That would teach you who's the father of all games(Besides DnD)->and then mock Blizz for their ripoff. Yeah, I'd so do that!
Interesting concept,but the last War mmo bombed big time.
Arguably, WAR goes down in MMORPG history as the game with the most wasted potential. Ironically, funding was a big issue for it, in addition to its other problems. It should get a second shot if the opportunity arose. Myself and Gorwe disagreed on the manner in which a WAR game should be (him PvE-based, me PvP-based), but either way the IP is incredible and it alone brings strength to any title.
If I had my way, I'd actually take over the current WAR game, bring it offline, and re-launch later. The details would be lengthy, but 100$ mil would bring it back from it's current coma easily. The game is half done and sincerely good at the core, but it needs a lot of polishing and new content too. The biggest hurl to get over would be the licensing of the IP. While I'm unsure what will happen specifically with the game when the current license runs out, it would be cheaper asking GW for a renewal instead of working under EA's nose.
However, I would also love to see a WAR 40K MMOFPS come to light too. Combine Planetside 2's RvR, 40k's extensive IP, Frostbite3 engine, and Dust 514's ground/space incorporation and that would make any WAR fan drool. That however is just a dream with no chance of seeing the light of day.
Originally posted by Chile267 I would give it a shot. Working in the industry in the past I would first call Scott Hartsman, whom I worked with before and say, "I have an idea and $100 million to make an AAA MMO title. You have the reigns, lets do this.
I like the plan.
Then you may like this...
Blade Runners an MMORPG
A brief teaser.
The year is 2047. My name is Talon Deckard. I am a Blade Runner. My story didn’t start here in the replicant filled stink-hole of New York, it started in 2019 on a rain soaked night much like tonight, in a retired policeman’s apartment in the armpit they call Los Angeles. Though I'm my father’s son I am what some would call a Merge, half-human and half-replicant. I can thank my mother Rachael for the other half.
Hell yes I could! I know this because my main goal would not be to make money or attract the most players, a common mistake that i think plagues most mmos these days. My goal would be make each player feel more powerful as they level. Instead of playing to reach max level, you would want to play to reach the next 3 or so levels for you next amazing ability. I would make it so that your abilities would be enhanced by other classes within you party making you feel even more powerful as a team. I would make each class have an identity that would be needed in group play.
I would have two worlds. The first a starter world made just for leveling, training and building your home, community and economy. The second world would threaten the first and because of this, max level players would need to travel there to eleminate the threat, therefore being a world entirely for endgame alone. I would make this endgame world entirely PvP. Teams would have to fight through pvp battlegrounds just to get to the endgame instances.
Well at least a profitable MMO. Everyone here that would say they could make an MMO will just be throwing money away becaise the MMO would be extremely niche and would nowhere near cover the costs of production and one losses money. Better off giving 25 million to some charity and pocket the rest. These companies that people constantly bitch, moan, complain about aren't idiots and do make a profit. People are so fickle when it comes to MMOs and go ape shit over just bout anything.
Personally I wouldn't go after a AAA MMO in anycase. I would much rather invest and produce a NWN3 of what Neverwitner should have been where players are equipped with making an immersive world, can tell a story and immerse a player into it, have the capability to maintain a wide array of persistent worlds with DM events.
the big issue nowadays is every game trying to get every player.... mostly its the bigwigs upstairs that dont give a shit about a good game, just raw profit that are fucking our market in the ass hard.
just given the money and told to make an excellent game I think many of the past few big failed MMO's would have actually been quite a bit better. Instead they were micromanaged by the investing companies to the point of shitbricked.
Given the money I would:
Round up the DAOC devs, cherry pick from WoW vanilla, WAR, guild wars, Eve, and city of heroes devs.
Tell them i want 5 factions, no faction swaps
character strength to rely on: 50% player skill, 20% gear, 30% skill training
EvE style character development but with faster aquisition for active skills being played
raidable world monsters that spawn at random intervals with random powersets in contested territories
player housing, titles, useful crafting in at launch
everything from skill lvl 15 + is open to pvp
everything from skill lvl 30+ areas are open to faction capping/owning
Buildable fortresses, hireable/trainable NPC's etc.
pvp ranking system
unlockable dungeons that require your faction to "own" the area.
materials are regional, making your faction having certain areas highly profitable and needed for crafting/town construction
1 server per continent
new playher faction balance if an imba above 10% occurs in any 1 faction pop #'s
is it a game for everyone... nope. Will it provide a ton of stuff to do for dedicated RVR style players, yup.
I have no proven business skills to manage a project of that size (or any size really).
I believe I do have good ideas, but there's a world of difference between having good ideas and actually getting anything done. If I really had it in me to make an MMO, I would, at the bare minimum, have already finished the basic design bible for the backbone of mechanics, simulations and data structures - those are the parts that wouldn't have required a dime of money, just the willpower to get it done.
I would have a better shot than most. I have the computer degree, some game development experience, and have done a fair amount of thought on the theory of mmo systems etc.
I work in the gaming industry and used to be on the business side of things and later transferred into the creative side; I realize the cost and scope design and can absolutely say hell yes.
It helps that I'm surrounded by people from the industry who would love the opportunity.
Why do I write, create, fantasize, dream and daydream about other worlds? Because I hate what humanity does with this one.
Odds are it would be a crappy AAA MMO, but you didn't specify it had to be successful or even remotely entertaining.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Probably wouldn't make an MMO, but might make something close.
My first choice would probably be a singleplayer RPG.
My second choice would be a small-scale multiplayer grouping RPG. I'd remove most of the scope of typical MMORPGs, but focus on iterating on a very uinque form of coop dungeon-running with dynamic dungeons that are tailored to your group's historic skill at running them, with dynamic rewards based on player performance.
Instead of struggling to replicate every single feature of a MMORPG, and having no money left over to iterate (and therefore resulting in a mediocre product) I would brutally reduce scope and help invent some new gaming patterns.
Neither is the most profitable possible game to make with that $100 MM, but hey it's free money right? :P
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Probably wouldn't make an MMO, but might make something close.
My first choice would probably be a singleplayer RPG.
My second choice would be a small-scale multiplayer grouping RPG. I'd remove most of the scope of typical MMORPGs, but focus on iterating on a very uinque form of coop dungeon-running with dynamic dungeons that are tailored to your group's historic skill at running them, with dynamic rewards based on player performance.
Instead of struggling to replicate every single feature of a MMORPG, and having no money left over to iterate (and therefore resulting in a mediocre product) I would brutally reduce scope and help invent some new gaming patterns.
Neither is the most profitable possible game to make with that $100 MM, but hey it's free money right? :P
I like the way you think, sir!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Seems like there's good untapped potential for fun.
Also it gets back to one of the better parts of tabletop role-playing in that you're playing with a small group of friends rather than an army of strangers.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Sandbox - pretty much the entire world eventually, but focusing first on the major gaming demographical areas and then expanding to including the rest of the world.
F2P
Economy and In game objectives tied to Charity. Bascially you pick the charity you fight, farm, craft, wpvp, pvp, raid, ........ on and on but tie it to multiple charities. Either your faction, guild, realm....... Raise the stakes. If you have a charity you really would like to help out all while enjoying your favorite past time ie MMORPG's, imagine the raised level of passion, commitment, community, a new level of seriousness few have seen.
Now that I have created a deeper desire to play the game. I need to make money to give to those charities. I'm going to do that by donating a percentage of the revenues earned through the item malls. An ingame pot is created and divided up. Portions of that pot are the reward for completing the ingame objectives whatever they might be. They could be pvp oriented or pve oriented or both. Your not just playing for the satisfaction of completing content, your competing for your charity, but don't worry because the game is going to grow on you and even though you starting competing for charity, you will soon be immersed in your alter ego. So immersed that I (the creator) spends many hours contemplating whether or not I should have made a game that consumed the lives of so many people in reality, (don't worry I tied it to charity I will keep my sanity :-)
To the game.
I said real world because it's easy to appeal the masses that way. I also want peoples current passions to be a major part of the game. I want cars (imagine selling cars in the item mall, I mean name brand cars styles, customizations......) It doesn't stop with cars but you can see where I am going. I am willing to bet you know someone that is deeply passionate about cars. Now lets say they also play mmorpgs. They try out this game that utilizes cars in some way (think Grand Theft Auto mmorpg) you've got street loads of people all driving what they like it tells of their personality....... Ok enough about cars, that was just an example. I want to sell things that define a persons style, personality, passions, or maybe even who they would like to be. Think cars, fashion, prestigious items, useful items to your ingame objectives ie Tanks, planes,.... we have so many options and avenues.
I'm still thinking a Grand Theft Auto like mmorpg to which your main objective is to build up your estate and wealth. Here is where my plan goes south though. No one is going to want to be a cop, ok so maybe a few but not a whole lot, ok let me rephrase that, no on will want to be an honest cop. Now if we leave room to be a crooked cop, I think we will get plenty of takers. At any rate, we have gangs, cops (crooked or not), and kingpins. Yes this opens the door for a lot of controversy, but this is what sells.
You want money, money buys you anything. You can be hired out, imagine a kingpin comes up to (kingpin is a real person mind you) and wants something done. You complete that task, you get the rewarded the kingpin offers, you build up rep, your gaining wealth, how far can you go? Maybe someday that kingpin will be working for you, or maybe someday he/she will stab you in the back.
Kingpin objectives are pretty much centered around making the most for their charity of choice. So you get to be a good guy and be bad while you do it. I think there is a market for this sort of thing. Now with that said, even if your just an average joe thug in game trying to make your way, you are going to want to try and work for the kingpin that is dealing with your charity. Lets say your ultimate objective is to become a kingpin and start donating to a charity of your choice with your donation having your kingpins name tied to it for history.
How about that guy that got all that money donated by playing video games.
I am no where near technical enough to make it all happen, but I feel like I know what an mmorpg needs, and that is incentive. Your incentive is defined by purpose and not just for some crummy achievement points, your purpose is tied to real world charity and real world prestige. Donations should be tied to at least the kingpins in the real world.
How can the nay sayers argue with you then? Blizzard does this all the time, you read a news article about the crazed wow player, and the next thing you know they are selling kitten companions for disaster relief, it's damage control.
It should be well known that this game whatever it would be called is directly tied to many charities and directly tied to helping fund those charities cause. Your ingame actions control how much the charities receive.
I think I could make a cool game with 100 mil but a AAA MMO? No. For starters, as someone with no expertise in the field I would only try to design a MMO that I was passionate about and therefore it wouldn't try to appeal to everyone and probably wouldn't be classed as a AAA title. That being appealing to the mainstream and meeting if not exceeding certain standards.
Most importantly though, is most established gaming companies struggle to make tripple A MMO's for more and they already have the supporting infrastructure and expertise so I certainly don't think an enthusiast such as myself with no real qualifications or contacts could out do them at their own game.
Rather hard to say, as I'm more into making the toolkits to make the games than I am to make a single experience.
I guess it'd end up depending on what the target is.
As far as trying to define a single experience I'd think would make an effective MMO, I'd say "Sims with Action".
Namely in that the game is presented with a greater focus on a relatively autonomous world. Your player and everything else always stays going, regardless of your presence. This doesn't mean in the fashion of EVE or other titles, where your character is logged out but gaining skills, or managing a shop front.
What it means is that when you make your character, you also make their personality along with everything else, and they have a lifecycle that they will continue to exist within.
At the basic level of play you can treat the game almost like it's Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time, except instead of Link you're Navi.
You exist in-game as a sprite or entity that is bound to an avatar, the character you create. While playing you can remain this detached entity and guide them through their interaction with the world, giving the avatar prompts to commit certain actions, promote activities they do, or punish ones you find disfavorable. In this way you teach the avatar and refine how they behave both while you are present and while you are away.
This level of gameplay allows you to effectively stay connected to the game anywhere. Being a simple enough level of interaction that it can be presented in a condensed format on mobile devices as well as in full detail on a gaming platform.
But then there's also the action element. If you want to play the game as the avatar, there's the possession option. This allows you to stop playing the sprite and instead directly play as the avatar. While you play in this manner you are directly provided all the options your avatar has in contextual prompts and menus as well as having any personal and unique abilities bindable to the hotbar or other keys.
Social elements actually comes into play by every character essentially having a Godville-like kind of journal to their lives. This is an element provided in-game, but designed to be ported directly to a site where they can be sorted through and used as elements to build a living story of you and your character from the game. Something you can take with you and share with other people.
Alongside the journal can also be a billboard style quest mechanic, where the game can generate quests for and through avatars, as well as players contributing their own requests. This mechanic can allow players to seek out scripted, generated, and personal activities for character progression. Aside from serving as a piece of the potential game economy, the other goal is to have a quest system that lets the players quickly sort and prioritize objectives and activities so that they can designate what ones they want the avatar to do themselves and what ones they want to have influence or direct control over.
Then there's grouping. Since the avatars are at a basic level autonomous and always on, they can also handily be offered up as hirelings for any given number of activities. If your character is capable of a given profession, then you can set parameters to have them try trading, crafting, and selling goods sometimes. If you want them out adventuring, then you can set them to go and act as an NPC companion for another player to hire.
If you login during such an activity, it simply spawns you in as the sprite alongside your avatar, letting them continue and complete the action as normal, or assisting in some fashion. In the case of logging in during a combat scenario, it likely prevents you from direct possession during the immediate fight so as to avoid any potential errors, but otherwise you can then assume direct control and have a go at it if you feel inclined.
The game setting would likely be something of a post-steam dark age. Like we had just passed through a period of renaissance and witnessed the start of new technology only for the world to come crashing down. So while there is the beginnings of many things, the potential has gotten crippled to the point of it all rapidly fading into antiquity.
Graphics goal would be a bit cartoony, putting emphasis on making sure characters look good in a simplified manner, but retain a relatively realistic overall set of features, and offset the simplified art with a set of screen overlays that give everything a kind of classic fantasy sketch/watercolor feel.
There are plenty of other unmentioned elements, but that's the gist of it.
EDIT: Basically it's not really aiming to make a large game, rather put the money and effort towards giving an experience that you can always 'keep with you'.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
A faction based sandbox. You choose a faction and that determines allies and enemies. I believe that people are more willing to participate in PvP when they have an easy way to determine who their allies and enemies are. I would love to see a large world where depending on your choice of faction and the server that you are on, you may never even see certain factions.
12 Factions
These factions vary greatly. I would love a steam punkish faction, high fantasy faction, tribal faction, undead faction, animalistic faction, pretty much as varied as possible. The high fantasy faction could be class based and governed by a theocracy where as the steam punk faction could be skill based. An animalistic faction would probably not even use gear and instead would evolve.
Huge World
The world should be large enough that a player shouldnt be able to go from one end to the other in less than 1 hours of constant travel. The world needs to be large so that faction and npc controlled land can have defined boundaries and be conquerable.
PvE
Players will interact with npc's in many ways such as assisting them, selling or buying from them, and even killing them. Killing NPC's isnt the only goal. Natural resource points will be placed all over the world. Some of these nodes may be easy to get to and some may be deep within a cave where some monstrosity(ies) resides. Natural resources are of great importance which leads to crafting. Once a mine or keep is conquered, NPC spawning will stop in that area.
Crafting
Crafting is vital. Your faction will need weapons, armors, potions, food, drink, and enchantments to survive in this hostile world. Equipment is only as powerful as the user. The scaling on equipment will make up around 30% of a players power. Equipment will need repaired and will eventually break regardless.
PvP
PvP is the point. Factional based warfare is mandatory. You could decide to be a crafter and rarely leave a village but you better have friends to forage or mine for you. Each faction starts with 1 city and a couple villages. Most of the map is controlled by NPC's but this will change as factions march to war and conquer. The main source of contention is territory control and resource control.
Invasions
NPC factions will amass and invade other NPC and player controlled lands. Npc's will harvest, mine, and do pretty much everything that players do. The point is to create a life like environment. Each Faction will speak its own language so when you attack are are attacked by that orc, is it a player, is it an npc, who knows. The larger an area a faction controls, the more prone to NPC invasions they will be.
I would make an awesome next gen MMO but with AAA quality but cheap. Hey if Blizzard could make WoW type quality back in 2005 well imagine what a team could make who actually understand what people want in the masses and how to put ideas together. Looking at SWTOR clearly those developers don't kow what MMO gamers want
Originally posted by MMOExposed I would make an awesome next gen MMO but with AAA quality but cheap. Hey if Blizzard could make WoW type quality back in 2005 well imagine what a team could make who actually understand what people want in the masses and how to put ideas together. Looking at SWTOR clearly those developers don't kow what MMO gamers want
The only reason I think WoW still justifies being called a triple A MMO by today's standards is because it was and still is extremely popular, it has almost all staple MMO features, what it does do is functional/polished and most importantly they continued to work on it and improve it for years.
If you were to make a game like WoW today, you wouldn't be able to do it at the cost WoW did originally. The continued development of WoW would push those numbers right up for starters. You most likely wouldn't have the same amount of content. People would probably be far less forgiving if a new game had WoW quality graphics if it was released today. This would put into question if the game would even be considered a triple A MMO.
Games keep getting more expensive as the standards go up and to be considered a triple A title you have to meet or exceed those standards. Even if you were to clone WoW you would have to take into consideration the cost of continued development for years afterwards and not just the original cost. Most importantly though if you claimed to be a next generation game people wouldn't be as tolerant with sub standard graphics and so on.
Hell there would be people who would expect action combat, voice overs and cut scenes, dynamic events and more all in one. Not only would those people (few as they may be) expect that, they would expect that and more out of a next gen tripple A MMO but they would also still want everything else that WoW has too.
In short it's not fair to say WoW did it back in the day so I could do it now and that's assuming you actually know what everyone wants.
I would love to say "Yes, I could!" I even have an idea and outline drawn up and ready for presentation. But, the reality is, my idea is too niche and I have zero technical ability. Having no technical ability means I'd have to rely on the skills and honor of others to get the job done without being completely knocked out of the loop.
What we need is multiple niche ideas targeting a certain audiences instead of making a game to please millions. These games were at its best when they weren't trying to re create the success of others.
I would love to say "Yes, I could!" I even have an idea and outline drawn up and ready for presentation. But, the reality is, my idea is too niche and I have zero technical ability. Having no technical ability means I'd have to rely on the skills and honor of others to get the job done without being completely knocked out of the loop.
What we need is multiple niche ideas targeting a certain audiences instead of making a game to please millions. These games were at its best when they weren't trying to re create the success of others.
Agreed. Judging by alot of the responses here (admittedly I haven't read everyone) alot of others recognize it too.
Comments
Arguably, WAR goes down in MMORPG history as the game with the most wasted potential. Ironically, funding was a big issue for it, in addition to its other problems. It should get a second shot if the opportunity arose. Myself and Gorwe disagreed on the manner in which a WAR game should be (him PvE-based, me PvP-based), but either way the IP is incredible and it alone brings strength to any title.
If I had my way, I'd actually take over the current WAR game, bring it offline, and re-launch later. The details would be lengthy, but 100$ mil would bring it back from it's current coma easily. The game is half done and sincerely good at the core, but it needs a lot of polishing and new content too. The biggest hurl to get over would be the licensing of the IP. While I'm unsure what will happen specifically with the game when the current license runs out, it would be cheaper asking GW for a renewal instead of working under EA's nose.
However, I would also love to see a WAR 40K MMOFPS come to light too. Combine Planetside 2's RvR, 40k's extensive IP, Frostbite3 engine, and Dust 514's ground/space incorporation and that would make any WAR fan drool. That however is just a dream with no chance of seeing the light of day.
Then you may like this...
Blade Runners an MMORPG
A brief teaser.
The year is 2047. My name is Talon Deckard. I am a Blade Runner. My story didn’t start here in the replicant filled stink-hole of New York, it started in 2019 on a rain soaked night much like tonight, in a retired policeman’s apartment in the armpit they call Los Angeles. Though I'm my father’s son I am what some would call a Merge, half-human and half-replicant. I can thank my mother Rachael for the other half.
Hell yes I could! I know this because my main goal would not be to make money or attract the most players, a common mistake that i think plagues most mmos these days. My goal would be make each player feel more powerful as they level. Instead of playing to reach max level, you would want to play to reach the next 3 or so levels for you next amazing ability. I would make it so that your abilities would be enhanced by other classes within you party making you feel even more powerful as a team. I would make each class have an identity that would be needed in group play.
I would have two worlds. The first a starter world made just for leveling, training and building your home, community and economy. The second world would threaten the first and because of this, max level players would need to travel there to eleminate the threat, therefore being a world entirely for endgame alone. I would make this endgame world entirely PvP. Teams would have to fight through pvp battlegrounds just to get to the endgame instances.
I would definitely give it a shot. It would be an eye opener for sure.
I can't be sure what kind of MMO I would make at the moment, but that is what focus groups, market analysts, and corporate espionage is for.
Helll... NOOO.
Well at least a profitable MMO. Everyone here that would say they could make an MMO will just be throwing money away becaise the MMO would be extremely niche and would nowhere near cover the costs of production and one losses money. Better off giving 25 million to some charity and pocket the rest. These companies that people constantly bitch, moan, complain about aren't idiots and do make a profit. People are so fickle when it comes to MMOs and go ape shit over just bout anything.
Personally I wouldn't go after a AAA MMO in anycase. I would much rather invest and produce a NWN3 of what Neverwitner should have been where players are equipped with making an immersive world, can tell a story and immerse a player into it, have the capability to maintain a wide array of persistent worlds with DM events.
Thanks,
Mike
Working on Social Strategy MMORTS (now Launched!) http://www.worldalpha.com
the big issue nowadays is every game trying to get every player.... mostly its the bigwigs upstairs that dont give a shit about a good game, just raw profit that are fucking our market in the ass hard.
just given the money and told to make an excellent game I think many of the past few big failed MMO's would have actually been quite a bit better. Instead they were micromanaged by the investing companies to the point of shitbricked.
Given the money I would:
Round up the DAOC devs, cherry pick from WoW vanilla, WAR, guild wars, Eve, and city of heroes devs.
Tell them i want 5 factions, no faction swaps
character strength to rely on: 50% player skill, 20% gear, 30% skill training
EvE style character development but with faster aquisition for active skills being played
raidable world monsters that spawn at random intervals with random powersets in contested territories
player housing, titles, useful crafting in at launch
everything from skill lvl 15 + is open to pvp
everything from skill lvl 30+ areas are open to faction capping/owning
Buildable fortresses, hireable/trainable NPC's etc.
pvp ranking system
unlockable dungeons that require your faction to "own" the area.
materials are regional, making your faction having certain areas highly profitable and needed for crafting/town construction
1 server per continent
new playher faction balance if an imba above 10% occurs in any 1 faction pop #'s
is it a game for everyone... nope. Will it provide a ton of stuff to do for dedicated RVR style players, yup.
No
I have no proven business skills to manage a project of that size (or any size really).
I believe I do have good ideas, but there's a world of difference between having good ideas and actually getting anything done. If I really had it in me to make an MMO, I would, at the bare minimum, have already finished the basic design bible for the backbone of mechanics, simulations and data structures - those are the parts that wouldn't have required a dime of money, just the willpower to get it done.
I work in the gaming industry and used to be on the business side of things and later transferred into the creative side; I realize the cost and scope design and can absolutely say hell yes.
It helps that I'm surrounded by people from the industry who would love the opportunity.
BOYCOTTING EA / ORIGIN going forward.
Anyone here could.
Odds are it would be a crappy AAA MMO, but you didn't specify it had to be successful or even remotely entertaining.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I was going to say something similar.
A game I would play for a long time? Yes
A game others would play making it a successful game? Probably not
Probably wouldn't make an MMO, but might make something close.
My first choice would probably be a singleplayer RPG.
My second choice would be a small-scale multiplayer grouping RPG. I'd remove most of the scope of typical MMORPGs, but focus on iterating on a very uinque form of coop dungeon-running with dynamic dungeons that are tailored to your group's historic skill at running them, with dynamic rewards based on player performance.
Instead of struggling to replicate every single feature of a MMORPG, and having no money left over to iterate (and therefore resulting in a mediocre product) I would brutally reduce scope and help invent some new gaming patterns.
Neither is the most profitable possible game to make with that $100 MM, but hey it's free money right? :P
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I like the way you think, sir!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Seems like there's good untapped potential for fun.
Also it gets back to one of the better parts of tabletop role-playing in that you're playing with a small group of friends rather than an army of strangers.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Genre : Real World
Sandbox - pretty much the entire world eventually, but focusing first on the major gaming demographical areas and then expanding to including the rest of the world.
F2P
Economy and In game objectives tied to Charity. Bascially you pick the charity you fight, farm, craft, wpvp, pvp, raid, ........ on and on but tie it to multiple charities. Either your faction, guild, realm....... Raise the stakes. If you have a charity you really would like to help out all while enjoying your favorite past time ie MMORPG's, imagine the raised level of passion, commitment, community, a new level of seriousness few have seen.
Now that I have created a deeper desire to play the game. I need to make money to give to those charities. I'm going to do that by donating a percentage of the revenues earned through the item malls. An ingame pot is created and divided up. Portions of that pot are the reward for completing the ingame objectives whatever they might be. They could be pvp oriented or pve oriented or both. Your not just playing for the satisfaction of completing content, your competing for your charity, but don't worry because the game is going to grow on you and even though you starting competing for charity, you will soon be immersed in your alter ego. So immersed that I (the creator) spends many hours contemplating whether or not I should have made a game that consumed the lives of so many people in reality, (don't worry I tied it to charity I will keep my sanity :-)
To the game.
I said real world because it's easy to appeal the masses that way. I also want peoples current passions to be a major part of the game. I want cars (imagine selling cars in the item mall, I mean name brand cars styles, customizations......) It doesn't stop with cars but you can see where I am going. I am willing to bet you know someone that is deeply passionate about cars. Now lets say they also play mmorpgs. They try out this game that utilizes cars in some way (think Grand Theft Auto mmorpg) you've got street loads of people all driving what they like it tells of their personality....... Ok enough about cars, that was just an example. I want to sell things that define a persons style, personality, passions, or maybe even who they would like to be. Think cars, fashion, prestigious items, useful items to your ingame objectives ie Tanks, planes,.... we have so many options and avenues.
I'm still thinking a Grand Theft Auto like mmorpg to which your main objective is to build up your estate and wealth. Here is where my plan goes south though. No one is going to want to be a cop, ok so maybe a few but not a whole lot, ok let me rephrase that, no on will want to be an honest cop. Now if we leave room to be a crooked cop, I think we will get plenty of takers. At any rate, we have gangs, cops (crooked or not), and kingpins. Yes this opens the door for a lot of controversy, but this is what sells.
You want money, money buys you anything. You can be hired out, imagine a kingpin comes up to (kingpin is a real person mind you) and wants something done. You complete that task, you get the rewarded the kingpin offers, you build up rep, your gaining wealth, how far can you go? Maybe someday that kingpin will be working for you, or maybe someday he/she will stab you in the back.
Kingpin objectives are pretty much centered around making the most for their charity of choice. So you get to be a good guy and be bad while you do it. I think there is a market for this sort of thing. Now with that said, even if your just an average joe thug in game trying to make your way, you are going to want to try and work for the kingpin that is dealing with your charity. Lets say your ultimate objective is to become a kingpin and start donating to a charity of your choice with your donation having your kingpins name tied to it for history.
How about that guy that got all that money donated by playing video games.
I am no where near technical enough to make it all happen, but I feel like I know what an mmorpg needs, and that is incentive. Your incentive is defined by purpose and not just for some crummy achievement points, your purpose is tied to real world charity and real world prestige. Donations should be tied to at least the kingpins in the real world.
How can the nay sayers argue with you then? Blizzard does this all the time, you read a news article about the crazed wow player, and the next thing you know they are selling kitten companions for disaster relief, it's damage control.
It should be well known that this game whatever it would be called is directly tied to many charities and directly tied to helping fund those charities cause. Your ingame actions control how much the charities receive.
Not sure $100 million would get it done.
I would create a world, not just a zone or a game, but a whole world with every aspect of a world.
Im sure the best way to do it would be to spend the money creating a program that could generate worlds itself.
Then just give it an endless universe to place them in and let it go.
I think I could make a cool game with 100 mil but a AAA MMO? No. For starters, as someone with no expertise in the field I would only try to design a MMO that I was passionate about and therefore it wouldn't try to appeal to everyone and probably wouldn't be classed as a AAA title. That being appealing to the mainstream and meeting if not exceeding certain standards.
Most importantly though, is most established gaming companies struggle to make tripple A MMO's for more and they already have the supporting infrastructure and expertise so I certainly don't think an enthusiast such as myself with no real qualifications or contacts could out do them at their own game.
Rather hard to say, as I'm more into making the toolkits to make the games than I am to make a single experience.
I guess it'd end up depending on what the target is.
As far as trying to define a single experience I'd think would make an effective MMO, I'd say "Sims with Action".
Namely in that the game is presented with a greater focus on a relatively autonomous world. Your player and everything else always stays going, regardless of your presence. This doesn't mean in the fashion of EVE or other titles, where your character is logged out but gaining skills, or managing a shop front.
What it means is that when you make your character, you also make their personality along with everything else, and they have a lifecycle that they will continue to exist within.
At the basic level of play you can treat the game almost like it's Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time, except instead of Link you're Navi.
You exist in-game as a sprite or entity that is bound to an avatar, the character you create. While playing you can remain this detached entity and guide them through their interaction with the world, giving the avatar prompts to commit certain actions, promote activities they do, or punish ones you find disfavorable. In this way you teach the avatar and refine how they behave both while you are present and while you are away.
This level of gameplay allows you to effectively stay connected to the game anywhere. Being a simple enough level of interaction that it can be presented in a condensed format on mobile devices as well as in full detail on a gaming platform.
But then there's also the action element. If you want to play the game as the avatar, there's the possession option. This allows you to stop playing the sprite and instead directly play as the avatar. While you play in this manner you are directly provided all the options your avatar has in contextual prompts and menus as well as having any personal and unique abilities bindable to the hotbar or other keys.
Social elements actually comes into play by every character essentially having a Godville-like kind of journal to their lives. This is an element provided in-game, but designed to be ported directly to a site where they can be sorted through and used as elements to build a living story of you and your character from the game. Something you can take with you and share with other people.
Alongside the journal can also be a billboard style quest mechanic, where the game can generate quests for and through avatars, as well as players contributing their own requests. This mechanic can allow players to seek out scripted, generated, and personal activities for character progression. Aside from serving as a piece of the potential game economy, the other goal is to have a quest system that lets the players quickly sort and prioritize objectives and activities so that they can designate what ones they want the avatar to do themselves and what ones they want to have influence or direct control over.
Then there's grouping. Since the avatars are at a basic level autonomous and always on, they can also handily be offered up as hirelings for any given number of activities. If your character is capable of a given profession, then you can set parameters to have them try trading, crafting, and selling goods sometimes. If you want them out adventuring, then you can set them to go and act as an NPC companion for another player to hire.
If you login during such an activity, it simply spawns you in as the sprite alongside your avatar, letting them continue and complete the action as normal, or assisting in some fashion. In the case of logging in during a combat scenario, it likely prevents you from direct possession during the immediate fight so as to avoid any potential errors, but otherwise you can then assume direct control and have a go at it if you feel inclined.
The game setting would likely be something of a post-steam dark age. Like we had just passed through a period of renaissance and witnessed the start of new technology only for the world to come crashing down. So while there is the beginnings of many things, the potential has gotten crippled to the point of it all rapidly fading into antiquity.
Graphics goal would be a bit cartoony, putting emphasis on making sure characters look good in a simplified manner, but retain a relatively realistic overall set of features, and offset the simplified art with a set of screen overlays that give everything a kind of classic fantasy sketch/watercolor feel.
There are plenty of other unmentioned elements, but that's the gist of it.
EDIT: Basically it's not really aiming to make a large game, rather put the money and effort towards giving an experience that you can always 'keep with you'.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
A faction based sandbox. You choose a faction and that determines allies and enemies. I believe that people are more willing to participate in PvP when they have an easy way to determine who their allies and enemies are. I would love to see a large world where depending on your choice of faction and the server that you are on, you may never even see certain factions.
12 Factions
These factions vary greatly. I would love a steam punkish faction, high fantasy faction, tribal faction, undead faction, animalistic faction, pretty much as varied as possible. The high fantasy faction could be class based and governed by a theocracy where as the steam punk faction could be skill based. An animalistic faction would probably not even use gear and instead would evolve.
Huge World
The world should be large enough that a player shouldnt be able to go from one end to the other in less than 1 hours of constant travel. The world needs to be large so that faction and npc controlled land can have defined boundaries and be conquerable.
PvE
Players will interact with npc's in many ways such as assisting them, selling or buying from them, and even killing them. Killing NPC's isnt the only goal. Natural resource points will be placed all over the world. Some of these nodes may be easy to get to and some may be deep within a cave where some monstrosity(ies) resides. Natural resources are of great importance which leads to crafting. Once a mine or keep is conquered, NPC spawning will stop in that area.
Crafting
Crafting is vital. Your faction will need weapons, armors, potions, food, drink, and enchantments to survive in this hostile world. Equipment is only as powerful as the user. The scaling on equipment will make up around 30% of a players power. Equipment will need repaired and will eventually break regardless.
PvP
PvP is the point. Factional based warfare is mandatory. You could decide to be a crafter and rarely leave a village but you better have friends to forage or mine for you. Each faction starts with 1 city and a couple villages. Most of the map is controlled by NPC's but this will change as factions march to war and conquer. The main source of contention is territory control and resource control.
Invasions
NPC factions will amass and invade other NPC and player controlled lands. Npc's will harvest, mine, and do pretty much everything that players do. The point is to create a life like environment. Each Faction will speak its own language so when you attack are are attacked by that orc, is it a player, is it an npc, who knows. The larger an area a faction controls, the more prone to NPC invasions they will be.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
The only reason I think WoW still justifies being called a triple A MMO by today's standards is because it was and still is extremely popular, it has almost all staple MMO features, what it does do is functional/polished and most importantly they continued to work on it and improve it for years.
If you were to make a game like WoW today, you wouldn't be able to do it at the cost WoW did originally. The continued development of WoW would push those numbers right up for starters. You most likely wouldn't have the same amount of content. People would probably be far less forgiving if a new game had WoW quality graphics if it was released today. This would put into question if the game would even be considered a triple A MMO.
Games keep getting more expensive as the standards go up and to be considered a triple A title you have to meet or exceed those standards. Even if you were to clone WoW you would have to take into consideration the cost of continued development for years afterwards and not just the original cost. Most importantly though if you claimed to be a next generation game people wouldn't be as tolerant with sub standard graphics and so on.
Hell there would be people who would expect action combat, voice overs and cut scenes, dynamic events and more all in one. Not only would those people (few as they may be) expect that, they would expect that and more out of a next gen tripple A MMO but they would also still want everything else that WoW has too.
In short it's not fair to say WoW did it back in the day so I could do it now and that's assuming you actually know what everyone wants.
When I hear people talking about AAA they normally mean big budget games that meet or exceed the standards of the most popular games.
What we need is multiple niche ideas targeting a certain audiences instead of making a game to please millions. These games were at its best when they weren't trying to re create the success of others.
Agreed. Judging by alot of the responses here (admittedly I haven't read everyone) alot of others recognize it too.