Is it the new "in" thing to attempt (and fail) to build a "World of Warcraft killer"?

#1 No offence but I have alpha/beta tested over 250+ mmos so far.
WoW was one of them. Subscribers or not, blizzard did nothing innovative to say the least.

Everything they included in WoW was a copy of other successfull mmos that was released years before WoW and even copy things from MMOS that appeared only shortly before them for their expansions (battlegrounds is a slightly modified heroes ascend from guild wars and the guild wars of guild wars).
Blizzard is generaly known as a "polisher" in which they are also good.
It started already with their first warcraft which was a copy of the first C&C game with the only difference being in a fantasy setting.

The major point that blizzard already beat the C&C developers back then was that the C&C developers were Indies with no major funding unlike Blizzard.

The same thing happened with WoW.
- They spent 200k in the first 1-2 weeks for advertisement already.
- They had a huge fanbase from the previous Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo players.
- They spent tons of money to be featured in almost every second page of various magazines(witnessed with my own eyes for months to years in Germany and heard the same from other countries).
- Internet Advertisement, TV Hype and Advertisement, Magazines Ads, WoW Magazine and tons of other promotions helped to gain so many players.

Most of these players were people that had no clue or idea what a MMO even was. I talked with lots of people I know from traveling (I travel daily with the train to work for 1,5 hours one way).

They came up with comments like "hey did you also hear about WoW? It should be great everyone says and you can play and communicate with people from allover the world".

The woman that told me that was not a gamer.

Of course it is a good thing to bring more people into the gaming and interest them cause all developers will benefit from it at the end.

However, from the 100s and 1000s of people I questioned and even meet in the CBs I was in there, around 90%-95% were there and stayed there because of the people they had meet even the gameplay "sucked" in many ways.

I meet many people that quit after a while, some after a year or two(which is normal for any mmo actually).

Personally I found it as a solid beginners mmo but not good for a experienced player. In overall is it a big ball that got stiched together with tons of features from other mmos instead of creating anything new themselves.

I also don't know on what do you base your assumption of the "wow copies" cause I'm getting invitations from almost every mmo that comes out and keeping my eye on the scene myself aswell but the only game you could really compare to WoW or say it is like a "WoW clone" was Runes of Magic that is also quite successfull even in my opinion is a horrible game to play.

Personally I hate the word "WoW Clone" because everyone and their granny is using it towards any new mmo.

So all in all their formula of success was the tons of money they spent on advertisement of any form and shape rather then the game itself.

Innovation for me = Spore, Little Big Planet, City of Heroes(was the first one on its type), Guild Wars and the upcoming Guild Wars 2, Lost Saga (unique and fun on its type as also very successfull), the upcoming Darkspore and quite a few more MMOs as also offline games with online multiplay.

WoW definately doesn't fall under the Innovation category when it comes to the game itself.

Even it managed to get the amount of money in that short time, there are other mmos from the past that had the same amount but needed years to reach it.

If the statistik values are really truth is also unknown cause to be honest all the people I knew were playing wow in the past, doesn't play for a while now.

Of course they are compared to the whole amount only a few but with all the newer mmos that came out and more that are released overtime, the amount will be hugely reduced in no time.

Most of all after the continent of ninth(needs localization for EU/US yet though), Blade & Soul(another innovative gameplay btw), Guild Wars 2, Arche Age (another innovative mmo that needs localization) and Terra get's released (to name a few). :)

#2 Nice answer, okay to clarify maybe i was a bit too blunt, i didn't mean that every MMO out there tried to be a WoW clone, i was merely saying that many companies are releasing games that basically try to "one up" wow and try to attract current/former wow players by using familiar mechanics and art direction.

Likewise i do not think that WoW is innovative either, but the competition isn't really trying either.

Maybe i am part of a dieing breed of gamers that like their MMORPGS to be deep and complex, instead of streamlined and simplified to the extreme.

The only reason these days that i am not actually playing any mmorpg is that i believe that i can find a similar experience (if not better) in single player and multiplayer games that do not demand from me a monthly fee.

The mmorpg genre today evolved into some kind of hybrid where the focus is on single player (linear questing) and small groups (raids, instances, etc...)

#3 I miss the days when 4-player simultaneous was about as Massive Multiplayer as games got and even a good 2-player simultaneous game was difficult to pull off.

#4 I prefer 4-8 players anyway, 16 for some styles. Bring back co-op CRPGs :)

#5 WoW put me to sleep all 3 times I tried to play it.

#6 Ronnie, that's the key to me. If you want 4 to 16 players co op play that doesn't justify having to buy your game again every months.

If they want a monthly fee , for me they have to offer something more, something regular multiplayer games cannot offer.

#7 WoW was nothing other than a glorified, dumbed down version of EQ1. Yet it sold millions of copies? How? There is nothing great about WoW other than the fact that its simple, can be played casually, low system requirements and relatively bug free. The gameplay in WoW is fun and addictive if you have the attention span of a parrot, which apparently most people do. Nothing innovative at all with it or any of it's clones/killers<sic>.

#8 To Kyrah: The thing that many thing that every new mmo or that many are trying to "copy" it is because most mmos are using the "same basics" which mmos previous to wow already had set and wow and almost everyone else used afterwards since it was taken like the "default systems" of a mmorpg game.

That's what made Guild Wars and a few others innovative.
They "dared" to bring along new systems, features and other things hoping that the players will accept them.

Not all did but many to most did and still do.

The progress that was made in the gaming industry through the years needs us all to be more innovative cause most of the players got used to the "same old, same old" and in the meantime they are bored and looking for something newer.

That's why new ideas HAVE to be mixed together with the old "defaults/standards" in almost every game in my opinion.

Through this procedure the players have systems in a game they are familiar with and "love" but at the same time have something new to discover. :)

The games offer then new "challenges" the players can take on.

There are quite a few good and hugely underated mmos out there (f2p & p2p) that offer partially very well made systems but in the most cases their approach to the public is bad.

What I have noticed is that most developers doesn't "bother" to advertise their games properly and thats one of the main reasons why they don't take lots of attention.

Most mmos can be only found through mmo related sites or their own websites. Some of them in some magazines after the magazines themselfs got interested and tested them.

That's a big shame in my opinion cause if you don't show your "baby", then no one knows that it's even there right? :/

That was also the major point Blizzard took advantage of and see there?
It works!

I must also admit that I came across many mmos that have good systems to offer but doesn't appeal due to the wrong approach on the graphics or wrong advertisement(Monster Forest online comes as example to mind...).

#9 Personally in term of game features i feel that instancing is an abomination, that's basically trying to shoehorn a game that isn't designed to be an MMORPG into one.

If you look at eve online, the way they handle players to allow absolutely massive number of ships per systems is quite different from most games.

Likewise, back in the past, UltimaOnline exploited it's top down view to split the game world into zones that could be handled by a single server, big capitals getting the smallest zones (because of the potential for a much higher player density) while most of the oceans where handled by a single server (boating was the only way to get there).

I can understand the technical appeal of handling small cloned instances because then you can use a lot of load balancing methods and assign server instances "on demand" to raid zones that require it.

But today's computers are powerhouses compared to what Ultima Online had access to for it's server architecture.

Today's mmorpgs tend to follow a trend that is to stick to very simplistic game mechanics, on the other hand the single player RPG games are aiming for more and more complex worlds.

I will cite "fallout: new vegas" because those games tend to offer an extremely rich single player experience, and that's beyond the simple questing concepts.
-NPCs have their own daily schedule.
-In depth faction relations.
-Random encounters as you travel the game world.
-Complex character customization.

Granted, this is a Single player game, but there is so much in it, provided you aren't just tagging along the main quest in order to finish it as fast as you can, it's a much better value than what your typical mmorpg is offering.

A game like fallout can make me forget that I'm in a single player game and make me genuinely take side in the faction conflicts happening in the game, on the other side most mmos today only offer you a moderately long grinding/questing line that can be achieved alone or in group along with a PvP that looks more and more like someone's adaptation of classic FPS game modes adapted to RPGs.

The social part of mmos seems to be mostly overlooked and if it exists it is completely crushed under bloated combat systems upon which players argue endlessly about "what is the best character build".

Exploration is almost non existent, the result of any mmo that puts questing as the focal point of single player and co op play is that any place that isn't on the path of a quest will almost never be visited.

Since UO gave the ability for players to build pretty much anywhere their own home/city/fortress, you might think that with more CPU power, more bandwidth and more graphical capabilities that modern computers have, those concepts would be even more present. But no, most mmo worlds are static as ever or timidly provide instanced homes.

Age of Conan promised player built cities, turns out it's only following an unmodifiable template that every player cities share.
The combat systems in most mmorpgs follow loosely the same principle of "point and click" that sums the combat in spreadsheet fight and "pulling the right power at the right time.

I will cite "mount & blade" and "lugaru HD" for being both excellent examples of games that offer medieval/hand to hand combat in a very "action" based method, why don't we see that kind of stuff in mmorpgs, instead of

"who has the highest level/gear will win unless he does something stupid"

Waiting for the next "tic" to throw my next spell/special attack is the thing that makes me dislike most mmorpgs out there, there is a huge disconnection between the player and what's going on onscreen.

#10 OK! I have to take one thing of my chest towards you Kyrah!
I LOVE "talking" with you. :)

It's motivating and fun!
I understand and agree on most points you wrote.

The problems that many developers have though are:

Good Points) They want to make their game accessible to a larger audience
Due to this:

- they are trying to include mid spec/level systems at least.

- they are adding mostly familiar point & click battle systems so even "slower players" (disabled people, older people or people with difficulty to react fast)have a chance to enjoy a game.

- limited recourses (some devs are really having this problem even it sounds unlikely to be true)

Bad Points)
- not well thought through designs

- systems that are TOO oriented on money making (atlantica online as example) and puts the players off.

- gamebreaking bugs that are not been taken care off for a long time(months and longer)

- bad approach through bad promotion & design (having a mmo with complex systems that would appeal to a larger and older audience but limiting yourself through kidsgarden graphics and "teletubby"-like promotional videos)

- bad management of important resources (like servers structure as example)

As far as I can tell the mmo you are looking forward to will be definately guild wars 2. :)

You should watch the gameplay and read about the lore, the systems and classes! I saw the game at the gamescom 2010 in germany in its alpha state and it was gorgeous!

Alpha state without bugs is the quality I already know from guild wars 1.

In guild wars 2 the world evolves and changes around the player depending on the players own decisions.

- No "question mark" quests anymore.

- Teamplay makes sense and has a great meaning (skill combos, benefits and more).

- wonderful design that makes you want to visit every single ankle of a area.

- npcs that are responding to your actions accordingly and intelligent

- you buy the game once and play forever without extra fees.
Tons of other things I'm looking forward too(it would take too much space and would look like a advertisement even my post isn't intented to do that).

Arche Age would be the response on what you are looking forward to when it comes to house and ship building.
Check this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiW_4k9cg4g

The customization is awesome and the environment behaviour beautifully made!

There are more videos around that are showing even more but I let it on this one only. :)

As about instancing: I didn't mind the instanced areas in city of heroes/villains back then (I was in the closed betas back in 2004 before its release in april 2004 and stayed for around 5 years) and I was happy to support the devs on their wonderfully and very customizable game with my around 10$ per month.

Why? Because in these 5 years they gave us 16 big updates with tons of things that was much fun and added a lot to the game like new classes, more editors, bases, mission editor(you could create your own missions other could play and rate and even a whole storyline with selfmade enemies from the greatest editor in a mmo ever among other things).

In the meantime they have given their community 19 expansions already and tons of other things along the way aswell.

Additionaly, the main instanced areas was the missions (when you entered a building with your team) mainly when you had a mission in a pve area. In a pvp area a enemy/villains team could even enter and interfere trying to prevent you from completing your mission.

The towns areas were very high populated and large enough to not give one the feeling of being in a small room with tons of people.

Gear based games are ok to me as long as equality is there.

Though as you said many unfortunately are focusing on gear too much making a player be like a good only because he had the luck(or the money in a f2p mmo) to get the "elite" stuff while everyone else is in disadvantage. :/

I like mmos that are not gear based better at the most part but also some that lets you craft your own gear without allowing "overpowereness" or limiting the materials to no existance for the player to gain.

Many mmo developers though tend to go for the "same old" procedure because they think its a "safe gig" ignoring the fact that this "same old" exists in 1000s or even more in the meantime and people will be mostly bored in no time making their game come to a closure faster then they can even look from left to right. :(

I still have some hope left though when I see games like the ones I mentioned appearing from time to time aswell. :)

#11 I second Antonios' sentiment there- these talks are great, IMO.

As for trying to one-up WoW, one of the things I notice is that many games that aren't saying it are having the "WoW-killer" label thrown at them. Just another example of people trying to sensationalize things. Outside of that, someone will need to properly bring an already established brand to the MMO realm with easy gameplay and graphics that allow it to run on a wide range of PCs, with that same Blizzard-like polish. That's a very high bar to reach- even Star Wars couldn't pull it off (not surprising- the last game that really gave me that Star Wars feel was X-Wing vs TIE Fighter, which was a long time ago).

Most MMOs are just lazy now, but at the same time, you can't innovate just for innovation's sake- there needs to be a need. And that need must come directly from what you want that player experience to be. I think one of the things that helped me out was trying to write out the gameplay a player experiences as a story, and looking at it that way (it works very well as part of a business plan, BTW) to see the flow as a player may see it. What I learned while I wrote is that there were some blind spots that design docs and hours of talks with my team didn't see, but looking at the narrative allowed me to fill it in, and then take that out and put it into the design to fill in the features.

But still, the features there are just to try and fulfill that experience. If you're just changing up crafting to change it, and there's no reason other than that, then the player will sense something "empty" behind it. Likewise for combat or skills or classes. It's a hard lesson.

I don't think that all matters too much, though, to tell the truth, and here's why: Facebook...

I don't think MMOs are dying, but I think the introduction of Facebook into the mix is going to hit the reset button on a lot of this MMO business. Part of it is that the technology has gotten to the point where 3D games are starting to be played in the browser, and that means that gameplay will need to adapt to that audience. MMOs, being a prime candidate for a social-network-based-game, will be refactored and (initially) dumbed down to introduce people to it. The next generations after that will be closer to what we have now, but with different features and gameplay types, because the fantasy or sci-fi genres are kind of narrow in that 500 million person market. And from those other genres you will get a slew of new mechanics that, if combined right, will make a killer MMO- even a WoW killer...because Zynga's game population dwarfs Blizzard's, and you don't need people to pay subscriptions every month to make loads of money.

#12 I like talking with you too guys, but is it me are we aren't that many reading this forum anymore?

(I will come up with something more on topic later)

#13 "" ...but is it me are we aren't that many reading this forum anymore?... ""

well I'm keeping an eye on this topic ;-)

#14 Funny enough, but when a new MMO is being discussed, its immediately compared to WoW. I am part of a group working on a MMO and I had that exact issue when i discussed it with openly with a few friends. Several of them (older gamers from back in the old EQ1 days) liked the ideas that I was discussing. A newer person to the group kept comparing what is being written to WoW. At one point, I ended up looking at them and flat telling them "Then dont play my game, play WoW".

Once that kind of attitude gets out to the bigger companies and they try to fill the areas that WoW DOESNT have and not try to steal the 12million customers that WoW has, youll find your next big success story.

#15 The big companies are afraid to innovate. Look at all the games that are announced and then never even make it past initial development. Because they are beholden to shareholders, the sales has to hit a certain mark and the subscriptions have to be +500k to even be considered a success. It doesn't matter if the game has a respectable number of servers full or is making a profit. They must be superstars and make a huge profit!

Many people are tired of the same old MMOs over and over again. Indies have the ability to create games that are different and can satisfy a niche group of players who are being ignored by the big companies. Right now what I call 'twitch' combat is becoming popular in new MMO's and that is great for those fps players who want a more challenging experience. But there is also another subset that is being ignored that wants more depth and storytelling in their game, less hack and slash, more socializing and exploring. There are also niche groups that want to build in MMO's, creating and destroying while they have a real impact on the world. There are players who would prefer a game that focuses on politics or a realistic market economy. But most games focus on combat and on combat support roles rather than actually branch out and capture new niche markets.

There are some good comments in this thread about the trends in the MMO market. I would like to think that these people who are getting tired of the same old stuff are looking at smaller games such as Salem, Wurm, and the myriad of other Indie games out there that are just a little different. I agree games that are linked to Facebook will capture many casual players but I must admit, I ignore all those Facebook game requests my friends send me. Serious gamers want serious games...and some want serious games that are not combat focused. If Facebook can deliver, or one of those many Indie games in development, then maybe they will attract all those folks who tell me they play WoW and games like WoW because the game they want to play doesn't yet exist.

There was a time when Adellion's forums had tens of thousands of fans. Adellion was about as different from WoW as one could get so I know those people exist out there.

#16 It is natural to compare every MMORPG to WoW, WoW is the big overlord for the best and the worst, it's an unit of measure everyone can understand.

My personal wishes for an mmo that would stand out of the usual crowd is one that would take example on FPS shooters and games like "Mount & Blade" when it comes to combat, even if it means that the core combat mechanics will be very simplistic and uncertain in PvP, but something that basically involve more the personal skills and positioning that the traditional "cast special power and wait" type.

What is also important to me is that the combat part of the game must be weighted equally with the rest of the game features. Most peoples on MMO take "professions" that they chose to satisfy directly their needs as a warrior/mage/etc... , the crafting is not a part of the game that runs on it's own, it's merely here to serve the "big" game which is combat.

For this i would take in example "A tale in the desert" which is pretty much my reference when it comes to crafting mechanics.

Now for the storytelling, well i love "good" storytelling, but at the same time it's something that i feel shouldn't be too developed in an MMORPG, a long time ago one of the definitions used to define mmorgps was:

"it's like a single player role playing game, excepted that you play with a huge number of other players, and it's designed in such a way that it has no end"

Rather than static quests that take time to make and that peoples churn through inevitably, i would prefer to settle on a set of "core" dynamically generated quests for beginners, and give the tools to the players so they can offer "quests" to others, based on what they need and what they are ready to pay for it.
EVE Online uses this a lot, some players make most of their ingame money through freight transport or producing/gathering rare goods.

I agree with Teila, the technology to create awesome persistent worlds is there, but shareholders are not interested in a profitable game but only in highly profitable blockbusters, kinda some sort of "do it fantastically, or don't do it at all". But again, in our ad world they also close shops that are not profitable "enough".

Another word on persistence, it seems that, excepted for a few exceptions, as the mmo genre grew older, less and less data is kept persistent. If we take the wow example again, beside the player sheet and inventory, there isn't really anything persistent in WoW.

There has been some interesting experiments in this regard tho, for example, Shadowbane had a sort of guild territory control system, but it created problems when some guilds where using the system to impose a racket on low level players, to force them to pay a tax to access a guild owned leveling zone.

#17 Kyrah, you and are definitely in different niches when it comes to gaming. :) I am a pen and paper role player and I want to recreate to some extent that experience when I play an online game. I want to immerse myself into my character. I want to stop being me for a short time. So a strong story and background is important to me. I also want limitations on the characters to be provided by this story. For example, if an online world creates a certain society, then the norms of that society should be imposed on the player characters..of course, keeping in mind that it is a game. But it can be fun to have to role play to fit into a world that is different from your own. Most games have no structure and are just huge sandboxes that allow players do pretty much do what they want within the confines of the game mechanics (and of course some common rules about behavior). I want a game that forces me to adjust to a fantasy (and I mean in the sense that its not the real world) environment. I want to use my character's skills and stats to fit into this world, not my own. FPS uses my skill, not my character's skill and as a woman with carpal tunnel, my FPS skills are very bad. So this one mechanic limits how I can play my character. I prefer the limits to placed on my by the story, not by my own physical failings. I don't want to play me! :)

Now, I am a writer. So it has been my job for the past 10 years to write the background and stories. I am rather biased I suppose toward the importance of that story. However, I do agree that not all games need a story. I have played enough casual MMO's to know that the simple act of playing with others is enough to make them worthwhile, even to me. I still have friends I met on text games years ago and I have fond memories of people from more recent games. That social bond is what makes people stay, regardless of the game mechanics. So the other thing I would like to see gain more importance in MMO's is the sense of community. While I think that does happen to some extent regardless of the game environment, I think it can be nurtured. Rather than just place crafting as extension of combat (making armor/weapons, potions, healing) it should be part of the community. I played Star Wars Galaxies during beta for a year or two after and really enjoyed the social aspects of the game. The player economy had its flaws but I spent a great deal of time making credits in-game by collecting resources and selling. Of course, SWG also had the cantina's where everyone met and socialized. These were built into the game and required to heal characters injured in combat but it brought them together with the non-combat folks. By the way, the role players in SWG in the old days were alive and thriving because the game gave them a story, a background, and a variety of ways to play the game. Too bad the company decided to appeal to one niche and change their formula!

I have not played any of the recent games, including WoW (not all that recent anymore), but my son plays them and I often watch over his shoulder. When I discover a new game is coming out, I immediately look at crafting and healing. I would also like a game with skills similar to A Tale in the Desert, although I find that game environment a bit sterile for my tastes. And I would like to find one that sees healers as something other than the old Dungeons and Dragons priests who heal in combat. If a game has one of those, I might try it. But typically, the games I find are class based (I don't like classes, too artificial) and every class is combat or combat support. Now..I realize most gamers want combat and want combat more than anything else, but again, there is a niche out there that is being ignored. I want combat..but I want more than combat. I want there to be a REASON for combat other than to gain XP to go up a level or because some background story that never really touches the players tells you that you must fight the race X people because they did bad things.

Funny you should speak of Shadowbane. I used to tell the Adellion fans that wanted to use the game to exploit other players (not an uncommon sentiment in a perma-death game) to try Shadowbane. It was my example of a game where 'boys go wild' and yes, I know girls sometimes like that sort of game play too. :) A game with a well thought out player justice system appeals to me too. I have read some articles about this but haven't quite figured out the best way to implement such a thing.

Anyway, it really is fun to chat here! I don't know why I lurked for so long.

#18 The one thing i missed the most from my early days of MMO gaming was the *omg...* LACK of hand holding. EQ1 had a decent amount of "its a huge world, go explore it". there was no "safe path" that if you didnt stray off the grey line you were ok. even running to the Qeynos zone line (a noobie zone) was an adventure at level1.

the other factor i miss is the "social" aspect. with the newer games, alot of them allow for solo play. while i can agree to SOME degree of that, that cant be all the players have to do. a game where you build a reputation with the PLAYER base.... what a novel concept.... wait, nm... its an old concept, but its ignored widely today.

eh, like my mother always said, "dont complain, fix it or move on". So Im working on fixing it.

#19

Quote:What is also important to me is that the combat part of the game must be weighted equally with the rest of the game features. Most peoples on MMO take "professions" that they chose to satisfy directly their needs as a warrior/mage/etc... , the crafting is not a part of the game that runs on it's own, it's merely here to serve the "big" game which is combat.

True, but the problem is- what else are you using crafting for? That is, you need to build more world into your game than just a background. If you can craft shirts, but those shirts have no importance or utility where gameplay is concerned, then why waste your time making them? Swords, shields, potions, etc, have that utility, and thus they get crafted as a matter of necessity. Which brings me to this...

Quote:Now for the storytelling, well i love "good" storytelling, but at the same time it's something that i feel shouldn't be too developped in an MMORPG

I both agree and disagree here. Story shouldn't be the "game on rails" that you and Telia go on to describe in your last posts, but a real virtual world will present the players with everything they need to experience a story.

This means that you have to dump a lot of AI and procedural content generation code into the world in order to make this work, but what you get at the end of the day is a system that feels more alive, and the content that it generates in order to bring that feeling out can be interacted with by the players.

One of the things we talked about in Epic Frontiers' design meetings were "seasonal events" that would occur. Not to be confused with the events in other MMOs which get advertised and happen in towns like the fair that pops up in WoW or things like that. What we were talking about were obscure things like a mass crab migration a la Christmas Island (www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNKgh6TfWXo). Does everyone get to see it? No. Does everyone even know about it? No. But it's a spectacle, and people who experience it don't forget it. Same thing goes for turtles laying eggs, whale sightings, etc. Small things like that can make a huge difference in livening up a world with things other than combat.

Another thing that P&P RPGs have over MMOs is that with P&P, the environment is usually an adversary. In MMOs, you can sprint up 40-degree inclines like it's nothing, whereas in P&P, you're probably making a check against your movement rate. Why can you run as fast through a swamp as over pavement? Why doesn't running over sand tire you out faster? What about gear that helps you get through that stuff faster?

And here's where I get back to crafting: If you want crafting to matter, you need items that matter in gameplay. If you wear an enemy factions uniform, and the NPC guards of your town don't care, then what's the point? Clothes should matter for things like that. If your players climb rock, then you should be able to craft rock-climbing gear. If you want that social aspect to be relevant to gameplay, then crafting clothing should instill modifiers for those relevant gameplay mechanics (+5 to looking like you're important, or part of a faction, or towards camouflage, etc).

Doing it any other way just means that you're bolting systems onto a world that is simply unable to care.

#20 Ted, I absolutely agree! Crafting MUST matter or no one will do it. As for clothing, I disagree big time with the idea that clothing must add to combat to be worthwhile. In SWG, I owned every item of clothing in the game and it did nothing for me other than to get my dancer big tips. lol I guess that is something. But I know many other players that also had loads of clothing. Now, most of them were female players, but a few were men. Clothing does do something..it makes your character unique. It allows you a degree of customization not available in most games. In a poll on the Adellion forums, character customization ranked way up there along with mechanics that encouraged role play and player leadership positions.

But to me the most important benefit of a good player crafting system is the economy, a real player economy. If a player wants a house, they must earn money. Unlike WoW, a good role play game with a balanced economy would not have huge monster loots, but instead players make money through making and selling items, real estate, collecting resources, and taking on jobs (quests, player jobs, etc). Combat folks can have a real purpose..ridding the town of bandits, taking care of player characters who commit crime, chasing off pests, providing game and animal parts for crafting, escort traders, arena entertainment, etc. Of course, this will not be a game that attracts the folks who want constant combat but as I said before, I am describing a niche game, not necessarily your niche game. :)

I also agree with you about adversary. Why do we allow player characters to run up steep cliffs? Why don't we add fatigue as a stat?

Unable to care...I think that depends on the players you are building the game for, doesn't it? I happen to know there are hundreds of thousands of gamers out there looking for a place where they don't have to only worry about doing something because it provides support for those in combat. This thinking has led to games where anyone who wishes to NOT play a combat character becomes second class...support only, there only to make sure the combat folks have what they need. I don't think this is necessary. Social games have no purpose other than socializing and they do quite well. So a hybrid of social and role playing with a story and some combat isn't that far off. But again, everyone is afraid to try..because its not what they are used to playing. No one will care. I know there are plenty who will. :)