Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ FASA video game rights back where they belong

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Dec 7 2007, 12:23 AM

http://kotaku.com/gaming/come-to-daddy/shadowrun-mechwarrior-safely-with-fasa-founder-331022.php.

Summary:

QUOTE

Those worried about the fate of Shadowrun, MechWarrior, and Crimson skies following the closing of FASA Studios need not worry at all; the licenses for those properties have been securely in the hands of FASA, WizKids (HeroClix), and 42 Entertainment (ilovebees) founder Jordan Weisman. The announcement was made on the website of Weisman's latest venture, Smith & Tinker Inc. back in mid-October. The company's plans for the properties is still up in the air.

Posted by: Stahlseele Dec 7 2007, 01:09 AM

sadly did not stop M$ from killing off Shadowrun Online . . those guys sure would have taken them up on their offer <.< . .

Posted by: Mr. Man Dec 7 2007, 05:07 AM

I doubt it. Those guys weren't exactly going about development in a professional manner.

Besides, every day that Shadowrun isn't an MMORPG is a good day.

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Dec 7 2007, 01:15 PM

There has been speculation already that Smith & Tinker might be gearing towards some MMO, but I'm not so sure. They are hiring a lot of "Web 2.0"/Alternative Reality Gaming people, not traditional video game programmers. Maybe some sort of online social software for gaming.

Posted by: DTFarstar Dec 7 2007, 01:18 PM

Oh come on guys, you know your life isn't complete till you have grouped with a Troll with the street name "T-Bagz" and watch as he constantly walks around resting his nuts on the top of every dwarfs head.

Chris

Posted by: Stahlseele Dec 7 2007, 02:25 PM

you are a horrible horrible person . . *gg*

Posted by: nezumi Dec 7 2007, 02:48 PM

I can now imagine how the Taliban must have felt when it finally drove the USSR out of Afghanistan...

We seriously beat back the evil empire? How much did Jordan have to pay to get the ip?

Posted by: eidolon Dec 7 2007, 03:07 PM

QUOTE (Mr. Man)

Besides, every day that Shadowrun isn't an MMORPG is a good day.

Preach it, brother!

Posted by: martindv Dec 7 2007, 04:47 PM

QUOTE (nezumi)

I can now imagine how the Taliban must have felt when it finally drove the USSR out of Afghanistan...

We seriously beat back the evil empire?

Next: The United States.

Posted by: Backgammon Dec 7 2007, 05:46 PM

WTF that was pointless and unnecessary flamebait. Go pick a fight somewhere else

Posted by: Irian Dec 7 2007, 06:09 PM

Let's hope that "Online Gaming" means something like Neverwinter Nights and not an MMORPG... I would really hate to hear that the great message the M$ isn't involved anyl longer makes room for the bad message that it will only be an MMORPG... Personally, I simply don't like MMORPGs and a Shadowrun MMORPG is exactly the same as no Shadowrun game for me...

Posted by: Eleazar Dec 7 2007, 06:37 PM

The only way Shadowrun being an MMORPG would be good is if the game innovated the genre. By this innovation, people would actually consider calling the genre MMO-REALRPG. Rather than the MMO-PSEUDORPG we most unfortunately have these days. I don't think there has been an RPG yet that has been able to fully capture the tabletop experience. Maybe the Baldur's Gate and NWN series, but these do not fit too well into the current MMORPG paradigm.

Given what the definition of MMORPG currently means, I would be most displeased to hear of a new Shadowrun game from this genre. If anything, I would like to see a Mass Effect-like Shadowrun game.

Posted by: Adarael Dec 7 2007, 06:52 PM

Shadowrun MMO:

"WTB Panthor Cannen!"
"LFG SK Prime! need shammy!"
"WTS epic MBWIII Beta x4! 2 mil each!"
"omg nub l2p ur adept! lol y u use element strike?"
"Lol ares alpha = street sam drop, not 4 bounty hunter! NUB!"

<shudders>
Yes, I agree with Mr. Man.

Posted by: Irian Dec 7 2007, 07:02 PM

A MMO-RPG can't exist. Most people don't want to roleplay, they just want to collect exp, equipment, etc. while chatting with their pseudo-friends. Roleplaying will always stay a niche (and source of inspiration) for the mainstream online games.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Dec 8 2007, 05:05 PM

You know what I recently figured out about myself? I really prize *atmosphere* in a video game. Obviously that's not my only criteria or I wouldn't play NES games but atmosphere is something I like a lot.

First person FPS type interfaces as with Deus Ex or System Shock 2 provide atmosphere. Online meta-gaming frenzies do not.

Posted by: mattness pl Dec 8 2007, 06:35 PM

Good news before christmas
I'm just afraid that SR would not be first IP they will work on.

Posted by: imperialus Dec 8 2007, 07:13 PM

*does backflips*

Posted by: hyzmarca Dec 8 2007, 07:30 PM

It should be a plot-heavy third-person squad-based tactical role-playing beat-em-up shooter with (up to) 8-person co-op and (up to) 32-person (up to) 4-way mission-based competitive and unique online tournament maps and missions. Its characters should include a bloodthirsty giant-rainbow-mohawk-sporting troll with dual chainsaw cyberarms and a lesbian porn star ninja assassin on the run from organized crime. The tone and gameplay should be somewhere between Deus-ex, Rainbow Six, Giants: Citizen Kabuto, Fallout, and The Lost Vikings.

Posted by: DTFarstar Dec 8 2007, 09:36 PM

Man, The Lost Vikings was such a fun game.

Chris

Posted by: Fortune Dec 9 2007, 01:09 AM

QUOTE (DTFarstar)

Man, The Lost Vikings was such a fun game.

In what way?

I haven't played many games, but want to, and am looking for suggestions for old (but not too old) games like Deus Ex.

Posted by: Eurotroll Dec 9 2007, 01:24 AM

Old but not too old? Heh.

Just to give you an idea: Lost Vikings was made by Blizzard when they were still called "Silicon & Synapses".

(It's also a SNES/DS game.)

Posted by: hyzmarca Dec 9 2007, 01:47 AM

The Lost Vikings can best be described as a side-scrolling squad-based action puzzle game.

You have three lost Vikings whom you guide through several stages. Each has his own unique abilities and they must be used in concert to defeat obstacles and enemies.

Posted by: Fortune Dec 9 2007, 06:52 AM

Ah, ok. Thanks.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Dec 9 2007, 11:36 PM

IIRC they could eat steaks and recover from grevious bodily harm. Protein, baby!

Posted by: Narse Dec 10 2007, 04:29 AM

QUOTE (Fortune @ Dec 8 2007, 08:09 PM)

QUOTE (DTFarstar @ Dec 9 2007, 07:36 AM)

Man, The Lost Vikings was such a fun game.

In what way?

I haven't played many games, but want to, and am looking for suggestions for old (but not too old) games like Deus Ex.

Really OT, but there is an awesome game that came out for consoles several years ago. I've only played it at a friend's house, but it rocked my socks. It is really heavy on the story elements and quite a bit lighter on the gameplay, so if that is what your into you should check it out. It has a really unique way of telling the story too. Good stuff.

Its called Indigo Prophecy in the US, and I believe it was released abroad as Fahrenheit. Check it out.

I'd recommend Deus Ex, but you're already in the loop on that one.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 10 2007, 04:56 AM

It's more interesting than it is good, but it's still pretty good. I second the recommendation. Just try not to take the tutorial the wrong way, if you run through it.

~J

Posted by: Mercer Dec 10 2007, 05:06 AM

QUOTE (Irian)

Most people don't want to roleplay, they just want to collect exp, equipment, etc. while chatting with their pseudo-friends.

Wait, you mean you don't do that in tabletop games?

I played Psi-Ops for the PS2, good mix of standard FPS and psychic powers (telekinesis, clairvoyance); I was really bored with FPS's at the time so I never finished it. The body modelling was good (when you flung a sec guard with your telekinesis, he flew like a rag doll; there's something inherently satisfying about flinging a guy with your mind-power and seeing his head catch on a doorjam), and the cut scenes had what was probably one of the more oblique Simpson's references I've seen, but I only got about halfway through. Its about as close to being a combat mage as a game can manage, though.

I have friends who got seriously into Knights of the Old Republic when it came out, and the Vampire:TM computer game. KotOR was interesing because it was built around d20 mechanics. I always wondered what a console game would play like basd around a good tabletop system. V:TM seemed like a pretty straight forward shoot-em up, with vampires.

One difficulty I see with making an SR game is its pretty hard to get a consensus on what an SR tabletop game is supposed to be like. Plus, their very different animals, vg's and tabletops. I enjoy both, but I enjoy them for different reasons.

Posted by: kzt Dec 10 2007, 05:14 AM

I suspect it's a lot easier to get general consensus on what an SR tabletop game is NOT supposed to be like.

Posted by: FlakJacket Dec 11 2007, 02:54 AM

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

and The Lost Vikings.

Gods, there's a blast from the past. Now I'm going to have to dig out the old Super Nintendo and play it again. Plus I'm getting the urge to write them up as adept or magician Shadowrun characters using the Norse magic rules.

Posted by: Fortune Dec 11 2007, 03:06 AM

I appreciate the info, thanks.

QUOTE (Narse)

I'd recommend Deus Ex, but you're already in the loop on that one.

I only know it through word of mouth (almost exclusively from this forum), so I am not that in the loop.

Posted by: Tanka Dec 11 2007, 06:02 AM

QUOTE (Narse)

QUOTE (Fortune @ Dec 8 2007, 08:09 PM)

QUOTE (DTFarstar @ Dec 9 2007, 07:36 AM)

Man, The Lost Vikings was such a fun game.

In what way?

I haven't played many games, but want to, and am looking for suggestions for old (but not too old) games like Deus Ex.

Caveat: The first two thirds is quite possibly the most intriguing game I've played in ever.

The last third? Pure, total, utter shit. The story takes a swan dive to the pavement and never recovers.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Dec 11 2007, 06:18 AM

QUOTE (Tanka)

QUOTE (Narse @ Dec 10 2007, 12:29 AM)

QUOTE (Fortune @ Dec 8 2007, 08:09 PM)

QUOTE (DTFarstar @ Dec 9 2007, 07:36 AM)

Man, The Lost Vikings was such a fun game.

In what way?

I haven't played many games, but want to, and am looking for suggestions for old (but not too old) games like Deus Ex.

Caveat: The first two thirds is quite possibly the most intriguing game I've played in ever.

The last third? Pure, total, utter shit. The story takes a swan dive to the pavement and never recovers.

Wait. Deus Ex, Lost Vikings, or Indigo Dye?

Posted by: mfb Dec 11 2007, 06:23 AM

Indigo. and the gameplay is... ugh. you basically play Simon the whole time, interspersed with button-mashing sessions (a la the torture scene in MGS). it was a fun game to watch someone else play, but i wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole.

Posted by: hyzmarca Dec 11 2007, 06:54 AM

Fahrenheit was a graphical adventure, and was intended to revive the genre in the modern era. But it played like a graphical adventure, and there is a very good reason why the genre took a nosedive in the first place. That sort of huge-world puzzle-solving gameplay can be combined with high-quality action these days.

Posted by: Narse Dec 11 2007, 06:57 AM

Well, I haven't played the entire thing, and I did mention that it isn't esspecially awesome in the gameplay department, but the way it pulled off the interactive storytelling I found intriguing and really quite good.

Posted by: Critias Dec 11 2007, 06:58 AM

It also sucked how distracting the combat system was -- and that the big Matrix-esque rooftop fight scene wasn't an animation you could unlock and watch at the end of the game.

No, instead you got ice skating, woohoo!

Posted by: Narse Dec 11 2007, 07:00 AM

Indigo Prophecy had combat!???

Wait, I think I am royally confused...

Which game are we all talking about?

Posted by: Critias Dec 11 2007, 07:03 AM

Yes, Indigo Prophecy had combat. It just sucked.

Posted by: Narse Dec 11 2007, 07:08 AM

Your kidding right? It must not have been a core mechanic or I can't think that they'd wait so long to introduce it. (I think I got over an hour into the game). As far as I could tell it just had interactive cinematic cut scenes with some weird joystick controls. Wow, I really need to finish off that game....

Posted by: mfb Dec 11 2007, 07:17 AM

the combat was basically the same as the rest of the game--it was a puzzle, and winning the puzzle meant you punched/dodged/whatever.

Posted by: kzt Dec 11 2007, 07:18 AM

QUOTE (Narse)

Wow, I really need to finish off that game....

It kind of sounds like a shredder should do a good job at that....

Posted by: Thanee Dec 11 2007, 08:57 AM

Damn, there go my plans to win the lottery and then buy the IP from Microsoft and make a Shadowrun MMORPG, which would truely redefine the genre. So far, my plans have had suffered from a little slowdown in the first stage, though.

Bye
Thanee

Posted by: Critias Dec 11 2007, 09:28 AM

QUOTE (Narse @ Dec 11 2007, 02:08 AM)

The combat was just like the cinematic cut scenes with weird joystick controls. When it said to hit up, you had to hit up. When it said to hit left, you hit left. Meanwhile, all kinds of cool super-powered asskicking is going on on-screen and you don't get to see any of it because you're so fucking freaked out by trying to frantically hit the puzzle bullshit with the controller that you can't tear your eyes away for even a split second.

And then -- and, again, to me this was the real kick in the nuts -- the big climactic fight scene wasn't something you could watch after you beat the game. Out of all the cut scenes and cinematics you could kick back and view to your heart's content, without all the button-mashing interrupting and distracting you...for some reason, the fight scene wasn't an option. Instead you unlocked (yes, really) ice skating, complete with an alternate costume and the same weird-ass puzzle controls!

Indigo Prophecy was a really neat idea for a game. The immersion was a cool concept, the attention to detail was neat, the first two-thirds of the storyline were really sweet. But the last third or so of it, and the execution of their concept, just really left it a bad overall gaming experience.

Posted by: Mr. Man Dec 11 2007, 10:36 AM

QUOTE (Critias)

I had a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon%27s_Lair flashback when I read this. That game was also a lot of fun (to watch other people play).

Posted by: Blade Dec 11 2007, 10:40 AM

Actually some of the combat scenes were ok (especially at the beginning). For example the action scene with the bugs in the office was consistent: when a bug jumped towards you you had to push the down button to duck under it. Just like in old cinematic games, except that back then they didn't tell you which button to press, not even when to press a button (leading to games like Braindead 13 where you spent most of your time watching your character die in hundereds different ways).

But at the end of the game, the ridiculous Matrix fights don't make any sense. The buttons don't match what's going on on the screen. You press all the right buttons at the right time... and your character gets his ass kicked (but not as much as if you didn't press the right buttons). So you're just watching a movie and pressing random buttons, except that if you press the wrong buttons your character will get killed.

Posted by: Kool Kat Dec 11 2007, 02:29 PM

That is great news indeeeeed. Kool Kat is a pleased virtual kitty.

As far as Shadowrun translating into a computer game... I have been dying for a GOOD Shadowrun game on the PC. I don't care if it is an MMO or FPS... I just want a Shadowrun game that captures the spirit, violence and overall cool factor that is Shadowrun. With today's graphic engines I think it is high time to see some kick ass FPS storydriven game with a GOOD Matrix immersion system. Hell I could even play if it was like... Call of Duty 12; Shadowrun where you play several different characters through a buildling storyline or even a Neverwinter Nights like engine.

Give me something!

Posted by: Adam Dec 11 2007, 03:47 PM

Do bear in mind that according to every announcement [including the one on Smith and Tinkers' website], that S&T is just licensing the rights from MS -- they didn't buy the rights outright.

Posted by: Blade Dec 11 2007, 04:00 PM

I can imagine buying a right to sell it later or to keep it for later.
But licensing means you want to use it, right?

Posted by: DTFarstar Dec 11 2007, 05:26 PM

Generally more of an intent, licensing something-especially from M$ is a bit expensive just for a want. I would say it is a pretty sage assumption that they are planning something.

Chris

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 11 2007, 05:32 PM

Or you want to keep anyone else from using it for as long as the license lasts, providing the license is exclusive. Or you want to make someone think you want to use it. The "want to use it" option is generally the most likely reason, but not the only possibility.

~J

Posted by: Adam Dec 11 2007, 06:32 PM

I'm not saying anything about S&T's intent [and don't know anything about it, either], but what I'm saying is: the former FASA properties have not been "saved from Microsoft" or anything like that. From everything I can tell, it's just a license deal; more or less the same sort of situation as Catalyst licensing Shadowrun from WizKids, just a different set of rights.

Posted by: nezumi Dec 11 2007, 07:56 PM

Clearly we need someone to break into MS's offices and steal the rights.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Dec 11 2007, 09:26 PM

Gee... That sounds a bit... Shadowy.

And I daresay on an expedition like that, there would be a lot of running (like you stole something), woulden't there be?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Dec 12 2007, 03:24 PM

It does mean, though, that it's far more likely that something will be done with those rights rather than sit and gather dust in Microsoft's Basement of Unprofitable Ideas. It also means that FASA Studio won't have anything to do with whatever comes next with those rights and that someone with a personal connection to Shadowrun's roots will.

Everything I've been able to find out about Smith & Tinker suggests they are geared towards "transmedia." In the past, transmedia has been used by properties like The Matrix, Lost and Heroes as a way of promoting a fictional setting across many forms of media simultaneously, such as movies, television, cell phone short episodes, comics, online animations, anime, video games etc. Looks like Smith & Tinker is interested in that sort of thing, as well as adding toys to that mix. Transmedia Shadowrun sounds really cool, though I have no idea how that would bump up against the publishing rights.

Posted by: martindv Dec 12 2007, 11:57 PM

Just what the world needs--more ARGs.

Posted by: Narse Dec 17 2007, 11:59 PM

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite)

...
It also means that FASA Studio won't have anything to do with whatever comes next with those rights and that someone with a personal connection to Shadowrun's roots will.
...

Just thought that I'd point out that FASA studio (i.e. the video game design studio) Has been disbanded by MS. I was under the impression that most of its employees were subsumed into other devisions of MS's software development section.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Dec 18 2007, 08:51 PM

QUOTE (Narse)

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite @ Dec 12 2007, 10:24 AM)

...
It also means that FASA Studio won't have anything to do with whatever comes next with those rights and that someone with a personal connection to Shadowrun's roots will.
...

Wonderful. We can expect more quality product from the 'soft, then.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 18 2007, 08:56 PM

Um, you didn't happen to think that this team was particularly bad or something, did you?

(Not to disparage the 'Soft's developers. I'm sure they've got bad ones around, but from what I hear most of the suck is introduced at the management level.)

~J

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Dec 18 2007, 08:59 PM

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

Lots of people on these boards was saying that Shadowrun the video game was a mediocre project and that the lack of a single player mode was just a cheap effort to slash man-hours and not need any creativity in terms of level design.

Posted by: nezumi Dec 18 2007, 10:07 PM

I've been loitering around the MS forums for a while, kicking out windows when no one is looking...

Yeah, about a third of the team was let go. Unfortunately, that seems to include the only guy on the team who actually played Shadowrun before the project was started and liked it (he actually has a Shadowrun Duels figure modeled after him!) Fortunately the guy is working again for... darn it, forgot the company. Someone that bought a bunch of pieces of Interplay and is based out of Illinois.)

Posted by: Stahlseele Dec 18 2007, 10:26 PM

Berthesda?
Same guys making the new fallout?
allways been saying, that a shadowrun mod for fallout 2 or tactics would have been RAD indeed *g*

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 18 2007, 10:39 PM

QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)

Well, there's a few parts to this. One thing that is necessary is to recognize that there is a difference between a bad product, a bad team, and a collection of less-than-capable individuals. While these things are relatively interchangeable in one direction (less-than-capable people usually combine into a bad team, and a bad team usually produces a bad product), it isn't the case in the other—less so in the pairing of the first two parts, though a good team can produce bad products, but very much so in the pairing of the second two—taking individually competent people and combining them will not always, and I might go so far as to say will frequently not, produce a good team.

Thus, the question's whether the individuals were bad, or if the rot started at the team level. If the latter, most of the individual members should be able to be placed into a team in such a way that it is a good team, which means that (especially for an organization this large, with this many teams) if they were hirable in the first place it's probably a good first choice to try to put them somewhere else, in a good team, rather than toss them out on the kerb.

So now I get down to the question of why I think it may have been a team-level issue.

The first is Mitch Gitelman, who was a manager and thus in a position to dictate much of the tone, focus, and design of the game. I'm not going to bother providing a detailed attack on him; if you don't already know, a quick search to see some of his public statements during development and shortly post-release should suffice.

The second is the nature of the things you mention (I'm going to assume they're all true right now—I don't know what their reason for not including a single-player mode, and don't really care enough to determine the truth). They're all pretty explainable by bad direction at the top—slashing man-hours isn't a decision that most of the team makes, for example, that's a managerial decision. Level design is a little less direct, but I'm guessing that the game has bad level design because they didn't spend much money on level design, which means they didn't get many level designer and didn't have them spend a lot of time on this game. This would also be a managerial decision, as the level designers don't choose whether they get assigned to the project and in what numbers, or how long they're given to fiddle around and see how things work. It's possible that they got a proper team together and they were simply composed of bad designers, but I'm not sure I give much credence to that.

Finally, there's the fact that from what I know, management is a fundamental weak point throughout Microsoft. All of my information is from third parties, so I'll defer to them for the defense of this (the first example that comes to mind is Mini-Microsoft). If true, this would increase the degree to which it is reasonable to assume managerial issues.

So yeah, what you say doesn't indicate the members of the team are necessarily not the kind of people you'd want to have working on your game.

~J

Posted by: nezumi Dec 19 2007, 01:39 PM

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

Berthesda?
Same guys making the new fallout?
allways been saying, that a shadowrun mod for fallout 2 or tactics would have been RAD indeed *g*

No, Bethesda is based out of Bethesda (MD). Lemme check... Volition.

Like I said, a good guy, actually plays Shadowrun and was the only developer who came to the forums to answer questions, explain things and so on, and never once told a lie (even when he was put in a rough spot). Apparently he was fired for 'failing to spread sufficient evil'.

Posted by: tete Dec 19 2007, 05:49 PM

I think conceptually it would be incredibly easy to make a good shadowrun MMO.

Races - Troll, Ork, Elf, Human, Dwarf
Classes - Rigger, Decker, Adept, Shaman, Mage, Street Samurai, Face

You go on "missions" to get "karma" and then spend "karma" on new abilities ala WoWs skill tree.

The game would be similar to DDO in that you have to go on missions in order to gain karma (ie go on quests to get xp) running around killing random npc gives you no karma or loot.

Sorta reminds me of a multiplayer version of the old sega game, only updated for modern gaming.

Posted by: mfb Dec 19 2007, 07:05 PM

that's only good if you want to play WoW with cyberware. i already play WoW; playing it with cyberware doesn't really appeal much.

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Dec 19 2007, 07:22 PM

I agree with mfb, but there are also other obstacles in the way of something like that. In WoW it's easy to have big social and quest hubs like the capital cities, with a scattering of appropriate adventurous NPCs. But in Shadowrun, you're talking about large city settings and shadowrunners make up a small segment of the population. Populating a quest/social hub with just fixers and Johnsons would feel wrong, conceptually. But filling it with all manner of random Sixth World people is a lot of overhead for little use, since most normal Sixth World people don't interact with the world of shadowrunners much.

Posted by: mfb Dec 19 2007, 07:49 PM

there's also the question of what type of content to use. do you really want to raid Deus every week, hoping that he'll drop the +5 Ares Predator you've been after?

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 19 2007, 07:57 PM

I know it's what I do. We've been farming bugs in Chicago for the last year looking for a rare drop.

~J

Posted by: X-Kalibur Dec 19 2007, 09:38 PM

I could see an instance-based FPS/RPG hybrid working out quite well. Sort of a mix between Rainbow Six (Raven Shield, not that silly Vegas) and Deus Ex. You put a team together, pick a mission (that is algorythmically generated to be somewhat random at least) and run it. Maybe it's clearing a ghoul nest, maybe it's a simple package run, maybe it's breaking into Ares and fending off fire teams and hell hounds and drones, oh my!

Posted by: tete Dec 19 2007, 09:57 PM

QUOTE (mfb)

there's also the question of what type of content to use. do you really want to raid Deus every week, hoping that he'll drop the +5 Ares Predator you've been after?

You assuming you need a +5 predator and that enemies drop loot. I'm saying you go on a run, you get cash and karma thats it. Karma is spent on abilities (no levels). Gear you buy off the fixer or other people. Also you could kill the "raid the same place" by not having repeatable quests. There of course are only so many combinations but you could randomly generate a whole lot of options. It would work out just fine but as a game company you need to accept the more true to shadowrun you are the less likely you are to get the number of players WoW has but you can still make plenty off a loyal following.

Posted by: hyzmarca Dec 19 2007, 10:22 PM

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite @ Dec 19 2007, 02:22 PM)

This assumes that all of the PCs are Shadowrunners. Good MMORPGs have non-combat jobs for people who want to roleplay doing completely mundane everyday things.

Ultima Online's extensive crafting system allowed PCs to roleplay seamstresses and chairwrights. A Sixth World MMO could, for example, include an extensive spreadsheet-based accounting engine, for players who want to roleplay accountants.

Johnsons have to meet their clients somewhere, which provides a good excuse for the important parts of the cityscape (bars, night clubs, and adult book stores with viewing booths with holes in them).

Actual meetings can be arranged by telecom.

Posted by: Fortune Dec 19 2007, 11:05 PM

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

Good MMORPGs have non-combat jobs for people who want to roleplay doing completely mundane everyday things.

Ultima Online's extensive crafting system allowed PCs to roleplay seamstresses and chairwrights.

I just never understood this. Is there really that many people that actually pay money to do this?

Posted by: Backgammon Dec 19 2007, 11:14 PM

Not really different from paying money to sit at monster spawns and farm them for XP and some gold. Hell, playing a crafter, you probably end up with more diverse social interactions than "Heal Me!".

Posted by: Stahlseele Dec 19 2007, 11:34 PM

i'm still saying the guys of Shadowrun Online(now 6th world games) had it pretty much spot on with most of their design/concept ideas . .

Posted by: mfb Dec 20 2007, 12:09 AM

QUOTE (tete)

i don't see this working. that is to say, i've seen similar game design choices made in other MMOs--specifically Matrix Online--and they didn't work. if you just hand out universal resources as rewards for playing, then everybody will be able to acquire the best gear. similarly, randomizing missions will just become stale and boring, because any player will have exhausted all of the randomization options within a month of play--and some players will exhaust them within hours. non-randomized missions, while also repetitive, at least give one a strong sense of progression.

MMOs, as they are currently played, are about repeating the same content over and over again in order to achieve goals (drops, levels, reputation, etcetera). in other words, grinding. the best MMOs give players many grinding options--many types of loot for their class, many factions to grind reputation with, many resource drains which the player must compensate for with further grinding. i don't think it's possible to create a set of SR grinding options that are both fun to do and even remotely true to the setting. but however it's done, i'm personally not interested in grinding SR at all.

Posted by: hyzmarca Dec 20 2007, 04:41 AM

Why have "best gear" at all? How about just having different gear?

Posted by: mmu1 Dec 20 2007, 04:58 AM

QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Dec 19 2007, 03:57 PM)

I know it's what I do. We've been farming bugs in Chicago for the last year looking for a rare drop.

~J

Well, the queen did drop that helicopter. You're still pissed off that I rolled on a Rigger item with my Street Sam, aren't you?

Posted by: mfb Dec 20 2007, 05:14 AM

QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Dec 19 2007, 11:41 PM)

Why have "best gear" at all? How about just having different gear?

i'm gonna go ahead and say it's impossible to design a game where every piece of gear, or even most pieces of gear, are equal. the mechanics are going to favor some pieces of gear over the rest. the only way around that is to make gear irrelevant.

besides, if all gear is basically equal, then there's no need to grind for gear (not to mention you're now short a large set of rewards for gameplay). in an MMO, that's a bad thing. doing away with the gear grind means doing away with at least a quarter of the possible grinding options available--you're left with the xp grind, the cash grind, and the faction reputation grind.

unless you're talking about designing a completely new massively multiplayer online experience (which isn't really what's being discussed), MMOs are--and should be--based around grinding. the reason for this is that new content is hard to produce, and it's impossible to produce at high rates without either spending a lot of money or accepting a lot of low-quality product. the current style of MMO can be played as long as the player can remain conscious at his keyboard, and there are a lot of players sitting at a lot of keyboards for a lot of hours in any successful MMO. to satisfy them, you need to give them repeatable content--and it's got to be repeatably enjoyable content. that means you'll need to explore every avenue available for grinding options and reward options, and that means you're pretty much stuck with +5 predators.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 20 2007, 05:48 AM

That may not be the only option, but I'll discuss that more if I do end up doing my thesis on that.

~J

Posted by: hyzmarca Dec 20 2007, 06:21 AM

It is not necessary to have every piece of equipment be perfectly balanced so much as it is to be sure that different sorts of equipment are more useful in different situations. Certainly, no one would use a rocket launcher in CQC no matter how powerful it may be.

MMOs should be about immersive cooperative roleplaying (and, to some extent, worldbuilding). Games based around grinding really suck.
Ideally, a MMO should mirror a tabletop game as much as is possible, just on a much larger scale. The pressure to create new content should be sufficiently alleviated by player roleplaying ad politicing, which should have the ability to significantly mold the game story and landscape.

Some games have this, most of them are text-only. Unfortunately, graphics seem to get i the way of actual roleplaying.

Posted by: mfb Dec 20 2007, 06:49 AM

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

MMOs should be about immersive cooperative roleplaying (and, to some extent, worldbuilding). Games based around grinding really suck.

hundreds and hundreds of thousands of gamers disagree. hell, i disagree. the grinding has to be interesting, and it has to be challenging, and it has to be as nonrepetitive as possible. but it's a lot of fun, if done right.

the reason why large-scale immersive cooperative roleplaying rarely works is that there's no good way to regulate roleplaying on a large scale. people have different roleplaying styles, and they don't all mesh well. some people want to play Neuromancer with elves, and some people want to play Lord of the Rings with smartlinks. and some people--the majority of people, based on the way most MMOs are played--want to game the system and be the best <insert party role here> they can be. if the reward system is automated, it's easy--even expected--for everyone will do their best to exploit it.

most people simply don't care about the roleplaying opportunities available in MMOs. if you wanted to create an MMO in which roleplaying is the motive force for the majority of the players, you'd have to throw out everything you know about MMOs as they are currently designed and played, and start from a completely different mindset. you probably couldn't even advertise your game as an MMO, because if you did, you'd attract MMO players, and MMO players are the death of roleplaying. the reward system would have to be almost, if not completely, ungameable; huge portions of the NPC populace would need live, or partially live, control; and you'd have to pay hundreds of guys to constantly develop new content. the end result would not be anything most people would recognize as an MMO.

Posted by: Critias Dec 20 2007, 11:52 AM

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

Games based around grinding really suck.

Yeah. I've heard nothing but bad stuff about World of Warcraft, from the few people that have ever played it.

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Dec 20 2007, 01:32 PM

Yeah, I personally hate the idea of grinding, but I still play WoW like an addict. I don't do the solo grinding thing very often, but even the guild activities I do are certainly grinding in a different form. Farming the high-end instances repeatedly is still a grind.

Right now, making grinding fun and appealing is the secret to a successful MMO. There are possibly other options, but no one has been successful with them yet. And personally, I don't see Shadowrun as a setting that is well served by the grinding MMO idea. I'd much rather see it as a squad-based FPS RPG, where you build your squad and can issue commands while on runs. The setting provides tons of material for a good story built on a series of runs and then you add a quality multiplayer experience for replayability.

Posted by: augurer Dec 20 2007, 02:50 PM

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite)

I think the Counterstrike style FPS that the most recent Shadowrun game used is the way to go. They just need to make the environments more true to the setting, and actually use the IP. Perhaps use a persistent character, too, with limits on development based on attribute caps and essence. The whole "hacker" thing would be hard to utilize in a team based FPS, but I suppose one player could control drones and/or security systems.

I don't think the IP would handle the MMO model very well. And I definitely don't want to see the dice mechanics codified... the SR combat system is not that good, IMO. I play SR because I love the setting.

Posted by: Nightwalker450 Dec 20 2007, 04:00 PM

Our Shadowrun got derailed for a couple hours discussing how we thought the Shadowrun MMO should be set up. I thought I'd post some of what I remember of our discussions on here.

-Guild Wars (WoW and City of Heros also use but not as the main) set up, most runs are done through instances.
-This said, we don't want a World, we want Seattle or some other Major City, with effort going into what we have not how big it is. They can do expansion Hong Kong later if they want.
-Many Instances would be able to Randomly Generate (Maps, Goons, etc.) for the basic Extraction, Wet Work, basic scenario runs. This results in more instances for less work.
-City of Heros style contacts, ie Johnsons as well.
-Triple Layer world, Physical, Astral, and Matrix, characters would be able to perform and view the different levels. Most Matrix could be done without entering the actual Matrix Layer (ie AR), but for hacking enter Matrix World.
-At times, have no Jobs available except for a single "On the Run", that would basically be Lone Star is after you or such and you will have to perform a series of tasks to loose the heat. Probably some type of "Karma Cap" similar to Final Fantasy XI's.
-Parts of the on the run might require you to get rid of particular items that have been compromised.
-Getting high end gear would be an instance in itself, possibly stealing from a company. With the costs being paying the contacts, blackmarket for the information.
-Death during a mission effectively would remove you from the mission (Luckily SR has quick stabilization/First Aid rules already in place to get you back on your feet, just remove the 1 try per wound and we're good), ie you receive no further Karma for the mission other than completion if your team still completes and reward for the same reason
-Safehouses for teams! Customizable again in City of Hero's style.
-Personal Pads, to store drones/vehicles things that aren't easily put into your pocket, or at least you shouldn't be seen regularly on the street with. Upgraded with Lifestyle investments! (You're monthly RL payments get you Squatter Lifestyle )
-Drones basically summoner style pets, unless you jumped into them.
-Yes we want vehicles! I don't know how to pull this off to make people happy, and keep realities in check. Some vehicles would be go anywhere (skates, skateboards, hoverboards...), Larger vehicles would need to go to your pad, or possibly have instances be within the space of a city block, so you could park in the instance. Or if the instance involves a chase you need a car for it.
-Factions (Gangers, Runners, Lone Star, Doc Wagon) completely different style of instance, perhaps these would be sets of instances available so you could act as one or any of these based on reputations. Start out as ganger, and develop into different role depending on which instances you do.

End result is a FPS, with the MMO flavor of reputation, equipment, and Karma. You develop a character instead of being thrown into a 30 minute arena with guns. We're on the side of we want the Shadowrun world, not an MMO as exists now.

Posted by: nezumi Dec 20 2007, 04:14 PM

Man... The idea of role-playing a Johnson just makes me drool... Imagine that, the corporation gives you a bankroll and a job, you decide how much you tell the team and how much you with-hold. I'd with-hold everything just for the fun of watching under-prepared groups get nuked.

And security-system designers! Can you imagine that! Maybe you get money for every Shadowrunner you kill, which you can then use to buy more machine-guns and neuro-stun.

Posted by: Nightwalker450 Dec 20 2007, 04:29 PM

Heh Still more, on the concept of Drops.

-Very limited carrying capacity, larger pad, and safehouse storages.
-Diablo II style carrying capacities, larger items result in less capacity
-Add a weight restriction as well.
-Can loot practically all goons for ammo/weapons.
-Most Nuyen is gained from the instance runs payout. Most gear is bought, or crafted. Similar to Final Fantasy XI. Black Market Auction Houses.
-Equipment should be very fluid, we're runners not investors. Very rarely should we become attached to an item, we need to be able to ditch it when the heat is on. This is a very FPS aspect, if you're out of ammo, loot and hope they have the type you need, or ditch your gun and steal the security guards.
-Mages will be on the Nuyen train as well if they need to get materials for spells (not standard SR, but needed here for balance)
-Cybered, have cost of cyber repair added on to your medical costs.
-Hackers... Fry the commlinks, or even just the software, like Cybered they need to get their comms repaired at times.

-Make Lifestyle Increases look very tempting, spiced with costs of repairs, to keep Nuyen from piling up. Pay your contacts once in a while.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 20 2007, 05:54 PM

I've been toying for a while with the idea of an asymmetric game—one "team" plays a real-time strategy game, allocating funds, hiring troops, designing chokepoints, all that, while the other "team" plays either a real-time tactical or first-person shooter-like game which starts at some semi-random time during the first team's game.

~J

Posted by: tete Dec 20 2007, 07:23 PM

MMOs dont have to be WoW!

Eve Online is very popular...
The Matrix Online is still online...

You don't need 100,000 + people to keep an MMO going.

I had a friend who played SWG back when it first came out, he didn't grind at all, He put a band togeather and went from cantina to cantina playing music. I personally love crafting. In EQ2 I love decorating my apartment, I would rather spend my time doing that than dungeon diving. One of the big problems I have with WoW is you dont get a place of your own, and I find combat boring. So there is a segnificant number of people who will shell out $15 a month to not grind. Hell look at second life, its way more popular than WoW.

Posted by: mfb Dec 20 2007, 07:57 PM

MMOs don't have to be WoW, but the SR MMO that people are discussing--and that you yourself outlined on the previous page--is basically WoW with cyberware. i've said before that it might be possible to create an SR 'MMO' by completely ignoring the standard MMO paradigm.

and Matrix Online is not a model that should be copied by anybody. i could write pages on what a failure and a travesty MxO is.

Posted by: Kalvan Dec 21 2007, 03:55 PM

Back to the main matter.

Doesn't anyone find it at all ironic that Microsoft, as a reward for treating FASA's intelectual property with bad faith, now gets to sell a temporary licence to Shadowrun to the original creator of the concept?

Posted by: tete Dec 21 2007, 06:19 PM

QUOTE (mfb)

is basically WoW with cyberware.

No, its not, read it again.

I never suggested levels or the ability to run around killing things for XP.
Yes, it has quests. Shadowrun the RPG IS QUESTS... so thats not really from WoW but rather the nature of the game itself. I also didn't suggest bigger badder gear drops from bosses. In fact I suggested no drops and that you buy all your gear. I did suggest using a skill tree ala diablo or WoW but thats because improving your skill from 5 to 6 without getting a new technique would be a bit dull. After all what does athletics of 6 mean? shouldnt a character with a score of 6 be able to do backflips and such that a character with a score of 1 can not? I did suggest classes but much like quests, classes have always been a part of the rpg (archtypes), though not as limiting as D&D because you could create your own.

Posted by: mfb Dec 21 2007, 06:45 PM

it's still the same style of game as WoW, or EQ, or DAoC, MxO, or FFXI: you control a single player, run around and fight mobs, get quests from NPCs, and so on. your suggestions are just variations on that theme. i don't think that style of game can both be fun and remain true to the SR setting.

Posted by: tete Dec 23 2007, 08:55 AM

Single Player, finds some buddies, gets a mission from a Johnson, goes does the run. Sounds a lot like the PnP Shadowrun to me. I'm not saying it has to be played that way but with DNA/DOA being the first adventure (other than food fight) I could totally see it fitting. I'm really curious now what Shadowrun is to you.

Posted by: Fortune Dec 23 2007, 09:02 AM

Keep in mind that DNA/DOA was not really in the normal style of other Shadowrun adventures, being more af a 'dungeon crawl', which is kind of fitting, seeing that it was penned by Dave Arneson of D&D fame.

Posted by: mfb Dec 23 2007, 09:37 PM

yes, on the surface, it sounds like the PnP version. the resemblance is only skin deep, though, because people play WoW-style MMOs differently from the way they play tabletop RPGs. as i've said, people grind WoW-style MMOs. that means that everyone is going to do all the 'cool' content over and over again. i don't want to form a group every week to kill Lofwyr.

Posted by: D Minor Dec 23 2007, 09:55 PM

That should not be an option

Posted by: Stahlseele Dec 23 2007, 10:16 PM

oh HELL YES it should . . old golden snout gave me enough trouble to justify that <.< . .

Posted by: Tanka Dec 24 2007, 01:29 PM

QUOTE (mfb)

Then make the game world dynamic. From what I hear, Eve does pretty well at that. It'll take a hell of a lot more coding, but it could be done. If done well, it'd blow most MMOs right out of the water.

...Though, it'd also mean people would come in specifically aiming to kill all the Big Names just to fuck with the system. So...

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Dec 24 2007, 03:35 PM

I've played quite a bit of Eve. It is very different, but a Shadowrun MMO that used a system like Eve used would not be terribly familiar as Shadowrun.

Eve is purely an economy-based game. The whole political system of Eve is player-generated content encouraged by resource gathering. You could make a "Shadowrun" MMO built around black market economies in the Sprawl, but it'd be more like a "Gangs versus Syndicates" game than anyone's typical idea of Shadowrun.

Posted by: Black Irish Dec 24 2007, 11:50 PM

Edit to nix the cross-posting. Arguments in the other thread.

Posted by: mfb Dec 25 2007, 02:45 AM

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite)

Eve is purely an economy-based game. The whole political system of Eve is player-generated content encouraged by resource gathering. You could make a "Shadowrun" MMO built around black market economies in the Sprawl, but it'd be more like a "Gangs versus Syndicates" game than anyone's typical idea of Shadowrun.

not to mention, Eve's hook doesn't involve a familiar game world. if Lofwyr is going to be killed, everybody who plays is going to want to be able to do it. if only five guys get to do it, ever, that's a big "fuck you" to everybody who isn't those five guys. good-bye hook, good-bye player base.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Dec 25 2007, 04:06 AM

Hey, you know, I think Shadowrun is all about that big "fuck you" to everybody who isn't the right five guys for each given situation.

~J

Posted by: mfb Dec 25 2007, 07:36 AM

exactly. that's part of why i'm saying an SR MMO would either not be fun, or not be true to the setting. because you can't say "fuck you" to all but five of your player base and honestly expect anybody who isn't those five guys to stick around.

Posted by: kzt Dec 25 2007, 08:21 AM

You get 60,000 people slapping themselves for not having the guts to try it themselves. Then 30,000 of them get killed trying to take out Hestaby the next week. I think that's about perfectly SR....

Posted by: Mr. Man Dec 29 2007, 02:01 AM

QUOTE (Kalvan)

Doesn't anyone find it at all ironic that Microsoft, as a reward for treating FASA's intelectual property with bad faith, now gets to sell a temporary licence to Shadowrun to the original creator of the concept?

If this is a reward (and one might say that it is more significant as an admission of failure on Microsoft's part) it is the booby prize.

An ironic reward for Microsoft would be if the ridiculous Shadowrun FPS had sold so well that FASA Studio could make a sequel. Instead the game bombed and FASA Studio has been dissolved.

While Microsoft is technically "making money" on their deal with Smith & Tinker you can be sure that it is peanuts compared to the money they are leaving on the table by not correctly exploiting the FASA IP themselves.

I would also like to take this opportunity to tell anyone who wants to see a Shadowrun MMO happen: I wish I could hate you to death.

That is all.

Posted by: mfb Dec 29 2007, 10:07 PM

QUOTE (kzt)

You get 60,000 people slapping themselves for not having the guts to try it themselves. Then 30,000 of them get killed trying to take out Hestaby the next week. I think that's about perfectly SR....

even if i agreed, it still wouldn't be fun for the 60k players who didn't try for fear of failing, nor would it be fun for the 30k who tried and failed. this supports my position that an SR MMO cannot be both fun and true to the SR setting, unless one does away with almost every MMO convention that exists.

Posted by: hyzmarca Dec 29 2007, 10:50 PM

Most people of the baby boomer generation remember where they were the day a lone gunman [on the grassy knoll] shot down John Kennedy. People of my generation remember where we were the day a lone magician firefielded Lord British to death.

He got banned, by the way.

The assasination of Lord British has one thing in common with the assasination of Lofwyr. It shouldn't happen. Lofwyr is a statless ultimate NPC. He is a plot device. He shouldn't be killable in an MMO under normal circumstances. Lord British died because Richard Garriott forgot to turn on his invincibility. It was a purely OOC error. It is certainly possible to program the game such that Lofwry's "I win" flag is set automatically.

Posted by: mfb Dec 29 2007, 11:21 PM

i could be wrong, but isn't UO also the game where NPCs ran around and led their own lives, and if you wanted to get a quest or turn one in, you had to actually track down the NPC wherever it was in its daily routine? as i recall, that behavior was eventually removed--questgiving NPCs sat in one spot, so they could be easily located by players.

this illustrates an import facet of MMOs. if you ask most people who want an MMO for their favorite setting, be it SR or Star Trek or My Little Pony or whatever, they'll tell you that they want a complete, living world. they'd think the idea of NPCs who run around doing their own thing all the time would be pretty cool. in the event, however, almost nobody actually wants that. people who play MMOs want, in large part, the same thing that people who play other types of game want--to have fun playing. that basically means that they want the world to be about them.

Blizzard understands this; that's why lore figures like Thrall and Illidan are either questgivers or raid bosses. hell, even Matrix Online got that much right--Morpheus talked to players all the time, giving them quests and stuff, up until he was killed by a cloud of flies wielding a pistol (no, i'm not kidding).

it's a catch-22. if you allow characters to interact with Lofwyr all the time (either by getting quests from him or killing him), you cheapen the experience. Lofwyr, Harlequin, and the rest stop being cool and special. if you lock the majority of players away from the big names, though--if you don't let them get quests from Harlequin, or down Lofwyr every week--people won't feel like they're playing SR. because as cheap as it would be to let everybody talk to Harlequin, or let everybody loot Lofwyr, that's the sort of thing that the LCD equates to partaking in a given setting.

Posted by: hyzmarca Dec 30 2007, 12:02 AM

I remember in one of my favorite text-based MMORPGs Gemstone:Dragonrealms a time when a storyline villain basically made people's heads explode at random by experimenting with ritual sorcery. One moment you'd be minding your own business, the next your head would explode for no apparent reason. He also made a volcano erupt, instantly killing countless PCs who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Losts of people activly looked for the guy. Some people found clues randomly for no apparent reason. I stopped playing before it was complete, but it was a damned fun storyline.

You don't need direct interaction with absurdly powerful NPCs, but their presence must be felt regularly. In the case of the Matrix Online, it is reasonable for the players to talk to Morpheus, given his role in the setting. In Shadowrun, it is reasonable for the players to be bystanders while Lofwyr does huge world-changing stuff due to his position in the setting.

Posted by: mfb Dec 30 2007, 01:06 AM

that makes the players spectators. players don't want to be spectators, they want to be active participants in everything.

Posted by: fistandantilus3.0 Dec 30 2007, 02:23 AM

QUOTE (Fortune)

QUOTE (DTFarstar @ Dec 9 2007, 07:36 AM)

Man, The Lost Vikings was such a fun game.

In what way?

I haven't played many games, but want to, and am looking for suggestions for old (but not too old) games like Deus Ex.

Lost Vikings was awesome! Sadly, I can't describe in what way, except that it belongs in the side-scrolling hall of fame, just a few steps below Contra.

I'd still love to see and SR video game that's more of a mix between Metal Gear and GTA.

Posted by: martindv Dec 30 2007, 05:42 AM

QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Dec 29 2007, 05:50 PM)

Please don't take this the wrong way but are you high?

That is just the worst comparison I've seen that didn't involve Nazis.

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

What kind of an idiot would pay money to play a game like that where you can die for no reason any second? That's not fun. It's a mitigating circumstance for justifiable homicide.

Posted by: kzt Dec 30 2007, 07:19 AM

QUOTE (martindv)

QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Dec 29 2007, 05:50 PM)

People of my generation remember where we were the day a lone magician firefielded Lord British to death.

Please don't take this the wrong way but are you high?

That is just the worst comparison I've seen that didn't involve Nazis.

I wasn't even alive then and I have some idea who JFK was and what happened. As I have no idea what the hell he's talking about with the Lord British bit it's a pretty weak comparison. Particularly when he tosses in the wackjob black helicopter crap....

Posted by: Kalvan Dec 31 2007, 03:35 AM

QUOTE (mfb)

Ah, those were the days. I feel like an old fart at 32. Nowadays I can't afford a MMORPG, but dumbing them down like they have didn't help.

I think that we need to make any Shadowrun MMO be completely separate from a single player game, because each would involve a different approach to playing the game. The only things they would have in common would be the underlying die rolling mechanics (assuming such were being used) and death being final.

Personally, I think that the approach to the single player version should be similar to the "Baldur's Gate" series with respect to character generation and NPC teammates, in broad outline if not specific detail (for example, I don't think anyone would like it if prospective teammates included a Russian berserker Adept and his bodyguard charge, a Russian Idol Priestess following the Great Mother Idol.) Mission Structure should be like a mix the "Grand Theft Auto" series (except that death=Reload), and the "Hitman" series, but allow some system (not too intrusive) for salary negotiation. In addition, it should also include other things like runner bars, flophouses and coffin hotels, bordellos, underground casinos and fight pits, Drug and BTL dens, Holovision Grindhouses, black markets, and many other things not specifically tied to the run.

Posted by: mintcar Jan 6 2008, 07:38 PM

QUOTE (Adarael)

That's good satire. Even so, I don't think it sounds too bad, to be honest. It's been a long time since I played Shadowrun or even had the urge to post about it on Dumpshock, but in the meantime I'm actually still playing the MS Shadowrun FPS, even though I bitched about it as much as the next man and never play any other FPS:s. It's a fun game, all things considered. And if someone makes a Shadowrun MMO, all I really want from it is that it's a fun game.

Love playing RPG:s, love the Shadowrun setting, don't want to GM anymore! Too timeconsuming and taxing on your creativity. Too bad I decided to be the GM of Shadowrun in my group of friends so long ago. How can I justifiably ask someone else in my gaming group to GM it when I've read virtually everything there is to read about it?

Posted by: Cthulhudreams Jan 7 2008, 05:38 AM

QUOTE (Tanka)

QUOTE (mfb @ Dec 23 2007, 05:37 PM)

Eve has other problems though. Most MMO players cannot stomach the 'lose your ship when ganked' game model despite any amount of rarity when ganked. (UO had the same problem)

WoW does something completely different.

Posted by: Kalvan Jan 7 2008, 02:15 PM

Well, Lofwyr's in Germany. This thing will start in Seattle and won't expand out of it for some time, let alone North America. Lofwyr will be unavailable to kill for the same reason the Dalai and Pachen Lamas, the king of the Zulu nation, and Australian Dreamwalkers will be. (Personally, I would think that the board of Aztech, "Tricky Dick" Villiers, or even Ghostwalker's clock would be in more need of a cleaning than Lofwyr's, but that may be just me.)

[RANT MODE=1]
If I'm in some bar in the Ork Underground sharing a few brews with my chummers after a run we all survived from while off in the corner someone is slotting a beetle and up on stage some Goblin Rock band is wailing (or yakking) on about how Lone Star, by its very nature, has no clean hands in any legal matter, I'm partaking in the setting. If I'm browsing through a lore store named "The Practicing Bitch" and Kritter Kibble and Hellhound Chow are on sale for 15.45 and 12.75 a bag (plus tax) respectively, I'm partaking in the setting. If I'm watching remakes of Sin City, Kill Bill, and Shoot 'em Up in a Holopic grindhouse triple feature and I can't but help but realise that Melody Tiger makes a much better Gail than Rosario Dawson, but Crime Time was the absolute worst possible choice for Dwight, and nobody can replace Paul Giamatti, Powers Boothe, or David Carridine, I'm partaking in the setting.[/RANT MODE]

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 7 2008, 02:33 PM

i'm still saying that if MMORPG is not wanted shadowrun should be realized kinda like fallout/fallout2/fallout tactics maybe with a more up to date graphics engine . .
but system wise those games come pretty close to the shadowrun PNP RPG i'd think O.o

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jan 7 2008, 04:10 PM

QUOTE (martindv)

QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Dec 29 2007, 05:50 PM)

Please don't take this the wrong way but are you high?

That is just the worst comparison I've seen that didn't involve Nazis.

QUOTE (hyzmarca)

What kind of an idiot would pay money to play a game like that where you can die for no reason any second? That's not fun. It's a mitigating circumstance for justifiable homicide.

You're so negative, man. Lord British biting it was major.

Posted by: Mr. Man Jan 8 2008, 06:46 AM

QUOTE (Kalvan)

[Some bizarre ideas about the sort of character and content a Shadowrun MMORPG might contain snipped]

Remember when the Shadowrun FPS was announced but without any details and everyone was posting elaborate fantasies about how it might be like Deus Ex only better?

Your rant contained more texture in one paragraph than most of the Shadowrun sessions I've played (taken individually).

Are you sure you aren't confusing "MMORPG" with "http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showforum=9"? For one thing: MMORPGs are about grinding levels, not cinema.

QUOTE (Adarael @ Dec 7 2007, 01:52 PM)

QUOTE

That's good satire.

No that's the truth, Mr. I've-Never-Played-An-FPS-But-This-Shadowrun-One-Is-Pretty-Good.

Some of us still actually play Shadowrun (the RPG) and would like it to not be overrun by a bunch of power-levelling, roll-playing, munchkin-acting douchebags. SR4 brought in enough of them, thank you very much.

Although I suppose when the D&D MMORPG was introduced nobody who played that RPG noticed any difference in the caliber of the new players being attracted. Ha. Ha.

Posted by: imperialus Jan 8 2008, 06:59 AM

That's because D&D online was a miserable failure.

Posted by: Ryu Jan 8 2008, 09:05 AM

QUOTE (mintcar)

Love playing RPG:s, love the Shadowrun setting, don't want to GM anymore! Too timeconsuming and taxing on your creativity. Too bad I decided to be the GM of Shadowrun in my group of friends so long ago. How can I justifiably ask someone else in my gaming group to GM it when I've read virtually everything there is to read about it?

You can because you gurantee to the new GM that at least one player will have an idea of what is going on in the campaign. I think it greatly enhances the experience if everyone GMs some time.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jan 8 2008, 06:41 PM

QUOTE (Ryu)

QUOTE (mintcar @ Jan 6 2008, 09:38 PM)

You can because you gurantee to the new GM that at least one player will have an idea of what is going on in the campaign. I think it greatly enhances the experience if everyone GMs some time.

Besides, you can always play the role of a character who isn't automatically going to do the right thing.