In my quest to develop a MUD, I've come up with a bunch of features that I really haven't seen before, or at least not in MMORPGs. So I just wanted to know...if you had the choice to play a game with these features, would you?

• 5 species (nation) warfare with no designation (meaning that you can form interspecies clans, alliances, whatever as you wish)
• A sci-fi setting on a far off planet
• Single shard, single server
• No way to communicate with other species other than to intermingle and learn their language (which, given that warfare is between 5 separate species, could be dangerous)
• Levelless, classless system based on skills that have caps determined by starter attributes that can't ever be changed
• Hit specific penalties (say you hit someone in their dominant arm that they'd have to then swing clumsily with the other arm or if someone got hit in one leg, they'd have to limp and if in both, they'd have to be on their knees or crawling)
• 50-100% of all skill gains penalty upon death (a tough decision for the designer)
• Full political system that allowed player created and run cities, as well as territory boundaries and laws, which could be later logged in a "library" of sorts and exist until the colony was destroyed, all created and enforced by the players themselves
• Crafting in any way you want, so long as it makes logical sense (pick up a stick and a rock and sharpen the stick with the rock if you want!)
• A complete sandbox spanning an enormous empty world waiting to be discovered over a range of terrains
• Dynamic PvE content that allows for PvE monsters to interact, co-exist, live off of each other and either overpopulate or become endangered, or even extinct based on how much a certain monster is hunted
• A balanced world with disastrous side-effects if the balance is destroyed

These are the features in a nutshell that I've been playing with, yes. I know that only a certain percentage plays MUDs anymore, so given that you could get the chance to play an MMORPG with these features, would you play it?

I would play it but unfortunately not in the form of a MUD, it would just ruin the experience for me. Also props for making your own game!

Originally posted by johnmatthais

 In my quest to develop a MUD, I've come up with a bunch of features that I really haven't seen before, or at least not in MMORPGs. So I just wanted to know...if you had the choice to play a game with these features, would you?

• 5 species (nation) warfare with no designation (meaning that you can form interspecies clans, alliances, whatever as you wish)

I've always wondered why an AAA title didn't go with the 5 color system Garfield implemented with MTG. The thought of 1 color being an 'enemy' of 2 others really created a nice twist of symmetrical warfare, which compounded with the asymmetrical playstyle of each color. The only thing I raise my eyebrow at is the 'no designation'. What's the point in creating niches if they are universally accessible? Over time, through entropy, you blur into homogenization. Boundaries are created artificially for a reason.

• A sci-fi setting on a far off planet

Make it unique!

• Single shard, single server

Best community possible. Assuming minimized numbers.

• No way to communicate with other species other than to intermingle and learn their language (which, given that warfare is between 5 separate species, could be dangerous)

Reference the comment about 'over time'. This feels like a very small limiter that veteran gamers will hurdle and 'then what'? For this system to achieve replayability, there needs to be an ongoing effort to retain knowledge. The flipside of this being frustration for having learnt a language, dropped it in favor of a new one, just to go back to the original for some reason. In general, these sorts of hurdles reek of 'kill ten rats' as time approaches infinity (sorry, I couldn't help myself with the calc reference).

• Levelless, classless system based on skills that have caps determined by starter attributes that can't ever be changed

I'm a fan of either doing levels right (that each level or skill or point or whatever other currency is used to define progress)- meaning that each step is an actual challenge to someone somewhere, increasingly so as you 'progress'... or no measuring stick at all. Considering humans are a social creature by nature, everyone defines their existence to some degree with those around them, I'm always more biased towards levels being done right, rather than at all. Obviously, poorly designed levels that are nothing other than a milemarker for an otherwise designed 'grind' are inexcusable on my judgemental basis.

• Hit specific penalties (say you hit someone in their dominant arm that they'd have to then swing clumsily with the other arm or if someone got hit in one leg, they'd have to limp and if in both, they'd have to be on their knees or crawling)

Personal preference with things like this are 'less is more'. Great concept, but as long as it's kept countable with less than 2 full hands (10 or less options of target for attack). Too many possible moves, and the 'flow' of combat breaks down. Ie: I know how to counter-attack move x and y, but if you have too many avenues of approach, I stop caring about how to modify the flow of combat and just blandly attack.

• 50-100% of all skill gains penalty upon death (a tough decision for the designer)

Don't follow the wording.

• Full political system that allowed player created and run cities, as well as territory boundaries and laws, which could be later logged in a "library" of sorts and exist until the colony was destroyed, all created and enforced by the players themselves

Needs to have a check and balance to things. The last thing you want is a system that *intends* well, but *implements* poorly, and the infrastructure doesn't allow for someone new to fix things (as an example).

• Crafting in any way you want, so long as it makes logical sense (pick up a stick and a rock and sharpen the stick with the rock if you want!)

Good luck programming a fully-functioning database for all possible items and combinations! If it gets done, more power to you! Would prove fun given the customability and experimentability!

• A complete sandbox spanning an enormous empty world waiting to be discovered over a range of terrains

I'm a dune-buggy kinda guy. Nothing more than personal preference. I like my themepark in the sand.

• Dynamic PvE content that allows for PvE monsters to interact, co-exist, live off of each other and either overpopulate or become endangered, or even extinct based on how much a certain monster is hunted

YES! About freakin time a 'world' was created rather than just a 'game'.

• A balanced world with disastrous side-effects if the balance is destroyed

Someone somewhere will go the length of destroying the balance just to get off on the frustration of the x players who fought to retain it.

These are the features in a nutshell that I've been playing with, yes. I know that only a certain percentage plays MUDs anymore, so given that you could get the chance to play an MMORPG with these features, would you play it?

Responses highlighted. Just offering, hopefully beneficial, critiques and thoughts.

Originally posted by pojung

Originally posted by johnmatthais

 In my quest to develop a MUD, I've come up with a bunch of features that I really haven't seen before, or at least not in MMORPGs. So I just wanted to know...if you had the choice to play a game with these features, would you?

• 5 species (nation) warfare with no designation (meaning that you can form interspecies clans, alliances, whatever as you wish)

I've always wondered why an AAA title didn't go with the 5 color system Garfield implemented with MTG. The thought of 1 color being an 'enemy' of 2 others really created a nice twist of symmetrical warfare, which compounded with the asymmetrical playstyle of each color. The only thing I raise my eyebrow at is the 'no designation'. What's the point in creating niches if they are universally accessible? Over time, through entropy, you blur into homogenization. Boundaries are created artificially for a reason.

Player freedom. There will always be those people that want to go off and be with other species. There will be hurdles for doing so, like learning the language, finding the ones that don't want to kill them, etc, so emphasis will be staying with your species, whereas it'll be fully possible for people to go "rogue." Guess I should have explained that better. >.>

• A sci-fi setting on a far off planet

Make it unique!

No problem.

• Single shard, single server

Best community possible. Assuming minimized numbers.

That's up to the players. A developer/GM can't just ban people for being asshats if they're being asshats in character.

• No way to communicate with other species other than to intermingle and learn their language (which, given that warfare is between 5 separate species, could be dangerous)

Reference the comment about 'over time'. This feels like a very small limiter that veteran gamers will hurdle and 'then what'? For this system to achieve replayability, there needs to be an ongoing effort to retain knowledge. The flipside of this being frustration for having learnt a language, dropped it in favor of a new one, just to go back to the original for some reason. In general, these sorts of hurdles reek of 'kill ten rats' as time approaches infinity (sorry, I couldn't help myself with the calc reference).

The point is simply to expand knowledge and rather than drop a language, they are adding on to their knowledge of languages, thus opening up new windows. However, rather than kill 10 rats, it'll be a diplomatic puzzle. Lone man defects to learn language of another race so that he can work among them. Spies get caught by players sooner or later, you know. ;)

• Levelless, classless system based on skills that have caps determined by starter attributes that can't ever be changed

I'm a fan of either doing levels right (that each level or skill or point or whatever other currency is used to define progress)- meaning that each step is an actual challenge to someone somewhere, increasingly so as you 'progress'... or no measuring stick at all. Considering humans are a social creature by nature, everyone defines their existence to some degree with those around them, I'm always more biased towards levels being done right, rather than at all. Obviously, poorly designed levels that are nothing other than a milemarker for an otherwise designed 'grind' are inexcusable on my judgemental basis.

The point is to keep there being a realm of balance between new and old players, and given that based on attributes, some players will have much lower possible caps than others, it will be a nice mix of everything that goes on.

• Hit specific penalties (say you hit someone in their dominant arm that they'd have to then swing clumsily with the other arm or if someone got hit in one leg, they'd have to limp and if in both, they'd have to be on their knees or crawling)

Personal preference with things like this are 'less is more'. Great concept, but as long as it's kept countable with less than 2 full hands (10 or less options of target for attack). Too many possible moves, and the 'flow' of combat breaks down. Ie: I know how to counter-attack move x and y, but if you have too many avenues of approach, I stop caring about how to modify the flow of combat and just blandly attack.

It was head, torso, left arm, right arm, left leg, right leg. That makes 6. We're good. =D

• 50-100% of all skill gains penalty upon death (a tough decision for the designer)

Don't follow the wording.

Meaning when you die, you lose a certain percentage of the skill gains accumulated since your last birth.

• Full political system that allowed player created and run cities, as well as territory boundaries and laws, which could be later logged in a "library" of sorts and exist until the colony was destroyed, all created and enforced by the players themselves

Needs to have a check and balance to things. The last thing you want is a system that *intends* well, but *implements* poorly, and the infrastructure doesn't allow for someone new to fix things (as an example).

One of the biggest complaints I hear about MMO politics is the limit put on them through hard coded efforts at balance. The point is for the players to create their own laws, which will then be hard coded, but still enforced and perhaps repealed by players over time. It'll be a little extra work for whoever's running the database, but it'll be engaging. The closest thing I can think of is A Tale In the Desert, except with more control. If a whole city passes a ridiculous law, then so be it. If it's not gamebreaking, then who is the dev to say they're wrong?

• Crafting in any way you want, so long as it makes logical sense (pick up a stick and a rock and sharpen the stick with the rock if you want!)

Good luck programming a fully-functioning database for all possible items and combinations! If it gets done, more power to you! Would prove fun given the customability and experimentability!

Aye, don't remind me, lol. In my case, it's not about me, though. It's about the people playing the game. =D

Plus, algorithms, though they will be the death of me, are great for stat possibilities, lol.

• A complete sandbox spanning an enormous empty world waiting to be discovered over a range of terrains

I'm a dune-buggy kinda guy. Nothing more than personal preference. I like my themepark in the sand.

Well, the point of this, once again, is freedom to alter the game world how you want within limitations of the world at hand.

• Dynamic PvE content that allows for PvE monsters to interact, co-exist, live off of each other and either overpopulate or become endangered, or even extinct based on how much a certain monster is hunted

YES! About freakin time a 'world' was created rather than just a 'game'.

Yep. This might be even tougher than the database of all possible crafted objects.

• A balanced world with disastrous side-effects if the balance is destroyed

Someone somewhere will go the length of destroying the balance just to get off on the frustration of the x players who fought to retain it.

No, they won't. It'll be realistic. One person can only screw the balance of the world if they can convince the rest of the players that it's worth it. If someone corrupt comes to power, it's the players' problem that they have to solve. In the case of nature, the balance of nature has to be thrown off by a world of corrupt players. Like in real life, good luck hunting and killing every last mouse in the world on your own. Dynamic PvE will keep that from happening. =P

These are the features in a nutshell that I've been playing with, yes. I know that only a certain percentage plays MUDs anymore, so given that you could get the chance to play an MMORPG with these features, would you play it?

 

Responses highlighted. Just offering, hopefully beneficial, critiques and thoughts.

They were. =D

Originally posted by Gabby-air

I would play it but unfortunately not in the form of a MUD, it would just ruin the experience for me. Also props for making your own game!

Perhaps if I can do it, with enough support, maybe someone else would pick up on it. ;)

Anything that can become profitable will be picked up by some investor!

---

Originally posted by johnmatthais

---

Originally posted by Gabby-air

I would play it but unfortunately not in the form of a MUD, it would just ruin the experience for me. Also props for making your own game!

---

Perhaps if I can do it, with enough support, maybe someone else would pick up on it. ;)
Anything that can become profitable will be picked up by some investor!

---

Personally the MMO market is flooded and no new ideas are being used and old ones are not being used well, games are being rushed and have huge budgets that do nothing more then cause the former to happen and then releasing before they are ready. MMOs are not money machines they are however the hardest games to make and maintain.

Originally posted by spyder2k5

 

---

Originally posted by johnmatthais

---

Originally posted by Gabby-air

 

I would play it but unfortunately not in the form of a MUD, it would just ruin the experience for me. Also props for making your own game!

---

Perhaps if I can do it, with enough support, maybe someone else would pick up on it. ;)
Anything that can become profitable will be picked up by some investor!

---

 
Not always, I cannot count the times when someone would steal the ideas rather then pay the creator. That or just move along and not spend the effort required to make the ideas a reality. If it was not a MMO I would be interested in making it.

 

Personally the MMO market is flooded and no new ideas are being used and old ones are not being used well, games are being rushed and have huge budgets that do nothing more then cause the former to happen and then releasing before they are ready. MMOs are not money machines they are however the hardest games to make and maintain.

Honestly, I'd give away the idea to a dedicated studio that was willing to produce an MMORPG out of it, so long as when/if the project was cancelled, they lost all rights to it so that I could possibly license it off to a better studio.

MUDs, as in Multi-User Dungeons really are just interactive reading, I wouldn't really call that a game. Now if this was an MMO I would definitely take a jab at it. Granted I would change a few things.

Originally posted by MisterSr

MUDs, as in Multi-User Dungeons really are just interactive reading, I wouldn't really call that a game. Now if this was an MMO I would definitely take a jab at it. Granted I would change a few things.

This post is about if it were an MMO, people just keep responding based on the fact I have a project going on with the same ideas. 

The "I would change a few things" part is the part I wanted to hear about.

---

Originally posted by johnmatthais

---

Originally posted by MisterSr

MUDs, as in Multi-User Dungeons really are just interactive reading, I wouldn't really call that a game. Now if this was an MMO I would definitely take a jab at it. Granted I would change a few things.

---

This post is about if it were an MMO, people just keep responding based on the fact I have a project going on with the same ideas. 
The "I would change a few things" part is the part I wanted to hear about.

---

Oh really? Okay well I would pull the game out of one world, and instead put it in an expansive galaxy with multiple worlds. This opens up various areas that combat could exist. I do like the idea of the various races that can create their own nations, but I would say bring it down to three different factions/alliances that have about five different races that exist within them. I actually have a concept that goes along to a somewhat similar format if you change those two things. It would take ages to type though. Haha.

Originally posted by johnmatthais

 In my quest to develop a MUD, I've come up with a bunch of features that I really haven't seen before, or at least not in MMORPGs. So I just wanted to know...if you had the choice to play a game with these features, would you?

Unfortunately, I'm one of those graphical people who likes to see things, so I wouldn't actually play the game - just saying that right off the bat.

• 5 species (nation) warfare with no designation (meaning that you can form interspecies clans, alliances, whatever as you wish)

Sounds good - although darkfall beat you to it, methinks.

• A sci-fi setting on a far off planet

Great, as long as there's no aliens vs. predator (vs. marines) aspect, or Primal Alien vs. Tech Alien vs. Humans thing going on. I'd like to see where you take the sci-fi setting.

• Single shard, single server

Again, sounds great. I hate not being able to be with a friend because I couldn't remember what server they were on. It also creates a better community with more accountability for one's actions.

• No way to communicate with other species other than to intermingle and learn their language (which, given that warfare is between 5 separate species, could be dangerous)

Great. I often wish I could do this in WoW - you generally start off with 300/300 "language" ability of various languages. At the least, I would like a dictionary so players could talk in other languages and it would come up in english to the other race/players... you know, Lok'tar ogar, etc.

• Levelless, classless system based on skills that have caps determined by starter attributes that can't ever be changed

So you have starter attributes, that affect your skills/skill caps? Sounds fair enough. I wonder what min/maxing will come of this.

• Hit specific penalties (say you hit someone in their dominant arm that they'd have to then swing clumsily with the other arm or if someone got hit in one leg, they'd have to limp and if in both, they'd have to be on their knees or crawling)

For this you would have to have a whole bunch of different states that a player can be in - limp1, limp2, corkedarm1, corkedarm2, concussion, solarplex - I would recommend making those different attributes on each player as booleans, and having them each give way to an effect on the player. A single limp, say, could reduce the player's movement speed by 20% and dodge by 5%, but having both limps would stack the 20% twice (making it... 36% or so?) and dodge by 10%, or whatever you want. But you can see how they'd add up, and a strategic fight would have players dismantling opponents with whatever attacks enable disabling/injuring parts of the body.

Also, remember that arachnids/snakes/tailed creatures would have other parts of the body, thing about that when designing this wierd and wonderful little addition to your combat.

• 50-100% of all skill gains penalty upon death (a tough decision for the designer)

Ouch. Makes you like life a bit more, though, eh? I often forget about my cooldown abilities in WoW until I'm dead... but I'm like "meh, I died, so what?" anyway. Losing more from death makes you want to not die more, leading to smarter, better players.

• Full political system that allowed player created and run cities, as well as territory boundaries and laws, which could be later logged in a "library" of sorts and exist until the colony was destroyed, all created and enforced by the players themselves

If the developer can sustain it, sure thing. Otherwise you'll have to create some sort of automated system for allowing rules to be put in place... but that would be hard, and would have to allow at least some sort of GUI for players to alter code, or to make rules in accordance with what the game engine can handle. I.E. player uses /spit command within 10 yards of City Guard, City Guard demands 5 silver for vandalism.

• Crafting in any way you want, so long as it makes logical sense (pick up a stick and a rock and sharpen the stick with the rock if you want!)

Ouch, good luck with that. But then again, as long as items are made with proper code, you can do anything. "Sharpened" could just be an attribute of its own. If an object "can sharpen" (boolean), then you can use it to sharpen something. If an object "can be sharpened" (boolean), then by all means change the item to "sharpened" (boolean). Then, hell, maybe after enough attacks, it becomes unsharpened, or blunt. Maybe "sharpened" doesn't have to be the only boolean, you could have "heavy", and "blunt", and "smoothed".

You're probably going to need at least ten or twenty booleans, or integers, to make all that work. If you wanted, you could make "sharpness" an integer, and increase it every time you sharpen it. You could do the same with "heaviness". You could say that something with a sharpness of 0 is blunt. If you have different kinds of damage, perhaps "piercing", "slicing", "blunt", and "crushing", that are altered dynamically as the weapon or item becomes very sharp with little weight, or more sharp and less heavy, or less sharp and more heavy, or completely blunt and very heavy, respectively. And what about the size of an item? What is it made of, metal? Wood? Some sort of Ethereal or Energy essence?

And if you're talking about making it a MUD, I imagine you'll have things like rat tails that can be swung around at people like weapons, and other ridiculous things. Good luck, you're going to need it on that one, haha.

• A complete sandbox spanning an enormous empty world waiting to be discovered over a range of terrains

*shrugs* Cool. I sort of like having some obvious things to do, though. I mean, just like in real life, I know I should exercise, but I have to actually make the effort to get up and do it. Where as if someone said "hey, go exercise", I'd do it every day and get more fit. Just sayin'.

• Dynamic PvE content that allows for PvE monsters to interact, co-exist, live off of each other and either overpopulate or become endangered, or even extinct based on how much a certain monster is hunted

Cool. This already happens a little bit in WoW, but not nearly the amount to what I'm thinking you're thinking. I'd like to see a real world just once.

• A balanced world with disastrous side-effects if the balance is destroyed

Cool, gives more people a reason to do quests specifically for the Cenarion Circle... erm, I mean, for the planet and such. Wouldn't want tornadoes going around screwing everything up, nor would you want the plant life to overthrow society.

These are the features in a nutshell that I've been playing with, yes. I know that only a certain percentage plays MUDs anymore, so given that you could get the chance to play an MMORPG with these features, would you play it?

Originally posted by Blazz

Originally posted by johnmatthais

 In my quest to develop a MUD, I've come up with a bunch of features that I really haven't seen before, or at least not in MMORPGs. So I just wanted to know...if you had the choice to play a game with these features, would you?

Unfortunately, I'm one of those graphical people who likes to see things, so I wouldn't actually play the game - just saying that right off the bat.

I didn't realize I never mentioned it but I'm doing it because I'm a writer and I love writing, whereas I'm like world's worst artist.

• 5 species (nation) warfare with no designation (meaning that you can form interspecies clans, alliances, whatever as you wish)

Sounds good - although darkfall beat you to it, methinks.

It'll be quite a bit different, methinks. Darkfall has six races, after all. =]

• A sci-fi setting on a far off planet

Great, as long as there's no aliens vs. predator (vs. marines) aspect, or Primal Alien vs. Tech Alien vs. Humans thing going on. I'd like to see where you take the sci-fi setting.

They're all going to start from the ground and work their way up. I'm still deciding whether it's going to stay primal tech or if it's going to be some sort of Civilization-esque WIP even after the base game is opened to the public.

• Single shard, single server

Again, sounds great. I hate not being able to be with a friend because I couldn't remember what server they were on. It also creates a better community with more accountability for one's actions.

Yep =D

• No way to communicate with other species other than to intermingle and learn their language (which, given that warfare is between 5 separate species, could be dangerous)

Great. I often wish I could do this in WoW - you generally start off with 300/300 "language" ability of various languages. At the least, I would like a dictionary so players could talk in other languages and it would come up in english to the other race/players... you know, Lok'tar ogar, etc.

Yeah, I'm still working out the specifics. Each language will have its own skill level for a person. No universal language skill. It'll also be one of the few skills not affected by attributes. As of yet, I really haven't figured out attributes beyond combat, to be honest. *shrugs* I may end up having 2 sets of attributes...those based on combat and those affecting skills. Now THAT would be different.

• Levelless, classless system based on skills that have caps determined by starter attributes that can't ever be changed

So you have starter attributes, that affect your skills/skill caps? Sounds fair enough. I wonder what min/maxing will come of this.

It'll depend on how much math I can do. xD

• Hit specific penalties (say you hit someone in their dominant arm that they'd have to then swing clumsily with the other arm or if someone got hit in one leg, they'd have to limp and if in both, they'd have to be on their knees or crawling)

For this you would have to have a whole bunch of different states that a player can be in - limp1, limp2, corkedarm1, corkedarm2, concussion, solarplex - I would recommend making those different attributes on each player as booleans, and having them each give way to an effect on the player. A single limp, say, could reduce the player's movement speed by 20% and dodge by 5%, but having both limps would stack the 20% twice (making it... 36% or so?) and dodge by 10%, or whatever you want. But you can see how they'd add up, and a strategic fight would have players dismantling opponents with whatever attacks enable disabling/injuring parts of the body.

Also, remember that arachnids/snakes/tailed creatures would have other parts of the body, thing about that when designing this wierd and wonderful little addition to your combat.

I'll have to account for it, but on the basic humanoid figure, it'll be "head, torso, left arm, right arm, left leg, right leg," whereas snakes could end up being "head, torso, tail." Wow. Way off balance. Poor snakes are fighting a losing match. Good thing I haven't planned snake men. xD

• 50-100% of all skill gains penalty upon death (a tough decision for the designer)

Ouch. Makes you like life a bit more, though, eh? I often forget about my cooldown abilities in WoW until I'm dead... but I'm like "meh, I died, so what?" anyway. Losing more from death makes you want to not die more, leading to smarter, better players.

That'd be the point. It may not be 100%, as that's just as bad as permadeath except you're stuck with the same character. It'll most likely end up being 50%, since I doubt there will be demand for a higher penalty.

• Full political system that allowed player created and run cities, as well as territory boundaries and laws, which could be later logged in a "library" of sorts and exist until the colony was destroyed, all created and enforced by the players themselves

If the developer can sustain it, sure thing. Otherwise you'll have to create some sort of automated system for allowing rules to be put in place... but that would be hard, and would have to allow at least some sort of GUI for players to alter code, or to make rules in accordance with what the game engine can handle. I.E. player uses /spit command within 10 yards of City Guard, City Guard demands 5 silver for vandalism.

I don't want people able to access the database. You know someone will end up hacking that. In terms of developer sustenance, I'm sure the community would be small enough that it wouldn't be too tough heh.

• Crafting in any way you want, so long as it makes logical sense (pick up a stick and a rock and sharpen the stick with the rock if you want!)

Ouch, good luck with that. But then again, as long as items are made with proper code, you can do anything. "Sharpened" could just be an attribute of its own. If an object "can sharpen" (boolean), then you can use it to sharpen something. If an object "can be sharpened" (boolean), then by all means change the item to "sharpened" (boolean). Then, hell, maybe after enough attacks, it becomes unsharpened, or blunt. Maybe "sharpened" doesn't have to be the only boolean, you could have "heavy", and "blunt", and "smoothed".

You're probably going to need at least ten or twenty booleans, or integers, to make all that work. If you wanted, you could make "sharpness" an integer, and increase it every time you sharpen it. You could do the same with "heaviness". You could say that something with a sharpness of 0 is blunt. If you have different kinds of damage, perhaps "piercing", "slicing", "blunt", and "crushing", that are altered dynamically as the weapon or item becomes very sharp with little weight, or more sharp and less heavy, or less sharp and more heavy, or completely blunt and very heavy, respectively. And what about the size of an item? What is it made of, metal? Wood? Some sort of Ethereal or Energy essence?

And if you're talking about making it a MUD, I imagine you'll have things like rat tails that can be swung around at people like weapons, and other ridiculous things. Good luck, you're going to need it on that one, haha.

Booleans are actually a really good idea, but even using them, there's a lot more work involved than anyone would hope in getting it set up. Most games have "x+y=z" whereas what I'm doing is x+y=a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h" and so on. I'm still looking for the most efficient way to do it and I think I'll end up using a library of booleans for it. The biggest problem with booleans, though is that I may actually end up doing more work because not every object can be sharpened and not every object can be bent.

• A complete sandbox spanning an enormous empty world waiting to be discovered over a range of terrains

*shrugs* Cool. I sort of like having some obvious things to do, though. I mean, just like in real life, I know I should exercise, but I have to actually make the effort to get up and do it. Where as if someone said "hey, go exercise", I'd do it every day and get more fit. Just sayin'.

I'm still trying to figure out with my system how quests would work...seeing as player cities could be placed anywhere and will span across several, if not dozens of, rooms.

• Dynamic PvE content that allows for PvE monsters to interact, co-exist, live off of each other and either overpopulate or become endangered, or even extinct based on how much a certain monster is hunted

Cool. This already happens a little bit in WoW, but not nearly the amount to what I'm thinking you're thinking. I'd like to see a real world just once.

andddd I'd like to know that I was the first one to manage it. Only time will tell though. =D

• A balanced world with disastrous side-effects if the balance is destroyed

Cool, gives more people a reason to do quests specifically for the Cenarion Circle... erm, I mean, for the planet and such. Wouldn't want tornadoes going around screwing everything up, nor would you want the plant life to overthrow society.

Lol, had to love that one. Still working on the specifics. I know that for one thing, any sort of prey that gets wiped out, the predator to that prey will too, and seeing as I'm planning on certain species of PvE monsters being region specific, based on terrain, it means that it won't take much to fuck up the ecosystem.

These are the features in a nutshell that I've been playing with, yes. I know that only a certain percentage plays MUDs anymore, so given that you could get the chance to play an MMORPG with these features, would you play it?

 

I've been messing around in a car drive (as a passenger) with a notepad and pen, on the topic of item dynamics.

Just the thought of it makes me tingle a little... here goes:

Item Dynamics

The idea is that every "item" has a use. One should take into consideration all of the things that a player can do before even thinking about itemisation.

Going ahead anyway, perhaps recklessly, such things on items you could thing about are:

Name (string)
Weight (100g units) (int)
Length (10cm units) (int)
Width (10cm units) (int)
Thickness (10cm units) (int)
Flammability (using PH scale 0-14) (int)
Malleability (using PH scale 0-14) (int)
Sharpness (using PH scale 0-14) (int)
Temperature (using PH scale 0-14) (int)

And then whatever booleans you wish to have in your game to make it easier, i.e.:

hasHandle
canBind
canSetFire
isReflective
isLiquid
isMetal
isWood
isUseless
isTwoHanded

etc. etc.

And of course, excluding text based MUDs, you would also have to consider:

model
texture
iconImage
actionAudio (this one may be good to include in a text based MUD, still, to help immersion)

So, creating a weapon, say a two-handed great sword, might be something like this.

Name: "Greatsword"
Weight: 100 (10kg)
Length: 12 (1.2m)
Width: 3
Thickness: 1
Flammability: 4 (not very flammable, perhaps "resistant" to fire effects)
Malleability: 2 (quite rigid, as it should be)
Sharpness: 10 (a bit sharp, could be sharper)
Temperature: 7 (neutral, room temperature)

Then, if all other boolean attributes were, by default, set to "false", you could put in a few like this:

isTwoHanded: true
isWeapon: true

And ta-daaaa, if your engine was made to handle all of these attributes well enough, you could have an item defined right there.

And what about the idea of sharpening a stick with a rock? Perhaps that would be something like this...

Name: "Stick"
Weight: 10 (1kg)
Length: 10
Width: 1
Thickness: 1
Flammability: 9
Malleability: 6 (snaps if bent a little too much)
Sharpness: 2
Temperature: 7
isWeapon: true

Name: "Rock"
Weight: 5
Length: 1
Width: 1
Thickness: 1
Flammability: 1
Malleability: 1
Sharpness: 1
Temperature: 5
canSharpen: true

So, the ability to sharpen is now on this rock. You could make many things that could sharpen. You may have a nice set of swords that "can sharpen", and so you continue to sharpen those swords with eachother.

Just a few thoughts for ya, I'ma continue grinding in WoW, because I loved the storyline of Warcraft 3 and still feel anger towards Arthas. Cheers.

EDIT: Also, just a small point here - making all of these attributes for each item would be tiring, but would perhaps be quite worth it. It's a problem of content vs. use of content.

World of Warcraft has hundreds, maybe thousands of different items... but what can you do with them? Enchant them via enchants or leatherworking/blacksmithing items, equip them, and sell them. You can do three things.

But if you could, say, throw a two handed axe at someone for 5k damage (and loot it off of their corpse) - wouldn't that be a cool feature? What about applying oil to a fairly fire resistant sword, setting it alight and creating a firey sword, which remains as such until you put it in your backpack, or the amount of oil you applied to the sword runs out, or the sword's stability reaches 0? (stability or structure could be another attribute of items, perhaps)

Having the ability to do a ten things with a stick rather than three would be pretty cool, IMO. It would be pretty amazing to have even a few dozen unique things, that you can do ten things with each of them... no?

God, if someone made an MMORPG like that I'd be playing it in a heart beat, I'd even pay upwards of $25 dollars and upgrade my computer, simply because this is the sort of MMORPG I've always wanted to be able to play. It gives everything you could ever really wish for in an MMO.

As long as it also includes a excellent background to the various races, factions, world history etc I'd be more than happy to play a game like that. (Background plays a huge part for me in what I play, including how quests are written and their storylines.)

That considered, questing wouldn't really play a huge part in a game like this only as a means of expanding older history perhaps.

Certainly an interesting concept, and some points developers really should consider.

 Blazz, that's actually a really interesting thought. I'll have to see what I'm able to do when the time comes to make the database, but a system like that could be extremely customizable in the long run.

The only issue is that making sure all the boolean defined attributes don't mess with the non-booleans. I foresee a lot of issues related to that. Say it isWeapon, well, what if it ends up just being a decoration or just doesn't equip at all?

Yeah, I know that's a product of bad code most times, just saying, heh.

My opinion is that I would never play a MUD where I lost 50%-100% of anything on death.

Why?  Because sometimes your death is completely out of your control and losing that due to a whim of fate is stupid, frustrating and no fun.

Not speculation; I have seen it happen in MUDs. I saw a guy get auto-deleted due to a mob sucking away all his extra lives from his corpse while he was dissconnected.

I can't emphasize this enough to would be designers.  YOU WILL NEVER MAKE A PERFECT SYSTEM.  It is all nice nice happy happy unicorn-land and pixy dust to think it would be great if death made things all meaningful and junk.  But guess what?  Your shit is gonna mess up and it is going to do so often and your death penalty is just gonna punch people in the face with a sledge hammer because you think your shit don't stink. 

Well designers shit stinks and it stinks bad so word to the wise do not punish the players for your failures.  And when you finish your MUD there will be many failures and that is just the way it goes.  Some of these failures will cause people to die randomly for no fault of their own.  What do you think their reaction will be when you take away ALL THEIR SKILLS at random whim of fate or a random whim of the internet god.  I got disconnected from a PvP match last night because all this damn snow busted a power line.

It wont make things meaningful it will make people hate you because you took an ass ton of work away due to your failure not their failure. That is not meaningful in fact it is the exact opposite it degrades people immersion in the game and makes them leery of doing anything in the game.

It is fine to want to add something to try to prevent cowboy BS behavior their is a flip side to that.  You the designer must have some sort of fault tolerance.  And sometimes the fault is yours not the players.  You punish people harshly everytime things go wrong, well what will they do when things go wrong due to your incorrect design or simply overlooking something you can do nothing about?  Yeah people will realize it and say "Oh fuck you and fuck your game".

You can't put everything on the players.  And one of the big problems with MUD designers is they did not accept responsibility for the misery they caused players due to their own designs.  They just said it was all on the players.  What a load.  It is the developer responsibility to make sure the players are only punished when they should be.  If you went around and spanked a kid randomly for no reason that is called abuse and makes that kid angry and fucked in the head.  You spank a kid at appropriate times and that is called discpline and can help out.

Don't be like the old MUD designers don't randomly abuse your players.  It makes the ones who stick around fucked in the head (or they were to begin with) and the well adjusted ones leave.

I can guarantee you that your death penalty will be applied un-justly at least sometimes.  And this is YOUR FAULT not the players fault; YOUR FAULT.  This is on you, it is your responsibility.

Don't listen to Bartle he is a fucktard who has no understanding of the weight of player misery all good designers must shoulder.  Dave Arnesson knew this.  Seriously, fuck Bartle.

You want death to be meaningful that is fine.  Cool.  Fine some creative way.  But above all your players must have fun.  FUN.  Not meaningless fun.  Not dumbed down fun.  It doesn't matter what kind.  Some people think chess is fun and that is fine.  But you must accept that all the failures in your design will be contrary to that and that this will be on you, not them. 

Every time you create some broad rule like "I will shock your balls any time something bad happens (even if you have no control over it)"  you are in serious danger of violating that cardinal rule.   Everytime that guy gets shocked in the balls due to something he can't control it is on you.  Not only are you violating that cardinal rule you are doing something mean to someone else for no good reason through negligence and then you might even have the gall to say its on them not you.

Think of these people like they are your friends, not some random strangers.  Do you really want to do that to your friends?  This is why Arnesson (the creator of D&D) understood this.  D&D was played with friends and why Bartle is a fucktard academic with idea how this shit really works. 

 How is a penalty for death punishing the player for somewhere I screw up?

When did asking an opinion ever claim to be saying I have a perfect system?

I fail to get what you're talking about...

I'm seriously lost...I don't know these people you speak of and I really think you just wanted to lay a personal attack on a designer because you hate death penalties...

Well not a lot of people like death penalties and when we're talking about 50-100% stat loss from one death, a very small minority would be interested in that.

Originally posted by Gabby-air

Well not a lot of people like death penalties and when we're talking about 50-100% stat loss from one death, a very small minority would be interested in that.

Well my point was simply that he went about attacking me for it somehow, when it's all still on the drawing board. *shrugs*

 Okay, now, since everyone's responded as if it were a MUD, say I were to be able to make it into an MMORPG (albeit with not the most impressive graphics), what would your opinion be?