Jon Wood: Why Not: New Cap City?
MMORPG.com Managing Editor Jon Wood returns this week with a column taking an idea for an MMO directly from a popular Sci-Fi television program, Caprica, in which people visit a virtual game world with no point and no direction called New Cap City.
Column By Jon Wood on April 29, 2010
I want to start this week's column with a disclaimer: If you have any intentions of watching the Sci Fi series Caprica, and haven't done so yet, the following article is going to prove something of a spoiler for you. Don't keep reading, and if you do, don't say I didn't warn you.
A while back, one of my colleagues wrote a weekly column called "Why Not." Each week, he'd come up with a different concept for an MMO and then talk about it, looking for reader opinions. Today, I wanted to resurrect that tradition by writing Why Not: New Cap City.
Those of you who are familiar with the Caprica series, a prequel to the recent re-imagining of Battlestar Gallactica, will know immediately what I'm talking about. For those of you not so well versed, I'll give you the Cliff Notes (Coles Notes for the Canucks out there) version of what I'm talking about.
Imagine a world where the internet isn't confined to your computer, but instead could be accessed directly from a device that hooks into your mind. This device allows you to move around "the internet", called V-World in the show (get it? It's a virtual world...).
Within that world are nearly countless different places and people, shops and programs, etc, etc. I wanted, however, to talk about one particular element of V-World, a game known as New Cap City.
Think of New Cap City as a kind of virtual reality mix between Grand Theft Auto and Second Life. It is, at its core, a virtual reality recreation of the fictional Caprica City. Players, when they log into the game, are free to roam around and do pretty much whatever it is that they want. There is no rule of law, there are no levels, no classes to guide you. Instead, you are left almost completely to the mercies of the other players in the sandbox, and they to you. It is, in effect, a true sandbox.
I know there are those of you out there who are going to tell me that this already exists in the form of Second Life, but it's not like that at all. Second Life has no real, true, unifying factor. One zone may be fantasy, the next Sci-fi, the next a proper shooter game, etc. etc. etc. the world is what its players make it, literally. New Cap City, on the other hand, already has a world that asks players instead to create their own social constructs, be they entrepreneurial or murderous, financially oriented or sexually oriented, it's all there and waiting.
If you're like me, you're probably thinking that all of this sounds like a fairly straight-forward sandbox style game. There are, however, two things that I think really make New Cap City stand out as a core concept that could shake up the MMO realm.
The first of these is the fact that the game has no clear, distinct purpose. In fact, part of the fun for players is in trying to figure out what the "point" of the game is, what the original designers intended to be the "endgame" goal. At one point in the series one of the characters inside of New Cap City remarks that perhaps trying to figure out what the goal is actually is the goal. In any case, it's certainly not a game that's about grinding to the "endgame" content.
The second, and probably most dramatic, set-apart feature is the fact that death in the game is permanent. In New Cap City, once your avatar dies, you can't log into the game again.
)
Now, if we were going to talk about creating an MMO in with the same core design elements as NCC, not allowing anyone to ever log in again after dying is not only something that might turn people away, but it surely isn't a good revenue model. Something would have to be done.
I'm certainly not suggesting that someone build an MMO on the Caprica IP. In fact, doing so would limit the potential of what would already be a fairly niche title. Instead, I'd suggest that someone take the spirit of that TV show game and turn it into a real life MMO. Take an already existing city like New York, and allow players from all over to populate it. Don't give them classes or levels, but instead give them unprecedented interactivity with the world around them. Allow for possibilities beyond simple PvP, and build a "lawless New York" simulator. Don't set goals for the players, let them find their own path, and their own goals.
Now, as far as that pesky perma-death idea, I wouldn't recommend scrapping it all together. The constant threat of being killed and kept out of the game is a big part of what keeps a lot of people in check, and adds significantly to the thrill and excitement of a true sandbox game. Instead, I'd suggest that it be replaced with a pay-per-death system. This not only creates incentive for players not to die, but also provides an interesting revenue stream for the company.
These are all just the foundations of an idea and I'm sure that you all out there have your own ideas and thoughts, so please, build on what I've written here in the forums. At best, it might give somebody a bit of inspiration, and worst-case scenario it's a head scratcher for the rest of us.
More Jon Wood Features:
More Columns:
More Features:
I absolutely love Caprica. I don't think the MMO would be for me, though, but I'd definitely be down for Battlestar Galactica.
you forgot that new cap city has perma-death, i.e 1 life and you can never go back.
Who's gonna pay for that? no one. :)
but i do get what you mean, and i think in a few years time we might start seeing stuff like that as people get bored of current trends and decide to try new different things.
Also the internet/computers need to get MUCH faster before we can start having huge non-instance/zoned worlds with 100's of people in one area. 2 games i know which allow huge amounts of people in one area both lag to hell and back when tons of people are in one area, Darkfall and EVE.
oops i meant to put "Thousands of people in one area" not 100's.
the pay per die sounds as bad as the perma death so what the player has to pay the company money everytime some other player kills them? I can see the company now hiring players to run around murdering players so they make more money.
on a side note
sry only slightly tho Trion has teamed up with the Sy Fy channel to make an action mmo that is also a show that runs on the Sy Fy channel.
http://www.trionworlds.com/en/games/syfy-action-mmo.php
So basically, you want a 3D MUD roleplay with perma-death?
This kind of game already exists in the form of Garry's Mod roleplaying servers. Granted, they are largely populated by /b/ anon 13-year-olds with little maturity. However, the whole point of these servers is complete openess (under the Source engine's limitations). You have a map. You have some weapons. You have the chat window. You have some props you can spawn via Garry's Mod UI, go.
Well, the OP pertty much stated why a game based on New Caprica city would be challenging, the perma death feature would be hard to incorporate and keep things challenging. (and keep that sub money coming in).
Also, in the show the characters have no idea who created New Cap City nor what they get out of running it. There's been some hint about players paying for it with in world cash(energy) so I'm sure ultimately we're going to find its some nefarious agency that is not acting the players best interest.
Also interesting is that people in New Cap City act at their basest moral level, which isn't so far off from how things tend to be over at SL which perhaps the shows creators intended.
The idea of virutal reality that you actually live in is the dream people have sought for years now, but I think we're a hundred years or more away from the sort of technology depicted by the show.
Believe me, if people will shell out US$25 for a freaking sparkly flying pony, they'll certainly pay a game-token of some sort worth $0.10 or $0.25 or $0.50 in order to rez after a death. Especially if most people are sitting on a pile of said tokens because you buy them in batches of 50 or 100 and can use them for other purposes.
Pay-per-death is an appealing concept to many developers. It has been quite seriously discussed as a valid RMT for products I have worked on. In a sandbox game, it puts a real, tangible value on not dying, which is one of the serious design problems developers face when trying to craft a proper virtual world.
As an aside, most developers have given up on trying to craft virtual worlds, and are in the business of selling RPG theme-park experiences instead. They're easier, and the public has a proven taste for paying to consume them as recreation. Tough to say "no" to all that money.
the only one that will benefit from the pay per death is the ones that are selling the respawn items there is no way you can just say im not going to die and I am sure will bring out even more hackers to make themselves as invincible as they can.
maybe its an appealing concept to developers trying to milk as much funds out of the consumers as possible but not really a good idea imho.
awww - u just posted that for the picture !!
tits john !!!
tits !!!
Second Life and Caprica's V-World are just graphical MOOs with an emphasis on sex.
NCC is just a single instance of Otherland. Otherland is a concept I'd like to see implemented.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otherland
Or, I can just invite the young lady out. See if she would be willing to share that apple.
The intriguing part to me - if I understand the concept - is having a hybrid game where (1) the players make their own sandbox content within a unifying setting, such as a virtual city, and (2) the sandbox has an underlying but undiscovered purpose or mystery, a la Myst.
That would be a little akin to original SWG. Limited content in a mostly sandbox setting, with players trying to discover the path to Jedi.
I would play that.
Forgot, or spent a paragraph explicitly mentioning? It's a fine line.
The problem with V-world is pretty well shown in the rest of the series. Take everything good and bad about the internet and make it more immersive and lifelike... I think we, as a society have a long was to go before a V-world would be a good idea.
But as far as a game with NCC rules/premise goes I dun see a problem with it and I dun see it as a new concept. The problem with making games like that today isn't in the rule set its in the ability to create a detailed enough world to make people want to play and give them the opportunity to do things.
There is already an mmo like this...it's called "Second Life" and it lags most of the time unless you have a super PC, I mean like nothing priced under $5k , top of the line, ridiculous PC. It is a great concept but so far poorly implemented. Some other IP's have tried to mimic the sandbox type; "There", "Utherverse", "Sociolotron", to name a few. SL(Second Life) is the most popular and has the best graphics though.
I would give it a try it sounds fun and bsg is cool
This sounds like a game I would gladly pay $15 for. The only problem i would have with it is the perma-death or pay-per-death idea. I don't like the idea of that. Now, maybe if you had an account, made a single character for that account, and then if you died, the character would simply hit the obituaries and you would have to start from scratch with a new character. That might be a cool idea, but I can't see many player's getting behind it. But as far as everything else, I'm all for it.
Reading comprehension for the win. Czanrei's "There is already an mmo like this...it's called "Second Life" comment, shows me he didn't read the entire article either.
I have to say this is an intriguing idea. I've never seen or even heard of the show Caprica until now, but the premise sounds fascinating. It reminds me of a couple of other intellectual properties. One that someone already mentioned is the rather disturbing game Sociolatron, and the other is the book Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson. Of course three problems I see that would need to be overcome before such a game could be made are the computing power needed, the sheer exhausting amount of labor such an endeavor would take a development team to create and maintain, and the permadeath option. Time and technological progress will fix the first two but I have serious doubts many people would play a game with a permadeath penalty, at least for very long.
I refuse to even attempt to delve into the questions of economy, or classes, skills vs level progression, crafting, etc that seem to be the core of current MMORPG design, and in many ways their downfall.
I don't think buying your way back in would be a good idea... however maybe earning it somehow would, because then the more financially endowed would be willing to sacrifice themselves to take out players with less money.
Also earning your way back might be done proactively by earning the right to return ingame, like extra lives, however you don't know how, when or how many you have.
I have always been for a "Harsh Realm" sandbox MMO (If you don't know what Harsh Realm is search for it with comics tv shows chris carter)
Player vs Player of Payer vs Payer? While an interesting concept and thought experiement, I doubt such a model would ever really be interesting.
However, as a side note to that, the current infinite lives without explanation why model used by most MMOs these days really needs to be re-thought.
maybe if you had kids in game that you raised(they being npc's)then if you died your assets and gear what not went to the oldest and you played then as him to seek vengeance on who killed your dad or mom
I get the impression most of the people who are commenting on this so far, have not actually watched the whole first season of Caprica. As someone who has been gaming online since there was an online to game on, I can tell you that the idea of New Cap City sounds extremelty appealing. Anyone who didn't watch Caprica but loved Battlestar Galactica, or just good science fiction in general needs to watch the whole season.
POTENTIALLY MORE CAPRICA SPOILERS AHEAD:
As the OP said, New Cap City is basically an underground internet MMO game. By underground I mean it is part of the underground area of Caprica's v-world, and doesn't seem to be legally operated. It's a city simulator without anything resembling law enforcement or rules. In a nut shell, it's like the lawless wild west pioneer days are taking place in a modern city. While it's true that there is no law, the people themselves still generate a loose social structure based on the idea that they all more or less want to survive and stay in the game. These players love New Cap City so much that they litteraly freak out at the idea of being killed and never being able to return. The threat of death is a KEY motivator, sort of like it is in the world.
Why? Because there are no rules here. They can do drugs, have endless hours of sex, do crime, and just about everything else you've ever dreamed of doing in a holodeck when no one is looking. On the open street there are always battles raging, and the fear of death is everywhere. It's a very interesting thing to watch on TV for a gamer. While there are some holes in the idea of implementing it in real life (such as permadeath), the same could be said about every game that has ever been put out. I actually like the OP's idea of pay-per-death. As has been mentioned, people pay a TON of money for much more ridiculous things than this in video games. Ever hear of Farmville?
Those of you who have spent any time in SecondLife know that it's nothing like New Cap City, although it can offer some insight as to how people would behave in a real New Cap City game. SecondLife has a base set of rules that have to be followed and from that fairly low base, things get very interesting and/or weird in a real hurry. It is also very inspiring and liberating. I spent some time in SecondLife in the past, and I was drawn to some basic ideas while I was there:
1) I wanted to express my avatar fully without fear of repercussions, and within my own moral comfort zone.
2) I wanted to be able to step out of my own comfort zone, and go see what kind of crazy, strange, scary, exciting things other people were doing and creating.
3) I wanted to be able to share my own creative ideas to bring other people pleasure.
In my case, this wasn't about sex, and despite what everyone says, SL isn't all about cyber porn. If you think that is all there is going on there, then you have no clue what SL is. The main reason SL didn't appeal to me long term was because there was no common "game" happening. There are games within SL, but that's not the same as there being a common "game" that everyone is more or less a part of. In New Cap City the game seems to be about exploring your uninhibitted or dark side while managing to stay alive. How this is accomplished is up to each individual.
Games are inherently limited by their mechanics. So while you can encourage players to set their own goals and give no direction they cannot do anything not programmed into the game. Say I want to set up shop as an vendor of pictures of girls with apples I've taken. If there is no money, or apples, or girls, or cameras, or selling, or shops, or pictures, I can't do it. Even something that simple requires every one of those elements to be present. Some things are no brainers and of course there is always emergent behaviors but the limitations are there and you can't think of everything. That being true you cannot build a game where people can set all their own goals. People will always be boxed in and guided away from the edges of the sandbox unless they can program the game itself and the computing power isn't available for that.
I watch Caprica with my daughter and we both thought it would be fantastic to play in New Cap City... or a real world equivalent!
This is where the concepts from SeconfLife come in to play. As long as there is a currency system and a way for people to build/script things, then you have all you need. Go download the free client for SL and just cruise around for an hour or so. Nearly everything in SL is player built and scripted. People have their own shops that they built from scratch, selling their own prodcuts that they also built. The game has a currency system that everyone uses for commerce. You could also create your own currency system if you wanted to.
While they don't really show this aspect of New Cap City, it is implied. Someone is creating content for the game, but this is a futuristic sc-fi tv show, and the technology is much more advanced than ours. In our reality, the players would need to be able to create some of the content within the confines of whatever the game creater deems appropriate.
oh so if some other sap is willing to pay for stupid items in a game that justifies the developers throwing in another stupid charge on top of what you pay to play the game to start with for something that is vital to playing the game being alive in it,
I could careless about the stupid things people spend their money on in cash shops thats their business but to implement a pay to be alive item on top of whatever monthly fee your paying is just wrong period.
but hey if you like paying for everything maybe you should play entropia I hear you have to pay real money to even kill a mob so maybe that is up your alley.
The choice is yours to make. Should someone make a game with this feature, you can always go play WoW or something else. To some of us, the appeal of death having severe penalties in these games is very strong. One of the reasons people run around and gank other people is because if they ended up being killed while acting like a jackass, they just respawn. The same goes for careless combat tactics. Obviously the pay-per-death system would have to be thought through, and could also include other restrictions such as safe areas, but I'm not apposed to exploring the idea just because money is involved. I believe many other people would be into it as well.
Go out and play paintball. After you get popped a few times and end up with some red-purple bruises, and it hurts, you will see how much more exciting the game is, and how much more seriously you take the combat. It hurts just enough that you DO NOT want to get hit if you can help it. This is the same kind of concept we are talking about here, and it is a game changer.
"Pay per death"?? Can you imagine what the gankers and griefers would do with that? Not to mention, it sets up a perverse incentive for the Dev's themselves. They *benefit* from players dying. That type of game would not only narrowly niche itself, but I seriously suspect it would take an excentric billiionare type to even consider funding it. The past history of sand box type games has demonstrated that they become havens for gankers and griefers. Thanks, but no thanks.
ahh yeah.. about that, i got distracted by the apple! i swear!
There are a lot of people around here who suffer from EXTREMELY narrow imaginations and ability to think through a concept completely. For those of us who do not have this limitation, we like to think of the possibilities. Why don't you sit down and explore the pay-per-death idea completely and see what you come up with. Add other rules, change pay per death to something else that would be equally motivating, but not cost money. Come up with some good ideas. Don't just sit there in your chair freaking out because your mind won't let you imagine anything but the worst case scenario.
Thank god for creative minds, or we would all still be sitting in caves and hunting our food with rocks and sticks.
lol its the go play wow defense I also bet your one of those that hates f2p games also which this idea of paying per death is no different than its called paying for advantage
and to answer your post right above this one maybe read up farther i did throw in an idea like having to spend time raising a npc child that would take your place if you died
the whole idea of paying money to respawn i still dont see why some are saying it would be a good idea most likely some of the some rail on f2p games also which this would be in the same vein with the pay to respawn idea
and what does wow have to do with anything anyways least of all giving developers more ideas on how to part you from your money?
Yeah, I hate f2p games, that's why it states clearly in my signature that I played (still play) Guild Wars, and the number one game I am looking forward to is Guild Wars 2. Also, every f2p game out there has a shop full of stuff people pay for every day, and many times they are paying for advantage. That's the way it goes.
Wow was just a name pulled from the hat. The point is, that not every player matches up with every game. If you don't like the rules of the game, go find something else. It's really that simple. No one is obligated to make a game with all the rules that make YOU personally happy. Some of us would be interested in seeing a game with a concept like pay-per-death. Some wouldn't. See how that works?
consequences for dying and what not dont bother me its the idea of putting a monetary value on it especially if you are already paying money to play it you shouldnt have to pay on top of that to keep playing it if somehow you died, maybe if it was a f2p game that wouldnt bother me as much but if it was a p2p game thats a different story
I've always been a fan of harsh death penalties. Perma-death, full loot, etc are all things I support in my "dream-game". I never thought of paying per death before, and now that you mentioned it..... I love the idea. I'm sure the idea has been floated about at game company meetings but what's the reality of this becoming a possibility? I guess the correct combat system that is evenly-balanced and a true virtual world need to be created to host this type of things but paying per death sounds extremely appealing to me. It's one step below perma-death, but one step above full-loot. Perfect.
With that said, is the community anywhere near accepting this type of payment model?
People have a hard time with anything related to perma-death. The main reason is, the first thing they think of is how easy it is to die or get ganked in today's games. When you look at it from that perspective, I completely understand their fear.
However, any game that wants to seriously implement permadeath (the kind where your avatar dies, but you can create a new one and start over) or pay-per-death would have to make sweeping changes to game mechanics in order to make it work. Just off the top of my head:
In favor of it being done properly sure, but there are a lot of ways this could go. You coul have 2 extremes. In 1 case you could have people with more $ nonstop griefing other players simply because they know it has a financial impact (just think of all the times youve seen people nerdraging at eachother over a comment in chat, what would happen if rathe rthan just harassing them in a game, you could actually cause RL impact to that person by causing them to spend more money). In the other extreme you could have the majority of people too afraid to do much of anything, experimenting/exploring new untested areas, pvping, etc and the game could become pretty stagnant because you may only have a few willing to spend that $, while everyone else is too afraid to do anything interesting.
The problem would be trying to find that perfect middle ground. I think a better option would be to have varying degrees of injury and death. For the most part, you lose a battle and become seriously injured/wounded temporarily, causing various effects depending on the situation such as becoming disoriented, losing the use of limbs, head trauma causing you to lose memory (perhaps loss of skills/skill points or something), being blinded/blurred vision, becoming deaf (unable to see chat or something like that). Perhaps you could even have actual facilities like hospitals, and ambulances/EMTs to respond and assist you, and players could even take up the roles of doctors who gain xp/money/etc for performing medical treatments.
You could have all of those various things, which would cause some pretty serious "death" penalties, which would be only temporary in some cases, but others would need to be treated medically at a high cost (in game, not RL $) or else would remain on you permanently.
Perhaps there could also be a system put in place which tracks various vitals and scores them based on previous injuries, and they become progressively tougher/more expensive to treat, and in some cases completely untreatable & permanent. You could then use these scores to basically measure towards a true death, in which sustaining too many injuries for too long and then "dying" again would actually cause a permadeath. This would give you plenty of chance to learn from mistakes, maintain the same character, etc while still having an eventual permadeath if you arent careful.
Now of course this is all still open to griefing, just like the pay option, but systems & tools could be put into place to allow players to develop their own policing (or bounty hunter) force, which could respond to things like griefing as a crime, and hunt down griefers and inflicting severe penalties on them (such as taking their money and possessions to be contributed towards funding their "police" force). Perhaps a judicial system could also be implemented in which certain players can be judged, and given a punishment such as some sort of mark/title on their record which prevent them from being able to go certain places or do certain things similar to how it works IRL (such as not being permitted to carry weapons).
Interesting short read about New Cap City.
SPOILER ALERTS for those who haven't seen the first season yet.
http://www.capricatv.net/2010/02/next-stop-new-cap-city.html
Well said. Of course you couldn't use games like WoW as a template for this type of game. Death can happen all too quickly, and very cheaply if you're out-leveled. As you've pointed out, the game-world itself needs to justify the harsh death penalty to attract players and keep them there. Your bullet points are also a good thing to point out. No one wants to feel cheated out of their hard-earned real life cash in a video game. There needs to be some type of prevention to minimize that feeling.
I'm optimistic we're almost done with the "Goden Age of Raiding" (thankfully). One can only hope that MMORPGs take a turn towards virtual worlds (sort of where the genre was when it started) where simulation and gameplay becomes the spotlight rather than connecting to Ventrilo to do a dungeon run for that ultra rare, cool-looking sword.
The more and more I type this reply I realize CCP has succeeded against all odds, even if just barely, in such an anti-sandbox gaming community. Then again, their success is most likely the outcome of having almost zero competition in such a niche market.
The whole Caprica "Virtual New York City" sounds neat, but would be such an enormous undertaking. Baby steps. :)
I understand where you're coming from. There would be negatives and positives of implementing a pay-per-death payment model. This also comes with any death system. There's so many alternative ways of implementing death that the conversation could go on forever.
With the way you have described above, such as having medical doctors for the injured and a judicial system for the law-breakers. It all sounds great when imagining it, but entertainment is something hard to create, especially if I'm a lawyer in a video game. Sounds great, but is that even remotely appealing to "play"? There's a fine line of being an enjoyable simulation and horribly boring.
Keep in mind that the reason it seems even remotely interesting to most of us is because the OLD Cap City doesn't even exist, so the New one would be a completely original copy. It would require creating a setting, which usually requires laying the foundation of a story at the very least, and the foundation of mythos necessary for the BSG universe. These elements I, and likely most gamers, find more than just passingly interesting.
If, however, you took New Cap City as it was to the fictional Capricans, perhaps in our world a New Philadelphia City, I would find it critically dull. A game that mirrors some real-world location, where I'm free to kill other people and pursue a goal that does / does not exist sounds like a very, very, very small niche market, probably for a handful of die-hard PvP'ers, and that's about it. I can't imagine the majority having much interest in a game that lacks goals, structure, rewards and even any elements of interesting fantasy or escapism. Sandbox play alone isn't worth it sacrificing the rest of a real game, despite what a very tiny majority would have everyone else believe. I think, even to them, the allure of a "goal that is not a goal" would fade quickly.
Well... When dealing with sand boxes, history has demonstrated that what one gets IS the worst case scenario. Human nature being what it is, thats a given. With all of the rule sets that have been tried, the fact remains that the Dev's end up doing something to protect their business model(think current Concord in Eve Online) or the game goes out of business. Its not a matter of a lack of imagination, its more a good grasp of human nature, and the history of sand box games.
I would like to see it.
i once remarked that the future is soon to become the movie gamer where people pay to play other people and others get paid to be played sounds great and all just sounds like the road to hell is paved with good intentions or something of that ilk
btw i was labeled as crazy for saying that but honestly shit like this makes me sound a whole lot saner red pill or blue pill take your pick
Why do people think of Pay per death as the ideal scenerio? I would prefer if you died, you wouldn't respawn for x days, perhaps a week. Time is the only currency everyone has somewhat equal access to. As long as you were only allowed one account, limited in some way by having to prove your identity then it should be fine. You would then put effort into making sure you weren't kicked out of the game for a week. You would build communities who would protect one another.
This is all easy if the graphics are low quality or if it's text based. As we have MUDS that offer almost exactly this and SecondLife is on it's way there graphically. It's generally going to be an entirely different atmosphere than the real world. This is what it's meant to be, an escape from the consequences in the real world.
how about new jack city =p
How do you figure I didn't read the whole thread?? Just because "Second Life" isn't named NCC doesn't deter from the point that the OP stated he didn't want a niche-based IP anyhow based directly off of NCC, which is where SL comes in. Not to mention the fact that SL does have a Caprica sim anyhow, a few of them actually. Try understanding a poster's point before flaming them needlessly next time, thanks.
"hangs ingame sign out now"....Griefer for hire, never wanna see that guy again? Just call 555-5555...
I'd be very curious to know how many people who support a pay-per-death concept also are of the mindset that companies are making games for money and anything else is a far second.
As another poster said If you assume that companies are doing it for money then you would also have to assume that companies are going to impliment things that will drive up the death count or at the very least they wont be building in systems that will prevent you from dying more often than not.
If I were a developer on a pay-per-death MMO the very very very first weapon type that I would add would be bombs/traps/mines/claymores/IEDs. And since these weapons provide a relatively safe way for the user to kill another people would eat them up. The second thing I would do would be to add the really effective ones items to a cash shop so I can get money coming and going.
I'm all for alternative payment models (the only one I downright hate is Subs Plus) but a lot of the alternative models are open to huge abuses by the developers (I'm not saying all developers would or do abuse their payment models, but it certainly happens and a pay-per-death would be no different)
I think that sub plus would be perfect here .. it would do away with developers wanting to "make death to easy" or intentionally finding ways to garner more death token sales ...
I agree with the above poster though .. time is the greatest commodity we all have access too .. you die your character dies for a day .. not too harsh but still .. now your gonna have to go find something else to do .. dammit .. my guild/team/friends won't have me around for the big raid/battle/grindfest/etc .. oh man .. now i have to go outside and do something cause i was stupid and thought that guy was afk ..
people would be forced to consider their actions vs consequences .. imagine SWG with this kind of system implemented... hmmm .. Jedi ... he's standing right there .. maybe i can take him .. i wonder if he has friends close by .. well he is in X clan .. they usually hang out on the other side of town .. perhaps if i get the drop on him .. maybe i should follow him to a more secluded area ..
real consequences make the game more interesting .. that is why people like full loot .. (those who do) .. your time was spent gathering those virtual sticks/rocks/berries/whatever .. if you die on the way to the bank .. your time is lost .. cant be gotten back either .. so you take pains to avoid that death .. Darkfall for instance .. no one fights anyone unless they are 100% sure they will win if they have something very valuable on them .. no one .. the risk vs. reward just isnt high enough ..
so what would a day/week/hour of your play time be worth .. think risk vs. reward .. what would you be willing to gamble? how much contemplation would it take to attack that guy/jump in to save a potentially doomed friend? .. what about save a stranger?? now your talking real social interaction .. thanks man you just saved me and now i will make that raid tonight after all .. you should come along
just food for thought
I have an idea!
Get this, pay to kill system!
If you kill somebody who has no warrant on them you have to pay, a moderate fee. This would keep random killing in-check.
The Dead person is locked out for 24hours, all there possesions are forfeit while they are dead, people can bring them to a hospital if theyre in a critical condition to wake them up sooner. Bank deposits can be made, and items can be stored in any location.
Literally you get billed at the end of the month for each person you killed.
This way there would be little killing in the game, and it would focus on social and economic gameplay, with strategic killings.
The only way this would work is if the sub-scription fee for the game was in-game currency, then in-game currency could be used to pay kill-debts.
There could be serious gameplay to be had. Additionally if in-game currency could be cashed out then how much intrigue would there be?. Bounties could be payed for with real money, and cashed out. There would be an intelligence game outside of the virtual game, information on money and goods being moved around, back-stabbing and power-struggles could earn you actual money.
In-game property(land and vehicles) could be bought and sold; weapons and equipement could be supplied and distributed by players themselves. The game would be serious buisness.
Just a thought.
I love the idea, I loved Caprica, I love Sandbox games. However do we really believe this is the general direction for mmo's? This site just the other day had the news article regarding the growing popularity and profitability of more superficial, casual gameplay and that this would be the direction for most of the VC in the near future. People now live in the plug and play society and thats exactly how they want their games. That's not to say thay sandbox has to be complex, but without direction people are required to think and create for themselves and this I just don't feel is the interest of the newer players in the mmo scene. They seem to want clear and defined objectives with just as clear and defined parameters for win and loss.
tell me what you are considering if said death is beyond your control a back stab unintended ganking etc?
Well the idea of this kind of game is appealing-all except the perm death and not being able to log back in again.
Personally I'd like to see a gangster sandbox mmo.
I would like to see something like this, my first MMO was the matrix online and one of the most enjoyable features of the game was the creating of your own stories, the fact it was in a massive city and most buildings were accessible and could be used. PvP could really happen anywhere and it just had a really great feel or mystery to the city. Up until SOE took over and wrecked it / saved it from closure.
Anyway i think a lot could be learned from MxO if a game like this would be made.
A true Battlestar MMO would rock IMO, if done right.. This means no short cuts or pulling a Cyrptic 1/2 assed job.. Imagine a MMO with 12 starting races, on 12 starting planets, with hundreds if not thousands of quest and tasks to achieve. Imagine all the different factions, splinter factions and hybrid factions, all on shakey ground with each other (but NOT K.O.S.).. Imagine all faced with a common enemy, the cylons :) Imagine as you may a "monster" play option where you can level up your very own cylon and become a real threat in some of the open PvP zones.. Imagine both land and space combat :)
It could happen, but it would take atleast 5 years in development with some cash to spend.. My mmo game that I designed as a hobby over the past 3 years can easily be converted to such a MMO.. However a Battlestar MMO is already registered and is due to come out as a browser based games :(
Oh well.. we can dream
You can have perma death where when you die, you need to re-roll - just make it quick to level / skill up or whatever, and allow players to compete on a fairly even level from level 1.
Jon it is nice to think of such a imaginary world. Except that your idea of how to handle death. What you would end up with is a big group of people that gank everyone else. While it is nice to imagine something else, that is exactly what would happen, hence you would rapidly lose your playerbase and the game would fold.
All you have to do is look at the uncontrolled ffapvp games that have passed by the wayside or have been changed to prevent this.
Time to get you feet planted firmly in reality and quit wishing it were not so.
I like the idea of pay per death. Not that once you die you can never return, ever, but if you want to return you have to basically buy a new account.
haha, people make such a huge deal when some fluff costs 5 bucks at the online store and you are talking about buying a whole new account every time you die?
why have to reroll if you put the time and effort into raising a internet offspring that you could just assume the role once you died as long as you spent the time and resources nurturing him/her/it?
Ok, I know this is "why not" type article designed to generate some creative thought on the mmorpg genre, especially regarding sandbox style play. And part of me respects it for that. But with that considered...
Here I was thoroughly bored and burnt out with themepark games and more than ever willing to listen to what the sandboxers have to say and then I hear all this talk of perma-death, or paying RMT for dying, or even X amount of days penalty for dying as as if these options would prove invigorating or immersive or appealing. WTF.
A great TV drama does not a good mmorpg make, and some of a TV drama's feaures removed from the dramatic context become something else entirely when applied to mmorpgs. It's the old issue of comparing like with like. This isn't even on the same page.
Mmorpg players, with a minority of rare and noble exceptions, are complete and utter cun.....Ok, I wont elaborate! I could've made a very long and misanthropic list of the types of people that have dominated all the mmorpgs I have played. But I want you to make your own mind up. I personally think that the mmorpg community is more akin to Lord of the Flies with ADHD on PCP rather than Plato's Republic or Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract. The former is utterly terrible, actually game-breaking, with perma-death options.
This is why perma-death on that scale will never work lol.
But a nice what if type article nonetheless.
Regards
Melmoth
ed for typo
If I wanted the pains of raising and nurturnig a child, I would just do that in real life. This is an uncreative and lame interpretation. I think the pay per death income stream would be interesting to explore given you pay a box price for access to the game + paying for 1st life of character and INSTEAD of subs, income model is prmarily generated off deaths.
This would be interesting, sort of in a way like gambling, but interesting and untried none-the-less. I think people with these other ideas to try and veer the idea away from this model are just the same people that want as much of everything for as a little as possible.
I'm sorry the offspring idea will not even come close to capturing the feel of a real death penalty because I wuold just keep making kids all day and the game ouwld quickly become stale as raisnig children is incredibly hard work from what I seen.
well apprently noone does contemplate helping ppl these days homeless guy risks his life to save a woman from a robber and the robber stabs him multiple times surveillance video show 3 ppl walked right on by his bleeding body as he lay dying in the street one man even lifted him up probably to check to see if he had any money then just leaves him the man died had someone helped or contemplated anything he might have lived
so i dont see ppl rushing to anyones aid especially in a fake world
this would lead to cops and medical personnel in the game and it would become what sounds an awful lot like the matrix
in fact this whole new cap city and caprica itself almost seems like a matrix rip off
I think it's a cool world but somehow I smell a epic fail. I'm thinking that the device will be hacked within a matter of days and people will abuse it allowing them unlimited free rezzes on altered IP and MAC address assigned devices. A world like this could easily be taken advantage of and fall into the same footsteps Second Life has. A world of griefers who take advantage of systems in order to fullfill their destiny making peoples lives miserable for personal pleasure and superiority. I can just see a bunch of them running around in the Caprica world terrorizing the city forcing everyone to pay for a rez knowing they can easily get back in right after getting booted.
Well, as much as I love the idea, it's a proven fact that perma-death just doesn't work. EVE, argueably the harshest MMO online right now, doesn't even have it and there is a good reason. You don't want people to rage quit because some douche camped the new player spawn and wailed on people as they logged in for the first time ever.
"Oh, but we'll have rules to protect against that ..."
Then you've just stepped away from the sandbox / permadeath concept and are now creating something else entirely.
Personally, I think perma-death should be an option at character creation, can't be that hard to add a 'resurrect' variable. Give people with a perma-death character bonuses to XP, quest gold, maybe even access to alpha-classes. As a trade off though, their PvP zones should be larger than the "average" player. Then you get to choose at creation the level of your risk versus reward.
Let me clarify on my previous post. That's assuming they don't use some strict real-life identification system and not just let anyone with am email address come in.
It's not the thread that you didn't read, it's the article you were commenting on in the first place. The reason that's obvious is because the article clearly and explicitly explains the difference between what I was envisioning and Second Life. So, I'm sure you can see where there might be some confusion.
My suggestion for a death penalty:
A character gets some number of "lives", like the proverbial cat. Once the lives are expended, the character is permanently dead.
However, there are things the character can do in the game to earn additional lives (obviously this would have to be done before the final death, not after).
New players would enjoy immunity for some reasonable time. Death at the hands of a character x (some appropriate number) levels higher than you (if there are levels) does not deprive you of a life. That way max level characters can't chase all the other folks out of the game.
You could also have a "deathblow" system like SWG, where the player who defeats you has the option of killing you and taking a life, or not.
There could be a random percentage chance that a defeat may inflict a very serious wound but be non-fatal; i.e., you would repop with a huge debuff from which you would have to recover before fighting again, but it would not take a life.
In this way, you would be at risk of permadeath, but there are things you can do to mitigate that risk and the possibility of getting a lucky break or be spared.
Finally, if your character dies, you can transfer some percentage (e.g., 50%) of its xp level to a new character. That way when you re-roll you don't start from complete scratch.
lol then you misunderstood me the making kids goes beyond just profligating it is in the realm of procreating you have to spend time raising nurturing caring for in a sense to get them to respect you its just not a bought and paid for idea but one that you have to spend time and energy on putting input into it and what not
your direct purpose being heir to all you own if you die but the way you raise him/her has an affect on the person you are when you take over the npc etc
for me the only way to use perma-death is like its used in text based mmo, like mafiamatrix or injustice
you have a master account that can only have 1 character at a time (only counts alive characters, u can have 200 dead characters), if you die, you cant use the character that died anymore and u create a new one, but you still have the same master account (the dead characters names become avaible again after some time for anyone to use).
the problem with this are all the Gandalf2341, or MagicWarrior3
but its add more excitement, and thats why i play games like mafiamatrix with perma-death
Yes, but even major governments haven't been able to come up with a mass, secure method of making that work. It would be hacked within days(if not hours). Its just not a viable way of doing things. There are too many perverse incentives, and it ignores human nature. Sand box games sound great in theory, until you see what happens in reality.
Just sounds like EVE without clones or insurance, death would really hurt a lot in that case.
I think you're confused about what a SL sim is, if you made it private and pay to access it may as well be a seperate game, you can stop people ressing and set the rules how you wish (no flight for example). The only limit then would be how much space you had to make your city and its interactivity.
This is ofcourse assuming sl will ever iron out the bugs, heh.
Players, when they log into the game, are free to roam around and do pretty much whatever it is that they want. There is no rule of law, there are no levels, no classes to guide you. Instead, you are left almost completely to the mercies of the other players in the sandbox, and they to you. It is, in effect, a true sandbox.
= Furry Sex. People are just TOO retarded.
I'd suggest that it be replaced with a pay-per-death system. This not only creates incentive for players not to die, but also provides incentive for them not to play.
Today, I wanted to resurrect that tradition by writing Why Not: New Cap City.
How appropriate that you should speak of resurrection.
I can't bring myself to watch Caprica - not after having enjoyed 4 seasons of BSG and then in the final episode being lumped with "it was all god". Monotheism is fine if you're into that sort of thing, but bible-bashing masquerading as sci-fi doesn't sit well with some people.
Funny thing really - just before this jaw-dropping final episode aired, plans were announced for a Battlestar Galactica movie that bears no relation to the re-imagined bible-bashing version. Mmmmmmm.
And Caprica doesn't seem to be rating terribly well.
Some people watch the show so it has a fanbase. But as an IP for MMO development, this one comes with stigma - or maybe that should be stigmata - attached.
You're completely missing the point of the discussion. It's not about using Caprica as an IP, but taking the idea of New Cap City, which just happens to be from Caprica, and making an MMO like New Cap City. Nothing to do with anything outside of that virtual world & the rest of the story of Caprica.
face of mankind has a pay per death system- you have to purchase clones with in game currency and if you die with no clones or in game money your character dies and gets wiped from the system
I like the idea of new cap city. It would be sandbox for sure. From what I saw anything goes you make your own rule set. No leveles you just gain abilities.
You want to fly a virper you fly one, you want to kill things kill them.
I am not sure about the permadeath of the game and how that would work. Posibly you would create a new avitar and possibly get some of youabilities back.
I think new cap city would be great, however I would love a bsg game better with space flight and killing cylons.
Thanks for the information, I've removed that from my list of games I'd like to try. The idea of perma death is not one I'll ever support.
In theory it sounds absolutely amazing. I doubt it would play out like that in real life though.
I Liked the Caprica series quite a bit. It took me by surprise.
I only read the OPs post so i might be repeating something.
First off, id like to play in a virtual world. However theres some problems with the idea laid out here (My oppinion anyways).
Permanent Death and Payments:
I like the idea, i like it alot, but..
If you take real money from people each time they die, youll run into a problem verry quickly.
Some people have alot of money, and the rest dont.
If you only give them a certain amount of lives, lets say 30/month, then you get the same problem again. The rich people will make multiple accounts, and the less fortunuate will not.
And theyll prolly be pissed.
Actual permanent death. How will this work in a virtual world? You have to coustomize youre character over and over? Just save a character as a template and use it over?
What will the actual punishment be if you take all youre items/property and give them to a character you never use? In a real sandbox you should be able to do most things based on youre REAL skills. NOT ingame "numeric" skills.
So HOW can you really punish a "blank" character?
By stealing a bit of theyre time? Thats the best thing i can come up with.
THe worst possible fate of an immortal is to suffer pain, locked in an unescapable prison. Maybe thats a good idea? You go to prison when you screw up?
Maybe breaking out/breaking youre friends out of prison is a fun activity?
Virtual Worlds vs The Real World:
Today you can play some games that looks pretty real. If you make a virtual world based on a real one, and it looks real theres a problem.
First off, a humans mind dont remember things clearly. Well most of us dont anyways.
So if you live 2 lives, one is real and the other is virtual and they both share the same space you might mix the two.
You create memories, during night youre head think/dream about your "experiences".
If you have done something that makes you associate something with something else then you remeber THAT thing most clearly in mind. So if you eat alot of virtual apples, and dont eat them in the real world youre likely to remember the virtual one first.
Lets say you live in New York, and thats the virtual world you live in to.
If they two are verry similar that might mess with youre brain. I have no backing for saying this at all, but think about it. It looks pretty real, you talk to real people.
You walk down the same street, you may visit youre house/appartment and talk to youre real life friends.
In books and games the people that "plain-walk" different dimentions typicaly end up mentaly insane.
If theres any truth to the ideas of writers..
Again i have no real backing for saying this, iam not a shrink. Iam just tossing some things on the table. You may bash it, or laugh :)
Iam all for a big fat sandbox with lots of possibilities. But somewhat sceptical to a direct mirror of reality.
How's that different from playing the Sims then? That's practically all you do and it would take away considerably from actual gameplay of any game that would utilize this method. The points I was trying to make is that the idea would be exploited and abused. Everyone would create huge families with like 8 or 9 children in the game to safeguard their future.
Due to the exploitation required for trying to secure your game experience, I can easilly see where the nurturing the children would become the game experience itself and would take away from the main point from the game. It'll end up feeling like more work and less play.
I also pointed it out as a cheap excuse to not utilize a pay-by-death business model, which reflects many common consumers idea that they want as much of everything for as little as possible.
i'd play, bring it on.
Ummm, for this whole "Pay Per Death" system it really comes down to the resurrection cost.
I think the first caveat is that there would be no monthly subscription.
I don't know how many times you wierdos die in an MMO per month but for me it ain't many outside of PvP.
So if you're charging $0.01 that's 1,500 deaths per month before you reach the cost of an average sub. At $0.10 per rez you're getting 150 deaths equal to an average monthly sub cost.
I think a nickel, or $0.05, is about right as that'll give you 300 deaths per month, or about 10 deaths per day, or roughly one death per 2.5 hours of gameplay.
So before you freak out over the system consider the actual, and only, variable in such a system: the cost of a single resurrection. If it's reasonable a good, non-retarded MMO player (I know there aren't many of us) could theoritically be saving a lot of money with such a system.
I know I die very litte, even when PvPing. I know when to run. And if I was paying to come back each time you can bet your fanny that I'd be running away even more.
So it's really the players here... for some reason most of y'all are conditioned to repudiate anything that doesn't constitute an all acess pass in the form of a monthly sub.
I'd welcome the hell out of a "Pay Per Death" system. Perhaps it would deter players that I normally don't enjoy being around from playing altogether.
Win.
Ok... But this type of system establishes a perverse incentive on the part of the Dev's, as well as being a gankers/griefers heaven. Whats to prevent them from playing games with server side variables(shaving some off here, adding some there), to increase the death margin?
Thats leaving entirely aside the serious issue of human nature as expressed by gankers and griefers. Roaming packs of gankers would be killing everything that moves(unless you always roam around in a pack yourself). I don't know about others, but I'm not always on at the same time as the rest of my guild. Does that mean I have to deal with the gank squads solo? And I'm PAYING for this "privilege"??...
Lose.
Your entire post is predicated on in game "meanies" and an evil developer pushing danger on the player for the sake of increasing revenue.
For all the griefing and gankers it depends on the PvP rule set, doesn't it?
As for the evil corporation...? Uhhh, they're all trying to take your money in one way or another, buddy.
My post is based on REALITY as it exists, and as MMO history has demonstrated it to be. I said nothing about "evil corporations". People and corporations act in their self interest. You do understand the implications, and why perverse incentives in that regard are not wise? Of course they are after money(profit is after all the main motivator in business....). But its how they go about it that matters.
As for the "rule set" approach to ganking and griefing... Again, look at past history as an example of the never ending war between the Dev's and the gankers and griefers. The Dev's will also act in their self interest(to protect their business model). I direct your attention to the evolution of Concord(and high sec rules) in Eve Online as a great example of that dynamic. Sand box games sound great in theory, but in practice end up as a narrow niche(if that).
It is incredibly annoying to me when people obviously have not read the article, and make a post that clearly shows they do not fully understand what the writer was saying and that they would rather shoot off a snarky comment than respond to the idea behind the article.
As for what the article actually said, I would be all for it. This is a game that It hink a great many people would get behind. And the pay-per-death idea is just perfection. Not only do you have a steady revenue stream for a company without needed a subscription fee, but you add an element that would give PvP intenisty and suspense, and make the world a truly vibrant sandbox.
One of the reasons EVE works so well as a sandbox is because if you die, you are out some serious stuff. It is truly annoying to die. It is not like so many MMOs where death is not that bad (I remember using lava to short cut back to an entrance during my first time through Tortage in AoC). Death would be upsetting. When you kill a player, you know you have won something serious. And, as in New Cap City, people would be on good behaviour. You would see a great deal fewer morons spouting Chuck Norris whatever or yelling snide or hateful comments at others. You do that, you are going to be out some cash.
As for how much money, that is an extremely touchy and complicated thing. Too little and people would not care enough. Too much and you risk alienating a large portion of the playerbase. But having real anarchy in this way, without real punishment for death, would create an incredibly interesting social dynamic for a sandbox. I would buy any game doing something similar, just for the innovation and the taking of the risk.
What an awsome idea!
New cap city would be a great base for an MMO
Its very new though so copywrite negotiations and deals might take a while if anyone was interested in doing it.
I caught an episode for the first time yesterday, but long after I read this article. It's not bad, but kinda seems written by people who didn't quite grasp the current memes and apply where they could be going. It's almost like they reverted to tech-idioms you'd see in the 80's.
Anyway, what I saw was how they broke into a guy's vault and converted his cash to points. What can possibly be the point of that? To eventually bankrupt the economy through converting all the currency to points, then the player with the highest tally wins?
Doesn't seem like the idea can really go anywhere, and that they are making it up as they go along... but as a serious Lost fan, I know that sometimes it only seems that way until they blow your mind with expert forethought.
Pay per death, that would be sweet. great idea.
But i rather think i have a better idea.
mix both ideas, the hardcore death penalty like diablo 2 where a char that dies becomes a ghost and can never play again, and the idea of paying per death.
what do you get? a pay per character revenue, you die your character is lost forever, you want to play again? you have to pay, say what 20 cents? but since the game is so sandbox lawless and massive, you'll die plenty.
Say creating your character 5 times would cost you one dollar, 30 times (1 a day for each day a month) that would be 6 dollars, and thats if BY MIRACLE YOU ONLY DIE IN SUCH A LAWLESS GAME ONCE A DAY. Which would be impossible, so imagine dying an average of 5 times a day, thats 30 dollars a month of revenue per player, with that you don't even need to set up an item mall which would obviously upset the gamers and the very idea of the game. 30 dollars monthly per player minimum, and players would surely be happy with the setting, imagine that...............
Hell they could make a 2 days trial where you pay with your credit card a small amount only so it registers your card and that way people cant abuse the trial, and in that 2 days trial make your acc being able to create characters for free so you can get a feel for the game.
Just imagine the real revenue such a concept could achieve!!, i mean face it, more than half the morpg community turns PK sooner or later, whether its permanently or not. People would flock by the millions to play a Caprica like that :O
Very, very doubtful in the west. Perhaps in Asia. But in the west, this type of game would have really limited appeal, as has been demonstrated time after time with the Asian imports. Games that allow ganking or griefing are not tolerated well these days in the west. I have no idea why people continue to confuse the two different gaming cultures.
Its like you say, but there are few instances of games like that succeding, and even in games that aren't like that you tend to find a great amount of players that only play for ganking.
I mean i know I exagerated but the game would be unique so by that itself it would surely draw out people. Im not into pking out of the blue but i would definitly play like that, and the idea of a completly sandbox morpg with no levels sounds interesting. Ofcourse It'd have to cost less than what i said since a game like this encourages ganking.
The only real issue is that most ganking players play F2P afaik, if you haven't seen that many pkers its probably because you don't play on many private servers, but like i said F2P players would be the issue, its not like they can those F2P gankers to start playing, they are basically F2P for one reason or another, either lack of $ or age for a credit card. Thats why i think you aren't exactly wrong, maybe in how you say it but not in what. At least i don't believe it'd have limited appeal in the west.
Also consider this, since the game would have no subscription and the creation of a character would be so cheap there would be lots of people playing sporadicaly, like, a person w a good computer that cant affoard a subscription (IE me lol) but still has a credit card, after all with this system the most interesting part is that you decide how much you pay, and no matter how much you pay you still have the same odds of dying as the next guy who spent 10 times what you did, since there would be no item mall and levels.
Sorry for double posting
Also there wouldn't be that much grieving. If you say that ur missing half the point, yes people might band together to gank, but the main cause of grieving in morpgs due to gankin is midgame / endgame players bashing on new players. That concept is impossible here, since there would be no levels or premium items.
If you cant imagine, or grasp the concept of a fair sandbox game where there is no edge except strength in numbers, I don't think you can conceive the potential of such game.
"Fair sand box game"?? What does "fair" have to do with this? "Fair" is a subjective value judgement(usually backed up by the power to impose ones view of "fair" on others when one speaks of larger groups, such as governments). How do you conceive that "fairness" is going to be in such a game, if not imposed by the Dev's(as in the concept of high sec and Concord in Eve online)?
This type of thing quickly devolves into various ganking/griefing groups preying on those who are weaker than they are. I've seen that way too many times, to have any interest what so ever in taking part in such a game again. These types of games may sound good (to some) in theory, but the reality quickly pales for all but a tiny number of people who get their jollies from such.