Here's a question that's been bothering me for some time. Why do all MMOGs have to have a persistent world? The thing that always makes me (and probably many other people too) get bored with every single MMOG that I play is the fact that there really is no point to them. They all follow the same pattern: Kill monsters, do pointless boring quests, get better equipment and skills, lather, rinse, repeat. You can never win or really achieve anything. There's always someone else that has done the same quests etc. before you. And will do after you've done them. What I would like to see is an MMOG that would have a goal you could work towards, either on a personal level or as a part of a clan, a guild or whatever. For example, imagine an fps like Unreal Tournament or something like that. Each server would be running just one huge map with thousands of simultaneous players. The map would be divided into sectors over the control of which a few opposing teams would fight. The goal of the game would be to help your team to capture every sector on the map. Once a team would succeed in doing it the server would be reset and the war would start over, perhaps with a new procedurally generated map so no "match" would ever be the same. I won't go into details about how a game like that would work, that's not the point of this post and you all can use your imaginations. What also bugs me about current MMOGs is the overall staticness of them. There isn't much interaction between the player and the world. You should be able to dig a hole in the ground, cut down a tree, build a house, that sort of things. Why don't the developers want to let the players leave their mark in the world and feel like they've achieved something, made a difference? I know that there are games that are trying to do this but it should be a standard, not an exception. In a non-persistent world there would be even less problems with letting the players mess with the world since everything would always be reset after the game would end. You could let the players raze cities to the ground, kill monsters to extinction, bring about the apocalypse etc. There are probably more things that you could do with MMOGs with non-persistent worlds than the current static persistent worlds. Persistent worlds were a new and cool thing in the past but now in my opinion they've also become the curse of many MMOGs. What are your thoughts on this matter? Why do non-persistent MMOGs not exist? And if they do, please inform me.

I'm not disagreeing with you in anyway, but I'd like to put my opinion in that you never "accomplish" things in games anyway, games are supposed to be fun. At least thats why I play them. If someone needs to feel like they are accomplishing something, games are probably not the greatest use of their time.

That said, I'm not knocking your idea. It sounds pretty neat, I'm just putting my opinion out on people who feel the need to accomplish something while gaming. I don't play MMORPG's or MMOG's in general, but the kind you described seems like something I could get into for a couple evenings.

I agree totally. Games are for fun, not for achieving something. I guess achieving was a bad choice of word. What I meant was just that there should be a goal to an MMOG and more interaction between the player and the world. Would Unreal Tournament be as much fun if there was no score keeping and the matches wouldn't end? You'd just run around shooting people aimlessly.

Isn't that what diablo 2 is?

The first half of what you describe sounds like a 'battleground'. You don't have to restart the game to have battlegrounds. Just reset the battlegrounds each time and let the character build up outside of them.

Now, as far as static-ness, I agree completely. However, there is one reason you should NOT allow people that much freedom in how they interact with the world.

It's called Second Life.

Any system that can be abused, WILL be abused. People will raze forests, spell out dirty words by digging trenches, Build houses shaped like body parts, that sort of thing.

It would solve the problem to simply reset the servers when a goal is reached, but then you essentially don't have an impact anymore, because any lasting changes you make to the world will be effectively wiped.

Effectively, by wiping servers, you are removing the persistence of the world. However, I don't believe that it is the persistence that's the problem. The problem is permanence. It would be so much more amazing to be able to influence the world, and then NOT have that change taken away.

Quote:

Original post by Werty Here's a question that's been bothering me for some time. Why do all MMOGs have to have a persistent world?

As someone said below, this is more about permanence than persistence. (Persistence in the gaming context really just means that the world remains even when everybody logs off.)

Quote:

What I would like to see is an MMOG that would have a goal you could work towards, either on a personal level or as a part of a clan, a guild or whatever.

A Tale In The Desert.

'ATitD also has a unique outlook in that the game itself has a global foregame, midgame, and endgame: on average so far, every year and a half the game ends'

Quote:

There are probably more things that you could do with MMOGs with non-persistent worlds than the current static persistent worlds. Persistent worlds were a new and cool thing in the past but now in my opinion they've also become the curse of many MMOGs. What are your thoughts on this matter?

I think you need to look beyond the obvious top 4 or 5 games before judging the genre. :P

Quote:

Why do non-persistent MMOGs not exist? And if they do, please inform me.

Not a problem.

I forgot about ATTID. I've never been present in ATTID when one telling ends and another begins. Does it reset everything with each telling?

Also, now that I think of it there are dozens of web-based strategy games that reset every so often, seeing as they allow any player to make huge amounts of change.

Quote:

Original post by Humble Hobo The first half of what you describe sounds like a 'battleground'. You don't have to restart the game to have battlegrounds. Just reset the battlegrounds each time and let the character build up outside of them.

But then the maps couldn't really be that big, could they? Or can one battleground in wow for example house all the players on the server? Haven't played battlegrounds in wow but I'm guessing not. And why does an MMOG even have to have character development?

Quote:

Any system that can be abused, WILL be abused. People will raze forests, spell out dirty words by digging trenches, Build houses shaped like body parts, that sort of thing.

Probably. But that's a risk I'd be willing to take. There would also be those who would use the system intelligently. And you could also come up with measures to keep the abuse in check, like allowing building of houses only on land you own etc.

Quote:

It would solve the problem to simply reset the servers when a goal is reached, but then you essentially don't have an impact anymore, because any lasting changes you make to the world will be effectively wiped.

Would it matter? If the game was designed taking the wiping into mind and not even try to make it too much a world simulation like Second Life but a real game, then I don't think it would matter that much.

Quote:

Effectively, by wiping servers, you are removing the persistence of the world. However, I don't believe that it is the persistence that's the problem. The problem is permanence. It would be so much more amazing to be able to influence the world, and then NOT have that change taken away.

Yes well, I agree as far as MMORPGs go. But notice how I'm talking about MMOGs, not just MMORPGs. How cool would it be to have an fps or an rts or whatever with thousands of players on a single map/server. Those type of games would have to end at some point. Give me Unreal Tournament with support for thousands of simultaneous players and onslaught levels the size of wow's entire world and I'll be happy.

And Kylotan, I have played A LOT of MMOGs of different types and sizes, so I think I know how I feel about them. Downloading a tale in the desert right now, thanks for the tip. I know there are many smaller MMOGs that are trying to be innovative and different but there lies the problem. They are too small and low budget to be enjoyable for a longer time. For me at least.

Bringing up the web-based games again:

I've only played a few, but one comes to mind: "Zelderex Online"

Games like these are exactly what you are describing. Hundreds (or rarely thousands) of players are all building bases and expanding, attacking eachother, making alliances and enemies... And then at a certain interval the server is wiped. Everything you do causes the balance of power to change. The world changes.

All that needs to be done is transfer a game like this from web-based into client-based (possibly 3D).

Yes, non-persistent worlds would definitely work. Someone just has to make one that isn't so obscure and web-based.

Quote:

Original post by Werty Quote: Any system that can be abused, WILL be abused. People will raze forests, spell out dirty words by digging trenches, Build houses shaped like body parts, that sort of thing. Probably. But that's a risk I'd be willing to take. There would also be those who would use the system intelligently. And you could also come up with measures to keep the abuse in check, like allowing building of houses only on land you own etc.

It only needs a very small proportion of players acting destructively to spoil it for everyone else. Think of the South Park WoW episode, or what happened to FlipCode.