MMOs Need More Bastards

Nov 12, 2010
239
0
0
Mike Kayatta said:
...the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world ...No one would accept the program ...
Over 12 million subscribers for WOW alone can hardly be considered a "no one accepting the program" occurrence.

I think the initial UO's system punishes players too much. Against a fully equipped warrior all a wizard had to do was cast paralysis and then spam fireballs... The funny thing is: a wizard risks nothing, but the reagents carried. A warrior risks everything, since a poorly equipped warrior is simply a poor warrior.

I agree with most of what you said, but I think that resource gathering should be made less tedious in that case. In UO you could literally spend weeks upon weeks mining for the best ore to make a full armor set, only for it to be taken away in few swift seconds by a PK'ing wizard.

The mining and crafting used in UO is a highly redundant system. It's tedious and mechanical, thus feels more like an actual mechanical job akin to pushing crates in a warehouse.

"Firefall" approaches this problem in a very clever manner. You have mining pods that you need to protect before the excavation is completed. Which already is a lot more fun than just clicking on rocks whole day long.

I would suggest another approach: engineering. Let players design and build their own mining installations, such as mining shafts. The said installations would then have to be outfitted with defenses against invaders, making it into a tower defense mini-game, essentially.

Automating production would be done in the same manner, minus the tower defense element possibly (it really depends on how much freedom in shaping the world you're willing to give to the player).

P.S.: yes, I do realize the whole world was macroing itself out of this kind of misery in UO, but what's the point, really? It's not much of a game if it's playing itself. In that way it's more close to an economic simulator than a game.

EDIT: spelling mistakes.
 

bjj hero

New member
Feb 4, 2009
3,180
0
0
Zakarath said:
Don't worry, I'm not going to brain you with a mace... I'm just going to give you a broadside of six 1400mm artillery cannons in the middle of high-security space. Sure, the police will kill me, but by then it will be too late for you.

(Like everyone else, I'm talking about EVE.)
As The Duke of Wellington said in Blackadder:

"Real men fight with cannons!"

Why would you use any other weapon in EVE when you can have cannons?
 

Mike Kayatta

Minister of Secrets
Aug 2, 2011
2,315
0
0
CrawlingPastaHellion said:
Mike Kayatta said:
...the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world ...No one would accept the program ...
I think the initial UO's system punishes players too much. Against a fully equipped warrior all a wizard had to do was cast paralysis and then spam fireballs... The funny thing is: a wizard risks nothing, but the reagents carried. A warrior risks everything, since a poor equipped warrior is simply a poor warrior.
Yeah, I don't think UO was perfect or anything (though I will counter that the reagents needed to make spells to whack a good warrior were rare and expensive), my main complaint is that they nerfed the game's philosophy instead of working on balancing and refining it. I think gameplay adjustments could have been made that wouldn't have restricted free will. Remember, it's still a very old game by today's standards (and the technology and experience guiding WoW). I just want to see this idea used as the skeletal structure of a well-designed experience. I'm not claiming that by extension of allowing freedom you magically have a good product.
 
Nov 12, 2010
239
0
0
Mike Kayatta said:
Yeah, I don't think UO was perfect or anything (though I will counter that the reagents needed to make spells to whack a good warrior were rare and expensive), my main complaint is that they nerfed the game's philosophy instead of working on balancing and refining it. I think gameplay adjustments could have been made that wouldn't have restricted free will. Remember, it's still a very old game by today's standards (and the technology and experience guiding WoW). I just want to see this idea used as the skeletal structure of a well-designed experience. I'm not claiming that by extension of allowing freedom you magically have a good product.
That was kind of my point, actually. I wasn't implying that you were putting UO on a pedestal of any kind. Still the truth is much closer to UO than to your everyday modern "mumorpuger". I actually don't even remember when I last had fun in a MMORPG. I remember UO for its incredible freedom and I remember "Ragnarok Online" for its novelty back in the days when the market wasn't flooded by bad korean diablo-clones. As of today, it's nothing substantial, just bells and whistles.
 

Crystalgate

New member
Feb 7, 2009
86
0
0
Despite all the good points (and some bad ones as well), I think it all boils down to whether you want the kind of interaction present in the old UO. I suspect that most players simple don't want it, no matter how deep such a system becomes.
 
Nov 12, 2010
239
0
0
Crystalgate said:
Despite all the good points (and some bad ones as well), I think it all boils down to whether you want the kind of interaction present in the old UO. I suspect that most players simple don't want it, no matter how deep such a system becomes.
They wouldn't mind it if getting items would be a lot easier, or at least a lot less tedious. I surely wouldn't and I myself quit UO because I was constantly getting killed by paralyzing wizards and deadly poisoning thieves.
 

Sean Deli

New member
May 11, 2011
57
0
0
There is a fundamental problem with free-PVP sandboxes.
They encourage teamplay so strongly, that a person becomes virtually helpless alone. A team of friends will be stronger than a team of random strangers, more so than just a lone stranger. Meaning - they require a lot of dedication.

People, who mentioned Eve in this thread, should know the term "alarmclock ops". It's when players HAVE to wake up in the middle of the night (thus "alarmclock") or take sick leave from dayjob to protect some ingame asset. In its peaks Eve takes up as much time as a full fledged hobby, just without anything to show for it. Actually, scratch that - noone can spend as much time in a gym, or playing footbal, or even painting WH40k minis as a hardcore Eve-player spends playing Eve. Not humanly possible.

Sandboxes not only eat your time, they eat it anytime they like.
Again, several times Eve have been reffered as "your second job you have to pay for" by players. I quit it when I understood, I will literally never forgive myself all the time I've spent on it.

But that doesn't mean I don't play games anymore. I play games, that I can turn on for 2 hours, play and turn off after that.
Eve, good-old-competitive-PVP-boost-your-killboard Eve, just does not work that way.
 

tetron

New member
Dec 9, 2009
584
0
0
Free world games like those have always failed and always will. That's because of the general attitude of the MMORPG player. They're more similar to farmville players but also screw that crappy facebook pos. I'll play a game that actually had developers. Not to mention that games with their fun based on the community typically have small communities. The largest community game I've played that had a free world style was Anarchy Online, game was great and fun but leveling was usually done in a group with one horribly twinked dps and a non grouped level capped healer making them immortal.

Nobody wants to deal with other players and their general asshole-ness because all you want to do while you're leveling is level. Modern MMOs are all about the grinding, if you want a break from that you que for a dungeon or a battleground. People want to be able to go to the danger, they don't want it springing up around them with a trollface and a "U mad son ?"

People who want danger typically play fps and moba style games. People who play games like WoW usually just wanna sit back and grind and/or socialize.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Well, I think the problem that you (the article writer) are missing is that online gaming has yet to move much past it's infancy in any absolute sense. Right now game developers want a game that they can just leave to run on it's own and make money for it's publishers with little in the way of direct control on the part of the administrators.

The problem with games like early UO is that you were dealing with what many would consider "griefing", which is people setting out for little purpose other than to exploit the system to make other players miserable. Realistically there was no lasting repercussions as evil death was just an inconveinence and a skill point dock, and no viable motivation "in character" to the world for a lot of what was done other than the knowlege that some player on the other side of a character was going to become irritated by what you did.

Add to this the issue of balancing good vs. evil. See in an MMO enviroment that is just left to run itself, evil is very easy to reward... you wind up with more stuff, the satisfaction of killing people and the furstration of players. Good on the other hand winds up presenting very little in the way of tangible rewards, in a game enviroment largely governed by loot, stats, and other things it's not like most other players care much because they are more concerned about whether you can afford the stuff they are selling, or their own self sufficiecy than what kind of play enviroment you might be fostering. What's more when the bad guys wind up with more and better stuff, and thus higher stats, the only way to really keep up to even conceive of stopping them is to become a huge bastard yourself... and then usually you wind up just becoming another rat yourself, irregardless of whatever your intentions might have been to begin with. Useless NPCs telling you what a great guy you are don't really provide much in the way of a reward.

What's more when your dealing with heroic fantasy, as opposed to something trying to be dark and realistic, that's a paticular issue. One of the things that slotted players of Ultima off is that the game series has always been about morality and the triumph of good over evil and the benefits of following the virtues even if only one very specific person became the incarnation of them all. In that world a guy dedicated to virtues like Compassion, Sacrifice, Honor, or others should wind up trumping someone who sets out to be a complete bastard in the long term... especially in THAT world. The guys complaining were not just victims but fans of the Ultima games (play them sometime, especially starting with IV, GoG has them, they were more recent at the time this game came out).

This all brings me to the initial point, to REALLY advance MMOs as a genere you don't just need players acting freely to advance the RPG and free form aspects, but you need an administration that constanly interacts directly with the player base, and is capable of subjectively interpeting what people are doing. GMs who are capable of looking at people being bastards and taking reasonable action on part of the world, or rewarding righteous
play for those being good guys.

The big problem with this of course is that most companies running MMOS don't want to actually pay a staff to run the game. What's more the people they hire are more akin to coders or customer service reps than actual Gamemasters (which is what we need), guys who both hold a certain degree of detachment from the players, as well as being trained to think dealing with them in any meaningful fashion isn't part of their job. If your lucky some GM might drop a few extra monsters on a town and call it event in most MMOs, and really that isn't what building a real world like this takes.

I believe it was Larry Niven's "Dreampark" novels that chronicled the evolution of games of this sort (ending up with VR, as they existed in the actual story) and has so far come pretty close, though we have sort of stagnated. Those stories outside of the central mysteries driving them kind of explained what you need to make a virtual enviroment work, and that involves an active administration running the game itself, as well as "Loremasters" who are players with similar authority (either known or covert) acting to cultivate the game enviroment. Many players of course fear the idea of other humans having direct control over thegame this way, but at the same time no code, no matter how advanced, is going to be able to maintain a proper fantasy play enviroment.

To be honest I kind of suggested something similar between actual GMS and the Loremasters of Dreampark early on in UO, based on what some MUDs wound up doing by empowering players, of course the idea was never really embraced, and we see what they chose to do instead... for good or ill.
 

jthm419

New member
Aug 8, 2011
6
0
0
Shadowbane. Was part of a small Guild for a while. Helped build up a town, was on every day farming for gold and items to sell, while the Guild Master set all the buildings to make items for his liking, ect. Suddenly we were targeted for demolition, and after us peons defending the town for a day... the Guild Master wouldn't help protect the town. A girl and I hunted him down, hiding by a wall at a deserted allied city, disbanded from our guild and killed him and went over to the guild that was attacking and we stomped a mud hole into the rest of the guild we abandoned for their weakness.

p.s. I was also that bastard that typed "Vas Flam" above my head and went into attack mode acting like I was going to attack you, and got you to attack me near a guard so I could loot you.
 

GrrWolfie

New member
Aug 29, 2008
23
0
0
Here here! Can't get enough of these articles, feels like i've been tidal waved by fail MMOs ever since UO and developers just don't see it.
 

loc978

New member
Sep 18, 2010
4,900
0
0
Honestly, I love the idea of such a world, but unfortunately your average MMO these days has a stat system that makes it impossible for a player five or more levels under another to even damage said player, much less survive a few blows.
I'm all for granting free will on a playerbase in a game where the bastards actually run the risk of losing, which, in current MMOs, they simply don't.

ie. more levels should not equal more hitpoints. The highest level players should possess more skills, more guile, better equipment... but the same health points as everyone else. As the Star Wars D20 GM guide says, "A blaster to the face is still a blaster to the face".
 

therealjeffa

New member
Nov 15, 2010
8
0
0
Cannorn said:
It took a while for me heart beat to slow and the adrenaline high to wear of and to this day no game has ever come close to that experience, and it was down to the fact that there was no saftey net, no rules, no GM, I was at the mercy of another player who simply wanted to kill me, not neccesarily for profit as I may have had nothing, but just on the off chance and for the lols because he could.
I respectfully submit that this person you describe clearly wanted to interact with other players in ways beyond griefing them "for the lols because he could".
 

FaceFaceFace

New member
Nov 18, 2009
441
0
0
Free will isn't inherently good. Just like life would suck if everyone could do whatever they wanted irl, games where anyone can do whatever they want are just annoying. Of course, I don't play MMOs at all (I don't understand the point of playing a game with no ending where you do the same stuff over and over to help you continue do the same stuff over and over), so that might color my opinion.

Why are you robbing people? Because I can use money to make myself more powerful. Why do you want to be more powerful? So I can be better at robbing people! Or alternatively, however else one makes money in Ultima to become more powerful so you can survive travelling between villages, so you can make more money in a new place. To me, it seems to be exactly the same as the whole "Raid dungeons to get better gear to help raid dungeons" thing in modern MMOs. They seem equally unfulfilling and meaningless. The whole fake society thing is silly because unlike real society which we're stuck with, there's no reason to be there.
 

W3rK

New member
Sep 2, 2009
13
0
0
I'm just going to mention a certain game for the Author of the article; the game is Wurm Online.

For little more detail - read on.

It not only has an extensive crafting system, with which you can create anything ranging from awls, barrels and carpets to rings, ships and two-handed swords, but also features structure building and terra-forming. And farming. And mining. And animal breeding. And so on.

On top of that, you can decide to leave a non-PvP islands to become part of one of the three kingdoms warring over land known as Wild - and probably experience again what the Author seems to miss the most from the modern-day MMOs.

There are certain downsides to the game however - it's really time intensive, takes a while to get used to and to become good at certain skills you might have to invest weeks of your time. While also it is slightly lacking in the graphics department (although mostly in the creatures and player avatars part, the landscapes are just breathtaking at times), it is still being actively developed and model quality and gameplay improvements are rolling in steadily.

On the other hand a new gameplay model, called Epic, is coming to it, which is again a PvP faction war with added twist of involvement from the Gods - that is players' actions are supposed to influence global events, such as small godly boons to cataclysmic events the likes of volcano eruptions.

I've been pretty much playing it for nearly two years now, and while the player base is on the small side, it is still a pretty lively place to be.

So, there. I hope I piqued the Author's interest (or anyone else for that matter), if so I suggest heading over to http://www.wurmonline.com/ and checking it out (the game is free to play on the non-PvP server with a limit cap on the skills).

PS: Also, funny fact, it was co-authored and developed by Notch, before he decided to try make his blocky game about terraforming, building and mining... hmm...
 

ThunderCavalier

New member
Nov 21, 2009
1,475
0
0
It sounds like a neat concept, but while it's certainly innovative, it fails to account for a vast demographic of players. By catering to one audience, you've completely isolated and ostracized another one, which is bad as a game designer (imo, but of course some people have tastes they want to fulfill and thus I respect them for that) and as a product (which holds more weight in a competitive market).

If they had servers like that for people to be on, that's perfectly fine, but an entire MMO dedicated to something like that? You're definitely not going to get a unanimous "Yes" on the project.
 

Yokai

New member
Oct 31, 2008
1,982
0
0
This is what pretty much all modern MMOs are missing: player-controlled societies. The modus operandi for MMO development is still "Make it like WoW but with X number of new features" when it should be focusing on allowing players absolute freedom. There's no point in having five thousand players in the same game world if they're all just adventurers.

I want an MMO where there are little to no NPCs, and instead it is the players who are the merchants and guard captains and kings. I want a persistent world where things actually change--a country is conquered and stays that way until the original owners take it back. The circumstances of warfare and diplomacy between player-controlled kingdoms would provide more than enough content without ever going on a scripted quest.

Only when we start seeing this sort of things will MMOs be living up to their full potential. In the meantime all we have is an incredibly "gamey" game that doesn't feel at all like an actual world, where players are defined by their limitations rather than any actual unique achievement.
 

Eiv

New member
Oct 17, 2008
376
0
0
I think someone didn't vote for lord British because maybe they are Lord British :)
 

Smokej

New member
Nov 22, 2010
277
0
0
didn't know that UO had so many <10 years old during it's Golden Age, if you take the profile age of some of the "veterans" posting here seriously...

Nevertheless casual style mmo's have prevailed which makes sense since playing style has changed alongside with the demographics of the consumerbase. Ingame ganking and griefing were always fun if you were one of 1% of the server population who were ahead of the cattle to pull it off and still being untouchable in terms of sanctions of the community. You can make more money with making the game more appealing to the 99%...

Real PVP is a relict now, patched to its death in nearly all relevant games over time or non exististent in newer games. On the otherhand it's saves the people who cared for it alot of free time.