Another take on MMOs? MMODRPG
by Bil Simser · in General Discussion · 07/19/2004 (6:18 pm) · 34 replies
Okay, silly acronym I know but thought it would grab someone's attention.
I was reading an article about revisiting the state of some MMOs and how they might have changed (they really haven't and the next generation of MMOs seems to be City of Heroes but that's a whole 'nuther thread). It got me thinking about problems with MMOs, challenges people have and a systemic behaviour that we see here all the time.
I was thinking architecturally about MMOs and the fact that they're usually one single server (or a farm of servers, or a shard/zone/whatever) controlled by the publisher. Okay, this has proven to work but one thing that bugs me. Why can't I, as an indie game developer, put up my own little piece of a MMO and be part of a bigger system, reaping the benefits of a structured multiverse but allowing me creative freedom in what I can do with it. Okay, so walk with me on this one.
Uber game creator comes up with an idea for a massive multiplayer game (let's say it's an RPG as we all know what those are). He/She comes up with the idea for the world, the genre, rules of the world, etc. and works out all those details. They then produce a master server that doesn't run any one part of the world but instead hands out metadata to servers that connect. This metadata can be rules about how the world works (races, classes, magic, whatever). It can also contain items or rules around how to create items (think of it as producing base classes for your OO system that you can extend). As well the master server is responsible for slotting you into a large map where your server lives and is responsible for.
You as a server owner manage your own persistence in your own little corner of the RPG universe, making it as big (or little) as you can handle. You're bound by the rules of the land (unless maybe there are provisions for breaking away from it) and there's a data exchange between you and the master server. You provide information about your little corner of the world and what's happening (which the server will publish out to other servers for them to do what they want with it, maybe like a small server publishing a newspaper on events happening in the land). You also provide the server with your whereabouts (IP address) when you connect. It in return gives you a chunk of territory from a larger map it maintains of the entire world. It also provides you with a set of destination points which you can use for letting your users navigate to other worlds.
So you're running your server. You have some kind of set of objects in your world (like a road sign) that is dynamic (and some code to populate it). When you hook up to the master server, it drops you into a giant map it maintains (maybe giving you that part of the world so nobody else can take it, even when you're offline) and sends you a list of other systems you can connect to (name, IP address). Your users will wander about, doing whatever they want on your server and perhaps they'll decide to go on a journey. They arrive at the crossroads (the edge of your land) and click on one of the road signs that you've generated when you connected with the server (and updated whenever needed). Now people can move freely from server to server, exchanging goods and services or whatever (since all servers abide by the same rules, etc.)
Okay, someone has probably done something like this before because I'm not that smart. However I thought it was an interesting approach to building an MMO. Rather than building a large monolithic system that nobody can afford to run, you distribute it (the "D" in MMODRPG) out and let people build their own systems modding it with the tools you provide and rules you create. Think of every server in the land as a Torque mod.
Ideas? Opinions? Bil has gone off his rocker comments?
I was reading an article about revisiting the state of some MMOs and how they might have changed (they really haven't and the next generation of MMOs seems to be City of Heroes but that's a whole 'nuther thread). It got me thinking about problems with MMOs, challenges people have and a systemic behaviour that we see here all the time.
I was thinking architecturally about MMOs and the fact that they're usually one single server (or a farm of servers, or a shard/zone/whatever) controlled by the publisher. Okay, this has proven to work but one thing that bugs me. Why can't I, as an indie game developer, put up my own little piece of a MMO and be part of a bigger system, reaping the benefits of a structured multiverse but allowing me creative freedom in what I can do with it. Okay, so walk with me on this one.
Uber game creator comes up with an idea for a massive multiplayer game (let's say it's an RPG as we all know what those are). He/She comes up with the idea for the world, the genre, rules of the world, etc. and works out all those details. They then produce a master server that doesn't run any one part of the world but instead hands out metadata to servers that connect. This metadata can be rules about how the world works (races, classes, magic, whatever). It can also contain items or rules around how to create items (think of it as producing base classes for your OO system that you can extend). As well the master server is responsible for slotting you into a large map where your server lives and is responsible for.
You as a server owner manage your own persistence in your own little corner of the RPG universe, making it as big (or little) as you can handle. You're bound by the rules of the land (unless maybe there are provisions for breaking away from it) and there's a data exchange between you and the master server. You provide information about your little corner of the world and what's happening (which the server will publish out to other servers for them to do what they want with it, maybe like a small server publishing a newspaper on events happening in the land). You also provide the server with your whereabouts (IP address) when you connect. It in return gives you a chunk of territory from a larger map it maintains of the entire world. It also provides you with a set of destination points which you can use for letting your users navigate to other worlds.
So you're running your server. You have some kind of set of objects in your world (like a road sign) that is dynamic (and some code to populate it). When you hook up to the master server, it drops you into a giant map it maintains (maybe giving you that part of the world so nobody else can take it, even when you're offline) and sends you a list of other systems you can connect to (name, IP address). Your users will wander about, doing whatever they want on your server and perhaps they'll decide to go on a journey. They arrive at the crossroads (the edge of your land) and click on one of the road signs that you've generated when you connected with the server (and updated whenever needed). Now people can move freely from server to server, exchanging goods and services or whatever (since all servers abide by the same rules, etc.)
Okay, someone has probably done something like this before because I'm not that smart. However I thought it was an interesting approach to building an MMO. Rather than building a large monolithic system that nobody can afford to run, you distribute it (the "D" in MMODRPG) out and let people build their own systems modding it with the tools you provide and rules you create. Think of every server in the land as a Torque mod.
Ideas? Opinions? Bil has gone off his rocker comments?
#22
1) Quality control. The publisher would have to do extensive qulity testing for all the servers that are to be added. If lower quality parts appear in the world, that will devalue the whole experience, in the eyes of most players. Same thing if some servers are less reliable than others, and have less uptime. There is no technical solution to this problem, and it is closely tied in with the next one.
2) Lost revenue. Why should the publisher share their revenue with someone else? Will the increased revenues they get from having more servers/parts of the world be high enough to cover the increased cost of quality control, AND add extra profit? My guess is that it would be cheaper for the
publishers to set up the extra servers themselves, and make (or contract out) the extra content, and keeping the server maintenance on the themselves.
That being said, I see no reason why there couldn't be an indie version of this thing, with no real top dog, more of a collaboration thing, to let indies share some of the costs of running a MMORPG service.
08/10/2004 (1:42 am)
I see two main problems with this (some have touched on this already). I don't think we'll ever see something like this from one of the major publishers for two reasons:1) Quality control. The publisher would have to do extensive qulity testing for all the servers that are to be added. If lower quality parts appear in the world, that will devalue the whole experience, in the eyes of most players. Same thing if some servers are less reliable than others, and have less uptime. There is no technical solution to this problem, and it is closely tied in with the next one.
2) Lost revenue. Why should the publisher share their revenue with someone else? Will the increased revenues they get from having more servers/parts of the world be high enough to cover the increased cost of quality control, AND add extra profit? My guess is that it would be cheaper for the
publishers to set up the extra servers themselves, and make (or contract out) the extra content, and keeping the server maintenance on the themselves.
That being said, I see no reason why there couldn't be an indie version of this thing, with no real top dog, more of a collaboration thing, to let indies share some of the costs of running a MMORPG service.
#23
Before you know it you would have people starting servers called 'Pimp Land' and stuff. Hell I've seen people in other MMORPGS running around with the name 'pimpface'. Totally ruins the experience. So you'd probably need some kind of admin to moniter the servers and make sure they comply with your world. Unless, of course, you don't care about roleplaying. In that case, leave off the RPG on MMO.
-Jase
08/11/2004 (11:47 am)
Not to include trying to keep a consistency of roleplayng. An MMORPG just isn't an RPG (ROLE-PLAYING game) without role-playing. I've chosen MUDs over graphical MMORPGs in the past because, despite building levels and gaining items and gold like other 'RPGs', an RPG just isn't worthy of the RPG name if theres no role-playing. Hell, before MMOGs role-playing games were best known because of their storyline. (Chrono Trigger is my fave of all time).Before you know it you would have people starting servers called 'Pimp Land' and stuff. Hell I've seen people in other MMORPGS running around with the name 'pimpface'. Totally ruins the experience. So you'd probably need some kind of admin to moniter the servers and make sure they comply with your world. Unless, of course, you don't care about roleplaying. In that case, leave off the RPG on MMO.
-Jase
#24
I agree completely with Jase. The concept of "Role-Playing" has been thouroughly misused in the MMORPG genre. For the purposes of role-playing, small, end-user run worlds seems to work better than sprawling mega-worlds with thousands of users. MUDs are a great example, as are some of the Neverwinter Nights online worlds that people have developed.
The problem with huge "RPGs" is that you have a world populated by thousands of people who want to be the "hero". Of course there is going to be no plot. How many novels, movies, or traditional RPGs have you seen where there were a thousand developed characters? Much less a thousand characters actively involved in the "plot". The only way this works out is in huge battles, but even then, someone has to be the poor bastards on the front line felled by the first arrow volley.
So, the low level players become the "NPCs" and the people who are close enough in power level to be the "heroes" are a bunch of whiney 13-year olds name "pimpsta2001", etc. because they have nothing to do but level all day long. Good luck getting a single in-character sentence out of them...
Even when plot is inserted, it just comes in the form of lame "quests" that repeat endlessly for every hero. It is just not possible to give 1000 people each the personal attention they need to feel like they are part of a real story. Ultimately, MMOs just turn into fancy-looking but expensive chatrooms, with monster-whacking on the side.
Because of this, small groups will always be better if plot, character, and depth are what you desire. The GMs can control who participates in the world and give personal plot development to each player. Of course it is hard for such things to be as profitable as MMOs... because of the huge time-commitment per-player to get it up and running. Much like MUDs, it is unlikely to ever generate more money than it takes to run, but the quality of experience and other intangibles are far greater for everyone involved.
As a side note, I highly recommend Progress Quest as an alternative to all those who've been trapped by the evil ways of MMO's. It has all the all of the benefits of an MMO with none of the cash or time commitment!
08/12/2004 (9:59 am)
Warning, MMO rant aheadI agree completely with Jase. The concept of "Role-Playing" has been thouroughly misused in the MMORPG genre. For the purposes of role-playing, small, end-user run worlds seems to work better than sprawling mega-worlds with thousands of users. MUDs are a great example, as are some of the Neverwinter Nights online worlds that people have developed.
The problem with huge "RPGs" is that you have a world populated by thousands of people who want to be the "hero". Of course there is going to be no plot. How many novels, movies, or traditional RPGs have you seen where there were a thousand developed characters? Much less a thousand characters actively involved in the "plot". The only way this works out is in huge battles, but even then, someone has to be the poor bastards on the front line felled by the first arrow volley.
So, the low level players become the "NPCs" and the people who are close enough in power level to be the "heroes" are a bunch of whiney 13-year olds name "pimpsta2001", etc. because they have nothing to do but level all day long. Good luck getting a single in-character sentence out of them...
Even when plot is inserted, it just comes in the form of lame "quests" that repeat endlessly for every hero. It is just not possible to give 1000 people each the personal attention they need to feel like they are part of a real story. Ultimately, MMOs just turn into fancy-looking but expensive chatrooms, with monster-whacking on the side.
Because of this, small groups will always be better if plot, character, and depth are what you desire. The GMs can control who participates in the world and give personal plot development to each player. Of course it is hard for such things to be as profitable as MMOs... because of the huge time-commitment per-player to get it up and running. Much like MUDs, it is unlikely to ever generate more money than it takes to run, but the quality of experience and other intangibles are far greater for everyone involved.
As a side note, I highly recommend Progress Quest as an alternative to all those who've been trapped by the evil ways of MMO's. It has all the all of the benefits of an MMO with none of the cash or time commitment!
#25
08/12/2004 (10:07 am)
@ Jase & Alex - I'll prove otherwise some day. :)
#26
I think this would be a very successful path in the future to all eyes on.
Example, currently in the MMORPG Ultima Online it is a proven fact that the servers (shards) run by Electronic Arts actually have fewer people per shard/server playing and paying $10.00 a month than certain free shards/servers running server emulation software. There are a lot of empty crappy shards out there, but there many succesfuly ones too.
Case in point, I helped create & maintain a shard last year with a few friends that had on average over a 6 month period 1200-1500 unique users logged in at once. We maxed out the server emulation software and had to have a custom build, and we had off-site hosting bills over $1000.00 per month and in one month we used aprox 4 Terebytes of bandwidth. Amazingly, the community paid these bills by "donation" every month in excess. This shard easily outperformed the pay - per -play official Shards that Eletronic Arts offers. It's a trick legal situation though.
Also, Alex raises many many great points. Most RPG systems being used today are ancient and were originally design for small groups of 3-15 or so. A new type of system for thousands of unique characters with extreme variety in character persona & traits is needed. It's hard to stuff 1000 people into 3 generic character class types (melee based character(warrior), dexterity/non-confrontational based character(thief), distance/power based character(mage) and how they break down from there).
08/12/2004 (10:36 am)
I think another take on this (sorry if this is repeating, I've just browsed the thread) would be the path Neverwinter nights took by giving the ability to create your own server, but further this to allow you to create your own shard (instead of having them all connected).I think this would be a very successful path in the future to all eyes on.
Example, currently in the MMORPG Ultima Online it is a proven fact that the servers (shards) run by Electronic Arts actually have fewer people per shard/server playing and paying $10.00 a month than certain free shards/servers running server emulation software. There are a lot of empty crappy shards out there, but there many succesfuly ones too.
Case in point, I helped create & maintain a shard last year with a few friends that had on average over a 6 month period 1200-1500 unique users logged in at once. We maxed out the server emulation software and had to have a custom build, and we had off-site hosting bills over $1000.00 per month and in one month we used aprox 4 Terebytes of bandwidth. Amazingly, the community paid these bills by "donation" every month in excess. This shard easily outperformed the pay - per -play official Shards that Eletronic Arts offers. It's a trick legal situation though.
Also, Alex raises many many great points. Most RPG systems being used today are ancient and were originally design for small groups of 3-15 or so. A new type of system for thousands of unique characters with extreme variety in character persona & traits is needed. It's hard to stuff 1000 people into 3 generic character class types (melee based character(warrior), dexterity/non-confrontational based character(thief), distance/power based character(mage) and how they break down from there).
#27
Hm, you could model a whole globe and use geographical relationships to determine the "landscape" created as servers go online....
Rich
08/13/2004 (3:16 pm)
You know, from the way Unreal described it's level portaling system I thought that this was what they were going to do - a whole world where you could add your own piece of the action....Hm, you could model a whole globe and use geographical relationships to determine the "landscape" created as servers go online....
Rich
#28
First, let me start by saying that I am in agreement with Alex. I've had the exact same thoughts about MMORPGs.
Believe me, I've put a substantial amount of time into thinking of ways to make unique role-playing experiences for 1,000+ players. And I do have quite a few ideas that I think may actually work.. but I won't share them because I have hopes of implementing them into an actual game later on when I get to that point; so it will be the defining point that will make my MMORPG unique and different from the rest(in a role-playing sense, of course). However, I'm a long ways off from actually beginning and accomplishing such a task as an MMORPG.
Whether its possible or not, it doesn't change the fact that unless your world is heavily moderated for role-playing then your game simpley becomes an MMOG and NOT an MMORPG. There will always be that lot of players that don't care about role-playing and are only interested in becoming 'uber'. I also have ideas to prevent people from straying away from role-playing. But the problem then becomes finding the time/staff to moderate 1,000+ players. Easier said than done.
Although, if you build a community of role-players who care about keeping your world persistent in the role-playing aspect then you have an extra foothold on keeping players in the bounds of your game. One method some RPers used in one MMORPG I played is that if they came across anyone disrupting the role-playing experience(whether through stupid names or how they carry themselves) then they would told that they are not in-character and if they refused to change the other RPers would make their life a living hell in-game. They accomplished this simpley by killing that player on-sight... over and over. I didn't stick with that MMORPG long enough to see if it actually worked out, but I'm sure every little bit of support can help.
I've also played MUDs where there were RP points that people awarded to other people for good role-playing which gave that player a slight boost in gaining experience for their character. This method seemed like a good idea, but it failed in that particular MUD mainly because the community didn't use or enforce it enough. Thus, it was back on the shoulders of the admin to keep role-playing active.
I wish anyone luck in this particular matter. But its a lot easier said than done, however you look at it.
-Jase
08/14/2004 (12:19 pm)
Quote:@ Jase & Alex - I'll prove otherwise some day. :)
First, let me start by saying that I am in agreement with Alex. I've had the exact same thoughts about MMORPGs.
Believe me, I've put a substantial amount of time into thinking of ways to make unique role-playing experiences for 1,000+ players. And I do have quite a few ideas that I think may actually work.. but I won't share them because I have hopes of implementing them into an actual game later on when I get to that point; so it will be the defining point that will make my MMORPG unique and different from the rest(in a role-playing sense, of course). However, I'm a long ways off from actually beginning and accomplishing such a task as an MMORPG.
Whether its possible or not, it doesn't change the fact that unless your world is heavily moderated for role-playing then your game simpley becomes an MMOG and NOT an MMORPG. There will always be that lot of players that don't care about role-playing and are only interested in becoming 'uber'. I also have ideas to prevent people from straying away from role-playing. But the problem then becomes finding the time/staff to moderate 1,000+ players. Easier said than done.
Although, if you build a community of role-players who care about keeping your world persistent in the role-playing aspect then you have an extra foothold on keeping players in the bounds of your game. One method some RPers used in one MMORPG I played is that if they came across anyone disrupting the role-playing experience(whether through stupid names or how they carry themselves) then they would told that they are not in-character and if they refused to change the other RPers would make their life a living hell in-game. They accomplished this simpley by killing that player on-sight... over and over. I didn't stick with that MMORPG long enough to see if it actually worked out, but I'm sure every little bit of support can help.
I've also played MUDs where there were RP points that people awarded to other people for good role-playing which gave that player a slight boost in gaining experience for their character. This method seemed like a good idea, but it failed in that particular MUD mainly because the community didn't use or enforce it enough. Thus, it was back on the shoulders of the admin to keep role-playing active.
I wish anyone luck in this particular matter. But its a lot easier said than done, however you look at it.
-Jase
#29
So why not develop a system for both? :)
What then if you provide an interactive way for the players to moderate themselves, leaving little to worry on the staff side of things? :)
I only push the issue because I have thought of these issues and how to resolve them. Granted the system will need testing to make sure it works, but the general idea is to make the game enjoyable for both the Role-Players and the Uber Players. The funny thing is how easy it would be to implement such a scheme and why it hasn't been done yet, even in games like UO and EQ.
Like you said...
Picture something quite similar, coupled with a reliable Karma System, and I figure I'd be more opt to losing staff due to boredom. ;)
If you do want to question it, please go right ahead, I want to know where it might go wrong. :D
- Ronixus
08/14/2004 (1:25 pm)
Quote:
There will always be that lot of players that don't care about role-playing and are only interested in becoming 'uber'.
So why not develop a system for both? :)
Quote:
But the problem then becomes finding the time/staff to moderate 1,000+ players. Easier said than done.
What then if you provide an interactive way for the players to moderate themselves, leaving little to worry on the staff side of things? :)
I only push the issue because I have thought of these issues and how to resolve them. Granted the system will need testing to make sure it works, but the general idea is to make the game enjoyable for both the Role-Players and the Uber Players. The funny thing is how easy it would be to implement such a scheme and why it hasn't been done yet, even in games like UO and EQ.
Like you said...
Quote:
...if you build a community of role-players who care about keeping your world persistent in the role-playing aspect then you have an extra foothold on keeping players in the bounds of your game. One method some RPers used in one MMORPG I played is that if they came across anyone disrupting the role-playing experience(whether through stupid names or how they carry themselves) then they would told that they are not in-character and if they refused to change the other RPers would make their life a living hell in-game.
Picture something quite similar, coupled with a reliable Karma System, and I figure I'd be more opt to losing staff due to boredom. ;)
If you do want to question it, please go right ahead, I want to know where it might go wrong. :D
- Ronixus
#30
I am currently looking for people who would be interested in helping me with this project. I am just now starting to learn Torque and will be getting an "indie" license once I have enough people in the development team.
08/14/2004 (3:09 pm)
Sounds alot like the project I am currently working on. I am in the process of developing a MMORPG universe in which each server runs its own planet. An SDK would be available to admins who would like to create there own world to add to the growing universe. Each world would have its own economic and polictical system. It would still have to abide by certain core rules in order to be compatible with other worlds. Travel would be possible between worlds. The character data would be transferred from the originating world to the destination world.I am currently looking for people who would be interested in helping me with this project. I am just now starting to learn Torque and will be getting an "indie" license once I have enough people in the development team.
#31
Get that first and start working on things and find out what code snippets you'll need, and then create all your documents(and if you think you have enough docs at 20 pages, sit down and spit out 5 times as much, because you havent thought it through nearly as much as you should have then). You want everything as concrete as possible before the art people come in, or else you're risking confusion(there will be anyway, as a matter of Murphy's Law).
And even then, you'll start falling behind, but pay it no mind, just keep pushing.
08/14/2004 (3:24 pm)
Tony: I speak from experience when I say Design First! This is because there's so much you need to do before you put a team together, they're only going to sit around and twiddle thumbs, and then leave. Create reams of documents for a team to execute, and then when your design is well enough along, then start gathering team members so that they can execute parts of the design without waiting for you to make it up, and that frees you up to work on other parts of the project. You don't need the art and coders from the get-go. But you do need TGE if that's the engine you'll be using. Get that first and start working on things and find out what code snippets you'll need, and then create all your documents(and if you think you have enough docs at 20 pages, sit down and spit out 5 times as much, because you havent thought it through nearly as much as you should have then). You want everything as concrete as possible before the art people come in, or else you're risking confusion(there will be anyway, as a matter of Murphy's Law).
And even then, you'll start falling behind, but pay it no mind, just keep pushing.
#32
Its entirely possible to create a system for both kinds of people. My take on it would be to have two seperate servers(or more than two), one for role-players, one for hardcore PKers.
Now that I think of it, I do think that this would help keep the 'uber' players off of the RP server and on the PK server. Perhaps this is why NWN had such great RP servers/mods. They had specefic areas for PKers called 'Arena' and other areas for either role-playing, or just straight out adventurering.
However, I'm a role-player at heart and my statements were more geared to those of hardcore role-playing.
-Jase
08/15/2004 (8:37 am)
Quote:So why not develop a system for both? :)
Its entirely possible to create a system for both kinds of people. My take on it would be to have two seperate servers(or more than two), one for role-players, one for hardcore PKers.
Now that I think of it, I do think that this would help keep the 'uber' players off of the RP server and on the PK server. Perhaps this is why NWN had such great RP servers/mods. They had specefic areas for PKers called 'Arena' and other areas for either role-playing, or just straight out adventurering.
However, I'm a role-player at heart and my statements were more geared to those of hardcore role-playing.
-Jase
#33
-Josh Ritter
Prairie Games
08/15/2004 (8:51 am)
I was totally addictied to Progress Quest around a year ago... I was even playing it while I slept!!!-Josh Ritter
Prairie Games
#34
From a purely business standpoint I think this idea works VERY well. The problem is not getting business interested in the model. Business has been interested in the model for at least 60 years. The problem is going to be how to make it profitable. McDonalds, Wendy's, and other fast food resteraunts hand out "little pieces of their world" for the right amount of money. They are called franchises.
Why not get the Big MMORPG's like EQ, UO, CoH and others interested in franchising out shards/regions/zones for an appropriate franchise fee? This will gaurantee the collaborators a profit and provide a failsafe way to prevent unbalancing the game overmuch due to the higher RW cost of owning and administrating a server.
If the prospective McDonalds owner wants in he pays X amount for the Franchise, He is handed a rule book known as a franchise operations manual, and is expected to abide by the FOM. When he deviates beyond the boundaries of the FOM, McDonalds (or whoever) will let the FO know that he has deviated, and if The practices that break the FOM are not adhered to his Franchise License will be pulled and the FO will be expected to pay a penalty fee as agreeed to in the contract.
Why can not this same type of idea work for MMORPG's?
-Morpheus
08/21/2004 (11:39 am)
@MattaisFrom a purely business standpoint I think this idea works VERY well. The problem is not getting business interested in the model. Business has been interested in the model for at least 60 years. The problem is going to be how to make it profitable. McDonalds, Wendy's, and other fast food resteraunts hand out "little pieces of their world" for the right amount of money. They are called franchises.
Why not get the Big MMORPG's like EQ, UO, CoH and others interested in franchising out shards/regions/zones for an appropriate franchise fee? This will gaurantee the collaborators a profit and provide a failsafe way to prevent unbalancing the game overmuch due to the higher RW cost of owning and administrating a server.
If the prospective McDonalds owner wants in he pays X amount for the Franchise, He is handed a rule book known as a franchise operations manual, and is expected to abide by the FOM. When he deviates beyond the boundaries of the FOM, McDonalds (or whoever) will let the FO know that he has deviated, and if The practices that break the FOM are not adhered to his Franchise License will be pulled and the FO will be expected to pay a penalty fee as agreeed to in the contract.
Why can not this same type of idea work for MMORPG's?
-Morpheus
Torque 3D Owner Eric Clausing
I think by allowing uncontrollable servers your asking for the game to fail. Now that isn't to say that if people want to create their own worlds not to but limit them. If they design some object for their land then they should be able to submit it to get approval. If approved then it will be inserted into the content pack others can use it. Trust me not everyone will have the same stuff out for there servers. People will find ways to be unique.