I think you're right about serious games, though. Definitely some possibilities with cue-based "quests" rather than the traditional quest givers. I think a fallback approach might be nice, even if it's not realistic. If the player takes too long to be making positive motions toward a site, he may need some help.

I think you're right about serious games, though. Definitely some possibilities with cue-based "quests" rather than the traditional quest givers. I think a fallback approach might be nice, even if it's not realistic. If the player takes too long to be making positive motions toward a site, he may need some help.

The popularity of quest helpers which lead the player to the point (and sometimes give critical information), as well as books and websites might suggest that people actually do generally want to just conquer the game as quickly and effectively as possible. Oh, the "high end" guilds may want to tackle content on their own, but that's usually for bragging rights and/or the game rewards. I'm not sure a living or random world would placate the average Joe who just wants to reach milestones (Better abilities, mounts for faster movement, high-level content, etc.).

On the flip side, the basic food groups of questing does indeed get old. It might be great fun to slay boars and hobgoblins from level one through five, but by level sixty it's old hat and boring; same mechanics, different models.

While it's possible that "natural mechanisms" is a feature that players don't yet know they need, not being able to find where a person, animal or item might be can lead to frustration. Frustrated players don't tend to stay long.

A living environment would be very interesting. Players can get this to an extent with player-vs-player, where an enemy can suddenly be active and chase him across lands, because both are real players. It would be intriguing to play a "living" world, where everything changes based on events. Player-bought homes change the landscapes; the ground becomes discolored if orcs own the area rather than the elves; rogues move to vulnerable points to work their craft.

I've also found it strange that a play can kill wolves in the same area all day long and there's no increase in rabbits, or that the animals have level-based zones. Level ten rogues lounging about huts next to a human city? Yeah, there's criminal genius for you.

-Eric

The popularity of quest helpers which lead the player to the point (and sometimes give critical information), as well as books and websites might suggest that people actually do generally want to just conquer the game as quickly and effectively as possible. Oh, the "high end" guilds may want to tackle content on their own, but that's usually for bragging rights and/or the game rewards. I'm not sure a living or random world would placate the average Joe who just wants to reach milestones (Better abilities, mounts for faster movement, high-level content, etc.).

On the flip side, the basic food groups of questing does indeed get old. It might be great fun to slay boars and hobgoblins from level one through five, but by level sixty it's old hat and boring; same mechanics, different models.

While it's possible that "natural mechanisms" is a feature that players don't yet know they need, not being able to find where a person, animal or item might be can lead to frustration. Frustrated players don't tend to stay long.

A living environment would be very interesting. Players can get this to an extent with player-vs-player, where an enemy can suddenly be active and chase him across lands, because both are real players. It would be intriguing to play a "living" world, where everything changes based on events. Player-bought homes change the landscapes; the ground becomes discolored if orcs own the area rather than the elves; rogues move to vulnerable points to work their craft.

I've also found it strange that a play can kill wolves in the same area all day long and there's no increase in rabbits, or that the animals have level-based zones. Level ten rogues lounging about huts next to a human city? Yeah, there's criminal genius for you.

-Eric

The popularity of quest helpers which lead the player to the point (and sometimes give critical information), as well as books and websites might suggest that people actually do generally want to just conquer the game as quickly and effectively as possible. Oh, the "high end" guilds may want to tackle content on their own, but that's usually for bragging rights and/or the game rewards. I'm not sure a living or random world would placate the average Joe who just wants to reach milestones (Better abilities, mounts for faster movement, high-level content, etc.).

On the flip side, the basic food groups of questing does indeed get old. It might be great fun to slay boars and hobgoblins from level one through five, but by level sixty it's old hat and boring; same mechanics, different models.

While it's possible that "natural mechanisms" is a feature that players don't yet know they need, not being able to find where a person, animal or item might be can lead to frustration. Frustrated players don't tend to stay long.

A living environment would be very interesting. Players can get this to an extent with player-vs-player, where an enemy can suddenly be active and chase him across lands, because both are real players. It would be intriguing to play a "living" world, where everything changes based on events. Player-bought homes change the landscapes; the ground becomes discolored if orcs own the area rather than the elves; rogues move to vulnerable points to work their craft.

I've also found it strange that a play can kill wolves in the same area all day long and there's no increase in rabbits, or that the animals have level-based zones. Level ten rogues lounging about huts next to a human city? Yeah, there's criminal genius for you.

-Eric

You're probably right that the majority of players only want to conquer a game as quickly and effectively as possible. But than again that's "players", what about everyone else? As the Nintendo Wii showed, the potential audience for video games was much larger than what game companies and analysts thought. cmagoun and I believe there's more to questing than has been tried so far. Luckily, building training simulations at Visual Purple I get to try and stretch the questing model. We aren't building games for people to conquer, but simulations to pass on knowledge and understanding. I'm happy we have a different objective; it allows me to experiment where game companies might not be that flexible.