At this point we are not ready to announce which direction we will be going. Because a decision is yet to be finalized. If anyone has a good argument to sway myself and my collaborators in a certain direction, hit us with it.
I'm a rodeo clown.
@tragedyjones said:
At this point we are not ready to announce which direction we will be going. Because a decision is yet to be finalized. If anyone has a good argument to sway myself and my collaborators in a certain direction, hit us with it.
Sure, here's my pitch: Include as many spheres as you feel comfortable with and create a game designed from scratch to be large and popular.
We've seen some good niche games be created and they were fun for a while but eventually interest in them dwindled down. Create a MU* meant to attract players who, currently, are running out of options if they'd rather not play on Fallcoast.
There are at least 2 multiple sphere games in Development already.
I'm a rodeo clown.
@tragedyjones said:
There are at least 2 multiple sphere games in Development already.
True, and they might be good, but that doesn't mean yours can't be different and appeal to many players while going in a unique direction.
For instance many MU* are very sandbox-based ("here is the world, you kids go play in it") with adversaries defined by each sphere's metaplot set in a generic north American city, but there is none with a universal immediate threat. You could run a game set in an outbreak of some sort, or following a world-changing event, or set in a different time period (or an alternate history with a steampunk theme), etc.
@Arkandel said:
You could run a game set in an outbreak of some sort, or following a world-changing event, or set in a different time period (or an alternate history with a steampunk theme), etc.
I'd kill for a Prohibition-era multisphere game. With Mummy, because FUCK IT IT'S COOL GODDAMNIT
^_______^
(@_____@)
---|---
/\
@tragedyjones said:
At this point we are not ready to announce which direction we will be going. Because a decision is yet to be finalized. If anyone has a good argument to sway myself and my collaborators in a certain direction, hit us with it.
Just be sure you and the collaborators want to really make the game and sustain that game. If not the want and drive could be better served making current games more successful.
It seems like a majority of the feedback in this thread as far as personal choice has gone was Hunter or M+. If you're not ready to go after that, then it seems like you or your collaborators aren't really up for that sort of game. So yeah, I'd also say just build the game you want to play.
@Glitch said:
It seems like a majority of the feedback in this thread as far as personal choice has gone was Hunter or M+. If you're not ready to go after that, then it seems like you or your collaborators aren't really up for that sort of game. So yeah, I'd also say just build the game you want to play.
Agreed. The important thing, I think, is that the creators are passionate and invested in the game. Whether it's niche or built for the largest common denominator, I think the thing in my experience that is MOST likely to lead to a game dying is staff losing interest. Not just in the overt "we're not doing this anymore" sort of way, but in not interacting with players or working to put things out there to do. Or getting distracted by the nearest shiny. As long as there are things to do, people will continue to do them. Maybe a single-sphere game that isn't Vampire will never get 50+ logins a night, but small and healthy is a valid design goal!
@Pyrephox said:
Agreed. The important thing, I think, is that the creators are passionate and invested in the game. Whether it's niche or built for the largest common denominator, I think the thing in my experience that is MOST likely to lead to a game dying is staff losing interest.
Yes and no. You're quite correct in that nothing brings games down more than their administration losing interest, it's not necessarily because things are like that from the start.
Quite often the main creators are quite involved right before the game launches and for a few weeks after it does... and then certain realities catch up to them. Such as the fact it's going to be a constant unrelenting timesink if they are to do it right, or that they'll need to compromise parts of their vision to get others to buy in - or risk losing them.
It's fairly rare that staff has what it takes for the long haul and it's unreasonable for us as players to demand that they do.
But yes, absolutely, the folks in this case should run the kind of MU* they want to because if they're not hyped up and excited about it how will they ever get other people to be?
@Wizz said:
I'd kill for a Prohibition-era multisphere game. With Mummy, because FUCK IT IT'S COOL GODDAMNIT
All Mummy, all the time.
@Wizz said:
@Arkandel said:
You could run a game set in an outbreak of some sort, or following a world-changing event, or set in a different time period (or an alternate history with a steampunk theme), etc.
I'd kill for a Prohibition-era multisphere game. With Mummy, because FUCK IT IT'S COOL GODDAMNIT
Prohibition era games are so 2012.
I'm a rodeo clown.
Prohi-whatever. Mummy: the Curse is basically getting to play Cthulhu, since you wake up only if your tomb is disturbed, if your cult summons you, or if the stars are right. Also, you get to pilot giant rock statue power armor. Dooo eeet.
@tragedyjones said:
@Wizz said:
@Arkandel said:
You could run a game set in an outbreak of some sort, or following a world-changing event, or set in a different time period (or an alternate history with a steampunk theme), etc.
I'd kill for a Prohibition-era multisphere game. With Mummy, because FUCK IT IT'S COOL GODDAMNIT
Prohibition era games are so 2012.
DO YOU KNOW WHERE I CAN BUY A TIME MACHINE????? I AM ASKING FOR A FRIEND 
I would love a shot at a Hunter game, especially if it could hit the creepy-dark-weird feel for real horror. I'm firmly in the camp that finds characters being in the dark a necessary function to get that right. In fact, I'd be down with the game being mostly Mortal/+-ish, with the possibility of compacts/conspiracies added later (whether that's via making themselves known or moving into the location where they hadn't been before, with options of course to recruit current unaligned PCs in either case). I'd love to see PCs working at cross purposes, moral ambiguity, death and other major consequences, the constant threat of becoming the monster by either being no better than them or being literally turned into one.
Mortal/+ is 2.0 ready as is; I am assuming you'd update the other powers as necessary, should it be a game that includes them. I think there's some other interesting ideas in 2.0 that could add a solid Hunter overlay to the base mortal stats. Adjust Integrity to work more like Werewolf, with a scale sliding between predator and prey, or use those poles as a Blood/Bone-style feature for willpower replen, etc. But those sorts of adjustments are obviously beyond the discussion at hand. The whole idea of Hunter is just exciting enough to me that things already running through my head.
I can't help but think that another Vampire game is going to be more of the same that everyone has already abandoned. They'll be high interest in something new, then that will fade away to stagnation as everyone realizes they'd already done this all before - and they barely enjoyed it the first three times.
The varied opinions in what a "hunter" is or is supposed to be automatically gives you a variety of interactions and play styles right from the start. Are you recruited to fight the monsters in the night with well funded armories and cataloged knowledge or did you just run into something you shouldn't have and have turned to survival mode from what you know is out there now? Then there is everything in between.
Every other Hunter game has been tucked away inside a multisphere game only to be overshadowed by the power of the other spheres, which is why they've mostly been under represented, but it is the same reason you see the lack of 'darkness' in the WoD MU*s that have been out there.
Go with Hunter. You'll have plenty of variety, a lot of new RP, a darker game setting and something with consequences.
I've never cared for any of th Hunter games.
(My best Hello Raptor impression: That's because you're a pussy., Theno.)
Depends on who's running the vampire game. I realize that there are people who hate any positive mention of RfK, but if someone were to run a vampire game with accessible political mechanics in addition to the usual D/s motif and all that jazz that there would be a lot of interest. Whether that's the kind of game that TJ and collaborators want to run is a different story.
Heyyyyy @Alzie, how much is a hosting (game + media wiki) cost?
@tragedyjones Are you asking in general or from me?
@Arkandel said:
You could run a game set in an outbreak of some sort, or following a world-changing event, or set in a different time period (or an alternate history with a steampunk theme), etc.
I'd kill for a Prohibition-era multisphere game. With Mummy, because FUCK IT IT'S COOL GODDAMNIT
