[MUD-Dev] PvP Systems

[The Druid]

----- Original Message ----- From: <the_logos at www.achaea.com>

> On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, John Buehler wrote:

>> I've heard this argument countless times and it simply doesn't
>> hold water.  The word 'role-playing' is only a reference point
>> for us to refer to these games.  When we go to a large base of
>> players, most people are roleplaying themselves in the virtual
>> world.  The players are going adventuring, not roleplaying.  Most
>> people simply don't have the energy or skill to be actors.
>> Roleplaying is supported, but hardly compulsory.

> God that is so true. I get very tired of trying to explain to the
> handful of hardcore roleplayers that we have that roleplaying is
> not some holy grail and that, in fact, most people aren't
> interested in doing it given that it takes a lot of effort to
> properly roleplay (ie going as far as to try and adopt a foreign
> point of view rather than just bringing all your real-world
> cultural inclinations and prejudices with you).

I thinks there are different levels of roleplaying, going from the
"I just act as my character is supposed to" to the "I am the
character and speek like he should, think like he should, ect...".
For my point of view, the first one is playable for anybody, even
the casual gamer. The only problem is that the curent games have no
guidelines with a reward system to encourage the players to do the
right things.  Even a casual gamer will understand that his Cleric
have to heal the people in the need if he receive some reward points
to do that.  I agree that it is not allowed to everybody to play as
well as an actor, but everybody is able to do the minimum.  The game
have to encourage the players to do this minimum.

>> For what it's worth, roleplaying will be far more common when the
>> NPCs outnumber players 10 to 1 and are far more intelligent and
>> interactive than they are today.  That will establish a framework
>> in which players will be encouraged to act 'in genre'.

> I pine for that day. Even then, however, I don't think we'll see
> serious roleplaying. Most people don't even seem capable of
> recognizing how much they carry from themselves into the
> characters they 'roleplay.' How many times do you see supposedly
> "medieval" characters talking about concepts like universal
> individual rights or the equality of man and woman. Very silly if
> you're going to be a serious roleplayer, but that sort of thing is
> nearly all-pervasive even when people make some attempt at
> roleplaying. I suspect that even with a super-population of
> intelligent NPCs, people will still just play themselves as
> adventurers mainly. It's a lot less work.

I agree on the point that we can't obliged the players to do
roleplaying when there are casual gamers.  I think that talking
about everydays things is not a problem in a game if there is some
private chanel to do this.  In EQ, when my friend and I where
waiting for someone else before starting a Dungeon, we were speaking
about absolutly everything, but the good point of EQ is that you can
use a private chanel for that.  The number of NPC will not change
that, it is only the communication system which can filter the RL
talking.

>> By the way, if you're roleplaying, why are you randomly pounding
>> on people?  Because your character loves a good fight?  Strange,
>> it would seem that there are LOTS of players who are roleplaying
>> that particular role.  Just like in Ultima Online there are lots
>> of people who are roleplaying serial killers.

> Funny how that goes isn't it. Also funny how those people who are
> roleplaying serial killers don't tend to actually exhibit any of
> the classic psychological symptoms of serial killers but instead
> exhibit classic psychological symptoms of adolescents who were
> given a little power. (I'm not bitter, no sir.)

Yep, I agree that this kind of players is sometimes a harm, but they
exists and we have to focus them on other orientations than "kill
everybody without reason".  I think that this kind of players and
the possibility to pk is needed. I am not maso :), but I think they
provide a fealing of danger and a good random system.  I explain, if
you allow pvp in some areas, you could be sure that the pk will be
there. So these areas become very dangerous and the other players
will have to seriously organise themselves to be able to travel
through these areas.  The good point is that the pk create for the
designers some kind of free new monsters with a real behaviour.  I
think that the pk players well managed could be a great feature for
a game without any harm for the casual gamers.  But I agree on the
point that it is not an easy thing :)

>>> all the other stuff is pretty clear, but implementing it all
>>> (and all the special-cases that will surely pop up during the
>>> testing) would consume a lot of resources, i think. is all that
>>> work necessary? isn't much more simpler and elegant to let the
>>> *player* decide if it is necessary to jail a guy that kills to
>>> much without reason?

>> Which player decides that it's necessary?  Who is known to be
>> responsible enough to carry the authority?  The only authority
>> figures in the game that are at all really trusted are the
>> gamemasters.  One of the goals of this system is to reduce the
>> load on gamemasters having to make judgement calls and monitor
>> players who are running around killing people.  Antagonistic
>> actions are a popular outlet among players, especially the young
>> ones, and neither gamemasters nor vigilantes provide a good
>> solution to the problem.  Gamemasters should be spending their
>> time designing and providing the game publisher's entertainment
>> content, and no in-game justice system will stop a disgruntled or
>> malicious player.

> Yeah. Saying "let the players decide" is a lot like saying "I'm
> for the people." As you say, which people? Which players?

I agree.  Having some strong rules in a game and some strong NPC to
apply them is perhaps an expensive system, but it will be more
efficient than a GM based system.  About that point a melt of the
flag system evoqued by John Buehler and a Karmic system sounds a
good way.  Some areas of the game allow some kind of actions. If you
kill someone in an area which doesn't allow it, you will be flaged
as a murderer and will be researched by NPC (and Bounty hunter PC).
For me, the best system should be to have the buddhist karmic system
in a game. It is probably impossible for the moment, but this system
is just perfect (even if you don't beleive to this religion). To
summarize, each person have a Karmic account, if you do some good,
this account grow and if you do some bad it decrease. But the great
point is that you will be helped like you helped others and you will
suffer the same harm you inflicted to other. The lower your accound
is and the lower are your probability to reincarnate in a human
after your death. And the higher is you accound and the higher are
your probability to become a buddha.  The question about PvP and PK
is a question that humans have since the begining and perhaps some
answers lies in the ancient texts.

>> As for implementation and consumption of resources, consider that
>> these games are complex to begin with and consume lots of
>> resources.  In the future, they'll be more complex and consume
>> even more resources.  I'm looking for games that are massively
>> more capable than current games.  Huge worlds, hundreds of
>> thousands of intelligent NPCs, physical simulations, and so on.
>> I'm not worried about the physical technology so much as how the
>> heck we're going to get all this to work at all.  That is,
>> assuming that we have the bandwidth, processing power and storage
>> capacity, how do you use those capabilities to provide new games
>> that are a couple generations more advanced than current games?

> Darn right. The technology will be there. Engineering the social
> control aspects is going to prove _far_ more difficult than
> constructing the technology to support it.
> --matt

This will depend on the company you work for.  If the company could
afford a long term development and research, you can start some
really ambitious design.  But most of the companies want some really
quick game and they don't have the founds or the trust in their
employees to start some ambitious research.

Xav...
The Druid
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev