Has any game done this yet?

[HRose]

I think what really stops MMOG teams from this kind of virtual ecology is the one question all game features should be asked. Will this make the game any more fun for the majority of users?

I was going to post something similar. Legitimating an idea just for the sake of it and without a real good motivation. As I wrote in the past this is mostly an experiment for geeks than something valuable to offer in a mmorpg.

All I see, right now, is even the absence of a slightly more complex scripted encounter system. And the possibilites of this system are nearly ENDLESS. Just look around and you'll see how even the most advanced WoW often isn't so different from autoattack.

So why mess with all these overly complicated structures when they offer nearly nothing?

Instead I completely disagree on the AI. I consider that path completely pointless and irrelevant for this genre. Mmorpgs do not need to implement AI. A slightly more scripted system could already do EVERYTHING you need and look like generations above what is already available. It would be already a dream to have some complex encounters where the monsters follow simple schedules and basic tactics that can be learnt.

PvE is "authorship". It's the possibility to tell a story imagined by someone. It's a direct form of communication that goes from an "artist" to an audience. This is why it's stupid to suppose that your players will create the content themselves. There's a need of quality here, something that only a dedicated writer paid to do so will be able to deliver. So, as in a book, a movie, or similar things, all the control must be in the hands of the dev. Good PvE will never be randomly generated and will never be based on AI. Good PvE needs history, it needs personality, persistence. It cannot be contingent, it cannot vary, it cannot adapt. Everything that is vaguely relative is going to fail in PvE because what the players want is something fixed, something that has an interesting story to tell. In that precise point in the space and in that precise moment. It's the concept of "identity" opposed to "contingent". Identity as something that cannot change and that cannot be elsewhere.

This is why the players love when a zone isn't built randomly as in SWG but carefully handcrafted in all its details. This is why they learn how to pull, how each single encounter works and must be tackled. It's all about mini-puzzles, or the act of "chunking" as Raph Koster would define it. If the lesson to learn goes directly out of control and isn't predictable to an extent, it will become simply frustrating and look absolutely generic, a-specific, relative, not tied to the history and life of THAT particular place.

(Reference)

In my simplified representation it's on the PvP that you want "Virtual World" elements and where you develop systems that can be reused. Because PvP games become so much better in the form of "toys" to use and re-use. They are naturally apt to go in that direction and form correlations up to a complex system.

Instead the PvE needs the story to tell, the set experience that you can find immersive and challenging. So the product of a "narrator" who knows what is going to happen.

Of course this changes if the use of monsters spawns points becomes a "toy" to use in PvP. Now, *THAT* is something fun.

[WindupAtheist]

I think what really stops MMOG teams from this kind of virtual ecology is the one question all game features should be asked. Will this make the game any more fun for the majority of users?

Frankly, it's a good idea for worlds, but in MMOG's that are games, it will just mean that people will be inconvenienced, either by not finding mobs they can fight or not finding mobs that are worth fighting. And that's not fun. Virtual worlds are about circle-jerk academic theories, MMOG's are about games. Nothing wrong with either one, but one is not something a mainstream audience should ever be exposed to, because they CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH.

And yes, in the DikuMud fog MMOG's currently have, this idea is all bad.

It helps to broaden the range of things that can be fought to some benefit.  In a game where players run from level 1 to 100, and everything four levels below you is "grey" and worthless, while everything four levels above you is certain death, a developer can't really do jack shit except lay the content out in a careful linear track for the player to follow as they level up.

Also, I don't want a complete "virtual ecology" in my game.  Nor do I really want a "virtual world" as I think the term is intended around here.  What I want, as I've said before, is a game that pretends to be a world.  Go ahead and keep spawning endless Evil Clerics at the Evil Temple you carefully built into the gameworld.  That's why it's there, and sometimes you do just want to kill stuff without considering the ramifications.  But maybe once in a while some of them could go ahead and attack the Good Temple, only stopping after we've killed enough of them.  Shit, people are killing Evil Clerics anyway, right?

[HaemishM]

You want what Horizons promised. You want the world to react back in ways that are not always predictable.

[Yegolev]

I think WUA should give Horizons a try.  You just have to install .NET and you are on your way to kicking that UO habit.  I'll invite you into my guild and give you a snappy title.  We can sit around complaining about Bowman.

[Hoax]

People play Horizons?  After they cut like 2/3rds of their playable races I figured the project was pretty much doomed for everyone who wasn't a dragon-nut.

[WindupAtheist]

I shall investigate this here Horizons game.

*sighs*

But you know, if UO had kept up the scenario system Calandryll was talking about...  Maybe added that city invasion thing, but included the ability to actually win...  I'd still be riding the UO bandwagon, shitty graphics and ninja elves be damned.  Players being able, by their own actions, to save a city that would otherwise have been destroyed (and WAS destroyed on other shards) was good shit.  Would have kept people on their toes beyond that point, knowing that the "bad guys" could actually win if enough players didn't kill foozles or what have you.

[Yegolev]

People play Horizons?  After they cut like 2/3rds of their playable races I figured the project was pretty much doomed for everyone who wasn't a dragon-nut.

The issue of "reducing promised playable races" doesn't even make the cut for the list of reasons to avoid Horizons.  That's so small-potatoes compared to the other shit, or lack of other shit perhaps.  I have forgotten most of the reasons, actually, but managerial retardation is in the top three.

I was mostly kidding, but WUA, if you actually do start up a toon in Horizons, I will invite you into my guild as promised.  I won't be playing, however.

[HaemishM]

I shall investigate this here Horizons game.

*sighs*

You do realize we lean you that way because we hate you. Truly. I'd link you to my review of it, but sadly, it's on that previous site.

[Signe]

Sending even WUA to Horizons is cruel.  You should all be ashamed.

[Paelos]

Sending even WUA to Horizons is cruel.  You should all be ashamed.

It's supposed to be a learning experience, shhhhhhh. It builds character.

[Yegolev]

Sending even WUA to Horizons is cruel.

He seems to care for UO a great deal.  It is not unthinkable that he might like Horizons.  Just think of the classes as skills with subskills.  It has playable elves, though... and worse.  I need someone to help me farm water golems, anyway.  In Soviet Horizons, resource nodes mine you!

[stray]

I made a suggestion for SWG several months back, and I still do. It isn't UO 2.0 or anything, but it's probably the best alternative.

[Yegolev]

Heh, it's like we are trying to set him up with one of our girlfriends with a good personality.

[HaemishM]

He could probably use a little meatplow heffer action.

[MahrinSkel]

For Diku-based, LevelQuest gameplay, virtual ecologies and the related AI systems are not of much use.  So, if that is the game a designer wants to make, and he's got the $100M in funding it will take to enter that market now that WoW is on the scene, have at and enjoy.

Myself, I think that LevelQuest mechanics have pretty much hit a dead end, and although the market dynamics will keep that design scheme commercially viable for close to a decade, the handwriting is on the wall for those who care to look.  Since I don't have any interest in refining that formula, and don't see how I could get that level of funding, I'm going to look in other directions, towards where I think these games will be when they're done evolving.

Look at WoW: Is it really, at a design and implementation level, anything more than "EQ Done Right"?  And do you really think that EQ nailed the problem of MMO entertainment on the second try, and there's no point in doing more than refining that?

"Virtual Worlds" in their idealized form are not practical yet, but they are inherently "larger" in potential than Diku mechanics.  All the arguments about why they can't be contained inside Diku games are missing the point, you can't put a 5 gallon bucket into a 1 gallon milk carton, does that mean that 5 gallon buckets can't possibly hold as much water as a milk carton?  There is a "possibility space" of potential online game design which is much, *much* larger than that of Diku-like games.  "Virtual Worlds" represent the urge to explore that possibility space to its fullest.

--Dave

[WindupAtheist]

I'm only vaguely aware of Horizons.  It's a commercially unsuccessful class/level game with playable dragons, and that's about all I know on the subject..  Precisely what is asstastic about it?  As for SWG...  I'm a Star Wars geek, and an MMOG geek, but for some reason I really don't want to play a Star Wars MMOG.

[stray]

I'm only vaguely aware of Horizons.  It's a commercially unsuccessful class/level game with playable dragons, and that's about all I know on the subject..  Precisely what is asstastic about it?  As for SWG...  I'm a Star Wars geek, and an MMOG geek, but for some reason I really don't want to play a Star Wars MMOG.

Next time there's a free trial (I think it's been pulled for now) give it a try. Raph is a big part of why UO is what it is, so some things you'll find familiar in SWG. If you don't want EQ, don't want elves, want something more shiney than UO, want to do things with your character in addition to advancing him, then you may like it.

[Paelos]

PS combat in SWG is ass. Have fun!

[Signe]

My nephew is the biggest Star Wars geek ever and he won't go near SWG.  He can't explain why, either.

[WindupAtheist]

The nature of the Star Wars license is the polar opposite of any MMORPG I've ever heard of.  A successful Star Wars game pretty much HAS to make you The Hero, it has to have a journey with an ending, and can't afford to make you dick around grinding for months before getting to the really cool stuff.  Otherwise it isn't Star Wars.

I want to be Luke Skywalker as he goes on adventures, blows shit up, and helps to destroy the Empire forever.  I most certainly do NOT want to be Luke Skywalker as he fucks off being a n00b on the moisture farm.  And while having the dragon respawn over and over in an oridnary MMORPG is annoying enough, having the Death Star respawn endlessly to be blown up by successive "heroes" just ruins the whole thing when it comes to Star Wars.

Worse still if you tell me I can't blow the Death Star up at all, for "continuity" reasons.

[Paelos]

You can't blow up the Death Star. I think the Death Star is already toast in the game's timeframe.

[Samwise]

The first one, anyway.  The theme park missions hint at the construction of the second Death Star.  And part of the original plan for the game was to gradually advance the timeline through the next two movies.  Maybe someday there'll be a giant JTL-based story arc that culminates in everyone getting to take part in that climactic battle over Endor.

And maybe someday monkeys will fly out of my butt.   

[Paelos]

And maybe someday monkeys will fly out of my butt.   

...carrying 900+ ore. And THEY will lead us into a new enlightened generation of SWG!

[Cheddar]

The first one, anyway.  The theme park missions hint at the construction of the second Death Star.  And part of the original plan for the game was to gradually advance the timeline through the next two movies.  Maybe someday there'll be a giant JTL-based story arc that culminates in everyone getting to take part in that climactic battle over Endor.

And maybe someday monkeys will fly out of my butt.   

I would sign up in an instant if this were true.  And if they have Ewoks.  Unlike some I like the yub yub song.  My inner child RULES my psyche.

[Ironwood]

My nephew is the biggest Star Wars geek ever and he won't go near SWG.  He can't explain why, either.

Possibly because, as a game, it sucks the very marrow of the earth.

[HRose]

"Virtual Worlds" in their idealized form are not practical yet, but they are inherently "larger" in potential than Diku mechanics.  All the arguments about why they can't be contained inside Diku games are missing the point, you can't put a 5 gallon bucket into a 1 gallon milk carton, does that mean that 5 gallon buckets can't possibly hold as much water as a milk carton?  There is a "possibility space" of potential online game design which is much, *much* larger than that of Diku-like games.  "Virtual Worlds" represent the urge to explore that possibility space to its fullest.

We all agree on that.

The point is: what is the actual difference between a "diku" and a "Virtual World"? How you define them?

From my point of view the definition is in the focus. A game with only one type of gameplay isn't a Virual World because a Virtual World is essentially a complexity. So a world where there are many different elements all tied together to form a complessive project. Often the mmorpg we can play right now don't have different elements, or when they have them, they are all detached.

This is also why I expect all this potential to have a better use in the PvP. The PvP is already essentially a complex system where you can have a precise role and effect and not just play in the background. A Virtual World implies you have an impact, small or big. Limiting this approach to the PvE will just offer a sandbox that is fun as a toy, till the novelty wears off. Like an aquarium.

It's instead with the PvP that those "toys" become fun. Because it's finally about you and the other players. It's about a real society that can have an impact and force consequences.

[Murgos]

The point is: what is the actual difference between a "diku" and a "Virtual World"? How you define them?

From my point of view the definition is in the focus.

No, thats actually not the point, there are already valid definitions for Diku derived games and virtual worlds.  A Diku based game could be a virtual world, it's just not likely too be because the mechanics of that style game don't lend themselves to more nebulous playing experiences.  Look at crafting in every Diku based MMOG, they always make it some repition based level system because thats the 'Diku way' thats what the mechanics of the rest of the games systems are so the rest of the games envorments have to be focused on supporting that mechanic.  So you get stuff like 15 'levels' of wood each one exclusive and successive to the next when in a virtual world wood would be wood (heh) with varying properties inhereit in it being wood not in what it's level is.

A little clearer, levels of wood (heh, again) are an artifical construct designed to support a level based system there is no analogous feature of wood in the real world.

[Bunk]

The first one, anyway.  The theme park missions hint at the construction of the second Death Star.  And part of the original plan for the game was to gradually advance the timeline through the next two movies.  Maybe someday there'll be a giant JTL-based story arc that culminates in everyone getting to take part in that climactic battle over Endor.

And maybe someday monkeys will fly out of my butt.   

I would sign up in an instant if this were true.  And if they have Ewoks.  Unlike some I like the yub yub song.  My inner child RULES my psyche.

They already have Ewoks. Rabid, pyschotic Ewoks that will rip out your intestines on site. Which is ok, because anything that justifies the killing of Ewoks is ok.

[Ironwood]

They already have Ewoks. Rabid, pyschotic Ewoks that will rip out your intestines on site. Which is ok, because anything that justifies the killing of Ewoks is ok.

It would be terrible if you had to relocate for such abuse.

[Cheddar]

I would sign up in an instant if this were true.  And if they have Ewoks.  Unlike some I like the yub yub song.  My inner child RULES my psyche.

They already have Ewoks. Rabid, pyschotic Ewoks that will rip out your intestines on site. Which is ok, because anything that justifies the killing of Ewoks is ok.

Oh.  Well then I am a filthy liar because there is no fucking way I will ever play that shit fest again.  Of coruse I also told myself I would never play EQ2.  

[Hoax]

From my point of view the definition is in the focus. A game with only one type of gameplay isn't a Virual World because a Virtual World is essentially a complexity. So a world where there are many different elements all tied together to form a complessive project. Often the mmorpg we can play right now don't have different elements, or when they have them, they are all detached.

This is also why I expect all this potential to have a better use in the PvP. The PvP is already essentially a complex system where you can have a precise role and effect and not just play in the background. A Virtual World implies you have an impact, small or big. Limiting this approach to the PvE will just offer a sandbox that is fun as a toy, till the novelty wears off. Like an aquarium.

It's instead with the PvP that those "toys" become fun. Because it's finally about you and the other players. It's about a real society that can have an impact and force consequences.

Someone give this man 10M to design something that doesn't suck ass, STAT!

MahrinSkel, also makes very good but disturbing points, but basically something we all agree on already.  Everquest clones have reached a dead end with WoW, but nobody knows the over/under on how long it will take for somebody to grow the balls to attempt a virtual world.

[Calantus]

No, thats actually not the point, there are already valid definitions for Diku derived games and virtual worlds.

Links please. I never got the Diku-MUD references 'cause I've not been a whole lot interested in the text-thing.

[HaemishM]

People have been attempting virtual worlds all along. They've just either been text MUDs (which is a much more efficient but not nearly as profitable or as marketable a VW as a graphical MUD), or suckass time-draining grindfests. Or Pk-grief infested shitstorms of up and down viability.

Virtual worlds won't be mass market for a while, but they will need mass market money to be viable. If there is a successful mass market MMOG in 10 years, I'll be surprised. We still have another 5 years of DIKU-a-likes, followed by a good 2 or 3 of dying Dikus. Virtual worlds won't be mass market until broadband is ubiquituous and affordable. Then it'll take some maturation of the idea that you are represented online by a virtual avatar.

By the time I'm 50, MAYBE there'll be a good 2 or 3 VW's. And a whole shitload of other sort-ofs.

[Yegolev]

I'm only vaguely aware of Horizons.  It's a commercially unsuccessful class/level game with playable dragons, and that's about all I know on the subject..  Precisely what is asstastic about it?

Probably the most disgusting thing to me about Horizons is the blatant lying.  David Bowman makes Smed look like an upstanding character.

Horizons has bad performance and plenty of bugs.  Combat is harder than before they "fixed", so getting a single class to lv100 is irritating, especially since you only see fifty people online at a time.  Getting two or three classes to a respectable level can be kinda grindy.  The only non-standard thing they managed to get into the game are the playable dragons, which are still not fully implemented.  Honestly the damn thing is still in a beta state, and I don't mean that in a WoW way.  They say they are rewriting the game from scratch.

[MahrinSkel]

By the time I'm 50, MAYBE there'll be a good 2 or 3 VW's. And a whole shitload of other sort-ofs.

I'd agree, although I'd like to hope we get there before I'm too old to notice.  But for now, I'll settle for making some of the more interesting "Sort-ofs".  Look at ATITD: A game entirely based on crafting and politics, no PvE, no content, and the interesting thing about the "Story" is how the players react to it and change it.  Sure, it's niche, but it's a *successful* niche product.  By any rational logic that doesn't start from the premise of "Where do we put $50-100M that will give us a better return than a mutual fund?", ATITD is as much of a success as EQ or DAoC, more successful than EQ2, AC2, Horizons, or anything from EA Online since they accidentally released UO.  It's not proportionally as successful as WoW, but what is?

There are a lot of pieces of the VW concept that can be effectively and profitably explored as games in their own right.  In fact, from a certain point of view, *every* successful game premise is simply a piece of a VW that can make money on its own.  VW is what we *all* really want, games is what we get in the meantime.

--Dave