# Ponderings on uniquity among MMO players

This topic is 4856 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

## Recommended Posts

##### Share on other sites
I'd say you're talking about NeverWinter Nights on your first point. Not only that, but NWN allows people to build their own worlds and manage them as they see fit. It does fix the problems you mentioned, but I like meeting new people in a MMORPG, because it's just a MORPG if I don't.

For the second point, that's my dream RPG. Ultima Online was originally envisioned this way, but a lot of that got axed before the game went online. Then, a lot of the stuff got axed afterward too, to keep the emergent economy from imploding.

I'll be honest, I don't like instancing at all. To me, that defeats the whole purpose of MMO-style games. I do like dynamic content; personally, I think that's the Next Big Thing™. You can double polygon counts all day long, but people aren't impressed by it anymore. If your world ACTS real, it doesn't matter how it looks.

##### Share on other sites
Instancing - Neverwinter Nights as mentioned before. They did it, and did it damn well. The only thing I think instancing should be used for is combat since it prevents people from hijacking kills and/or loot.

Instancing fixes the 'griefer' problem, but if you have ever played UO in the early days that heart pounding excitment was fun almost every time. =) At least for me.

Dynamic World - I'm sure people have tried this, but none have done it well enough to be known for it. Even MUDs do not really have this on any scale.

This will rock once it is done well, but the effort nescesary makes it not cost effective in the view of alot of companies. Especially when people are willing to pay for virtually the same thing with a few upgrades, primarily in the graphics engine.

##### Share on other sites
I certainly see the NWN parallel, but what I see as a major difference is the persistence aspect. There's an inherent difference between saving a game and turning it off, and things happening while you're away.

The way I see it running, you could log on at one point in your day, levelling your character and completing tasks alongside 20 other people, sometimes grouping sometimes solo. Later that evening, you log back in and take jobs that only your class is offered, or that are based on your particular interaction with npc's earlier that day.

Maybe I'm just trying to find a way to make the MMO experience a little more exclusive. There have been attempts at simply trying to broaden the skill base so as to reduce copycat density, but you still end up with your playerbase filling up with the "best possible skillset" sheets. My thoughts could simply be heading towards a "co-op experience for 50 people" idea. I'd just like to see some kind of meaning to player action in an rpg setting. If I have [Farmer John's Father's Burning Axe], no one else should have that, because I found him his long-lost beer stein and I got the credit. Likewise, while I was getting that axe, Player 34 went and defeated a local crime boss in the alleys of Mainport and was rewarded 4000g by the royal family. I should never get the chance to have won that same pot.

I'm sure this all borders well on the conceptual and argumentative, and less on a specific game design. Just thoughts, at any rate.

##### Share on other sites
I think players have come to expect some measure of fame for their individual accomplishments. When you play single player RPG's or adventures your often the grand-puba savior of the entire universe, but when dealing with a large number of players this kind of mentality and framework just doesn't work since a few players would have to be the hero's and the others not. This kind of experience tends to be built around the players individual Ego, so MMO's often cookie-cutter it so everyone has the chance to be the hero with quests, and that just invalidates the whole thing since its a Caned, static experience. MMO's are large scale, and they're stuck using small-scale frameworks of the adventuring party with the wizard, the fighter, and the healer, that doesn't make proper use of large scale MMO communities.

But this is where i think Planetside got it right, no players the grand-puba hero of the universe, but the collective battles of the whole empire determine if they succeed or are defeated. Its the random and not-so random small and large scale battles that happen between my team and the enemy players that, to me, make it all worth while.

You may get some idea of what i mean. ;D

One of the downsides to the game however has been that players often complain if there isn't enough accomplishment (taking continents) on a global scale, and if there is they often complain that it gets boring because things change overnight. :p

##### Share on other sites
A few ideas that might help:

Eliminate classes. Have a large number of skills. (I would also eliminate leveling and have skills advance based on use, but this is less important.) This way there are no specific skillsets suited for specific jobs. People will of course tend to specialize. But they will have very different overall abilities. For examle, you can have two strong, heavy weapons fighter types. But one has also given considerable study to healing, and the other has some thief abilities. So to choose between these two, you don't just look for the highest stats one as your groups fighter. If your party is weak on healers you choose the first guy. If you need to sneak in somewhere, you choose the second. With a large set of skills, player's will have more unique abilities. It won't be limited to a primary and secondary ability either. You could be mediocre all around, or pretty good in two areas, or whatever.

Have some sort of large scale conflict/competition. This can be a war between nations. It can also be guild conflicts, house rivalries, or business competition. Maybe player created groups can even play a role. This conflict is dynamic, and sometimes it erupts into large scale conflicts. You have a chance to make a name for yourself in this conflict. In addition, leaders of the different sides frequently give new, one-of-a-kind quests based on the situation of the dynamic conflict.

Titles or Ranks. Players may hold military ranks, be knighted, become nobles, etc. Those who distinguish themselves are rewarded with titles and in game power.

Player created quests. If someone wants something done they can accept offers or set a reward for the first person to do it.

More unique items. Most special items are just cool sounding names, a bunch of stats, and a short simple history. Anyone can come up with a list of these in no time. So keep adding more to the game. Maybe even allow highly-skilled crafters to make their own occasionally.

##### Share on other sites
What the previous poster said is true, about removing the class based system and have a large set of skills..Ultimate Online for example. That you did have identity with. I remember when I got grandmaster smithing when I would walk by some people they would stop and ask me if I could make them armor because with that level of skill, your name was branded on items. Hence you became more known by your skill and your title and the amount of customization you could do to your character.

That is something else that seems to be lacking in MMO's is the lack of customizing color/shape and general look of your character. NWN with the CEP added alot more detail and individuality in a character.

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by Morkai1I certainly see the NWN parallel, but what I see as a major difference is the persistence aspect. There's an inherent difference between saving a game and turning it off, and things happening while you're away.The way I see it running, you could log on at one point in your day, levelling your character and completing tasks alongside 20 other people, sometimes grouping sometimes solo. Later that evening, you log back in and take jobs that only your class is offered, or that are based on your particular interaction with npc's earlier that day.Maybe I'm just trying to find a way to make the MMO experience a little more exclusive. There have been attempts at simply trying to broaden the skill base so as to reduce copycat density, but you still end up with your playerbase filling up with the "best possible skillset" sheets. My thoughts could simply be heading towards a "co-op experience for 50 people" idea. I'd just like to see some kind of meaning to player action in an rpg setting. If I have [Farmer John's Father's Burning Axe], no one else should have that, because I found him his long-lost beer stein and I got the credit. Likewise, while I was getting that axe, Player 34 went and defeated a local crime boss in the alleys of Mainport and was rewarded 4000g by the royal family. I should never get the chance to have won that same pot.I'm sure this all borders well on the conceptual and argumentative, and less on a specific game design. Just thoughts, at any rate.

Ive been looking at these kind of things for a while. To have a mores personalized experience (versus the same quest sequence the other 100000 players all go thru) you need to have a much larger world with enough combinations of situations so that each specialized player has a space to shine in (and unique achievements). This would be done with a world mechanism more like StarTreks holodeck where the world areas can be generated on the fly as needed (even to the point of every player being in their own 'bubble'). Next ia content mechanism that will generate the data for that large world space. Ive been looking into hierarchial parameterized templates to generate unique quests for the next generation of games -- where monsters/npcs/scenery props are autoplaced in an area the player moves into and are adaptable enough to adust themselves into a coherant/cohesive situation, and higher structures (world entities) would coordinate those areas to make the world likewise coherant/cohesive. Initially Im looking for it to be used as a content creation tool for DMs to prebuild world content (and to facilitate tapping into players to do this task as well to constantly expand new territory in a MMORPG world).

I dont see why most of a would could be built using a sophisticated implimentation of 'infinite universe' mecachanisms guided by DMs who shape the flavor/high level plot lines (setting control parameters that the templates then use to adapt/shape themselves to). If done right, a system that count allow very large world could be made 'in the fly' such that one player going his own way, may visit places never been in before (complete with unique scenery and game situation) and possibly never again AND with content that is NOT just a clone of many other places.

The most significant part of the design is that hierarchical templates allow reuse (conserving dev $$) and multiple levels of sub components allow combinatorics. The parameterization allows localized (seed) flavoring to be incorporated into the creation (the control data itself would be hierarchical -- regional to local). An analogy would be 'splatting' used to vary terrain mesh texture be applied to world area themes... The system is also scaleable, allowing new templates to be added to expand the combinatorics (again allowing tapping into players and their imagination to get past the$$\$ limitation at most companies).

I hope that game companies start moving to use such mechanisms, as I too am sick of traveling thru game worlds that are too small and fighting EXACTLY the same mob yet again (and going to a new place just to find another mod all too similar).

Another aspect that this methodology could address -- eliminate the huge 'pretty' world that is effectively a desert -- interesting interactive details far apart. Auto generation could fill in local detail recursively as far as needed. An evil wizards workshop should contain as many weird/interesting possibilities as an entire huge island elsewhere. There could be something interesting for a player under every rock.

One more idea -- who says that the logic built into these templates I speak of (the script logic being the real magic of the whole thing) cannot have a bias toward creating game situations of particular interest to the specific player ??? If the player is a thief, put more resources into creat a situation with things to steal (and coordinated 'quests' oppirtunities).
Obviously with multiple players passing thru the same game space you cant have the entire world be 'a thieves paradise' but who says you can add into the mix (dynamic adjustments) the required NPCs (who can walk in and out of town)and props that come and go (a more changeable/mutable world in general) AND adaptations to the consequences of players actions (world plot dynamics at both local and regional levels).

##### Share on other sites
The above post is lovely. Completely infeasible, and not really the basis of an MMO at all, but still, it has some nice ideas.

First I'll point out the primary problem: Content generation of that type would require a break in the immersion - a loading screen between the instanced content and the world at large. You could explain this by magical portals, transport to a spaceship (as for the corvette in SWG) but such linkages are kludgy at best.

Secondary problem: Procedural content is also a complete bitch to regulate to maintain a 'cohesive' world. If your content seed specifies that, when generated, a certain location will have a certain item, that item will always be spawning there. There is no easy method of calculating a new seed to remove the item because someone has already completed the associated quest. The only way to preserve cohesion would be to store the entire procedurally generated world on the server (albeit seed and state alterations rather than complete descriptors).

This works well for 'static' content creation like laying out forests or generating a mountain heightfield (I use similar techniques) but it doesn't work well for procedural expansion of a seamless world or allow fine tuning of what the world should look like.

Generated quests within a designed, complex system DO work, and I am implementing systems to allow this both in my library base code for release, and the showpiece game(s) built on it. Uniquity of action is pretty much guaranteed for every single player, should they look for it. Rewards (when items) are also unique - there may be many similar items, but once a quest is complete it cannot be done again. NPCs may or may not be quest-specific, if they are, they will spawn out shortly after the quest is completed.

Quests are also under competition - someone else may fulfil the quest requirements before you do. If so, tough luck! Quests also propogate other quests (resource aggregation) and generally cause the whole system to tick over.

This sort of complex system doesn't work very well in on-the-fly generated worlds. The system requires a known route from resource to consumer at every stage, or the whole thing grinds to a halt, thus we have to at least have known geography before the system can start.

Character uniquity, as has been mentioned, is often best assured with a skill system in which you cannot max-out. UO had the problem in that templates arose in which you'd max out certain skills (at the skill cap) and certain stats to support those skills. Effectively you ended up with a character class of sorts, it was just work to get there - but those classes were defined by (mostly) combat. Having more complex puzzles, or requirements of skills made common in the game world could help encourage players to develop different templates.

My opinions anyway.

##### Share on other sites
You basically are whining because you don't have the time to be 'uber' and feel special, so you want to do away with everyone who is more uber than you, so you can feel uber again.

• ### What is your GameDev Story?

In 2019 we are celebrating 20 years of GameDev.net! Share your GameDev Story with us.

• 14
• 12
• 29
• 11
• 44
• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
634856
• Total Posts
3019661
×