[MUD-Dev] MMORPG Cancellations: The sky is falling?

[Scott Jennings]

From: Raph Koster

> ...you cite creating a virtual world, and then embedding game
> experiences within it. The commoner reaction is "just make a
> game."

> I recently had a very lengthy discussion or three with the folks
> at f13.net regarding this issue, wherein I tried to point out that
> presupposing "game" as opposed to presupposing "world" may prevent
> you from adding more embedded games later, may prevent you from
> extending the game later, and in general may not even play to the
> strengths of the medium.

> But the fact is that the market is wanting stuff that is more fun
> more immediately. I can't really blame them for that--the danger
> for those of us interested in the larger potential of the medium
> will be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I think what we're seeing is a fairly violent, if entirely
justified, reaction to the fact that the majority of MMOs do a
really, really bad job of creating a new user experience. One reason
why City of Heroes is so popular among MMO veterans, IMHO, is that
it does nail that really well (in fact, really to the detriment of
the rest of the game - I've personally found the game's appeal to
trail off radically after the first month).  Literally within
minutes of creating a character, you're a superhero running into
packs of gang members and Nazis and smiting them with reckless
abandon.  The game isn't actively making you feel small and puny and
telling you to hunt rats and spiders for chunks of fur - you're
saving the world! Right now!

This is entirely separate from the game vs. world debate. I feel
very strongly that an MMO can be a dynamic world as opposed to a
static just-a-game and still offer a compelling inclusive experience
to new users.

> One of the commoner refrains I hear is "give players a more
> directed experience." The huge push towards instancing is all
> about this, and the risk is seeing the massively multiplayer part
> reduced to being a chat lobby--an experiment which we already saw
> tried in the mid to late 90s and

> which failed pretty dramatically.

At the same time, there is nothing particularly fun about having
your group of friends being locked out of content simply because
someone else got to it first, and the game doesn't have enough
content in your skill range for you to go elsewhere. Sure, games
that are based on nothing but instanced content will probably not do
very well. Or, more to the point, not actually be MMOs - few call
Diablo II an MMO, and it can arguably be described as an online game
where all content is instanced for your group. The "MMOish" things
about online games that tend to draw people in - active
guilds/nations to encourage meeting of new people, conflict between
players, roleplayed dramas, out of game dramas, etc - tend not to
happen, and people will look for those.

> The real reasons why "world first" muds may be inferior games is
> largely one of resources and focus, I suspect, and not inherent to
> the model.

Exactly.

---
Scott Jennings
Programmer
Mythic Entertainment
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev