Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games

[Unknown,Unknown]

Hi, Ken,

What do you think of Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (“MMORPGs”)? Under your stewardship, Sierra helped pioneer this now thriving platform with The Sierra Network (later ImagiNation Network), and The Realm. How have you seen MMORPGs develop since that time, and more importantly, where would you like to see them go?

Some quick background on myself: though I grew up in a 1980s computer family household – truly a rarity back in the day when the Apple II was the pinnacle of home computing – I never found myself drawn to computers and technology until Roberta’s games, and your company, helped give life to the imagination behind King’s Quest. Since then, I have devoured computer games and played them with an intimate passion; for that, I deeply thank you and those at Sierra for bringing me such wonderful gaming opportunities in my youth.

Thanks!
Juan

[Unknown,Unknown]

Well, I’m not Ken LOL, but I always hoped the adventure genre would be able to continue with integrity in the MMORPG genre. I started writing a design document in 2000 for such a combination. As far as I know, there are tons of really fun MMORPG games out there, but none that really exist in the adventure genre. I’ve never gotten around to playing any MMORPG’s, because first my internet connection was too slow, and now my computer is too slow.

[Unknown,Unknown]

There was going to be a MMOAG (Massive Multiplayer Online Adventure Game) named Uru Live. Unfortunetly They did not get enough subscribers in the prologe phase and the idea got scrapped. What I DO think however is that the online part of the game never got launched due to the phisics engine it used (Harvoc). Realistic and laggy.

[Unknown,Unknown]

I would love to see a MMORPG in the adventure game kind of game play. There was a old site called Good ol Adventure game where you could play any sierra AGI game character and any AGI game game. It was great. You could chat with other people too. 🙂

[Unknown,Unknown]

Good Old Adventures is pretty cool, it’s still up (http://goodoldadventures.com),  but it doesn’t have any gameplay elements (that I am aware of) except for walking around and talking to other users.

[Unknown,Unknown]

Hello, this is Chris Williams, AKA son #2. =) Think this is my first post to my dad’s page.

A general belief in the gaming industry these days is that gamers make the best games. My dad also believes this if you ask him. The truth of the matter, though, is that of my mom, Al Lowe, Shigeru Miyamoto, Sid Meyer, et al., I am not certain that any of them are gamers. Definitely, none of the ones I know are, and in fact my mom is largely computer illiterate.

Now, previous to making any new game, my mom would go out and purchase whatever the top selling games were (be it Myst or Duke Nukem) and give each a good weeks worth of play. For “The Mask of Eternity” I believe she might have played some form of MMORPG, and if so I would guess that that is it for either of them.

I myself am not much of a gamer, but working in the computer industry (and then moving to Japan where networked gaming is my only source of English-language fraternization) have become increasingly more likely to play MMORPGs. So far my progression has been Yserbius -> SWG -> CoH -> EVE -> WoW.

To try and answer your question, based on my knowledge of my parents and the current state of online RPGs:

If my dad was running a company that was producing an MMORPG, his primary concern would be with “Who will be the biggest market for a game of this type, and what needs to be done to make them like it more?” So pretty much, he wouldn’t have an opinion of the genre itself–just whether or not what was being made looked like it will become a successful product. Beyond that, if there were particularly nifty graphics he might be interested in trying to figure out how they did it (as a former programmer.)

If my mom was playing any of these games she would probably just say “It’s not an adventure game” and that would be that. …She’s a bit biased.

Personally, I would like to see a MMO Adventure Game and I do think it could be done. WoW certainly appears closer to this but I suspect that towards the higher levels this will degrade back to xp grind.

So, just to say what would need to be done to make a MMOAG:
No levels or skill modifiers. No dice roll
Zero-twich
Does not require more than arrow keys and the mouse <- Opinion
Player would be able to advance through a story (or perhaps several stories) and a multitude of subplots within each
Completing a story would give only the reward of a nifty animation sequence and perhaps open up a new story

Of course on top of that you would need to figure out how to make it multiplayer and a way to make enough content to satisfy millions of people for several years and provide in-game stuff to do when you just want to putter about.

-Chris

[Unknown,Unknown]

Chris, welcome to the site! It’s cool to have you join in and share your thoughts with us.

Brandon Klassen, archivist ~ SierraGamers.com admin/dev team ~

[Unknown,Unknown]

Quote:
“… (by Chris Williams)
So, just to say what would need to be done to make a MMOAG:
No levels or skill modifiers. No dice roll
Zero-twich
Does not require more than arrow keys and the mouse <- Opinion
Player would be able to advance through a story (or perhaps several stories) and a multitude of subplots within each
Completing a story would give only the reward of a nifty animation sequence and perhaps open up a new story

Of course on top of that you would need to figure out how to make it multiplayer and a way to make enough content to satisfy millions of people for several years and provide in-game stuff to do when you just want to putter about.

-Chris…”

Hi, Chris. I just have a few comments on your post. Consider that every online game out there, big and small, is generally about fighting other players and/or building up your character. The majority of the content of MMPORGs is fluff. They keep respawning monsters and have their players whack them so they drop the magic booties. Repeat ad nauseum to level 50. What you are proposing is to eliminate the RPG aspect from MMPORGs, and I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, but it effectively guts them. But if that is done, then one must think of a way to make it worthwhile to play with other players other than for the sake of it being a glorified chat room…Otherwise it’s just another adventure game whos online component has no point. I think Myst: Uru tried to do something like this, and I played it. It was a dismal failure. Let me put it this way – The online play was so boring that the players were trying to kick as many of the various construction cones from all over the map into the central fountain as possible. Also, one of the things they had to do to get to another map was to run all over the place finding these little tokens. If you got enough of them, it unlocked a new world for you to experience new levels of boredom in. That is not fun. And those were pretty much the only two things you could do in Uru, other than be ragged on for being “out of character”, which also happened to me.

So the question then is, what can be done differently? How could you whip up so much content not centralized around fighting each other (not that there’s anything bad with a little competition, it’s just that the game shouldn’t be centered around killing things) or pushing up stats that it keeps everyone busy and happy? The answer is: You don’t. You let the customers do it. That’s right, you give them a piece of the development engine and let people do their own thing, and build your persistent world for you. A real life example of how this works can be found with Second Life (http://www.secondlife.com&nbsp; ). Just read through the site, it’s pretty crazy what they have done. The difference between this and what you are proposing is that a MMPOAG would be centrailized around quests and puzzles, instead of opening shops and buying useless junk 🙂

I remember a long time ago I played a text-only game called British Legends – I guess you could call it a MUD – on CompuServe that was kind of like that. It was very Quest-Centric. You increased your rank on the system by completing them – You’d get so many points for each one done. As you got more powerful you could take on more difficult quests, usually involving slaying some high level monster or some such. I can’t say much more as I never got a chance to play it that much (I can’t remember what I paid for CompuServe, but it was per-minute and a lot to rack for a 14 year old), but overall I thought it was pretty fun.

Update: Looks like someone took British Legends and put it on the ‘Net. I hope my memories about it served me as well as I thought they did…See for yourself: http://www.british-legends.com/

[Unknown,Unknown]

Lots of good points in this thread.

Surely, by its very essence, an adventure game is like a novel brought to the computer screen. It has a definite beginning and end. With a clear thread running between the two. And clearly delineated characters, a constant setting, etc.

What most people seem to describe when they talk about multiplayer adventure games are really not adventure games at all, but rather “life simulations” (for lack of a better word). You know, they are virtual worlds within which the player get to play out some fantasy life, facing the challenges that go with that life.

Anyway, I’m not saying it’s impossible to build a successful on-line adventure game. Merely that it would be difficult (and that the gameplay would necessitate certain restrictions that MMORPG players may find frustrating or annoying). All the same, it’s a project I would love to be a part of!

[Unknown,Unknown]

Quote:
“… (by Chris Schweiter)

What you are proposing is to eliminate the RPG aspect from MMPORGs, and I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, but it effectively guts them….”

Mmm…. Really what I was saying is what the ground rules one would have to lay down if he wanted to create something that really was an adventure game and not a role playing or action game. I tend to think in terms that if you try and just blodge one thing about and force it to become something else that it isn’t, you’ll just get a half-assed whatever. So I’m not talking about taking an MMORPG and cutting it down and then trying to add some new stuff in, but rather, that if you wanted to create a new genre (MMOAG) based on traditional adventure games, the first thing one would have to do is accept those limitations before he could go on to actually making a design that could be successful.
But as you stated, whether or not there is any design that could be successful is unclear. …Or at least a design that is feasible to make based on X budget and Y time (and 0 idea of how well it would do either.)

At the moment I personally don’t have any solution–or even if I thought I did it wouldn’t mean I was right of course =)
Am certainly open to post what various thoughts I have had playing MMORPGs, but I do think that for the moment doing such a thing as a true MMOAG would be a very difficult task. Mostly was just trying to show where I think my parents (and myself as it is) would come from on encountering an MMORPG.
…And of course the only game design experience I have is having a wizard named after me.

-Chris

PS. Howdy Brandon and Johann as well =)

[Unknown,Unknown]

That Second Life project is pretty interesting. Actually, I know one of the designers who did concept work for their logo.

I agree with what you’re thinking, Chris. As I said above, I haven’t really played any MMORPGs. I’ve never heard of British Legends, though I remember playing a lot of Trade Wars when I was in high school. We’d setup our own games on our school network, and it was a lot of fun.

Here’s the short version of the idea I had a few years ago: to setup a MMOAG, the engine connects to a server and downloads “quest modules”. These modules are either single player quests or multi-player quests. The game-world is exploration-based so that you run across the quests as you explore. The gameplay is centered around activity hubs such as towns. What this means is that while you need people playing the game and building the game world, you also need people to write the quests on a continual basis. The quests are constructed according to certain components so that they are easily added to the game world, but yet they can’t be too simple as to become repetitive. By uploading an entire series of quest modules to the server, you’d basically have a full adventure game. This is probably a poor explanation, but I just wanted to give the gist of the idea. I have a very specific idea of exactly how it could all work.

[Unknown,Unknown]

Quote:
“… (by Chris Williams)

Mmm…. Really what I was saying is what the ground rules one would have to lay down if he wanted to create something that really was an adventure game and not a role playing or action game. I tend to think in terms that if you try and just blodge one thing about and force it to become something else that it isn’t, you’ll just get a half-assed whatever. So I’m not talking about taking an MMORPG and cutting it down and then trying to add some new stuff in, but rather, that if you wanted to create a new genre (MMOAG) based on traditional adventure games, the first thing one would have to do is accept those limitations before he could go on to actually making a design that could be successful.
…”

It’s true what you say about making a game something it is not and having the results stink…However, one must not limit themselves too much by not budging from a design concept that’s about what an adventure game “should” be. To my knowledge, no one has been successful at making an MMOAG, which means no one has the formula. We know that the MMORPG formula works. Therefore, it would be a good idea to figure out what those elements that make it work are and apply them to an adventure-centric game. But first it needs to be said that content is king. Exploration and puzzle solving can only last so long before you are tired of seeing the same stuff over and over again.

That said, we must also not forget the whole point of multiplayer games: Competition/co-op. Simply being a place people can get together and chat, except this time while playing an adventure game, just won’t cut it. Such a game should have player rankings or ways to increase stats to help give people an incentive to play. As simple as it sounds, it works. I was not kidding about the magic booties…I was at a LAN party and actually witnessed a friend of mine playing EverQuest wait for 3 hours for a monster to spawn that would drop some special item. Turned out to be a pair of magic boots that he couldn’t use because they were outside of his character class. Hahaha. But I digress. The point is, if you can make someone sit at a game for three hours waiting for an item to max out his stats – and that’s not to mention people who give up entire nights to get to the next character level – then it’s safe to say that having such a component in a multiplayer game makes sense to have, because that’s the hook.

Brandon, I like your idea about “quest modules”. Of course, having an engine that allows for easy addition of diverse content that cannot be abused by users, should the system be open to them, is an arduous design task. One would also need a large enough database of quests to keep things interesting. That’s why I floated the idea of user-created content, as I don’t think there’s a core devteam of any size that could keep of with the demands of a system like that on their own. To bump up stats, you could have “quest points”. That is, for every quest you complete, you get X points…Very similar to Sierra’s scoring system, I suppose. Hitting certain point thresholds should open up new and more difficult quests…New maps to explore would be a good idea too. The quests available to each player should be randomized as much as possible to limit trading solutions amongst players, and to allow for a certain amount of replayability. How to do that seamlessly is something I’d think to think about more. I don’t know, maybe you could have something like the enchanted door in KQ2 except it leads each player to someplace different.

[Unknown,Unknown]

Quote:
“…We know that the MMORPG formula works. Therefore, it would be a good idea to figure out what those elements that make it work are and apply them to an adventure-centric game. But first it needs to be said that content is king. Exploration and puzzle solving can only last so long before you are tired of seeing the same stuff over and over again….”

…At heart every RPG boils down to fighting mobs. And I think most people do tire of it, which is the point at which they switch to a different MMORPG and get to experience the new UI, the different rule set, and the stories in the new world. But at least when you are fighting things you get to see lots of flash and bang, and worry about “dying.” With just story, it would be hard to create a rush like that on a regular basis.

The other, main, issue with a story-based MMO would be that, in an MMORPG you can get objects that you keep and that you want–ecause they make you stronger. If, in a story, the object of your quest is to get a wife…. Well how do we give the player a wife? An NPC won’t do him any good, and you can’t force two players together in the game.

Yet another issue is that stories end. RPGs kind-of end in that there is a maximum level. But that is only self imposed…if you wanted you could keep the levels growing exponentially forever–except you would need to make realms for the two level 130 players =\ Certainly you can have endless mini-stories, but MMORPGs as they already are seem to have difficulty creating enough story content for everyone.

Quote:
“…Such a game should have player rankings or ways to increase stats to help give people an incentive to play. As simple as it sounds, it works. I was not kidding about the magic booties…I was at a LAN party and actually witnessed a friend of mine playing EverQuest wait for 3 hours for a monster to spawn that would drop some special item….”

Dunno, I approach adventure games as being an attempt to give a player the ability to become a character in a story in as seemless a manner as possible. And this is admittedly not the part of gaming that the core group of computer game players has preferred through history–and so adventure games died and RPG won. Simply, there weren’t any buttons and numbers, and all that was left was silly stories for kids–who don’t play computer games.

So I do agree that it is quite possible that the current set of people buying and playing MMORPGs would not enjoy an MMOAG as I described. The main question for me would be how many girls 12-28 do you think you could get to start playing online games? And the second one is, how many of the people playing WoW also liked Ranma 1/2 (semi-soap-opera Japanese Animation) and why, as they just might like such a game after all.

I think that if I were to start programming an MMOAG, the core bit would not to be to really have any stories, but just lots of non-player characters with lots of stats and interests.

#define PERSONALITY_FUNNY 0
#define PERSONALITY_SERIOUS 1
#define PERSONALITY_TEMPERAMENTAL 2
#define PERSONALITY_VAIN 4
#define PERSONALITY_COWARDLY 5
… //the more the better

#define OPINION_LOVES_SECRETLY 0
#define OPINION_LOVES_OPENLY 1
#define OPINION_HATES_SECRETLY 2
#define OPINION_HATES_OPENLY 3
#define OPINION_LIKES 4
#define OPINION_DISLIKES_SECRETLY 5
#define OPINION_DISLIKES_OPENLY 6
#define OPINION_NONE 7
… //the more the better

#define RELATION_PARENT 0
#define RELATION_LOVER 1
#define RELATION_SIBLING 2
#define RELATION_FRIEND 3
#define RELATION_SPOUSE 4
#define RELATION_BOSS 5
#define RELATION_MONARCH 6
#define RELATION_OTHER 7
… //yup

#define POSITION_BEGGAR 0
#define POSITION_MONARCH 1
#define POSITION_HEIR 2
#define POSITION_NOBLE 3
#define POSITION_NOBLE_HEIR 4
…

#define LOOKS_HIDEOUS 0
#define LOOKS_GODLY 1
#define LOOKS_MEH 2
#define LOOKS_GOOD 3
#define LOOKS_BAD 4

#define ITEM_WEAPON 1
#define ITEM_DRESS 2
#define ITEM_SHIELD 3
#define ITEM_POTION 4
#define ITEM_WAND 5
…

#define EFFECTS_LOOKS_GODLY 0
#define EFFECTS_LOOKS_HIDEOUS 1
#define EFFECTS_OPINION_LOVES_OPENLY 2
#define EFFECTS_RESUSCITATES 3
#define EFFECTS_KILLS 4
#define EFFECTS_FIGHTING_SKILL_UP 5
…

struct Relation {
NPC *person;
int opinionOf;
int relationship;
};

struct Item {
int type;
int effect;
int value;
};
struct NPCItem {
Item* item;
boolean has;
boolean wants;
};

class NPC {
private:
Relation* relations;
int relationCount;
NPCItem* items;
int itemCount;

boolean male;
boolean goodGuy;
int socialStanding;
int looks;
int age;
boolean alive;
unsigned char fightingSkill;
…

public:
…
};

You could then, for instance, randomly create a “family” for each player. Giving the player a room in their house as a servant or such. Each member of the family would have their various interests and statistics. If you find out something from one of your family, then you can go out looking to solve that. And if you do, then they will tell you more about themselves and maybe give you better things (bigger room, nicer clothes, some money, etc.)
For instance, if the son of the household lets slip that he likes the girl across the way, then you know that getting those two together will be good. So you can then go and perhaps buy a love potion. …But for that you will need to make certain they are looking at each other. So you have to talk to the player managing the house across the way to convince them to bring over their daughter so you can lock the two of them in a room. …But the player across the street might be on at different times than you or has their own reasons for not wanting to allow the two to get together.
So instead of buying a potion, you might follow the daughter about a bit. There you might find out she likes some other guy–so him you give a potion that makes him act mean. The next time the daughter meets him, he dumps her and she flees away crying. At which point you bring over the guy from your house. He comforts her and presto, you are back on path.

Would be my first idea. In a sense it would be player created content–just they would create it by advancing the story, and it would advance based on what methods they used trying to make the lives of their family better. The biggest issue would be the question of how many different mini-instances you could create for each time two NPCs meet each other so that the player really has the ability to be creative. The above example for instance requires that we can administer potions to NPCs, that an NPC being rude to another can not only change their opinion of that NPC but after it has been changed react properly (burst out crying), get your NPCs to follow you, add a new NPC to a list (daughter meets our NPC), and that our NC who was secretly in love will react properly on seeing the daughter crying.
I think such a thing could be considered as a type of MMOAG that would have marketability (though a bit Sim-My Family) though I suspect there are still other versions without having to break down and put in RPG stuff.

-Chris

[Unknown,Unknown]

“the core bit would not to be to really have any stories, but just lots of non-player characters with lots of stats and interests.”

You’re right Chris, that idea is very Sims-like. I think the problem with it is that there’s no actual storytelling. Yes, with a good system you’re going to get very creative character interaction and development, but it has no story beyond that character interaction. With enough NPC programming and user commitment, can that character interaction develop into stories? I would argue against your basic premise (that this would work) and say instead that planned stories, of the epic variety, are neccessary to adventure games, and without those you do not have an adventure game.

“though I suspect there are still other versions without having to break down and put in RPG stuff.”

Interestingly enough, many RPG-like story elements are in adventure games – dungeons, monsters, heroes, magic, etc. It’s not a mistake to include some RPG elements in an adventure game – take Sierra’s Quest for Glory series. It stands as one of Sierra’s original and top five adventure series (King’s Quest, Space Quest, Leisure Suit Larry, Police Quest, Quest for Glory). One of the most unique Sierra games (Dynamix, actually) is Betrayal at Krondor. Sure, it was more RPG-oriented, but the story really shone through and it was released at a time (1993?) when the technology hadn’t exploded to the point that the interest was just in making great battle scenes or special effects. I’m not sure what my point with that was… just that in terms of playability, I’m not sure you’re going to get enough people to want to play your game idea. I’d rather play Sims than play a game with nothing else except for character interaction. Betrayal was a game that appealed to gamers across genres.

[Unknown,Unknown]

Quote:
“…You’re right Chris, that idea is very Sims-like. I think the problem with it is that there’s no actual storytelling….”

Yup. Or at east there is only in the sense that any story is just a case of “X wants Y so he can do Z” at heart–but indeed this type of setup would largely require that the players read stories into the game-play themselves instead of just viewing it as the world’s largest version of playing dolls.

Quote:
“…I would argue against your basic premise (that this would work) and say instead that planned stories, of the epic variety, are neccessary to adventure games, and without those you do not have an adventure game….”

Valid. The problem being how do you allow a player to have this grand epic quest while still allowing multiplayer. For instance, in City of Heroes, they have “Task Forces”, which is a 5 hour series of missions with a story attached to it. But only a very few people do it simply because you essentially have to set aside 5 hours to just that as you are chained to the other players that you are doing it with and if all 5 decided to try and do just one mission each night, you could never be certain that all five would be able to, or properly show up each of the subsequent nights.

Quote:
“…I’d rather play Sims than play a game with nothing else except for character interaction. Betrayal was a game that appealed to gamers across genres.
…”

Don’t know Betrayal so can’t comment there.
But I do think that given a soap-opera engine as described above, you would have the fexibiility to be able to create large scale stories (at the developers end) that would require players working together (since individually they have only limited control in the large scheme), with the freedom that you wouldn’t have if you were always busy trying to create mini-missions by hand.
For instance, if you were to announce to the players that the kings of each of the kingdoms was going to meet. And then you replace the NPC kings with actors for a large get together (maybe repeating every hour or so) and have some spectacular display of enmity between the kings. And continue doing such stuff working the world into a state of war. But you would announce every time some important event was going to happen and the players would have chances to try and maneuver things so that everythig went well instead of getting worse.
But if, for instance, they failed you could make all of the young men disappear for a week, and then only return a few with different personalities. I think that the players would care very much and that they would indeed view it as that they had lost in the story that had been organized, even though individually they had only a small amount of influence in the result and it was the entire community which failed.

But as said, this is just a kind of thing I could envision if I wanted to stick very strictly to the ideas I said earlier. That it is wise to stick to those is not clear. I just think that those are the kind of rules my mom would have laid out for herself if she were to approach making an MMO adventure game.

-Chris

[Unknown,Unknown]

This is the simplest solution I could come up with:

1. Create an interesting and varied game world (the setting).
2. Then create two hundred main quests.
3. Each main quest will apply to a specific player character.
4. The player is at first provided with a blank/generic character (which the player can create, within certain limits).
5. He/she is given the option (through interacting with pre-programmed NPC’s or human game masters) of assuming the identity of a pre-determined player character; and in turn assuming the responsibility for finishing a specific main quest.
6. If at some point the player gets stuck or tires of this quest, he or she can visit an inn or similar establishment where the quest can be returned to the main collection of quests (for another player to try and solve it).
7. Only one player can attempt any one main quest at one time.
8. Another thousand or so subquests (i.e. diversions), that would be accessible to everyone, can be created to keep players interacting.
9. Present everything in an isometric perspective (with 3D polygonal characters on 2D pre-rendered backgrounds) that would be familiar to adventure game fans. And which should allow access to players with older computers.

I’m not a programmer, so I’m not the best person to judge the logistical viability of the above ideas. However, as a generally creative type of guy I’d love to be a writer/designer on this (as long as the division of work/responsibility is clearly divided between the different members of the writing team).

And hi to Chris Williams. I still remember that article you wrote about mopping up fake blood on the Phantasmagoria set. (Your writing had this “man, this is cool” quality about it.) It was great having a kid my own age skulking about Sierra. I guess, in a sense, us younger fans identified with you.

Anyway, good luck on your future endeavours! And let us know if you ever decide to go into game development!

[Unknown,Unknown]

Yeah, I too remember the articles that Chris wrote in InterAction. About how Roberta said he couldn’t play Phantasmagoria, but then he did anyway. I remember the articles about Mask and Outpost… and I’m sure there were more.

I don’t see the necessity of an isometric or pre-rendered view, although that’s certainly one way to do it.

The idea of having a bank of quests that players can choose from (or be assigned), and if they want to give it up can return it to the pool is interesting, but also perhaps not necessary. Why divide up main quests and subquests – if the subquests are just diversions? Say for a really simple one, a farmer’s cow has been stolen. When player #2 talks to the farmer, farmer has all his regular dialogue and then says “player #1, player #4 and player #6 have gone to look for my cow. I hope they bring it back to me, but if they don’t, maybe you can!” And then player #2 is added to his list. I don’t know if that’s the best solution. My perspective is that the game world needs to have realism to immerse the player in it, and it won’t be realistic if player #1 walks up to farmer and has a chat with him while player #2 sits there watching, then player #2 goes up to the farmer and the game tells you “It’s a farmer going about his business, don’t bother him” because the farmer is locked-off as a player #1 quest. I think players should be able to interact with each other on two levels – one, to solve quests together. Two, to have those diversions together. Such as playing a game of checkers or darts in an inn.

Good ideas, keep them rolling. I might post a few more in reaction to what you wrote later.

[Unknown,Unknown]

Quote:
“… (by Chris Williams) Dunno, I approach adventure games as being an attempt to give a player the ability to become a character in a story in as seemless a manner as possible….”

Actually, I’d quibble a bit with this. I don’t see story as being a distinguishing factor between adventure games and RPGs. There are RPGs with very complex and well-developed stories. And there are adventure games that are little more than a plotless collection of puzzles, with a paper-thin story pasted on afterwards as an obvious afterthought. Both adventure games and RPGs have stories, and in both genres there are some games that have better or more complete stories than others.

The way I see it, adventure games and RPGs are actually very closely related. Both genres share two main goals: to tell a story, and to give the player a feeling of immersion in an imaginary world. In both genres, some games concentrate more on one of these goals than the other (and some games don’t manage to do a good job of either of them). But both adventure games and RPGs need something else to keep the player occupied, to give him more to do than just plow through the story with minimal interactivity. And it’s in how they approach that “something else” that the genres differ. Adventure games do it by requiring the player to solve puzzles to progress. RPGs do it by forcing the character to gradually build up level and/or stats to face more difficult opponents later in the game.

So that, as I see it, is the key difference between adventure games and RPGs–not in the story, which exists in both genres (to varying degrees depending on the individual game), but in the puzzles. I think Johann de Waal and Brandon Klassen have brought up some interesting ideas for how to approach puzzles in a massively multiplayer setting, and I’m certainly not trying to find fault with those; I just wanted to express my disagreement with the implication that adventure games are focused on story and RPGs aren’t.

[Unknown,Unknown]

In order for this project to remain (fundamentally) an adventure game, I do believe we would have to restrict each player to a single main quest. The subquests, or diversions, would be integral to adding richness to the player’s experience of the world. They would also facilitate “party formation”, where a bunch of players join together to solve a subquest. However, to return to the original idea – for it to remain an adventure game, each player must have one single quest that is only accessible to that player. A single story that only that player has a part in.

You could implement a game ranking system, whereby say a player is awarded a gold star for each main quest completed and a silver star for each subquest completed. A money system would also be a good idea. The player could in true Quest for Glory style earn money by selling ingredients to herbalists or cleaning stables or working farms, etc.

I also should have added that everything (in my last post) applies to a single server, or Ultima Online-like shard. So that you could accomodate many players, by giving them access to different parallel, though basically identical, game worlds.

[Unknown,Unknown]

The problem with assigning each player to a single main quest to accomplish is that… this is a lot of main quests to write. Of course, my variation that quests are open to different players to see how they are progressing does not mean significantly less main quests must be created. I agree that the main quest needs to be part of the adventure experience. I also appreciated Alun’s thoughts about what the differences / similarities between adventures and RPGs are. Perhaps there are still more models, other alternatives as to how to approach this. I’ll think more about this today.

Another option that comes to mind immediately. That every player plays the same main quest. Once they finish one main quest, they move to the next one. This encourages players to chat in the game world, as they might ask each other for help. This means you have infinitely less main quests to write. This could ignore or use the idea of a “quest bank” that you can return the quest to. Either it doesn’t, and every player must go through each quest in order. Or it does, and you can pick the quest you want to do. If there’s 100 quests, then at first you can only choose from the first 20, the easier ones. As you complete more, more become available to you. In my opinion, if you give up a quest in this model, then the quest should reset. This would be basically the same as your original idea – except that I’m saying quests are re-useable / experienced by each player, and they’re not “assigned”. From the start, the player should choose what quest they’re going to embark on. And the idea I mentioned earlier, I think needs to somehow happen. Eventually main quests should come up that require players to work together with other players, 2 or 3 players at the most.

Something I wanted to mention on another point that also ties into the game being more reality-based is that player should have more freedom of movement, more like a 3D Shooter or an RPG than an adventure game. This may be obvious and you may agree with it, or this may not be obvious and you’ll disagree. But when there’s a fence, the player should be able to jump or climb over the fence, instead of walking all the way around it. And similar things.

More thoughts later.

[Unknown,Unknown]

To address a few things you said specifically, Johann. If I misinterpreted what you mean, then don’t worry about it. This might clarify what you meant or bring up more discussion points.

“In order for this project to remain (fundamentally) an adventure game, I do believe we would have to restrict each player to a single main quest. For it to remain an adventure game, each player must have one single quest that is only accessible to that player. A single story that only that player has a part in.”

I disagree… firstly, that I think there need to be multiple main quests, so after each player finishes a main quest, then they can do another main quest. If there is a quest bank, the easier ones would not be the length of a Sierra adventure game, but would still be considered main quests. The later, harder main quests would approach the length and depth of a Sierra adventure game. And, that quest modules may be added to the quest bank in expansions sets by the developers. There is a simple reason for this. For me to want to continue to play in the game world, I’ll want to keep questing. Diversions / subquests can only keep me interested for so long (I’ll say more about that in a second).

Secondly, that the main quests must only be exclusive to one player – that’s wasting a lot of potential material that can be re-used by allowing multiple players to each progress through each main quest, as I suggested in my previous post. This is only logical – it’s simply not developmentally feasible to write main quests for 200 players that only one player would ever experience.

“The subquests, or diversions, would be integral to adding richness to the player’s experience of the world. They would also facilitate “party formation”, where a bunch of players join together to solve a subquest.”

I agree. But where players join together to solve quests, I believe should be the main quests. There should be single player and multi-player main quests. The diversions should be in the style of mini-games. Now, of course it depends on what we are both thinking about the term “subquest.” If there are subquests, I don’t think they should be adventure-styled (inventory objects, dialogue with NPCs, etc). Diversions could be mini-games as I said… as for subquests, one idea is that they could be puzzle-game type subquests. For example, explore a cave with two other people. This is a one-screen (or a series of one-screen) puzzle in the puzzle-style of the Coktel game Gobliiins, where the two players must work together to reach the end of the puzzle and receive a reward.

“You could implement a game ranking system, whereby say a player is awarded a gold star for each main quest completed and a silver star for each subquest completed. A money system would also be a good idea. The player could in true Quest for Glory style earn money by selling ingredients to herbalists or cleaning stables or working farms, etc.”

I agree about some sort of ranking system, simply showing how many main quests are completed. Depending on what subquests are, a ranking system could be used there too. Money / QFG-like RPG stats I agree would be a good thing to have. I think if the subquests were puzzle-type, then subquests could be used simply as a way of building up your stats and bettering your character. I believe in having inventory-solutions (place a plank over a broken bridge to cross the rapids (you can’t wade through it)), but I also believe as I said in having that real world ability – if you have enough of whatever stat, you can jump far enough to jump over it. Whether or not the subquests do develop stats, or if we have some puzzles that require you to jump (with no inventory solution) – thus meaning that you have to do the subquests in order to progress in a main quest – is up for debate. The other thing about this is that stat-developing subquests could result in money awards, which could be used to buy things (better shoes, better sword, better armor, etc), or could simply result in acquiring those items. Yes, I did say sword, armor, etc. We’ll have to discuss if there’s going to be any combat – and I’m certain we are agreed that primarily this needs to be rooted in traditional adventure puzzles – but I do think the player should have these things in a QFG-like style. Perhaps we are going down a similar road that Roberta went down when she first started designing KQ: Mask of Eternity – except for the multi-player part of it. I can’t help but imagine what Mask would have been if it had remained in Roberta’s creative control. Or, as Lori & Corey tried to design QFG5 multi-player.

“So that you could accomodate many players, by giving them access to different parallel, though basically identical, game worlds.”

The cool thing is that once players complete a quest set, the developers could create a new one. Or, the developers could create a whole new world. You get onto a ship, sail across an ocean, and join other players who have completed the first set of quests in a whole new expansion land. These players could still return to the first land as well and continue to interact with players who are still there or new players who join.

[Unknown,Unknown]

Brandon, I believe that if we implemented what you are suggesting, then the game would no longer be an adventure game but a RPG. At some fundamental level, I believe for it to qualify as an adventure, we need to give each player a unique experience that only he/she has access to. Massively multiplayer comes into it as we allow many players to have these unique experiences (the main quests I suggested) within a shared environment/world.

We seem to be approaching the same problem (that of Massively Multiplayer Adventure Games) from two different angles. Obviously mine is more restrictive, but that’s the way I see adventure games. You shouldn’t be leading the player by the nose, but at the same time consider that we’ve never seen a truly non-linear adventure game, probably because it cannot exist.

Anyway, to sum up, I suggested the Main Quests as separate experiences unique to each player (and driven by human or computer controlled NPCs), and added the smaller Side or Sub Quests as ways of allowing players to mix socially with each other and to allow the creation of shared experiences (thus providing the multiplayer element).

[Unknown,Unknown]

I’ve been extremely interested in the concept of making an online adventure game for a few years now. I’ve played most of the MMORPGs and as cool as they were, I left all of them for essentially the same reason. I found myself falling behind in the XP game so much so that I couldn’t play together with people I had become good friends with because, as we all know, typical MMORPGs discourage players with level differences from actually playing the game together. Sure I’d make new friends, but then they’d pass me as well.

I constantly felt alone in a world bustling with activity. It was somewhat depressing even. Perhaps I don’t have the mentality of the average MMORPG player. I surely don’t fit into the typical demographics, being that the most I can usually commit to gaming is about 20 hours a week. Unfortunately, most MMORPGs require much more commitment in order to progress at a rewarding pace.

I also found most of the stuff you could do in MMORPGs to be extremely boring and monotonous. If I wanted to become a master beer brewer, I’d have to brew 100,000 pints… each brew consisting of 4 uninteresting mouse clicks within an inventory screen… but that would only be for lagers… don’t get me started on the ales. I’m sorry, the only reason anybody would become a master brewer is if they had way too much time on their hands and the thought of being the best at something allowed them to stomach the most nauseating game experience ever. Maybe that’s the society we live in…

So what is a person to do when they clearly can’t (and don’t really want to) play MMORPGs, but still like online games and are eternally fascinated with single-player adventures and RPGs? (I did play Bioware’s Neverwinter Nights and it was the best MORPG [minus the massively] I’ve ever played. However, it still had that XP / level thing that I can’t commit enough time to play.) I think my online adventure gaming solution would be a hybrid of adventure, puzzle, arcade (simple), and role-playing games (minus the XP thing).

Why not just make an online “pure adventure” game? Because if anyone was to play it for any length of time, they would constantly need to have huge amounts of story driven content to occupy their time. I mean, how long does it take to complete the average adventure game as opposed to the typical RPG? Definitely a lot less time, unless the puzzles are maddeningly cruel. It also takes a lot of time to design and write a single-player adventure game… imagine multiplying that by a number that you can’t count to.

As far as allowing the community to build content and areas for a game goes, Neverwinter Nights (NWN) did this quite well, but it’s only flaw was in that a lot of people are not world designers and/or they can’t write. There are a lot of bad NWN modules out there. I don’t know how many days I wasted trying to find a server that was worthwhile playing.

Back to this hybrid idea (that others have pointed out in this thread)… without XP as the driving force behind what your character can and cannot do, how would you appeal to a wide audience of gamers? Variety is a simple answer, but that’s what all games strive for. In fact, a hybrid MMOAG would have to do the other things that current MMORPGs do and better in order for people to be the least bit interested.

Engaging story aside, I believe key aspects to a hybrid MMOAG would be…

–> All actions would be visual. This sounds like a no-brainer, but how many MMORPGs actually show your character grabbing a hammer and pounding metal in order to make a cool set of crafted armor? Wouldn’t it be neat if you had to know how many times to bang that metal (or at least pay attention to the metal’s condition) to make to best armor? Perhaps a small puzzle within a typically mundane action… which leads me to my next point.

–> Keep the player engaged. Even if you’re just riding a horse to the next town. Maybe make it into a simple arcade sequence where you have to make the horse jump over a log or two… and duck under a few tree branches. Yeah, it would be a lame game on its own, but would definitely be better than Dark Age of Camelot’s hop on a horse and watch the world go by for half an hour. I’d also ensure the horse riding game wouldn’t last more than 30 seconds. Don’t get me wrong, horses are cool, but the cool factor is like one of those sparkler candles. Yeah, it kicks ass, but it also fizzles out faster than you’d expect. Don’t let the audience see a smoldering candle. Keep them on their toes. Keep them from falling asleep. Trust me, that is a good thing.

–> I think aspects of the game should be a fully realized. For example, your character owns an apartment. Well that’s fine and dandy, but that’s about it when it comes to the typical MMORPG (Anarchy Online, anyone?). What if some story elements surrounded your domicile? What if NPCs came to meet you at your home or certain equipment necessary to solve puzzles was too large to carry? Then you’d have a reason to go back to your home. That’s where the microwave is… these burritos don’t cook themselves, mister!

–> There should be fun stuff to do when there’s nobody online that you care to play with. The idea of single-player mini-games is cool as long as they produce a nifty reward for the efforts. And when I say reward, I mean something useful in the game, not just fluff. Have you ever played Animal Crossing? That’s a game where you work your ass off to get an item that doesn’t do anything. All the rewards in Animal Crossing are useless graphics. I hate Animal Crossing, even though it’s such a cute game. If the reward system is good enough, it would be beneficial to create multiplayer mini-games… within your game. I’m still waiting to play a game of poker at the local tavern in one of those MMORPGs.

–> Repetitive actions should have variety and progress in said variety. Beating rats about the head with a wooden spoon is cool the first 50 times… but wouldn’t it be awesome to squish them with a sledge hammer? …or use that ol’ Jedi choke trick and watch them squirm? Perhaps, upgrading your sword might disintegrate the enemy instead of leaving a bloody pile of quivering flesh. Food for though anyhow.

–> I believe that crafting things is very cool, but should be controlled. For example, I think that if my character wanted to make a Flaming Moe, he should have to go and collect the ingredients. However, once an ingredient is collected, a timer would have to start that would restrict the player from collecting the ingredient again from the same location until the timer runs out (maybe a full day or something, basically to discourage camping of areas). Also, by spreading out the resources across the world, it creates a need to explore and share Krusty’s Cough Syrup. Collecting resources should involve interesting puzzles and some should be critical to advancing the plot as well as for just making cool stuff to use and share.

–> If there was anything to gain in the game to keep the diehards happy, it would have to be money. There should be a lot of interesting items to buy and a lot of insanely high priced items as well. Sure, your old clunker transport spaceship does the job, but wouldn’t it be cool to fly in style… say, an intergalactic warship with cruise control and driver’s side airbags?

–> I think NPCs should definitely remember your character or at least remember how they fee

[Unknown,Unknown]

–> Most importantly, your character must change as the game progresses. RPGs do this in a simple, but rewarding fashion. Adventure games should do the same. After the game starts, your character should have to choose a profession at some point and follow a common story, but from that profession’s perspective (this would create a re-playability factor, like in the Quest For Glory series). By following the story, your character grows and gains items and abilities that help them in their quest and help other players too. If your character was a doctor, he might have to learn how to implant cybernetics into a person. Well, wouldn’t that be cool to surgically alter other players? Though, getting through the spaceport metal detectors would be a bitch. Also, I do think it would be a must for players to choose some new abilities as your character gains rank in his or her career. It gives the player a feeling of empowerment. That in someway they are tailoring their character to the way they want to play through the stories. I think the skill trees that branch out are pretty neat, like in Diablo II. (Slightly off topic: remember those old Choose Your Own Adventure books or the Pick a Path variety? I felt like I was in control of the story. It didn’t always work out as I expected, but damn it was cool! I felt empowered! …okay maybe not empowered, but it felt good, whatever it was.)

–> Character skills are interesting to have. In typical adventure games, the player could do everything required to progress through the game on their own. I think that should be true for a hybrid MMOAG as well. However, there are many different ways to solve the same puzzle or conquer the same obstacle depending on the character’s profession and/or abilities. Though, the solution might involve earning enough money to buy that knockout gas grenade or possessing the “computer hacking” skill to flood the room with the defense system’s own toxic gas.

–> Virtual pets are a must. Tamagotchi wasn’t popular because of the graphics… it’s because you had this little thing that required your attention and gave you back virtual affection. Everybody wants to be loved. Besides wouldn’t it be cool to have a pet that grows in its abilities like you. Not only does your character’s progression amuse and fascinate you, but your 50 ton gelatinous cube, Fluffy, would make it an interesting experience as well.

All those are important things to think about, but the biggest hurdle for any MMOG is to allow the player to feel like he or she is making a difference in the game world, but without ruining it for everybody else. Something to think about… I think I’ve blathered on enough though.

I always ask people who play MMORPGs if it was a single player game, would you still play it? [cue the unintelligible babble… somewhat like when Kirk and Spock would confuse the alien super computer and its brain slowly melted] Some say no, but defend their game by saying that it’s all about playing together, the players are what make the game. I’m sorry, but I’m not going to put my enjoyment of a game in the hands of an eight year old in Guatemala. Why can’t a game be fun on its own… and then add the ability for people to play it together?

I honestly think there is a solution to a non-RPG MMOG that would appeal to many different audiences. However, it requires a lot more planning than any other game on the market… because it doesn’t exist. A successful one would be the first of its kind.

The funny thing about the human race is that we can envision something that doesn’t exist… and make it a reality. It is just a matter of time before a MMOG of a different variety makes an entrance. Who knows? …maybe it might start here.

— Cody

[Unknown,Unknown]

This is a pretty enlightening discussion. I have really enjoyed reading everybody’s thoughts.

The major hurdle that would have to be overcome in order for a MMOAG to be successful is the fact that so far, nobody has really been able to translate a good storyline past the single-player experience – and an adventure game has nothing without a story.

My experience with MMORPGs is limited to a few years of Ultima Online and a couple weeks of Star Wars Galaxies. The Star Wars and Ultima worlds both have very rich histories to draw upon in attempting to write compelling story content, but from what I have seen, any attempts to do so in those two MMORPGs have fallen flat for a number of reasons:

– The majority of the people playing the game aren’t role-players, and simply don’t care.
– Players generally aren’t lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time to see unannounced events.
– Many people avoid attending announced events due to lag and the presence of grief players.
– With the vast number of players in the game, one person can’t truly have any impact on the story, making the whole thing feel more like you’re watching a play or movie than actually taking part.

So how do you take a story, make it massive, and be successful? I don’t think it’s possible. Even if you could do it, you’ll never get around the fact that a large part of the game’s population will be k3w1 d00dz with little interest in role-playing, which can really kill your suspension of disbelief. You can’t force RP on players and expect to still be financially successful, and you can’t write a quality story on a massive scale. I have possible solutions for these issues, though.

How do you make players role-play and feel like they are part of a story without needing to ham it up like a stereotypical role-player would? Set the game in the real world, where the “character” you “play” is you. This would also carve out a niche for the game, in a field where everybody else is doing Sci-Fi and Fantasy.

I have much knowledge of today’s Ultima Online “dungeon crawl” – Recall to a Blood Elemental spawn area and compete with five other guys for the three Elementals, rinse and repeat, and hope for the best magic loot to drop. OSI didn’t even try to counter this trend – instead they created a dungeon specifically for the item farmers. Now, you can spend days if you like, competing with fifty other guys for a 0.0001% chance at a rare item! Recently developers seem to have realized how un-fun this can become and have invented “instanced dungeons” – random dungeons that spawn just for you and your buddies, so you can enjoy a good crawl whenever you want, and in your own way. Now think about the way that you used to enjoy adventure games, and imagine how this concept could be utilized to take adventure games into the multiplayer realm.

I enjoy playing adventure games alone, sure, but the best times I’ve ever had playing an adventure game were when I was with a few family members or friends, everyone brainstorming ideas for how to get past the puzzle at hand. It wouldn’t be so difficult to make this work online by giving each player an avatar to control. You make the adventure game multiplayer, just not massive.

Rather than having one major story arch, the game could be episodic in nature. In fact, a police theme would lend itself very well to this format – imagine Police Quest, but with a squad of four or five people instead of just yourself. An episode could involve any of a million situations drawn from real life – from basic patrolling to recovering stolen vehicles, drug busts, or tracking down a murderer.

For maximum realism, it might be necessary to employ a simple combat engine (minus any kind of stats or levelling). We’ll not let realism get in the way of fun though, and say that nobody can die, but will rather be incapacited and hospitalized until the end of the mission should they get shot. You might also give people the opportunity to play the bad guy instead of joining the police force.

To make players feel like they are part of a larger world, you could name your servers after various larger and smaller American cities, with each town’s crime rate being tracked for all to see.

I’m not sure whether this idea would satisfy adventure purists, or whether it would be successful long-term, but I don’t think anything like it has been tried before and it’s about as close to a multi-player adventure game as I think you could get.

[Unknown,Unknown]

Sorry Chris, I totally fergot about this site, I get so busy with other things. 🙂
Welcome, Welcome!

[Unknown,Unknown]

I must admit, this is a very interesting thread, though it may have drifted away from the initial post… maybe just a little, eh? Anyway, Jason has brought up some very valid points regarding storylines…

Quote:
“… (by Jason Artman) The major hurdle that would have to be overcome in order for a MMOAG to be successful is the fact that so far, nobody has really been able to translate a good storyline past the single-player experience – and an adventure game has nothing without a story….”
I believe the main reason why single-player games have great storylines is because, for the most part, everything is scripted. This allows the most fantastic happenings to develop. MMOGs are typically about a huge world to explore… where as single-player role-play and adventure games are typically about the story, in my opinion.

Quote:
“… (by Jason Artman) So how do you take a story, make it massive, and be successful?…”
I’m so glad you asked that question, Jason. I think that is the most critical and most difficult question to answer. I’ll try and take a stab at it.

Given the fact that everybody has to share the MMOG world, drastic world-shaping events cannot drive the story. The game has to be fair for everyone and not everybody can commit to witnessing scheduled server plot events. The story has to remain about the character and not the world surrounding them.

Sure, you can have interesting political situations that change as time goes on and catastrophic wars, but the player is merely an observer of the aftermaths of these events from their character’s point of view. However, I do see the trends of the player-base affecting the world generating new events and side-quests. What I mean by this is…

Imagine that a majority of the player base likes to cause trouble in a certain area of the game world. Perhaps news within the game could reflect where the most player activity is. For example, what if players were smuggling contraband between certain planets, more so than any other available places. “The Gemini Sector is now under galactic military alert due to the recent surge of criminal activity.” All of a sudden, the place is crawling with armed forces and there ain’t no way you’re going to be able to make that big “run” anymore until things cool off. You’re going to have to find an alternate way to make your illegal living.

What if players were killing innocent animals as the most common solution to obtaining resources in a certain region? Side-quests could be generated to help the fauna. Maybe your character might be given a quest to meet with the government and plead for a law to make it illegal to kill the creatures. If enough people (% of the player base) actually complete the “Save the Artic Toucan” quest then the game will understand that the action of killing those creatures is a crime, until the toucan population gets back to where it should be. Then people would have to think of another solution to get the resources or risk being captured by the authorities.

I think a hybrid MMOAG’s story should consist of…

–> A historical background. Giving purpose to the game’s setting.

–> A world story. Events shaped by the trends of the player base. These events give the world ebb and flow keeping things interesting, but never stopping the player from completing tasks and/or quests. It should never become a hindrance.

–> A character story. These could be the episodic stories that Jason mentioned. What ever they are, they should be meaningful to the player and the player’s character. Stories surrounding the character’s profession, interests, and personal life. Personally, I like the idea of episodes because then the story can be broken up into more manageable pieces. An episode might take only an hour and a half to complete, but there might be 30 of them in total. These would be the stories that allow the character to gain different abilities and grow during the game.

–> Optional stories. These would be side-quests that have no impact on the character, but allow the player to feel productive in their escape from the character story.

–> Cooperative stories. These, like the optional stories, are not integral to the character story, but require two or more persons to complete. I’ve always thought it might be neat to have puzzles that require two or more people to work together in order to complete. Maybe someone has to remain and hold the door open while the other retrieves the item… or maybe somebody has to distract the enemy in order for the other to overcome them. Again, they should be short and sweet and geared for a small group.

[Unknown,Unknown]

–> Player created. I don’t mean player submitted content. I mean role-playing. Yes, there are a few players out there that actually like role-playing. It’s a great way to escape the boundaries of a scripted story, but in existing MMOGs, the role-play is all about emoting things and pretending. Why hasn’t a game supported role-playing yet? Do you honestly think there are games that identify role-playing between players with game mechanics and choices geared specifically for that purpose? If you think making your character do an embarrassing “/dance” emote is role-playing, I think I need to explain this further.

I’m talking about interactions between characters. Perhaps I could actually, pour someone a drink… and it actually shows it happening. Maybe I could offer my hand in dance to a pretty lass… she in turn has the choice to accept the offer or decline it. Accepting would result in a waltz for the duration of the song. If someone was injured, perhaps my character could actually offer to bandage the wound carefully wrapping the injured limb. I suppose what I’m basically getting at is that the game would visually support a much wider range of character actions and cooperative actions that lend themselves to role-playing. Imagine a fallen comrade is too heavy for you to carry, but with the help of another, you could both drag him to safety. I don’t think it’s as complicated as it may sound, but then again, I do tend to underestimate things… a little.

Another idea for player created stories is that you create a mission for yourself and others to complete. You could select a series of plot options such as, mission type (rescue, assassination, escort, etc.) and choose appropriate sub-options (setting, enemy, environment, etc.) and most importantly you could choose appropriate rewards for completing the mission. So if I wanted to role-play and have a cool adventure to support my character’s dilemma, I could run up to an unsuspecting person on the street and frantically explain that my brother has just been shot and needs to get to the hospital as soon as possible. Unfortunately, my brother happens to have been shot during a gang war and the firefight is still on. Again, it sounds like a tall order, but I don’t think it has to be as complicated as it may sound. Essentially, that’s how all the missions are in the typical MMORPG. Get this item, kill this person, etc… how hard could it be to build simple missions with cool rewards by allowing the players to do it themselves?

Maybe I’m out to lunch, but I would think it would be so awesome in a game to lean in for a kiss and have the other player choose to return the favor or slap me in the face. I mean, wouldn’t it be cool to conclude a business transaction with a handshake between two characters? Or just to be standing on a street corner and light a cigarette and smoke it while gabbing with some schmuck? I don’t know, maybe it’s just me, but I’d think that more people would role-play if the game actually supported it.

Anyway, I just wanted to thank those who have contributed to this thread thus far. I’m really enjoying it and hope to continue discussing this to a point where we think there might be a viable solution to the MMOAG conundrum.

Oh yeah, one last thing… have you ever seen a cut-scene in a MMORPG? In a MMOAG, I think they’d be critical in advancing whatever plots there were for the player. You see them all the time in single-player games. They are there for a reason and MMORPGs don’t seem to understand the importance of them. My two cents.

— Cody

[Unknown,Unknown]

Hey, guys. I have already tried working on something like this. I am only missing one key point to this and that is a programmer on my team. We have been working with a MUSH server for several years and have gotten it to the point where it is ready to be released as a text adventure or converted into a graphical adventure game. However, we have been looking at server setups lately and have not been able to find and decent client/server systems for what we are looking to do.

I have thought that something like The Realm would be absolutely perfect for us, but none of us, as we have skulked and searched the entirety of the web, have not been able to find a system even similar to the SCIW system.

Perhaps one of you might know of an engine which is similar to SCIW/SCI32 so that we might attempt to keep the system familiar with those that have been playing these games forever, but might also attract fresh blood, so to speak, into the system as well.

Anybody know of a system like this or would I have to find a programmer who is willing to code the whole thing from scratch?

Wolverine@Space Quest Remakes

[Unknown,Unknown]

Never playing one of these games with dialup, I would like to see an online multiplayer game were people can gather resources (wood, stones…) and build their houses or forts. The managers of the game would set up an world that would grow. A board game similar to this idea is Settlers. Where you try to take over the land with roads and buildings while working with the land around you.

The developers could have “spies” that are their own characters who add to the story by speading stories of treasures. They could cause all kinds of changes in the users life. I would give the user several vehicles to use. Air planes and underwater vehicles. I would not limit the user to land. I played a game called “Mean Street” that allowed side scrolling, 3D flying, and video conferencing.

Ideas for the world could be the Old West or Mad Max. I would consider adding character moves similar to Tomb Raiders.

[Author]

Posts