Adventurer's MOBA Hall

[Osvir]

So this thought totally came out from nowhere.

MOBA styled fights, Faction vs Faction.

Perhaps becoming your own Faction, sending out soldiers against other Factions.

Warfare! :D

Anyways, I'm ambivalent (other form of "idrc") to the idea and curious what others feel (I really like the DOTA level in Warcraft 3: TFT with Pandaren, the Blood Elf and the Naga), top-down isometric really works so well for the LoL/Dota stuff.

There could be a dungeon that just pumps out goblins at you, and you have to fight your way forward (minor, weak creatures, at a point when your team/party is stronger~higher level). Similarly, taking the idea, fighting a blizzard that blows you away unless you "do something" to press forward.

With objective experience, you'd get the experience at the end of (When Goblin King = Slain).

Thoughts?

[rjshae]

Perhaps in a sequel...

[AGX-17]

[jivex5k]

Don't pollute my cRPG with a MOBA minigame please.

Minigames in cRPGs should be:

1. Drinking

2. Cards (while drinking)

3. Dice (and a few drinks)

4. and maybe.....maybe arm wrestling (with a bit of ale)

[IndiraLightfoot]

I'm not a big fan of the DOTA/LoL-genre, so no.

 

And I reckon it would ruin the mood of PE as I'd like to envision it:

A rather mature RPG with atmosphere in spades. I think Obsidian can really make PE shine in making it a gritty thick-description universe, so to speak.

 

Jivex5k is right, that's the kind of minigames to be expected. Just swap out the word "dice" with "knuckles" and add a fortune teller, and you're home!

 

Fallout New Vegas has loads of it, and even Bioware's NWN1 had some gambling in an inn in the final expansion IIRC, on another plane and all.

[Xienzi]

Don't pollute my cRPG with a MOBA minigame please.

Minigames in cRPGs should be:

1. Drinking

2. Cards (while drinking)

3. Dice (and a few drinks)

4. and maybe.....maybe arm wrestling (with a bit of ale)

Drinking for wolf medallions again?

Edited January 25, 2013 by Xienzi

[Sensuki]

while I love dota

 

just no.

 

almost as bad as "social features".

[cyberarmy]

Nope and this;

Don't pollute my cRPG with a MOBA minigame please.

Minigames in cRPGs should be:

1. Drinking

2. Cards (while drinking)

3. Dice (and a few drinks)

4. and maybe.....maybe arm wrestling (with a bit of ale)

 

5. Knife/spear throwing or shooting games,

6.Unarmed cage fights.

 

 

As a long time DOTA player, this is a very bad idea.

[Osvir]

While I think it could be fun, I won't go deeper into the Adventurer's Hall aspects, but rather the "One team against another team". Faction vs Faction having a battle, not a mini-game per say, but a strategical and tactical battle. Of course, unlike a MOBA (such as Dota or LoL), the fights should be a bit more fierce and intense (instead of going Dynasty Warrior on the minion creep waves, it could be fixed encounters instead and no "infinite spawns").

Basically, 2 Factions are fighting each other on an open field, do they go gung-ho at each other, is there a chance that they deploy some sort of tactic? I feel that "MOBA" does have a lot of favorable features in terms of "Faction vs Faction" combat.

[JOG]

No.

 

Recent RPGs included so many elements from other genres that there was less and less place for elements from the RPG genre.

If we want to play an RPG like they used to be, we have to look at the indie scene or try and crowdfund one.

 

You want a Faction vs. Faction combat? This battle is going on right here. Diversity vs. Unity. There once were countless genre, right now there are two main genres: shooter and social online game, which can be divided into action-shooter, stealth/talk shooter, play-pretend online game and strategic online game. The main variation is the technology level ingame.

 

The games recently funded on kickstarter are like the last stand of their respective genres and came about because neither the players nor the designers want to accept that "their" genres are no longer in demand. Adding stuff from other genres is counter productive when you want to prove that your own genre is still viable.

Edited January 25, 2013 by JOG

[TRX850]

Thankyou for using the word "nor" correctly. Just.....thankyou.

[Osvir]

Great post generally JOG, as always, and I understand what you are saying. This question is what I want to address actually:

You want a Faction vs. Faction combat?

Yes!

There were talks about "Hey! Defending our Stronghold mini-game?". Now what would be best for that? What if we besiege another Faction's (F2) castle, with the help of another Faction (F1). What would be the best form of "Defense" and the best form of "Attack"?

[JFSOCC]

Great post generally JOG, as always, and I understand what you are saying. This question is what I want to address actually:

 

You want a Faction vs. Faction combat?

 

Yes!

 

There were talks about "Hey! Defending our Stronghold mini-game?". Now what would be best for that? What if we besiege another Faction's (F2) castle, with the help of another Faction (F1). What would be the best form of "Defense" and the best form of "Attack"?

I'd surely hope to see different factions antagonising each other a little, yeah.

[Xienzi]

Great post generally JOG, as always, and I understand what you are saying. This question is what I want to address actually:

 

You want a Faction vs. Faction combat?

 

Yes!

 

There were talks about "Hey! Defending our Stronghold mini-game?". Now what would be best for that? What if we besiege another Faction's (F2) castle, with the help of another Faction (F1). What would be the best form of "Defense" and the best form of "Attack"?

Besieging seems like it'd just be another dungeon with the help of non-controllable allies. I actually wouldn't mind that, because then you'd actually have to mind your AoEs. Want to defend your stronghold? Just command your own forces and allies through dialog options. And maybe your pet ferret.

Edited January 26, 2013 by Xienzi

[Dream]

I think we should have a dungeon/minigame/quest/dlc/etc. where we take over a character directly and see the game through their eyes.

 

Because, you know, Doom was fun.

[Heresiarch]

That reminds me of the time I first saw the defence minigame in Revelations. Words escaped me.

 

Seriously, all the games that had enjoyable minigames (KOTOR, Witcher, Rage, Fallout to name a few) had those minigames in a form of some in-game activity. This includes brawls, races, cards and the like. On the other hand, having an entirely different (and half-arsed too) game inside another game never works out well.

[Sensuki]

No Minigames please.

 

I payed for an IE style game, not a Bioware game.

[Oner]

*shrugs* I wouldn't mind. If they made it stretch goal for a sequel KS, they may make a lot of money with it, which makes lets them make the game better in general, everybody wins.

Though I'd go for general co-op too.

[jamoecw]

depends on how it was done.  in all honesty strongholds in games generally don't feel like 'strongholds' just quest spots, or achievement place.  ever played celtic tales?  it was a whole game (back in 1995) about ruling a village and gathering a party of heroes and unifying the various tribes against a common enemy.  considering how many npcs you got in bg1 i was kind of hoping i could make use of them in a similar fashion when they announced strongholds in bg2.  i could go for something like that, sort of like a long drawn out side quest to actually rule a place.  having a siege take place at some point, either by your forces against another, or another against you based on how you ruled would be nice, sort of like a dungeon, only that you have to deal with the consequences afterwards.  it would be funny if you had the option to abdicate at any point and go and settle in a house somewhere so that you don't have to deal with ruling anymore, as long as the decision isn't forced on you.