Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

164 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fnnng (-1, Offtopic)

Helen Keller (842669) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002740)

PGMMMMMMMMMost!

Ummm, dare I say it ? (-1, Offtopic)

OneSmartFellow (716217) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002746)

Who cares ??

where do i brag about my sexual exploits? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17002748)

here?

Time to dust off the chequebook (2, Interesting)

simm1701 (835424) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002756)

I have several friends playing this game and do actually have it installed but only have internet in the office right now. However this is one cause I think I will be getting out the cheque book for - from what I saw of it looks a rather nice game that I would certainly like to play!

Evil Plan (3, Insightful)

PsyQo (1020321) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002766)

Blizzard buys it and then shuts it down to eliminate the competition. It is evil, but hey, it has been done before and they have cash-a-plenty.

It's already GPLed (2, Insightful)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003484)

I could see some other, dumber, companies doing this, but Ryzom is a niche game, there's no way they'd waste money to but it just to shut it down.

I find it interesting to note that Saga of Ryzom's parent company already GPLed the engine -- but offers a non-GPLed version for a fee:

http://www.nevrax.org/tikiwiki/tiki-index.php [nevrax.org]

So it should be trivial to get the end product.

The ENGINE is GPLed... (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003672)

The game itself is not. The content, storyline, etc. is owned by Neverax and Ryzom itself
would have to be "bought" from them to GPL or Creative Commons license it unless the
receivers from the bankruptcy allow it (Which is usually unlikely...)

Re:Evil Plan (1)

Nos. (179609) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003494)

Definitely something they might consider, but I'm hoping they wouldn't sell it like that. This is obviously a fairly one sided crowd, but wouldn't you rather take less money to see your creation go on, evolve, and continue to be appreciated, rather than buried by the competition, even if you had no further involvement?

Re:Evil Plan (1)

Stregone (618612) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004984)

From what I've read about this, it isn't up to them. A 3rd party is in charge of doing whatever it takes to get as much money back to the investors.

Obviously there's no benefit... (3, Interesting)

Rinzai (694786) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002774)

...in being #3.

Horizons has gone through some owners, as well, and even got Peter S. Beagle to take over some of the story writing. I'm not surprised that Ryzom is hitting the skids, though, as WoW pretty much has every moron in the world ponying up for the pleasure.

Can't stand WoW myself. Not too fond of Ryzom, either, come to think of it.

What's fascinating to me is that City of Heroes and City of Villains continue to do well in spite of the WoW-ed world. I guess it's just the fantasy genre that's too crowded.

All you fantasy MMORPG developers that haven't made it to market yet, take heed, sez I.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (2, Insightful)

Kyokugenryu (817869) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003544)

The reason I play WoW is the massive community, the insane amount of content to cover, and most of all, the PVP. When I played CoH, there was no PVP, so I wanted nothing to do with it. City of Villains added it, but I can't be arsed trying it out. NCSoft has a far superior game in Lineage II, which is the best PVP game I've ever played. Guild Wars has decent PVP as well. WoW's PVP is fun, but it's nothing compared to L2. PVP is the main reason I keep a sub for L2 AND WoW.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

GuyWithLag (621929) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004188)

I've played WoW, and switched over to Eve Online several months back. While WoW's PvP didn't win me over, I find that in Eve it actually means something, and it's far, far more integral to the player experience than the simple Alliance-Horde split in WoW.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

Kyokugenryu (817869) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004312)

I've heard a lot of good things about Eve. Wow's PVP gets boring after a while, I'm hoping Burning Crusade makes it a little more balanced and fun.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

GuyWithLag (621929) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005192)

Eve offers a free 14-day trial, it certainly won't hurt to check it out. Two notes only: the tutorial takes about 2-3 hours to play through (and it really does pay to follow it), and don't try it on tuesday - a new content patch is arriving. Otherwise, have fun! If possible, do try to find a corporation that is willing to take you in despite the fact that you are on a trial account, it does make a difference.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17003590)

I'm not so sure about City of Heroes/Villains doing well. I took them up on a free weekend recently, after being away from the game for 8 months, and I've never seen it so deserted. Usually there is a horde of people in the newbie zones (re: The Hollows), and it reminded me strongly of trying to play EQ on the Mac; the bots are all there, but hardly any people.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (2, Interesting)

The Living Fractal (162153) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003636)

I'm not surprised that you don't like WoW. A lot of people don't like it merely because it's popular. Maybe you're one of them, I don't know. A lot of people don't like WoW because they can't stand how long it takes to get the best gear. Perhaps those people should see the changes Blizzard is making with 2.0 and the expansion. And even more people think that in WoW if you don't raid with 40 people you can never compete. So that is the whole casual vs. hard-core debate. Again, I offer that these people take a look at the changes Blizzard is making regarding this issue.

I'm not surprised you decided to use the word 'moron' to describe people who play WoW. Given your previous statements you are obviously highly opinionated about your MMORPGs.

But you are simply wrong IMHO. The Fantasy genre may be crowded... But the reason these other games aren't making a strong profit or even staying afloat has less to do with crowding as the fact that World of Warcraft is just that good. You can argue against it all you want, but the numbers will prove you wrong. Money talks and you apparently choose not to listen. That's your choice.

People choose WoW because they like it. They don't choose other games because they choose WoW. And guess what, someday WoW will get trumped by something new.

Your argument is like saying when DVD overtook VHS that the recording medium market was 'too crowded' for VHS to survive. Wrong. DVD (WoW) is just that much better. Or are you going to argue that VHS is better now?

TLF

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17004054)

The idea of WOW being for hard core gamers actually amazes me, I would say it is quite the opposite. The controls are absolutely inane, combat is simpler then diablo, graphics are boring and childish and every creature in the WOW universe has the ability to phase through or walk through objects! But I can understand the appeal of WOW's community aspects for some, it is just not what I look for in a game; challenging game first, community second. Endless mining and walking != to challenging game. Clicking a mouse repeatedly on a target over and over != challenging game. WOW is actually successful because it appeals to the multitude of non-gamer because it doesn't require any skill to play.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17004528)

not even a wittle bit of skill?

-Anonymous MooMooCoward

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17004650)

I suppose it require enough skill to start up both WoW and your farming Bots, but it ends there.

-RoboHunter

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

The Living Fractal (162153) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004870)

As a WoW player from release (well beta, but beta doesn't count really for various reasons when talking about skill) I have a few things to say about the challenge level in WoW.

If you're into PvP skill becomes a factor immediately. Two equally skilled players will often have good, hard-fought, battles. It's very obvious when you encounter someone in PvP who isn't skilled -- you steamroll them almost effortlessly.

What about PvE (or player versus world/environment, i.e. single player)?

Well yes, less skill is required to grind single mobs outside in the open world. But you aren't limited to just that. What I do is play two characters at one time (alt-tabbing between them). I play a warrior/priest combo. Talk about a challenge controlling two at once. If you get it down you can take out monsters that no solo player ever could. You can solo parts of instances that no solo player ever could and use it to make money. You can twink out your low level players.. There are many entertaining options (if you're willing to pay the extra $15/mo that is)

TLF

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17005174)

I, personally, don't like WoW or EQ for several reasons (I don't know about the parent's reasons for not liking it):
1.) Monthly subscription fees.
2.) Programs that try to detect cheating. I don't cheat in games, but I don't need my computer clogged with programs that examine the memory space of all other programs. It burns my CPU time, and reportedly breaks Cedega/Wine...
3.) EULA that changes in middle of subscription cycle, so that you've already paid for one licnese when your forced to agree to a new license. I've already payed you for this subscription term, under one set of polcies -- if you change them midstream I should be able to decline and either:
  - get my money back the rest of the current cycle and leave the game
  - continue to be able to play under the old EULA until my subscription comes due again, at which point I either agree to the new terms and poney up more cash or leave the game.

That said... I play GW. No sub-fees, new content and events on a regular basis and they fund through PVP upgrades and new expantion packs. That means, until GW goes under or switches to a Eula I don't like, I keep playing for the initial cost only.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

Rinzai (694786) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005386)

It's not that good. I played it. Too much "been there, done that" in it for me. Played Asheron's Call for 4.5 years before looking into WoW. It was simply too darned shallow. I have no use for PVP (what, exactly, is the point of PVP, in anything but an FPS?), so that aspect didn't grab me, but PVP aside, there simply isn't enough to do beyond whack 'n slash. True, there are grand enough vistas to be viewed, and clever bits like the undersea train, but once you get past that, the next thing is the same thing as the current thing--just painted a different color.

Disagree all you like. I tried it. I found it lacking in areas I found critical. That's enough to make me move on--end of story.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

QuantaStarFire (902219) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005484)

I would actually surmise that people play WoW because it's made by Blizzard, so it's gotta be good.

I'll admit that WoW is a well-made game, but like most MMOs that have come before it, it gets really boring REALLY fast because all there is to do is grind mobs, grind quests, grind rep, grind resources, grind honor...just grind, grind, and grind some more. Then maybe after you finish that, you can do a bit of grinding, take your mind off the grind for a bit while you prepare for your next grind.

It seems that the only time you can really get some GOOD, non-grind-related entertainment is if you're one of those rare creatures that actually plays MMORPGs to roleplay your character, and even then you're only a mere drop in a bucket full of inbred assholes who hate you for doing something other than grinding. The GMs won't do anything because their job isn't to hold events anymore, but to do what every other company has the people at the bottom of the company do--provide shitty customer service, even to people with legitimate problems.

What makes this even sadder is that WoW actually made some attempt to add roleplay elements to the game with interactive objects, like chairs to sit on or books to read, and even alcohol to consume. Yet when the players themselves have to expand the interface to add RP elements that should have been there by default, and won't add those elements to the standard UI, then are you really playing a role-playing game anymore?

This is only a small bit of the things I feel are wrong with MMOs, though the central theme of all of them is that roleplaying and worthwhile events get the shaft in favor of static worlds because 1) No company wants to write up a contract that allows them to avoid lawsuits from volunteers, and 2) They don't want to piss people off by "always having events when I'm offline and its not fair" and having people quit in a childish manner. And honestly, I'm not expecting any company to move forward with such things in the near future.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003728)

Cities of X have the mixed benefit of being dead fucking simple. There's very little traditional loot (almost all of which can actually be bought in the in-game stores) and most of the gameplay is based around instanced maps. What world-map hunting there is consists mostly of 'Defeat X of Y Faction' or hunting specific critter types to earn kills toward badges... which, by and large, have no in-game effect. With the exception of the very sparse end-game content, it's focused almost entirely on casual play and very accommodating to solo heroes. On the other hand, it's only slightly deeper than the average petri dish.

Another thing to consider is that almost all of the Korean-developed MMOGs and a sad proportion of North American developed ones are... well, crap. Horizons failed because they began with an utterly insane design document that kept having increasingly unlikely features added; by the time they actually had a functional engine, there was precious little content. Asheron's Call 2 failed for largely the same reason: it had a decent engine and pretty landscapes, but a lack of towns, vendors or life beyond monsters to whack meant that there was precious little content to keep the players interested and occupied. Unless there's story being doled out in bite-sized pieces (like what City of X does, and like the original Asheron's Call did), or a steadily changing menagerie of things to hit and loot to show off, you're going to lose all but the worst fanboys and the most abjectly obsessive-compulsive players.

Re:Obviously there's no benefit... (1)

araemo (603185) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005380)

"Unless there's story being doled out in bite-sized pieces (like what City of X does, and like the original Asheron's Call did), or a steadily changing menagerie of things to hit and loot to show off, you're going to lose all but the worst fanboys and the most abjectly obsessive-compulsive players."

Interesting way to put it. I've played a few MMO's(all during the beta stages, very few of them kept the fun when they started 'fixing' things for release - like how long it took to level, and the cost of items and balance/time sink stuff like that)

I definitely prefer the latter - having a story that is uncovered bit by bit as time goes on, compared to the pokemon-esque "Gotta catch em all, but about the same time you do, we add more to catch!"

Not a guarantee (3, Insightful)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002786)

Making a project Free and/or Open Source doesn't automatically makes it better no matter what some zealots may say. In this case, a MMORPG project may or may not be suitable to such a change. The advantage of MMORPGs in the form that we all know is that one or several servers are run by an entity/company by its rules and the server rules are stricytly controlled by them.

Open Source almost always equalös division and we will see millions of variations of modifications that will be incompatible with each other and that will bring down the quality of the game.

I beg to differ.. (2, Insightful)

CptnHarlock (136449) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003008)

Of course there will be "millions of variations" (heh, dream on.. :P .. hundred(s) at the most i guess), but all the bad ones will die out or just be played by the gangs that cooked them together. The good ones will attract more players and developers and thus - evolve. Also, open source software being used on a server doesn't mean that a server admin can not be BOFH:ish and impose strict rules.

Cheers..

Re:Not a guarantee (5, Interesting)

swillden (191260) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003032)

Making a project Free and/or Open Source doesn't automatically makes it better no matter what some zealots may say.

Who said it would make it better? What it will do is make it Free, so lots of people who want to can run their own servers and play with their own virtual worlds.

we will see millions of variations of modifications that will be incompatible with each other and that will bring down the quality of the game.

Some will be much worse than the original, probably few will add high-quality content, but some may become very good indeed. I think the biggest attraction for those who want to play the games, though (as opposed to those who find it more fun to hack on them) is the ability to run your own server. I was a big EQ fan a few years ago, and I think it would be great fun to explore Norrath with a small group of friends. I probably wouldn't change the content at all, either, except to dramatically reduce spawn rates in many areas so a strategy of exploration could be successful.

It's entirely possible that an open source MMORPG could even spark some more competition in the genre by lowering the barrier to entry. There's no reason multiple companies couldn't be founded who charge for access to their Ryzom-based worlds, perhaps collaborating on engine features while competing on content.

All in all, I'd say we have no idea what might result from the availability of a high-quality Free MMORPG. I pledged 20 euros because I'd like to find out.

Re:Not a guarantee (2, Interesting)

simm1701 (835424) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003140)

Actually there are a couple of groups which provides such servers

One I played on for a while is http://www.shardsofdalaya.com/ [shardsofdalaya.com]

Its free but they accept donations and is several versions of the game behind (ie lots of the new content is not there) but I prefer that. The storyline for the world has also been largely rewritten - its not the same game at all - just using a lot of the same engine and zones.

They also heavily enforce role play which was my main apeal in playing it. (and they enforce it consistantly and sensibly - e.g. they won't let you grief and say you were just playing your character - they will just ban you - probably the other advantage of being fre, they have no obligatino to keep you on the server)

About the only downside I found is neriak is gone and that was my favorite zone - and was proably the most unique of the home towns in the old world....

Alas I dont have the time to play it at the moment - but I'd definitely recomend it

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

archen (447353) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003682)

I was a big EQ fan a few years ago, and I think it would be great fun to explore Norrath with a small group of friends.

Heh, I never thought of that. You know many of these MMORPGs I tend to hate because of the traffic and people, but letting you on a server with a bunch of friends really does sound like an all out blast. I wonder if World of Warcraft would survive one day in this manner.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

dieth (951868) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003866)

Knowing Blizzard they will fight a Free WoW server to the death just like they killed bnetd.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

llefler (184847) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004556)

Of course they would. Blizzard makes their money from subscriptions on WoW. I wouldn't be surprised to see them start making the client available for free download soon.

Bnetd was a completely different situation. Blizzard made their money from the boxed games and provided Battlenet for free.

By the time WoW subscriptions fall enough that Blizzard would consider shutting it down (thus the need for a 3rd party server), very few people will have any interest in playing it. Looking at other MMORPGs as a reference, that will be at least 10 years from now.

Re:Not a guarantee (2, Insightful)

ImTheDarkcyde (759406) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003688)

making something Open Source does not make it free- look at quake 1, 2, and 3. Source Code freely downloadable, but not the game content.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

swillden (191260) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003808)

True, but in this case, there wouldn't seem to be any reason the liquidator would sell the engine and content separately. About the only way I could see that happening would be if the content was actually licensed from a third party and the liquidator didn't have a right to sell it. It seems more likely that components of the game engine would fall into that category, actually.

Re:Not a guarantee (2, Informative)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005620)

The engine is opensource already, what they're trying to buy is the rest.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

gigne (990887) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003208)

No, it doesn't necessarily make it better, but someone with time and inspiration could do so.
I play text based MUD's (yes, still), and most of those are forks from the original (open Source) DikuMUD [wikipedia.org] code. This then led to the more widely forked MERC engine. Some forks are good, some are bad.

It's the choice that matters.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

Drey (1420) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003334)

It's not correct to call DIKU open source; DIKU has a profit prohibition in its license which is incompatible with most open source licenses.

Your comment about the DIKU code base is misleading as well, since the "original DikuMUD" comment makes it sound as if that's where MUDs began when DIKU itself was not in the first generation.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

gigne (990887) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003430)

Interesting stuff. Thanks for filling me in on the info.

I only mentioned Diku as it was (in my limited experience) the most widely used codebase.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

Drey (1420) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004496)

Well, mudconnector.com has between 1581 and 1648 total MUDs in their listing (they say 1648 on the site, but a search for 'any codebase' turns up 1581). Of these, 97 claim to be DikuMUD; 28, Envy (DIKU derivative); 38, Merc (another DIKU derivative). There are probably more DIKU offshoots, I didn't check for them. A check on LP MUD, a non-DIKU, had 181 listings. It's probably fair to say there are many forks of DIKU but not that most MUDs are forks.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

Huff (314296) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003522)

The earliest mud was written at Colchester University back in 1979. Check out http://www.mud.co.uk/ [mud.co.uk] for a history.

It's modern day versions are still running at www.mud2.co.uk and www.mud2.com

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004088)

It's not correct to call DIKU open source; DIKU has a profit prohibition in its license which is incompatible with most open source licenses.

Open Source is a design methodology. You mean "Free Software". Diku is indeed Open Source. It is not Free (as per the Stallman definition.)

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

dosius (230542) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004362)

There is no one single definition of open source.

Some define it as the source is available.
Some define it as the source is available and can be freely modified.
I define it as the license is GPL-compliant.

-uso.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

Drey (1420) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004408)

That was the definition I was applying, as well, and the DIKU license is not GPL-compliant.

Re:Not a guarantee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17003262)

You closed-source zealots, spitting and foaming at the mouth in
you tirade of hatred, should learn to calm down a bit. It's only
a game after all.

In fact it you might even consider that it might be nice to have
an open source game -- perhaps you could tinker with the code
and make it better, then share the results with your friends.

But that is inconcievable to you long haired spit-spewing zealots,
you have nothing but hatred and bile inside you.

[those ad hominim attacks arent so nice when you're on the
recieving end, are they]

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

deathy_epl+ccs (896747) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005186)

But that is inconcievable to you long haired spit-spewing zealots

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait... when did longhairs become equated with closed source zealots? I thought long haired hippy freaks were Open Source nuts? Did I miss a memo or something?

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

earnest murderer (888716) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003680)

Sure, this is true. But no one was asking for a guarantee or expecting one. Fact is, it will not likely improve, and it's optimistic to think someone out there will maintain the current level of quality/service. But it will still be there in some fashion.

What I think will improve are the development tools. An area where pretty much all companies skimp on (skimp is probably a generous term) even when the tools are part of the released product.

As an asside...
You ever meet someone who spends hours and hours rolling and customizing D&D characters? You may know a few that wrote their own lousy stories too. Well now they have a whole damn ready to go content complete MMORPG. This is exciting!
I made my own shitty game back in the day. Had a few people that were polite enough to play through it, as lousy as it was. But I made it, and that was awesome.

Re:Not a guarantee (1)

Derosian (943622) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004956)

Even though it really wasn't meant to be open source, the Ragnarok Online free servers was where I ended up playing. A few in particular were very fun and I played for a long time on them. There were hundreds of variations but I loved the server I was on also because it was unique, I knew the GM's by name, and I would wave to them and stuff when I saw them. One of the big things I hate about WoW, is the fact I never see any GM's playing, different policy I know, but I would rather have someone I know watching out for everything rather then some nameless person on the other side of a line. These mini-servers end up doing something right. Like Dairy Queen setting up shops in small towns, it just works sometimes.

Re:Not a guarantee (2, Interesting)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004996)

Making a project Free and/or Open Source doesn't automatically makes it better no matter what some zealots may say.

Actually, yes it does. Being Free/Open source is a feature. Your argument is like saying "adding support for other platforms doesn't make it better." Sure it does, although the end result of such additions will not necessarily be positive.

The advantage of MMORPGs in the form that we all know is that one or several servers are run by an entity/company by its rules and the server rules are stricytly controlled by them.

I think it is debatable as to whether that is an advantage or disadvantage, but how does open sourcing this project stop some company from running a game using it on their own servers with their own rules?

Open Source almost always equalös division and we will see millions of variations of modifications that will be incompatible with each other and that will bring down the quality of the game.

Actually, I think the gaming market is ready for open source, but not following the same business model as Tux Racer, rather more along the lines of Apache. I'd like to see several companies contribute to an open source gaming engine and system and each of them build commercial games on top of them, including copyrighted artwork and trademarked settings. That way both commercial enterprises and community games can collaborate and improve the base engine and everyone wins. Ideally, I'd like to see a gaming environment with an engine that takes plug in game modules that anyone can create and which can be downloaded or purchased from a network built into the game engine. For the most part it is not the engine or the graphics even that need improvement in games. It is the story and game play. If one or a consortium of companies maintained this base system we could have numerous game modules developed faster for less cost and with more shared code. Really, how many slightly modified copies of the unreal engine does the average person need on their computer?

And another thing... (2, Interesting)

OneSmartFellow (716217) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002808)

Learn to count for fuck sake !

From the website: !

Highest Ranked MMORPGs

EVE Online Rating: 8.3
Guild Wars Rating: 8.3
EverQuest II Rating: 8.3
Dark Age of Camelot Rating: 8.2
Ryzom Rating: 8.2


Looks like number 5 to me

Re:And another thing... (3, Informative)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002888)

Learn to count for fuck sake !
Dark Age of Camelot Rating: 8.2
Ryzom Rating: 8.2


Looks like number 5 to me

LOL. Looks like it is tied for number four to me! LOL!

Re:And another thing... (0, Redundant)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002990)

Learn to count for fuck sake !
  Dark Age of Camelot Rating: 8.2
Ryzom Rating: 8.2

 
  Looks like number 5 to me
 
LOL. Looks like it is tied for number four to me! LOL!
 
EVE Online Rating: 8.3
Guild Wars Rating: 8.3
EverQuest II Rating: 8.3
Dark Age of Camelot Rating: 8.2
Ryzom Rating: 8.2

If its tied, it would be tied for 2nd place.... as the first three in the list are then tied for 1st place....

Re:And another thing... (1)

Lostconfused (1019042) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003034)

Faulty logic, tied for first place followed by two losers deciding second and third place between themselves. So it is 4th or 5th place for it.

Re:And another thing... (4, Informative)

mutube (981006) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003066)

If its tied, it would be tied for 2nd place.... as the first three in the list are then tied for 1st place....

Um no.

1st: EVE Online Rating: 8.3
1st: Guild Wars Rating: 8.3
1st: EverQuest II Rating: 8.3

4th: Dark Age of Camelot Rating: 8.2
4th: Ryzom Rating: 8.2

When one or more places are tied, the following position starts counting from where it would have been (ie. you don't just ignore you've had 3 people in front of you).

Re:And another thing... (2, Informative)

Azarael (896715) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003082)

In sports it doesn't work that way. If there is a tie in the Olympics for example, then places that follow the tie are eliminated from the standings.
For this list, the places would be:
1.EVE
1.Guild Wars
1.Everquest
4.Dark Age
6.*next game on the list*

Re:And another thing... (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003436)

Unless the numbers on the web are rounded, of course. Which would explain why the otherwise joint-first holders aren't in alphabetical, or any other obvious order.

Re:And another thing... (1)

HugePedlar (900427) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002912)

The first three are joint-first.

There's no accounting for taste... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17003232)

If you look at the list of most popular MMORPGs, you get the following:

1. World of Warcraft
2. Lineage
3. Lineage II
4. Runescape
5. Final Fantasy XI

None of those are on the list of highest rated MMORPGs. (Although FF11 comes the closest, being just one place shy of appearing on the list. WoW comes close, too, just after FF11.)

But the others just aren't there.

Makes you wonder just how accurate those MMORPG ratings really are. Given that I've heard FF11 is essentially an uninspired EverQuest rip-off, and almost everyone loves WoW, I'm thinking the MMORPG.com ratings may not be all that accurate. It's probably more of a reflection of how many fans of a given MMORPG inflate the rate vote on the site than anything else.

Re:And another thing... (2, Interesting)

Aceticon (140883) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003492)

I've played EVE Online in the past and although it's interesting at first, sooner or later one figures out that it overwelmingly consists of time sinks (eg travelling, mining, missions).

I find it highly suspicious that it has 1st place. I seem to remember a "Vote for EVE Online at mmorpg.com" campaign (i still receive EVE Online newsleter e-mails).

If the 1st place is suspect i reckon the rest of the list is suspect too.

Re:And another thing... (1)

elbenito69 (868244) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004056)

The solo content in EVE is overwhelmingly boring. What makes EVE worth playing for me is the PVP side of things. Unlike WoW, dying actually has consequences, and it's the higher stakes that make it so enjoyable.

Re:And another thing... (1)

Saffaya (702234) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003694)

In my tongue, it would be told as follows :

EVE Online & Guild Wars & EverQuest II, First place ex-aequo with a Rating of 8.3
Dark Age of Camelot & Ryzom , Second place ex-aequo with a rating of 8.2

Yes, yes, I know.
There is no room for the Ex-Aequo concept in the US culture. Every competion MUST have a WINNER and a LOSER, right ?

Rated for what? (4, Informative)

Rhys (96510) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002862)

It sure isn't quality. A friend of mine downloaded the free trial they have. He played for an hour or two then uninstalled it because it was that bad. I hit it back in open beta and concluded I wouldn't be buying it.

Re:Rated for what? (2, Interesting)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005672)

Sadly, open beta was just after they destroyed the skill system. Prior to that, it was FUN. There were ways to use healers that could keep the whole team healed, if everyone worked together. You could go on long rampages and have a TON of fun. Nevrax had a 'it should take 6 months to max a character' policy and it could be done in 2 weeks with that skill system. So they didn't just nerf it, they completely reworked it.

I quit open beta, and I played the free trial several times, and you're right. It STUNK.

I just pledged 15 EU ($20 US) because of the fun I had in Beta, in the hopes that it can be that much fun again.

Wasn't that bad... (1)

Phydeaux314 (866996) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002958)

I played this game when it was back in beta. It wasn't horrible, but it didn't have that much that set it out from all the other generic MMORPGs I've seen.

Best of luck! (4, Informative)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17002968)

Link seems slashdotted, so here's the mirrordot. [mirrordot.org]

While I personally hate MMORPGs, I wish these fans the best of luck in acquiring the game. Something as large and mainstream as the #3 MMO going FOSS can only mean good things for open-source in general.

What I wonder, though, is who would actually run the game. A perusal of your fandom of choice's lower levels of fanfic will raise questions of the ability of even the most enthusiastic and well-meaning fans to actually run the canon.

Re:Best of luck! (2, Funny)

jandrese (485) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003134)

I wonder who's bright idea it was to make the donation meter Penis Shaped [mirrordot.org] . I can see where they were maybe trying for the thermometer look, but the proportions are all wrong.

Smoke cigars much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17003224)

Paging Doctor Freud!

Re:Best of luck! (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003226)

"Something as large and mainstream as the #3 MMO going FOSS can only mean good things for open-source in general."
Not really.
It could be a disaster. In fact I am betting that it will.
Who is going to pay to run the servers? Bandwidth costs, and servers cost.
How are you going to control cheating?
It could be a great example of how FOSS can fail. So not it could also mean bad things for open-source in general.

Re:Best of luck! (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003272)

Who is going to pay to run the servers? Bandwidth costs, and servers cost. How are you going to control cheating?
Now that I think about it, I guess if the game goes FOSS anyone willing to agree to the license and donate the work and bandwidth will be able to start up their own Ryzom server, thus taking on the responsibility for maintainance and rules-enforcement individually. There won't just be one Ryzom game, there will be good and not-so-good private and public servers just as with other games out there.

Re:Best of luck! (1)

Harker (96598) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005684)

Who is going to pay to run the servers? Bandwidth costs, and servers cost.
How are you going to control cheating?
It could be a great example of how FOSS can fail. So not it could also mean bad things for open-source in general.


FOSS does not necessarily (have to) mean free to play. If they can keep the game up and running, with a reasonable player base who pays their monthly dues, the game can at least break even and keep going.

Most MMO's are priced so the company can make a (huge) profit off of it. It's when they don't realize that profit that they get shut down. However, if those who purchase it for nothing more than the desire to keep the game going, they can charge less to only cover the costs.

Mind you, getting the whole thing up and running to begin with is going to be the toughest part, since not only will they have to buy the servers needed, and acquire hosting, bandwidth, power, etc, etc... It's an ambitious project to be certain.

H.

Played the trial for the last 3 months (1)

phreaki (725521) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003036)

Ryzom is rough, the graphics could use a touch of work, and it's nonetheless a bit quirky in the movement. All the downsides considered, Ryzom has interesting features like stanzas, supposed always moving roots in the sky, and a pretty decent looking enviroment. Open source doesn't always mean free however, and providing the means for thousands of people to connect and play would be a problem. However, it seems like enough people not unlike myself would be happy to host a server for a few hundred people minimum, or more for no charge. For being crowded in the fantasy mmorpg sector, http://multiverse.net/ [multiverse.net] is gonna have some problems unless some really new games hit the market.

NeL is already open source (2, Informative)

nuzak (959558) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003040)

... I haven't exactly seen an explosion of free MMORPG's hit the scene despite the core engine of Ryzom having been GPL'd for as long as I can recall.

Re:NeL is already open source (3, Informative)

chew827 (1032396) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004376)

The NeL engine is a very powerful engine and could have been the framework behind a lot of open-source MMORPGs. The problem is that it is only meagerly documented. Nevrax nearly abandoned the community (with a couple exceptions of developers from within helping us in their spare time) so none of this documentation was ever updated and completed. Recently they converted to a wiki and some of us have been putting together documentation ourselves. One of the big issues, that opening Ryzom up would help with, is that there is a lot of code that makes no sense without context. An example that I use frequently is the NLLIGO module. Nevrax refers to this as "legos for landscape." Ligoscape is a module for rapid development of landscape/levels. Only about 10% of this module is really documented (and only self-documented through code and examples of usages in the NLSOUND library) and the pieces that make this module shine - notably the pieces that take the "legos" and generate the landscape you as a player see - are contained in the closed source tools. Opening these tools up would empower existing (and new) NeL projects as well as encourage the ongoing improvement and development of the tools.

Re:NeL is already open source (1)

grimwell (141031) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005718)

You might be interested in Torque [garagegames.com] . It is an open-source engine but not free.

There is a fair collection of how-to [garagegames.com] articles [garagegames.com] and one author has put together an "add-on" product [mydreamrpg.com] for the engine.

I've played with the Torque engine a bit and it's interesting. The thing I like the most is the server-side can be linux and the client side can be both windows & linux. I haven't played with the MyDreamRPG products, so I can't comment on them but they look interesting.

Whee, another fantasy MMO? Where do I sign up? (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003078)

I think the biggest problem with Ryzom is that it's an also-ran in the fantasy MMO market. Frankly, I can't think of many reasons to play this over WoW (and I don't even play WoW). I'm also not sure how the whole "community owned" aspect is going to work. I mean someone has to pay for the bandwidth and servers to host it (it's an MMO after all), so it seems likely that they're going to have to have a monthly fee still. I'm really not convinced that these people have though this all of the way through.

Admittedly it could be pretty cool to have a few dedicated teams on the internet building new content for the game, but I'm not sure it's going to be compelling when compared to WoW.

Re:Whee, another fantasy MMO? Where do I sign up? (2, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005422)

Frankly, I can't think of many reasons to play this over WoW (and I don't even play WoW).
Well, if the content (& source) gets GPL'd and some of the servers turn out to be free-as-in-beer, that can be a pretty compelling reason to play this over WoW.

I mean someone has to pay for the bandwidth and servers to host it (it's an MMO after all), so it seems likely that they're going to have to have a monthly fee still.
If that were to happen, I think it's likely we'd see different pricing structures from different suppliers... for me, a per-hour fee might be ideal, while serious grinders would enjoy unlimited access for a monthly fee. Either way, I don't think I'd end up spending $200-300 per year to play the game a couple hours a week, which is reason enough not to play WoW, IMO.

Slashdot... good work. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17003120)

Assuming that link worked when this was posted, has it ever occurred to any of you that the Slashdot effect is a very irresponsible way to kill websites that either aren't hosted on powerful servers or can't afford high-throughput hosting?

For this kind of thing, I would say it'd have been a much better idea to either let people do their own legwork or host a temporary mirror of the relevant article rather than bringing down the little guy without even thinking about it.

Not just code assets! (4, Interesting)

CompSci101 (706779) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003170)

It seems like people are criticizing the effort because they've only considered the code that will be saved, or that the game itself wasn't very good, or that nobody will be able to run it with commercial success. But what about the various other assets like art (models, textures) and music that would be saved?

I think it would kick ass for smaller dev groups to have a production-ready (well, it's been used in production, anyway...) library of (L?)GPL-ed art to pick from, even if it was just to have available at production time and not polishing/shipping time. All that stuff sucks up resources and gets in the way of little shops producing anything commercially viable.

Granted, it ain't Oblivion but it's sure better than looking at a blank page to start with.
C

Re:Not just code assets! (1)

Mirar (264502) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004198)

That's a good idea. Having a library of ready-made skeletal animations and models would be really good!
What a boost in any free project wanting to play with 3d... ...would that be included?

OS is not for mmorpgs (2, Interesting)

sinij (911942) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003184)

Open Source if done right can be good for projects where access to data and source code, community contributions and decisions by community consent are good things. That is clearly not the case for mmorpgs due to data security and balance decisions that clearly cannot be done by public.

Data Security: Assuming that potential cheating issues are somehow resolved, even that all mmorpgs out there use security by obscurity approach due to non-trusted client AND need to offload large chunk of computations client-side at all times, simple access to formulas will take min-maxing to the extreme and will make balancing nearly impossible.

Balance Decisions: What community of players would ever agree on balancing changes? For any mmorpg player your class/type/template is underpowered and class/type/template of anybody that beat you is overpowered by definition. Good luck getting anyone to agree how to balance the game.

As to mmorpg.com ranking - it is irrelevant and biased data. Subjectively - no way obscure vaporware like SoR can be ranked #3 when even in North America when there are more than 3 mmorpgs that are NOT going bankrupt right now. Objectively - you should look into available subscription data, mmogchart.com is a good place to start.

Re:OS is not for mmorpgs (1)

Xugumad (39311) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003570)

Personally, I think it would be good to see SoR open sourced so budding MMO designers could look through what the Ryzom developers did, and learn from it. However, I seem to remember large parts of the core engine are already OS, and I also wouldn't suggest it's worth the sums it's likely to cost to get the source.

Re:OS is not for mmorpgs (2)

Saffaya (702234) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003572)

"simple access to formulas will take min-maxing to the extreme and will make balancing nearly impossible."

umh .. no. At all.
A properly designed game has absolutely no problems with that. Only shoddy crafted ones do.

"Good luck getting anyone to agree how to balance the game"

You are missing the point entirely.
MMORPG as free software means ... Freedom to compete.
You don't like the balance on this particular server ? Then go to another ! The choice is yours.

Commercial RPGs lock you into a monopolistic micro market where you have absolutely no choice.
If the GM, events, hotfixes, balance, design, etc ... sucks, then tough luck.
But if the game is free software, you can still enjoy the game on a server that you agree more with.

Re:OS is not for mmorpgs (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004276)

All games have min-maxing, however giving players access to the formulas directly doesn't affect that much. In fact all hiding the formulas does is make it take slightly longer for the players to start min-maxing. City of Heroes showed this quite well I think. Cryptic Studios were extremely tight lipped about the formulas and tables used, but in the end the playerbase reverse engineered the whole thing and still min-maxed.

In fact, it is easy to argue that the min-maxing was good for the game in the end. Without the players constantly beating on your system it can be very difficult to determine which combos are overly powerful (or overly gimped for that matter). CoH was badly unbalanced for well over a year before the developers finally got a handle on the balance. Granted, it wasn't popular with the players who were used to their old demi-god status (Invulnerability Tankers used to live up to their name, there was almost nothing in the game that could kill them once they reached level 30 or so, and even moreso when they hit 38. Unfortunatly, they were kinda boring to play because you could herd up an entire instanced mission and still not be in any real danger). WoW gives out their numbers quite freely and the min-max situation isn't exactly a catastrophe over there.

MMORPG.com has no merit (1)

drnoi (876832) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003246)

Don't believe the ratings you see at MMORPG.COM. That site is full of hardcore gamers and most of these hardcore players branches off to become hardcore supporter of certain games. Last year's MMO winner was EVE online. give me a break. nobody plays that game (250,000 is nothing compared to 7.5 million). I noticed that at the time votes were being tallied, EVE supporters flooded the voting booth. These aren't your average MMO players we're talking about here, these are people who has a stake in the community. They'll do whatever it takes to draw people into favorite game (a fansite forums), so dont mistake these people for casual players. Next time, I hope slashdot would stop holding MMORPG to such a high standard. Just check the MMORPG.com forums and you'll see rants about MMOs and extreme anti-WOW comments. Mention WOW and you will have your arse (ass) handed to you.

Where does it say GPL? (1)

simm1701 (835424) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003282)

I mean this in the literal sense as I can't find mention of what license they want to release it under on the main page - and the site is too slashdotted to access it other than via the mirrordot posted above

I'd like to donate - but first I'd like to know what license they plan to offer it under... if its the GPL then I'm interested - if its the GPL and an option for them to sell commercial licenses for the game engine and tools to smaller game developers then I am even more interested (as it would give smaller games companies the chance to hit the market as well as offering another revenue stream for a central game server network in addition to donations)

However if the GPL isn't going to come into it at all and its going to be some custom license of their own then I probably wont donate...

As Nevrax's former CEO & founder (5, Informative)

Lejade (31993) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003396)

I find it immensely sad that it has come to this.

When I started Nevrax it was with the idea that all the code would be GPL both on the client and the server side. Following a dispute over corporate strategy with the VCs funding the company, a good chunk of the core team left (myself included).
From that point on, the remaining managment and shareholders slowly closed more and more of the code - destroying in the process the spirit and the vision over which the company had been founded. In the end, destroying the company itself.

If Xavier Antoviaque and the folks behind this initiative think they can bring the ideas underlying Ryzom back to life , I sincerly wish them the best of luck.

Re:As Nevrax's former CEO & founder (1)

Jestrzcap (46989) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003932)

I was very sad we never saw a linux client for Ryzom (if there was, they forgot to email me to tell me to re-activate my account). I had a lot of fun and I liked what it *appeared* to have going for it at the time.

It's great that you were able to accomplish as much as you did. I hope your next project is even more successful.

Re:As Nevrax's former CEO & founder (2, Insightful)

chew827 (1032396) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004076)

As a member of the NeL community this effort signifies great hope for me and my project. We've been in the NeL community and contributing bugfixes and updates to the engine that runs Ryzom for over 3 years. The community has supplied the engine more than 1k bugfixes in the 6 year lifespan of the GPL'd version of the engine and all of this with dwindling interest in the community from the company, as Olivier Lejade stated. For more than 2 full years we were next to ignored by the company (except for the wonderful support and help from Vianney Lecroart and Olivier Cado) but we continued. Between this thread and the threads raging on the ryzom.com forums I'm surprised at the treatment this idea has been getting from the user community and others considering the numerous contributions we, the open-source movement, have already made towards this game. Whether Xavier's group can maintain a viable commercial entity doesn't matter. By contributing funds to his group you're not helping him buy Ryzom - you're helping everyone buy Ryzom. Any person here, with some expertise and financial backing, could run their own commercial version of Ryzom if it were GPL'd. A lot of comments have been made about the "chaos" of opening up Ryzom. Hundreds of players contributing code and compromising the integrity of the codebase, etc. A lot of projects do very well if they have a strong maintainer, a bright core team and very well founded peer-review practices. We submitted over 1k patches (as I stated earlier) to Nevrax and we never once compromised the integrity of the end-product. Dozens, if not hundreds, of people contribute to the OGRE but it still remains a strong, viable open-source project which is being used extensively in the commercial arena because Steve (Sinbad) is a good maintainer. Likewise with Linux and Linus. As far as the financial probability of Xavier's group managing servers - I can't say whether he has put a lot of thought into that or not. But by pledging and helping Xavier's group buy and open Ryzom you won't have to rely on Xavier alone to run a Ryzom shard. If Xavier cannot manage to do this Ryzom does not die with him (much like it may die with Nevrax) - anyone will be fully able to take up the torch, commercial or free. Olivier, thank you for your post, it means a lot to us in the community that you started so many years ago.

Re:As Nevrax's former CEO & founder (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004258)

Welcome to the process of "growing" from a startup to a venture-funded firm. This is, unfortunately, the way of things. After all, those who control the purse strings ultimately control the way things are operated.

'course, different funds have different policies regarding the companies they finance. So, in part, you can blame management for not doing their homework and working with a fund that was more hands off. *shrug*

Re:As Nevrax's former CEO & founder (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#17005498)

I don't know when you quit Nevrax, but I'm hoping that it's around the time in Beta when they totally changed the skill system. Ryzom was SO MUCH FUN at that time. Yes, you could 'exploit' the healing system if your group was willing to work together, and yes, that made levelling quicker than it you wanted. But it was FUN! After that, levelling was so slow that I didn't care anymore. It was obviously that Ryzom was about stretching out the grind so you couldn't max your character within 6 months. (Nevrax's number, not mine!) There was a whole rebirth system planned that I was anxiously waiting to see.

But then you made it not fun. I didn't play for the rest of Beta.

At launch, I tried the free trial. Still boring.

A few months later, free trial... Still boring...

A few months later... etc etc.

Now I see that the whole game has indeed failed. I have to say: Is it because it wasn't enough fun!?

I sincerely hope you didn't approve of this change, and that anything you do in the future WILL be aimed towards fun, instead of a money-machine.

Planeshift (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17003468)

Planeshift anyone? http://www.planeshift.it/ [planeshift.it]

Ton Roosendaal (1)

Ingolfke (515826) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003534)

Reminded me of Wes Mantooth [wikipedia.org] .

Spinning off of what others have already said I think this will only be successful if they modify the code to allow individuals to run a single server with a piece of a world and a somewhat standard ruleset. Without that, you're dependant on another business (or a very generous individual) to run multiple servers to host the game. A peer-to-peer MMORPG would be a major step forward.

It seems to me that this group is going to be as successful as the Star Trek nerds that tried to keep Star Trek: Enterprise on the aire.

the nature of software development (2, Insightful)

micromuncher (171881) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003542)

The attempt to hit OSS is really a recognition that the game needs a LOT of work in a short period of time, more than anyone is likely to put into it ($).

The market is pretty much saturated with EverQuest and WoW. There is huge money and tons of time behind polishing these apps. Even lesser crud like GuildWars.

You can't do A1 titles on a shoestring budget, and if you build it they don't always come because you need to support it. (So capital and operating costs...) So they're looking for a buyer; and one buyer is suggesting an OSS because its sisyphysian in nature.

There are other open alternatives around. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open_source_g ames [wikipedia.org]

The story of some of them is the same; source company can't keep the burner going without income so does whatever it can to keep the dream alive.

Software development is almost pure labor. Labor is the most expensive part of any endeavor. You can't take from the huge pot of $ without an equal amount of $ comming in. And there is a boatload of competition.

Re:the nature of software development (1)

Patoski (121455) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004022)

Software development is almost pure labor. Labor is the most expensive part of any endeavor. You can't take from the huge pot of $ without an equal amount of $ comming in. And there is a boatload of competition.

A couple of points... You don't need huge budgets to create quality software. Just look at what Apache, Linux and even Blender [blender.org] did with little or no budget. If people are willing to donate their time, then you have just taken the most expensive component of software development, and you have driven it to virtually zero. The largest part of work in Ryzom has already been completed, since Ryzom already functions in a production environment. There's an artwork pipeline, production-worthy server, and a functioning client. Sure, things need improving, but regular, small, incremental improvements is what the Free Software / Open Source software model does best, in my opinion.

About money... The organization behind this effort would be a non-profit. They would only need to break even on their infrastructure costs to keep development going. Lots of people and organizations are even willing to donate infrastructure to Free Software / Open Source projects, so they might not even have to pay for infrastructure.

Great business model!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17003558)

Wow, Slashdot can always be relied upon to come up with amazingly great business models for tech companies!

Take this game, for example. The Slashdotters claim that someone should buy out an MMOG which is in bankruptcy because it can't make enough money. Then, their recipe for success is to make the game free and open source the software so anyone can alter it.

So you will take a money losing proposition and ensure it never makes money (since you never charge the customers anything)... then give the users the ability to easily cheat... or even start up their own free cheat zone servers!

It's too bad that evil old "reality based community" never listens to the Slashdot. Why can't we bring back the "dot-bomb" days, when everyone realized companies never have to generate money?

Remember the MUD? (1)

einnar2000 (985070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003644)

I remember text based MUDs that you could log into the world over. There were several means you could take to becoming an admin (god) on that realm, but what it really let you do was program your own series of encounters or quests in an area set aside for you.

Granted, a graphical MMO is in an entirely different class, but I think that having a core continent or two for the core developers, and outlying areas / dungeons / instances for people that want to sign on and develop would be a great idea.

Problems :
- You are pretty much throwing your storyline out the window, as add-on areas will reflect the individual programmers interpretation of the main storyline. This could be overcome with a manifesto being made for add-on content, and a review process before it would be allowed live. (much like the linux kernal, I'm guessing.)
- Continuity, related level of difficulty, rewards, etc..etc.. In these seperate areas, the core devs would need to control the drop tables, and ensure that it relates well to the core areas. Possibly having a dictionary of mobs that satellite developers could use / modify for use in their areas. Lots of ways you could work with this.
- Compatibility. There is a lot more work to be done in this regard than most think. If you have flying mounts or characters, there is a whole additional pane of the area that has to be textured, made solid, etc. Model sizing. (nuff said)

In short, it's a lot harder to make something like this work with a large group of unrelated programmers than with straight code, IMHO.

I'd love to see it done, though.

Re:Remember the MUD? (1)

QuimRovira (1032498) | more than 7 years ago | (#17003862)

I have played MUDs... specially remember one named The Two Towers, which was really amazing. But now MMORPG have become their legitimate successors, and regarding this, Nevrax developed a player-zone creation tool integrated into the game, so everyone can create new zones and quests, as well as adding content, history and culture to the fabulous world that Ryzom is. This tool is part of the code people at www.ryzom.org are trying to set free. This zones become temporal at first, and with time they can become permanent zones integrated into the world.

Re:Remember the MUD? (1)

james_orr (574634) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004338)

Ryzom already supports player created content [ryzom.com] .

Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17004122)

What good does it do to open source the software when the real cost of running the game is the servers? Somebody's got to buy and babysit the hardware and pay for all that bandwidth! Unless you can come up with some sort of distributed computing model where the player's machines themselves act as the servers, but that is frought with all sorts problems such as cheating, viruses, and recovery from dropped nodes.

Not "#3 MMORPG" (1)

RasputinAXP (12807) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004290)

For the people who are misreading it, it's the #3 RATED GAME at MMORPG.com. It's entirely a popular vote, as can be seen by EVE Online, Guild Wars and EverQuest II being tied for the top spot.

The top three MMORPGs in the world are still World of Warcraft, Lineage and Lineage II. Runescape and Final Fantasy XI round out the top 5.

Nevrax went under because the game itself wasn't successful, and introducing "Ryzom Ring" didn't help them. Players creating your content can be a good thing, but in this case it was the last gasp of a dying company.

Regret & hope from an ex-player (2, Interesting)

BandoMcHando (85123) | more than 7 years ago | (#17004598)

I played Ryzom for more than 9 months, roughly from the introduction of the encylopaedia missions to shortly after the introduction of the PvP outposts, and for the most part, I loveed it, and made many friends there, some of whom I am still in contact with on a daily basis. One of the tings I liked most about it was the fact that it was so different to the other games around.

One of the high points in my eyes were the crafting system, which was, Shock! Horror!, more complex than 3a + 2b -> Sword No 5. Enough that best crafters gained a reputation for crafting better items than anyone else, and their items were highly sought after.

Other things that made it nice were the classless system (get bored of tanking? fine, heal instead), and the community that generally took in new players and guided them, with a remarkable lack of "FFS! Noob!".

Even though I've stopped playing, I used to pop my head in from time to time, and it is sad to see it get to this state, especially with the relatively recent addition of player created content (sort of player made instances) but hopefully there is an opportunity here for it to be reborn anew.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>