[MUD-Dev] Ten commandments for the next MMORPG

[AR Schleicher]

At 07:26 PM 5/21/2000 +0000, Matthew Mihaly <the_logos at achaea.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 21 May 2000, Raph Koster wrote:
>
> > #1: Thou Shalt Not Require Vulnerability to Other Players.
> >
> > Consider the number of active EQ Subscribers (henceforth =93customers=94=
)
> > complaining that their server is too crowded. Now take a good look at=
 how
> > many people are on the Player-Versus-Player (henceforth =93PvP=94)=
 servers.
> > Either they are being hypocrites, or as a whole the customers do not=20
> want to
> > be vulnerable to harm from other players at all times. And yet I find it
> > curious that practically every upcoming MMORPG I=92ve looked into has
> > Mandatory PVP =AD one (Atriarch) even goes so far as to have permanent=
=20
> PvP (if
> > the character dies, it=92s time to start a new character). Others (UO2,=
=20
> Anarky
> > Online) skirt this by making some areas Non-PvP =AD and yet it takes=20
> something
> > less than a rocket scientist to realize you won=92t be able to stay in=
 the
> > =93safe=94 areas all the time.
>
>I certainly hope that this customer isn't suggesting that every game that
>comes out work like this. Perhaps I (and many others) would like to play a
>game where PK vulnerability is required.

I think the idea he's getting at here is that while PK vulnerability can=20
exist, there should be at least some complete form of the game, that allows=
=20
invulnerability from PK, or as close to it as is possible.  A version of=20
the game where you can go everywhere, and do everything, except have to=20
worry about PK issues.  I don't think it's a bad idea, either...

> > #5: Thou Shalt Test Thy Product Before Thy Releaseth It or Any Part of=
 It
> >
> > Should be assumed, and yet everybody but game manufacturers seems to=
 know
> > better. Here=92s a clue =AD if it=92s =93your world=94, you bloody=
 better well be
> > willing to sign your name to it. Now granted that the very nature of the
> > MMORPG genre is such that updates will be constant, and that any changes
> > that need to be made can be handled quickly. Nonetheless, there is NO=20
> EXCUSE
> > WHATSOEVER for a game to be out for a year before the people=20
> responsible for
> > it discover something along the lines of Wolf-form having the wrong=20
> faction.
> > There is an equivalent amount of excuse for quests that appear to have=
 been
> > in the game from the beginning to still appear broken (which reminds me,=
 I
> > haven=92t checked Kinool Goldslinger since the last =93quest=94 patch).=
 A
> > recommendation? Absolutely NOTHING in the game should go Live until the
> > person most responsible PERSONALLY confirms it is working on a Test=
 Server,
> > and this confirmation should be made the same way the player would be=
 doing
> > it. The recent incident in which Abashi actually went into the game and=
=20
> made
> > sure the spells were dropping before he said this to customers (after=
 weeks
> > of insisting they were dropping without doing so, unfortunately) is a=20
> start.
>
>This is a silly and naive commandment. I'm quite sure that Verant already
>tests stuff it puts in quite a bit. Further, this guy is essentially
>contradicting what he says later. He says "this confirmation should be
>made the same way the player would be doing it."

This is, I'm sure, based on how Verant test the alchemy tradeskill in=20
EQ.  For months and months, they claimed it worked, but they did all their=
=20
testing using special clients / modes, within which it did work.  For=20
players without these, it did not.

>Later on, he says he
>doesn't want to play games where there is only one way out of things (ie
>he wants problems that can be creatively solved, not puzzles in which
>there is only one way out). If this is what he wants, then there is no way
>to fulfill this commandment, as the designer can't know how the player
>would be doing it. In fact, flat-out, the designer cannot know how the
>players are going to do things.

Having problems that players can solve in a variety of ways is good.  He=20
wants the designers to test it in at least one way a normal player could=20
test it.  Testing in a mode players don't have access to, even though it=20
makes it easier, shouldn't be allowed if there is any chance what you are=20
testing will work only because you are in that mode, and would not work if=
=20
you weren't.

AR Schleicher (Jerrith)
ars at iag.net


Allison Rae Schleicher IV (AR)
ars at iag.net  | ars at qualkids.com
http://www.iag.net/~ars





_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev