Phallic Compensation.

Landfish · 2000-06-29T00:29:13

Power-maxing is great, it''s rewarding, it''s easy, and it show''s everyone just how big and strong you really are! Look at me, Î can stand at spawning point and click my little mouse until I could kill god! And this takes exactly the amount of effort it would take to actually swing a sword! Really! Now, if you were to somehow create a power-maxing-free game, there would still be a wealth of players to play it. I kid you not. There are people out there who rely on MMORPGs for simple escapism, not phallic compensation. What does power advancement mean to them? Not much. So how do you eliminate power-maxers? It sounds so simplistic, but it''s true. Strike at the heart. EVERY SINGLE RPG, without exception has been based in some way off of the D&D format. Experience levels are the center of power-maxing evil. Even if they aren''t murder-based; allowing the player the opportunity to "repeat this action over and over and eventually be awesome" is what powergamers need to survive. There are a few obvious, but pretty wild solutions. What if we removed the premise of advancement from our player''s minds? The systems weren''t intended to work this way, it was supposed to be a natural measure of your activity reflecting your general increase. So what if you just say "NO. Make an interesting, deep character who will be your vessel in this imaginary world. Do not expect upward incline, just work with what you''ve go." Well, the first thing that would happen is all the power-maxers would get up and leave. A few would stay and try to see if they can tyame a system with no advancement by making the most powerful character possible at starting point. Would anyone stay? Yes. All of the people who are sick of power-maxing. And the ones who are sick of the whole murder-based scene, which =was designed to harbor escapism, but ended up creating a microcosm of the crappy "real world". We don''t have deep Fantasy novel style intrigues. We don''t even have the level of character development of a freaking table-top RPG, and they aren''t that impressive. As for the VERY few powermaxxers who went out on that limb, they will find a system that is balanced. Since experience is not murder based, they will have no advantages, no encouragement. If they do choose to make a tough as nails fighter, they will actually be role-playing in their own weird, diluded way. AND HERE"S THE KICKER. The above described "no advancement system" COULD HAVE advancement. It just needs to be a different kind. If combat is now on an equal plane of worth to everything else, or even lower than everything else... you could create a simple skill system with attrition. Advancement would be so subtle no one would really take notice until it had happened. With no indicators to annouce the "raising of a level" since levels don''t exist... it would simply be the occasional realization that you seem to be having an easier time at certain things. BUT there''s a catch. Why bother with a skill system if the game isn''t combat centric? Do I really need skills to tell me how to do mundaner activities? So, enough primer. Here''s the topic for this thread: What are the implications of a no-advancement system? A low-advancement system? Any system that completely discourages power gaming by making it entirely not rewarding or worthwhile? Is there really a market niche for non-powergamers, or is landfish full of crap? C''mon, you know I''m full of crap! =)

Game Design and Theory Game Design

Started by Landfish June 25, 2000 11:28 AM

45 comments, last by Landfish 23 years, 9 months ago

Landfish

288

Author

June 28, 2000 01:45 AM

Silvermyst, your post almost made me shed tears of joy. I look forward to it... oh yes.. =)

======"The unexamined life is not worth living."-Socrates"Question everything. Especially Landfish."-Matt

Landfish

288

Author

June 28, 2000 03:18 PM

Actually Silvermyst, I would like your legal permission to quote material from that reply, in the evnt that I need to create a proposal for a venture capitolist. What do you say?

======"The unexamined life is not worth living."-Socrates"Question everything. Especially Landfish."-Matt

STVOY

156

June 28, 2000 03:30 PM

Well Now,

For me it''s simple. I love to level up as much as
I can. Special opponents that can;t be defeated
or need special objects to defeat them are also
a good idea. But for me personally I normally
finish the game before I reach the Max level up
or whatever.

STVOY

Mega Moh Mine!!

Pyre Light Studios (Under Construction)

Morbo

218

June 28, 2000 03:47 PM

I''ve brought up this point on another thread a while ago, and I''ll bring it up again here: MMORPGs are NOT a new thing. They''ve been around for many many years in text form. MUDs, MOOs, MUSHes, or whatever acronym you care to use, have been playing with these ideas and more for almost a decade now.
I urge everyone here to go try them out. I think you''d be suprised at how many different gameplay styles you''ll come across: everything from pure-combat to pure-roleplay.
Don''t be put-off just because they''re text based. A lot of them have some really great and innovative approaches to combat, roleplaying, and social interaction. This includes ideas put forth in this thread, such as no levels and non-combat-centric gameplay. Check them out, and you can often see how some of these ideas worked in practice.
And no, I''m not some MUD zealot. Haven''t played them for a while now, I just think that we could draw off the experience of them. Some MUDs have been up for >8 years, and are constantly evolving.

Morbo

Landfish

288

Author

June 28, 2000 03:52 PM

Morbo, I know exactly where you''re coming from. I am a MUSH veteran myself, and I wonder why it is that we can''t make room in graphical MMORPGs for that audience. It''s out there, why not use it?

"The unexamined life is not worth living."
-Socrates

======"The unexamined life is not worth living."-Socrates"Question everything. Especially Landfish."-Matt

ManaSink

122

June 28, 2000 05:48 PM

quote:Original post by Landfish
Silvermyst, your post almost made me shed tears of joy. I look forward to it... oh yes.. =)

quote:Original post by Landfish
Actually Silvermyst, I would like your legal permission to quote material from that reply, in the evnt that I need to create a proposal for a venture capitolist. What do you say?

Damn, I''m gonna have to pay more attention to Silvermyst''s posts. I''ve been hoping to hear stuff like that for years, and now I am, straight from ''el Pez de la Terra'' no less. Well, I *was* hoping people would be saying it to *me*...

(sigh)

ManaSink

sunandshadow

7,435

June 29, 2000 12:29 AM

Has anyone considered the type of game where the goals you have to achieve are social? The ones where the stats that matter aren''t your strength or speed, but are calculated from choices you make? I admit there aren''t many of these games - offhand I can only think of Tamagotchi Boyfriend (don''t ask) and the ones where you''re a detective and you can only ask people so many questions and if you make them mad they won''t talk to you any more. Wouldn''t this kind of system be more appropriate for actual ''roleplaying'' than any kind of a physical attribute-and-weapon based system?

I want to help design a "sandpark" MMO. Optional interactive story with quests and deeply characterized NPCs, plus sandbox elements like player-craftable housing and lots of other crafting. If you are starting a design of this type, please PM me. I also love pet-breeding games.

Phallic Compensation.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Phallic Compensation.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines