Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
LF *thinkers*: Designing an MMO
RedCodeOne
Member Posts: 7
Hi there.
Don't know where to put my post --doesn't seem to fit anywhere. But this is a cool forum, so I just post it here.
I'm looking for people to think and discuss about how you want your (near) perfect MMO to be like. So it's about imagination and using your phantasy, and about discussing these ideas (and maybe even work out how to make these ideas function).
Everyone of you has gone through one or several modern MMOs and figured 'aaahh, this ought to be better!' and 'if this would just be this way --not that way!', etc. So what about having a constructive look at these these ideas and then over time put them together. Just for the pure fun of it? No one has the ressources to make this reality, of course. So it's all just paper work for the sheer fun of it.
Since there is a vast spectre of MMO types, I reduce it to this target frame:
- MMORPG (Not a shooter, etc.)
- Sandbox-Elements (possibly) combined with Themepark elements (take the best of both worlds)
- No separation of gamers by levels. (Progression done in other ways.)
- Community centered
- User driven content based on Voxel technology and other means!
See, it's about designing an MMO on paper, a bit within the restrictions of what would actually be feasable, of course.
If there is something that annoys you in your current bread and butter MMO you have a starting point. For instance, if you think NPCs you see in MMOs are horribly stupid, we could think and discuss about alternative ways how NPCs could behave / react / go for their business, etc.
But before you start sharing your imaginations I just want to ask if you are interested in such a discussion/"project".
Cheers.
(btw, in such a discussion, it would be mandatory to be rational, means, always respect viewpoints that differ from yours.)
Comments
I think it's an interesting idea you have here. Would be fun to bounce some ideas.
I have been working on a Minecraft server for about a year - it's a very easy platform to work with, so I see it as a playground for me to try and develop the best possible MMO I can imagine.
There is one thing I am struggling with currently:
No separation of gamers by levels. (Progression done in other ways.)
Imagine a game played in a limited area - a shared space where you interact and work with the community. You could even call it a "community simulation" of sorts, where your goal is simply to be part of the system. You shape the system through your actions. The progression then is mainly defined by how much "power" you have in the system, how many different strings you can pull at a time.
If you enjoy crafting, your progression would not be defined by what recipes you have unlocked, but by the way in which you can bend the system to allow you craft the most demanding of items.
The question is though, without a clearly defined progression number, or some sort of a clear visualisation, would the player find such free progression enjoyable? Does a game need a goal to be fun?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
The problem with most MMORPGS these days is two things. The basics are gone. Also the RPG in mmorpg is gone also. Its been wateredown and honestly I think that is able to have a fully sandbox game, with the whole "your only limited by your imagination" will be the first to suceed
The biggest thing I think that is required for this and the game requirements isthe following:
Having a system that revoles around itself, no one part is greater than the other, if one suffers everyone feels the impact.
Gatherers ---> Crafters ---- > Pvpers/Pvmers
PvPers/Pvmers ----> Crafters -----> Gathers
At the start of the game it will definately look like this, once the game begins to mature people will be able to specialize in what they want, but they cant forget if there is no supply for the PvMers or PvPers good luck trying to kill.
I would say the game needs to be broken into three Overrall Professions (I'll be using very vague terms for simplicity sake)
Gathering: Farmer/WoodWorker/Miner
Crafting: craftsmen/Metalworker/Weaver
Combat: No classes, you are what you wear.
What should also be required in the game:
I have many more ideas/explantions that i should be in an mmorpg.
@Bladestorm
In EVE (etc), read "Sandbox games", it's all done by the community. And EVE seems to be cohesive enough. But I guess, you are right, user created content doesn't fit into themepark schematics. Usually you don't connect user driven events and such to "MMORPG".
Themeparks have advantages: casual friendly, fancier, easier, greater wow! effect from the get-go. After a while it gets stale, and the dev team is always hung up in a huge struggle to keep the audience entertained.I can't read no crystall balls, but I have a feeling that future MMOs that focus more on being a plattform for users to make up their own creations will have more pull. (TheRepopulation, Minecraft, EQN / LM comes to mind.)
@laxie
Yeah, let's start sharing! In RL this sort of non-sense usually ends in a couple of beers and a wasted evening. But hey, you never know.
I could never get crazy over Minecraft for the graphics totally put me off. (But I know I am missing out on something. And obviously Minecraft has an inspiring impact. Maybe I give it a try.)
However, this comes very close to what I had in mind:
We shouldn't talk details here for it's better to keep it easy at this point. But to summarize my experience:
As pointed out to Bladestorm, to me Themeparks are great, but lack long term fun --there is something missing after max level. I don't feel like being part of a world I have influence over. My impact is virtually ZERO. I am more of a spectator of a show, hence "themepark". And after max level there is no endgame, just repetition.
This is why sandbox elements are a winner. What you describe is getting right to the point. I see it as: "Entities" such as PCs and NPCs act in a system in a reciprocal way. Input matters.
On to "levels". See, at least I experienced levels as highly problematic. First, they are a constant source of annoyance:
This is why the best MMO I can imagine surely has no levels or any such thing as an item spiral. Levels send the community through a corridor that naturally separates and divides the community.
TBH I can't answer your question. Quote:
"The question is though, without a clearly defined progression number, or some sort of a clear visualisation, would the player find such free progression enjoyable? Does a game need a goal to be fun?"
All I know is, that list up there is true for me. I find absolutely zero enjoyment in a number turning from 34 to 35. But I find enjoyment in teaming up with my buddy to do something together, but can't since he is level 19 and I am 58 and this breaks the system left, right and center.
Still I think there must be a goal, though. At least at times. Who defines that goal or how it is defined is another matter. What you think?
EDIT: Just read this great post of yours, moshpitt. Cool stuff, too!
Many people enjoy lvl progression in there mmorpgs, one way to combat the problems caused by levels is to do what Final Fantasy ARR does, which is, events and dungeons scale you to its lvl, you dont even have access to abilities that are above the event capped lvl.
Another issue i have with MMORPGS is there questing, there are too many quests and too many trash mobs just standing around in fields. Its really stupid.
I think there should be only a few welly written and thought through quests per zone, and they should take you on a journey. You dont just walk into town and collect 10 random quests then go to the mark on the map and kill stuff untill it says quest complete and then you move to the next mark on the map.
Instead quests should be like mini dungeons, with mobs in them that make sense, eg. scouts roaming around, guards stationed outside the door, a main boss and his leutenants. Each one of these encounters would require a strategy as the mobs would be strong and have good ai. This would allow for many non combat skills such as tracking, stealth, grappling up walls, persuasion, bribery etc to be used.
Another issue i have with many mmorpgs is that dungeons need to have massive replay value, this could be achieved with, different difficulty scailings, which could be done at any lvl.
There also needs to be great insentive to replay dungeons, people tend to play to progress and not just for fun, so dungeons should have things in them that are very hard to get and desireable.
Dungeons should also be randomly generated like Diablo, where everytime you enter things are in different places, different bosses are around and different traps/puzzles etc need to be solved.
There should also be player built houses and player owned houses, which should be very customisable and you are able to use whatever resources you gather to build them, eg Minecraft.
I share some of my design document that is part of the UDK module i am working on:
A. Non player entities live in the world.
A.1 Sentient: They do not stand around with things floating above their heads. They are not at the same spot all the time of day/year. They sleep. They go to work. They open and close their shops. They transport wares between towns/cities. They fight each other. They steal (from you). They run away when severely injured, They mostly come in groups (with exceptions). They have family. They live in a house. They don't know you (only by reputation which can be gained).
A.2 Non-sentient: They have a daily cycle and they sleep. They form herds that migrate. They drink at waterholes/rivers. Carnivores hunt, herbivores graze, scavengers ... scavenge. They migrate in huge areas, sometimes continents (birds/fish). Some build nests/foxholes/caves and protect them.
These are just a few points...
I know there are tons of ppl that love a strict WoW formular and are lost in an open world. So I am stunned to see so many jump on the "sandbox-elements" train.
I try to summarize a TOC on what topics came up.
(This is error prone for sure. Be easy on me, I'll keep improving it --If the discussion continues).
A. System - The foundation
A.1 The overall world mechanics
(Iaxie) (a) Imagine a game played in a limited area - a shared space where you interact and work with the community. You could even call it a "community simulation" of sorts, where your goal is simply to be part of the system. You shape the system through your actions. The progression then is mainly defined by how much "power" you have in the system, how many different strings you can pull at a time.
If you enjoy crafting, your progression would not be defined by what recipes you have unlocked, but by the way in which you can bend the system to allow you craft the most demanding of items.
(moshpitt) (b) Game world must be living and moving even if players sit and do nothing. (example Monster migration)
A.2 Economy and Crafting
(moshpitt) (a) Everything is the game aside from the beginning town (tutorial) must be able to be created/destroyed by players. Of course each item/structure in the game will have a durablitiy rating.
(moshpitt) (b) Having a system that revoles around itself, no one part is greater than the other, if one suffers everyone feels the impact.
Gatherers ---> Crafters ---- > Pvpers/Pvmers
PvPers/Pvmers ----> Crafters -----> Gathers
(moshpitt) (c) The game needs to be broken into three Overrall Professions:
Gathering: Farmer/WoodWorker/Miner
Crafting: craftsmen/Metalworker/Weaver
Combat: No classes, you are what you wear.
(moshpitt) (d) Monsters should not drop anything besides monster parts then can be used towards making things.
A.3 Progression
So far, we don't have an agreement over traditional levels vs. some other form of progression.
Iaxie nails it:
"The question is though, without a clearly defined progression number, or some sort of a clear visualisation, would the player find such free progression enjoyable? Does a game need a goal to be fun?"
(Long story short: To me it matters what YOU prefer, as opposed to what an imaginary average gamer wants.)
A.4 Housing
(Suntouched) (a) There should also be player built houses and player owned houses, which should be very customisable and you are able to use whatever resources you gather to build them, eg Minecraft.
B. Artificial intelligence - On top of the basic system
B.1 NPC behaviour
(Bascola) (a) (This is awesome!)
Non player entities live in the world.
1. Sentient: They do not stand around with things floating above their heads. They are not at the same spot all the time of day/year. They sleep. They go to work. They open and close their shops. They transport wares between towns/cities. They fight each other. They steal (from you). They run away when severely injured, They mostly come in groups (with exceptions). They have family. They live in a house. They don't know you (only by reputation which can be gained).
2. Non-sentient: They have a daily cycle and they sleep. They form herds that migrate. They drink at waterholes/rivers. Carnivores hunt, herbivores graze, scavengers ... scavenge. They migrate in huge areas, sometimes continents (birds/fish). Some build nests/foxholes/caves and protect them.
(Bascola, can you give more input once you got your A++?)
B.2 Questing
(Suntouched) (a) Only a few welly written and thought through quests per zone, and they should take you on a journey. (You dont just walk into town and collect 10 random quests then go to the mark on the map and kill stuff untill it says quest complete and then you move to the next mark on the map.)
Quests should be like mini dungeons, with mobs in them that make sense, eg. scouts roaming around, guards stationed outside the door, a main boss and his leutenants. Each one of these encounters would require a strategy as the mobs would be strong and have good ai. This would allow for many non combat skills such as tracking, stealth, grappling up walls, persuasion, bribery etc to be used.
(Suntouched) (b) Different difficulty scalings
(In fact this is standard MMO (normal, hard, nightmore mode raids). I include this, so we can have a discussion on it later. I can imagine a scaling where you just have more of the same NPCs or more silver ones instead of grey ones. But we cross the bridge when we come to it.)
(Suntouched) (c) Dungeons should also be randomly generated like Diablo, where every time you enter, things are in different places, different bosses are around and different traps/puzzles etc need to be solved.
C. Gameplay
(moshpitt) (a) Give the players the ability to protect themselves from griefers - (example if a group of characters managers to build a small town and own the land, they can ban the griefers from being able to use anything in the town)
Mosh I have to give you credit.
This is the first time I have read in a thread such a this, suggestions for an MMO that actually make sense for a game to have both social and long term aspects to it.
I think this guy gets it!
Well done and good luck convincing the rest of the forummers here.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
My advice is don't.
I know some people who have tried and games; especially MMOs, take far to much time and energy to produce anything of real value with a small group.
You would be better off spending you time/energy building up a resistance to iocane in case you ever enter a battle of wits to the death against a Sicilian.
--John Ruskin
I feel the same way. Ultimately I've come to the conclusion that there should be both horizontal and vertical progression. Not only do people like achieving new levels, its a necessary barrier for certain abilities the character can gain along the way. Being able to learn and utilize the most powerful abilities in the game as a new player introduces all kinds of problems.
@ OP
My ideal game is pretty similar to your own. I'll copy and paste my ideas from another thread here a few weeks back.
I'd make an open world, "sandbox" game with both PvP and fully fleshed PvE content. A true MMORPG with a focus on massively multiplayer gameplay, ie. grouping and small to large scale cooperative goals in a dangerous world. Content as well as territory would serve as a continual source of competition, so not your ordinary sandbox that gets boring due to a lack of meaningful goals. More of a choose your own adventure with no golden path or linear storyline.
Dropped and crafted item progression with a very robust crafting system including group crafting for massive creations like creating large ships, buildings and so forth. Both player run cities and npc capitals. Crafting and commerce would have the depth necessary to make it viable as a sole source of gameplay for those who choose to do it. NPCs all on factions and a proper alignment system so your choices have consequences in a living virtual world.
That would be my rough outline at least.
In 10 years all of the MMOs around today can be visitied in a digital museum. We will laugh about their naive mechanics. Future gamers will think 'Jeez..., and THIS poeple wasted their time with?' Already today we see companies try to address the annoyance gamers have with MMOs. (I am particularly eyeing TheRepopulation (Kickstarter Indie), DBG's(SOE) EQN+Landmark and Warhorse's Kindom Come:Deliverance.)
@Boneserino
Agreed. moshpitt is getting right to the core. As is Iaxie (in a more abstract way). Having decently analysed the core system is what makes a future game fun + exciting in a prolonged way. My impression is, dev studios too quickly bind themselves to actual impementations with a certain graphics engine. So their thinking is a lot in line with the limitations of the picked graphics engine.
So I'd love to dive deeper into core mechanics / the system. But it's also fun to just write down what you DON'T want to see in an MMOrpg anymore. I renew my invitation to constructively let off some steam here. (I mean MMOs mechanics are stupid, right?)I am full of dissapointment when I play my daily MMO. So are you --admit! Just keep writing here what should be improved, abandoned or introduced.
@Dullahan
I'll include your input in the next version of the TOC. I try to summarize:
Non-linear questing along scaleing (small to large) cooperative goals, alignment system (choices with consequences), group crafting (massive creations) + commerce as fundamental pillar of the eco-system.
If this discussion continues, there is need to sort out many of these ideas that are so easily put on paper.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to include all of your ideas as I see fit with what's been put in before. (I'd ignore shooter proposals.) I'd love to see more of your stuff you guys have in your brain cells. I try to moderate this here a bit and I am flabbergasted that there is a common direction with a dynamic open world ecosystem.
Even though none of us has the zillion $ to realize this, it's just fun getting these itching ideas off your chest. And you never know. Developers are following gamer forums, too. If any studio / indie picks up ideas floating around here, I'd be more than happy.
the missing link in a chain of destruction.
All spelling and typographical errors are based soely on the fact that i just dont care. If you must point out my lack of atention to detail, please do it with a smile.
2D simple graphic big game world , combine between table top and side scrolling
No liner story quest , all quests and event are repeatable with no exp reward.
No level restriction , do what ever player want without level restrict
H&S combat combine with jump and puzzle solve.
Crafting = custom create item in the way player want
Sandbox mode with building house , city , dungeons.
Simulation mode where player play as lord of village to city and take care of the NPC or simple open a personal shop
Gold always require .
Basically a hot pot with everything put it.
When you try to design a game , you need to image how it look like first before try to add the mechanic in it
If you had a MMO sandbox with land taking from other parties and developing/destroying it, fk yes.
And with risk, no holding hands by the developer.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
I know how to design a game and i also know how costly it is.
There lies the problem,this si a business for developers,they are not making games as a gamer with heart felt passion to design the best game ever.I am quite certain all these studios house some great creative minds however cost and investment,profits rule over everything.
What has happened because of Wow's success is that the market became flooded with every coder on the planet making games.So the competition became impossible to win so each started looking for gimmicks to sell inferior products.Problem is big name devs will always sell more than the little guy even if the product by the little guy is better.
o in comes f2p marketing,Smedley was one of the first to really push it in NA because he could no longer make much profit from his EQ franchise.
Point is that great ideas are abundant,developers are ONLY interested in ideas that work CHEAPLY and can be incorporated EASILY.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
@MrBum21
Could you explain, what's the cool stuff about the skill and level system of Asheron's Call (as I didn't play it)?
@iixviiiix
I am on board with your suggestions of simulation (NPCs --tell them how to behave), puzzles (yeah!), detailed crafting (precise looks of items, I assume?) and no level restrictions (my words!). But certainly not with a vision of 2D.
@Muke
Could you elaborate on, quote, "And with risk, no holding hands by the developer."?
@Wizardry
I am a developer myself, though not working in the gaming industry. I know how costly things are. But a very successful yet simple game was implemeted by ONE developer: Minecraft. BTW again, this here is a fun thread to bounce ideas for the cheer fun of it .
But just pretend we actually want to build a real MMO for a minute. If you seek to vastly reduce costs, I'd go with this idea:
- DON'T build the world yourself, apart from a small start area
- let the ENGINE build a simplified version of the world (simple graphics and layout) according to some rule sets defined in the game engine. (All based on voxel technology.)
- let the incoming players conquer these simplified worlds / islands / planets and do the improved building themselves
The setting would preferable be a Sci-Fi-setting with a lot of technical stuff (buildings, etc.) as phantasy or a medieval setting require more real world aspects (such as trees, etc.) which are harder to auto-generate. (But maybe I am too shortsighted here and this is possible too.)
The trick is: You have a set of rules that define logical build units and that can be combined. The game engine randomly generates tons of logical units (such as a landscape of buidlings) according to these rules. Randomly! This way, you don't spend a trillion on world designers. The game builds itself. Players come in, conquer and improve upon it.
I think Darkfall Unholy Wars has the greatest concept and foundation for a sustainable game. They have economical issues and therefor lack resources in order to develope it fast enough, but they have some really strong reasons why it's a game I like. Sandbox features.
What they need to fix though is economy in order to make it worth farming. It has a risk ending up with inflation due to too much equipment in the game that are just lying around.
Other thing is that there should be a purpose to PvP over areas in order to get close to a certain resource for instance. If my clan lacks a certain resource, we want to fight with clan X for their city to get close to the resource. Player driven gameplay is the future.
They need some more depth and content. Apart from that, Darkfall is really good.
I've personally looked into darkfall myself. No matter how many guides/youtube videos/reviews of the game. I ended up taking the "every road eventually leads into pvp" so it is pretty much a pvp game. While I'm not against pvp, I'm not for it either. Only time I like pvp is when there are things on line. I would rather fight and die trying to defend my town lose everything. Then to fight and die constantly to the groups of people camping the "hotspots"
In an earlier post, I agree in today's age everyone wants everything different thing, and can't even agree on things that is better for the game as a whole. There is a problem with this, so many mmorpgs I've played the core of the game is fundamentally wrong. There is always one part of the game that is "bigger" or more focused on then the rest. As a gamer and as a future programming. I believe if you start the core of the game right this should not be a problem, and if it becomes a problem just blame the players, but no one will ever do that because they are the people who pay/play the game.
We are starting to get to the age where unless you make the games engine from scratch smaller and smaller teams are able to make large scale games. The polish might not be there, but as I said if the foundation of the game is rock solid, everything else will come.
You need a reason to keep players playing, real goals real things. If a person built a house he is more likely to stay and live in the house for years to come. So why not apply that logic to gaming. I don't know how many people who continue to play the games they continue to play only because "I've put so much time into it, why stop and play something else when I'll just come back"
-----
My latest two disappointments in MMORPGS are Wakfu and Runescape.
Wakfu - Everything on the game was broken or a waste of time on Official release besides two things, grinding and doing dungeons. So what did everyone do? They grinded and did dungeons. Ankama (the developers behind wakfu) Heres what they did, over the course of the games existense(7/8 years, its been live for about 4~),the game has been reworked so many times I can count. PvE/PvP/Crafting all revamped. Loot System/Drop rates/Exp rates., all revamped. You name it its been revamped. 16 classes all but 2 has been revamped. The majority of the life of the game and developement time has been spent on revamping the game...... Why? Not because the game was a turn based tactical mmorpg, it was because the core systems of the game was terrible. The game was pretty much I do more dmg then you. To this day it is still pretty much that.
Runescape - I don't know where to begin, I give Jagex great credit for pretty much splitting there game into two Rs3 / Oldschool runescape for their players, but it was Jagex that divided there playerbase in the first place. Rs3 had a certain charm to it, the bad graphics, the click and afk combat, in its hayday it had 200k~ players online even if 50% were bots. Jagex tries to give players a say in what content they make, and its funny how things that are supposed to make the game better overrall, everyone is agasint it, but the things that add no longetivity to the game only what benfit people NOW is what everyone seems to agree on.
Which brings me to another point, We are also in the age of NOW NOW NOW. If you get everything now, then whats the point? you'll end up quitting anyway. I'm personally a cuplrit of this. I RWT'd in a game and quit a month after because I got everything I wanted, did the "end game content" to this day I regret spending that money. Not because I spent it, because it killed the passion I had for the game and no longer wanted to play it.
Hey mospitt.
I totally agree with your main statement, Quote:
"...if the foundation of the game is rock solid, everything else will come"
Maybe the foundation of the MMOs I played are rock solid -- but I simply don't like their foundations. Their core ideas to me feel dead wrong.
The main MMO I played the last 3 years - don't laugh at me - is SWTOR (the only Star Wars MMO around, I guess). This is yet another WoW clone --More or less the same thing. And the game just feels wrong.
Initially there weren't MMOs. Games were single player experiences. And to me it seems, the static and stiff concept of nowadays MMORPGs stem from that: Old ideas in the heads of the devs put to a new game concept -- which is: player connection. (I am speaking of Themeparks, of course. World of Tanks, etc. is another matter.)
Sandbox is perceived as "casual unfriendly", and therefore the underdog to themeparks in terms of player base. Still I think sandbox (in whatever form) is the future. Because I simply cannot imagine that the stupid foundation (the core mechanics) of games today will prevail in the long run. Instead I see people worshipping their creations in SOE's Landmark, even though 80% is utter crap, and 20% maybe comes close to the standard a studio creates professionally. But why do they love it? Because they made it. As moshpitt puts it:
"If a person built a house he is more likely to stay and live in the house for years to come."
..as opposed to the player is bypassing beautiful houses that are mere scenery, or if able to pick one it is still build for him/her.
So just image again we would build our perfect MMORPG. I would concentrate on the foundation only. This would result in a "core game engine" that is seperated from a concrete "graphics engine" (that is doing actual rendering). In between these two engines there is an interface that translates happenings in the core game engine to the graphics engine. (And if you think games always have such an architecture, I mean to take this to a totally new level that is so obviously not implemented in existing MMOs. One patch breaks it all, right!?)
So the focus would be on the core game engine. And how to collect ideas for that? Well, since nowadays stiff MMOs are a constant annoyance, contributors just write down what they don't want to see anymore plus how things should be. Just as in this thread.
The foundation has to be rock solid. And to me that is a dynamic, complete ecosystem. (E.g. there are scarce resources needed to live/survive; NPCs are driven by motives to get those, etc.) So nothing is pre-scripted.
Btw, in my previous post I had the idea that the game "builds itself", and inflowing gamers elaborate over that. Guess what? I did some research and there are voxel engines that do already have this possibility.