[ X sucks and so do all the people who like it ]

that'd be the ad hominem attacks I was talking about. and as i said, likely its from someone wholly ignorant and not worth the time. though i understand the ranting as a self-fulfilling way to vent. But you just have to expect that sort of thing; particularly in an online forum with a community this large, and no self-policing ability.

which really comes back to what ringersol was saying about the quality level of gamers in text MUDs. when the community can self-police, it tends to achieve a common level of decorum.

and i don't think the gameplay of current massmogs are addictive. I think adiction-prone and obsessive personality traits are somewhat required to enjoy them, given their game mechanics. I should know, i'm pretty obsessive and I played alot of those damn games. Hell, toon-town online occupied my attention for a few weeks last holiday season (and you know going into that Disney isn't about to ship a pvp game to actual children).

It wasn't until fairly recently that I realized the next commercial massmog wouldn't be substantively different from the last. And there was no point in joining, hoping, and inevitably becoming frustrated and bored again 3-4 months later. Market forces just don't swing that way.

Oh, and Bleeckerx, I haven't really been following games lately much, but I was really looking forward to Unreal Tournament 2003 but once I got it, I wasn't as impressed with it as I would have hoped (considering I was such a big Unreal Tournament fan. I think my biggest peeve with that game is the annoyingly long load times (even Tribes 2 doesn't take as long to load new maps). I really love the graphics though. I could just be slowly growing out of first person shooters though.

As for single player games, I really want to get Max Payne 2 because I loved the first game. I think it would be cool as multiplayer PvP, but I can't see how Bullet Time could be implemented in that setting (I was reading the review for it on the same site which asked the same question).

As for MMORPGs, a MUD friend of mine who introduced me to Asheron's Call (who also introduced me to FARK, incidentally), invited me to try Anarchy Online, claiming that things were much improved from the bad old days when it first came out. I'm still trying to decide if I want to pay on a monthly basis to play a game (although I suppose it's hardly worse than paying monthly for my cell phone, my internet, cable, rent, gym membership, etc.).

I wish Blizzard would hurry up and port Ghost to the PC, or make StarCraft III or something (preferably as a 3D MMORPG/FPS/Real Time Strategy hybrid).

What I'd really love to see, however, is a well-designed Robert Jordan-approved, official Wheel Of Time MMORPG. The last game put out based on the WoT series was a huge disappointment (I didn't even buy it after my friend bought it and found all these severe drawbacks and problems with it).

Or maybe an FPS/martial arts/MMORPG hybrid based on anime would be cool too.

ForceMcCocken What fanasy world are you living in?

most PVP players are no more competetors then they are decent spellers. The majority of PVP 'ers are there for one rason, and one reason only. TO PVP. They PVP because they enjoy the thrill of domination over another human being. A very different feeling from the joy of competition. Why else would most PVP'ers stalk the area just outside training grounds dressed in starting gear? they want to gloat about being in command. brag about their power. No actuall skill is necessary beause they tend to be unilateral in their application of brute force.

I've met very few Competetors in my time. Competetors are polite about the fight. they tend to engage players of similar level, instead of simply dominating a low-level party. Competetors will show mercy and even reward lesser opponens who fight well. PK'ers too often simply collect the spoils of their victory and vanish.

ringersol - That's why they should combine their resources.

Must it be pretty? A good, ugly game would be far easier to make than a game that could compete graphically with, say, WoW. Also, ugliness would scare away the undesireables.

Nearly every revolutionary game has been created by small, "who?", type outfits. Blizzard, Id, Bethesda, etc. With the quarter to half million dollars that other wannabe entrepreneurs acquire through loans and begging to get their own coffee shop up and running, a dedicated group of game programmers could start their own development company.

What about this simple "real world concept applied to multiplayer":

1. Player Deaths, when from another player, are permanent, or have extraordinarily high penalty.
2. Police/Constable is a player class.
3. IF you witness a player kill, you can call the cops (or the constable, whatever). OR, the cops can find a body, and collect evidence. When enough evidence is gathered, the killer's screen name is revealed.
4. The cops have the ability to one-strike-kill, but ONLY against players that have killed other players, and ONLY if they have been notified or have gathered enough evidence.
5. NEW players are generated in highly public places.
6. No levels, or a reduced "leveling" effect.

Results of this: Player kills happen against people that don't group (which would tend to be people that don't get along with others). Or, players that want to kill either know to kill ALL witnesses, and do so in very non public places - say deep in an already dangerous dungeon (where it's better to be grouped anyway). Plus, they learn to lure people into "hidden" areas - so that the blood can't be found.

Meanwhile, the Cop class has its own set of skills, which might impact the game a lot. Since they'd not be intensely mission oriented (player actions determine some missions), they'd get a more free-roaming view of the world at hand.

Thoughts?

Lord_Marquis

Scrotoa because designing a MMORPG takes Millions of dollars and man-hours, and maintaining it costs a ton too...

Designing a MUD is essentially free. All that is required is a relatively adept C++ programmer or two who happens to like MUDding (I'm sure there are a few out there) and has time to work on the code.

bdbthinker: Medievia is fun if you have no morals. Until they give credit to the DIKU team for the code Medievia is based on and stop acccepting "donations" (both requirements of the DIKU liscence), I wouldn't touch that game with a 10 foot pole.

I hope one day you code something great, give it away free and ask only that people not charge for it and give you credit. Then some asshat comes along, starts charging "donations" for uber equipement and removes all mention of you.

But you have fun on MedThievia, jackass.

I wish Blizzard would hurry up and port Ghost to the PC, or make StarCraft III or something (preferably as a 3D
MMORPG/FPS/Real Time Strategy hybrid).

The acronym for such a game would be terrifying.

Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Real Time Role Playing Strategy Shooter

Or

MMOFPRTRPSS

Queen Mushroom wrote: It's stupid as hell to hear that Trandoshan master creature handler say "my mom neds to use the comp ill be back l8r!!!

You are right, there. That is way I try to find a group or groups of people who feel the same way and play with them. In Star Wars Galaxies right now people are building player cities, and in some of them you will get kicked out of the city and banned for life if you use l33t speak or do otherwise anti-RP things.

MMOFPRTRPSS

wow

Nice to see IPY getting some attention like this. Its pretty good, except for the infinate gold on venders + low monster loot, which is the opposite of what it should be.
And the numbers really arent that close to 1000, people have way to many duel logins.

But hey, its an great effort, since every other single MMOG is a carebear paradise for people who cant compeat with the chance that 1337 d3wD will take their stuff and force them to either protect theirselves or requip.


When a player dies they can choose to be sent to their home town (which can be changed) with all items intact and no lost experience or skills.


That is ABSOLUTE bullshiat...

For the PvP discussions, www.griefers.net
good forums for people who arent afriad of onine bullies

http://www.achaea.com

http://www.nexustk.com

/nuffsaid

It's funny, they're talking about how the games are no fun for players who can only play an hour or so a day, because they get on and aren't as powerful as other players. So they say the devs will implement something to make the game easier for these 'weekend warriors' and that leaves them with a feeling of dissatisfaction for not having earned what they got.

Then they turn around and act like PKing will solve all this. Well, as a Weekend Warrior back on the original UO I can say it's ALOT more frustrating to play your 'one hour a day' being killed over and over and over again by people who are basically just there to laugh at your sorry ass because you don't have 8 hours a day to lvl up. PKing would be great if there was an actual system of punishment for PKers, but until they can come up with a way to keep certain hardcore players from 'preying' on weaker ones, it's not going to be any fun.

And as for the developers just out to 'get rich', well duh! But don't forget, each payment they receive is from someone who is playing the game. If no one wants to play it, then of course no one is going to make it, whether they are getting paid for it or not. Even if the service was free and the developers weren't getting rich ,would they still make something like this for a small group of people rather than someone that would appeal to more people? Possibly, but most likely not.

ForceMcCocken wrote: I think adiction-prone and obsessive personality traits are somewhat required to enjoy them, given their game mechanics.

Actually, I think those personality traits are what prevent people from enjoying them. What I don't understand is why people feel they must grind and do boring, repetitive things. You've described MMORPGs that way several times, but that is only one style of play. Nowhere in the rules does it say you must do things you don't like over and over. You do if you absolutely have to level up as quickly as possible, but if you just want to RP with others it doesn't matter what your character's level is.

Star Wars was my first MMORPG, and as a conventional single-player gamer it took me awhile to understand that concept. I was grinding and becoming incredibly bored, just as you described, until I started ignoring the xp meters and just having fun with it and interacting with other players.

This is pretty sad.

The problem is that "hardcore gamers" (or "powergamers" or whatever they want to be called) don't belong in MMORPGs.

Their pleasure is strictly derived from PKing weaker players in a manner that is of little risk to themselves.

In any MMORPG, there are no consequences for illegal/immoral actions. There will also always be a massive divide between those that can play 18 hours a day vs those that play 30-90 minutes a day. The gaming companies have to compensate for this, otherwise the more casual gamers will leave in droves. It's all about money, folks.

Eve-online came close to eliminating much of the hassle involved with that, but it's not perfect by any means. Levelling-up (in Eve, you simply train skills) takes real-world time -- you can log in, start training, log off -- come back in the 8 hours it says it is going to take, log back in, start another skill.

Many of the solutions they came up with to avoid PKing in sectors that should be "safe" I don't nessecarily agree with, and it still is tedious and time consuming to make money if you're not in a corporation.

If you're a true hardcore gamer, go play a (MM)OFPS, where you are assured that the fact that you just 0w3nD someone it is because of your l33t skills, rather than the simple fact that you spent 12 hours a day the last three months getting the awesome equipment you have, and the poor schmuck you just annihiliated had spent 1 hour a day in the same period. Regardless of the fact that the rest of the time he was partying and getting laid, whereas the closest thing to a pussy you've seen is the inside of a twinkie.

Player-killers are assholes. Thankfully, on-line, they can only prey on themselves. Unfortunately, dicks will always try to ruin someone else's gaming experience. Assholes.

Uhlek: I'd love to have the last paragraph of your post framed. Awesome. Simply awesome.

If you need graphics in your MUDding, try Wyvern. It's expanding so rapidly these days, I can't keep track of the new material.

Lord_Marquis:
We're clearly using different terminology. When you say PVPer you describe what I call a Griefer. when I say PVPer, i mean 'guy who enjoys competition against a reasonably equal opponent over a predictable AI'.

There are other players however that enjoy PVP and do none of the things you describe. And for the most part, they don't play massmogs -- because their desired form of pvp doesn't exist there. (though there are many in Dark Age, and some in SWG and UO)

ColSanders:
Bad wording, i meant that obsessive personality traits on the part of the users is generally what makes the game popular. which has nothing to do with enjoyment (though i'd argue that despite their complaining, grinders are having fun).

and Yes, you can play however you like in a massmog. But you can RP anywhere, in any game, or any chat room for that matter. Just because you can RP and have fun -in spite of- the game mechanics, doesn't mean they aren't broken.

And again, the game -ostracizes- you for playing as you do. If you refuse to grind, and level, odds are you quickly will not even be able to survive travelling to the lands where the average playerbase spends most of its time. You will not have enough money to buy the things you might like (or even need) because of the monetary-inflation. And your skills won't be appreciably useful to most, compared to who else they could put in their limited number of 'group' slots. There may be a stream of newbies, or even some likeminded regulars, but by definition they (and you) exist outside the core community.

At that point there is little reason to pay monthly to play a massmog. You might as well just load up neverwinternights and each save the $15/mo.

For the same reason, i'm not a big fan of the 'instanced' dungeons and such that are popular. The things that simply seek to segment the player population to prevent crowding. Having tons of players all together is what -defines- the genre. With 'instanced' dungeons, the rest of the game is essentially a glorified chat room for making a group, and the 'game' is just diablo or neverwinternights.

Again, perhaps the game is fun for you, and in the end that's all that matters. and as I understand it, SWG is much better for the non-grinder (be it an RPer, socializer, or casual gamer) than its contemporaries in most respects. But it can still use some work.

Of course, your willingness to ignore the XP bar is a big part of another of my pet-design-dreams. a No-Numbers games. no points for stats, skills, experience - nothing. no out-of-character numbers whatsoever. but i digress.

What does MMO stand for
Thanks in advance for any explanation.

Massively Multiplayer Online.

you can add MMO to your genre of choice's acronym.

MMO-FPS (first person shooter)
MMO-RPG (role playing game)
MMO-RTS (real-time strategy)

it's also a very stupid acronym. no shiat it's multiplayer you just said it was massive. no shiat it's online you just said it was multiplayer... hm.

'Persistant Multiplayer' is better, but the dumb acronym came first and stuck.

some people use 'massmog' too (as in MASSively Multiplayer Online Game) but that's just cuz it's easier to say.

as I understand it, SWG is much better for the non-grinder (be it an RPer, socializer, or casual gamer) than its contemporaries in most respects. But it can still use some work.

Yeah. However, and I thing that this is because it brought in many people who are new to MMORPGs (because it's Star Wars), I've found it has more griefers than any MMORPG I've ever been a part of.

There isn't a single MMORPG that can compare to MUD'ing.
I've tried them all, they just have no sense of -immersion-
You'd think the graphics help, but they don't do anything but distract you from why you're really playing, which is unfortunate.

now that i type that out i think Persistant Online, or Online Persistant is better.

Multiplayer is pointless, and i would suggest Persistant World, but you'd still need to specify 'Online' as technically any single player RPG has a persistant world. it just doesn't move while you're away. Persistant Online World? catchier acronym. potentially confusing.

I say we just call em 'games', eh?

ForceMcCocken: I understand your point. However, most of the RP groups hang out on starter planets in areas relatively safe for "weak" players. That's why so many RP characters play as artisans or entertainers, since there is no need for them to be able to destroy high level characters or carry uber weapons just to survive. You just have to find the right group to hang out with.

And you are correct about SWG -- it could definitely use some improvement, but since I've never played any other MMORPGs I have no idea how it compares to others.

BTW: a No-Numbers games. no points for stats, skills, experience - nothing. no out-of-character numbers whatsoever. but i digress. Make it and I'll be the first in line to buy it! Hell, I'll be a beta tester for you.

What a dumb acronym. Whichever media outlets and gaming sites helped propagate such dim-witted redundancy should be shut down. Simply unconscionable behavior.

"What fanasy world are you living in? most PVP players are no more competetors then they are decent spellers. The majority of PVP 'ers are there for one rason..."

Hehehe... There is a preview function, you know, and it helps to avoid ironic little things like this.

I play EQ, SWG, AoCS, and Dodq but own PRPtED and DooKofHzrd. my l337 3lf Pwnz j00, ya all tha pvp greefers love the n00bz but when a PK assassin frags sum n00bs and those carebears hugalot...etc. lol. itz not Pwnz j00 when a +20 gloves of DOOM. NWO 4 life. Bullshiat bugs. P2P twinker razzes the dazzle. wtf? derf? poopoo. lolmaoaufarkingasshats. MMORPGs 4 life.

Lord Undervenom
Server 15
Level 75 Elf Wizard

/never played any of these games - but considering it as a social exercise...seems fun.

.
Meridian59 - the BEST in PvP. Seriously. Luvin the frenzies, too.

It's alive again... PC and Q bought the rights. neardeathstudios.com

Enjoy.

GuardianKana tells you, "Muhahahaha...."

.

ForceMcCocken: you are welcome however to maintain that no pvp whatsoever is your preferred method of play. it takes all kinds, and there's plenty of room. I'm just pointing out why it's as unpopular as it is in massmogs, despite that openly pvp games in other genres (fps, sports, racing) are so much more popular.

Unless you've done a survey, it's also equally possible that the other genres are more popular because, let's say, there are more sports fans than RPG fans as opposed to the thrill of PVP. Heck, the Pacman arcade game used to be the biggest game ever, and it was you vs. machine. Why was it so popular? Perhaps because it simply was first in line of the evolving technology. RPGs, by and large, have adapted poorly to being electronic games for years because of the rich depth pen-n-paper games have, by comparison. When what's in the arcade or on the console is a mere shadow of what you can evoke from some pieces of paper and your imagination, the electronic version simply isn't going to attract as many fans.


ForceMcCocken: Of course, your willingness to ignore the XP bar is a big part of another of my pet-design-dreams. a No-Numbers games. no points for stats, skills, experience - nothing. no out-of-character numbers whatsoever. but i digress.


If you go down this route, then you're hoping for a chatroom with cool-looking avatars. A G-MUD, I guess you could call it. If I wanted to spend all my time just roleplaying, not worry about stats, and strut around singing my own praises, I'd go back to participating in my old fantasy pro-wrestling league (not that there's anything wrong with that; I enjoyed that, actually).

What MMORPG designer are trying to do is emulate D&D, and the plethora of other genres which followed in its footsteps. What happens in a D&D adventure? You overhear a tavern tale of loot out in the old cave, so you round up some buddies and go kill monsters and take the loot. Sometimes, you have to talk to NPCs while you're out, maybe rescue some hostages, et al. That's the core of what an RPG is, kicked up with adding some personality and color to your character, to me. I don't have to kill my own party members to have a good time, nor do I feel obligated to whack another player over the head just because they're there and "look like a challenge." That's what kind of person/gamer I am.

Ditto:
One thing I thought was -really- odd in their pvp setup is the way it just kinda tosses everyone in together in the same areas all the time. A big part of grief defense in a 'war' setting like that is to ensure that people can ID their enemy, know which 'way' they come from, and generally where the 'front' is. in SWG rebels and imperials all level in the same places, rubbing shoulders all the time. that plus the whole 'covert/overt' thing can really make some thick soup out of it in a hurry.

at least when you know where the front is, you can expect a reasonable amount of peace and safety for solo wandering when you're bored or waiting for friends. in their setup you pretty much have to hang out in your house or faction-aligned town (if those are even in) until your friends come online.

numinous:
i thought that too. when i was trying to play m59. i just didn't get it.

but as i played the later (more graphically advanced) games i saw where the immersiveness of a graphical client can do things that text just cannot.

mostly in regard to the awe of seeing 'really big shiat' or 'lots of shiat' as you explore, or actually seeing flying stuff fly by, or seeing a crowded market of dozens of people. then there's the -feelings- in tight corridors versus the jungle and the vast expanses. they truly affect your ability to see danger, to escape danger, and to find your way through. To see the sun rise and set, and the rain and snow come down.

not to mention the richness it can provide to actual combat tactics through positioning (when properly implemented). Eg melees holding a line to protect archers/casters, rogues having to maneuver to get their backstabs off, etc.

you can approximate all these things in text, sure - but seeing is believing. Though occassionally i lament it when their art falls well short of my imagination -- never a problem in text. Though typos and bad grammar don't help the case for text ;p

Though there's plenty of room for improvement in graphical immersiveness, but as it gets deeper, it will be able to convey so much more, so much more quickly -- text won't be able to compare. I mean, the biggest complaint i got from friends i introduced to mudding is how hard is to -get- immersed initially in a text MUD. as things happen so fast, and so much text flies by.

they essentially have to learn how to -perceive- the world at the same time their learning how to function in the world. with a graphical client, it's intuitive to perceive. though that's the major 'dumbed down' accessibility gripe from the purists, but to each their own.

One thing I thought was -really- odd in their pvp setup is the way it just kinda tosses everyone in together in the same areas all the time.

Yes. Plus, there's now way to not PvP in SWG. Consider the TEF (Temporary Enemy Flag) system. Say your a neutral doctor. Your in a medical center healing people. You happen to heal a Rebel. 20 seconds later an Imperial comes in and kills you because, since you healed that Rebel, the system flags you as a Rebel sympathizer making you open season for any opposing faction members who happen to be overt.

Now, it would make sense not to take advantage of that since you just alienated yourself from that doctor. However, the power gaming teenage PvP crowd is only there to piss people off and don't give a shiat.

I think they should of just made it open season. Everyone can kill everyone. You have alignment type properties. If you went willy nilly killing everything you would eventually get to the point where every NPC in the galaxy would attack you on site.

Bah mmorpgs won't go mainstream until players are protected from the behavior of the unemployed sociopaths.

The "hardcore" crowd who can afford to spend 10 hours a day playing a mmorpg need to realize they're in the minority of gamers and then get over it.

I detest that article, simply because the crux of it seems to be "free PVP makes a game better." That's not at all true. Look at Anarchy Online - PVP zones, which were the only reasonable places to hunt once you'd gone about 1/3 of the way through the allotable levels in the game. But that didn't make people any more likely to roleplay, it just turned the game into Counterstrike with levels.

The real problem with MMORPGs is that none of you farkers have any concept of what it takes to be a tabletop GM. And when I say "you" I mean both the players and the people running the game. I defy you to run a real tabletop game for five players, one four-hour session a week, for six months, and have more than one of your five players tell you that the thing that was missing was the ability to kill their teammates. NO. PVP is not what's missing.

What's missing, on the part of the player base, is a willingness to actually adopt a role to play, rather than look at it as a shopping spree - to get the most stuff before everything closes down. You're all just content-rapists, sticking your little dicks in hoping you feel better about yourself when you're done.

What's missing, on the part of the producers, is a willingness to cull their customer base. When you run a D&D game or a Vampire LARP, the really creepy guy who keeps molesting your little sister gets kicked out, the girl who doesn't follow the rules because she just wants to "win" gets asked to be a team player or not come back, and the people who steal snacks from other players get their ass whipped.

You don't need top of the line graphics. You need to provide a graphical interface, sure, but you don't need timed translucency GUI or 64MB T&L particle effects or radial floral. shiat, you could step back in time to a turn-based hexidecimal game (Fallout, anyone?) and people would play it. If you had a core GM team producing actual content with involving, personalized storylines, PEOPLE WOULD PLAY IT. Maybe not 300,000 people, but if you're putting $100,000 into development (how much would it take to make an isometric sprite game?), getting 5,000 subscribers at $20 to buy the game and $9/mo to subscribe, I think you'd make your money back.

I'm shocked the guy interviewed hasn't been picked up by Sigil or Blizzard yet. He seems to have all the answers about how to make a blockbuster game.

I was amused that he thinks his opinion actually means dick.

Yeah, you the man DataShade. You obviously have this shiat all figured out. Me and my little dick are going to go make whip cream now.

I've played D&D. It sucked. I tried it with different people. It still sucked. I tried it with some other people. Yep, still sucked. You can try to be all high and mighty about your little tight nit group but remember these two thing. You're nothing special and D&D isn't near as complicated or engrossing as you seem to think it is.

I'm shocked the guy interviewed hasn't been picked up by Sigil or Blizzard yet. He seems to have all the answers about how to make a blockbuster game.

I was amused that he thinks his opinion actually means dick.

blah.. double post sorry =x

Its quite hard to find a good mud. Either you die of constitution drain from being pk'd repeatedly into dust, wich gets old fast, or there is some sort of horribly disgusting color scheme. Sometimes there are only 2 or 3 classes to choose from. Favorite codebase is definatly ROM.
arkheimwinter.kyndig.com 6666 - small player base, some pk (can only be done with a large amount of role playing, unless you join a particular cabal then you can go slaughter an oposing cabal's members)
forsakenlands.org 6666 - large player base, kind of heavy on the pk, lots of cabal action as well
The main problem with mudding is that it will destroy your life as only a hard core addiction can

Rindred: Pac-Man

it's all opinion, and all theoretical. i never pretended it was anything but. But you have to admit it is hard to outright deny that the nature of how pvp is implemented in such rpgs is the primary cause of its unpopularity.

Consider: when you fight computer controlled goblins, do you complain as loudly if another 'spawn' happens nearby and more goblins appear, outnumbering you and killing you? not nearly as much as if it had been a player right? You certainly wouldn't petition a game developer to stop new spawns from aggro'ing because it isn't fun, or it's cheap, right?

most people get much much angrier at the player because there is an reason to suspect them because there are no indications they are your enemy. There's likely other people nearby, possibly people he was friendly with, and you may have just seen them in town walking past the guards that keep you safe from your enemies. The sudden change of assumptions is what makes people upset.

Furthermore, in the fight against the extra goblins you generally have a chance. you picked them to fight because they're a challenge, but not overpowering. you can likely survive the initial surprise and get away, or your group can make a decent fight of it and maybe survive. These are some of the most exciting and rewarding events in such games -- when you are completely caught off guard but you and your group rise to the challenge to scrape by with many acts of outstanding play and heroism.

against the player, odds are he intentionally picked you and your group out because you represent no threat. In almost all cases, you will have -0- chance. you will all die. but if a player tried to attack you, and it was a fair fight would you be as angry? what if you could escape, or even defeat them as you could the extra goblins?

furthermore, if you -knew- the land you were fighting in was a lawless land between two warring nations, you'd have an expectation of danger. you'd also have a fairly avoidable situation due the warning. this again, makes player vs player combat much more palattable.

consider that while EQ may have few people playing on its anarchic pvp servers, dark age of camelot has an order of magnitude more playing on its more structured servers. the only appreciable core difference between EQ and DAOC PvP is that in dark age, you -know- which lands are contested. and you -know- the enemy when you see him. two simple rules and 10-20x more players show up to play. I don't think it far-fetched to figure that levelling the playing field of combat itself wouldn't have at least a similar effect.

As for you not liking my No Numbers concept... graphical chat i think is far from the result. Think about a game where you don't leave content behind. where the players meet a goblin threat and -actually end it-. where -anyone- can play and -everyone- is useful. some people will be better than others, sure, but 2 bodies would be nearly always more useful than 1.

I think it would be much -more- alive. because people won't fight what gives them the most experience. they won't decide to wield an axe over a sword just because it does 2% more damage. they won't pick the 'class' that gives them the most hit points. they'll fight what they want, with the weapon they want to use, and -do- what they want.

it's similar to how UO was, early on in the game when no-one was super-powerful and the ganking hadn't begun. They had a few numbers in their game, but you couldn't effect any of them directly, so it wasn't a big deal. people grouped with whomever, banded together to fight as necessary, and nobody was derided as a newbie.

taking out a goblin camp that appeared near town was a huge effort. but when it was done, they were gone. they weren't going to reappear in 2 minutes in the same exact place. they weren't going to stand still and wait to be killed.

of course they screwed all that up because the suits oversold their servers, and the player population suffocated the ecosystem -- but it was so damn fun while it lasted. i've never had that kind of an experience in a massmog since.

the fundamental problems with massmogs is that they -are- just trying to recreate D&D online.

in D&D the live game master can sense when the players are gaming the system. he can make sure that they always meet a challenge and aren't knocking off low-risk/hi-reward enemies and flooding the economy with undeserved gains.
Furthermore, the DM won't keep 'respawning' goblins with the same amount of random loot for as long as the players sit in the goblin cave. Most importantly, even if a bad GM allows all this to happen, it only impacts the players in his game. If the players become super-powerful there aren't other players for them to grief even if they wanted to.

Their having millions of gold pieces doesn't destroy the economy for other people trying to start a game, who suddenly can't afford a weapon because no crafter sees their paltry sums of money as worth their time. Not when they can make so much off the rich guys.

The 'level' system falls apart as soon as the level of the player's characters seperates. in pen and paper a DM can bump a new guy up the other player's level. in a massmog they don't do this. (can't, really, because the level-grind-veterans would cry bloody murder)

The 'experience' system falls apart as soon as the players can stay stationary and fight the same goblins over and over, and there is no story or purpose behind the combat. There is only combat, and it doesn't move, and it has no effect. Too often, when a massmog has coded quests, they are truly static, are the same for everyone, and the rewards often do not compare to simple stationary fighting.

And by supporting pvp I'm not suggesting anyone make a game where PvP means killing your party members. Rather, i'm suggesting more of a game where the Bad Guys(tm) your party faces, is not nearly mindless computer controlled goblins - but an actual human intelligence capable of planning and tactics.

Imagine if the Bad Guys(tm) in a D&D campaign were another group of players. they have a goal, a plan, they learn from mistakes, and they use tactics.

It isn't your group of friends stabbing each other in the back. That's the kind of pvp i do not endorse. It's your group against a known enemy group. And you're fairly equally matched.

hell, in pen and paper that's what you get with any decent dungeon master. you get a guy who doesn't have goblins just appear 4 at a time to be cut down until you level up. He has em use bows, or traps - maybe boars, or a flanking maneuver. And there's only as many in the cave as there are in the cave. Because the DM can think and react and has his goblins do the same. AI in a massmog can't do that.

the game design crutch of trying to literally translate D&D game mechanics is my biggest pet peeve in the whole genre. Almost all of its failures stem from that. Nearly everything i suggest changing is diametrically opposed to standard D&D game mechanics -- for a very good reason.

Carrion Fields is the top of the MUD heap for for the combination of PvP, game balance, and roleplaying. It's a smaller (~100) person game, largely because they don't cater to whining and aim their product at adults, not teenagers. Something the big commercial boys can't do, because they need to line their pockets and children have a lot of disposable income and time.

Hrm. Link didn't work, even though the URL does. Anyway, they're over at www.carrionfields.com, away from the kids' section.

I say ForceMcCocken and DataShade should start a gaming company.

I always though that pokemon would be an amazing idea for a MMORPG

ForceMcCocken

As for you not liking my No Numbers concept... graphical chat i think is far from the result. Think about a game where you don't leave content behind. where the players meet a goblin threat and -actually end it-. where -anyone- can play and -everyone- is useful. some people will be better than others, sure, but 2 bodies would be nearly always more useful than 1.

If you don't have numbers (stats, levels, etc), what determines a player's accomplishments? How does he/she stand apart from the rest of the players?

Atomhead:
I just can't decide whether you were being serious or not.

DataShade:
First, it seems that it hasn't occurred to you that most people who play D&D -also- do not take on a role. There's your hardcore rp games, and your beer & pretzels games. Both can have fun, neither is a more 'right' way to play.

But the ability to kill your party members doesn't apply to either, but the ability to be killed by an equally matched opponent (not in your party) capable of thinking is nearly required by -any-. hell, good stories almost always involve betrayal, surprise, and theft.

the main difference is that in pen and paper it's the DM's job to make sure everything is fairly balanced. No-one's doing that in a massmog. You can be surprised and attacked by a guy 20 levels higher than you, and you're screwed. You can be robbed of your most precious item and never have an opportunity to retrieve it.

People only biatch about pvp in massmogs cuz it isn't fair. there isn't a system by which you can find out where your stolen gear is, who betrayed you, or how you can get revenge. up until recently most of them penalized you for trying to get revenge.
there isn't a system that keeps 20th level guys from stomping on 5th level guys bare-handed for fun and profit.

games can place limits on direct fighting, and stealing - but its going to happen anyway. someone will lure monsters to you and get you killed in a no-pvp game. someone will block a door when you need to run away. someone will curse at you nonstop. someone will try to steal your loot, or con you out of stuff. someone will game the system to make you do most of the work, and they swoop in and get credit for the kill.

and in such systems the victimized player has -no- recourse. you can't kill the jerk, you can't take your stuff back - you likely can't even give their name to a community to put him on a shiat list, cuz he'll just make another guy tomorrow. call a CSR he gets what? a warning? after how many offenses do the CSRs do something? and when they finally get serious, the guy just makes a new character and continues playing. problem solved right? no. not for the 100 people he ruined a game for prior to that.

so perhaps if you balance the system out so no-one is super-powerful in relation to another, you'd be best off just leaving most of the rules out of it, and letting players sort it out?

fyi: griefing didn't ruin UO until people became too powerful for even a group of a half dozen newbies to kill.

I have GM'd. several games, over several years.

I also know that if i gave my current group the kind of gameplay that massmogs give them - they'd all quit. I have to have a world that responds to them, and I have to have enemies who provide a fair challenge, but not certain victory.

In either case, the monsters can't just stand there or respawn. I can't have monsters attack like idiots wave after wave, head-on, waiting just long enough between fights for the group to rest and relax.
I can't leave people 'behind' if they miss a few sessions.
I can't just omit the 'bad' things that might happen to them - ambushed by bandits, lucky shots, being stolen from in an inn, being betrayed by an NPC.

All I can do is my job as DM -- ensure that it's -fair-.
They don't get surprised by anything they have no chance of avoiding, running from or defeating.
They don't all die when they get betrayed by another character they assumed was friendly.
They don't get crap stolen from them that they can't track down and get back (if they want it bad enough).
and they don't get rewarded for hanging out in the same place doing the same stuff until they can afford the next shiniest sword.

the massmog experience can use lots of help. implement rough parity in character ability, and i'm all for open pvp.

valkore:
[If you don't have numbers (stats, levels, etc), what determines a player's accomplishments?]

whatever the player decides to do.

I find it more immersive to keep a handy 'journal' page showing what quests a player has done: what types of monsters they've fought, how long they've be adventuring (in gametime, and /played time), who calls them friend, and what city he calls home and what nation he pledges allegiance to. Rather than just show them how much 'experience' they've gotten. when they switch over.

showing someone an experience bar encourages people to only do things that will fill it up. usually this involves min/maxing risk/reward and almost never doing quests, being part of a community or RPing.
showing someone a list of deeds encourages people to actually -do- something.

[How does he/she stand apart from the rest of the players?]

the same way they do now. clothing. attitude. personality. friends. guild associations. weaponry. profession.

i'd also recommend having a way for characters to make -rough- in-game measurements of various attributes though.

so i wouldn't want them to see they have '18/32 strength' but i'd want them to have a mechanism let them figure out their character can lift a bucket of 18 stones over their head; while yours can only lift 12. Also, something like arm-wrestling would allow people to realize that while two people may both be able to lift 16 stones, one may be much stronger than the other.

Similarly, your character may be able to sprint faster, or longer, jump higher, or hold your breath longer than theirs. but the point would be to keep their abilities -entirely- in in-game terms. partly for roleplaying consistancy, but mostly so that they don't focus on the number itself as a definitive measurement.

Sure, you may say, they will still essentially have the number they want -- but it would be impractical for them to test it constantly - and the only precise measure they have would be relative.

would it be so bad for them to be forced to say 'well i can lift 18 bushels, but little john still beats me in armwrestling' instead of 'i have 18/32 stength'.
how about 'i made the kessel run in 12 parsecs' vs 'the millenium falcon has eleventybillion horsepower'.

of course, naturally the numbers thing would have to entail more precise measurements in a scifi game, but i digress.

Open PvP is the equivalent of getting together with some friends to play D&D, and 4 strangers with 20-sided dice barge in and say "Stop what you're doing. We're attacking you."

"Uh, we were doing our own thing here..."

It just wouldn't work. That is what online FPS games are for. If I want to slaughter everything that moves I'll fire up BF1942, where all character weapons/abilities are equal and your success is relative to your skill, not how many hours you've played that week to reach Rifle Level 3.