Originally posted by Flatfingers I've recently been pushing some other ideas I think MMORPGs need to try, too, like games without character levels, and permadeath, and real non-combat content... and hey! those were recent "Out of the Box" columns, too! So either these are all just ideas whose time has come, or Nathan and I happen to think remarkably alike, or... well. If the next "Out of the Box" column duplicates a mini-essay I just wrote a couple of days ago about how raiding is not a perfect idea for end game "content" because phat lewt shouldn't be the only end-game reward, I'm gonna start thinking something fishy's going on here... --Flatfingers
You're not the only one who's come here and wondered if Nathan was somehow channeling your brain, man.
Anyway, my basic approach to the "Next-Gen" MMORPG is based on three ideas:
1. Player-Created content alone isn't enough; My shard on UO had a LOT of that, but because the Devs were doing their thing, it eventually got rolled under and destroyed. This applies to players creating events and such as well as any idea of players actually creating dungeons and similar things. Either way, the Devs, who are not going to have the time to be informed on ever player-generated event, instance or community are going to do things that will muck up that aspect of the game.
2. Hand-crafted Developer Content isn't enough. Reference WoW and DDO. They just cannot create it fast enough to keep up with player demand.
3. Procedurally-generated content (which still seems to be a mostly new idea) will not be enough. You really can't do a lot of high-end procedurally-generated content that isn't eventually going to become nearly as repetitive as limited dev-gen content, and no one wants to do low-end content exclusively. Even with periodically updated databases and procedures, it won't keep up with player-demand.
So what is needed is a mix of all three. Doing it well will be difficult; But if you start from the ground up with this idea, and build the tools to be able to expand on it later without having to reinvent the wheel, it will be possible. And I honestly believe that this will be the key to a truly lasting MMO.
Take a look at Heroes Journey - this is a game in development I have recently become interested in.
It seems to have one of the most advanced character generation systems around - so there is no reason two characters of the same class should ever look the same.
They are also recruiting GM's to develop content, and run in game events from their player base. These GM's act as external contractors for content development.
It received some great interest at last years E3 so I am looking forward to the reviews and release of information from this years E3.
There are also some nice developer articles and interviews around.
As far as player content, perhaps a saavy developer / investor devote staff to player content and set up a site where player created content can be downloaded. For a premium fee of course.
That's exactly how NWN 1 worked, except that the content modules were free. The problem was that you couldn't upload anything to official servers (as I understand it there weren't any), you just downloaded a module and played it alone, or in LAN with a few RL friends if you happened to know how to setup a private computer network.
Originally posted by airhead
As you mentioned, Ryzom made a step in this direction, and it was GREAT, the most interesting part of that game imo.
Yeah, but it's also pretty boring in the long run. The real value of a feature is not in how realistic or fascinating it is at first, but how long it can keep you entertained. Sure I can stop and appreciate a world that has life of its own every once in a while, but most of the time I hardly even notice. So things like this count as "nice to have" features in my book, but they are by no stretch of imagination the reason why I play the game. Same goes for crafting, weather effects, etc.
Originally posted by airhead
I just think that in the mmo world, it's gonna have to come about from player actions instead of external toolsets.
The problem here is that player actions are often pretty random and shallow, or just downright malicious. Many PvP players have posted on this thread, and their idea of what content is differs from mine like night differs from day. There is no story in destroying what someone else has created, just as there is rarely any kind of unique story behind the process of creation either. If you rely on player interaction to generate content, then no matter how advanced your system is, it will always be severely lacking in the one single thing I use to define what game content actually is: a story. A story you are part of.
The same goes for procedurally generated content; SWG had a system where you could take missions from a terminal, but it got old in a few minutes because eventhough the mobs and locations kept changing, you were still basicly limited to just two missions, destroy and escort. Fly to point X, kill (or escort) mob Y, return to get reward, rince, repeat. I just can't see even the most advanced random quest generator being able to generate rich stories as well; only the human mind can.
Not everyone can tell a story, not by a long shot; but some can. We should give them the tools they need to do so.
It's really scary that is considered to be anything new or 'advanced.' Welcome to Ultime Online, 1997.... or the MOO/MUD scene prior to that.
People have bought into the mindless levelfests of EQ/DAoC/WOW for so long that they don't seem to realize that not only can a more dynamic and player-driven world be created, it has been done so for longer than most of them have been gaming. So, why aren't more developers doing it? Because players genuinely do not want it.
"Players won’t just select pre-fab housing units and drop them into designated real estate slots; they’ll build their dwellings, shops, and bases wall-by-wall, laying out floor plans as they see fit.
Here we go! Player’s need to be able to create not only houses for themselves, but entire cities from the ground up."
In UO, you build your house tile by tile. In Shadowbane, you can build entire fortresses and cities... defendable and destructible cities.
"Something we learned last week from City of Heroes/Villains is that character customization goes a long, long way towards forging a deeper connection between the player and the world around them."
No, we learned that with UO last century.
"Once we have the advanced visual customization of player-created content, we need to address statistical uniqueness. There’s little point to allowing everyone to make their swords look wildly different if they’re all going to do the same damage, cost the same amount, and attack at the same rate. Then again, we need something much more capable than choosing between high damage/slow attack, medium damage/medium attack, and low damage/fast attack. How about being able to change ten aspects of a sword, from weight and balance to sharpness and material?"
UO or AC... anyone? Again, the EQ/DAoC/WOW player more than likely isn't aware that such choices are availabel in other games and have been so for years.
But then he gets to the meat of the matter - that which is truly retarding the growth or advancement of the games...
"As with the natural order of things, building player housing is only half of the equation. We must also consider what it takes to destroy them. Nobody wants to invest a huge chunk of their personal wealth into something that a random griefer can undo in a few seconds with a basic torch. Then again, I find indestructible player housing to be just as ridiculous as games with no death penalties. At some stage of the game, it becomes pointless to build and defend something if nothing can destroy or conquer it."
The biggest hindrance is the playerbase. The vast majority of players do not want risk or consequence. They want an ever evolving arcade game where they play, gather shinies, and do not have to suffer any penalties for their actions.
Most of today's gamers have a very different playstyle than the author's. What he wants would do well as a niche game at best. Don't get me wrong... from what he describes and the features he likes, I would be first in line to sign up for any game he writes. It's just not popular. Risk vs Reward as opposed to no risk and perpetual grind for greater rewards? Definitely.
I play UO, EVE, and Puzzle Pirates. They are games where players create content, shape the world, and build the history. They have many of the features that the author has described.
The issue isn't that they are avante gard creations. The issue is that the average gamer does not want those dynamics - they want big markers on the next quest guy, a level system, and constant news of the next expansion coming.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Originally posted by LynxJSA The biggest hindrance is the playerbase. The vast majority of players do not want risk or consequence. They want an ever evolving arcade game where they play, gather shinies, and do not have to suffer any penalties for their actions.
I play UO, EVE, and Puzzle Pirates. They are games where players create content, shape the world, and build the history. They have many of the features that the author has described.
The issue isn't that they are avante gard creations. The issue is that the average gamer does not want those dynamics - they want big markers on the next quest guy, a level system, and constant news of the next expansion coming.
ouch! talk about throwing water on the fire?! Unfortunately, there is a high probability that this is true. Very sad imo. I suppose a poll from the people at this site would yield results that would disagree with this assessment, but then, it appears to me most users here are very seasoned gamers. AVERAGE gamer... tough to tell. Most of my friends, like me, loved wow and all the others for the first 4-5 months. But everyone I know has since left for the reasons described in this thread. Are they average gamers? maybe not.
I would reason thusly... why did almost everyone (seasoned and average) like wow for at least a little while? I think it's because of the exploration, learning the laws of that universe, exploring different classes, professions, and a little bit of story (wow didn't have much imo). Eventually, all these things go dull and users either complain, quit, or accept some kind of wierd slavery to the repititious, doing the same things over and over, telling themselves that it means something. The initial enjoyment of exploration and figuring out the virtual world is usually good in almost all MMOs... but they all seem to go stagnant at different times after that.
User created content is the only real answer imo. How to do it, that's the real question. Lots of great ideas in the article and this thread. Eventually, some companies/people will figure it out. The only thing that will ever keep it from happening is the acceptance of this opinion that people do not want a dynamic and changing world with risk / reward. I just hope you are not right...
Lynx, Dude.. I like UO as much as anyone. I've still got an active account, despite the agonizingly slow decline of the game. But you're overexaggerating, by a LOT, to claim UO pioneered some of the things you are claiming.
Fully Customizable Player-Housing: First done by another EA product: Sims. Sure, UO did it before any other MMO, but it was also years after UO fell from a commanding position in the pack. And the customization is not "functional" as Nathan puts it, but pretty much purely cosmetic. Don't get me wrong, the value of cosmetic customization isn't to be denied.
Caveat: With creative placement of doors with different access levels, one could create a "functional" building. But with the inability to fire from "arrowslit" windows and other such restrictions, it it, unfortunately, very limited.
Character Customization: UO has one of the most lacking character customization systems that currently exists. You get to choose gender, skin color, hair style/beardstyle and hair color. You can then put on a limited variety of clothing or armor, that, other than color, pretty much all looks the same. Now, it's gotten a teeny bit better over time, but the split focus between 2D and "3D" clients has kept it from growing the way it should have. CoH/CoV pretty much hold the crown for character customization, with the old SWG system commanding a very close second. UO, unfortunately, isn't even in the race.
Weapon Differentiation: Old UO had crap for this. A few limited magical weapons. New UO is notably more varied, but it's damn near a clone of Diablo's magic weapon system. What Nathan is talking about is real, player-designed differences in weapons, not a random magical attribute system with neon colors being pretty much the only appearance differentiation. I can't speak for AC, but so far as I've personally seen, SWG is the only game to make any sort of real progress in this direction.
Your comments about playerbase are right on, though. Perhaps a little over-stated, but as I've not done any sort of market study, I'm not going to try to call you on it. The real thing here is... We're not trying to rely on the big-name developers, whose bottom-line is subscription count and money. We're discussing the ideas, old or new, and how to implement them in a game that doesn't try for the mass appeal. As people have pointed out, a game that caters to a minority group, doesn't try to please everyone, and does so without any shame will never be a WoW-killer.. But if it does what it sets out to do well, the fanbase will be loyal, and grow slowly.
That's what really kills the fun in MMOs.. The development team, perhaps due to pressure from above, selling out to the lowest common denominator.
OK, I'm slightly mollified that we all just appear to be independently coming up with similar alternatives to the tired old conventions that every MMORPG developer today seems to want to copy. It's probably a sign that there are certain deep problems endemic to the industry... or perhaps just natural to current MMORPG designers.
Maybe that's the answer: if you want new designs, get new designers....
Just for fun, here are some conventions in current and upcoming MMORPGs that I'd like to see challenged by some upstart developer. Some are old concepts nearly forgotten, some are things that haven't been tried yet, but I'd be happy to see any of these attempted in a serious way by a modern MMORPG:
replace pure destruction-focus with balanced destructive, accumulative, creative, and perfective gameplay
build character ability systems and game content that map to each of these gameplay styles
instead of promoting only insect-like specialization, also reward jack-of-all-trade generalist characters
find an alternative to basing the end game solely on accumulating more and more loot
make the game world dynamic enough to be a fascinating simulation in its own right
instead of independent systems, build reflections of every system in every other system
replace the exploitable concept of "aggro" in favor of mobs with plausible agendas
missions/quests should should integrate into overarching story-driven sagas
stop thinking of "tactics" as special moves -- build richly detailed sensory environments
actions should have moral implications with significant consequences in the game world
apply the concept of "customizability" to every system, not just character appearance
make the game universe large enough that exploring it fully will take real-time years
stop making crafting about production or sales; make the R&D process fun in and of itself
I'd definitely play a game that offered several of those features. It's nice to think others might as well.
Originally posted by DariusWolfe But you're overexaggerating, by a LOT, to claim UO pioneered some of the things you are claiming. Fully Customizable Player-Housing: First done by another EA product: Sims. Sure, UO did it before any other MMO, but it was also years after UO fell from a commanding position in the pack. And the customization is not "functional" as Nathan puts it, but pretty much purely cosmetic. Don't get me wrong, the value of cosmetic customization isn't to be denied. Caveat: With creative placement of doors with different access levels, one could create a "functional" building. But with the inability to fire from "arrowslit" windows and other such restrictions, it it, unfortunately, very limited. Character Customization: UO has one of the most lacking character customization systems that currently exists. You get to choose gender, skin color, hair style/beardstyle and hair color. You can then put on a limited variety of clothing or armor, that, other than color, pretty much all looks the same. Now, it's gotten a teeny bit better over time, but the split focus between 2D and "3D" clients has kept it from growing the way it should have. CoH/CoV pretty much hold the crown for character customization, with the old SWG system commanding a very close second. UO, unfortunately, isn't even in the race. Weapon Differentiation: Old UO had crap for this. A few limited magical weapons. New UO is notably more varied, but it's damn near a clone of Diablo's magic weapon system. What Nathan is talking about is real, player-designed differences in weapons, not a random magical attribute system with neon colors being pretty much the only appearance differentiation. I can't speak for AC, but so far as I've personally seen, SWG is the only game to make any sort of real progress in this direction.
Housing: Sims isn't an MMO. If we include ALL computer games, then everything has been done before in the 80's and early 90's. We're talking about doing it in an MMO.
My house is right next to the Yew crypts on Pacific. It is built so that the walls block line of sight and also so that I can fire out my windows. I've been firing out my windows for as long as I can remember. And old past time was to toss bombs IN through the windows at people. Building your house allows you to create a defendable or functional structure, whether for PvP or social gatherings. A house is also more than the four walls. You have a wide range of functional items that can be placed in and used in the house to allow for the creation of a building that serves purpose, eiyther publicly or privately. Forges, looms, chests, runes(recall stones), and other items can be secured and access to them restricted or allowed to make usable workshops, libraries, and meeting places.
Character customization: You could probably describe the look of each of your friends characters in UO. In WOW, each player is wearing the epic set that is assigned to his class. While you cannot change eyes and noses in UO, you could create, through varied armor , cliothing, and dyes - a unique look. The lack of classes provides exponentially higher customization because you no longer have certain people restricted to specific armor sets (robes only for this one, plate only for that one...) and you no longer have weapon restrictions. Add to that a skill system that lets you pick and choose your characters and you have a game where players can make up to a dozen difrferent types of mages, countless styles of rogues, and a wide range of warrior types... PLUS... PLUS... a crafting character that only needs to CRAFT to ply his trade. Imagine that? Imagine games advancing to the point where someone could play a character in a game world!
The noob gets his fishing pole and learns to fish. Eventually he can afford a boat and picks a home port to sail from. Skara Brae! Eventually he becomes good enough to fish up the deep sea serpents and builds up a wealth of hides that he brings back and sells in town. He doesn't have a house and doesnt really want one but wants aplace to set up shop, so he travels to the big city to rent a stall at one of the major malls there. Meanwhile, his fishing improves and now he's pulling up chests of sunken treasure and other goodies. With the money saved, he finally buys a home, settles down, and takes a new adventurer under his wing...
Not once did I have to stop fishing because my fighitng level wasn't high enough to continue. Not once was my choice of skills for the character hindered by some arbitrary rule. Complete customization of a character in a dynamic game world. More importantly, the character has a history.
Weapon differentiation: Both UO and AC allow imbuing of items to change the properties or add to them. UO's imbuing is not solely cosmetic. The system allows for enhancing magic properties and the damage type/defenses of an item. AC, where I think imbuing was prior to UO, allows for a much richer experience in custom tailoring an item. Weight and value can be changed. On weapons you can enhance the damage type, damage amount, damage variance, attackand defense bonuses, etc. For more info: http://www.thejackcat.com/AC/Shopping/Crafts/Tinkering.htm
UO, Puzzle Pirates, EVE, ATITD, and several other games allow for a much deeper gaming experience - and more dynamic gaming experience - than most MMOG players realize is available to them. And of the players that know of it, there's really only a niche audience that wants it.
However, the best thing that ever happened to MMOGs is WOW. It brought millions of players into the genre and those players are going to branch out looking to try other types of MMOGs. Of those, there's going to be some people that will be interested in the dynamic worlds, risk v reward, and more engaging gameplay.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Lynx, man, you're preaching to the choir. Everything up to the Anniversiary edition I'm familiar with, and mostly enjoyed.
Housing: Perhaps I've not experimented with it as fully as you have. My house is a pretty cool looking structure, but my few attempts to make it functional have fallen short. Don't get me wrong, I've got a stable, a forge/crafting room, library (with copies of as many of the in-game books as I could get my hands on) council chamber, supply room, vault and social gathering area.
But even so, it's not functional on the same scale. Either you're safe inside it, and no one can get in, or it's open and anyone can get in, unless they're banned. This sort of structure doesn't allow for "content"-like things, such as sieges, or any sort of real defense. You can't build weapons into your house. Arrow slit windows don't work (tried this; In the original build for my house, I had a barbican with murder holes. I had my guildie stand in the barbican while I tried to shoot him from one of the aligning chambers, but those window segments were obviously considered solid walls, and I couldn't fire through)
Now, the main point I'm trying to make is that the UO housing system was designed to be cosmetic. Sure, you can, with some creativity, design a house that is functional. But imagine a housing system built with the *intention* of being useful in both PvP and PvE functions?
Character Customization: Clothes are important, and WoW, DDO, and some more modern games have forgotten this. But clothes aren't enough. The facial options, the height and weight options, these are equally important in making unique looking characters... frankly moreso, because if you want a force that wears an identifiable uniform (my guild did; Royal Blue cloaks, and a bonnet to match {they look like berets!} and a sash in the color of the character's chosen Virtue), then all your people will look the same without those details. I don't know how often my First Knight and I would go hunting and I'd get confused about why my character wasn't doing what I wanted until I realized I was watching his character instead of mine! We both wore plate armor made of different materials (geared toward the particular prey we hunted) and de-colored so that it wouldn't look mismatched, and those blue capes. He used a katana and I used a viking sword, and his sash was red while mine was purple.. Yet it was still confusing.
Character Builds: Stat customization in UO is vastly better than pretty much any game that followed. No arguments from me. SWG originally had a good system too, but with all the "special abilities" inherent in that system, it was harder to balance. The ability to mix and match skills to create something unique was definitely cool too. My "Ranger" build was incredibly different; it was half crafting! But she could enter the woods naked with a knife and a sewing kit and come out fully armed, armored and well-fed (did this once, too; Killed two silver serpents while I was at it.. fast fuggers).
Weapon Customization: Again, we're not on the same page. Yes, AoS implemented a pretty unique magical item system (then proceeded to flood the market with magical items) That's not what we're talking about. Even with imbuing (awesome system.. Bronze an undead-slayer, and your killing ability went up quite a bit, as most undead were weak to fire) it's not the same. What we're talking about is the ability actually craft a weapon for a purpose; The best you could predictably do is create an "exceptional" weapon out of a particular material. Any other enhancements were randomly decided, and required you to grind out massive quantities of items to get a randomly decided special hammer. The shift from skill to item dependency was massive with the new system. Again, AC I cannot speak of.
Anyway, I'm assisting in hijacking this thread pretty majorly. The point isn't that these ideas are necessarily new. The point is to take these ideas, old or new, and implement them in new ways to create a new game paradigm, one that allows players to make a real difference, or even better, makes it impossible for them not to. I want a game that takes every player action, from gather resources and crafting, to hunting animals in the woods, to ambushing travelers on the road, to building a house to have an effect on many other areas of the game.
Edit: Oh yeah.. Actually, your fisher WOULD have to stop fishing if his fighting skill wasn't good enough.. Sea serpents can be pretty nasty.. But I got your point, anyhow.
Well, I think you can make a distinction between different modes of player-content creation so to say.
What Nathan seems focused on in the article is tangible (sp, sorry, not native here) content that follows the characteristics of the main example: housing.
Housing as we know it in mmo's is to a certain extent player created content. But i.m.o. to a very minor extent only. That of course depends on the added functionality, which currently is very limited in our gameplay, but could indeed be much more diverse in future. However, housing is and remains a largely cosmetical owner/creator-oriented piece of content. The same goes for customisable avatars or vehicles/ weapons etc. It's all so WoW, so obviously targeted at the player himself instead of elsewhere.
What I'd place in the future of 3rd generation mmo's is player created content that is primarily peer-oriented instead of creator-oriented. What players are good at, needing some basic tools and incentives only, is the creation of social content. Storylines, intrigue, player-politics.
Wether or not my avatar is unique or my ship has a unique pattern of stripes is more or less moot to me in the context of an mmo. I understand the mmo as a social venue where I play to create things with and for my friends more then for myself as an individual. What imo is key in the creation of self-perpetuating player-made content in an mmo is the possibility to affect eachother directly, and non-consensually. That's not just pvp combat i'm talking about here. I mean cause and effect on a scale beyond spawncamping, pvp combat, market competition and virtual harrasment in a chatroom.
A cause-effect chain involving players only perpetuates the content. Given enough tools to express the reactions and actions with that means that you end up in a world where you don't just live virtually anymore. You actually get involved beyond that.
Housing or other indivudal-targeted 'tools' are imo largely irrelevant in this. What's relevant is equating the payerbase with the gameworld so as to have any change in the first change the other. That goes far beyond tools of customisation towards a toolset that lets us all determine eachothers gameplay.
I very enjoy reading your articles although I don't agree with it at all.
By reading this article and the posting there came up some thaughts almost everybody of us already had but on a different point that at first seems to have nothing to do with MMORPGs.
So one question from me. Does everybody know the feeling if you are hungry and you are going into a supermarket to buy your something to eat? What happens if you come home and want to make you a meal of the things that you thaught you want to eat after coming home?
I often find out that I bought more than I can eat. We often say that your eyes were bigger than your hunger.
So back to your article. Reading it I think your eyes are bigger than your hunger will let you and most players consume features afterwards. Somewhere you or a other person wrote, it makes no sense to implement a feature only 5% percent of players enjoy. A running game's success doesn't come out of a mass of features but of some main features that keeps me on track. So what should I do in a game around questing and grinding with building a city like sim city? I think player content is a good thing but its important to create it around the core features of the game and not to add more complexity that can only enjoy some players.
In general, your point of not implementing a feature that 5% of players will enjoy is a good one.
But what about the specific case where your target audience is that 5% of gamers? Everyone likes to focus on the bottom line of more subscribers = more money, but the technology is getting to the point where you don't need massive amounts of cash to keep an MMO running. If your primary goal is to create the MMO that certain people will have fun playing, rather than creating the next WoW, then your whole outlook changes.
In many ways, I think this line of discussion is more useful to that goal than to the next-big-thing goal.
An interesting aside concerning customizations, the hardest part is the artwork interaction. That was seen in SWG with a lot of the armor where there would be little glitches with certain races wearing armor.
I also agree with some of the other posts about the crafting system in SWG (pre nerf). I like the idea of having to design subcomponents that improve the performance of the final product. But that could really play into the problem with artwork interaction. I also agree that a crafting system needs to be useful at all levels.
One possiblilty would be to have lower level crafters commissioned by other players to provide basic components. You could even have crafters in general required to purchase resources from other players. Unlike WoW's resource gathering system, I would like to see there be a NPC commodity market (that actually acts like a market economy) and keeps resources available, albeit at inflated prices. This would give players the opportunity to earn money by providing raw resources to other players.
One other thing that I think is a necessity, is for player crafted items to be competitive with dropped items. One way to encourage this is to allow the reverse engineering of dropped items to extract higher quality peices for the craftsman to use. It would be a fine line between the master craftsman 'breaking' an item in the hope of making a truly UBER item, but that should be the way to the best quality weapons.
And as for doing things for 5% of the players, IF a game company would provide a toolset that allowed 5% of the players to design items on an extended test server, that company would be able to produce enough content to keep a majority of the other players very happy. But remember the quote by William Cosby, Jr: "I don't know the secret to success, BUT the secret to failure is trying to please everyone". Allowing topend, experienced players to design content (including missions and adventures) would allow game companies to harness the creative power that is usually reserved for finding and exploiting loopholes that exist in every game todate.
Comments
You're not the only one who's come here and wondered if Nathan was somehow channeling your brain, man.
Anyway, my basic approach to the "Next-Gen" MMORPG is based on three ideas:
1. Player-Created content alone isn't enough; My shard on UO had a LOT of that, but because the Devs were doing their thing, it eventually got rolled under and destroyed. This applies to players creating events and such as well as any idea of players actually creating dungeons and similar things. Either way, the Devs, who are not going to have the time to be informed on ever player-generated event, instance or community are going to do things that will muck up that aspect of the game.
2. Hand-crafted Developer Content isn't enough. Reference WoW and DDO. They just cannot create it fast enough to keep up with player demand.
3. Procedurally-generated content (which still seems to be a mostly new idea) will not be enough. You really can't do a lot of high-end procedurally-generated content that isn't eventually going to become nearly as repetitive as limited dev-gen content, and no one wants to do low-end content exclusively. Even with periodically updated databases and procedures, it won't keep up with player-demand.
So what is needed is a mix of all three. Doing it well will be difficult; But if you start from the ground up with this idea, and build the tools to be able to expand on it later without having to reinvent the wheel, it will be possible. And I honestly believe that this will be the key to a truly lasting MMO.
Take a look at Heroes Journey - this is a game in development I have recently become interested in.
It seems to have one of the most advanced character generation systems around - so there is no reason two characters of the same class should ever look the same.
They are also recruiting GM's to develop content, and run in game events from their player base. These GM's act as external contractors for content development.
It received some great interest at last years E3 so I am looking forward to the reviews and release of information from this years E3.
There are also some nice developer articles and interviews around.
Nathan. You are a genious.
I cannot agree with you more. I truly hope developers all over the world get inspired from this. This is something needed in Mmorpgs today.
That's exactly how NWN 1 worked, except that the content modules were free. The problem was that you couldn't upload anything to official servers (as I understand it there weren't any), you just downloaded a module and played it alone, or in LAN with a few RL friends if you happened to know how to setup a private computer network.
Yeah, but it's also pretty boring in the long run. The real value of a feature is not in how realistic or fascinating it is at first, but how long it can keep you entertained. Sure I can stop and appreciate a world that has life of its own every once in a while, but most of the time I hardly even notice. So things like this count as "nice to have" features in my book, but they are by no stretch of imagination the reason why I play the game. Same goes for crafting, weather effects, etc.
The problem here is that player actions are often pretty random and shallow, or just downright malicious. Many PvP players have posted on this thread, and their idea of what content is differs from mine like night differs from day. There is no story in destroying what someone else has created, just as there is rarely any kind of unique story behind the process of creation either. If you rely on player interaction to generate content, then no matter how advanced your system is, it will always be severely lacking in the one single thing I use to define what game content actually is: a story. A story you are part of.
The same goes for procedurally generated content; SWG had a system where you could take missions from a terminal, but it got old in a few minutes because eventhough the mobs and locations kept changing, you were still basicly limited to just two missions, destroy and escort. Fly to point X, kill (or escort) mob Y, return to get reward, rince, repeat. I just can't see even the most advanced random quest generator being able to generate rich stories as well; only the human mind can.
Not everyone can tell a story, not by a long shot; but some can. We should give them the tools they need to do so.
People have bought into the mindless levelfests of EQ/DAoC/WOW for so long that they don't seem to realize that not only can a more dynamic and player-driven world be created, it has been done so for longer than most of them have been gaming. So, why aren't more developers doing it? Because players genuinely do not want it.
"Players won’t just select pre-fab housing units and drop them into designated real estate slots; they’ll build their dwellings, shops, and bases wall-by-wall, laying out floor plans as they see fit.
Here we go! Player’s need to be able to create not only houses for themselves, but entire cities from the ground up."
In UO, you build your house tile by tile. In Shadowbane, you can build entire fortresses and cities... defendable and destructible cities.
"Something we learned last week from City of Heroes/Villains is that character customization goes a long, long way towards forging a deeper connection between the player and the world around them."
No, we learned that with UO last century.
"Once we have the advanced visual customization of player-created content, we need to address statistical uniqueness. There’s little point to allowing everyone to make their swords look wildly different if they’re all going to do the same damage, cost the same amount, and attack at the same rate. Then again, we need something much more capable than choosing between high damage/slow attack, medium damage/medium attack, and low damage/fast attack. How about being able to change ten aspects of a sword, from weight and balance to sharpness and material?"
UO or AC... anyone? Again, the EQ/DAoC/WOW player more than likely isn't aware that such choices are availabel in other games and have been so for years.
But then he gets to the meat of the matter - that which is truly retarding the growth or advancement of the games...
"As with the natural order of things, building player housing is only half of the equation. We must also consider what it takes to destroy them. Nobody wants to invest a huge chunk of their personal wealth into something that a random griefer can undo in a few seconds with a basic torch. Then again, I find indestructible player housing to be just as ridiculous as games with no death penalties. At some stage of the game, it becomes pointless to build and defend something if nothing can destroy or conquer it."
The biggest hindrance is the playerbase. The vast majority of players do not want risk or consequence. They want an ever evolving arcade game where they play, gather shinies, and do not have to suffer any penalties for their actions.
Most of today's gamers have a very different playstyle than the author's. What he wants would do well as a niche game at best. Don't get me wrong... from what he describes and the features he likes, I would be first in line to sign up for any game he writes.
I play UO, EVE, and Puzzle Pirates. They are games where players create content, shape the world, and build the history. They have many of the features that the author has described.
The issue isn't that they are avante gard creations. The issue is that the average gamer does not want those dynamics - they want big markers on the next quest guy, a level system, and constant news of the next expansion coming.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
I would reason thusly... why did almost everyone (seasoned and average) like wow for at least a little while? I think it's because of the exploration, learning the laws of that universe, exploring different classes, professions, and a little bit of story (wow didn't have much imo). Eventually, all these things go dull and users either complain, quit, or accept some kind of wierd slavery to the repititious, doing the same things over and over, telling themselves that it means something. The initial enjoyment of exploration and figuring out the virtual world is usually good in almost all MMOs... but they all seem to go stagnant at different times after that.
User created content is the only real answer imo. How to do it, that's the real question. Lots of great ideas in the article and this thread. Eventually, some companies/people will figure it out. The only thing that will ever keep it from happening is the acceptance of this opinion that people do not want a dynamic and changing world with risk / reward. I just hope you are not right...
Lynx, Dude.. I like UO as much as anyone. I've still got an active account, despite the agonizingly slow decline of the game. But you're overexaggerating, by a LOT, to claim UO pioneered some of the things you are claiming.
Fully Customizable Player-Housing: First done by another EA product: Sims. Sure, UO did it before any other MMO, but it was also years after UO fell from a commanding position in the pack. And the customization is not "functional" as Nathan puts it, but pretty much purely cosmetic. Don't get me wrong, the value of cosmetic customization isn't to be denied.
Caveat: With creative placement of doors with different access levels, one could create a "functional" building. But with the inability to fire from "arrowslit" windows and other such restrictions, it it, unfortunately, very limited.
Character Customization: UO has one of the most lacking character customization systems that currently exists. You get to choose gender, skin color, hair style/beardstyle and hair color. You can then put on a limited variety of clothing or armor, that, other than color, pretty much all looks the same. Now, it's gotten a teeny bit better over time, but the split focus between 2D and "3D" clients has kept it from growing the way it should have. CoH/CoV pretty much hold the crown for character customization, with the old SWG system commanding a very close second. UO, unfortunately, isn't even in the race.
Weapon Differentiation: Old UO had crap for this. A few limited magical weapons. New UO is notably more varied, but it's damn near a clone of Diablo's magic weapon system. What Nathan is talking about is real, player-designed differences in weapons, not a random magical attribute system with neon colors being pretty much the only appearance differentiation. I can't speak for AC, but so far as I've personally seen, SWG is the only game to make any sort of real progress in this direction.
Your comments about playerbase are right on, though. Perhaps a little over-stated, but as I've not done any sort of market study, I'm not going to try to call you on it. The real thing here is... We're not trying to rely on the big-name developers, whose bottom-line is subscription count and money. We're discussing the ideas, old or new, and how to implement them in a game that doesn't try for the mass appeal. As people have pointed out, a game that caters to a minority group, doesn't try to please everyone, and does so without any shame will never be a WoW-killer.. But if it does what it sets out to do well, the fanbase will be loyal, and grow slowly.
That's what really kills the fun in MMOs.. The development team, perhaps due to pressure from above, selling out to the lowest common denominator.
Auughh -- they're in my brain!
OK, I'm slightly mollified that we all just appear to be independently coming up with similar alternatives to the tired old conventions that every MMORPG developer today seems to want to copy. It's probably a sign that there are certain deep problems endemic to the industry... or perhaps just natural to current MMORPG designers.
Maybe that's the answer: if you want new designs, get new designers....
Just for fun, here are some conventions in current and upcoming MMORPGs that I'd like to see challenged by some upstart developer. Some are old concepts nearly forgotten, some are things that haven't been tried yet, but I'd be happy to see any of these attempted in a serious way by a modern MMORPG:
I'd definitely play a game that offered several of those features. It's nice to think others might as well.
--Flatfingers
My house is right next to the Yew crypts on Pacific. It is built so that the walls block line of sight and also so that I can fire out my windows. I've been firing out my windows for as long as I can remember. And old past time was to toss bombs IN through the windows at people. Building your house allows you to create a defendable or functional structure, whether for PvP or social gatherings. A house is also more than the four walls. You have a wide range of functional items that can be placed in and used in the house to allow for the creation of a building that serves purpose, eiyther publicly or privately. Forges, looms, chests, runes(recall stones), and other items can be secured and access to them restricted or allowed to make usable workshops, libraries, and meeting places.
Character customization: You could probably describe the look of each of your friends characters in UO. In WOW, each player is wearing the epic set that is assigned to his class. While you cannot change eyes and noses in UO, you could create, through varied armor , cliothing, and dyes - a unique look. The lack of classes provides exponentially higher customization because you no longer have certain people restricted to specific armor sets (robes only for this one, plate only for that one...) and you no longer have weapon restrictions. Add to that a skill system that lets you pick and choose your characters and you have a game where players can make up to a dozen difrferent types of mages, countless styles of rogues, and a wide range of warrior types... PLUS...
PLUS... a crafting character that only needs to CRAFT to ply his trade. Imagine that? Imagine games advancing to the point where someone could play a character in a game world!
The noob gets his fishing pole and learns to fish. Eventually he can afford a boat and picks a home port to sail from. Skara Brae! Eventually he becomes good enough to fish up the deep sea serpents and builds up a wealth of hides that he brings back and sells in town. He doesn't have a house and doesnt really want one but wants aplace to set up shop, so he travels to the big city to rent a stall at one of the major malls there. Meanwhile, his fishing improves and now he's pulling up chests of sunken treasure and other goodies. With the money saved, he finally buys a home, settles down, and takes a new adventurer under his wing...
Not once did I have to stop fishing because my fighitng level wasn't high enough to continue. Not once was my choice of skills for the character hindered by some arbitrary rule. Complete customization of a character in a dynamic game world.
Weapon differentiation: Both UO and AC allow imbuing of items to change the properties or add to them. UO's imbuing is not solely cosmetic. The system allows for enhancing magic properties and the damage type/defenses of an item. AC, where I think imbuing was prior to UO, allows for a much richer experience in custom tailoring an item. Weight and value can be changed. On weapons you can enhance the damage type, damage amount, damage variance, attackand defense bonuses, etc. For more info: http://www.thejackcat.com/AC/Shopping/Crafts/Tinkering.htm
UO, Puzzle Pirates, EVE, ATITD, and several other games allow for a much deeper gaming experience - and more dynamic gaming experience - than most MMOG players realize is available to them. And of the players that know of it, there's really only a niche audience that wants it.
However, the best thing that ever happened to MMOGs is WOW. It brought millions of players into the genre and those players are going to branch out looking to try other types of MMOGs. Of those, there's going to be some people that will be interested in the dynamic worlds, risk v reward, and more engaging gameplay.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Lynx, man, you're preaching to the choir. Everything up to the Anniversiary edition I'm familiar with, and mostly enjoyed.
Housing: Perhaps I've not experimented with it as fully as you have. My house is a pretty cool looking structure, but my few attempts to make it functional have fallen short. Don't get me wrong, I've got a stable, a forge/crafting room, library (with copies of as many of the in-game books as I could get my hands on) council chamber, supply room, vault and social gathering area.
But even so, it's not functional on the same scale. Either you're safe inside it, and no one can get in, or it's open and anyone can get in, unless they're banned. This sort of structure doesn't allow for "content"-like things, such as sieges, or any sort of real defense. You can't build weapons into your house. Arrow slit windows don't work (tried this; In the original build for my house, I had a barbican with murder holes. I had my guildie stand in the barbican while I tried to shoot him from one of the aligning chambers, but those window segments were obviously considered solid walls, and I couldn't fire through)
Now, the main point I'm trying to make is that the UO housing system was designed to be cosmetic. Sure, you can, with some creativity, design a house that is functional. But imagine a housing system built with the *intention* of being useful in both PvP and PvE functions?
Character Customization: Clothes are important, and WoW, DDO, and some more modern games have forgotten this. But clothes aren't enough. The facial options, the height and weight options, these are equally important in making unique looking characters... frankly moreso, because if you want a force that wears an identifiable uniform (my guild did; Royal Blue cloaks, and a bonnet to match {they look like berets!} and a sash in the color of the character's chosen Virtue), then all your people will look the same without those details. I don't know how often my First Knight and I would go hunting and I'd get confused about why my character wasn't doing what I wanted until I realized I was watching his character instead of mine! We both wore plate armor made of different materials (geared toward the particular prey we hunted) and de-colored so that it wouldn't look mismatched, and those blue capes. He used a katana and I used a viking sword, and his sash was red while mine was purple.. Yet it was still confusing.
Character Builds: Stat customization in UO is vastly better than pretty much any game that followed. No arguments from me. SWG originally had a good system too, but with all the "special abilities" inherent in that system, it was harder to balance. The ability to mix and match skills to create something unique was definitely cool too. My "Ranger" build was incredibly different; it was half crafting! But she could enter the woods naked with a knife and a sewing kit and come out fully armed, armored and well-fed (did this once, too; Killed two silver serpents while I was at it.. fast fuggers).
Weapon Customization: Again, we're not on the same page. Yes, AoS implemented a pretty unique magical item system (then proceeded to flood the market with magical items) That's not what we're talking about. Even with imbuing (awesome system.. Bronze an undead-slayer, and your killing ability went up quite a bit, as most undead were weak to fire) it's not the same. What we're talking about is the ability actually craft a weapon for a purpose; The best you could predictably do is create an "exceptional" weapon out of a particular material. Any other enhancements were randomly decided, and required you to grind out massive quantities of items to get a randomly decided special hammer. The shift from skill to item dependency was massive with the new system. Again, AC I cannot speak of.
Anyway, I'm assisting in hijacking this thread pretty majorly. The point isn't that these ideas are necessarily new. The point is to take these ideas, old or new, and implement them in new ways to create a new game paradigm, one that allows players to make a real difference, or even better, makes it impossible for them not to. I want a game that takes every player action, from gather resources and crafting, to hunting animals in the woods, to ambushing travelers on the road, to building a house to have an effect on many other areas of the game.
Edit: Oh yeah.. Actually, your fisher WOULD have to stop fishing if his fighting skill wasn't good enough.. Sea serpents can be pretty nasty.. But I got your point, anyhow.
Well, I think you can make a distinction between different modes of player-content creation so to say.
What Nathan seems focused on in the article is tangible (sp, sorry, not native here) content that follows the characteristics of the main example: housing.
Housing as we know it in mmo's is to a certain extent player created content. But i.m.o. to a very minor extent only. That of course depends on the added functionality, which currently is very limited in our gameplay, but could indeed be much more diverse in future. However, housing is and remains a largely cosmetical owner/creator-oriented piece of content. The same goes for customisable avatars or vehicles/ weapons etc. It's all so WoW, so obviously targeted at the player himself instead of elsewhere.
What I'd place in the future of 3rd generation mmo's is player created content that is primarily peer-oriented instead of creator-oriented. What players are good at, needing some basic tools and incentives only, is the creation of social content. Storylines, intrigue, player-politics.
Wether or not my avatar is unique or my ship has a unique pattern of stripes is more or less moot to me in the context of an mmo. I understand the mmo as a social venue where I play to create things with and for my friends more then for myself as an individual. What imo is key in the creation of self-perpetuating player-made content in an mmo is the possibility to affect eachother directly, and non-consensually. That's not just pvp combat i'm talking about here. I mean cause and effect on a scale beyond spawncamping, pvp combat, market competition and virtual harrasment in a chatroom.
A cause-effect chain involving players only perpetuates the content. Given enough tools to express the reactions and actions with that means that you end up in a world where you don't just live virtually anymore. You actually get involved beyond that.
Housing or other indivudal-targeted 'tools' are imo largely irrelevant in this. What's relevant is equating the payerbase with the gameworld so as to have any change in the first change the other. That goes far beyond tools of customisation towards a toolset that lets us all determine eachothers gameplay.
Nathan,
I very enjoy reading your articles although I don't agree with it at all.
By reading this article and the posting there came up some thaughts almost everybody of us already had but on a different point that at first seems to have nothing to do with MMORPGs.
So one question from me. Does everybody know the feeling if you are hungry and you are going into a supermarket to buy your something to eat? What happens if you come home and want to make you a meal of the things that you thaught you want to eat after coming home?
I often find out that I bought more than I can eat. We often say that your eyes were bigger than your hunger.
So back to your article. Reading it I think your eyes are bigger than your hunger will let you and most players consume features afterwards. Somewhere you or a other person wrote, it makes no sense to implement a feature only 5% percent of players enjoy. A running game's success doesn't come out of a mass of features but of some main features that keeps me on track. So what should I do in a game around questing and grinding with building a city like sim city? I think player content is a good thing but its important to create it around the core features of the game and not to add more complexity that can only enjoy some players.
Lemar,
In general, your point of not implementing a feature that 5% of players will enjoy is a good one.
But what about the specific case where your target audience is that 5% of gamers? Everyone likes to focus on the bottom line of more subscribers = more money, but the technology is getting to the point where you don't need massive amounts of cash to keep an MMO running. If your primary goal is to create the MMO that certain people will have fun playing, rather than creating the next WoW, then your whole outlook changes.
In many ways, I think this line of discussion is more useful to that goal than to the next-big-thing goal.
An interesting aside concerning customizations, the hardest part is the artwork interaction. That was seen in SWG with a lot of the armor where there would be little glitches with certain races wearing armor.
I also agree with some of the other posts about the crafting system in SWG (pre nerf). I like the idea of having to design subcomponents that improve the performance of the final product. But that could really play into the problem with artwork interaction. I also agree that a crafting system needs to be useful at all levels.
One possiblilty would be to have lower level crafters commissioned by other players to provide basic components. You could even have crafters in general required to purchase resources from other players. Unlike WoW's resource gathering system, I would like to see there be a NPC commodity market (that actually acts like a market economy) and keeps resources available, albeit at inflated prices. This would give players the opportunity to earn money by providing raw resources to other players.
One other thing that I think is a necessity, is for player crafted items to be competitive with dropped items. One way to encourage this is to allow the reverse engineering of dropped items to extract higher quality peices for the craftsman to use. It would be a fine line between the master craftsman 'breaking' an item in the hope of making a truly UBER item, but that should be the way to the best quality weapons.
And as for doing things for 5% of the players, IF a game company would provide a toolset that allowed 5% of the players to design items on an extended test server, that company would be able to produce enough content to keep a majority of the other players very happy. But remember the quote by William Cosby, Jr: "I don't know the secret to success, BUT the secret to failure is trying to please everyone". Allowing topend, experienced players to design content (including missions and adventures) would allow game companies to harness the creative power that is usually reserved for finding and exploiting loopholes that exist in every game todate.
Enough of my rambling for now.