I certainly suppose that it applies to MMO, but then again, my whole design structure kindof falls apart that that point. That''s not a weakness at all, because MMO games are just a completely different animal, and part of the reason that they suck right now is because designers refuse to realize that.

For example: Murder-based leveling structures should have been the first thing to go in graphical MMORPGs, but the designers were too short-sighted to realize they weren''t just making an RPG with multiple players. And most of the new design that''s been done so far is just compensation for this initial mistake.

Anyway, when I wrote out the ten commandments of game design at landfish.com, I wanted it so you could apply it to pretty much any divergent media. Most of those commandments are OLD, way older than me. And I didn''t imagine a single one, I only ripped them off from other places. So I hope you might be able to get something outof applying them to MMO, although ones like MEANINGFUL turn slightly grey, now don''t they?

======
"The unexamined life is not worth living."
-Socrates

"Question everything. Especially Landfish."
-Matt

and why should they think anything's wrong...they're making a crap-load of money the way it is...

of course, they're all going to Gamedev Hell in the end.



"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya --nes8bit" -- Nazrix
""You see... I'm not crazy... you see?!? Nazrix believes me!" --Wavinator
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.


Edited by - Nazrix on October 14, 2000 8:24:46 PM

MMORPG''s will be capable of sustaining player-run plots when someone comes up w/ the bright idea to design one with this purpose in mind. Some ways you could do this:

• Strengthen the sense of community in your world. Let people own things. Set up sysop-run guilds to supplement player-run guilds. Only accept submissions for guildhalls from legitimate guilds w/ a distinct in-game purpose. Let people build their own houses, and give sysops the right to declare a design unfit if it doesn''t jive well w/ the atmosphere. Players will bitch that they paid, so they can do what they want, but you pay to get into a movie theatre, too, and you don''t have the right to ruin other people''s experience.
  
• Plant plot instigators in your world. By this I mean hire good role-players, (I don''t think you''d have to pay them much to play their favorite game part-time ) or offer free or discounted service to people willing to play a good role well. (I don''t think you''d be at a loss for recruits here either) Let these people play dragons, demi-gods, or other strong roles prone to abuse by irresponsible players.
  
  The reason this would work is that people are surprisingly willing to go along with a plot-line, just can''t be bothered to come up w/ one themselves. I hate to say it, but people are sheep, for the most part. I''ve done some "independant research" on a few MUDs, and I''ve found that people will go along w/ just about anything resembling a plot, now matter how strange, silly, or contrived it is. Seriously, try this some time if you haven''t; its great fun.
  
• 
  Give people something else to do. Really work this into your interface. People need a graphical emote system in a graphical MMORPG. I''m thinking something like a body language selection menu/wheel. Work the missions into the theme of your world. Obviously w/ so many players, not every player is going to be involved in every key plot-point, but the missions should relate to the grand epic in some way, even if it is some lame "delivery-boy quest".
  
  LF- Need a place to stay? You see, there''s this club. . .
  
  
  If you see the Buddha on the road, Kill Him. -apocryphal

hehe. AP., you''re missing something.

YES, they have to give players something else to do. Many games already have. But if you leave Murder-based Experience in place with a leveling system, no one will do anything else unless you reward them more for that.

Seriously. Stick a rat in a cage, with a button that produces cheese. Never expect that rat to do anything but push that button as long as the cheese keeps coming. Put a wheel in the cage, and he might run on it every so often, but he sure as hell won''t run if he''s hungry, he''ll be eating cheese!

If you want players doing something else, either remove the psychological reward system from combat, or add a more rewarding one to something else. Basic Behavioral Psychology has never applied anywhere so much as in graphical MMORPG...

LF,
very true. I liked your ideas on MMO. Most of your ideas I respect, but the MMO ones I really agreed the most w/.

You could have it so the cheese is far removed from combat, and combat could potentially have such a negative affect that it would rarely be seen as a solution. When it is it would be quite an incredible situation.


"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya --nes8bit" -- Nazrix
"If your parents didn't explain this one, I'm not going to." --Felisandria




Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.

Graphical MMORPGs were the one demon I could not fight. When and if Goblin is ever made, perhaps I would consider it, but until then, no one but you will support my ideas. Oh well.

Has anybody heard anything about Goblin recently? Did it die or what?

Really? I thought that your ideas on MMORPGs were the most useful ones. Of course they''re hard to apply since MMORPGs are such a commitment with needing servers and all.

I was thinking about the effect of combat when I was watching Titus last night. The concept of death and loss is exemplified in Shakespeare better than any story. When the characters die it means something, it means a whole lot...and the audience feels it. The same concept could be applied to MMORPGs...

My, we have certainly strayed from topic, haven''t we?


"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya --nes8bit" -- Nazrix
"If your parents didn't explain this one, I'm not going to." --Felisandria




Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.

The thing I''ve been trying to reconcile is how to allow players to have creative input into the game (actions affecting setting and story) while, at the same time, employing rules and structures in order to keep conflicts dynamic and impartial.

The problem with MMORPGs is the totally clinical interaction between the world and the players. The world or engine doesn''t care who you are or what you want. It really doesn''t care what you do unless you''re practicing skills or killing things while collecting levels and items. Relevant social interaction is limited to cooperating to kill stuff, practice skills and cooperatively gain levels and items. Anything else isn''t the province of the world engine and that tends to stunt meaningful or compelling player spawned storytelling and roleplaying - aside from acting a role "just ''cause" and knowing that it''s a rather futile and meaningless act. This serves to explain a bit of the rift between MMORPG roleplayers and the powergamers. The former are in denial that roleplaying In Character in the context of a MMORPG is just silly. Who cares if you''re a Ranger with a tragic life whose village was burned by Orcs? Your story will never have a point or a resolution because it /never happened/ as far as the world is concerned.

MUSHes, text based online roleplaying, have their own problems. Because of the deeply creative and personal nature of the roleplay IC issues often become OOC, cliques of players form, and powerjockeying becomes as much an OOC activity as an IC one. New players often feel completely clueless and picked on by judgmental old hands whose characters are all powerful and who often control crucial administrative spots. Newbies themselves can also be incredibly disruptive to the creative ecosystem as the strength of a MUSH comes from an assumed culture of cooperation. If newbies abuse the setting or the rules vast tracts of roleplay may have to be retconned, or erased, so that continuity or consent issues aren''t violated. Over time entrenched players often grow jaded and highly selective with their play but unwilling to abandon coveted positions of control over storylines and props. This leads to total stagnation.

There has to be a middle way and I think, again, this comes down to simulating a world, with mortality, economics and flushing toilets and letting the players do what they will. If powergamers can find a niche that roleplayers find highly useful and roleplayers can serve a function that powergamers will recognise as realistic and actually useful then the world simulation is doing its job. Factions and family should be more important than levels and magic dodads. Wages or rewards from players should be more important than scraps of gold from monsters mugged. Form the channels and let human nature take its course. There will be stories aplenty in a world where personal background and goals can be taken into account and made relevant and where an the benefits of an impartial engine, instead of flawed human administrators, can be used to best effect.

I have to wonder what a graphical MMORPG might be like if you had "angel" admins who were always invisble, giving "karma" to good people, or just good roleplayers. Instead of an exp structure? Hmmm.

LF-I''d be happy w/ different flavors of cheese, at this point.

I guess to follow out the analogy w/ a Skinner Box, part of what MMORPG designers need to do is get rid of the cage. What I was suggesting is not substituting other soulless activities in lieu of combat, or merely making combat more interesting. I''d rather play a messenger in a real war, w/ all the intrigue and subtlety required of that role, than a mindless butcher, hacking my way up the corporate ladder. But that''s kind of a side issue here, though you know my feelings on what combat in games should be. . .(I think)

Anyway, I think the real problem is the lack of geniune meaning to 90% of your actions in an MMORPG. In a single player game, it might be enough to simply advance your own player/party, if this afforded enough interesting interaction for your game. But this just doesn''t work in an MMORPG environment, or it at least fails to take full advantage of the genre''s strengths. An MMORPG''s strength is in real interaction w/ real people. As LF said, what we have now is essentially two-hundred single player RPG''s being played out on one map, w/ limited interaction between the players.

MMORPGs now attempt grand scale world events, but the problem is that they are always limited to a small number of players, and the situation usually has to resolve itself by everybody''s bedtime. Its kind of the same problem sitcoms have- there''s simply not enough time to develop a really good dramatic situation. That''s why my second and third point really go together. For this kind of thing to work, you''d need dependable people to play key roles. A two month war won''t hold together if the leading generals forget to pay their phone bill & can''t log on for a week. And of course it would be even better if the two month scenario was based around the Archduke''s assassination, and the only other blood shed was the killer''s in a public execution. But to be honest, I think that we''re a long ways off from that, simply because players wouldn''t know what to do w/ themselves in that scenario.

And as the last Anon pointed out, this all has to be supported w/in the game engine. That''s the key point, and the worst problem w/ the current crop of MMORPGs.

If you see the Buddha on the road, Kill Him. -apocryphal