🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉

Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!

MMOPOS

Started by
31 comments, last by Landfish 23 years, 8 months ago
Since we're telling UO stories, I tailored my first house. Making skullcaps... best cost/sell price ratio and they were easy to make.

Excelent Idea with the story template. There are alot of possibilities with how to implement it. You could actually have the game capture a guy and his quest would be to escape the dungon. While simultaneously the engine assigns the quest to another character to find his long long lost father... as the first character escaped and moved around the engine could drop hints for the second character. When they finally caught up with eachother there would be alot of IC story that could be told by both parties to eachother. An excelent way to facilitate social interaction.

This type of system would not be possible under current communication systems in Massively Multiplayer Role Playing Games(there I typed it all out!) where everyone and anyone can talk to someone on the other side of the world by

eg. "/t bobo, hi bobo!"

wich leads me to think that part of the culperate (sp?) for lack of (in character)IC interaction is the private tells and global chat that exsist in these games. In my expirence people are more likely to talk OOC when using private tells/messages. Typically when people first meet eachother in public they say "hail!" and make poor attemts at OOC until they finally break down and

"/t highlevelcharacter, so do you have any good weapons for me or what?"


I think if people were restricted in their communications to those around them, much like real life... local communities would form, and there would be more of a venu for people to speak pubiliby In character. I realize i haven't totally flushed out this argument.. but I think you under stand what i'm trying to say.


Edited by - ironside on October 17, 2000 5:14:18 AM
Advertisement
It's not exactly UO's fault but people just ended up using ICQ w/ UO anyway

But that's a good point. The game could be full screen all the time like EQ and not let any 3rd party communication programs be used. That would help things to be more realistic.




"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya --nes8bit --CmndrM " -- Nazrix
""You see... I'm not crazy... you see?!? Nazrix believes me!" --Wavinator
"You know you're cool when you're in Nazrix's sig " --Martee
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.


Edited by - Nazrix on October 17, 2000 5:19:56 AM
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself. "Just don't look at the hole." -- Unspoken_Magi
One angle of the idea of growing a culture of players, as I mentioned before, is the fact that if there's a knowledgable population in place then that's who new players are going to naturally turn to for tips. If the local culture, and the term peer pressure isn't unappropriate, embraces the differences between IC and OOC communication then newcomers who'd prefer not to be ignored will likely follow the same models. This is how things work on MUSHes and they work well. Ostracism is a powerful punishment in a social MUSH or this ideal MMORPG but it will only work if there is a player-culture that will employ it and that really desires to promote IC roleplaying. The setting, the engine and the players who are intrinsically intertwined with both have to encourage IC roleplaying by making communications skills and relationships every bit as important, if not more so, than the pursuit of personal power. The only way to do this is model the pressures, economic and political, of the real world that reward such skills.


There should be channels for OOC and IC local communication that are seperate and that don't intrude on one another. There should be no live global OOC or IC channels at all - I agree with Nazrix and Ironside definitely here.


Edited by - Oddjob on October 17, 2000 9:37:06 AM
So, in summary:

1. A MMORPG''s engine should be able to allow players to find their own path, rather than have prescripted quests provided for them (which would force them to adhere to a specific system).

2. The engine should have a player-communication design focused on keeping people in character.

The combination of these two would allow for player communities and social pressures to form naturally. This being a derived result, rather than one that has to be artificially implimented, in contrast to what is done in the big-name MMORPGs today.

--Nazrix is cool.
oops

--Nazrix is cool.
have any of you ever seen a show on Fox (been canceled) called Harsh Realm? There was one goal, take out the leader of Harsh Realm because he had high-jacked the game. But along the way, the characters could go on any number of "side quests" so that they could gain favors and advance themselves in an attempt to get closer to the leader. What if there was something like this? Players vying for power over the land? And the one who did have the power could have his own army of PC's and NPC's. Obviosly you would need a safe area, like a country that is not in his control that the newbies would start from. But after that, you could do any number of things. You could organize a resistance faction and create some terrorism, or you could try to infultrate the army and go through the ranks and try to take out the head (how that will be balanced would be a problem because everyone will probably try this. Maybe he could be surrounded by an elite squad of NPC's), or you could try and do it Solid Snake style and sneak in. Of course, then you have to get out.

Bowowow yipeeyo yipeeyay
[IFRAME nuked by MadKeithV 'cause it was causing problems]


Edited by - MadKeithV on October 18, 2000 10:38:38 AM

[Formerly "capn_midnight". See some of my projects. Find me on twitter tumblr G+ Github.]

I was looking back through the posts and saw some stuff about focussing on death. What if when you died, your spirit went on to an afterlife area, where you had to battle to see who would get to be resurrected. When you arrived in the afterlife, you lost all your items and your stats were dropped some (not all the way, you need some reward for your work in life). Then, you battle, speak to the ''gods'' and attempt to prove your worth. In fact, you might be able to implement alternatives to battle to display worthyness. Stuff like chess matches (strategy) and magic tests and number of good deeds in your previous life. Hey! There''s an idea, Karma. The better karma a player has the easier it will be for them to prove their worth. If the player has bad karma, then they might have to stay in the afterlife for awhile before they can get resurrected.
What do you all think of that?

[Formerly "capn_midnight". See some of my projects. Find me on twitter tumblr G+ Github.]

Karma... If you look back at this post and this
one You''ll see what I think of that

As for your suggestion about going to an afterlife... I like it. In fact, we have designed something similar into our MPOW.

Dave "Dak Lozar"Loeser
Dave Dak Lozar Loeser
"Software Engineering is a race between the programmers, trying to make bigger and better fool-proof software, and the universe trying to make bigger fools. So far the Universe in winning."--anonymous
Anon: Yup. That''s my prescription in a nutshell. And I don''t think it''s really been done yet.
capn_midnight - This is what I have been saying for a while as a different style of story telling. Have a totally linear story with sidequests that do not change the story line but advance the gameplay.

I also have a bit of stuff about Karma in the Doc

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement