A game to get rid of the younger audiences

#1 Make the game violent enough to earn an Adult rating. That will stop about half of them from getting their hands on it, lol.

I myself am planning a game(after I finish my current project) that will be so outrageously violent that it should cause outrage and anger from coast to coast.

#2 This is possibly one of the single-most narrow minded concepts I have seen in a while. Maybe I am missing something

#3 Okay, after re-reading that for the fifteenth time, I think I understand.

You are trying to eliminate the "lamer" crap that goes on with online games, like purposely annoying the team members and botching missions, cheating, or just plain making the game experience un-fun.

I can't say for sure that its strictly younger players doing this. It could be someone that is just plain immature to begin with (when you get older, the assholes in the world seem to age with you). Or they are just bored with normal gameplay and looking for a cheap thrill at everyone else' expense.

Violence won't eliminate it. I can't even think of an Indie game that carries a RATING.

#4 Just add the ability to kick them, either by voting or by an admin. Of course if you do this, then you are relying on the admins and other players. Theres no way to get rid of them completely im sure. Sadly, you get jerks everywhere in life.

Oh, and while it is not only the younger audiences who are immature, they do make up the majority (its kinda the definition of young).

#5 I would say make a game using a topic that is not interesting to younger players.

A online multiplayer drama where many people find the inner meaning of life through reflection would probably do the trick.

Seriously though... no way you can eliminate it, just put in tools to deal with it and do whatever you can to build a strong community and give them the means to police themselves.

#6 Not have it multiplayer. That would work :)

Be better about picking who you play with/against works good too.

But if you wanted to promote more "team" play create rules around that. Don't allow someone to run off and leave their team behind (esp if they jump into the jeep the team should use). Punish a player if they pick up ammo too much when others on their team don't have any.

Without a game in mind its hard to come up with examples that will work within a theme, but with some tweeking you might be able to help it. Never avoid it.

#7 Yeah as I thought kind of impossible. Admins seem to be rarely around.

And when I said young I basicly meant young minded.

Randall, sorry if it didn't make much sense my English skills aren't very good (even thou it's my first language, I have a problem with words period.)

I 'spose I just remmeber back to the days when there were alot less of these people or I didn't notice it so much.

Single player does seem to be the answer.

Thanks

Edit:
Dan, yes there the sort of things I've been thinking about. How do people think about been kind of punished?

#8 Interesting thread, I can fully understand the reason for such thinking and adding very realistic details may work but could also be a really bad thing. IMHO computer-games have evolved alot since the late 70:s where a really good game fundamentally needed about 90% imagination (think Space Invaders) to really rock. Today that has changed and realism has become both a key and a buzz-word. To much realism could either make or break your game so perhaps cutting a few corners here and there would be the best way of doing business (again IMHO).

My suggestions:
Lower the pace of the game, avoiding furious fire-fights and focus on stelth and strategy in the design-phase as this would make the game "boring" to those who are looking for a quick fix.

Add conditions that has to be met in order to advance trough the game. Think "Planetside" where you have to gain experience to certify on different weapons and vehicles. This would make it "complicated" and "tedious" for those who require big guns just to actually achieve anything, these persons are often the same ones that thinks only in I-terms.

Try to incorporate a mission-like gameplay with many different objectives where each member of the team has their own very specific task forcing everyone to wait for all the members to accomplish those tasks, only the patient and organized teams will find success and the gamers you want to avoid are all but organized and patient.

I could probably think up some more ideas, but I need some food right now, my brain is hibernating :-)

#9 There are a large number of articles about dealing with "griefer" players --- these are worth doing a search on. It's a tough issue.

If you give the power to the "non-griefers" to police themselves, the griefers WILL try and take advantage of this ability to further annoy players.

If you use built-in functions to detect and punish griefers, they'll figure out loopholes, and try to bait other players who don't know the loopholes to get themselves punished.

If you restrict the ability for players to "grief," you'll also be restricting legitimate gameplay. And griefers will still find lesser means.

You can't get rid of them, but you can find ways of limiting their ability to ruin the game for others.

#10 Lamers will unfortunetly always be around, and will always be there to ruin the multiplayer experiences for the rest of us intelligent folks. Best I can suggest is to offer a good kick/ban scheme, and possibly a 'Report Lamer' option, which would report the lamer to a master server. The user would have a 'Player Quality' rating in their user-profile which anyone can look at. When a player is kick/banned, it's listed, along with whenever you report a Lamer. Then other users could truly see what the user is like based on prior feedback.

And to prevent people from having multiple accounts so they can ditch a bad feedback, make sure the account is tied into a CD key or something similar to the game, so they can only log in through that account on that CD key.

Of course, this would also require a system where a said 'lamer' would be able to challange their grading.

Just food for thought... I for one don't play online games anymore except with my friends because of how many lamers are out there.

#11 Giving players a way to download or exchange banlists / blacklists voluntarily could be useful here. You could import the banlist from servers you normally play on, or potentially even a "main" banlist from your company server (particularly useful to slap down pirated activation keys).

#12 I would like to say one thing; A game should be fun to make for you as a developer, at least to some degree.. or it will not be finished, most likely.

Try not to modify the game too much with the mature thing in mind, just make sure it's fun.. and put some very easy and recognizable rules that everyone should follow.

What I'm trying to say with my bad english is that you shouldn't adapt to the immature crowd, just try to outlimit them :)

#13 This may seem rather backhanded, but require a credit card validation check.

#14 I wouldn't play a game if it required me to hand over my credit card number after I purchased it or downloaded it. Even if the company said it was just for a "ID check".

#15 Thanks for those ideas, I like what Jorgen said as i fits well in to my game design and re-enforces it abit.

Is the banlist from Tribes 2 in Torque at all still? As I haven't looked in to it, beut there is that banlist.cs?

Thats a nice idea Dave with the reporting of a lamer, I 'spose that is kind of like a world wide banlist.cs but with stages.

Would there have to be a warning, "If you annoy people etc your abilty to play on some servers is lost"?

I would also find that a credit card validation check would drop out alot of players, also I would have to have lots of safety towards those credit card numbers and could be worrying and become a target?

I'll have a look around for "griefer" thanks.

Stefan, I know what you mean to. No one would like to make a game which they see as pointless, boring and don't even understandable.

#16 My WWII game is going to have a morale indicator, if you're not near an NCO or officer, you won't have access to a map, or to extra ammo. That should help promote teamplay and discourage lone-wolf smacktards from wanting to play.

I also plan on having a bootcamp that a player has to pass in order to play, with results saved to a database, which also keeps track of a player's experience, and if they are banned. I won't care if younger players play, as long as they play within the normal scope of the game.

These things in themselves won't get rid of all unwanted players, but I think it will definitely cull out a lot of them.

#17 Willbkool, Yes I'm looking at moral etc to go in with my team play which breaks down the sides to platoon and then the most usable section size.

Thats a nice idea with no access to the map etc. Extra ammo, good if this is a game which the players stay alive for a long time?

I wanted to have a sort of deserting when moral is too low, how do you think that would be on the players?

#18 I have the same idea, if morale goes too low, and a player is under fire, they lose control of their character for a bit, and run for cover. Some or a lot of people may not like ideas like these, but I'm not in this for the money. lol

With up to 128 or more players per map, I plan on having the battle last for a while, and only a limited amount of respawns per player, that way if you use up all of your lifes, no more playing for that map, and that should make each virtual life a little more precious, and give more reason for teamplay, and help get rid of the smacktards. hehe

Also, I plan on having iron sights only and no wussy crosshairs. You can shoot from the hip, but it won't be that accurate. I've been playing an awesome UT2003 mod called 'Red Orchestra' and it is very realistic, and there are almost no losers playing it. The player base is very small, but the maps and models are great.

Of course, the best way to keep most kids and losers from playing is have a monthly fee, but that would limit the player base, plus the fact that you would probably have to have a dedicated T1 or better connection, and who could afford that on an indie budget?

I've spent literally thousands on 3ds max, Photoshop, and college classes because game making is something I've wanted to do for a long time, and Torque gives me that ability. Of course implementing everthing I want to do is not easy, but I feel that the realism factor I'm trying to achieve will keep most of the smacktards away, and most casual players as well unfortunately.

The difficult balance between realism and fun is going to be hard to achieve, but the more realism a game has, the less likelihood that the immature players will want to play, and that alone is okay with me.

#19 Sounds good, I like iron sights also, but need lots of modelling otherwise may not look to good.

I'm thinking of a one life in most gameplay modes, but one would have a endless or near end-less supply.

Yeah Torque is great been using it for a while and just doing lots of little things :-). Great for learning.

Have you seen FarCry? they have a lazyweapon, basicly you can't turn around really fast and have your weapon ready as soon as you turn around. I thought that sounded nice.

#20 If this is going to be war then have a hierarchy. If a grunt does not follow orders then put him the stockade or just shoot him. In time of war the military has to deal with idiots doing stupid things too. It might be worthwhile to see how different militaries around the world handle disent. Could make for more realistic game play. I know if someone were going to give our position away (Geraldo) I would slit his throat nice and quiet.