Developers Corner

Allright guys, I'll keep this one in the theoretical. Basically, I've been mulling over a concept in my head that would make for an interesting reform to the current MMO archtype. It does a number of things that other MMORPGs don't, not by adding features, so much as removing them. Some things are just plain gone, such as character skill or levels and PvE play, while others are supporting by providing mechanics that empower player regulation of areas such as politics, economics and even combat, rather than simply providing mechanics to regulate these areas.

Politics and the aim of the game are obviously massive factors in an MMORPG, even if we don't recognise them so much. In this concept, there would be a city, divided into a certain amount of areas, or "dens." There are three factions who must fight for control of the dens, each with a starting den which is particularly hard to assault. The ultimate aim of each faction is to control all of the dens, and with them, all of the starting dens for the other two factions.

How to rise in politics is something which needs to be addressed. This concept employs a fairly laisse-faire approach to all this. The game has a control chip for each den. This chip can be equipped by any player. This gives that player control over the various aspects of a den, which will be discussed below. Much like capture the flag in popular FPS games, this can be given away, dropped on death and when it is destroyed, a new one will arrive in its place, perhaps for a lucky passer-by to pick up, then ward off the responsibility and danger it entails.

Economics are an issue I feel are very poorly addressed in most MMORPGs, and I can see why. In the standard PvE model, there is just so damn much money being injected into the economy, far more than the feeble money sinks can provide. However, if one removes PvE completely, how can one gain money? Well, this economy is based on regulated flow of money into the economy, based on certain deregulated parametres. Basically, the main way to gain money is through supply trains. These only arrive to the factional starting zones and may only be used by the factional leader, or those whom he chooses as the administrators of this task. Here, a train will arrive from a faceless body supporting that faction at a set interval, with a set amount of supplies. This can be currency, weaponry, or anything else that would aid a player. The receiving faction can control the arrival of the goods by trading things for them, such as citizen chips that are dropped my members of the opposing factions, and other goods that can be exchanged for currency. This supply delivery is substantial, and indeed, the benefits from this have to be delivered to the entirety of that faction's population if it is to have a chance of success in the war that is all around them.

The secondary way to gain capital is through augmentation chips, the function of which will be discussed below. Each den creates chips at a set rate, and they can only be harvested by the den's leader, or again, those whom they allow in their place. Each den creates a unique type, and their varying function means that they may be traded to other players as is seen fit. These allow groups disassociated with the main body of the faction to remain economically viable, and to provide another, smalller scale model for distributing goods to the playerbase. Another way, which is largely unregulated is through factional citizenship chips, which I've touched on already. Each character spawns on them, and when they die, they are lootable from that corpse. They can be traded in for extra supplies from supply trains. The only fear I have is that cartels will pop up who aim to deliver one faction much capital by creating characters for the sole purpose of suiciding and giving resources to one faction at the detriment of another. I think this could largely control itself, but some kind of mechanisms would need to be considered.

Character advancement is always a big issue, especially as I have said that levels and skills are completely abolished. Indeed, this is true. There are no races, classes or skill sets. Character utility is based around player skill, quality of the gear and the augmentation chips installed. Two of these speak for themselves, but the latter is one I want to look at. Basically, augmentation chips are created by zones, and each zone creates a unique type, with a unique function. These could be a boost in run speed, better weapon aim or any number of things. A character may only have five of these installed at any one given time, which determine the speciality of that character.

Combat is a combination of a number of existing systems. It came to me when I was coding on Half-Life 2 mods. That game does its bullet detection by drawing a line between the gun the charater is holding and where it is pointing, and the weapon hits where a solid intersects that line first. I'd like to employ this, based around locked aiming and auto-attack. So, the player selects the enemy character, presses auto-attack, can use abilities and all that jazz. Well, it sounds like regular ranged combat in Everquest or any other fantasy MMORPG. However, I plan for a crucial feature... there is no detriment to attacking whilst moving, and certain augmentations which make attacking while running effective, too. So, what does this mean? Well, the player needs to stay on the move, there's no point in just standing there in the one spot, auto-attacking. The opponant will be behind cover, coming up just after you've fired, popping off a shot, ducking again, weaving behind pillars and whatnot. The shot will only hit if there is direct line of sight, and that goes for both parties in the combat, therefore, espcially when against multiple foes, tactics and "battlefield shaping" are very important indeed.

With combat comes death, and oft-contraversial part of MMORPGs. This concept has what I like to call effective permadeath, which means that the character is kept and all the rest of it, but the corpse of it remains on the ground for several days, or until looted, by whomever feels like it. Each player only spawns with basic clothes and a factional citizenship chip, the latter of which can be used by opposing factions to gain extra supplies. Everything that was on the character, including the aforementioned items is lootable, and the character spawns with a fresh citizenship chip and set of basic clothes. I've voiced my fears about this when discussing the economy, and I'd welcome suggestions on how to fix it.

I think I've covered the majority. Thanks goes to anyone who had the tenacity to read all this, and if anyone has any questions, or comments, I'll be hovering like a fly. Thanks for your interest.

with the exception of the economy part what you discribe is well protraied by games such as counterstrike and battlefield 2142 (?). For a MMO funds might be hard to come by because of the very limited nitch it would fill.

    The whole economics as you have it would not work for long, mainly because there is no reason to gather it up beyond killing another player, the trains would come and noone would bother with that feature because it would be more fun to gather it from other players.

   now if you had wear on the weapons and other equipment were at a point they NEEDED replaced that would be better. But then you would have players whining about decay being too great.

  As a rough draft of a PvP MMO it is good, I hope to see your refinements over time.

Originally posted by F'lar

with the exception of the economy part what you discribe is well protraied by games such as counterstrike and battlefield 2142 (?). For a MMO funds might be hard to come by because of the very limited nitch it would fill.

    The whole economics as you have it would not work for long, mainly because there is no reason to gather it up beyond killing another player, the trains would come and noone would bother with that feature because it would be more fun to gather it from other players.

   now if you had wear on the weapons and other equipment were at a point they NEEDED replaced that would be better. But then you would have players whining about decay being too great.

  As a rough draft of a PvP MMO it is good, I hope to see your refinements over time.

You're right in a sense, only this would be persistant, and on a much larger scale. Consider a level in Battlefield to be one of the dens I'm talking about, and you can see that the scale is completely different, therefore lending itself to a different playstyle altogether, more persistant and community based.

Gathering it from other players is a necessity, but not sustainable, because equipment changes hands so fast. Yes, high level players could gather from newbies, it'd be a lot of effort/time and alienation for very little indeed. If one is to go for people of a comparable player skill and gear level, then there is an equal chance of dying, which isn't really very good to creating capital.

I'd also be interested in decay, and when I consider it, I can see a decay system based on death with an item could be good. When someone dies with an item equipped, it loses a portion of its durability, when that gets to zero, it would be gone forever. This would be a problem in most games, but in this, when one dies, they are unlikely to see their gear again anyway, so it wouldn't be a whining issue (although everyone loves to whine anyway).

A game which I would have loved to see completed was Imperator from Mythic, this game had several interesting concepts in it, however it was shelved a few months before Mythic announced that they would be producing Warhammer.

I don't believe that any game that does away with the PvE concept entirely can have anything but a small limited audience, similarly I don't think that a game that is pure 'anything' can succeed nowadays. Games can have a primary focus but without several secondary aims and skills for people to work on/with as a pastime/relief from the same thing day in day out the game is not going to have the longevity that most MMO's need.

Originally posted by Parsifal57
A game which I would have loved to see completed was Imperator from Mythic, this game had several interesting concepts in it, however it was shelved a few months before Mythic announced that they would be producing Warhammer.

I don't believe that any game that does away with the PvE concept entirely can have anything but a small limited audience, similarly I don't think that a game that is pure 'anything' can succeed nowadays. Games can have a primary focus but without several secondary aims and skills for people to work on/with as a pastime/relief from the same thing day in day out the game is not going to have the longevity that most MMO's need.

Yeah, I never thought this'd be more than a niche concept. I'd be looking for those who want combat with progressive goals (territory aquisition) that remain persistant, with a secondary focus on politics and economics. Very niche market.

Either way, I put it here for people to poke holes in, so I won't reply to every post. I think I'll get some sleep, instead. Cheers for the feedback so far.

Some interesting stuff.  But not for me. I wouldn't want to play it, and to beta/test it, I would require a salary, wouldn't want to do that with my free time.

This would be a whole new way to define MMORPG (playing a role in the grand scheme of things rather than in the small surroundings such as groups and such.), but I'm more of a old-fashion guy.  I like my RPG to focus on character development.  If I wanted to do player skills, then I play quick games of CS or DoD.

Also, one thing I HATE about the present MMORPG is the idea of gear-dependent be too dominant, and since your idea say it should be dominant, then I guess I will stay away for a game with this idea, even if it is a nicely, well thought idea.



Also, what you've mentioned is more in-line with MMOFPS idea... by adding on systems which makes the FPS games have more meaning.

It's nice to see thoughts along different lines for MMORPGs. Indeed it is such thoughts that do at rare times lead to a different way of playing. My major problem with what you have put is the lack of pve. There are times when I just want to log in and kill some stuff by myself for 30 minutes or so. Without that ability to do so, I wouldn't even consider playing such a game. Equally whilst you draw pve as a negative point for bringing in money (gold) to the ingame economy, it does more than just effect the economics of the game. It is a system of psychological reward for the player. They kill things (pve) and at times something is dropped. This brings about a feeling of pleasure which in turn creates an anticipation for the next item to be dropped. Thereby casuing the player to keep killing stuff (pve) and in turn resulting in the player continung to play the game. The reason some games are let down by too much stuff going into the economy and unbalancing it. Is due to them not employing an economist and a psychologist to create a good balance in drop rates and valid, working reasons for money to go out of the system. Also at times some players will find ways to dupe and hence create an imbalance in the economy. I do feel a game without pve would be nothing more than something like BF2142 (etc). Possible very good but almost impossible to charge a subscription fee for.