Reviving the "Roleplaying experience" thread
by Alfred Norris · in Game Design and Creative Issues · 06/05/2005 (11:47 pm) · 110 replies
Wow. I just read the thread down there and it had some interesting throughts. Hopefully people would still like to discuss those issues?
1) Live people playing in-game monsters:
I believe you will see this more and more as long as the finances can support it. The Themis Group (MMO econ think tank) believes that the future of MMOs will be guided excursions.
In our project we are implementing 2 interfaces for GMs (who at release will be my online gaming guild that has 50+ members and plays SB and WoW)
a) An RTS-like interface - so that one person can control in-game mobs with one interface for much more realistic encounters. GM spawns 10 mobs of level 35 next to 6 characters average level 30. They send some mobs for what they think is the leader and scattered mobs for various other players. In the end its real people reacting to what they see.
b) Acting as NPCs - the ability to jump into any NPC and speak, attack, move around as that character. This can lead to highly customized reactions or conversations about a multitude of things. I can see that a GM might have to cook dinner and play at the same time in real life. Ok. Jump into a guard who is patrolling an area. The guard is scripted to move around, but when the GM can be at the computer he sees a player trying to sneak into the control room.
2) Do stats break immersion?:
There's a post about designing MMOs called "Mu's unbelievably long rant about designing MMOs" or something like that. He wrote it several years back and called for a no-stats game. The idea is tempting...but I just dont think it should be done.
a) people will find a way to make their character more powerful
Try as hard as you might to vary xp, randomly change xp based on lvl of mob, location and other factors...some geek is going to sit there with a pad and a pencil and find out that 1000 kills of Mob X = 32 skill points. You will get found out.
b) people LIKE to min/max stats - It lets them feel more in control and that that can really have a good character
c) can you realistically give non-numerical information that is as good?
Ok. So your character limps when his leg is broken and is a pretty good lock pick. But how does a character know that he only has 30 hp left out of 3000? If hes only pretty good at lockpicking...wont he get tired of trying to open an uber-hard safe...and just get frustrated?
Perhaps you can come up with an entire info feedback replacement for numbers, but I feel they are necessary. Besides PnP roleplaying is even MORE mathmatical but you dont hear people saying they roleplay LESS in PnP.
3) Player-run quests:
Im not opposed to this..but most of the examples given could have been fixed by going to the bazaar or teaming up with friends. You dont have the Ogre Staff of Pummelling? Why post a whole quest when you can buy one? (Personally Id rather go get it myself but Im being realistic about how MMO players work) Why post a quest when your buddies will help you get it? To be fair...perhaps you could work out a system where they post a quest that their buddies can accept, which gives more xp than merely going and killing the mob, but there has to be more than that...otherwise its just extra xp for clicking a button. You would need to link it to getting increased faction with the wizard guild (if the quest maker is a wizard) or increased standing in the city nearby.
4) Unreal Gameplay:
Someone spoke of Onslaught gameplay earlier and you must be looking at our game doc ;)
Why dont more MMOs (FPS or not) include UT2K4 gameplay? Assault maps in UT have multiple objectives like quests do. In fact they feel a little more immersive. But they fall flat because planting the bomb is just holding the "E" key down for 10 seconds. Why not link that to an RPG skill to make the whole thing more immersive? Or how about having Invasion gameplay...your clan town is invaded by a nearby religious cult? Or Capture the flag? Youve stolen a virus that the guards want to get back?
1) Live people playing in-game monsters:
I believe you will see this more and more as long as the finances can support it. The Themis Group (MMO econ think tank) believes that the future of MMOs will be guided excursions.
In our project we are implementing 2 interfaces for GMs (who at release will be my online gaming guild that has 50+ members and plays SB and WoW)
a) An RTS-like interface - so that one person can control in-game mobs with one interface for much more realistic encounters. GM spawns 10 mobs of level 35 next to 6 characters average level 30. They send some mobs for what they think is the leader and scattered mobs for various other players. In the end its real people reacting to what they see.
b) Acting as NPCs - the ability to jump into any NPC and speak, attack, move around as that character. This can lead to highly customized reactions or conversations about a multitude of things. I can see that a GM might have to cook dinner and play at the same time in real life. Ok. Jump into a guard who is patrolling an area. The guard is scripted to move around, but when the GM can be at the computer he sees a player trying to sneak into the control room.
2) Do stats break immersion?:
There's a post about designing MMOs called "Mu's unbelievably long rant about designing MMOs" or something like that. He wrote it several years back and called for a no-stats game. The idea is tempting...but I just dont think it should be done.
a) people will find a way to make their character more powerful
Try as hard as you might to vary xp, randomly change xp based on lvl of mob, location and other factors...some geek is going to sit there with a pad and a pencil and find out that 1000 kills of Mob X = 32 skill points. You will get found out.
b) people LIKE to min/max stats - It lets them feel more in control and that that can really have a good character
c) can you realistically give non-numerical information that is as good?
Ok. So your character limps when his leg is broken and is a pretty good lock pick. But how does a character know that he only has 30 hp left out of 3000? If hes only pretty good at lockpicking...wont he get tired of trying to open an uber-hard safe...and just get frustrated?
Perhaps you can come up with an entire info feedback replacement for numbers, but I feel they are necessary. Besides PnP roleplaying is even MORE mathmatical but you dont hear people saying they roleplay LESS in PnP.
3) Player-run quests:
Im not opposed to this..but most of the examples given could have been fixed by going to the bazaar or teaming up with friends. You dont have the Ogre Staff of Pummelling? Why post a whole quest when you can buy one? (Personally Id rather go get it myself but Im being realistic about how MMO players work) Why post a quest when your buddies will help you get it? To be fair...perhaps you could work out a system where they post a quest that their buddies can accept, which gives more xp than merely going and killing the mob, but there has to be more than that...otherwise its just extra xp for clicking a button. You would need to link it to getting increased faction with the wizard guild (if the quest maker is a wizard) or increased standing in the city nearby.
4) Unreal Gameplay:
Someone spoke of Onslaught gameplay earlier and you must be looking at our game doc ;)
Why dont more MMOs (FPS or not) include UT2K4 gameplay? Assault maps in UT have multiple objectives like quests do. In fact they feel a little more immersive. But they fall flat because planting the bomb is just holding the "E" key down for 10 seconds. Why not link that to an RPG skill to make the whole thing more immersive? Or how about having Invasion gameplay...your clan town is invaded by a nearby religious cult? Or Capture the flag? Youve stolen a virus that the guards want to get back?
#22
Personally I liked that and with some tweaking I think that could be a brilliant way to let people RP... Those I played with (as well as I) enjoyed the instanced questions greatly... it inspired roleplay, considering you are all alone in your own area, vs a massive trianing ground zone, much more realistic and much more D&D like. Even the time constraints add in a realstic value since usually you play D&D with some sort of time restriction (whether sleep, work, too late, etc).
I think a lot of them are, but I don't think all of them are, though most can have ties to this, they can have ties to other rewards as well, quest advancement, etc. (realistically most D&D sessions I've played involve materialistic and combat gains, so I think this goes hand in hand)
I disagree... I think it has the same value as a tabletop RP game, making friends and RP companions... in tabletop game you don't get massive rewards for your RP, a lot of rewards are weighed by the roll of the dice, weighing by the hours camped isn't any worse than random dice rolls in my opinion.
I agree and disagree... yes to some (or many) it is thought of that way, but definately not all, at least from my experiences in EQ (years), DAoC, Shadowbane, EQ 2, and UO. I've often found that roleplaying is infectious, especially to those that don't normally do it.
I agree mostly as well. Live events are already in many games, but are encumbered by multiple things. Like the limit of GM's and Admin's time to moderate them, as well as a mix of people who want to RP and those who want the "uber loot."
I agree :)
06/17/2005 (3:30 pm)
@Brian: though I agree with roughly the jest of what your saying, I disagree with a couple things...Quote:For a preview of this madness look at Everquest and the instanced quests system they introduced not too long ago (as Everquest goes).
Personally I liked that and with some tweaking I think that could be a brilliant way to let people RP... Those I played with (as well as I) enjoyed the instanced questions greatly... it inspired roleplay, considering you are all alone in your own area, vs a massive trianing ground zone, much more realistic and much more D&D like. Even the time constraints add in a realstic value since usually you play D&D with some sort of time restriction (whether sleep, work, too late, etc).
Quote:The thing with MMORPGs is that all rewards are materialistic or combative in nature in the standard equation of MMORPG
I think a lot of them are, but I don't think all of them are, though most can have ties to this, they can have ties to other rewards as well, quest advancement, etc. (realistically most D&D sessions I've played involve materialistic and combat gains, so I think this goes hand in hand)
Quote:roleplaying has absolutely no benefits to most all of MMORPGs out there.
I disagree... I think it has the same value as a tabletop RP game, making friends and RP companions... in tabletop game you don't get massive rewards for your RP, a lot of rewards are weighed by the roll of the dice, weighing by the hours camped isn't any worse than random dice rolls in my opinion.
Quote:As is, all MMORPGs I have been exposed to retains the majority of the community looking down on roleplaying as a total waste of time that could be better spent on the treadmill.
I agree and disagree... yes to some (or many) it is thought of that way, but definately not all, at least from my experiences in EQ (years), DAoC, Shadowbane, EQ 2, and UO. I've often found that roleplaying is infectious, especially to those that don't normally do it.
Quote:Live administration team running special events
Your dreaming.
I agree mostly as well. Live events are already in many games, but are encumbered by multiple things. Like the limit of GM's and Admin's time to moderate them, as well as a mix of people who want to RP and those who want the "uber loot."
Quote:Player run quests
A nightmare waiting to happen in the current MMORPG equation.
I agree :)
#23
As for player created quests, the old UO seer system was pretty good. Unfortunatly they killed it shortly after AOL got sued by some of their former volenteers.
06/17/2005 (3:46 pm)
Wish got around(or would have if they hadn't run out of money) the 'static quest' thing by creating tools that would automaticaly schedual 'events' accross the world once the GM's had created them. It was kind of a hybrid of 'special events' and traditional static quest scripting. The lack of teleporters helped keep the EQ 'everyone gates to the nearest zone of the event' thing down, even though it made it a pain to get from one town to another.As for player created quests, the old UO seer system was pretty good. Unfortunatly they killed it shortly after AOL got sued by some of their former volenteers.
#24
Removing numerical measurements of progression
Maybe there is a mind out there that could develop something that not only removes mathematical progress (no levels, no skills, no bonuses) but also keeps player subscriptions coming in to pay for the development and running of MMORPG servers -- but until I see this done successfully, my not-so-humble opinion is it cant be done. Yes, there are games out there that have done it, but they werent pay2play MMORPGs ot my knowledge that had years of development and equipment to pay for. Players need that measurement of progression to make a game worthwhile, especially a MMORPG. If they our hours into play on your game, they had better see something come out of it and not just be the same thing they were last month.
Persistance
Alex Swanson has already stated the only way I see persistance working. And that is on the smaller scale. Are you gonna pay to play on a server where where 5k people are competing after the same 10 prime locations on the server without having some sort of footup on the deal ? (read: 1 to 500 ratio) I wouldnt. That would be like joining Everquest and boldly stating your going to compete with and take out the Triune guild for top guild. Sorry, aint happening. You might get the chance to integrate, but highly doubtful and then you wont ever get the degree of persistance. And hey, "There is always the next new server!" where everyone starts little and their is the arms race to make your mark in the server's persistance before the other 4999 players do ... but from a developer's standpoint, how many servers are you going to need to try to open to keep interest in your game and still make a profit after equipment and bandwidth ? When Alex said the massive needs to be taken out to make that sort of thing work, I think he nailed it on the head.
Emphasize the "massive" aspect
Nevermind technical considerations (such as server power, client repsonse, bandwidth, end user machine requirements, etc) bringing in this element immediately introduces and reinforces two nasty MMORPG problems. Competition and grief playing. Introduce the struggles of a truely massive environment where little gains take extraordinary effort and you alienate casual gamers and introduce competition for all resources available in game. And as soon as things get tight where resources are limited, players have to rely on players for expansion and progression, and etc... you immediately go to bed with grief players. One of the major reasons this sort of thing is ignored in MMORPGs is that it causes huge headaches for development and end user satisfaction. Too little and players get frustrated with the difficulty. Too much and you flood out your fundamental approach of "massive" cause you dont have to rely on other players, you can "solo".
The word "unique"
Ah isnt this a lovely theory. You remove redundency too make the world more alive and allow for persistance by virtue of "I earned (this)" or "I had this adventure" or likewise. Again Alex Swanson nailed this one ... this theory works on the small scale. But the moment you crack the the four digit figures for players (some would argue the three digits figure) and you have a design and asset nightmare and then some. In response to this arguement I have been presented in the past my return remark is, "Who is faster? The development team making ever unique content, or the hardcore players constantly looking for that next challenge you advertised on the box they got when they bought the game?" We know the answer... unless you make the new content so vastly different or more difficult to approach/overcome/succeed than the last it takes the hard core players time to do it, this wont work. And by doing so, you again alienate the casual gamer and catter to the hardcore players like all the MMORPGs have had to do before.
... to be continued ...
06/17/2005 (3:49 pm)
... continued from first post ...Removing numerical measurements of progression
Maybe there is a mind out there that could develop something that not only removes mathematical progress (no levels, no skills, no bonuses) but also keeps player subscriptions coming in to pay for the development and running of MMORPG servers -- but until I see this done successfully, my not-so-humble opinion is it cant be done. Yes, there are games out there that have done it, but they werent pay2play MMORPGs ot my knowledge that had years of development and equipment to pay for. Players need that measurement of progression to make a game worthwhile, especially a MMORPG. If they our hours into play on your game, they had better see something come out of it and not just be the same thing they were last month.
Persistance
Alex Swanson has already stated the only way I see persistance working. And that is on the smaller scale. Are you gonna pay to play on a server where where 5k people are competing after the same 10 prime locations on the server without having some sort of footup on the deal ? (read: 1 to 500 ratio) I wouldnt. That would be like joining Everquest and boldly stating your going to compete with and take out the Triune guild for top guild. Sorry, aint happening. You might get the chance to integrate, but highly doubtful and then you wont ever get the degree of persistance. And hey, "There is always the next new server!" where everyone starts little and their is the arms race to make your mark in the server's persistance before the other 4999 players do ... but from a developer's standpoint, how many servers are you going to need to try to open to keep interest in your game and still make a profit after equipment and bandwidth ? When Alex said the massive needs to be taken out to make that sort of thing work, I think he nailed it on the head.
Emphasize the "massive" aspect
Nevermind technical considerations (such as server power, client repsonse, bandwidth, end user machine requirements, etc) bringing in this element immediately introduces and reinforces two nasty MMORPG problems. Competition and grief playing. Introduce the struggles of a truely massive environment where little gains take extraordinary effort and you alienate casual gamers and introduce competition for all resources available in game. And as soon as things get tight where resources are limited, players have to rely on players for expansion and progression, and etc... you immediately go to bed with grief players. One of the major reasons this sort of thing is ignored in MMORPGs is that it causes huge headaches for development and end user satisfaction. Too little and players get frustrated with the difficulty. Too much and you flood out your fundamental approach of "massive" cause you dont have to rely on other players, you can "solo".
The word "unique"
Ah isnt this a lovely theory. You remove redundency too make the world more alive and allow for persistance by virtue of "I earned (this)" or "I had this adventure" or likewise. Again Alex Swanson nailed this one ... this theory works on the small scale. But the moment you crack the the four digit figures for players (some would argue the three digits figure) and you have a design and asset nightmare and then some. In response to this arguement I have been presented in the past my return remark is, "Who is faster? The development team making ever unique content, or the hardcore players constantly looking for that next challenge you advertised on the box they got when they bought the game?" We know the answer... unless you make the new content so vastly different or more difficult to approach/overcome/succeed than the last it takes the hard core players time to do it, this wont work. And by doing so, you again alienate the casual gamer and catter to the hardcore players like all the MMORPGs have had to do before.
... to be continued ...
#25
Here is a sticky point in the MMORPG equation. Spawning does not figure into persistance at the fundamental level. Again going Everquest here ... you go in and slowly but surely kill everything in Crushbone, the orcs were defeated. Persistance demands there are no more orcs in that zone, and very quickly there would be no more in the surrounding zones either ... they have no means of procreation - especially in numbers that would facilitate "spwaning monsters". Ignore persistance and you lose the charm of anything feeling alive because it has instantaneously been converted to an emulation of real life persistance to "another game". I mean really, if your entire-flipping-server full of heroes of varying power cant manage to eliminate the threat of orcs consistantly harassing and killing the neighboring dwarves, where do you get the emulation of having purpose in the game ? You cant even manage to get rid of orcs, nevermind dragons or such !
Matthew "King Tut" Langley's post ;)
Inspiring players to roleplay is a very useful element - but as admitted with the mix of "roleplayers" and "powergamers" you will not truely facilitate a lot of what is being aimed for here. Not that I would know how to fix this problem short of calling the game "RolePlaying: Powergamers Need Not Apply" and administrating the game to remove people whom do not roleplay ... and that system certainly doesnt sound like it would be profitable in the long term to me.
- - - - -
I think the first step that would go a long ways to helping the roleplaying aspect of MMORPGs and taking some of the spotlight away from the treadmill would be for the NPCs to dynamically react to persistance elements throughout. Sure your character and the rest of your entire guild can have good standing reputations with both the high elves and the dark elves ... but in current MMORPGs this doesnt do anything to the actual world about you. There is no real sense of diplomacy with anyone but other roleplayers which does not facilitate roleplaying with the more opportunistic players. And roleplaying doesnt get you better anything in the current MMORPG equation ... your high elven cleric of dark elf god killing wants an item from the dark elves to finish a quest ? It happens one of two ways -- 1. you have to kill something for it and loot it or 2. ask one of your guild dark elf buddies to pick one up on their way back from the bank. Not encouraging. Even more defeating to the purposes of roleplaying, if your dark elf buddy gives a high elf something beneficial, does he get any negative reputation with his/her own race ? Nope. Now you can kill a no-name NPC dark elf 40 zones away from the dark elven city zone and somehow upon that no-name NPC character's death you instantaneously gain negative reputation with the dark elven race, but help the mortal enemy of the race as two PCs, and nothing is done, when in reality it would alienate you from both.
Dont get me wrong though with all of these posts. I talk big shit, but dont think for a second I have an equally long essay drawn up on how to fix all of these problems - or I havent played MMORPGs since pre-Trammel days on UO in MMORPG infancy - or I am blaming anyone for their counterarguements - what I am doing is playing devil's advocate to a problem with MMORPGs as a whole. Like any good debate both sides need aired to try to find middle ground, comprimise, and above all, solutions. To which I give all good luck to those attempting to address it.
06/17/2005 (4:16 pm)
Dynamic spawningHere is a sticky point in the MMORPG equation. Spawning does not figure into persistance at the fundamental level. Again going Everquest here ... you go in and slowly but surely kill everything in Crushbone, the orcs were defeated. Persistance demands there are no more orcs in that zone, and very quickly there would be no more in the surrounding zones either ... they have no means of procreation - especially in numbers that would facilitate "spwaning monsters". Ignore persistance and you lose the charm of anything feeling alive because it has instantaneously been converted to an emulation of real life persistance to "another game". I mean really, if your entire-flipping-server full of heroes of varying power cant manage to eliminate the threat of orcs consistantly harassing and killing the neighboring dwarves, where do you get the emulation of having purpose in the game ? You cant even manage to get rid of orcs, nevermind dragons or such !
Matthew "King Tut" Langley's post ;)
Inspiring players to roleplay is a very useful element - but as admitted with the mix of "roleplayers" and "powergamers" you will not truely facilitate a lot of what is being aimed for here. Not that I would know how to fix this problem short of calling the game "RolePlaying: Powergamers Need Not Apply" and administrating the game to remove people whom do not roleplay ... and that system certainly doesnt sound like it would be profitable in the long term to me.
- - - - -
I think the first step that would go a long ways to helping the roleplaying aspect of MMORPGs and taking some of the spotlight away from the treadmill would be for the NPCs to dynamically react to persistance elements throughout.
Dont get me wrong though with all of these posts. I talk big shit, but dont think for a second I have an equally long essay drawn up on how to fix all of these problems - or I havent played MMORPGs since pre-Trammel days on UO in MMORPG infancy - or I am blaming anyone for their counterarguements - what I am doing is playing devil's advocate to a problem with MMORPGs as a whole. Like any good debate both sides need aired to try to find middle ground, comprimise, and above all, solutions. To which I give all good luck to those attempting to address it.
#26
06/17/2005 (4:22 pm)
Actually I think your counterarguments were put together well, even if a bit in a harsh tone, on this topic I think its permissible. most of your counterarguments are adequately backed up, in my opinion at least, and about 75% of it coincides with my experience and opinions. Look forward to seeing some solutions from people though.
#27
@ Nauris - Sweet idea! I'm thinking more along the lines of randomized creation of concurrent quests and an intelligent system of relaying that quest to players, RP-style.
@ Alfred -
As I mentioned to Nauris above, not just changing needs and goals for NPCs, but reason for it, collaboratively, within the game world. It would be difficult going into too much detail for now, but basicly:
- Generate opposing element.
- Generate situations based on elements plot.
- Generate key NPCs who have information on the quests involving the opposing elements.
- Players/Guilds can get involved in a 'campaign' by taking on one of that campaign's quests.
There are many factors that can go into these quests as well, and when one is generated specificly to appeal to (a) certain player(s)...
...You can reward them effectively, wether it be handsomely or corruptive or both. A unique item is just that, an item you can't find again. It could resemble a more common item but the factors that make it unique are what matter. These can be slight, or detrimental, or insanely powerful (without burdening the gameplay/rules).
Your error, I said abilities and levels! For instance, say a player starts off studying magics. They learn and begin to favor Plant magics. They happen upon information that leads them to finding roots of a certain mysterious tree. They need to learn certain aspects of collecting those roots effectively. These roots give them a specific advantage over all other Plant magic casters. Now, they've recently began studying Fire magics. They find out, through experimentation, that the same roots, which were indeed useful, are even more useful since they managed to create a more powerful spell. Together, this mage now has the ability to cast Flower Bombs (a name they've chosen for the spell) which, when cast on plants, turns them into proximity mines!
Can everyone make proximity mines out of plants? If they learn how, yes, otherwise that player now is the only one who can cast it. They can now research more, too!
@ Alex -
Does that give me immortal reckoning? ;)
What if those players weren't on any certain contained xp treadmill and instead relied on what they persisted to learn to reach their own desired levels of ability? Two smiths can be at Level 7 Smithing, but one masters a sharp blade while the other minimizes on raw material consumption in the process. Again, they are unique and they can learn from each other. In a sense, knowledge becomes power!
(To be continued...)
06/23/2005 (6:01 am)
Okie dokie...@ Nauris - Sweet idea! I'm thinking more along the lines of randomized creation of concurrent quests and an intelligent system of relaying that quest to players, RP-style.
@ Alfred -
Quote:
B) ...Had original quests, all the time, whenever he wished?
> Very hard...but Im working on it...a dynamic quest system based off NPCs with changing needs and goals
As I mentioned to Nauris above, not just changing needs and goals for NPCs, but reason for it, collaboratively, within the game world. It would be difficult going into too much detail for now, but basicly:
- Generate opposing element.
- Generate situations based on elements plot.
- Generate key NPCs who have information on the quests involving the opposing elements.
- Players/Guilds can get involved in a 'campaign' by taking on one of that campaign's quests.
There are many factors that can go into these quests as well, and when one is generated specificly to appeal to (a) certain player(s)...
Quote:
C) ...Had a chance, in every quest, to get rare, exceptional, or artifact items?
> then those items wouldnt be rare LOL
...You can reward them effectively, wether it be handsomely or corruptive or both. A unique item is just that, an item you can't find again. It could resemble a more common item but the factors that make it unique are what matter. These can be slight, or detrimental, or insanely powerful (without burdening the gameplay/rules).
Quote:
D) ...Had totaly unique abilities and levels?
> Explain what a unique skill is? Some skill I have that no one else has? Uhm. Lockpicking a small chest would be something everyone should do...not just one person.
Your error, I said abilities and levels! For instance, say a player starts off studying magics. They learn and begin to favor Plant magics. They happen upon information that leads them to finding roots of a certain mysterious tree. They need to learn certain aspects of collecting those roots effectively. These roots give them a specific advantage over all other Plant magic casters. Now, they've recently began studying Fire magics. They find out, through experimentation, that the same roots, which were indeed useful, are even more useful since they managed to create a more powerful spell. Together, this mage now has the ability to cast Flower Bombs (a name they've chosen for the spell) which, when cast on plants, turns them into proximity mines!
Can everyone make proximity mines out of plants? If they learn how, yes, otherwise that player now is the only one who can cast it. They can now research more, too!
@ Alex -
Quote:
...Can you imagine a game like WoW where all of the million players were totally unique and had unique abilities and skills? How would you balance that? It would be a nightmare beyond mortal reckoning!
Does that give me immortal reckoning? ;)
What if those players weren't on any certain contained xp treadmill and instead relied on what they persisted to learn to reach their own desired levels of ability? Two smiths can be at Level 7 Smithing, but one masters a sharp blade while the other minimizes on raw material consumption in the process. Again, they are unique and they can learn from each other. In a sense, knowledge becomes power!
(To be continued...)
#28
@ Thomas -
Better yet, what if they could learn how to fight better (better moves), then integrate those moves into their tactics? That's how I plan it. Then, the player gets to see some real combat and only has to concentrate on keeping his character alive during combat, with healing and such (which could possibly be macro-ed in as well). Basicly a list of instruction involving tactics and countermeasures in combat. The character can then, realisticly, take care of itself in battle.
Now, take it a step further and integrate multiple, intelligent targeting and you can imagine what a real war could look like from my eyes!
@ Michael -
And what if you could make your ship instead of a ship? What if you could be a ship-builder who has a custom design? What if you could also be a mage who can make ships sail through the air/space/time?
@ Alex (again) -
There are two main reasons this happens. One, which you've pointed out, is that every Level X Crafter can make Item X. There's no difference. My plans above point to a solution to this. The other factor is thus - Item X. Once Item X becomes absolete, there's no need for the skill to make it.
I say, make no item absolete nor absolute. Enhancements! They can be added to anything! You should also have the ability to break down an object for some usable material, unless it's considered an artifact. In these ways, and possibly more, no item will be a waste. This is something that urks me with just about every RPG out there, MMO or not.
(To be continued...)
06/23/2005 (6:03 am)
(Continued...)@ Thomas -
Quote:
what if players could customize their character's fighting style by combining skills (kick , punch, fire ball,etc.) in different orders or groups? it would be unique but not ultimately unique... get what i mean?
Better yet, what if they could learn how to fight better (better moves), then integrate those moves into their tactics? That's how I plan it. Then, the player gets to see some real combat and only has to concentrate on keeping his character alive during combat, with healing and such (which could possibly be macro-ed in as well). Basicly a list of instruction involving tactics and countermeasures in combat. The character can then, realisticly, take care of itself in battle.
Now, take it a step further and integrate multiple, intelligent targeting and you can imagine what a real war could look like from my eyes!
@ Michael -
Quote:
...all I want to do is build ships and sell them, and I can pretty much do that.
And what if you could make your ship instead of a ship? What if you could be a ship-builder who has a custom design? What if you could also be a mage who can make ships sail through the air/space/time?
@ Alex (again) -
Quote:
...even if I can just do what I want, the things presented must be compelling in some way that is going to keep the players interest. Being a crafter is all well and good, but you can only click the "make shiney leather armor +1" button so many times before it gets a little drab.
...again it somes down to the fact that there are hundreds of crafters with the same skills you have, and there is often very little that you can do to set yourself apart.
There are two main reasons this happens. One, which you've pointed out, is that every Level X Crafter can make Item X. There's no difference. My plans above point to a solution to this. The other factor is thus - Item X. Once Item X becomes absolete, there's no need for the skill to make it.
I say, make no item absolete nor absolute. Enhancements! They can be added to anything! You should also have the ability to break down an object for some usable material, unless it's considered an artifact. In these ways, and possibly more, no item will be a waste. This is something that urks me with just about every RPG out there, MMO or not.
(To be continued...)
#29
But technically this doesnt add uniqueness by very much. Sure you'[ve lessened the list, but you havent given players the ability for true creativity, which would mean one player coming up with his OWN idea for something to make.
Put differently, allowing the player to put an idea/item into the game, instead of all items coming from a list the game developers give them.
The online games There and Second Life make a big deal out of being able to add items to their games...but I havent checked them out.
Two ways of doing this would be:
a) allowing offline creation through a modelling program and uploading
b) the list of ingame combination of materials for crafting being so huge that it simulates making something noone has thought of before.
Both have their problems.
06/23/2005 (6:37 am)
Well some games have fixed the "every level x crafter can make y item" through recipes. Not all crafters at level 20 have the recipe for hardened scale mail.But technically this doesnt add uniqueness by very much. Sure you'[ve lessened the list, but you havent given players the ability for true creativity, which would mean one player coming up with his OWN idea for something to make.
Put differently, allowing the player to put an idea/item into the game, instead of all items coming from a list the game developers give them.
The online games There and Second Life make a big deal out of being able to add items to their games...but I havent checked them out.
Two ways of doing this would be:
a) allowing offline creation through a modelling program and uploading
b) the list of ingame combination of materials for crafting being so huge that it simulates making something noone has thought of before.
Both have their problems.
#30
a) The potential array of useful item combinations must be very large. Too low a number and the system doesn't serve its purpose of adding content and uniqueness.
b) The potential array of useful item combinations must offer perceiveable and usable differences from one item to another; each product must offer it's own unique advantages and disadvantages. If item A and item B are so similar that the player never notices the difference between them then it is useless to have both combinations. If anything, it would only add confusion.
c) The speed at which players can "re-tool" and produce different/new combinations needs to be slow enough that the player community is capable of progressing through phases of supply-demand as well as visible competition within similar industuries/markets. If players only needed a couple of minutes/hours to prepare entirely new or a variety of products then the market would be glutted with so many products that players will never have enough time to pick and choose amongst the various similar products and decide what is better. There also wouldn't be any opportunity for a player to establish himself as a quality producer (name-brand;) and attain a solid customer base.
06/23/2005 (8:01 am)
I like the idea of ingame combinations of materials. As I see it there are several conditions that must be meet for that to solve the problem:a) The potential array of useful item combinations must be very large. Too low a number and the system doesn't serve its purpose of adding content and uniqueness.
b) The potential array of useful item combinations must offer perceiveable and usable differences from one item to another; each product must offer it's own unique advantages and disadvantages. If item A and item B are so similar that the player never notices the difference between them then it is useless to have both combinations. If anything, it would only add confusion.
c) The speed at which players can "re-tool" and produce different/new combinations needs to be slow enough that the player community is capable of progressing through phases of supply-demand as well as visible competition within similar industuries/markets. If players only needed a couple of minutes/hours to prepare entirely new or a variety of products then the market would be glutted with so many products that players will never have enough time to pick and choose amongst the various similar products and decide what is better. There also wouldn't be any opportunity for a player to establish himself as a quality producer (name-brand;) and attain a solid customer base.
#31
Im cursious to see something answered.
Alex posed the following train of thought.
To which you replied.
Which, continuing to play the Devil's Advocate in the light of making MMORPGs more than what they currently are, is all fine and dandy but fails to answer the (in what my mind is ...) biggest obstacle of your so far submitted theory on making MMORPGs more than they are - and that is balance of the powers. Having watched the MMO communities at large, balance is without a doubt one of the player base's biggest concerns. Arguements like "rogues can tank better than warriors if you do <--this-->" in flavor are a constant source of headache to both the player and developer base. How would your proposed system of proficiency in actions (skills if you will) be balanced against one another and the NPC base at large, compounded by the complexity of the seemingly huge proficiency base you suggest and the multiple paths of specialized proficiencies within each ? (ex: craftsmanship breaks down to catgories like smithing - smithing breaks down to catagories like swordsmithing - swordsmithing breaks down to catagories like "sharper blades" versus "optimized materials usage"). Im terribly curious to hear about this theory.
06/23/2005 (4:38 pm)
@ Christopher Dapo.Im cursious to see something answered.
Alex posed the following train of thought.
Quote:...Can you imagine a game like WoW where all of the million players were totally unique and had unique abilities and skills? How would you balance that? It would be a nightmare beyond mortal reckoning!
To which you replied.
Quote:Does that give me immortal reckoning? ;)
What if those players weren't on any certain contained xp treadmill and instead relied on what they persisted to learn to reach their own desired levels of ability? Two smiths can be at Level 7 Smithing, but one masters a sharp blade while the other minimizes on raw material consumption in the process. Again, they are unique and they can learn from each other. In a sense, knowledge becomes power!
Which, continuing to play the Devil's Advocate in the light of making MMORPGs more than what they currently are, is all fine and dandy but fails to answer the (in what my mind is ...) biggest obstacle of your so far submitted theory on making MMORPGs more than they are - and that is balance of the powers. Having watched the MMO communities at large, balance is without a doubt one of the player base's biggest concerns. Arguements like "rogues can tank better than warriors if you do <--this-->" in flavor are a constant source of headache to both the player and developer base. How would your proposed system of proficiency in actions (skills if you will) be balanced against one another and the NPC base at large, compounded by the complexity of the seemingly huge proficiency base you suggest and the multiple paths of specialized proficiencies within each ? (ex: craftsmanship breaks down to catgories like smithing - smithing breaks down to catagories like swordsmithing - swordsmithing breaks down to catagories like "sharper blades" versus "optimized materials usage"). Im terribly curious to hear about this theory.
#32
You see, a hierarchy of skills and abilities, derivitive of their parent skill set, and containing their own factors of ability based on knowledge related to the skill, is all that's needed. In effect, the same hierarchy of skills is used for all abilities - combat, magic, trades, etc. The way one gains experience within a skill would be subject to factors which infuence the use of the skill.
For instance, the hierarchy for Swordsmithing would look like this:
Physical < Object Manipulation < Swung Objects < Hammering < Smithing < Weaponsmithing < Swordsmithing
And factors that are applied to swordsmithing:
Kiln
< Temperature knowledge
< Heatflow knowledge
< Stress Factor
Material
< Quality knowledge
< Quantity knowledge
< Preperation knowledge
< Stress Factor
Smithing Accuracy
< Strength ability
< Detail ability
< Accuracy ability
< Stress Factor
The hierarchy consists of Levels signifying experience in the skill/ability at question, all derivitive of the skills they factor in. At the bottom of the hierarchy, the individual specialized skill consists of factors based on the knowledge of performance as well as current performance ratings.
As a skill is used effectively, a slight xp count factors in only as preventive measure for unenlightened ability (ie. to assimilate accumulative knowledge from using the skill) while, at the same time, a randomized chance of heightened success takes place (a check to see if the character actually figures it out on their own, so to speak).
When the knowledge 'comes' to them, it increases the relative factor applied to the skill (Knowledge in Materials < Quantity would decrease the amount of material wasted in making the item). Though what knowledge or ability is increased in somewhat random, some hidden factors which tally up factors that seem desired by the player will increase the chance that they learn what they focus on learning more than what they care least about. In this sense, a player can focus on gaining knowledge on their ability to use less material than that of another smith through continued skill use.
Also, skills can be learned, taught, or even happened upon by chance (try it and see > wow, I made a sword on my first try! Or wow, I just cast a huge fireball almost by accident!).
Too much detail?
- Ronixus
06/24/2005 (12:42 pm)
Though you have actually asked a couple questions, ironicly they are completely related!You see, a hierarchy of skills and abilities, derivitive of their parent skill set, and containing their own factors of ability based on knowledge related to the skill, is all that's needed. In effect, the same hierarchy of skills is used for all abilities - combat, magic, trades, etc. The way one gains experience within a skill would be subject to factors which infuence the use of the skill.
For instance, the hierarchy for Swordsmithing would look like this:
Physical < Object Manipulation < Swung Objects < Hammering < Smithing < Weaponsmithing < Swordsmithing
And factors that are applied to swordsmithing:
Kiln
< Temperature knowledge
< Heatflow knowledge
< Stress Factor
Material
< Quality knowledge
< Quantity knowledge
< Preperation knowledge
< Stress Factor
Smithing Accuracy
< Strength ability
< Detail ability
< Accuracy ability
< Stress Factor
The hierarchy consists of Levels signifying experience in the skill/ability at question, all derivitive of the skills they factor in. At the bottom of the hierarchy, the individual specialized skill consists of factors based on the knowledge of performance as well as current performance ratings.
As a skill is used effectively, a slight xp count factors in only as preventive measure for unenlightened ability (ie. to assimilate accumulative knowledge from using the skill) while, at the same time, a randomized chance of heightened success takes place (a check to see if the character actually figures it out on their own, so to speak).
When the knowledge 'comes' to them, it increases the relative factor applied to the skill (Knowledge in Materials < Quantity would decrease the amount of material wasted in making the item). Though what knowledge or ability is increased in somewhat random, some hidden factors which tally up factors that seem desired by the player will increase the chance that they learn what they focus on learning more than what they care least about. In this sense, a player can focus on gaining knowledge on their ability to use less material than that of another smith through continued skill use.
Also, skills can be learned, taught, or even happened upon by chance (try it and see > wow, I made a sword on my first try! Or wow, I just cast a huge fireball almost by accident!).
Too much detail?
- Ronixus
#33
I also am not totally clear on what you mean by saying that "factors that seem desired by the player" and how that could possibly be any different than continued skill use. If you could, please describe that further.
I need you to also clarify wether or not a player can possibly learn all skills, a large set of skills, or a narrow set of skills. From the sounds of it, players can learn anything so long as they experment enough (random), or can find a teacher (npc/pc?).
I am also a bit put off that no one seems to have taken note of my posts, most importantly my last post. I feel that it goes a long way to addressing the parameters of balancing the game (which no one here has addressed yet - only have mentioned details of balancing, not the theory behind those details).
06/24/2005 (10:18 pm)
The problem here is that the randomness doesn't offset the likelyness that some skills will be more useful in-game than other skills and that players will recognize this and concentrate on those skill sets. Additionally, attempting to mask the algorythm of progression can only be successful in delaying how long it is before players figure out how you mask things and just what the under-lying algorythm for progression is. For example, the magic system in Asheron's Call was supposed to seem highly unique to each individual by varying the proper color and order of magical candles used in preparing spells. However, the pattern behind the psudo-randomness was eventually figured out and quickly spread for all to utilize. Now instead of each player taking hours and hours of time trying different combinations of candles, players just consult the nicely done spreadsheet detailing the system and get the spell recipie right the first time, every time.I also am not totally clear on what you mean by saying that "factors that seem desired by the player" and how that could possibly be any different than continued skill use. If you could, please describe that further.
I need you to also clarify wether or not a player can possibly learn all skills, a large set of skills, or a narrow set of skills. From the sounds of it, players can learn anything so long as they experment enough (random), or can find a teacher (npc/pc?).
I am also a bit put off that no one seems to have taken note of my posts, most importantly my last post. I feel that it goes a long way to addressing the parameters of balancing the game (which no one here has addressed yet - only have mentioned details of balancing, not the theory behind those details).
#34
Myself, I havent had a lot of arguement to put against your post, hence why I have not said much against it. However if you wish to argue these ideas / theories I will be more than happy to accomidate ... AFTER I get some sleep, being fresh home from an eight hour shift. A quick review of everything you have posted does lead me to several points I would love to hear arguement/counterarguement on. :)
06/25/2005 (6:34 am)
@ Michael Brewer.Quote:I am also a bit put off that no one seems to have taken note of my posts, most importantly my last post. I feel that it goes a long way to addressing the parameters of balancing the game (which no one here has addressed yet - only have mentioned details of balancing, not the theory behind those details).
Myself, I havent had a lot of arguement to put against your post, hence why I have not said much against it. However if you wish to argue these ideas / theories I will be more than happy to accomidate ... AFTER I get some sleep, being fresh home from an eight hour shift. A quick review of everything you have posted does lead me to several points I would love to hear arguement/counterarguement on. :)
#35
@ Joshua -
I believe that a player character should already have a home, at least a basic one. In time, they could sell it, swap it with another, possibly have it vandalised, or build upon it. In any sense, they should have a place to call home.
2. I agree. But sometimes, like it has been quoted, the world is not enough.
3. What if you could have both static quests and a dynamic quest, along with custom quests and campaigns?
4. What about tribes, civilizations, and countries which 'live' in the game? They have everything from social groups to hunting parties consisting of all NPCs, that go out into the world to explore for a reason.
5. Minigames can be entertaining at certain times, but if you're there for the RP-ing then why bother? I know some people could argue either way. They could insinuate some cultural activities, though, for now, I'll concentrate on the gameplay in question.
@ Brian -
I believe a good RPG should be able to accomodate both parties; RP-ers and Power Players. RPGs were originally all about roleplaying a fictional character within a fantasy place and/or time. Most RPGs though, only shred away the RP-ing aspect and leave us with a colorful place for combat. There are so many 'role-centric' elements that we miss out on that I plan to bring into view. But the power players will want to get their fix as well. They focus on developing their character productively for the game, though they could care less about actually playing an imaginable role.
My solution is to allow both to play with the ability to choose wether to RP or not. This way, if a party is out RP-ing and they happen across some non-RPers, they can continue without getting thrown from the experience. There would be options for listening to the area chat or just the RP Chat system.
The RP Chat system is partialy automatic except when making decisions. Say, for instance, you are entering battle (initiating it yourself) with two friends. Since they follow you, if they deem the target a threat, they attack as well. Your character automaticly responds with a war cry, they back him up with theirs, the enemy responds with their own, and the battle ensues. It's very similar to the same way the battle would take place - macro-ed response.
These responses are varied and may be set by the player to automaticly roleplay a common situation. In the above example, the situation for the first character was: act < initiating battle < tough enemies < war cry. His friends responded to: act < battle initiated < by leader < reasonable==true < initiating battle < tough enemies < backup war cry.
This works to enhance the roleplaying experience even during the battle - say, for instance, a fighter get's zapped by a mage, he could then respond with an actual display of pain and/or vengance. Outside of battle, your character can respond to NPC vendors if it thinks it's being duped in a sale!
The one thing I'd like to do with this is to integrate a voice sampling utility to give players their own option of using their own voices in the game.
(Continued...)
06/26/2005 (11:27 am)
(Continued from above...)@ Joshua -
Quote:
1. Property ownership(as in houses and vehicles). Perferably visible on the map, though if you allow this, you need a very good landmass to player ratio to keep urban sprawl down. I had a good time running a little pub back in my UO days.
I believe that a player character should already have a home, at least a basic one. In time, they could sell it, swap it with another, possibly have it vandalised, or build upon it. In any sense, they should have a place to call home.
2. I agree. But sometimes, like it has been quoted, the world is not enough.
3. What if you could have both static quests and a dynamic quest, along with custom quests and campaigns?
4. What about tribes, civilizations, and countries which 'live' in the game? They have everything from social groups to hunting parties consisting of all NPCs, that go out into the world to explore for a reason.
5. Minigames can be entertaining at certain times, but if you're there for the RP-ing then why bother? I know some people could argue either way. They could insinuate some cultural activities, though, for now, I'll concentrate on the gameplay in question.
@ Brian -
I believe a good RPG should be able to accomodate both parties; RP-ers and Power Players. RPGs were originally all about roleplaying a fictional character within a fantasy place and/or time. Most RPGs though, only shred away the RP-ing aspect and leave us with a colorful place for combat. There are so many 'role-centric' elements that we miss out on that I plan to bring into view. But the power players will want to get their fix as well. They focus on developing their character productively for the game, though they could care less about actually playing an imaginable role.
My solution is to allow both to play with the ability to choose wether to RP or not. This way, if a party is out RP-ing and they happen across some non-RPers, they can continue without getting thrown from the experience. There would be options for listening to the area chat or just the RP Chat system.
The RP Chat system is partialy automatic except when making decisions. Say, for instance, you are entering battle (initiating it yourself) with two friends. Since they follow you, if they deem the target a threat, they attack as well. Your character automaticly responds with a war cry, they back him up with theirs, the enemy responds with their own, and the battle ensues. It's very similar to the same way the battle would take place - macro-ed response.
These responses are varied and may be set by the player to automaticly roleplay a common situation. In the above example, the situation for the first character was: act < initiating battle < tough enemies < war cry. His friends responded to: act < battle initiated < by leader < reasonable==true < initiating battle < tough enemies < backup war cry.
This works to enhance the roleplaying experience even during the battle - say, for instance, a fighter get's zapped by a mage, he could then respond with an actual display of pain and/or vengance. Outside of battle, your character can respond to NPC vendors if it thinks it's being duped in a sale!
The one thing I'd like to do with this is to integrate a voice sampling utility to give players their own option of using their own voices in the game.
(Continued...)
#36
@ Michael -
Two main answers:
A) Players will most likely proceed with skills and abilities that appeal to them.
B) Characters (PCs) cannot do anything they don't know how to do yet! Granted, if the situation is set for them (everything needed is available), they may attempt to do a skill with minimal to no knowledge (and they may even find out they have a knack for it), but otherwise they would require some form of direction to persue a skill, mainly the knowledge of it.
This is where you will find half of the balance in the gameplay.
The other half is constantly looking out for disturbances, wether it be someone doing something outside the gameplay (they're breaking rules) or mistreating players (though some things are fine if you're evil!), it could have a slight to drastic effect in any given instance, based on a karma system.
Above, I said...
In other words, if your focus is strength (and the dominant ability of your skills) then whenever a skill involving the strength check is used, the chance to increase the strength ability is focused on more than intelligence.
Another thing I feel I should explain is the Stress Factor. This is a determining factor based on the situation relevent to the current skill in use and the surrounding environment. If you just got done losing a fight and went to go smith an axe to replace the one you just lost, your character could still be pretty upset! He might be too upset to hit the metal right, or even foil his own attempts! The material component might have been ill prepared or fragile and could reach it's stress point in midst of using the skill to work with it.
This is how skill use can be made so much more voluntary without an imbalance.
Skills will progress and be learnt in the path of learning which would be taken. This is how characters would remain completely unique from each other. It's how the randomness would become even more random and skills can become professions. Even the learning is random, though influenced by what's already known. Learning from an NPC will involve the character observing the skill at use and drawing up their own conclusions about how it's being done. This can be influenced somewhat if the NPC (or PC) happens to spurt out some advice during the demonstration. That is effected by your standings with that character.
Again, it's determined by personal ability (per the character) over the general knowledge.
(Continued?...)
06/26/2005 (12:29 pm)
(Continued from above...)@ Michael -
Quote:
The problem here is that the randomness doesn't offset the likelyness that some skills will be more useful in-game than other skills and that players will recognize this and concentrate on those skill sets. Additionally, attempting to mask the algorythm of progression can only be successful in delaying how long it is before players figure out how you mask things and just what the under-lying algorythm for progression is.
Two main answers:
A) Players will most likely proceed with skills and abilities that appeal to them.
B) Characters (PCs) cannot do anything they don't know how to do yet! Granted, if the situation is set for them (everything needed is available), they may attempt to do a skill with minimal to no knowledge (and they may even find out they have a knack for it), but otherwise they would require some form of direction to persue a skill, mainly the knowledge of it.
This is where you will find half of the balance in the gameplay.
The other half is constantly looking out for disturbances, wether it be someone doing something outside the gameplay (they're breaking rules) or mistreating players (though some things are fine if you're evil!), it could have a slight to drastic effect in any given instance, based on a karma system.
Quote:
I also am not totally clear on what you mean by saying that "factors that seem desired by the player" and how that could possibly be any different than continued skill use. If you could, please describe that further.
Above, I said...
Quote:
Though what knowledge or ability is increased in somewhat random, some hidden factors which tally up factors that seem desired by the player will increase the chance that they learn what they focus on learning more than what they care least about.
In other words, if your focus is strength (and the dominant ability of your skills) then whenever a skill involving the strength check is used, the chance to increase the strength ability is focused on more than intelligence.
Another thing I feel I should explain is the Stress Factor. This is a determining factor based on the situation relevent to the current skill in use and the surrounding environment. If you just got done losing a fight and went to go smith an axe to replace the one you just lost, your character could still be pretty upset! He might be too upset to hit the metal right, or even foil his own attempts! The material component might have been ill prepared or fragile and could reach it's stress point in midst of using the skill to work with it.
This is how skill use can be made so much more voluntary without an imbalance.
Quote:
I need you to also clarify wether or not a player can possibly learn all skills, a large set of skills, or a narrow set of skills. From the sounds of it, players can learn anything so long as they experment enough (random), or can find a teacher (npc/pc?).
Skills will progress and be learnt in the path of learning which would be taken. This is how characters would remain completely unique from each other. It's how the randomness would become even more random and skills can become professions. Even the learning is random, though influenced by what's already known. Learning from an NPC will involve the character observing the skill at use and drawing up their own conclusions about how it's being done. This can be influenced somewhat if the NPC (or PC) happens to spurt out some advice during the demonstration. That is effected by your standings with that character.
Again, it's determined by personal ability (per the character) over the general knowledge.
(Continued?...)
#37
There would be some materia that is extremely rare that would have stronger properties. Instead of having a direct level requirement, it would just cost a lot of mana, or whatever magic system is in the game, and the reduction of stats would be more significant, effectively allowing lower-level players to see some more advanced magic but also not making him too powerful. Materia cannot be created by players, but also is not placed at exact locations in the world. Of course, some more advanced materia would be in more dangerous areas. Not everyone can acquire this magic, and if there is a PvP system, those with rare magic better have some loyal teammates or else he will have to consistantly look out for his life.
That leads to the issue of crafting. I have worked through several drafts of how crafters can make truly unique items and it falls to one of my personal core game philosophies: not every item in a world is exactly the same. What I'm saying is that some chunks of iron are more durable than others, not every link on chain mail is created to exact perfection, every hammer used to craft these items not exactly the same, etc. If a crafter wants to be well known for his items, he'll have to find higher quality metals, hammers, leather, anvils, etc. in order to produce the highest quality armor or weapons he can.
Of course, finding "perfect" lumps of coal or other materials would be an exercise in futility, so the player would have to sacrifice some quality of the item unless he searches intently for every single item to be as good as possible. So those crafters who want to be well known would have to actually work at getting quality products. The player could also spend more time crafting the item in production, which would help some of the imperfections, but would not make an item from poor materials become a perfect suit of armor.
Better crafters would have a reputation to hold, which is what I've always seen missing from MMORPG's. In most of them, every crafter is essentially the same, and it doesn't really matter who you can get an item from.
This doesn't solve all of the issues at hand, but I think it's a more interesting approach to adding "uniqueness" to the currently plain MMORPG settings.
(If you haven't noticed, I tend to play spellcasters or crafters in RPG's)
06/26/2005 (1:26 pm)
While I'm not a fan of "borrowing" concepts that obviously came from a game, I think something like the FFVII materia system would be interesting to experiment with in a MMORPG setting. The materia system is one where the player can combine "normal" magic spells with certain properties, like auto-casting it as a counter-attack or casting it on a larger group of enemies. In order to gain these properties, players would have to find materia, or whatever you would call it in this game, and combine it themselves, but it also will adjust the player's stats for balance purposes. There would be some materia that is extremely rare that would have stronger properties. Instead of having a direct level requirement, it would just cost a lot of mana, or whatever magic system is in the game, and the reduction of stats would be more significant, effectively allowing lower-level players to see some more advanced magic but also not making him too powerful. Materia cannot be created by players, but also is not placed at exact locations in the world. Of course, some more advanced materia would be in more dangerous areas. Not everyone can acquire this magic, and if there is a PvP system, those with rare magic better have some loyal teammates or else he will have to consistantly look out for his life.
That leads to the issue of crafting. I have worked through several drafts of how crafters can make truly unique items and it falls to one of my personal core game philosophies: not every item in a world is exactly the same. What I'm saying is that some chunks of iron are more durable than others, not every link on chain mail is created to exact perfection, every hammer used to craft these items not exactly the same, etc. If a crafter wants to be well known for his items, he'll have to find higher quality metals, hammers, leather, anvils, etc. in order to produce the highest quality armor or weapons he can.
Of course, finding "perfect" lumps of coal or other materials would be an exercise in futility, so the player would have to sacrifice some quality of the item unless he searches intently for every single item to be as good as possible. So those crafters who want to be well known would have to actually work at getting quality products. The player could also spend more time crafting the item in production, which would help some of the imperfections, but would not make an item from poor materials become a perfect suit of armor.
Better crafters would have a reputation to hold, which is what I've always seen missing from MMORPG's. In most of them, every crafter is essentially the same, and it doesn't really matter who you can get an item from.
This doesn't solve all of the issues at hand, but I think it's a more interesting approach to adding "uniqueness" to the currently plain MMORPG settings.
(If you haven't noticed, I tend to play spellcasters or crafters in RPG's)
#38
The overhead of such a system would certanly require more data to be downloaded every time a new character appears within the proximity of a player client, but intelligent use of compression and selective LOD of items would probably make this overhead minute.
06/29/2005 (7:05 am)
It just came to me that using basic primitives with adjustable size, rotation, skew, etc. parameters could allow players to create highly customizable armor, weapons, and structures similar to the vechicles and buildings in the Spore demonstration. Finding some means of determining the effectivness of designs may be quite difficult, but several build factors such as material type, material quality and craft skill could help. This would be great, craftsmen would be capable of becoming recognized for the fashion of equipment they produce.The overhead of such a system would certanly require more data to be downloaded every time a new character appears within the proximity of a player client, but intelligent use of compression and selective LOD of items would probably make this overhead minute.
#39
People keep hitting on the nags of MMOs like the level grind and so on, and while those things are annoying, if you had a player centric story for people to follow, something riviting enough to keep people wanting to find out more, then what you have done is created insentive, insentive to keep playing without sticking to the tried and true notion that more power = mor enjoyment, and while to an extent this can be true, to most people this just gets boring, you can't keep people playing your game with loot, and exp, and extra higher level caps.
The point of a role playing game is story, character interaction, moral dillemas, and choices, none of these things have really been fully implemented into any MMO yet which is the reason they will remain stale until someone does.
06/30/2005 (6:26 am)
I think the whole point of getting rid of stats is to force the player to concentrate on something other then leveling which is good, of course there has to be ample rewards for everything you do or else the player will see no point in continuing to play. Mainly the things that have kept me interested in single player RPGs is the single player story. The fact that the story made you feel like you were making a difference in the world around you, and that you were it's one true saviour. If MMOs don't start making the player feel like they are making a difference, people will inevitably get tired of playing.People keep hitting on the nags of MMOs like the level grind and so on, and while those things are annoying, if you had a player centric story for people to follow, something riviting enough to keep people wanting to find out more, then what you have done is created insentive, insentive to keep playing without sticking to the tried and true notion that more power = mor enjoyment, and while to an extent this can be true, to most people this just gets boring, you can't keep people playing your game with loot, and exp, and extra higher level caps.
The point of a role playing game is story, character interaction, moral dillemas, and choices, none of these things have really been fully implemented into any MMO yet which is the reason they will remain stale until someone does.
#40
Tis was supposed to be short, ohwell.
06/30/2005 (8:46 am)
I have something very small to say. Im a experianced roleplayer, i played alot of them PnP. Ive played 3 which does'nt deal with numbers or even paper except if your wanting to remember what equipment you are carrying. Here is where logic applies, to much damage ill faint, but before that ill go on and get more damaged, sometimes get an adrenaline boost, all according to how i play my character and what the GM decides. And when im to damaged like shot in the legs and can't move I just can't.... This is when we are playing hyperrealistic games even going around "in-game" in our own homelands "that is sweden" And take upon roles. No dice or numbers needed. We just play and have fun. How to roleplay death ? best way is to either die for real and restart but if your not that hardcore of a player or you think its frustating, you fainted, or the like. Tis was supposed to be short, ohwell.
Torque Owner Brian Hunter
I mean the MMORPGs I have been exposed to - the following were the "goals of the players" :
- More levels. (...which provides better skills, able to equip better gear, able to go to the fancy zones).
- More skills. (... which provides steady source of equipment and income, both of which lose importance with higher levels).
- Better equipment. (... which provides safety from dangerous NPCs and PKers, faster experience gains, and able to go to the fancy zones).
- Better materials. (... which provides equipment with bonuses, which loses importance with the introduction of "rare drops" and higher levels).
- Good/bad faction. (... which provides travel and commerce in select locations, both of which lose importance with higher levels).
- Membership in guilds. (... which provides faster experience gains, worldwide "guildspeak" for arranging raids, and innerguild trade of rares).
- Space ownership. (... which provides skill training safety in some MMORPGs, and greater storage for stockpiling resources in most all MMORPGs).
There might be more but I think this catches the sum of it. All based around the infamous treadmill or around exclusively combat oriented considerations. There is nothing substantial to MMORPGs other than those two elements. The "RP" in "MMORPG" is a bit of a falsely included term in this regard -- roleplaying has absolutely no benefits to most all of MMORPGs out there. And the very meager benefits you reap are laughable that I have seen so far. As is, all MMORPGs I have been exposed to retains the majority of the community looking down on roleplaying as a total waste of time that could be better spent on the treadmill. There are always exceptions to every rule I admit, but the majority is that way.
And some of the arguements on these forums I am afraid would be little help. The following is YMMV.
Live administration team running special events
Your dreaming. Sorry, but special events are spam fests that take most of the time allowed to them telling people to pay attention, stop fighting and flaming, and end out either with a massive fight with 300+ people in a lagging zone fighting to make the last hit on the special event MOB so they can have the "unique drop it leaves" ... or they are vague attempts at storyline that everyone ignores and gets upset that they were part of a special event without any MOBs or special rewards given out for being there and not out on the treadmill.
Player run quests
A nightmare waiting to happen in the current MMORPG equation. What do players want ? I listed the moajority of it above. So in player run quests, what are they going to be looking to maximize ? Yep, the list above. Player run quests is like asking for abuse from your community trying to min/max every square inch of room you give them to excel. For a preview of this madness look at Everquest and the instanced quests system they introduced not too long ago (as Everquest goes). And Lord help you if the quests span into normally camped real estate ingame ... then you are looking at rotations among the top tier clans and on and on and on .... no thanks.
... to be continued ...