Roleplaying isn't defined by a series of features though, it is more of an attitude you take toward a game.
I think you can partially define it by an absence of certain features though.
For example if you were some kind of preist/shaman/druid in EQ1 you could go and kill lots of mobs on your God's faction to gain favour with another faction (for whatever game reason) and then after you'd finished what you wanted to do you could regain favour by killing lots of other mobs on a hostile faction - all the while stil having the powers supposedly given you by your God. I think the faction system in a RP focused game would be much stricter.
Another faction related idea i've had for a while is different race-faction combos might have different rules i.e every mob in the game would be on some faction or other and they'd all have a relationship e.g friendly, neutral, hostile and elves could only target and attack mobs that were hostile, while humans/dwarves could attack both hostile and neutral and orcs/dark elves could attack friendlies as well.
CactusmanX, you're right and I see what you're saying, since you can essentially RP in any game you choose to as long as you group with some like-minded players, whereas a hardcore PVPer can't impose PVP on a game that doesn't have it (or doesn't have good mechanics for it.)
That said, there are certainly games which appeal to Hardcore Roleplayers in the same way that Hardcore PVP games appeal to another niche audience. I've seen MUDs where you have to submit a bio to a live GM for approval to even get into the game. Such a game doesn't even give halfhearted RPers a chance - they're prevented from even getting into the game! The resulting population is probably filled with RP purists; probably a fairly small population, but obviously not small enough to stop them from rejecting many of the character applications they receive. Presumably that's the way they want it.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
a couple things come to mind that you havent mentioned yet, the first of them being instant travel and how it should never be used in an RP MMO. i would say a built in vent would be nice...
Instant travel is bad, but talking to someone across the continent is fine.
?
ah sorry, my bad.. guess i should have explained that a little better. what i meant was a local version of it, so as you walk through a market or something you can hear actual people trading stuff.
thats another thing though, the way most mmos have a chat system wouldnt work in a hardcore RP MMO
This could be done with 'Mumble' integrated to the game.
Pretty good ideas OP. I however, never RP'ed on an mmo before. However, I do enjoy that environment way more. The RP enforced chat names is an excellent idea. In wow, I can't stand when I see those names. There are two things that do turn me off however, and those are the non storyline and no classes. In my humble opinion, the only feasible way I see this to work is, if you have everyone start as the first humans with no knowledge of anything. I think there needs to be some back lore of the world. As for classes, it's very hard to balance out groups with a skill system in my opinion. I am in no way saying it can't be done, if so, great!
Another question is, how are you going to fund and pay the people who are working on your title? Also, do you plan on charging people a fee? How do you plan to ship your game? I do warn you though, if you do not fund it your self, an investor may not give you a chance if you don't have any other shipped titles. Other than that, good luck on your endeavors, because I am making an mmo for a small niche as well as you who would like about half of what you have mentioned here in my mmo as well, been working on it since 2004.
Pretty good ideas OP. I however, never RP'ed on an mmo before. However, I do enjoy that environment way more. The RP enforced chat names is an excellent idea. In wow, I can't stand when I see those names. There are two things that do turn me off however, and those are the non storyline and no classes. In my humble opinion, the only feasible way I see this to work is, if you have everyone start as the first humans with no knowledge of anything. I think there needs to be some back lore of the world. As for classes, it's very hard to balance out groups with a skill system in my opinion. I am in no way saying it can't be done, if so, great!
Another question is, how are you going to fund and pay the people who are working on your title? Also, do you plan on charging people a fee? How do you plan to ship your game? I do warn you though, if you do not fund it your self, an investor may not give you a chance if you don't have any other shipped titles. Other than that, good luck on your endeavors, because I am making an mmo for a small niche as well as you who would like about half of what you have mentioned here in my mmo as well, been working on it since 2004.
Let me touch on the points of query in this post. First off, there's no way classes are ever going to be in a game I am in charge of. They are restrictive and force elitism to a degree (sorry, we need a tank, or healer, etc). Not to mention they force players to be a certain type (warrior, mage, etc) and limit what they can learn, wear and do. This is the antitheisis (sp?) of RP at the core. As the game will not revolve around groups, instances, raids, etc. there is no need for consideration to classes, balance and groups. People should group together for a common goal without feeling the need to fill some niche. At no time will there by any content designed to cater to such a playstyle. Sorry. I'm not making WoW, or EQ2. There won't be any "kill to advance" mechanism in this game.
As far as funding is concerned, I won't pay anyone who helps, at least not up front. I can't. I have no liquid assets. I myself won't see any money. But if and when the game does go up to subscription fees (I don't like the F2P model with micro tansactions), those that contributed and those still working on the game (i.e. the staff) will be splitting the profits equally (or at least based on the amount work done) after all operating expenses (and maybe an office!) are paid for. Kind of like shares on a ship when booty is divied up.
Shipping the game won't happen. You create an account, download the software and play. No box, no publisher. I don't want any external company deciding my release date. It'll be done when its done.
Of course, there will be a free trial.
Oh, and good luck on your game!
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
it's called dungeons and dragons or go play neverwinter nights an RPing game would fail cause it would only be for about 10 people
There are far more role-players out there than you give credit for. And, as was stated, this isn't very constructive to the topic, so if you can't contribute in a mature fashion, please don't post on public forums.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
it's called dungeons and dragons or go play neverwinter nights an RPing game would fail cause it would only be for about 10 people
An RP niche game would have to focus strongly on immersion - so it would attract a wider audience than strict RPers, though personally I'd think there'd be enough for a niche game either way. There's also RPers who aren't gamers and many of those might join and just use a tavern as an RP chat room / forum.
Pretty good ideas OP. I however, never RP'ed on an mmo before. However, I do enjoy that environment way more. The RP enforced chat names is an excellent idea. In wow, I can't stand when I see those names. There are two things that do turn me off however, and those are the non storyline and no classes. In my humble opinion, the only feasible way I see this to work is, if you have everyone start as the first humans with no knowledge of anything. I think there needs to be some back lore of the world. As for classes, it's very hard to balance out groups with a skill system in my opinion. I am in no way saying it can't be done, if so, great!
Another question is, how are you going to fund and pay the people who are working on your title? Also, do you plan on charging people a fee? How do you plan to ship your game? I do warn you though, if you do not fund it your self, an investor may not give you a chance if you don't have any other shipped titles. Other than that, good luck on your endeavors, because I am making an mmo for a small niche as well as you who would like about half of what you have mentioned here in my mmo as well, been working on it since 2004.
Let me touch on the points of query in this post. First off, there's no way classes are ever going to be in a game I am in charge of. They are restrictive and force elitism to a degree (sorry, we need a tank, or healer, etc). Not to mention they force players to be a certain type (warrior, mage, etc) and limit what they can learn, wear and do. This is the antitheisis (sp?) of RP at the core. As the game will not revolve around groups, instances, raids, etc. there is no need for consideration to classes, balance and groups. People should group together for a common goal without feeling the need to fill some niche. At no time will there by any content designed to cater to such a playstyle. Sorry. I'm not making WoW, or EQ2. There won't be any "kill to advance" mechanism in this game.
I am still a big fan of classes, I guess the EQ model did it for me. In EQ, the tanks, pullers, healers, dps and cc where born there because of classes. I don't think that was something the class designers had in mind when devoloping them. I think you went a little too far when you say "elitism" because I am in no way shape of form an elitiest. I just know what I want. I compare classes to real life jobs in the work place. Yes, you may find a chef who knows karate. But that chef wont use karate while cooking. One thing that did upset me and I am getting quite sick of, is when someone mentions classes, grouping, playstyles ect they always retort "its like wow, or i am not going to make a wow" becuase of those things. Yes I full comprehend that you want a full rpg game. Like I mentioned before, I really never played or role played on any mmo, so sorry to ruffle your feathers here. I still enjoy classes, and I think I am a pretty good class designer my self, you should see my design for them...
As far as funding is concerned, I won't pay anyone who helps, at least not up front. I can't. I have no liquid assets. I myself won't see any money. But if and when the game does go up to subscription fees (I don't like the F2P model with micro tansactions), those that contributed and those still working on the game (i.e. the staff) will be splitting the profits equally (or at least based on the amount work done) after all operating expenses (and maybe an office!) are paid for. Kind of like shares on a ship when booty is divied up.
You may find some people, but the thing is, you might only find people on the internet. I haven't had a good experience with internet devolopers because you can't be a producer towards them. You milestones and orginization will be out in left field. You might get lucky however. I can tell you, not may game designers would take on such a product with out being in a company. The best bet is to find people trying to break into the game industry so this would go in thier resume. The game industry and people who are associated with it, it can be harsh at times. For the things you want in your mmo, its going to take ALOT and I mean a massive amount of time to do. If you can honestly find a good well rounded team in your local area or would move there to work, you may have something going. I say these things because I am trying to get into the industry my self, and its a harsh reality. I would love for your game to be made becuase we need more of those in this genre. But to find dedicated people for the long haul for your mmo with no pay, is going to be very difficult to find, but again, I wish my luck to you.
Shipping the game won't happen. You create an account, download the software and play. No box, no publisher. I don't want any external company deciding my release date. It'll be done when its done.
That's probably the best way to do it.
Of course, there will be a free trial.
Oh, and good luck on your game!
Thank you, maybe you will find a home there one day =D
Answers will be in blue.. easier for me at the moment...
I think RP servers are really a strong step in the right direction for most games, but I do think that additional tools should be in place for players that want to take it 'a step above'.
I'd also like to see an age or maturity filter in place on RP servers (really, all servers). I think this would help a lot, too.
There are various social MMOs out there that fit the needs you defined, except for enforced Role-playing. But nothing stops you from creating a role-playing community on those games. The problem, it seems, is you want a game company to do all the actual work in creating a role playing community rather than you. Unfortunately, that doesn't work, and never will. About the closest you could get would be to go play a MUD (MUSH).
In no way was I implying that you were an elitist, I was making a general statement based on my play experience. I do play WoW right now (my wife loves the game as far as the social aspect and raiding) but finding groups sometimes can be daunting simply because of the class-based game system forces such exclusion. My game won't be anything like WoW or any other game out there that does use classes. Not to burst any bubbles but there won't be any 'dungeons' or instances. No quests either, period. So there will be no need to create restrictive classes and worry about balance. Its also far easier (and waaaay more realistic) to set up a set of skills everyone can eventually learn and let the players decide what they want their character to know than it is to design each class, what they can and can't do and then determine what they get at each level. Ugh. Then the 'balancing' issue takes place. No thank you.
With that said, you are probably wondering what will draw people to play a game where there are no quests. Personally, quests get dull as most are all one of a few types. First there's the "Go kill me X number of X." quests, followed by the ever so unpopular (to me) "Go get me X number of X items of that X mob." quests. Ugh. Other than those, there's the "Go here and kill X and bring me his head/tail/tooth/etc" quests and lastly the "Here, bring this thing to X for me." quests. After a while, the rinse and repeat style of such chores makes one yearn for something different to do.
So what will there be to do that isn't in any MMO out there to give some pizzaz to the world without quests, instances and raids? How's this for you: Once made, there will be a dedicated team of GMs who's only job will be to control unique NPC antagonists and create events for the players to partake in! If you have ever played tabletop games like D&D, then the people I am talking about will act as the DMs (dungeon masters for those that haven't played D&D), adding that unknown element to the world and acting on the RP that takes place.
Who knows. Maybe the good RP session about your character's backstory will inspire a GM who's invisible nearby and surprise you with that backstory coming to life! THAT is my kind of game!
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
There are various social MMOs out there that fit the needs you defined, except for enforced Role-playing. But nothing stops you from creating a role-playing community on those games. The problem, it seems, is you want a game company to do all the actual work in creating a role playing community rather than you. Unfortunately, that doesn't work, and never will. About the closest you could get would be to go play a MUD (MUSH).
If you are referring to me (the OP) I don't want a company to make a community for me, or even a game because they simply won't. I am going to make a game for me that others can enjoy. A game for role-players, by a role-player. All those various MMOs out there you are referring to aren't made strictly for those that like to immerse themselves in a living, breathing world. They simply want to get tough, get gear and pwn things (including other players). This has led developers to shoot for the lowest common denominator and sacrifice vision for profits.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
Before the MMO boom, there used to be a lot of text-based games of various types - MUXes, MUSHes, etc that are a lot like what you describe - heavy, heavy roleplaying, really no combat, player built world, etc. They were a lot of fun but I don't see them ever coming back strong in this era. If you made something like this it would be fun to try though.
The problem with you making a role playing MMORPG is that, you might not want to play in something you made. Since you already made it, it is not as fun. However, at least it will be a good RP chat program for you.
Originally posted by Arshoon Let me touch on the points of query in this post. First off, there's no way classes are ever going to be in a game I am in charge of. They are restrictive and force elitism to a degree (sorry, we need a tank, or healer, etc). Not to mention they force players to be a certain type (warrior, mage, etc) and limit what they can learn, wear and do. This is the antitheisis (sp?) of RP at the core.
Playing roles is role-playing! Classes are roles!
Skill-centric RPGs create roles by having skill caps. The game has 10 skills * 1-100 points per skill, and out of those 1000 total skills you could invest in you can only earn 300 total skills -- and as a result you're forced to min/max yourself into a specific role.
Without such limitations, everyone becomes the same carbon-copy super soldier who can do everything, and that's not very interesting. And in fact it discourages teamplay because players don't have to rely on others to offset their weaknesses.
If you want to do away with elitism, you're going to go down one of three paths: 1. Groups need roles x, y, and z, but anyone can respec to any role at a whim. 2. Content is so easy that roles don't matter. Maybe there are no instances so bosses can be zerged easily. Maybe the "5-man" dungeon with the Black Dragon could basically be killed with any 2 players, regardless of their skill loadouts. 3. Everyone is the same generic carbon-copy super soldier who can do everything, but you still need 5 teammates to take down the Black Dragon in that dungeon.
I mean it's not like you need roles to have a successful game. Plenty of games manage to be fun without any roles at all.
But if you're calling it a role-playing game, roles are rather important. And without a particularly compelling combat mechanic, a role-less game would be extremely tedious if combat is common.
Heck even in noncombat roles are damn important. If you want the game to have any sort of a player-run economy, letting everyone do everything is a bit dubious. Maybe your crucial role-limiting limitation is you can't do everything at once, but you gotta have limitations in there somewhere.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
There are various social MMOs out there that fit the needs you defined, except for enforced Role-playing. But nothing stops you from creating a role-playing community on those games. The problem, it seems, is you want a game company to do all the actual work in creating a role playing community rather than you. Unfortunately, that doesn't work, and never will. About the closest you could get would be to go play a MUD (MUSH).
If you are referring to me (the OP) I don't want a company to make a community for me, or even a game because they simply won't. I am going to make a game for me that others can enjoy. A game for role-players, by a role-player. All those various MMOs out there you are referring to aren't made strictly for those that like to immerse themselves in a living, breathing world. They simply want to get tough, get gear and pwn things (including other players). This has led developers to shoot for the lowest common denominator and sacrifice vision for profits.
I understood your point. However, you also stated the following:
"I want to make a game only for role-players. There just simply isn't one out there."
Which isn't true. There are tons of them out there. From graphical options like A Tale in the Desert (which, interestingly enough, has absolutely no real combat which makes me wonder what games you thought I was talking about when I mentioned "Social MMOs") to an insane amount of text-based games. The problem is, if you actually go digging for them, you'll find none of the graphical based ones require role-playing, simply encourage it. The text-based ones, unfortunately, often have a small player base as most people are too narrow-minded to even try and appreciate a text-based game anymore.
I'm not going to discourage you from your plan to create a role-playing enforced MMO, just point out there is a reason why it hasn't come up before. Mainly, because it is nearly impossible to make it successful, especially in the face of the other options out there such as text-based games or through communities like those in Neverwinter Nights.
Let me touch on the points of query in this post. First off, there's no way classes are ever going to be in a game I am in charge of. They are restrictive and force elitism to a degree (sorry, we need a tank, or healer, etc). Not to mention they force players to be a certain type (warrior, mage, etc) and limit what they can learn, wear and do. This is the antitheisis (sp?) of RP at the core.
Playing roles is role-playing! Classes are roles!
Skill-centric RPGs create roles by having skill caps. The game has 10 skills * 1-100 points per skill, and out of those 1000 total skills you could invest in you can only earn 300 total skills -- and as a result you're forced to min/max yourself into a specific role.
Without such limitations, everyone becomes the same carbon-copy super soldier who can do everything, and that's not very interesting. And in fact it discourages teamplay because players don't have to rely on others to offset their weaknesses.
If you want to do away with elitism, you're going to go down one of three paths:
1. Groups need roles x, y, and z, but anyone can respec to any role at a whim.
2. Content is so easy that roles don't matter. Maybe there are no instances so bosses can be zerged easily. Maybe the "5-man" dungeon with the Black Dragon could basically be killed with any 2 players, regardless of their skill loadouts.
3. Everyone is the same generic carbon-copy super soldier who can do everything, but you still need 5 teammates to take down the Black Dragon in that dungeon.
I mean it's not like you need roles to have a successful game. Plenty of games manage to be fun without any roles at all.
But if you're calling it a role-playing game, roles are rather important. And without a particularly compelling combat mechanic, a role-less game would be extremely tedious if combat is common.
Heck even in noncombat roles are damn important. If you want the game to have any sort of a player-run economy, letting everyone do everything is a bit dubious. Maybe your crucial role-limiting limitation is you can't do everything at once, but you gotta have limitations in there somewhere.
Sorry, but I still have to say no. You like classes and that's great for you. My design will not be the 1-100 stuck at X amount for skills as a cap.
First off, you must be new to gaming because you can't get your mind around a game that doesn't have classes and force roles, the curse of MMO design today that's perpetuated by the slew of class-based games that are out today. I could be wrong about you, but after the posts made, that's where I am.
Secondly, you must not have read the post I made on how I want skills and progressions to work. Learning will be time and player-trained based, not use and gain a fraction of skills. There won't be a cap on skills learned but there will be degradation due to a skill not being used for a time, that's realistic.
Third, I must disagree once again about roles. People do not need to be forced into them, that's a designers choice and one I choose not to make for RP and immersion purposes. It is not my job as a developer to decide what YOUR character can and cannot learn and do based on the class you choose.
Again you missed my post about why classes won't be in. There won't be dungeons, no need to group a certain type of class with yours, etc. I am not making a WoW clone, I can't state that enough. In games like that, there's a need to group and a need for classes: XP. There will be none in my game, no XP per kill, no leveling. No leveling means no grinding, and that frees one up to do what they want and RP.
Let me touch on levels and grouping now just to clarify why I am against them. Levels are the worst kind of forced elitism in a game. When you are X level, you are forced pretty much to have group members (if there is grouping) of other characters near or at your level. Groups usually exclude any member that is not of a certain level range and therefore this forces people to exclude others simply based on where their character's progression is in the game. And, with a level-based game, a divide is soon created between the high levels and those grining their way on to try and reach that level just so they can play with their friends or reach the 'end game' content.
I don't agree with that.
If there is pvp in the game, levels make the game even more unfair. A level 1 character has absolutely no chance in most MMOs against a character of level 10. Most games design the classes to have ubsurdly high health (hit points) and cause an equally absurd amount of damage compare to someone of vastly lower level. This creates that rift again and a sense of serious unrealism to the the player. Sure, it makes you feel god-like if you are the higher level character because you can decimate low level foes, but its highly unrealistic.
In the real world, even the most pathetic individual has the chance, a chance, of killing a very skilled fighter. Its slim, but it can happen, especially with ranged weapons and guns. Also, in the real world, a very skilled soldier may be able to take on many, many opponants, but a sword bow is still a sword blow and may kill you if placed right.
My combat system will be compelling as you say, with many options for the player based on hat skills they know. Everyone can feint, roll, parry, block, etc. Skills will determine what else one can do.
But this won't be a combat-centric game. Not in the least. There won't be a ton of creatures just waiting outside of town that only want to kil YOU and not each other if they are enemies. I could go on and on but hopefully I have made my point.
Classes and levels are out. I won't budge on that. But thank you for adding to the discussion in an intelligent and mature manner and please exscuse me if I get a little emotional in my posts on your topics.. I am not attacking you or your point, just expressing how I am against such design.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
The problem with you making a role playing MMORPG is that, you might not want to play in something you made. Since you already made it, it is not as fun. However, at least it will be a good RP chat program for you.
I am making a game for me to play in. This is the entire purpose for making it.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
There are various social MMOs out there that fit the needs you defined, except for enforced Role-playing. But nothing stops you from creating a role-playing community on those games. The problem, it seems, is you want a game company to do all the actual work in creating a role playing community rather than you. Unfortunately, that doesn't work, and never will. About the closest you could get would be to go play a MUD (MUSH).
If you are referring to me (the OP) I don't want a company to make a community for me, or even a game because they simply won't. I am going to make a game for me that others can enjoy. A game for role-players, by a role-player. All those various MMOs out there you are referring to aren't made strictly for those that like to immerse themselves in a living, breathing world. They simply want to get tough, get gear and pwn things (including other players). This has led developers to shoot for the lowest common denominator and sacrifice vision for profits.
I understood your point. However, you also stated the following:
"I want to make a game only for role-players. There just simply isn't one out there."
Which isn't true. There are tons of them out there. From graphical options like A Tale in the Desert (which, interestingly enough, has absolutely no real combat which makes me wonder what games you thought I was talking about when I mentioned "Social MMOs") to an insane amount of text-based games. The problem is, if you actually go digging for them, you'll find none of the graphical based ones require role-playing, simply encourage it. The text-based ones, unfortunately, often have a small player base as most people are too narrow-minded to even try and appreciate a text-based game anymore.
I'm not going to discourage you from your plan to create a role-playing enforced MMO, just point out there is a reason why it hasn't come up before. Mainly, because it is nearly impossible to make it successful, especially in the face of the other options out there such as text-based games or through communities like those in Neverwinter Nights.
Point well taken, but I am still going to try.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
heh, it seems that most people are attacking this idea a lot. the more i hear from the op, the more i think that i want to play this game. from what ive read, it seems that this game will, hopefully, be something completely different from just about every mmo out today. so, Arshoon, youve got my support.
2) A map that can be altered. Players can terraform, build structures, and even plant new trees and breed animals (And I know this can be done, see Wurm Online) 5) RP names and chat rules are enforced with mutes and IP/account bans. 6) A player-based economy, no NPC vendors with unlimited funds. 7) Player run social organizations, no pre-determined guilds, kingdoms or other NPC run groups. 8) Realistic fauna, not the typical MMO "everything wants to kill ONLY the players, and they're encountered every 10 paces or so" 9) All wearable gear that shows, including scabbards, holsters and bags (No 'magnetic back' syndrome as I like to call it, where the weapon just magically clings to your back or side) EDIT: Almost forgot ... 10) A game with no classes or levels. Everything is skill based and you learn your skills and get better from others, practice and training. No, I don't mean you have to make 10000000 daggers to get skill in Blacksmithing, you learn new techniques from others and discover ones yourself. Time-based learning combined with use-discoveries. Those are just a few off the top of my head.
Here is my oppinion on some of the few features you want to integrate into a RP MMO. First of all i'm a huge fan of the Final Fantasy series and for me all the different game mechanics and story based missions are the best that have been done untill today. Bioware is a great game creator too, for the western market (great story which can alter the outcome of the game). But i'd love to see a MMORPG game that has such great elements as Squaresoft made them (someone remember the group combat in Crono Trigger). I would like to see such aspects of the game where a warrior can throw an archer sky high and he makes an overkill move on to the enemy/s, something like an AOE effect made ba 2-3 group members. A piece of this combat art you can see in Final Fantasy XI if 2-3 party members do they skills one after another and they evoke a buff or double dmg effect.
I don't know what games other ppl have played but i have played RPG games since the table top set of rules and the RPG games of today died when the diablo (no-brain, no-story based game came out). Don't get me to wrong i played Diablo myself but i never could figure out the whole story behind the game. I heard that there are books that are prequels of the Diablo series. BUT why should i read a book to be emerged into a game story, i don't need to play a game then, i would read the whole book series instead?
Here is my oppinion on some of the few features you want to integrate into a RP MMO. First of all i'm a huge fan of the Final Fantasy series ...
When it comes to RPGs, there's two very distinct groups. One group that wants to play through a story and "unlock" the next part of it through a conflict or series of events, and another group that wants to dictate the direction of the story. The former would probably consider Wizardry 8 a poor game with zero direction and consider Final Fantasy 6 to be an awesome story-based RPGs. The latter is more inclined to find something like FF6 to be linear and restrictive while finding Wizardry 8 more to their liking.
I'm not saying that people cannot or do not like both, but people usually lean more towards one side or the other, and designing for both groups at the same timeis very difficult.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Comments
I think you can partially define it by an absence of certain features though.
For example if you were some kind of preist/shaman/druid in EQ1 you could go and kill lots of mobs on your God's faction to gain favour with another faction (for whatever game reason) and then after you'd finished what you wanted to do you could regain favour by killing lots of other mobs on a hostile faction - all the while stil having the powers supposedly given you by your God. I think the faction system in a RP focused game would be much stricter.
Another faction related idea i've had for a while is different race-faction combos might have different rules i.e every mob in the game would be on some faction or other and they'd all have a relationship e.g friendly, neutral, hostile and elves could only target and attack mobs that were hostile, while humans/dwarves could attack both hostile and neutral and orcs/dark elves could attack friendlies as well.
CactusmanX, you're right and I see what you're saying, since you can essentially RP in any game you choose to as long as you group with some like-minded players, whereas a hardcore PVPer can't impose PVP on a game that doesn't have it (or doesn't have good mechanics for it.)
That said, there are certainly games which appeal to Hardcore Roleplayers in the same way that Hardcore PVP games appeal to another niche audience. I've seen MUDs where you have to submit a bio to a live GM for approval to even get into the game. Such a game doesn't even give halfhearted RPers a chance - they're prevented from even getting into the game! The resulting population is probably filled with RP purists; probably a fairly small population, but obviously not small enough to stop them from rejecting many of the character applications they receive. Presumably that's the way they want it.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Instant travel is bad, but talking to someone across the continent is fine.
?
ah sorry, my bad.. guess i should have explained that a little better. what i meant was a local version of it, so as you walk through a market or something you can hear actual people trading stuff.
thats another thing though, the way most mmos have a chat system wouldnt work in a hardcore RP MMO
This could be done with 'Mumble' integrated to the game.
Pretty good ideas OP. I however, never RP'ed on an mmo before. However, I do enjoy that environment way more. The RP enforced chat names is an excellent idea. In wow, I can't stand when I see those names. There are two things that do turn me off however, and those are the non storyline and no classes. In my humble opinion, the only feasible way I see this to work is, if you have everyone start as the first humans with no knowledge of anything. I think there needs to be some back lore of the world. As for classes, it's very hard to balance out groups with a skill system in my opinion. I am in no way saying it can't be done, if so, great!
Another question is, how are you going to fund and pay the people who are working on your title? Also, do you plan on charging people a fee? How do you plan to ship your game? I do warn you though, if you do not fund it your self, an investor may not give you a chance if you don't have any other shipped titles. Other than that, good luck on your endeavors, because I am making an mmo for a small niche as well as you who would like about half of what you have mentioned here in my mmo as well, been working on it since 2004.
it's called dungeons and dragons or go play neverwinter nights
an RPing game would fail cause it would only be for about 10 people
I didn't think the OP wanted this kind of response, so you failed. But you are right about NWN and DND however.
Let me touch on the points of query in this post. First off, there's no way classes are ever going to be in a game I am in charge of. They are restrictive and force elitism to a degree (sorry, we need a tank, or healer, etc). Not to mention they force players to be a certain type (warrior, mage, etc) and limit what they can learn, wear and do. This is the antitheisis (sp?) of RP at the core. As the game will not revolve around groups, instances, raids, etc. there is no need for consideration to classes, balance and groups. People should group together for a common goal without feeling the need to fill some niche. At no time will there by any content designed to cater to such a playstyle. Sorry. I'm not making WoW, or EQ2. There won't be any "kill to advance" mechanism in this game.
As far as funding is concerned, I won't pay anyone who helps, at least not up front. I can't. I have no liquid assets. I myself won't see any money. But if and when the game does go up to subscription fees (I don't like the F2P model with micro tansactions), those that contributed and those still working on the game (i.e. the staff) will be splitting the profits equally (or at least based on the amount work done) after all operating expenses (and maybe an office!) are paid for. Kind of like shares on a ship when booty is divied up.
Shipping the game won't happen. You create an account, download the software and play. No box, no publisher. I don't want any external company deciding my release date. It'll be done when its done.
Of course, there will be a free trial.
Oh, and good luck on your game!
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
There are far more role-players out there than you give credit for. And, as was stated, this isn't very constructive to the topic, so if you can't contribute in a mature fashion, please don't post on public forums.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
An RP niche game would have to focus strongly on immersion - so it would attract a wider audience than strict RPers, though personally I'd think there'd be enough for a niche game either way. There's also RPers who aren't gamers and many of those might join and just use a tavern as an RP chat room / forum.
Let me touch on the points of query in this post. First off, there's no way classes are ever going to be in a game I am in charge of. They are restrictive and force elitism to a degree (sorry, we need a tank, or healer, etc). Not to mention they force players to be a certain type (warrior, mage, etc) and limit what they can learn, wear and do. This is the antitheisis (sp?) of RP at the core. As the game will not revolve around groups, instances, raids, etc. there is no need for consideration to classes, balance and groups. People should group together for a common goal without feeling the need to fill some niche. At no time will there by any content designed to cater to such a playstyle. Sorry. I'm not making WoW, or EQ2. There won't be any "kill to advance" mechanism in this game.
I am still a big fan of classes, I guess the EQ model did it for me. In EQ, the tanks, pullers, healers, dps and cc where born there because of classes. I don't think that was something the class designers had in mind when devoloping them. I think you went a little too far when you say "elitism" because I am in no way shape of form an elitiest. I just know what I want. I compare classes to real life jobs in the work place. Yes, you may find a chef who knows karate. But that chef wont use karate while cooking. One thing that did upset me and I am getting quite sick of, is when someone mentions classes, grouping, playstyles ect they always retort "its like wow, or i am not going to make a wow" becuase of those things. Yes I full comprehend that you want a full rpg game. Like I mentioned before, I really never played or role played on any mmo, so sorry to ruffle your feathers here. I still enjoy classes, and I think I am a pretty good class designer my self, you should see my design for them...
As far as funding is concerned, I won't pay anyone who helps, at least not up front. I can't. I have no liquid assets. I myself won't see any money. But if and when the game does go up to subscription fees (I don't like the F2P model with micro tansactions), those that contributed and those still working on the game (i.e. the staff) will be splitting the profits equally (or at least based on the amount work done) after all operating expenses (and maybe an office!) are paid for. Kind of like shares on a ship when booty is divied up.
You may find some people, but the thing is, you might only find people on the internet. I haven't had a good experience with internet devolopers because you can't be a producer towards them. You milestones and orginization will be out in left field. You might get lucky however. I can tell you, not may game designers would take on such a product with out being in a company. The best bet is to find people trying to break into the game industry so this would go in thier resume. The game industry and people who are associated with it, it can be harsh at times. For the things you want in your mmo, its going to take ALOT and I mean a massive amount of time to do. If you can honestly find a good well rounded team in your local area or would move there to work, you may have something going. I say these things because I am trying to get into the industry my self, and its a harsh reality. I would love for your game to be made becuase we need more of those in this genre. But to find dedicated people for the long haul for your mmo with no pay, is going to be very difficult to find, but again, I wish my luck to you.
Shipping the game won't happen. You create an account, download the software and play. No box, no publisher. I don't want any external company deciding my release date. It'll be done when its done.
That's probably the best way to do it.
Of course, there will be a free trial.
Oh, and good luck on your game!
Thank you, maybe you will find a home there one day =D
Answers will be in blue.. easier for me at the moment...
http://www.adellion.com/
Only been in Development for 25 years or something.
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
I think RP servers are really a strong step in the right direction for most games, but I do think that additional tools should be in place for players that want to take it 'a step above'.
I'd also like to see an age or maturity filter in place on RP servers (really, all servers). I think this would help a lot, too.
There are various social MMOs out there that fit the needs you defined, except for enforced Role-playing. But nothing stops you from creating a role-playing community on those games. The problem, it seems, is you want a game company to do all the actual work in creating a role playing community rather than you. Unfortunately, that doesn't work, and never will. About the closest you could get would be to go play a MUD (MUSH).
Eronakis:
In no way was I implying that you were an elitist, I was making a general statement based on my play experience. I do play WoW right now (my wife loves the game as far as the social aspect and raiding) but finding groups sometimes can be daunting simply because of the class-based game system forces such exclusion. My game won't be anything like WoW or any other game out there that does use classes. Not to burst any bubbles but there won't be any 'dungeons' or instances. No quests either, period. So there will be no need to create restrictive classes and worry about balance. Its also far easier (and waaaay more realistic) to set up a set of skills everyone can eventually learn and let the players decide what they want their character to know than it is to design each class, what they can and can't do and then determine what they get at each level. Ugh. Then the 'balancing' issue takes place. No thank you.
With that said, you are probably wondering what will draw people to play a game where there are no quests. Personally, quests get dull as most are all one of a few types. First there's the "Go kill me X number of X." quests, followed by the ever so unpopular (to me) "Go get me X number of X items of that X mob." quests. Ugh. Other than those, there's the "Go here and kill X and bring me his head/tail/tooth/etc" quests and lastly the "Here, bring this thing to X for me." quests. After a while, the rinse and repeat style of such chores makes one yearn for something different to do.
So what will there be to do that isn't in any MMO out there to give some pizzaz to the world without quests, instances and raids? How's this for you: Once made, there will be a dedicated team of GMs who's only job will be to control unique NPC antagonists and create events for the players to partake in! If you have ever played tabletop games like D&D, then the people I am talking about will act as the DMs (dungeon masters for those that haven't played D&D), adding that unknown element to the world and acting on the RP that takes place.
Who knows. Maybe the good RP session about your character's backstory will inspire a GM who's invisible nearby and surprise you with that backstory coming to life! THAT is my kind of game!
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
If you are referring to me (the OP) I don't want a company to make a community for me, or even a game because they simply won't. I am going to make a game for me that others can enjoy. A game for role-players, by a role-player. All those various MMOs out there you are referring to aren't made strictly for those that like to immerse themselves in a living, breathing world. They simply want to get tough, get gear and pwn things (including other players). This has led developers to shoot for the lowest common denominator and sacrifice vision for profits.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
Before the MMO boom, there used to be a lot of text-based games of various types - MUXes, MUSHes, etc that are a lot like what you describe - heavy, heavy roleplaying, really no combat, player built world, etc. They were a lot of fun but I don't see them ever coming back strong in this era. If you made something like this it would be fun to try though.
The problem with you making a role playing MMORPG is that, you might not want to play in something you made. Since you already made it, it is not as fun. However, at least it will be a good RP chat program for you.
Playing roles is role-playing! Classes are roles!
Skill-centric RPGs create roles by having skill caps. The game has 10 skills * 1-100 points per skill, and out of those 1000 total skills you could invest in you can only earn 300 total skills -- and as a result you're forced to min/max yourself into a specific role.
Without such limitations, everyone becomes the same carbon-copy super soldier who can do everything, and that's not very interesting. And in fact it discourages teamplay because players don't have to rely on others to offset their weaknesses.
If you want to do away with elitism, you're going to go down one of three paths:
1. Groups need roles x, y, and z, but anyone can respec to any role at a whim.
2. Content is so easy that roles don't matter. Maybe there are no instances so bosses can be zerged easily. Maybe the "5-man" dungeon with the Black Dragon could basically be killed with any 2 players, regardless of their skill loadouts.
3. Everyone is the same generic carbon-copy super soldier who can do everything, but you still need 5 teammates to take down the Black Dragon in that dungeon.
I mean it's not like you need roles to have a successful game. Plenty of games manage to be fun without any roles at all.
But if you're calling it a role-playing game, roles are rather important. And without a particularly compelling combat mechanic, a role-less game would be extremely tedious if combat is common.
Heck even in noncombat roles are damn important. If you want the game to have any sort of a player-run economy, letting everyone do everything is a bit dubious. Maybe your crucial role-limiting limitation is you can't do everything at once, but you gotta have limitations in there somewhere.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
If you are referring to me (the OP) I don't want a company to make a community for me, or even a game because they simply won't. I am going to make a game for me that others can enjoy. A game for role-players, by a role-player. All those various MMOs out there you are referring to aren't made strictly for those that like to immerse themselves in a living, breathing world. They simply want to get tough, get gear and pwn things (including other players). This has led developers to shoot for the lowest common denominator and sacrifice vision for profits.
I understood your point. However, you also stated the following:
"I want to make a game only for role-players. There just simply isn't one out there."
Which isn't true. There are tons of them out there. From graphical options like A Tale in the Desert (which, interestingly enough, has absolutely no real combat which makes me wonder what games you thought I was talking about when I mentioned "Social MMOs") to an insane amount of text-based games. The problem is, if you actually go digging for them, you'll find none of the graphical based ones require role-playing, simply encourage it. The text-based ones, unfortunately, often have a small player base as most people are too narrow-minded to even try and appreciate a text-based game anymore.
I'm not going to discourage you from your plan to create a role-playing enforced MMO, just point out there is a reason why it hasn't come up before. Mainly, because it is nearly impossible to make it successful, especially in the face of the other options out there such as text-based games or through communities like those in Neverwinter Nights.
Playing roles is role-playing! Classes are roles!
Skill-centric RPGs create roles by having skill caps. The game has 10 skills * 1-100 points per skill, and out of those 1000 total skills you could invest in you can only earn 300 total skills -- and as a result you're forced to min/max yourself into a specific role.
Without such limitations, everyone becomes the same carbon-copy super soldier who can do everything, and that's not very interesting. And in fact it discourages teamplay because players don't have to rely on others to offset their weaknesses.
If you want to do away with elitism, you're going to go down one of three paths:
1. Groups need roles x, y, and z, but anyone can respec to any role at a whim.
2. Content is so easy that roles don't matter. Maybe there are no instances so bosses can be zerged easily. Maybe the "5-man" dungeon with the Black Dragon could basically be killed with any 2 players, regardless of their skill loadouts.
3. Everyone is the same generic carbon-copy super soldier who can do everything, but you still need 5 teammates to take down the Black Dragon in that dungeon.
I mean it's not like you need roles to have a successful game. Plenty of games manage to be fun without any roles at all.
But if you're calling it a role-playing game, roles are rather important. And without a particularly compelling combat mechanic, a role-less game would be extremely tedious if combat is common.
Heck even in noncombat roles are damn important. If you want the game to have any sort of a player-run economy, letting everyone do everything is a bit dubious. Maybe your crucial role-limiting limitation is you can't do everything at once, but you gotta have limitations in there somewhere.
Sorry, but I still have to say no. You like classes and that's great for you. My design will not be the 1-100 stuck at X amount for skills as a cap.
First off, you must be new to gaming because you can't get your mind around a game that doesn't have classes and force roles, the curse of MMO design today that's perpetuated by the slew of class-based games that are out today. I could be wrong about you, but after the posts made, that's where I am.
Secondly, you must not have read the post I made on how I want skills and progressions to work. Learning will be time and player-trained based, not use and gain a fraction of skills. There won't be a cap on skills learned but there will be degradation due to a skill not being used for a time, that's realistic.
Third, I must disagree once again about roles. People do not need to be forced into them, that's a designers choice and one I choose not to make for RP and immersion purposes. It is not my job as a developer to decide what YOUR character can and cannot learn and do based on the class you choose.
Again you missed my post about why classes won't be in. There won't be dungeons, no need to group a certain type of class with yours, etc. I am not making a WoW clone, I can't state that enough. In games like that, there's a need to group and a need for classes: XP. There will be none in my game, no XP per kill, no leveling. No leveling means no grinding, and that frees one up to do what they want and RP.
Let me touch on levels and grouping now just to clarify why I am against them. Levels are the worst kind of forced elitism in a game. When you are X level, you are forced pretty much to have group members (if there is grouping) of other characters near or at your level. Groups usually exclude any member that is not of a certain level range and therefore this forces people to exclude others simply based on where their character's progression is in the game. And, with a level-based game, a divide is soon created between the high levels and those grining their way on to try and reach that level just so they can play with their friends or reach the 'end game' content.
I don't agree with that.
If there is pvp in the game, levels make the game even more unfair. A level 1 character has absolutely no chance in most MMOs against a character of level 10. Most games design the classes to have ubsurdly high health (hit points) and cause an equally absurd amount of damage compare to someone of vastly lower level. This creates that rift again and a sense of serious unrealism to the the player. Sure, it makes you feel god-like if you are the higher level character because you can decimate low level foes, but its highly unrealistic.
In the real world, even the most pathetic individual has the chance, a chance, of killing a very skilled fighter. Its slim, but it can happen, especially with ranged weapons and guns. Also, in the real world, a very skilled soldier may be able to take on many, many opponants, but a sword bow is still a sword blow and may kill you if placed right.
My combat system will be compelling as you say, with many options for the player based on hat skills they know. Everyone can feint, roll, parry, block, etc. Skills will determine what else one can do.
But this won't be a combat-centric game. Not in the least. There won't be a ton of creatures just waiting outside of town that only want to kil YOU and not each other if they are enemies. I could go on and on but hopefully I have made my point.
Classes and levels are out. I won't budge on that. But thank you for adding to the discussion in an intelligent and mature manner and please exscuse me if I get a little emotional in my posts on your topics.. I am not attacking you or your point, just expressing how I am against such design.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
I am making a game for me to play in. This is the entire purpose for making it.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
If you are referring to me (the OP) I don't want a company to make a community for me, or even a game because they simply won't. I am going to make a game for me that others can enjoy. A game for role-players, by a role-player. All those various MMOs out there you are referring to aren't made strictly for those that like to immerse themselves in a living, breathing world. They simply want to get tough, get gear and pwn things (including other players). This has led developers to shoot for the lowest common denominator and sacrifice vision for profits.
I understood your point. However, you also stated the following:
"I want to make a game only for role-players. There just simply isn't one out there."
Which isn't true. There are tons of them out there. From graphical options like A Tale in the Desert (which, interestingly enough, has absolutely no real combat which makes me wonder what games you thought I was talking about when I mentioned "Social MMOs") to an insane amount of text-based games. The problem is, if you actually go digging for them, you'll find none of the graphical based ones require role-playing, simply encourage it. The text-based ones, unfortunately, often have a small player base as most people are too narrow-minded to even try and appreciate a text-based game anymore.
I'm not going to discourage you from your plan to create a role-playing enforced MMO, just point out there is a reason why it hasn't come up before. Mainly, because it is nearly impossible to make it successful, especially in the face of the other options out there such as text-based games or through communities like those in Neverwinter Nights.
Point well taken, but I am still going to try.
If you aren't actively part of the solution, you have no right to complain about anything.
heh, it seems that most people are attacking this idea a lot. the more i hear from the op, the more i think that i want to play this game. from what ive read, it seems that this game will, hopefully, be something completely different from just about every mmo out today. so, Arshoon, youve got my support.
Here is my oppinion on some of the few features you want to integrate into a RP MMO. First of all i'm a huge fan of the Final Fantasy series and for me all the different game mechanics and story based missions are the best that have been done untill today. Bioware is a great game creator too, for the western market (great story which can alter the outcome of the game). But i'd love to see a MMORPG game that has such great elements as Squaresoft made them (someone remember the group combat in Crono Trigger). I would like to see such aspects of the game where a warrior can throw an archer sky high and he makes an overkill move on to the enemy/s, something like an AOE effect made ba 2-3 group members. A piece of this combat art you can see in Final Fantasy XI if 2-3 party members do they skills one after another and they evoke a buff or double dmg effect.
I don't know what games other ppl have played but i have played RPG games since the table top set of rules and the RPG games of today died when the diablo (no-brain, no-story based game came out). Don't get me to wrong i played Diablo myself but i never could figure out the whole story behind the game. I heard that there are books that are prequels of the Diablo series. BUT why should i read a book to be emerged into a game story, i don't need to play a game then, i would read the whole book series instead?
When it comes to RPGs, there's two very distinct groups. One group that wants to play through a story and "unlock" the next part of it through a conflict or series of events, and another group that wants to dictate the direction of the story. The former would probably consider Wizardry 8 a poor game with zero direction and consider Final Fantasy 6 to be an awesome story-based RPGs. The latter is more inclined to find something like FF6 to be linear and restrictive while finding Wizardry 8 more to their liking.
I'm not saying that people cannot or do not like both, but people usually lean more towards one side or the other, and designing for both groups at the same timeis very difficult.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?