I think the problem a lot of people have can be taken from the term open ended. For something to be truly open ended, there will be an infinite number of possibilities for potential endings. This is damn near impossible to code and create without some level of human interaction on the other end to go "Oh crap we're out of Mtn. Dew....uh you save the kingdom and ride into the sunset."
I think what Will is talking about is games give the ability to explore other possibilities, not INFINITE possibilities. RPGs like Morrowind, Arcanum, Fallout, etc etc give you the ability to do several different things and make choices, and react to things. There will still be an ending, and it may be the same or different, but the ultimate ending isn't exactly what matters. HOW you dealt with the change does.
An example of this outside of the digital gaming world, and into the analog...I've done a lot of tabletop DMing for several different systems, ranging from D&D to Vampire to Exalted to Shadowrun. I know where the ultimate ending will be for most of these games. I'll usually make 2 or 3 endings based on choices that have been made by the players, and they will reach those endings even if they decide to "turn left" as the saying goes. The fun for me is putting things in that question the morality of players, and seeing how they react and watching them explore their own morality. A few examples of things that have had surprising endings...
Is it right to kill the person who commits evil acts for the person they love?
Is it noble to persue corrupt, evil power to use it to do good?
Is sacrificing yourself to save others noble, or just a coward's easy way out?
All of these questions I raised through scenarios, but ALL of these questions have also been asked in video games, and grappled with by me. Just like in the games, in my adventures they still wound up saving/sacking/enslaving the kingdom, but the end didn't matter. What mattered was how each idea was dealt with.
Run Blackwing Lair in WoW successfully for the first time...
Or run Ahn'Quiraj 40 man for that matter...
Then talk about the game being "Easy" and how the highs in EQ were higher
And yes I had a level 60 druid in EQ, so I feel I have some ability to comment on this.
Surprised nobody's mentioned it yet, but Katamari Demacy is perfect for the casual gamer to get into, and "We Love Katamari" has a two player mode that is awesome. The basic gameplay is you're a tiny little man with a stick ball thing, and you roll over stuff to try to roll it up into the ball. You start rolling up tiny things, like thumbtacks and coins and stuff, and eventually you are rolling up people, and trees, and buildings, and everything! I know it sounds weird, and trust me it is. The game looks like a rainbow threw up on a syrup covered kitten, but it's damn fun. Rediculously easy controls (two sticks control it all), challenging gameplay, and some serious fun are in that game. It's one of those games that anybody can play, and comes highly recommended...
Oh yeah...I wasn't paid to say any of this stuff either...now excuse me while I go roll up more stuff...
...but I'll say it again. You wanna stop goldfarming? Don't make it boring and tedious to get gold, or don't make massive amounts of gold helpful. How can this be done?
Make better skills equal better gear, and get rid of non-player bound world drops.
Get rid of massive goldsink things, such as 900g epic mounts.
Get rid of gold entirely by having an economy based on bartering and exchanging crafted goods.
People will always pay others to do things that they don't want to spend time to do themselves. If it seems like work, people will find a way to get paid for it.
For example...I mow my own lawn. I enjoy mowing my lawn. I would not pay somebody to mow my lawn. I also make money mowing my neighbor's lawn, because my neighbor does not enjoy mowing his lawn. My neighbor enjoys playing football on his lawn however, and would therefore like a nicely mowed lawn. The money he spends for me to mow his lawn, is worth him avoiding the displeasure of mowing his lawn, so he can play football on his lawn.
If he could play football on a lawn that wasn't mowed, I'm sure he'd rather do that however...
Slashdot Mirror
It's as if millions of voiced cried out and were suddenly silenced...
I think the problem a lot of people have can be taken from the term open ended. For something to be truly open ended, there will be an infinite number of possibilities for potential endings. This is damn near impossible to code and create without some level of human interaction on the other end to go "Oh crap we're out of Mtn. Dew....uh you save the kingdom and ride into the sunset." I think what Will is talking about is games give the ability to explore other possibilities, not INFINITE possibilities. RPGs like Morrowind, Arcanum, Fallout, etc etc give you the ability to do several different things and make choices, and react to things. There will still be an ending, and it may be the same or different, but the ultimate ending isn't exactly what matters. HOW you dealt with the change does. An example of this outside of the digital gaming world, and into the analog...I've done a lot of tabletop DMing for several different systems, ranging from D&D to Vampire to Exalted to Shadowrun. I know where the ultimate ending will be for most of these games. I'll usually make 2 or 3 endings based on choices that have been made by the players, and they will reach those endings even if they decide to "turn left" as the saying goes. The fun for me is putting things in that question the morality of players, and seeing how they react and watching them explore their own morality. A few examples of things that have had surprising endings... Is it right to kill the person who commits evil acts for the person they love? Is it noble to persue corrupt, evil power to use it to do good? Is sacrificing yourself to save others noble, or just a coward's easy way out? All of these questions I raised through scenarios, but ALL of these questions have also been asked in video games, and grappled with by me. Just like in the games, in my adventures they still wound up saving/sacking/enslaving the kingdom, but the end didn't matter. What mattered was how each idea was dealt with.
Run Blackwing Lair in WoW successfully for the first time... Or run Ahn'Quiraj 40 man for that matter... Then talk about the game being "Easy" and how the highs in EQ were higher And yes I had a level 60 druid in EQ, so I feel I have some ability to comment on this.
Surprised nobody's mentioned it yet, but Katamari Demacy is perfect for the casual gamer to get into, and "We Love Katamari" has a two player mode that is awesome. The basic gameplay is you're a tiny little man with a stick ball thing, and you roll over stuff to try to roll it up into the ball. You start rolling up tiny things, like thumbtacks and coins and stuff, and eventually you are rolling up people, and trees, and buildings, and everything! I know it sounds weird, and trust me it is. The game looks like a rainbow threw up on a syrup covered kitten, but it's damn fun. Rediculously easy controls (two sticks control it all), challenging gameplay, and some serious fun are in that game. It's one of those games that anybody can play, and comes highly recommended...
Oh yeah...I wasn't paid to say any of this stuff either...now excuse me while I go roll up more stuff...
When I first read the headline I thought it said "Different Breasts" and I started thinking..."Yeah...DOA is art"
...but I'll say it again. You wanna stop goldfarming? Don't make it boring and tedious to get gold, or don't make massive amounts of gold helpful. How can this be done? Make better skills equal better gear, and get rid of non-player bound world drops. Get rid of massive goldsink things, such as 900g epic mounts. Get rid of gold entirely by having an economy based on bartering and exchanging crafted goods. People will always pay others to do things that they don't want to spend time to do themselves. If it seems like work, people will find a way to get paid for it. For example...I mow my own lawn. I enjoy mowing my lawn. I would not pay somebody to mow my lawn. I also make money mowing my neighbor's lawn, because my neighbor does not enjoy mowing his lawn. My neighbor enjoys playing football on his lawn however, and would therefore like a nicely mowed lawn. The money he spends for me to mow his lawn, is worth him avoiding the displeasure of mowing his lawn, so he can play football on his lawn. If he could play football on a lawn that wasn't mowed, I'm sure he'd rather do that however...