(I actually started writing this before my previous post)
/set DJ_ramble 1
Firstly, Wheee! Good news. Lick your face.
Now to the nitty gritty.
Not sure where to start, so I might as well start with:
- Starting impression:
MC5 was a good concept, but suffered from a poor implementation.
Actual learning scope was little better, if not worse than simply going straight to the main world. With low newbie populations the place is a ghost town and as a result failed to offer the safe 'play pen' environment for new players to grasp the game's basics with people of the own (lack of) experience.
The inclusion of a (optional) linear tutorial quest/sequence, prompted info screens (on a scale above that which are allready present), various info-NPCs each giving advice on different game aspects or a similar method of explaining the mechanisms on which the game operates would ease people into NC's steep learning curve (which I see no reason to lower). They could then practice in the beginning area or leave, as they see fit.
Also, the whole story aspect of the area is completely unexplored. Your character has been kidnapped, brainwashed (successfully or not) and has awoken in a top secret NC facility.
Yet nothing is made of this. It's never followed up. There's no avenue of questioning or investigation for the player to discover. This is a perfect opportunity to add depth to the players interaction with the game world and a long running story element that can follow the player's character right from the start.
A good example would be the two recent Fallout games. There's a trail to follow that directly involves the character, with deep emotional effect. This ties the character, and by extension the player, to the setting of the game world much more engaging manner.
Of course there's the option to completely forgo this and strike out on your own, a chance to start again from the character's old life for whatever reason. This in itself can convey a sense of freedom and lack of ties, operating outside regular society (which is what most runners do).
Which brings me to:
- The Mission System:
The one big drawback to the NC mission system is the fact that only one mission can be running at any one time. In just about every other RPG, MMO or not, the player can perform and track multiple quests at once. I don't see why NC can do the same thing.
The other main issue is the mission system available from the CityComs. Though this is mainly a matter of re-writing and re-organisation.
The Quick Kill missions:
Firstly (purely as an example), why are Launcher missions set as Very Hard? I would have thought that something like Warbots or upper level fire mobs would be better suited here.
There's also problems with the naming of various Quick Kills, such as Amok Copbot, which doesn't actually exist as far as I am aware, only Mad Copbots (I must confess I haven't taken said mission and killed any Mad Copbots to find out if it's simply a naming issue, so it might work, but I am guessing it doesn't).
Another aspect is that the number of kills forces the player to run back and forth to the CityCom to grab new missions, which is boring and breaks up the leveling process in a manner that is not conductive to enjoyment.
'Rolling' quick kills, that award a single cash/xp bonus upon each individual kill, without a minimum or maximum number of kills would be better for longer durations of leveling.
Both could of course remain, Quick Kills could be 'Specialist Extermination Contract', offering higher xp/nc per kill, but require higher symp, whereas the rolling missions could be more like regular jobs, something like 'Vermin Regulator Post', requiring lower symp and with lower overall reward but less intrusive to game play.
Also, the mission selection system is horribly random.
Now this can give the impression of there being a large list of ever changing missions being available, but cycling through them is not fun, only tedious.
Setting out the mission system into categories like the navray would allow people to find what they want more easily. A small amount of random selection for specific jobs to cycle through would still give the impression of a fluid job system without being frustrating.
The next issue is that the missions available have little or no relevance to the faction in question. Neither story/background wise or geographically.
CM for example have Raptor missions. Aside from the fact that raptors are only spawned by terroraptors, they aren't found anywhere near MB, don't pose any threat to CM and if anything help keep TG busy.
Then there's the non-quick kill missions. Which, though by nature are repeatable and therefore need a degree of suggestion towards the routine, are rather bland; They hold no depth, a sense of importance or meaning towards the faction, even if they are only short, off the cuff jobs. A few snippets of dialogue can go a long way.
And then of course with have the quest system, independent of the CityCom system.
There isn't much intrinsicly wrong with this, it's more a matter of the scope and scale, Ie. Not enough of both.
I've allways felt that there should be missions starting NPCs everywhere. Big quests, little quests. It all adds to the atmosphere of the game world and gives people more things to do aside from grind when they aren't PvPing.
In addition, I feel that there should be greater scope for mission based xp gain. Perhaps even an integral part of the leveling process (though optional, not forced). Grinding xp from missions is worse than grinding it from mobs, at least there you're doing something that at least appears constructive. While the small missions from the CityCom are OK for lower level characters, they quickly become aggravating for higher level ones. A range of quests for all types of characters (tradeskill, tank/PE/spy/monk, combat, investigation) that provide high xp rewards would provide another avenue for leveling and again, a greater degree of immersion.
- Relationships, Faction Diversity and Faction Membership:
I've allways considered the SL system to be rather ham-fisted and yet at the same time impotent. It has little real effect on a character and a measure of right and wrong in a post-apocalyptic cyber-punk setting seems rather out of place.
My opinion has allways been that the SL system should be scrapped and faction sympathies be expanded greatly to nearly all aspects of runner life. This would again create a more in-depth and inclusive experience of the game world.
Shop prices, GR access, GR price, red/yellow/green appearance to other players, guard reaction, quest access, quest reward level and all manner of routine interactions that the player/character is involved with.
Also there should be greater scope to gain and loose symp other than the CityCom missions and player killing. I still think that NPC kills should effect symps, though I'll concede that this is very open to abuse. However I think that this can be controlled by making symp hard to increase, but very easy to lower. After all, NC is a world where respect is hard to garner, but easy to loose. NPC level affecting the relevant symp gain/loss would also help. Killing a load of low level faction NPCs (shop owners for example) would get you little increase, loose you a lot in other areas, and piss a lot of other people off. Killing several high level ones would be more dangerous, but take longer, increasing the risk of reprisal from other players (a turret death style warning on the faction channel would be good).
The factions, aside from their FSMs (which I'll get to later), epic, HQ locations and supposed area of influence, are actually not that dissimilar. Aside from the titles below their names, your enemies aren't all that different.
A slight tangent now, but it's relevant to the next bit.
What exactly is a runner? Is every player character a runner?
The first question, as I see it, is that runners, coming from the Shadowrun influence, are not corporation employees. They are temporary contractors who take jobs from whoever they happen to fancy working for at the time. They have no direct loyalty (other than to their master's wallet) and operate outside of the usual social structure.
Of course, as a runner takes (and completes) more and more missions for any given faction, they will bring more and more attention to themselves, both from that faction and it's enemies. They can choose to either carry on as they are, free and independent but without support, or join as a full employee, with all the benefits and restrictions that entails.
Then we have to ask if a full employee is in fact a runner any more. Could there in fact be two 'stages' or types of employment. A 'faction runner', someone who does the faction's dirty, yet (potentially intentional) visible work and odd jobs that require a higher degree of trust and support and a full employee who attends to the faction's more delicate inner workings and important roles.
As to the second question, it depends what the player wants. Should there not be scope to choose whether or not to be a runner? How much does faction membership define a character? Should faction membership be enforced?
In essence I think that not only should there be a more defined difference between the factions in how they operate, their goals and how they go about this but also that this should influence player life in a much more intrinsic nature.
This could be manifested in a range of things. Symp affects (as mentioned above), zone bonuses dependant on faction, discounts on certain product types (beyond simple symp effects), common mission types (sabotaging other factions, assassinating other faction NPCs, etc.) and of course access to items. This would all give a greater faction identity.
In addition, I think there should be a real scope for factionless play and varying levels of involvement with any given faction. From those unrelated contractors, to faction runners and full faction members. Right from character selection the option to be a complete neutral or a full fledged member (or anywhere between) would allow people to make a more individual choice about who their character is.
Of course this could be altered at any point. A free runner may want to or end up performing more missions for one faction or through a series of events find themselves with enemies and/or inadvertently impressing someone. They could either:
Smooth things out, return to neutrality.
Remain a free runner, but one who obviously has a preference for a given faction.
Join as a 'faction runner', afforded some respect/protection but with greater responsibilities.
Work through the latter and garner enough respect to join as a full member with all the benefits, duties and expectations that entails.
It would be quite possible to go back down as well.
Then we have to ask how clans and PvP enters into all of this.
Should clans only be faction member organisations? Surely if factionless play is intended to be as integral as factioned play then clans have to be possible at all levels of faction involvement.
Factionless clans (leaning or not towards any given faction) would also appeal to those players that have little wish to be part of a faction.
I might not like it, but most people simply don't care what faction they are in so long as they can shoot people and have OP fights. This would allow them to 'go rogue' all they wish without annoying their faction colleagues. Of course they would find that things are more expensive, movement is restricted and people don't like them much, but then this is still an MMORPG after all.