Ok now thats out of the way, the problem isnt immersion its gameplay.
My first mmo was 10six and its still the best game ever (to me). It had loading screens everywhere, basically you had a plot of land (out of a million plots) and you could gain more by teleporting(loading) to a different plot and taking it from that PERSON. It was one world but you had to load to go anywhere. There was no story, there were no quests, it was all about gameplay. ( and winning)
Now all them loading screens made it possible to have instant action and only one server.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I get the feeling that you associate immersion with visuals. If that is the case then I agree with you. Eye candy is stock in mmorpgs. When I choose a mmorpg it isn't based on the elements that are available in every game. I want to be a part of an environment that extends the base features available. Gameplay is all about strategy and continuity. What is the sequence of events which come to pass by declaring war against a given faction or party. Without continuity a game can seem clunky and without consequence. I want to feel immersed in a responsive environment where my friends and my enemies are able to respond accordingly. The trophy for victory is measured by the obstacles overcome and the challenges turned.
To simply put it, technology has been developing slow, and because we as humans believe that technology will always improve, we are always expecting more from the future. In this case, we are expecting two things from future games. Uniqueness and Creativity. Because our minds has fixed itself upon the games we have now, our brain can remember movements, pictures, feels, and intensity of games. When we move on a new game, it is that special 'unique' feeling to the game that allows fun for a week, than after that it just seems like crap. To me, this is saying that the human brain is far more complex than words can describe, and that we should learn to adapt to different styles of gameplay so that we may increase our interest in a variety of games, allowing ourselves to pick from a huge vault if you would like to put it that way. After doing that, our minds will put together the pieces and apply the most appealing gameplay to you. In this way, you will know which type of game you enjoy playing most, and you will start to adapt to only that style of play. Once this happens, you will be able to enjoy that specific type of game play a lot more than you have, which will lead to try other games of that same style so that you may make comparisons and continue on. What I'm trying to get across, is that we are expecting too much and should expect less. If someone would like to put my words in better terms, please do so.
I am going to put in my own words.
No one game can please everyone. By pleasing one person, it aggravates another. The worst games are ones which try to please everyone and make the game far too simplified and repetitive. I don't know about you, but I don't want to play a game that a 7 year old can master(not that such a game doesn't have merits). I expect for a gaming service provider to create a game with a planned theme and genre and to build a flawless interface for that specialized theme. Have I found a flawless game. Not yet. Will I ever? Probably not, but I do think that I will find a game which follows through on its promises.
Out of the many factors that contribute to the relative success and failure of massively multiplayer online games, few are, in my opinion, more critical than the level of immersion achieved. When did you play your first MMO? 1999? 2000? Later? Whenever that happened to be, I feel relatively safe saying that was probably your most 'magical' and immersive MMO, if not video game totally. Why is this? And why have developers failed time and again in recapturing that feeling? Are graphics part of that? Most certainly. As the standard for graphics and aesthetics in the interactive entertainment industry reach previously unforeseen levels, so too do the expectations of consumers increase. But any graphical leaps are nullified if they are not applied to the game in a manner which produces immersion. While some of the ideas and examples I present here may seem out-of-reach or too far-fetched, I ask that you consider the rapid pace at which games are evolving. In two decades, graphics technology went from simple vector-based constructs to near photorealism. For example, one of the most disappointing examples of failed immersion comes from loading screens, particularly in scenarios of travel. When I owned my first spaceship in Star Wars Galaxies, I fully expected (perhaps unrealistically) to have to pilot my ship through the atmosphere into space. Instead, I clicked a button and appeared there after a loading screen. Even though I expected that, I would've still been completely blown away by that level of immersion. Alternatively, allow me to give you an example of great immersion. The most recent example is also one of the most impressive. While Vanguard might be considered a 'flop', it did a few select things right. I contend that there is not a single MMO on the market today that can compete with Vanguard's environments. Few would argue that the game doesn't have impressive graphics, especially in regard to the landscapes. The first time I walked down a road on a mountain, looked over the side and saw the entire landscape for miles, I was floored. The architecture of cities in general was also very impressive. Another important factor for immersion is audio. Often overlooked, in my opinion, I believe strong production values in auditory development is crucial. While I don't think that background music, or a soundtrack, is required, it can add a lot to a game. What's more important are the sound effects. The violent clashing of swords, the mystical buzzing of a cast spell, the foreboding 'click' of an empty ammunition clip, or the thunderous engines of a starship. Also oft overlooked are ambient sounds. You would be surprised how much you miss in day to day living. Another issue many players, myself included, have with auditory values of MMO's is the level of repetitiveness. This is a reason I don't feel confident an MMO should have a soundtrack, unless variation can be guaranteed. Variation should, optimally, also be present in the sound effects. When you fire a gun or swing a weapon, it doesn't always sound the same. I believe and hope that in the coming years developers will step-up production values of sound. The last point is something that has been the subject of much debate between non-casual gamers. The rules system. I don't have a point-of-view on this particular subject simply because I have seen the benefit of a variety of rules systems. The main contest is found in realism versus convenience. For example, I thoroughly enjoyed my time with World of Warcraft, which we can safely assume caters to the convenience aspect; but I also had a great experience with EVE Online, which I contend is the most realistic MMO available (relative realism; considering the setting). Neither of those games, though, offer strong immersion. Blizzard's art-style, while attractive, doesn't lend itself well to immersion; while CCP has a realistic and architecturally impressive style, immersion is killed by limiting a player to the confines of a ship. In closing, I believe that the future of MMO's and gaming in general is bright, but that we must sometimes voice our ideas constructively to spur the industry in the right direction. This, I hope, has been one such constructive observation.
First, overall, excellent essay (I had to skim over some parts).
Audio is definitely overlooked and underestimated.
Visuals are more than graphics.
Graphics are way, and I mean way, overrated. Good graphics cannot make a bad game good.
Second, I think there are additional features to immersion:
Customization: different combination of classes, skills, and abilities. I am not referring to specialization that pigeonholes my character. Caster: Mage or Wizard, imho, is specialization enough or Healer: Priest, Shaman, or Druid is specialization enough. I am referring to customizable features and options for the Shaman itself. Moreoever, appearance is very underrated in MMORPGs. I should look differently from everyone through my size, color and design of clothing, etc.
Varied options to develop (such as EQ's AA system which allows for customization, character development all in one. Brilliant system, imho).
Activities. World activities such as fairs, tournaments, and tavern brawls. Fishing, hunting, building a unique home. Building a merchant shop in town. Building a boat or ship. All very underrated and underestimated. (Note to developers: some people play for the social aspect of MMORPGs, which is underrated. We just want to log in and work on our house for a month or go hang-out in a tavern).
Exploration and World Feel. Dungeons must look and "feel" real. A dangerous forest must look at feel real. A city must look and feel real. Many ways to enhance feel. The world must feel dangerous, mysterious, and the ability to EXPLORE is so, so, so underrated, underestimated, and missing in MMORPGs. Enhance feel with audio, visuals, and other features. A mysterious forest does not feel dangerous if I simply run through it with no potential severe consequences of dieing, losing something, getting mugged by bandits, etc. Travel does not feel special if nothing happens during my travel. The world needs to feel very unpredictable.
Impact and Lore. I need to feel that I can impact the world. When I complete an epic Quest, it needs to feel a part of the fantasy world. I need to immerse myself in the game's story, lore, and history during the process. I need to feel accomplished. These petty tasks are burning me out, just like raiding ddi.
MOST IMPORTANTLY OF ALL: F R E E D O M.
People want to feel free, not forced. Afterall, this is supposed to be a fantasy world with different rules regarding physics; different laws governing behavior; different opportunities to "be" and "become" something bigger and greater. Like you are the main character in an unfolding story (but your actions determine the direction of the story, not some developer's story). Gamers should have the power of choice over all their actions.
I could go further, but I think we covered enough ground for now. Besides, I have my final for my summer class in a few hours.
For example, one of the most disappointing examples of failed immersion comes from loading screens, particularly in scenarios of travel. When I owned my first spaceship in Star Wars Galaxies, I fully expected (perhaps unrealistically) to have to pilot my ship through the atmosphere into space. Instead, I clicked a button and appeared there after a loading screen. Even though I expected that, I would've still been completely blown away by that level of immersion. Alternatively, allow me to give you an example of great immersion. The most recent example is also one of the most impressive. While Vanguard might be considered a 'flop', it did a few select things right. I contend that there is not a single MMO on the market today that can compete with Vanguard's environments. Few would argue that the game doesn't have impressive graphics, especially in regard to the landscapes. The first time I walked down a road on a mountain, looked over the side and saw the entire landscape for miles, I was floored. The architecture of cities in general was also very impressive.
I would just point out that what gives players a sense of immersion is different for different Players. For example, I don't mind loading screens in the least and they don't break my immersion.
I played the Vanguard beta. I thought the game design was terrible, and just threw the grind right in your face. So, instead of grinding, I walked across the whole landscape at about level 7. That was a challenge, to avoid MObs at that level, and still walk from one side of the world to the other. I didn't find the landscape particularly immersive, but it was nice to look at.
I get a sense of immersion when I"m playing with a group, and we are deep into a dungeon that is very challenging and requires a lot of team work to go any deeper.
Leshtricity, I agree with Gillvane1...
In MUDs there are no graphics and frequently no sound at all. Yet most that play them all agree that text-based multiplayer games provide the best immersion - immersion that puts MMOs to shame. Therefore graphics and sound probably have little to do with it.
In my experience with text-based muds, most people who truly enjoy them like to read books as well. In fact, many people who play muds enjoy to write text for inclusion into muds. In my opinion, the immersion that many text-based mud players seek is an immersion of development rather than an immersion of play; text-based mud players tend to favor authorship.
Things that kill immersion. 1. Loading screens 2. General chat 3. NPCs that stand in the same spots and never move. 4. Repetitive quests
I agree. Especially on number 3 in combat-oriented mmorpgs. I think that mobs can see me just as well as I can see them, so when they see me standing 30 yards away buffing and loading my repeating crossbow that is probably a good indication that trouble is brewing. That said, I do actually appreciate the implementation as it is when applied in a setting that is built for grinding solo. If mobs had the immersive type of artificial intelligence then soloing wouldn't be possible; or the exp gained per fight would have to be reduced significantly. Essentially, a handful of gameplay balancing issues come into effect.
Many of these items are intended to be used as conveniences. I think that it is key to implement difficulty levels when considering the immersion available and the consequences which apply for receiving what is asked for.
As stated by others, immersion means different things to different people. Immersion can mean a sense of reality, of believability, of putting yourself into your character. The problem with the reality aspect is that, in real life, a lot of dull things occur (eating, sleeping, using the bathroom, etc). You could consider a game like the Sims to be very immersive; but also, imo, very dull. On this note, removing some of the 'realistic' parts in favor of expediency is good. Yes, it can be realistic to have to ride 10-20 minutes real time from one town to another, but it's boring. Give me a waypoint. One key problem I find with immersion is that having a crowded city can be realistic, but try to get everyone to speak in character, ie roleplay, and you are mocked by the masses. Playing a sorcerer or barbarian can be immersive but once someone starts spouting on republican vs democrat or some other rl topic, that immersion is destroyed. How can devs make a game more realistic if the people themselves are part of the problem? Another key problem in MMO immersion has to do with builds. In almost every game, for every class, there are about a half dozen viable builds for any class, and each class have about the same amount of options for viable gear selection (at the top). This makes each of us less unique, less diverse.
I agree on the first two, but the third isn't making sense to me.
On the second, yes, people who are playing mmorpgs do sometimes choose to talk ooc, and that does decrease immersion in my opinion. That said, I prefer to have the option to talk about rl issues so personally I don't mind yielding some of that immersion.
On the third, I don't think there are very many full release games that offer unique builds. And when a game does offer those unique builds it makes the community more diverse and less stock. My preference is such that I want to game for the purpose of building a non-stock persona. In the real world everyone is equally significant in their contributions; it is impolite to roam the world and accuse other people of being less productive than the other. In my ideal gaming environment I want the option to gloat over the cleverness of my build. In my opinion, most gamers seek something of the same sort and when they reach the end of the game they often quit it because they realize they can't progress any farther than the next person; they can't have a unique persona. What other purpose is there to a story-line or progression based mmorpg other than to attain some new/unique plot/ability.
Out of the many factors that contribute to the relative success and failure of massively multiplayer online games, few are, in my opinion, more critical than the level of immersion achieved. When did you play your first MMO? 1999? 2000? Later? Whenever that happened to be, I feel relatively safe saying that was probably your most 'magical' and immersive MMO, if not video game totally. Why is this? And why have developers failed time and again in recapturing that feeling? Are graphics part of that? Most certainly. As the standard for graphics and aesthetics in the interactive entertainment industry reach previously unforeseen levels, so too do the expectations of consumers increase. But any graphical leaps are nullified if they are not applied to the game in a manner which produces immersion. While some of the ideas and examples I present here may seem out-of-reach or too far-fetched, I ask that you consider the rapid pace at which games are evolving. In two decades, graphics technology went from simple vector-based constructs to near photorealism. For example, one of the most disappointing examples of failed immersion comes from loading screens, particularly in scenarios of travel. When I owned my first spaceship in Star Wars Galaxies, I fully expected (perhaps unrealistically) to have to pilot my ship through the atmosphere into space. Instead, I clicked a button and appeared there after a loading screen. Even though I expected that, I would've still been completely blown away by that level of immersion. Alternatively, allow me to give you an example of great immersion. The most recent example is also one of the most impressive. While Vanguard might be considered a 'flop', it did a few select things right. I contend that there is not a single MMO on the market today that can compete with Vanguard's environments. Few would argue that the game doesn't have impressive graphics, especially in regard to the landscapes. The first time I walked down a road on a mountain, looked over the side and saw the entire landscape for miles, I was floored. The architecture of cities in general was also very impressive. Another important factor for immersion is audio. Often overlooked, in my opinion, I believe strong production values in auditory development is crucial. While I don't think that background music, or a soundtrack, is required, it can add a lot to a game. What's more important are the sound effects. The violent clashing of swords, the mystical buzzing of a cast spell, the foreboding 'click' of an empty ammunition clip, or the thunderous engines of a starship. Also oft overlooked are ambient sounds. You would be surprised how much you miss in day to day living. Another issue many players, myself included, have with auditory values of MMO's is the level of repetitiveness. This is a reason I don't feel confident an MMO should have a soundtrack, unless variation can be guaranteed. Variation should, optimally, also be present in the sound effects. When you fire a gun or swing a weapon, it doesn't always sound the same. I believe and hope that in the coming years developers will step-up production values of sound. The last point is something that has been the subject of much debate between non-casual gamers. The rules system. I don't have a point-of-view on this particular subject simply because I have seen the benefit of a variety of rules systems. The main contest is found in realism versus convenience. For example, I thoroughly enjoyed my time with World of Warcraft, which we can safely assume caters to the convenience aspect; but I also had a great experience with EVE Online, which I contend is the most realistic MMO available (relative realism; considering the setting). Neither of those games, though, offer strong immersion. Blizzard's art-style, while attractive, doesn't lend itself well to immersion; while CCP has a realistic and architecturally impressive style, immersion is killed by limiting a player to the confines of a ship. In closing, I believe that the future of MMO's and gaming in general is bright, but that we must sometimes voice our ideas constructively to spur the industry in the right direction. This, I hope, has been one such constructive observation.
First, overall, excellent essay (I had to skim over some parts).
Audio is definitely overlooked and underestimated.
Visuals are more than graphics.
Graphics are way, and I mean way, overrated. Good graphics cannot make a bad game good.
Second, I think there are additional features to immersion:
Customization: different combination of classes, skills, and abilities. I am not referring to specialization that pigeonholes my character. Caster: Mage or Wizard, imho, is specialization enough or Healer: Priest, Shaman, or Druid is specialization enough. I am referring to customizable features and options for the Shaman itself. Moreoever, appearance is very underrated in MMORPGs. I should look differently from everyone through my size, color and design of clothing, etc.
Varied options to develop (such as EQ's AA system which allows for customization, character development all in one. Brilliant system, imho).
Activities. World activities such as fairs, tournaments, and tavern brawls. Fishing, hunting, building a unique home. Building a merchant shop in town. Building a boat or ship. All very underrated and underestimated. (Note to developers: some people play for the social aspect of MMORPGs, which is underrated. We just want to log in and work on our house for a month or go hang-out in a tavern).
Exploration and World Feel. Dungeons must look and "feel" real. A dangerous forest must look at feel real. A city must look and feel real. Many ways to enhance feel. The world must feel dangerous, mysterious, and the ability to EXPLORE is so, so, so underrated, underestimated, and missing in MMORPGs. Enhance feel with audio, visuals, and other features. A mysterious forest does not feel dangerous if I simply run through it with no potential severe consequences of dieing, losing something, getting mugged by bandits, etc. Travel does not feel special if nothing happens during my travel. The world needs to feel very unpredictable.
Impact and Lore. I need to feel that I can impact the world. When I complete an epic Quest, it needs to feel a part of the fantasy world. I need to immerse myself in the game's story, lore, and history during the process. I need to feel accomplished. These petty tasks are burning me out, just like raiding ddi.
MOST IMPORTANTLY OF ALL: F R E E D O M.
People want to feel free, not forced. Afterall, this is supposed to be a fantasy world with different rules regarding physics; different laws governing behavior; different opportunities to "be" and "become" something bigger and greater. Like you are the main character in an unfolding story (but your actions determine the direction of the story, not some developer's story). Gamers should have the power of choice over all their actions.
I could go further, but I think we covered enough ground for now. Besides, I have my final for my summer class in a few hours.
One feature I must commend in EQ is the unique title system which is granted to players who achieve some success during live events.
I am not as impressed by the AA system in EQ because it is possible for any person who has enough time to acquire all AAs and thereby make a stock end-game character. If there was a limit to the maximum number of AAs attainable by a single character then I would agree that the AA system does add an element of uniqueness.
On all of your other suggestions I agree. Having the capacity to build ones domain is a significant benefit to the gaming experience. More possessions in the virtual world sets one player apart from another.
Impact the world is more complicated. Yes, this would certainly add to immersion. However, one persons fantasy is another persons vex. I think that such a virtual world could only be implemented effectively if a clean slate was reset on a fairly frequent basis.
As stated by others, immersion means different things to different people. Immersion can mean a sense of reality, of believability, of putting yourself into your character. The problem with the reality aspect is that, in real life, a lot of dull things occur (eating, sleeping, using the bathroom, etc). You could consider a game like the Sims to be very immersive; but also, imo, very dull. On this note, removing some of the 'realistic' parts in favor of expediency is good. Yes, it can be realistic to have to ride 10-20 minutes real time from one town to another, but it's boring. Give me a waypoint. One key problem I find with immersion is that having a crowded city can be realistic, but try to get everyone to speak in character, ie roleplay, and you are mocked by the masses. Playing a sorcerer or barbarian can be immersive but once someone starts spouting on republican vs democrat or some other rl topic, that immersion is destroyed. How can devs make a game more realistic if the people themselves are part of the problem? Another key problem in MMO immersion has to do with builds. In almost every game, for every class, there are about a half dozen viable builds for any class, and each class have about the same amount of options for viable gear selection (at the top). This makes each of us less unique, less diverse.
I agree on the first two, but the third isn't making sense to me.
On the second, yes, people who are playing mmorpgs do sometimes choose to talk ooc, and that does decrease immersion in my opinion. That said, I prefer to have the option to talk about rl issues so personally I don't mind yielding some of that immersion.
On the third, I don't think there are very many full release games that offer unique builds. And when a game does offer those unique builds it makes the community more diverse and less stock. My preference is such that I want to game for the purpose of building a non-stock persona. In the real world everyone is equally significant in their contributions; it is impolite to roam the world and accuse other people of being less productive than the other. In my ideal gaming environment I want the option to gloat over the cleverness of my build. In my opinion, most gamers seek something of the same sort and when they reach the end of the game they often quit it because they realize they can't progress any farther than the next person; they can't have a unique persona. What other purpose is there to a story-line or progression based mmorpg other than to attain some new/unique plot/ability.
You are right, and kudos to you for expanding on my point. In the rl, nobody is exactly the same as anyone else, yet in many MMOs, you can find identically built characters with near identical gear and near identical appearance. More variety = more immersion.
Tip: If you want me to read your post don't put “essay” in the title.
Just for the record I don't want immersion in a virtual world, I want immersion in a game – more specifically a computer game. I love games, I have all my life (that's 40 years of gameplay).
When I game, I want to be in a game not in a world, for that I'll read a fantasy novel – which I often do.
And for me loading, and zones and instances are all a part of computer games, I played my first computer game in 1977. There has always been loading and waiting – this is a machine, that what it does.
And when the computer does things a computer needs to do, my computer game immersion is not broken, yes I am still playing a computer game.
So when you get pissed off that a computer is doing things a computer needs to do, perhaps computer game immersion just isn't for you. Perhaps you should try reading a book.
The competition is betwen immersion and convenience. Generally the more convenient you make things like travel and combat, the more you sacrifice immersion. This is where devs need to resist the cries from gamers. The tedious only seems that way if the game isn't fun to play. If it is, most people don't mind the time sinks that lend themselves to immersion.
Another important factor for immersion is audio. Often overlooked, in my opinion, I believe strong production values in auditory development is crucial. While I don't think that background music, or a soundtrack, is required, it can add a lot to a game. What's more important are the sound effects. The violent clashing of swords, the mystical buzzing of a cast spell, the foreboding 'click' of an empty ammunition clip, or the thunderous engines of a starship. Also oft overlooked are ambient sounds. You would be surprised how much you miss in day to day living. Another issue many players, myself included, have with auditory values of MMO's is the level of repetitiveness. This is a reason I don't feel confident an MMO should have a soundtrack, unless variation can be guaranteed. Variation should, optimally, also be present in the sound effects. When you fire a gun or swing a weapon, it doesn't always sound the same. I believe and hope that in the coming years developers will step-up production values of sound.
I am going to disagree with you here and say that a soundtrack is actually incredibly important. That theme song that rings the bells of war as you surge in to battle seems to seep itself into your subconscious. I believe that the subconscious is the key to immersion, it is the thoughts that you don't even you are thinking that really keep you going. When you are surging into battle, you most likely will never even notice the soundtrack that is playing in the background, but if I play it on a CD, I guarantee that you will know right away what it is from.
"Time is not money, it is much more; For I would give my very last dollar just to have one more moment on this Earth; But I can't, for time does not accept payoffs, only lives"
Tip: If you want me to read your post don't put “essay” in the title.
Just for the record I don't want immersion in a virtual world, I want immersion in a game – more specifically a computer game. I love games, I have all my life (that's 40 years of gameplay).
When I game, I want to be in a game not in a world, for that I'll read a fantasy novel – which I often do.
And for me loading, and zones and instances are all a part of computer games, I played my first computer game in 1977. There has always been loading and waiting – this is a machine, that what it does.
And when the computer does things a computer needs to do, my computer game immersion is not broken, yes I am still playing a computer game.
So when you get pissed off that a computer is doing things a computer needs to do, perhaps computer game immersion just isn't for you. Perhaps you should try reading a book.
Books are but prequels to games. Every fantasy book you have ever read would be a lot cooler if you were the main character, and that is where a game (a simulator more or less) steps in and takes over.
"Time is not money, it is much more; For I would give my very last dollar just to have one more moment on this Earth; But I can't, for time does not accept payoffs, only lives"
The competition is betwen immersion and convenience. Generally the more convenient you make things like travel and combat, the more you sacrifice immersion. This is where devs need to resist the cries from gamers. The tedious only seems that way if the game isn't fun to play. If it is, most people don't mind the time sinks that lend themselves to immersion.
It has been said before and I'll say it again, the definition of immersion and convenience tends to vary with the player, enough so that it's impossible to get everyone to agree. This is the cause of virtually all hte arguments in this forum and most others. Players have an idea in their mind of the best game, and this tends to vary from other players, sometimes greatly. So to get any kind of 'definition' entails surveying all players to weed out the differences.
While it's true games like WoW can attract millions of gamers from across the world, I think it's doubtful a MMORPG will ever capture EvERYONE--unless it's life itself. What we have is a multitude of gamer populations. No game can be exactly what a player wants unless they make it, so gamers tend to cluster with like-minded gamers. These populations can be 10's or 100's, or as large as millions or more.
The issue of maybe only 50 players in the whole world being interested in a game does not mean they're misguided. That's the wrong way to think. The more correct attitude should be maybe this is the only game they enjoy! Too many people assume this tiny group of 50 players is merely lost, and thus further reproduce the kind of thinking which leads to the neverending arguing on forums like this one.
The recipe to building more immersion is more simple than many people think. Let's take Elder Scrolls Online as an example. I'll describe just one feature that would add greater immersion to ESO.
1. Allow people to join Town Guard through some quest chain.
2. Build game mechanics to allow Town Guards to search people for skooma and drugs or check their criminal status.
3. Build game mechanics to allow Town Guards to stun and arrest people, and to send them to jail.
4. Build a mechanic to allow people to break people out of jail.
5. Build a hierarchy for town guards to feel that their are progressing in that career.
This kind of feature existed in Face of Mankind MMORPG and will probably exist in the spiritual successor, Mankind Reborn.
I don't want even to get started describing all the hundreds of immersive features in the best multplayer persistent worlds in Neverwinter Nights multiplayer persistent worlds. Let's just say that it is in a completely different league compared with MMORPGs.
Star Citizen should emerge to be quite immersive too. Just read the guides about mining or how to repair a ship to understand why.
What Face of Mankind, Neverwinter Nights and Star Citizen have in common is the tools and gameplay mechanics that allow to generate role-playing and actions that immerse players into certain roles and possibly steer them into adversity with other player factions.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I think a big mistake with game devs, is that they rely on immersion into the game world for their game to resemble something, but then might have added a whacky graphical user interface, with distracting colors, setup, or otherwise cluttering the screen. Then, there might be other things having been added to the game that ends up working against the already established immersion-into-the-game-world.
So, I guess one explanation for such to happen with games, is that the devs are either clueless and tone deaf, or they just don't care.
I could add that, basically, achieving "immersion" shouldn't/musn't be some smoergasbord of ideas and then failing to work with things within a given context; and maybe ending up just piling stuff without caring for the gameplay experience that has to do with "immersion".
I am expressing myself this way, because it seems to clear to me, and this would be true regardless of any game. Whether or not something is as terrible as it might at first sound like, would ofc have to be explored further for any particular case.
I guess my dreaded "feature", is the 'gimmick' in games. A gimmick is by me understood as something that is both generally repetitive and also something shallow or inapropriate as far as game design goes. Because then if you as a game developer rely on gimmicks, I think your motives behind any game "design" is questionable, as if there is no (good) art direction.
One can never recapture the first 'magical' MMORPG whatever it may be. Mine was AC2, played many, many games, single player, shooters, rpg, strategy.
I read about games like EQ, UO and at the time, zero interest?, then i was reading about AC2 and decided to give a whirl if anything only to check out what this mmorpg stuff is all about, boom! hooked for life.
I mean when i got SWG and EQ2 i was almost equally blown away, but i kinda knew basic's, where your first is 100% no clue walking in.
Wow was a moment in that at first you're like OMFG this is so freaking easy it felt amazing, but that wore off quickly and went back to proper mmorpg's. Only to end up in classic and retail a decade+ later, and now it's the chit cause it's the most challenging thing we got in the genre. lmao
My faith is my shield! - Turalyon 2022
Your legend ends here and now! - (Battles Won Long Ago)
Now, now, we can't give up hope, Amaranthar. Fight for the light.
(Not that we don't want darkness present in our MMORPGs. It's a lot less interesting to play a good character if other players aren't allowed to play evil characters. Even if more players decide to play evil than good, that's okay. The real world is like that, why should a game world be any different? Most evil people/characters don't actually believe they're evil, of course. They almost always justify the evil they do in some way and believe themselves to be good or at least not evil. Or. at the very least, not as bad as someone else.
Anyway, creative use of NPCs, mobs, NPC factions, and mob tribes/hordes can help to maintain the balance in a game world even if the player population is unbalanced. Evil characters & factions usually would not trust each other and would often betray each other or vie for power the moment they sensed weakness in those with whom they temporarily ally themselves. Only fear of those in authority or fear/hatred of the enemy/adversary can keep them in line for long.)
Btw, the OP is very well-written. I actually read it while I was still lurking on this site for a week or so (b4 I made my account). But, honestly, I forgot about it. And I don't usually forget about things so quickly. My forgetfulness may be at least partially due to the fact that I've been reading so much and not getting enough sleep lately.
Post edited by Ancient_Exile on
"If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."
"Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
Now, now, we can't give up hope, Amaranthar. Fight for the light.
(Not that we don't want darkness present in our MMORPGs. It's a lot less interesting to play a good character if other players aren't allowed to play evil characters. Even if more players decide to play evil than good, that's okay. The real world is like that, why should a game world be any different? Most evil people/characters don't actually believe they're evil, of course. They almost always justify the evil they do in some way and believe themselves to be good or at least not evil. Or. at the very least, not as bad as someone else.
Anyway, creative use of NPCs, mobs, NPC factions, and mob tribes/hordes can help to maintain the balance in a game world even if the player population is unbalanced. Evil characters & factions usually would not trust each other and would often betray each other or vie for power the moment they sensed weakness in those with whom they temporarily ally themselves. Only fear of those in authority or fear of the enemy/adversary can keep them in line for long.)
Btw, the OP is very well-written. I actually read it while I was still lurking on this site for a week or so (b4 I made my account). But, honestly, I forgot about it. And I don't usually forget about things so quickly. My forgetfulness may be at least partially due to the fact that I've been reading so much and not getting enough sleep lately.
I agree. My dream world would include evil played by players. It would also include Factional Races. But it would have to have some special design so that non-PvPers aren't feeling hindered and forced into the PvP, at least not very often (and by that I mean not often at all, very rare and maybe never).
I see "evil" and Factions as two entirely different things that each need their own design to safeguard non-PvP players and their game play.
I have some ideas, but I haven't thought it all the way through yet.
There's also Guild Wars, and that one's easy to fix. Simply have military orders and players who don't want to PvP simply don't join that order. They become non-blocking, and shadowy figures that aren't visible at all outside of a range, in combat, while uniforms stand out. That way they can't get in the way. They lose nothing, but their guild can lose Guild assets so they do have a stake in the warfare. They can provide support for their Guild's cause through economic activity (taxes), donations, etc. Or a Guild can have no military at all, freeing them up from all of that stuff. They'd still possibly be part of a city, whether they care who runs that city or not.
@Ancient_Exile I love your idea of NPCs being a big part in preventing Factions from overrunning non-PvP players, if that's what you are getting at. That could be a huge boon in making a game very exciting and interesting, and not letting it cause non-PvP players to feel the heat, so to speak.
I picture a world that's divided, Factionally, and these NPCs acting like a strong front lines, as well as support, so that one Faction can't get into the other Faction's realms for much damage. However, that battle ground, contested area between it all, that's where most of the action takes place.
I wasn't really thinking of a game that allowed for people to choose not to participate in PVP. I was hoping to make a game where PVP would actually be fair and fun for everyone, so that players who usually don't like PVP in MMORPGs (for good reason) wouldn't be so afraid of it. However, I suppose there could be a way to allow players who don't want to PVP to opt-out. Or at least be protected from being exposed to it the vast majority of the time. The problem is though, they would probably have to stay in the relative safety of cities and towns with powerful NPC and/or PC military orders/armies defending them. Some farms and villages might be safer than others, depending on how close they were to a fort, castle, or garrison or how frequently they were patrolled.
Honestly, I don't like Adventurer Guilds or Player Guilds. Or at least I don't want to call them that. Guilds should be trade guilds. Which player characters could join. But those trade guilds would have NPCs in them as well. (And perhaps some larger cities might have thief or assassin guilds/organized crime.) However, players could possibly form their own factions/organizations. These could be anything from mercenary companies, to bandit gangs, to pirate crews, to religious and/or military orders, or even a trading company. If a certain player character got knighted, then rose to the position of a lord, other player characters could swear fealty to him or her. So then those player characters would belong to that certain player character's mini-faction within a larger faction.
We don't have to reinvent the wheel. Just pattern PC/NPC/Mob factions and organizations after real-life medieval factions and organizations.
EDIT: True, your idea of not allowing Factions to be totally overrun could work. And there could be a way to just allow some players to totally opt-out of PVP. But it's still my hope that we could somehow build a dynamic game world where factions could potentially be destroyed and no one is totally safe. Though it would need to be very difficult and probably take years of playing to build enough to power plus unlock hidden progression paths (by making certain decisions, performing certain actions) in order to do so.
"If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."
"Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
Perhaps what I'm thinking of is a little too advanced at this time.
So, let's build upon your idea of a contested areas. Yes, there could be contested areas between factions. There could be contested resources, settlements, forts, and strategic locations within those contested areas. There could also be dungeons within those contested areas.
Players would choose a faction and develop their character within the relative safety of the province or provinces which that faction controlled. But not all players would have to be adventurers or combatants. Some players could choose to follow other progression paths. This might appeal to those who don't normally play MMORPGs because they aren't interested in killing, looting, and dungeon crawling. Players could choose to be farmers, hunters, fishermen, horse-breeders, tradesmen, merchants, and perhaps other non-combat professions. Though it's possible that some of those roles might be better performed by NPCs. Players would later be able to hire and acquire NPC subordinates to perform certain tasks and duties for them. But for those who chose to be soldiers or adventurers, there would be quests and missions within the lands controlled by their faction and on the borders which often required combat. There could also be ruins and dungeons to explore within their province or provinces.
Then at a certain point, those players who chose to be soldiers or adventurers would have the choice to enter the contested areas. Adventuring and fighting in the contested areas (PVP zones) would earn the players more favor faster with their faction than staying in the safer areas.
When the players are of higher power and rank, they could be asked to perform quests and missions further away from their home province(s). Perhaps adventuring and fighting in the contested areas lying between their allied factions and other enemy or opposing factions. Eventually, an ancient city of magic could be discovered. All the more powerful factions would send soldiers and adventures to explore it and try to claim its secrets and riches. The entire city, crawling with undead, would be one huge dungeon which increased in difficulty as the players delved further and deeper into it. (The ancient inhabitants of this city tried to discover the secret of eternal life, but they ended up cursing themselves and their entire population to undeath.)
"If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."
"Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
Comments
Correct me if I am wrong, but I get the feeling that you associate immersion with visuals. If that is the case then I agree with you. Eye candy is stock in mmorpgs. When I choose a mmorpg it isn't based on the elements that are available in every game. I want to be a part of an environment that extends the base features available. Gameplay is all about strategy and continuity. What is the sequence of events which come to pass by declaring war against a given faction or party. Without continuity a game can seem clunky and without consequence. I want to feel immersed in a responsive environment where my friends and my enemies are able to respond accordingly. The trophy for victory is measured by the obstacles overcome and the challenges turned.
I am going to put in my own words.
No one game can please everyone. By pleasing one person, it aggravates another. The worst games are ones which try to please everyone and make the game far too simplified and repetitive. I don't know about you, but I don't want to play a game that a 7 year old can master(not that such a game doesn't have merits). I expect for a gaming service provider to create a game with a planned theme and genre and to build a flawless interface for that specialized theme. Have I found a flawless game. Not yet. Will I ever? Probably not, but I do think that I will find a game which follows through on its promises.
First, overall, excellent essay (I had to skim over some parts).
Second, I think there are additional features to immersion:
MOST IMPORTANTLY OF ALL: F R E E D O M.
People want to feel free, not forced. Afterall, this is supposed to be a fantasy world with different rules regarding physics; different laws governing behavior; different opportunities to "be" and "become" something bigger and greater. Like you are the main character in an unfolding story (but your actions determine the direction of the story, not some developer's story). Gamers should have the power of choice over all their actions.
I could go further, but I think we covered enough ground for now. Besides, I have my final for my summer class in a few hours.
I would just point out that what gives players a sense of immersion is different for different Players. For example, I don't mind loading screens in the least and they don't break my immersion.
I played the Vanguard beta. I thought the game design was terrible, and just threw the grind right in your face. So, instead of grinding, I walked across the whole landscape at about level 7. That was a challenge, to avoid MObs at that level, and still walk from one side of the world to the other. I didn't find the landscape particularly immersive, but it was nice to look at.
I get a sense of immersion when I"m playing with a group, and we are deep into a dungeon that is very challenging and requires a lot of team work to go any deeper.
Leshtricity, I agree with Gillvane1...
In MUDs there are no graphics and frequently no sound at all. Yet most that play them all agree that text-based multiplayer games provide the best immersion - immersion that puts MMOs to shame. Therefore graphics and sound probably have little to do with it.
In my experience with text-based muds, most people who truly enjoy them like to read books as well. In fact, many people who play muds enjoy to write text for inclusion into muds. In my opinion, the immersion that many text-based mud players seek is an immersion of development rather than an immersion of play; text-based mud players tend to favor authorship.
I agree. Especially on number 3 in combat-oriented mmorpgs. I think that mobs can see me just as well as I can see them, so when they see me standing 30 yards away buffing and loading my repeating crossbow that is probably a good indication that trouble is brewing. That said, I do actually appreciate the implementation as it is when applied in a setting that is built for grinding solo. If mobs had the immersive type of artificial intelligence then soloing wouldn't be possible; or the exp gained per fight would have to be reduced significantly. Essentially, a handful of gameplay balancing issues come into effect.
Many of these items are intended to be used as conveniences. I think that it is key to implement difficulty levels when considering the immersion available and the consequences which apply for receiving what is asked for.
I agree on the first two, but the third isn't making sense to me.
On the second, yes, people who are playing mmorpgs do sometimes choose to talk ooc, and that does decrease immersion in my opinion. That said, I prefer to have the option to talk about rl issues so personally I don't mind yielding some of that immersion.
On the third, I don't think there are very many full release games that offer unique builds. And when a game does offer those unique builds it makes the community more diverse and less stock. My preference is such that I want to game for the purpose of building a non-stock persona. In the real world everyone is equally significant in their contributions; it is impolite to roam the world and accuse other people of being less productive than the other. In my ideal gaming environment I want the option to gloat over the cleverness of my build. In my opinion, most gamers seek something of the same sort and when they reach the end of the game they often quit it because they realize they can't progress any farther than the next person; they can't have a unique persona. What other purpose is there to a story-line or progression based mmorpg other than to attain some new/unique plot/ability.
Very well done, went through many things >.>.
First, overall, excellent essay (I had to skim over some parts).
Second, I think there are additional features to immersion:
MOST IMPORTANTLY OF ALL: F R E E D O M.
People want to feel free, not forced. Afterall, this is supposed to be a fantasy world with different rules regarding physics; different laws governing behavior; different opportunities to "be" and "become" something bigger and greater. Like you are the main character in an unfolding story (but your actions determine the direction of the story, not some developer's story). Gamers should have the power of choice over all their actions.
I could go further, but I think we covered enough ground for now. Besides, I have my final for my summer class in a few hours.
One feature I must commend in EQ is the unique title system which is granted to players who achieve some success during live events.
I am not as impressed by the AA system in EQ because it is possible for any person who has enough time to acquire all AAs and thereby make a stock end-game character. If there was a limit to the maximum number of AAs attainable by a single character then I would agree that the AA system does add an element of uniqueness.
On all of your other suggestions I agree. Having the capacity to build ones domain is a significant benefit to the gaming experience. More possessions in the virtual world sets one player apart from another.
Impact the world is more complicated. Yes, this would certainly add to immersion. However, one persons fantasy is another persons vex. I think that such a virtual world could only be implemented effectively if a clean slate was reset on a fairly frequent basis.
I agree on the first two, but the third isn't making sense to me.
On the second, yes, people who are playing mmorpgs do sometimes choose to talk ooc, and that does decrease immersion in my opinion. That said, I prefer to have the option to talk about rl issues so personally I don't mind yielding some of that immersion.
On the third, I don't think there are very many full release games that offer unique builds. And when a game does offer those unique builds it makes the community more diverse and less stock. My preference is such that I want to game for the purpose of building a non-stock persona. In the real world everyone is equally significant in their contributions; it is impolite to roam the world and accuse other people of being less productive than the other. In my ideal gaming environment I want the option to gloat over the cleverness of my build. In my opinion, most gamers seek something of the same sort and when they reach the end of the game they often quit it because they realize they can't progress any farther than the next person; they can't have a unique persona. What other purpose is there to a story-line or progression based mmorpg other than to attain some new/unique plot/ability.
You are right, and kudos to you for expanding on my point. In the rl, nobody is exactly the same as anyone else, yet in many MMOs, you can find identically built characters with near identical gear and near identical appearance. More variety = more immersion.
Tip: If you want me to read your post don't put “essay” in the title.
Just for the record I don't want immersion in a virtual world, I want immersion in a game – more specifically a computer game. I love games, I have all my life (that's 40 years of gameplay).
When I game, I want to be in a game not in a world, for that I'll read a fantasy novel – which I often do.
And for me loading, and zones and instances are all a part of computer games, I played my first computer game in 1977. There has always been loading and waiting – this is a machine, that what it does.
And when the computer does things a computer needs to do, my computer game immersion is not broken, yes I am still playing a computer game.
So when you get pissed off that a computer is doing things a computer needs to do, perhaps computer game immersion just isn't for you. Perhaps you should try reading a book.
The competition is betwen immersion and convenience. Generally the more convenient you make things like travel and combat, the more you sacrifice immersion. This is where devs need to resist the cries from gamers. The tedious only seems that way if the game isn't fun to play. If it is, most people don't mind the time sinks that lend themselves to immersion.
I am going to disagree with you here and say that a soundtrack is actually incredibly important. That theme song that rings the bells of war as you surge in to battle seems to seep itself into your subconscious. I believe that the subconscious is the key to immersion, it is the thoughts that you don't even you are thinking that really keep you going. When you are surging into battle, you most likely will never even notice the soundtrack that is playing in the background, but if I play it on a CD, I guarantee that you will know right away what it is from.
"Time is not money, it is much more;
For I would give my very last dollar just to have one more moment on this Earth;
But I can't, for time does not accept payoffs, only lives"
Books are but prequels to games. Every fantasy book you have ever read would be a lot cooler if you were the main character, and that is where a game (a simulator more or less) steps in and takes over.
"Time is not money, it is much more;
For I would give my very last dollar just to have one more moment on this Earth;
But I can't, for time does not accept payoffs, only lives"
* more info, screenshots and videos here
So, I guess one explanation for such to happen with games, is that the devs are either clueless and tone deaf, or they just don't care.
I could add that, basically, achieving "immersion" shouldn't/musn't be some smoergasbord of ideas and then failing to work with things within a given context; and maybe ending up just piling stuff without caring for the gameplay experience that has to do with "immersion".
I am expressing myself this way, because it seems to clear to me, and this would be true regardless of any game. Whether or not something is as terrible as it might at first sound like, would ofc have to be explored further for any particular case.
I guess my dreaded "feature", is the 'gimmick' in games. A gimmick is by me understood as something that is both generally repetitive and also something shallow or inapropriate as far as game design goes. Because then if you as a game developer rely on gimmicks, I think your motives behind any game "design" is questionable, as if there is no (good) art direction.
The renderings of such is the only immersion most modern day gamers (those who are still interested) really care about.
This genre is dying on the vine, let them eat cake, for tomorrow nothing will change.
Once upon a time....
I see "evil" and Factions as two entirely different things that each need their own design to safeguard non-PvP players and their game play.
I have some ideas, but I haven't thought it all the way through yet.
There's also Guild Wars, and that one's easy to fix. Simply have military orders and players who don't want to PvP simply don't join that order. They become non-blocking, and shadowy figures that aren't visible at all outside of a range, in combat, while uniforms stand out. That way they can't get in the way. They lose nothing, but their guild can lose Guild assets so they do have a stake in the warfare. They can provide support for their Guild's cause through economic activity (taxes), donations, etc.
Or a Guild can have no military at all, freeing them up from all of that stuff. They'd still possibly be part of a city, whether they care who runs that city or not.
Once upon a time....
I love your idea of NPCs being a big part in preventing Factions from overrunning non-PvP players, if that's what you are getting at.
That could be a huge boon in making a game very exciting and interesting, and not letting it cause non-PvP players to feel the heat, so to speak.
I picture a world that's divided, Factionally, and these NPCs acting like a strong front lines, as well as support, so that one Faction can't get into the other Faction's realms for much damage.
However, that battle ground, contested area between it all, that's where most of the action takes place.
Once upon a time....