Schilling's Green Monster Games

[Goumindong]

A quick golf clap for the fact that you don't work in the industry!

What, i can't be literate if i don't work in the industry? Or is it that i cannot play games or understand what its possible to do currently with a computer?

Or maybe you should put up or shut up.

Hell, i have a 3 day weekend this next week, i can drive to Baltimore(don't think i would want to all the way to MA) and see this wondrous system you have that does this and then i'll come back here and tell these folks how wrong i was and how awesome it is.[Yes, i'll sign an NDA if you want]

[gehrig38]

Has nothing to do with literacy, or games or anything other than you pointing out my comment was ridiculous, meaning you don't think it can be done, or don't believe what I said, or both, that was the reason for the golf clap.

[Goumindong]

Has nothing to do with literacy, or games or anything other than you pointing out my comment was ridiculous, meaning you don't think it can be done, or don't believe what I said, or both, that was the reason for the golf clap.

Yes, i understand what I said, but there is not a logical connection between a "golf clap" and doing anything other than hitting a golf ball. In all other instances its conveying some other sort of information.

Since i know what i did and i know what you did, the only thing that is left is the reason behind the golf clap. I.E. what it says other than "hey that was a nice golf shot you just made there". Since we aren't at a golf match, the meaning of "that was a nice action, i will cheer you on in the socially acceptable manner" isn't in effect.  Golf claps not being the norm over the internet, there must be some other meaning.

This is what i was asking, what was it, other than the simple fact that the statement exists that made you make the comment.

[schild]

A quick golf clap for the fact that you don't work in the industry!

I still don't think you're going to be able to make truly world changing stuff.

Do I get a golf clap?  

[Musashi]

The next couple of years in this thread are gonna be entertaining.  I love you internet.

[Hawkbit]

[UnsGub]

Which is ridiculous shit.

Can you give an example?

I think it is between hitting a home run in the first inning, but having to play till then of the game to see if it is the game winner in a 1-0 game and Gollum struggles with Frodo for the Ring, bites off Frodo's finger and then falls into the fire, taking the Ring with him. The Ring is destroyed the only way it can be, in the same fire where it was forged.

Anything inbetween those two works for me.  I can add what is currently available in Eve, and not in other games, works for me.

[rattran]

I think it is between hitting a home run in the first inning, but having to play till then of the game to see if it is the game winner in a 1-0 game and Gollum struggles with Frodo for the Ring, bites off Frodo's finger and then falls into the fire, taking the Ring with him. The Ring is destroyed the only way it can be, in the same fire where it was forged.

Can you rephrase that so it makes any sort of sense?

[March]

I think it is between hitting a home run in the first inning, but having to play till then of the game to see if it is the game winner in a 1-0 game and Gollum struggles with Frodo for the Ring, bites off Frodo's finger and then falls into the fire, taking the Ring with him. The Ring is destroyed the only way it can be, in the same fire where it was forged.

Anything inbetween those two works for me.  I can add what is currently available in Eve, and not in other games, works for me.

Holy mixed metaphores   

I think it is between hitting a home run in the first inning, but having to play till then of the game to see if it is the game winner in a 1-0 game and Gollum struggles with Frodo for the Ring, bites off Frodo's finger and then falls into the fire while throwing the ball to Frodo who fires to Samwise to complete a miraculous game ending triple play?

[Rendakor]

English, motherfucka, do you speak it?

[Draegan]

Haha ok that made my day.

[dusematic]

Which is ridiculous shit.

Can you give an example?

I think it is between hitting a home run in the first inning, but having to play till then of the game to see if it is the game winner in a 1-0 game and Gollum struggles with Frodo for the Ring, bites off Frodo's finger and then falls into the fire, taking the Ring with him. The Ring is destroyed the only way it can be, in the same fire where it was forged.

Anything inbetween those two works for me.  I can add what is currently available in Eve, and not in other games, works for me.

Burgled any turds lately?

[Bzalthek]

Holy shit, UnsGub is the old bartender guy from Boondock Saints!

[Musashi]

I think it's funny that UnSub is usually so well spoken, but his doppelganger... wow.

[Senses]

Haha.  I have read that "example" he gave like 12 times trying to figure out where he was going with it, or how I could possibly fix the lack of punctuation and or complete word ommissions to make it get the point across but I must admit, I'm still completely at a loss.  Its almost like he was speaking another language, and I think I want to learn it!

[Soln]

this thread and its "game" is ready for the Graveyard


probably a first

[Musashi]

this thread and its "game" is ready for the Graveyard


probably a first

It's probably for it's own good.

[UnSub]

I think it's funny that UnSub is usually so well spoken, but his doppelganger... wow.

I'm obviously the evil doppelganger, since I have a goatee. 

Also, at this point it looks like Schilling is pretty much trolling his own thread and I'm borderline ready to write a sitcom where Schild and Schilling live together, called "The Schills". One's a millionaire ex-baseball star developing his own AAA title, one's a jaded indie designer working on a homebrew release. They're the original odd couple!

[Soln]

the real difference being one actually has a real game in production that you can play

[schild]

the real difference being one actually has a real game in production that you can play

"A" implies one. You know me better than that.

[Soln]

the fact you have even one makes you the more experienced, so yah   

[Triforcer]

Which is ridiculous shit.

Can you give an example?

I think it is between hitting a home run in the first inning, but having to play till then of the game to see if it is the game winner in a 1-0 game and Gollum struggles with Frodo for the Ring, bites off Frodo's finger and then falls into the fire, taking the Ring with him. The Ring is destroyed the only way it can be, in the same fire where it was forged.

Anything inbetween those two works for me.  I can add what is currently available in Eve, and not in other games, works for me.

Have you considered whether Satiricon-based factors could affect this analysis, especially given the recent Tokyo municipal elections? 

[Khaldun]

No, he's got a point. Sometimes good ideas on paper are only good ideas on paper. And the fact remains that the most successful games have been the ones with the most predictability in them (whether it's because of the loot table optimizers in raids or because PvE is just a cross you bear until PvP like the Eastern titles, or Eve).

Permanent world-changing constantly-altering experiences have always been what people ask for. But until it's actually done in a shared space, we really don't know if it's what they want. We just get to take potshots at the results

If nothing else though, if they do back away from it because it's not fun, I'd love to see a Gamasutra feature about the post mortem on the attempt.

I think this is probably a bigger issue than the actual possibility of dynamic change.

Schild's got a weird hang-up on the idea that if an individual action can't provoke by itself a changed state in the gameworld, it's not worth doing or it doesn't count. That seems totally off the mark. A dynamic-world MMO is going to have to change because of collective actions: say, for example, if enough players do missions for a particular NPC faction, that NPC faction takes over a city, tosses out a rival faction and burns its buildings, and launches a new cycle of missions that involve players leading a crusade against a rival city.

That's a dynamic world, its landscape actually changes, new features appear, there are consequences. I also think this is very much within the realm of current technological possibility. It's not fully deformable terrain, and it's not a gameworld where every NPC is an autonomous agent with its own Maslowian hierarchy of goals. That's much more pie-in-the-sky.

But whether it's modest dynamism or some kind of godlike agent-based procedural-content out the wazoo wondertech, the real challenge is not just shoehorning this kind of design into a vanilla DIKU, because that's likely to make a game which is mechanically interesting but not at all fun. If you embrace even a modest kind of dynamism that results from collective actions of players, you have to think about how to keep the world moving in a linear direction. E.g., you can't just have the world return to a default state every time. We've seen that in MMOs, it's not dynamism, and it's generally not very fun if what you're looking for are consequences to player actions. But a world which can really change always has the potential of changing into a very UNfun state. Imagine if Asheron's Call had allowed players to defend Bael'Zharon's takeover of the world. If you allow it, you have to be prepared to actually end the world. If you allow players to help an NPC faction, you have to be ready for what happens when that faction dominates everything. Again, maybe you need to be prepared at some point to say, "game over".

Meaning, even a modestly dynamic world needs to put less emphasis on character development and more emphasis on the world. Players need to care more about the story of the world and less about how lootastic and min-max their character is. Because a modestly dynamic world will probably need a reboot now and again, because there has to be some chance that the world will go in a direction that no one really enjoys. Building a design where world matters more than avatar is a comprehensively difficult thing to do, and players are radically unaccustomed to the idea at this point in MMO history.

[gehrig38]

Again, maybe you need to be prepared at some point to say, "game over".

.........

[Draegan]

So you want to be the first person to make a subscription based game that ends?

[rattran]

The Tabula Rasa/AC2/Auto Assault plan may not be the best one to follow.


But I look forward to watching. 

[UnsGub]

Can you rephrase that so it makes any sort of sense?

The baseball example is just a respawn of some content.  Each time is it played again there is a unique or close to a unique set of events.  Game importance and value might depend on the time the game takes place, spring training, regular season, play offs, world series.  A score in the first inning does not say game over at that time and both teams continue to believe and play like can win.  It significant is really only seen once the game is over.  Teams can even say will have a different result next season if they lose a playoff or world series.  It is the “it” in an action that makes a difference.

The Lord of the Ring example is just another “it”.  Early on we know what it is and what will be done.  One does not need to look back to see its significance as it is stated in the beginning.  The Ring is destroyed along with end of the Age, most of the races leave,  world is saved, and is about a final ending as I can come up with.

Since the claim has been made that an MMO, with a shared experience, have actions that make a meaningful difference that make permanent change can we have some speculation on that that solution is?  A fair number of clues, hints, and possible solutions have already been dropped.  What solution is currently under play test by http://www.38studios.com/?

[Mrbloodworth]

I enjoy each team members creations individually, so I look forward to seeing what they come up with for this project.

[dusematic]

Can you rephrase that so it makes any sort of sense?

The baseball example is just a respawn of some content.  Each time is it played again there is a unique or close to a unique set of events.  Game importance and value might depend on the time the game takes place, spring training, regular season, play offs, world series.  A score in the first inning does not say game over at that time and both teams continue to believe and play like can win.  It significant is really only seen once the game is over.  Teams can even say will have a different result next season if they lose a playoff or world series.  It is the “it” in an action that makes a difference.

The Lord of the Ring example is just another “it”.  Early on we know what it is and what will be done.  One does not need to look back to see its significance as it is stated in the beginning.  The Ring is destroyed along with end of the Age, most of the races leave,  world is saved, and is about a final ending as I can come up with.

Since the claim has been made that an MMO, with a shared experience, have actions that make a meaningful difference that make permanent change can we have some speculation on that that solution is?  A fair number of clues, hints, and possible solutions have already been dropped.  What solution is currently under play test by http://www.38studios.com/?

Burgled any turds lately?

[Triforcer]

Again, maybe you need to be prepared at some point to say, "game over".

.........

Oh lord in heaven, a lot of the things you have been hinting at are very clear now.  Two week reset MMO, ahoy!

[March]

So you want to be the first person to make a subscription based game that ends?

To UnsGub's rewritten point... not all endings are final.

An end is not the same as the end.  Games might benefit from some sort of intermediate end.

I've no idea what that would look like, but its philosophically coherent.

[Draegan]

He said "game over".  That seems pretty fucking final.

It all sounds just stupid.  If you character ends and you start up a new game or whatever, it isn't an MMOG.  It's basically an online episodic storyline you participate it for a while, stop playing, then come back in 6 months when they have something new.  Which is fine if that's what you're doing, but that isn't an MMOG if you are playing a different roll each time and asking for a subscription.

[March]

He said "game over".  That seems pretty fucking final.

It all sounds just stupid.  If you character ends and you start up a new game or whatever, it isn't an MMOG.  It's basically an online episodic storyline you participate it for a while, stop playing, then come back in 6 months when they have something new.  Which is fine if that's what you're doing, but that isn't an MMOG if you are playing a different roll each time and asking for a subscription.

Well, so he did.

/exeunt

[tazelbain]

He said "game over".  That seems pretty fucking final.

It all sounds just stupid.  If you character ends and you start up a new game or whatever, it isn't an MMOG.  It's basically an online episodic storyline you participate it for a while, stop playing, then come back in 6 months when they have something new.  Which is fine if that's what you're doing, but that isn't an MMOG if you are playing a different roll each time and asking for a subscription.

Bullshit.  There is no such requirement.

[Draegan]

 

Requirement? No.  You can make any game you want and call it an MMOG if it connects to other computers.  What the general public will expect from a MMORPG is persistent and sustained single character development.  If your characters are not permanent, and are subject to disappearing depending on the content cycle of the developer then you have to bill it as that, but it won't be your standard MMORPG (yes I know there isn't any mention of permanent characters in the acronym M.M.O.R.P.G.).