tl;dr - world centered around player-populated, player-run, player-dependent factions where what matters is the city state you have created, rather than the individual.

I've hatched an idea a while ago that involves a world wherein there are no NPCs, and only players & natural animals, trees, etc exist. It would be a game similar to Civilization, oriented around the creation of a city and the sustenance of the created state through the communal cooperation of the player community; building off the Civilization reference, the game would start with a handful of game developers being faction leaders, who would exist as hero settlers that are responsible for the initial momentum of the given community. They would pick the location where the initial city would be built and be responsible for the first actions of that community. Certain players would need to be guards who protect the evolving settlement from wild beasts; certain players would need to make tools to build the city; certain players would need to harvest food and crops in order to provide food for the community; certain players would need to be responsible for constructing the city. The game developer hero-settler would keep watch on what needs to happen, and direct groups of players to do these specific tasks. 

Eventually, the city would be constructed. The players who were most loyal and zealous in performing their specific role given by the game developer hero-settler would be recognized for their usefulness and would be given positions of higher responsibility: the hero-settler cannot do it all by himself, and, after all, he is merely a temporary leader that exists until the players can fully manage themselves. 

Remember that there isn't just one city but several; many. As the city grows and more are built eventually the whole world will become filled with them, and contact with neighboring factions would be established. The players in positions of management would be responsible for determining what happens, and in this way players are truly having an effect on the world. These governmental players -- who, remember, earned their prestigious positions due to their merit and hard effort spent early on -- would have the large responsibility of ensuring the survival of their city/state. Growing amounts of players will be part of their city, and they need to make sure that elements of it are provided for and that the population is being used effectively.

There will be players who inherently exist as trolls, which my brother pointed out: their sole purpose will be to sabotage the momentum of the city simply because some people are malicious in that way. The managing players will need to appoint guards therefore to watch out for these griefers, and ensure that they don't disrupt the concordia of things. If they DO disrupt it, then they deserve to reap the fruits of their labor: if such a substantial number of rebels can organize themselves and take over a city, they deserve it. 

Gear would be practically irrelevent. You would have work clothes, standard clothes, light armor, or heavy armor, and that's what it would be called: your armor would simply read "heavy armor." You could customize it, by bringing it to a person in your city who specializes in such a thing, but that's the extent of it. 

Oh, also: perma-death. 

Why perma-death?

The player doesn't matter. The player is merely a cog in the grand machine that is the city which you belong to. If you are tasked with providing the city with a certain amount of wheat every once in a while, (your exclusive "gather quest" as it were,) and some rebels happen to slay you, then you are slain. You would merely make a new character and ask the government for what it needs from you.

The goal of the game is to have a truly player-driven world. Given that there are no NPCs, the success of a city depends entirely on the rare ability for strangers to work together for the common good. Individualists who want instant gratification simply won't get anything out of this game because only long-term fulfillment exists: you will know that you contributed so much effort to the prosperity of your city that to see it as successful would be the only gratification you could possibly want. 

Perhaps your faction, venerating that initial hero-settler from 5 years ago, would eventually conquer the rest. Who knows what would happen from there? The possibilities are endless. There isn't any linear trajectory that can be followed because the entire game is an experiment. The job of the developers is to watch from a distance and try to add in features as they become necessary to the players.

This isn't a "perfect game" but a perpetual work in progress. From the beginning it would be centered around the doings of the players. If you do well enough, perhaps you too could be in a position of management in your city, knowing that you are responsible for affecting the real lives of the thousands of players around the world that are contributing to your city's prosperity. Such an idea is fulfilling to me. 

In the end, I have identified that this is exactly what I want in a game, and it is what I conceive of when I hear of a "sandbox." That grand castle you are looking at, the one flanked by dammed rivers, protective walls, paved roads, broken siege weapons from previous battles, unburied corpses, rotting beasts -- all of those are things that players are responsible for.

Nothing exists aside from the wild beasts, trees, rocks, land, etc, unless if a player has caused it to be. 

My brother pointed out that elements of this seem similar to the game Minecraft, which I have seen people play a few times and have a basic understanding of it. I suppose such a comparison could be made, but only to the extent that it is a world that the player is manipulating. It is intended to be a massive game, more worthily to be compared to Civilization, Total War, or Mount & Blade. 

Asheron's Call 2 tried this, and although the game failed, it was an innovative idea and I think could still work.

Crafters, of course, have their own incentives to mine, set up shop, and sell.

Guards?  Maybe there could be pay or faction or experience reward for pulling guard duty and hanging out in town, policing the streets.

Town Mayor?  Sounds like politics and voting could jump this off, with maybe some cut of taxation being the reward.

And towns not maintained?  Well, they fall into ruins maybe, and new towns can be started.

All of this could be done; would be quite interesting.

Originally posted by ReallyNow10

Asheron's Call 2 tried this, and although the game failed, it was an innovative idea and I think could still work.

Crafters, of course, have their own incentives to mine, set up shop, and sell.

Guards?  Maybe there could be pay or faction or experience reward for pulling guard duty and hanging out in town, policing the streets.

Town Mayor?  Sounds like politics and voting could jump this off, with maybe some cut of taxation being the reward.

And towns not maintained?  Well, they fall into ruins maybe, and new towns can be started.

All of this could be done; would be quite interesting.

Yes exactly, you understand.

Being a guard inherently seems like a tedious action. You conceive of a person walking around, rarely if ever encountering actual discord or something which requires his attention. Though you would indeed be responsible for engaging traders from nearby cities, and determining what business they have in the city. You would have to make sure that wild beasts aren't slaying your city's gatherers & farmers. If someone is trying to rob one of your city's vendors, you have use your handcuff ability that causes the person to be immobile, and put them in the jail, etc. What sort of player would be good for such a role? It must be someone who has the interests of the city at heart, someone who the managing players could trust. 

Someone would do it.

I would do it, if it meant that I would be able to contribute to this city -- which I previously spent two weeks gathering substantial amounts of wheat for; if it meant I would be able to have a position of management. 

Crafting? Let's say the city needs someone to do something monotanous, like providing swords for the guards or the army. Nobody is doing this role. 

I'll do it.

If I do it, it means I'm showing I'll do what the city needs and given more trust and responsibility later. After all, this game isn't about me, but the city. I suppose I could derive fulfillment from knowing that everyone's swords are stamped by me, and that I'm responsible for all the deaths of the neighboring faction. Perhaps I'll have been such an excellent smith that the people would have my character in their minds when the governors initiate a vote as to who should be the next mayor?

And indeed, your idea of neglected towns falling into ruin would really be quite a spectacle. Knowing that this isn't just "random scenery" but a whole village that players spent much time on would be amazing: you would wonder "what caused it to fall into ruin?" Just walking by such a site would be quite fulfilling.

The idea is very interesting.... making it happen, would be very hard, though.

Players these days are used to be able to actually start playing from day 1 of their gaming experiences. A game like this would work close to how the forming of an actual city in the real world works, the first settlers will have it very rough and hard experience and low populations and little to do except "working" until the city reaches an actual size and starts attracting new settlers.

An empty world like that would not attract many players in the first place, because most players would not be attracted to the game until there are actually things to do there, as in, a working economy, places to visit and trade, castles to attack, things like those. Those few first players are critical for the success of this game, though, you'd need to keep them playing at least until enough of the world gets built so that it starts attracting more players. Until it gets to that point it'll most likely operate at a loss, and it's a gamble that it'll be succesful later on, either because the first players quit or because new players don't come in (which can happen if the game gets a reputation of being empty and with nothing to do at first).

Most publishers wouldn't fund or touch a project like this, they want guaranteed profits preferably quickly, not possibility of profits down the road. The only way I see this happening would be a stablished company that already has a working cash cow out, or that it's sufficiently self funded, and that will stick to their guns and not give up to the pressure to add non player created content to the game and leave it to succeed or fail on its own.

Originally posted by L0C0Man

The idea is very interesting.... making it happen, would be very hard, though.

Players these days are used to be able to actually start playing from day 1 of their gaming experiences. A game like this would work close to how the forming of an actual city in the real world works.

An empty world like that would not attract many players in the first place, because most players would not be attracted to the game until there are actually things to do there, as in, a working economy, places to visit and trade, castles to attack, things like those. Those few first players are critical for the success of this game, though, you'd need to keep them playing at least until enough of the world gets built so that it starts attracting more players. Until it gets to that point it'll most likely operate at a loss, and it's a gamble that it'll be succesful later on, either because the first players quit or because new players don't come in (which can happen if the game gets a reputation of being empty and with nothing to do at first).

Most publishers wouldn't fund or touch a project like this, they want guaranteed profits preferably quickly, not possibility of profits down the road. The only way I see this happening would be a stablished company that already has a working cash cow out, or that it's sufficiently self funded, and that will stick to their guns and not give up to the pressure to add non player created content to the game and leave it to succeed or fail on its own.

I'm not saying it can or will happen, really. It's just that this is what an MMO sandbox really is to me, and the core of what I'm looking for in a game. When becoming disillusioned with other games it's the fact that these elements are missing that drive me away. There were moments in vanilla WoW where I felt like I was part of a world like this, when I was naive and didn't have a full scope of understanding of the world. 

A themepark is a fine introduction to the genre: it shows you what a world like this would be like when its all been established. Yet I think the MMO community is rather stabilized at this point: the people who are buying this MMO are the same commuity that bought that MMO. Most MMo players, I say, are experienced in the genre, and every themepark or pseudo-sandbox that a developer puts out will fail as a result, and cause them to lose money.

As a result, I think that a sandbox of such an immensity as this would profit, and that it would draw players. I dont think that the failure of the modern MMO is due to that hackneyed image of legions of 14 year olds that want instant gratification, but I think it's the result of the core of the MMO population -- MMO veterans -- being tired of the same. If Age of Conan was released istead of & before WoW, perhaps that would be the juggernought game everyone complains about. I say the people want something different, and a game as different as this would indeed attract a crowd, perhaps surprisingly. 

I don't know how much money it would require to make a game like this really. is it substantially different than Minecraft? You just need a large world capable of holding many players, and developers that are continually adding new mechanics & skills into the game as they become necessary. 

What I take as a maxim is that everyone is different. If there was a game that I knew I could have a substantial part in at its release, wouldn't that really attract me? I think several people would be drawn to it initially.

Originally posted by L0C0Man

The idea is very interesting.... making it happen, would be very hard, though.

Players these days are used to be able to actually start playing from day 1 of their gaming experiences. A game like this would work close to how the forming of an actual city in the real world works, the first settlers will have it very rough and hard experience and low populations and little to do except "working" until the city reaches an actual size and starts attracting new settlers.

An empty world like that would not attract many players in the first place, because most players would not be attracted to the game until there are actually things to do there, as in, a working economy, places to visit and trade, castles to attack, things like those. Those few first players are critical for the success of this game, though, you'd need to keep them playing at least until enough of the world gets built so that it starts attracting more players. Until it gets to that point it'll most likely operate at a loss, and it's a gamble that it'll be succesful later on, either because the first players quit or because new players don't come in (which can happen if the game gets a reputation of being empty and with nothing to do at first).

Most publishers wouldn't fund or touch a project like this, they want guaranteed profits preferably quickly, not possibility of profits down the road. The only way I see this happening would be a stablished company that already has a working cash cow out, or that it's sufficiently self funded, and that will stick to their guns and not give up to the pressure to add non player created content to the game and leave it to succeed or fail on its own.

Shadowbane tried this, so it has been done to an extent.  Maybe you have to have a few NPC towns, then players can to the branching out by creating newer towns.

Shadowbane was a very interesting game.  It did have its flaws, but those were more of implementation than design; was very buggy, non-intuitive U.I., etc...

Won't work unless the game has a dedicated, stable player population.

Plus, I highly doubt i would want to only deal with other players in a game.

The problem with players having 'mundane' duties in such a setup is one of scheduling.  If you need to have a guard present at certain times then the player doing that job will have to be online at the time or teh city will suffer from it.  You are not going to get many people who are willing to schedule their life around a game activity that might be quite boring at times.  This would be even worse if you need guards 24/7. 

I think there would have to be base villages on the opening day that players could either help grow or leave to have something there for everyone to connect with. Perhaps leave off the ability for players to group up and form their own villages until a major expansion a few months after launch so that the major cities can initially be formed and players can find out how to create their own villages/cities whilst doing so. So I guess what I'm saying is a little theme park may be needed in the start, hell you could do this in Open Beta even.

Once thats out of the way make it full sandbox with players being able to just leave the major cities/factions and form their own if they wish. Of course this would come with the dangers of the faction you just left wishing to hunt you down and burn your village to the ground of course, but that's all part of the fun.

I have a horrible feeling that giving people the power to create their own civilisation will ultimately end up in dictatorship and oppression of others, but honestly that idea could make the game the most interesting on the market. Imagine if a group of players politicked their way to the top of the food chain of a major faction/city and began wiping out all the minor villages around them, eventually running the entire world (it happens in every faction in every mmo with one guild wiping all others, so I assume this would be very likely to happe n). That in itself is an interesting idea for a sandbox mmo, but after that there could be alliances of minor groups to take them down or even terrorist cells working within the cities to destablish the governing powers.

Great idea if done right. By that I mean it would be excellent as a free to play if that term was used right and didn't disbalance PvP/PvE. 

Originally posted by ReallyNow10

 

Shadowbane tried this, so it has been done to an extent.  Maybe you have to have a few NPC towns, then players can to the branching out by creating newer towns.

Shadowbane was a very interesting game.  It did have its flaws, but those were more of implementation than design; was very buggy, non-intuitive U.I., etc...

I really wish I had given shadowbane a proper go I always remember looking at the political map in game and thinking wow people actually control those areas..

Ah well hopefully somthing similar will come along :)

As for the OPs idea yeah its pretty cool.. one issue and a big one is that players wont want to do mundane tasks, they always want to be where the action is if you know what i mean.. they dont want to stand around guarding things hoping somthing will happen.

Originally posted by Torik

The problem with players having 'mundane' duties in such a setup is one of scheduling.  If you need to have a guard present at certain times then the player doing that job will have to be online at the time or teh city will suffer from it.  You are not going to get many people who are willing to schedule their life around a game activity that might be quite boring at times.  This would be even worse if you need guards 24/7. 

Then comprimises can be made. Perhaps the only NPCs that would exist are "player created NPCs." A city reaching a certain capacity can have X amount of guards in it, but they all need to be paid for by the people in it then. I think it would be better to try out the system of player-guards first and see how it works. You would only need to spend 2 hours or so as a guard every once in a while, and many people would be guards. You could be both a guard and a harvester. 

Originally posted by ReallyNow10

Asheron's Call 2 tried this, and although the game failed, it was an innovative idea and I think could still work.

Crafters, of course, have their own incentives to mine, set up shop, and sell.

Guards?  Maybe there could be pay or faction or experience reward for pulling guard duty and hanging out in town, policing the streets.

Town Mayor?  Sounds like politics and voting could jump this off, with maybe some cut of taxation being the reward.

And towns not maintained?  Well, they fall into ruins maybe, and new towns can be started.

All of this could be done; would be quite interesting.

... Just what I have been looking forward too after a long week in class, coming home and logging in to walk back and forth by a gate for 8 hours, and how would I be paid? In pelts? Are there going to be players that set up just to mint coins?

You won't have enough player to have a game devoid of NPCs and I think guard duty would be a major reason as to why...

Originally posted by comrademario

I think there would have to be base villages on the opening day that players could either help grow or leave to have something there for everyone to connect with. Perhaps leave off the ability for players to group up and form their own villages until a major expansion a few months after launch so that the major cities can initially be formed and players can find out how to create their own villages/cities whilst doing so. So I guess what I'm saying is a little theme park may be needed in the start, hell you could do this in Open Beta even.

 

Once thats out of the way make it full sandbox with players being able to just leave the major cities/factions and form their own if they wish. Of course this would come with the dangers of the faction you just left wishing to hunt you down and burn your village to the ground of course, but that's all part of the fun.

 

I have a horrible feeling that giving people the power to create their own civilisation will ultimately end up in dictatorship and oppression of others, but honestly that idea could make the game the most interesting on the market. Imagine if a group of players politicked their way to the top of the food chain of a major faction/city and began wiping out all the minor villages around them, eventually running the entire world (it happens in every faction in every mmo with one guild wiping all others, so I assume this would be very likely to happe n). That in itself is an interesting idea for a sandbox mmo, but after that there could be alliances of minor groups to take them down or even terrorist cells working within the cities to destablish the governing powers.

 

Great idea if done right. By that I mean it would be excellent as a free to play if that term was used right and didn't disbalance PvP/PvE. 

Yes, an open beta is a good idea. It would have "themepark cities" that allow you to see what it is possible for the player to create, so that they would get a feel for the manipulability of things, as well as the player dependency of the game. And you resolved your fear of dictatorship quite nicely there on your own!

Originally posted by Slampig

Originally posted by ReallyNow10

Asheron's Call 2 tried this, and although the game failed, it was an innovative idea and I think could still work.

Crafters, of course, have their own incentives to mine, set up shop, and sell.

Guards?  Maybe there could be pay or faction or experience reward for pulling guard duty and hanging out in town, policing the streets.

Town Mayor?  Sounds like politics and voting could jump this off, with maybe some cut of taxation being the reward.

And towns not maintained?  Well, they fall into ruins maybe, and new towns can be started.

All of this could be done; would be quite interesting.

... Just what I have been looking forward too after a long week in class, coming home and logging in to walk back and forth by a gate for 8 hours, and how would I be paid? In pelts? Are there going to be players that set up just to mint coins?

You won't have enough player to have a game devoid of NPCs and I think guard duty would be a major reason as to why...

If you won't have enough players to have guards then the necessity of having guards wouldn't exist, since you could just have your farmers double as militia.

Originally posted by Consuetudo

Originally posted by Torik

The problem with players having 'mundane' duties in such a setup is one of scheduling.  If you need to have a guard present at certain times then the player doing that job will have to be online at the time or teh city will suffer from it.  You are not going to get many people who are willing to schedule their life around a game activity that might be quite boring at times.  This would be even worse if you need guards 24/7. 

Then comprimises can be made. Perhaps the only NPCs that would exist are "player created NPCs." A city reaching a certain capacity can have X amount of guards in it, but they all need to be paid for by the people in it then. I think it would be better to try out the system of player-guards first and see how it works. You would only need to spend 2 hours or so as a guard every once in a while, and many people would be guards. You could be both a guard and a harvester. 

Why compromise? Just get rid of the idea. NPCs exists in games since dawn of gaming. If it is not broken, may be you don't need to fix it.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Consuetudo

Originally posted by Torik

The problem with players having 'mundane' duties in such a setup is one of scheduling.  If you need to have a guard present at certain times then the player doing that job will have to be online at the time or teh city will suffer from it.  You are not going to get many people who are willing to schedule their life around a game activity that might be quite boring at times.  This would be even worse if you need guards 24/7. 

Then comprimises can be made. Perhaps the only NPCs that would exist are "player created NPCs." A city reaching a certain capacity can have X amount of guards in it, but they all need to be paid for by the people in it then. I think it would be better to try out the system of player-guards first and see how it works. You would only need to spend 2 hours or so as a guard every once in a while, and many people would be guards. You could be both a guard and a harvester. 

Why compromise? Just get rid of the idea. NPCs exists in games since dawn of gaming. If it is not broken, may be you don't need to fix it.

In order to have a superior system, seeing that I detest NPCs.

Originally posted by Consuetudo

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Consuetudo

Originally posted by Torik

The problem with players having 'mundane' duties in such a setup is one of scheduling.  If you need to have a guard present at certain times then the player doing that job will have to be online at the time or teh city will suffer from it.  You are not going to get many people who are willing to schedule their life around a game activity that might be quite boring at times.  This would be even worse if you need guards 24/7. 

Then comprimises can be made. Perhaps the only NPCs that would exist are "player created NPCs." A city reaching a certain capacity can have X amount of guards in it, but they all need to be paid for by the people in it then. I think it would be better to try out the system of player-guards first and see how it works. You would only need to spend 2 hours or so as a guard every once in a while, and many people would be guards. You could be both a guard and a harvester. 

Why compromise? Just get rid of the idea. NPCs exists in games since dawn of gaming. If it is not broken, may be you don't need to fix it.

In order to have a superior system, seeing that I detest NPCs.

From the discussion of all the problems, there is nothing "superior" about a all PC system. You would have a nightmare of scheduling conflicts, inconsistent populations and what-not.

You "detesting" NPCs is just a personal preference. Nothing more. It is not like there is a big out-cry for NPCs in video games.

Xsyon sounds very similar altough not identical, you will most likely be dissapoint though.

I think the majority of the MMO playerbase is far to anti social to enjoy such a design at this point.

It's a neat idea though.

Originally posted by Slampig

Originally posted by ReallyNow10

Asheron's Call 2 tried this, and although the game failed, it was an innovative idea and I think could still work.

Crafters, of course, have their own incentives to mine, set up shop, and sell.

Guards?  Maybe there could be pay or faction or experience reward for pulling guard duty and hanging out in town, policing the streets.

Town Mayor?  Sounds like politics and voting could jump this off, with maybe some cut of taxation being the reward.

And towns not maintained?  Well, they fall into ruins maybe, and new towns can be started.

All of this could be done; would be quite interesting.

... Just what I have been looking forward too after a long week in class, coming home and logging in to walk back and forth by a gate for 8 hours, and how would I be paid? In pelts? Are there going to be players that set up just to mint coins?

You won't have enough player to have a game devoid of NPCs and I think guard duty would be a major reason as to why...

Depends upon what's going on.  You sort of had an unspoken guard duty in Shadowbane, where players hung out and sort of watched their player made town, guarding it against raids.

I suppose you could have a criminal element (NPC's and PC's alike) come out at night to try to raid shops and mug citizens (NPC's and PC's alike, hehe), and there could be bounties and a jail, and faction increases for upholding the law.

Remember, you don't always have to be the center of an RPG experience, "the hero", to enjoy a game world.  Some players will want flashier play, some will want to craft and set up shop.  All, I think, can appreciate the immsersion of a living breathing world.

Now, I agree that voiding all NPC's might be a stretch, maybe have it so players can take up NPC duties from time to time, even if just to earn enough coin to make the difference for some item at the Auction House.