[MUD-Dev2] Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests]

[John Buehler]

Damion Schubert writes:

 
> So my hypothesis: MMOs are a unique art form and genre,
> with a unique set of rules for helping its users find fulfillment.

Clearly.

> The next obvious question is: what are those rules?  And are
> NPCs really necessary and/or central to that?  WoW says
> 'yes'.  Games like Eve and Tale in the Desert say 'no' - they're
> not about the quest, and much more about game mechanics
> creating interesting social dynamics.

NPCs are facilitators of player interaction.  More specifically, they are
proactive facilitators.  Swords, spaceships and spells all facilitate player
interactions as well, but they do it passively.  Both passive and active
types are part of a toolkit that MMO developers can use to get their players
interacting as strongly or as weakly as they care to.

Note that quest NPCs are passive.  That's why they're likened to vending
machines.  Monsters are active.  They demand reactions from players.  If
they demand reactions from multiple players then they are doing their job in
an MMO.

The classic example is the monster assault on a village.  A bunch of
monsters take it upon themselves to attack a village populated by a bunch of
players.  The players are obligated to react over a shared problem.  That's
good use of NPCs in an MMO.  From there, we get into levels of
sophistication such as why the monsters are attacking and whether the world
state will change depending on what happens.  Monster motivations are only
interesting because they make them more interesting as proactive
facilitators.

So my rule of MMO design is that players interact.  The interactions range
from shallow to deep, incidental to purposed, but the goal of MMO
entertainment is to be involved around and with other players.  NPCs are
just one way to facilitate those interactions.

JB