in most circles. I like games that they don't. I'll always be in the minority.

But you know... this world is big enough to have a game for everyone.

[Lucidus]

Too bad that kind of thing couldn't have been used more ... push was only something I payed attention to when I didn't want the opponent to fall off a ledge

Classic EQ was a game of position. Success and failure hinged on knowing where to stand and when to stand there. The lesson of Velious was that you had to have leaders who understood those rules, and melee who could anticipate and execute the changes necessary to satisfy those rules.

Anecdote: Years ago when Vex Thal was new, we engaged one of the midlevel mobs by pushing him into a wall. However, too many of our melee stood directly behind the mob, so it was pushed into and through the corner, falling to the lower level. The boss then proceeded to run back to the raid from the lower level, building up a train of ~80 spawns plus at least one more boss. Somewhere I have an epic screenshot of that horde running through the door at the far end of the room.

I really wish games would make me think more about the environment when I'm playing ... I think the reason these kinds of things always interest me is because i'm an engineer (software). I look at systems as things to overcome.

Try out EVE Online sometime. Hidden beneath the gorgeous graphics is a bunch of math equations, and the secret to success is to balance the equation faster than the other guy. Aside from Everquest, it is the only other game I've seen that will actually cause a heart attack.

[stormlord]

I was browsing this thread when I got to thinking about the environment again. I know this might be kind of off topic, but ....

There're a lot of arcade games where the trick is not in how to kill the boss and/or his minions, but it's how to survive pitfalls (traps) and jump at the right time (to avoid falling to your death) and knowing where to go (not to take the wrong turn because you only have so many lives and you shouldn't waste them) and know where the bonuses are (things that give you extra lives and/or points and/or levels and/or gold)... all with the goal in mind of finding TREASURE (or whatever it's you're after). Why don't MMO's have more instances or zones or (insert place that you go to do a mission or task or adventure) where the objective is not to kill things but to survive the environment so that you can collect things (treasure, gold, points, etc). Instead of monsters that want to kill you, there're moving platforms and high cliffs that you must climb and traps that you must avoid or disarm and puzzles you must solve (maybe it has a big treasure inside) and so on.

Why can't it be a combination of monsters AND environment? I know I'm not the only one to bring this up because I see bits and pieces of this in almost all MMOs, including EQ. Just not very much. Mostly, what you find is that the enemy is a monster. The environment is usually just a second thought or worse even.

This same idea of battling an enemy (whatever it's) to get things (treasure, points, experience, gold, etc) can be translated to WR bags and other WR things. We get in the mode of thinking that killing monsters is the only fun thing to do. But it's not. Everything imaginable can be made fun. It just needs to be developed. My mode of thinking is that encumberance is boring to players because developers failed in their job to translate it to something fun and challenging. But I know that this is just me tricking myself. The reality is that I'm an engineer and I'm attracted to things most non-engineers are not. I'm like a man who is sexually attracted to bumps on a log and disliked. They see me with a log and shake their heads and all walk away with shame on their faces.

[messiah_b]

I can't answer your poll question due to an indefinite article pronoun.

I don't know who 'they' is.

[Mcbard]

WTB charming of Sirran!

Sold to the highest bidder.
http://i.imgur.com/VN4C6.jpg

[Kika Maslyaka]

actually WoW has plenty of raiding instances containing arcade elements.
And this is EXACTLY what majority of P99 player dislike the most in WoW - the need to move around and click things/jump through hoops etc - the majority here prefer casual and slow paced pull-tank-heal game ;)

[Flunklesnarkin]

I kinda want to change my vote to yes now.. so i can be a hipster :(

[Daldaen]

Sold to the highest bidder.
http://i.imgur.com/VN4C6.jpg

Baller.... last I heard they weren't putting it in because it was deemed overpowered.

[Messianic]

Lol sirran's dps is absolutely jacked

[Frieza_Prexus]

You should see him first hand when he's hasted and gotten mage goodies. It's quite spectacular.

[YendorLootmonkey]

I would like to humbly point out that the Sister of the Spire is screaming my name in that screenshot because I am making her climax in the background, and it in no way has anything to do with eating a death touch.

[chimare123]

you're not the only whore here

[stormlord]

actually WoW has plenty of raiding instances containing arcade elements.
And this is EXACTLY what majority of P99 player dislike the most in WoW - the need to move around and click things/jump through hoops etc - the majority here prefer casual and slow paced pull-tank-heal game ;)
I know that's why I mentioned WoW in a couple posts in this thread. I'm aware that they have used the envrionment in some of their instances. But it's not at the level I'm talking about here. Most MMORPGs focus almost solely on killing monsters. What I'm saying is the RPG culture is a broad one and MMOs should branch out more so that gameplay is more diverse. We all know most anything can be turned into a game. That idea should be applied to this so that MMORPGs aren't just about killing monsters and getting better armor/weapons.

Combat is a traditional DnD kind of thing. It hails back to the roots of RPGs. No RPG can come out without combat and claim itself to be traditional in anyway. I just want to see more branching out.

A post in this thread linked this:
http://www.eldergame.com/2010/09/being-aware-of-genre-conventions/

... That link refers to "abstraction."

I address it somewhat here:
http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=485093&postcount=5

Traditionally, most everything is abstracted while combat is not (as much). If a game is going to be more diverse it will have to probably abstract combat a bit more than is commonly the case. This allows the developers to add more detail to other things so that they can keep us interested. So what comes out of this is a gameplay that has you doing different things with just the right amount of abstractness to them.

You can see this in all sorts of games. Ship games add more detail to ship combat, while taking away from other things. Melee/magic games will have lots of detail in close combat, generally, while they'll abstract ship-based combat a great deal by comparison. Games cannot do everything.

You can't give everything detail because it requires time and money to develop the mechanics and the risk/reward and to debug and so on. You have to pick and choose. Can't have it all. Additionally, players can't do everything either. They have to pick something to focus on. Most players like combat (at the moment).

Something similar can be seen in different types of RPGs. They have to juggle detail. For example, in text-based RPGs, you saw a lot of detail in skills and mechanics. I think tbe real reason this is the case is not because they're hardcore or old-fashioned. Rather it's because they don't have to worry about 3d models or 3d environments or even graphics (for that matter). You'd be surprised how expensive and time consuming it's to create 3d worlds, as opposed to text-based worlds. Not to say that creating text-based worlds is easy.

Changing technology can also change how things are weighted in games. For instance, eventually we will have non-players that we can speak to through voice or typing. Not because players will change and think that's fun, but because improving software will allow it to happen. On the other hand, attitudes towards this kind of gameplay might change once the technology is able to produce smooth and seamless communication. No more will non-players act like scripts and disappoint us. What do I mean by all of this? Well look at exhibit A: text-based MUDs. Gamers played them a lot in hte 1980's. Does this mean they didn't prefer 3d MMORPGs? Of course not. 3d MMORPGs didn't even exist yet because the processing and software demands were not being met. It just means that the technology couldn't produce acceptable 3d worlds, so players weren't interested. Similarly, being able to produce acceptable natural language in player to non-player voice/text communications might open some new doors that were previously closed tight due (in part) to deficiencies.

One day, players will EXPECT non-players to act smart. A non-player that acts as it does today, maybe 20 years from now, would be seen in the same way that we see text-based worlds; disapprovingly.

Although I have to say that some of the "natural" language parsing in text-based muds is markedly better than in modern MMORPGs. This is mostly because the interface is text-based and functional communication is necessary. But it's still far, far from being smooth and seamless. And even if I could talk to a non-player in a natural sort of way, if it has nothing to say or add or has no opinions or memories then it's boring.

I'm straying off topic here. I started with abstraction and ended with (the physics of) how you pick what to abstract. What to abstract is limited by time and money and influenced by technology and the type of game. Whether something is fun or not is too subjective since I think ti's fun to look at numbers. There's a lot of things that I think are fun and that most others don't. So I'm trying to objectively figure out what abstraction is.

[EnnoiaII]

Push will be around until forever. Play with less terrible tanks and it becomes a non-issue.

[Vondra]

I love that in anything I see on here, whether image or video, if a ranger is involved it tends to feature them getting death touched.

If someone posted a video of them doing low level grouping in oasis, somewhere in the video, people would be talking about rangers getting death touched in /ooc.

[Lagaidh]

I played from 1999 through 2005 with Dragons of Norrath being my last expansion where I engaged in raid content (I still love that Clawhammer!)

As a paladin... I personally loved push. I would use my knockback stuns to perfectly place my tanking objective. I could counteract casters. The trick was that you face the way you wanted the mob to go. If you needed the mob to come closer to you, you would face backwards, cast the knockback stun, and then turn around to resume fighting.

Any caster with a knockback spell could do this. But it seemed few knew about it. I think in that light it added interesting wrinkles to otherwise boring fights.

Of course with my guild, I always said if we were fighting in a zone the size of west karana, and that zone had a single tree in it, well we'd figure out a way to push our raid mob up that damned tree.