Comments on: EA Mythic’s Mark Jacobs Goes And Touches That

By: Brat

Brat — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 17:09:52 +0000

Part of the draw for fantasy over sci-fi is the ability to view the game from a third person, while sci-fi and the necessity for more ranged combat is so limited in 3rd person. Not only that, people are used to 1st person when shooting a gun in a game.

Two ways to address this issue would be:

1. A quick key solution to change from 3rd to 1st person (possibly even automatic) with a crosshair where you have to actually aim at your target like an FPS.

2. Longer range shots have a much higher percentage to miss than close range. Or, depending on the weapon itself (pistol for short range, rifle for long range).

Both of these would lower the advantage of ranged combat over melee. This same system could be implemented for Fantasy as well...imagine casters and archers that have to actually aim at their targets.

By: Xilren

Xilren — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 15:50:28 +0000

One thing I've long thought on fantasy being "easier" than sci-fi is that it's a matter of scale, not just cultural familiarity. High fantasy is all about your avatar being up close and personal with everything that they do. Fighting, socializing, crafting, you name it it's all very intimate b/c it has to be. The further up the tech tree you go, the more distance, and therefor impersonal, the interactions become. The problem with the gun compared to a bow is a matter of distance, or scale. Getting shot by someone far enough away that you never saw them makes for a poor game. Add to that the accepted thought that sci-fi = "in space" and you are automatically dealing with large scale things like planets, moons, stars and up.

So, the real question is, how to do sci-fi without losing the small scale personal interaction that makes fantasy "easier"?

Plus, for some reason people really want to explore space themed games, which is a whole nother kettle of game design.

(And as already mentioned, Star wars is NOT sci-fi. It's fantasy in a future disguise. The most sci-fi part of it is the space battles which are still full of fantasy placeholders like blasters (aka colored lightning bolts) and shields (aka magic defense) and the absence of physics.)

By: Heartless Gamer

Heartless Gamer — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 13:28:42 +0000

Female Gamer you are one of the proud, one of the few… one Auto Assault (the game written off by its sugar daddy as a complete loss) player. Shut up already.

By: IanB

IanB — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:36:55 +0000

“Who ever heard of a sword in sci-fi, it just doesn\’e2\’80\’99t fit\’e2\’80\’a6 oh wait, there was that Star Wars thingy\’e2\’80\’a6″

Star Wars isn’t science fiction. Star Wars is fantasy. It has swordfighting and magic, after all. There’s very little science.

By: Kithias

Kithias — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 10:51:59 +0000

2006 and Mark Jacobs is still my god.

Who would have guessed it?

By: Brent Michael Krupp

Brent Michael Krupp — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 19:32:11 +0000

What Mist said, times 10. AO was just reskinned EQ with magic called nano.

They even had pet classes and shapechangers (a la EQ druid wolf form). Not sure how you transform into a wolf or bird with nano. They had a buffer/debuffer that was *very* close to an EQ shaman. Etc.

By: Female Gamer

Female Gamer — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:38:41 +0000

I know for example with women, there\'e2\'80\'99s an even lower attraction rate to the game if all they get to play is just a car.

So what exactly explains my playing AutoAssault?

And what's less attractive about playing a car than playing a tauren warrior? Except it's pretty hard to spin out a tauren on hard cornering.

By: Xanthippe

Xanthippe — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:12:27 +0000

“What I\’e2\’80\’99m not okay with are games that are designed to be nothing but quarter suckers in the online space. “

The whole buffbot thing was a quarter sucker, wasn’t it?

By: Tide

Tide — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 13:10:53 +0000

Eve may become one of the unique business cases out there because aside from personal burnout, there is no real way to exhaust the game. CCP just has to keep physically expanding its universe, while fixing things and adding new features for retention. But that basic ability to increase the play-space suits both veterans and newbs, since the newbs don’t have to contend for vital new shinehs if the veterans move on to those new pastures. The old sectors are new to new players.

The real-time skill advancement and tipping point you pass sometime for making money means that’s the horizon for churn must be really long. In fact, I bet CCP loses far more subs in its first few days/weeks/months than most MMO’s because the game is pretty punitive on solo, isolated newb casuals. But it makes up for it by having amazing retention, like Dave suggested.

And re. RMT’s… the one thing I truly can’t cope with is organized collusion in a game, such that if one person is being unfair you can always hope to reason or argue with them, and that way get some kind of feedback and personal satisfaction (or more info about them). But when they’re on the job you know pretty quickly there’s no way you’ll ever be able to influence them. Being unfair to other players isn’t their choice or sport or playstyle, its their *job* and they will not move from that spot or let you have a chance at that boss. That’s what professional farming is to me (and why I’m trying to do Playerep) — organized, out-of-game collusive abuse.

By: Freakazoid

Freakazoid — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 08:14:19 +0000

True, but they only lasted 4 seasons. The show didn’t get enough “good numbers” and the cost to produce it became unprofitable. I’d like to think the downfall in viewership was because of poor writing (due to ruining canon, among other things), but it could also be no one really likes star trek right now.

But in the end, Enterprise is television. MMOs are different. Lum got it down in the other post about a BSG MMO.