Slashdot Mirror
MMORPGs - Ruined By Non Role-Players?
Thanks to RPGDot for their new editorial discussing why actual in-character roleplaying in MMORPGs is dying out, as more and more 'action fans' are being attracted to RPGs. The article suggests: "When you take an MMORPG apart to analyze what it is, you discover pretty quickly that it's mostly a huge graphical chat room... the role-playing aspect of an MMORPG is nowhere in the [priority] list, which leaves the few poor souls who are willing to do so in the dust, grinding their teeth at the l337 speech they are subjected to." But it seems in-game bugs and glitches make it difficult for even the most hardcore role-player to keep in-character: "It's hard to sustain a willingness to role-play when the mindless android in front of you swallows your shuttle ticket without so much as an apology."
This happened with MUDs, The Realm, UO, EQ, and is still happening today. It's nothing new. Perhaps if there was some way that players (of higher levels???) could reward roleplaying, and make it an important part of the game. Even automatic filters/penalities for using leet speak? Use something akin to the grammar checking programs in various work processors to figure out your 'roleplaying level'? At one point I would have said GMs could help in these efforts, but there are too few of them, and they are always just fixing problems in the games for the most part.
The Best solution would be if quests required some degree of roleplaying (thus actually making it a roleplaying game), instead of just having to kill something, find something, or deliver something.
Tibbon
tibbon.com
Are there any MMO's out there that have community or operator based moderation? (i.e. a way to tell if people are good role players, or just don't care.) It would seem that you could divide most game universes into two - one for real role players and another for everyone else who just wants to chat. If you step out of character one too many times the system operators could warn you; and if the behavior continues, they'd simply kick you from the 'Real RPG' universe to the 'Big Chat Room' universe. You'd still have fun playing the game the way you want to play it, but you're not interfering with those who want to play it differently.
The only MMORPG I was ever "serious with" (I had dabbled in the free trial of AO and the AC2 Beta, but neither of those took an hour of my time total) was the SWG Beta. If you've read any of my other comments, you'll know what I think of it (as a "game" it sucks). Thats not the point, however.
The problem with Role Playing in a computer game is that you are artificially limited by the constraints of the game. If the programmers have decided that you have to get past (kill) target A to get object B, then you have to kill target A to get Object B. In a "true" RPG (DnD, or whatever "flavor" you prefer), there is a DM who may *want* (or goad) you into fighting target A, but in the end, you could at least attempt to bluff your way past it or sneak around or whatever. Also, in a PnP RPG you can interact with your environment in ways that a MMORPG cannot currently let you. For instance, I've never quite been able to walk through tables or other party members in DnD, yet in SWG you have a rather incorporealness that, well, breaks immersion. Also, the NPCs can be only so engaging. If I told an NPC to "blow off" in a PnP game, he'd "hear" me, and react accordingly, whereas unless its a specific encounter, if I type "blow off" to a random NPC he'll simply ignore me.
So it all comes down to the Game Master. Without the human interaction, its very difficult to stay in character, IMHO. Of course, one day that might not be the case, and there isnt anything wrong with MMORPGs, other than they are in fact glorified chat rooms most of the time.
This is my sig. Its pathetic.
The thing with MMORPGs are that they are in a perpetual state of being broken, right from the get-go. Launches are inherently troublesome times with client bugs and play balance issues. Only over time do these things become lessened. They're still doing fixes to Dark Age of Camelot after what, two years of being in operation? They're primarily fixes to balance issues, the odd glitch, no real show-stoppers.
Once you come to terms with that you'll have a pretty fun time with MMORPGs as a whole. I guarantee you though that WoW will suffer the same problems at launch that they all do. Busted registration/logon servers, lag, goofy gameplay balance, etc, etc, etc. It's the nature of the beast, and don't let the Blizzard name fool you. It's their FIRST MMORPG, and it will be at least one thing to them -- a learning experience unlike any they've had before.
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
I used to play a lot on a MUD where they had both an age requirement (18 or over, or no go), and roleplaying was required. If you didn't roleplay, the other players simply started to ignore you, and sooner or later the admin would give you the "start acting your role or look for another MUD" deal.
It did have a chat channel for out of game-talk, though. I pity the soul who used it for metagaming talk...
I think I'll start playing there again. I miss it.
Leveling up builds character.
where someone will be paid minimum wage to play an in game "Non-Player" character. Much cheaper then inventing AI. Give them a script for some events and have them wing it on other occasions. Of course, if you have too many people playing NPCs it could get prohibitively expensive.
Or you could offer someone free in game time or items if they spent a certain amount of time playing a character. It would be kind of funny if teenagers could earn minimum wage sitting behind the counter in a virtual shop, just like they can IRL.That's a good point. The people you are referring to act like its a privilege to play a MMORPG and you must abide by the RPG rules to play them. Sure, they'd be much happier that everyone would be playing them like RPGs, but how long would that happiness last before Sony (or whoever else is running the servers) decides that there aren't enough people playing the game and decide to cancel the service, as was recently (or will recently be) done with Motor City Online.
The role-players should realize that without all of the '1337' action-gamers, the producers of the game would not see it as a profitable endeavor.
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
It's not just that adventure gamers are `ruining' the experience.
:)
I used to play Dark Age of Camelot. Excellent MMORPG, as well designed as they come. But I've long since stopped playing, because the experience was just too artificial.
In a pen and paper or even a computer RPG, the world changes in epic ways as you advance through the story. But because the world of an MMORPG has to be consistent for players, the world cannot change too much. For example, the king of the fairies will have to always be there, you can't guide empires to ruin, buildings stand forever-- the sense of changeability that is otherwise present in RPGs is lost. So is mortality, because you respawn. You might be penalised, but your character can't be dead and gone. Where then is the comradeship? Can you really feel for an immortal character as you would for a real companion (well, RPG companion)? There's a good reason D&D players become very attached to their characters, and spend a lot of time mourning their deaths, but it is partly that mortality that makes their journey perilous and exciting.
I think some of the MMORPGs out there really are very good, but they lack a certain je ne sais quoi that story- driven RPGs have. And that is a problem with the melding of genres, rather than who's playing them. I recognise that there are many more issues to consider, but i feel that this is one of the major ones.
Just my 2 cents.
guarantee you though that WoW will suffer the same problems at launch that they all do
You may be right, but I'm not so sure. Blizzard has a pretty good reputation about delaying a game until it is truly ready to ship. I mean, Warcraft3 took years to make, they cancelled that Warcraft Adventures game because it simply wasn't going as well as they wanted (but come on, they coulda released a dried up turd with the name "Warcraft adventures" on it and sold a million copies - see Enter The Matrix).
So Blizzard may finally get it right. They're not Eidos. Blizzrad could have released a new Warcraft every year since 1998 (like Eidos has done with Tomb Raider), but they like to wait until a product is ready...
You are telling me it is easier to roleplay while making it all up over a coffee table, than it is in front of a computer game where you look like your character, move like your character, get to interact with mobs, explore a true virtual world and basically see what it is you are talking about? Oh and do it in realtime...
Who cares how buggy it is, it has to be a step-up from rolling a dice to see how much damage you do (yeah like that is real...).
In fact having fewer uber-geeks who have memorised the rule book, and look at me funny when I order quiche from the tavern vastly improves my gaming experience.
While it's not quite in the league of MMORPGs, there are numerous Persistent Worlds set up using the NWN engine. Some of these encourage/require active roleplay, usually through the presence of DMs who oversee everything, give NPCs life beyond scripted conversation, and reward roleplayers with experience or other in-game prestige.
The problem, of course, is finding a good PW and integrating yourself with the cliques and whatnot that have surely already formed there. Likewise, since these are usually run out of some guy's bedroom or dorm room on their home machine using an existing connection, you're probably not going to get the stability or scalability of a true MMORPG.
On the other hand, the personal touch can be quite nice. It's worth dabbling in, at the very least.
Not representing or approved by my company or anybody else.
It's not a question of being outvoted so much as it is there not being a product on the market that caters to this niche group.
The reason for this has been touched upon by earlier posters: Enforcing true Role Playing is not conducive to Making Big Buck$.
For purposes of this discussion, "Role Playing" is defined as communicating in-game as one's character would, not using 1337-speak, and leaving one's Real Life self and Real Life concerns "at the door". Looking for help with a quest one just recieved would be considered RP. Discussing Yankees' scores or the new website you created for your guild/clan/PA is not.
The only way to improve RP is to hire in-game GMs or NPCs or both to reward those players that play their roles and punish those who do not. The money you have to pay these GMs and NPCs cuts into your profits, and the players you punish for not playing their roles will get frustrated and leave, creating a ton of bad buzz about your RPG. What few true roleplayers you have will be thrilled at the prospect of the One True RPG, fiercely loyal to it and its creators, and very depressed when the MMORPG goes out of business in less than a year.
Slightly off topic, but bear with me: Did you ever see the Cartmanland episode of South Park? Cartman buys an amusement park for his sole use, denying everybody else entry. But then a ride breaks down, so he has to pay a maintenance man. To offset his salary, he lets two people in. Then he has to hire a ticket seller. Two more people let in. Ride operators, concession sellers, etc etc. By the end of the episode, it's just another amusement park.
I'm all for a Heavy-RP-only MMORPG - it'd get the purists off my back for not speaking in thees and thous. But their RP utopia would almost have to cave to market pressures or be exorbitantly priced in order to stay afloat.
Dare to Hope. Prepare to be Disappointed.
You may be right, but I'm not so sure. Blizzard has a pretty good reputation about delaying a game until it is truly ready to ship.
Blizzard may get the game itself into better shape than some MMO developers, but the servers will be the same old story. The release of a new game from Blizzard has routinely crippled battle.net from it's inception, and Diablo 2 only made it that much worse by hosting the games and character data in addition to the registration/login functions.
When US West became overcrowded because the Asian server(s) went down, Blizzard took action and added more servers in Asia. Unfortunately, it didn't change anything for US West, because all of the Korean players that had been playing on US West didn't want to leave their characters behind, and Blizzard had not supplied any way for them to transfer those characters. Will they have the same types of problems when WoW hits? Who knows for sure until it hits, but even if I were planning on buying WoW, I would wait until at least the first week is over and judge how the servers handled the load.
Beyond that, there're the little things, like bugs in both StarCraft and Diablo 2 when they shipped after much delay that prevented people from continuing with the games until they were patched (or in the case of Diablo 2, if they started over and then didn't duplicate the circumstances that caused the bug). Not to mention the play-balance issues. If WoW gets to 1.03 (assuming a 1.0 release) without an overhaul of some play-balance issue that a large number of people exploited, then I'll be surprised.
-PainKilleR-[CE]
when me and one of my freinds ran some MUDs we ran into this problem, left unchecked they would have devolved into a big OOC chat room, with little or no role-play. And some of the larger MUDs REALLY suffered from the OOC Syndrome. (btw, OOC = Out of Character) with almost every message being a global OOC, with some of the Admins even happy with this, running all manner of OOC games/quizes for free exp.
The nonRP thing is partly because of the Admins, of course, if the admin PCs don't set an example, or reinforce nonRP behaviour, then the online enviroment will devolve into an interactive chat. Or if there is not proper incentive to RP, meaning that experience gathering and item farming is 100% from just plain game interaction, and not social interaction, then people will not roleplay, since it is not required.
Our solution was to make higher-advanment contingent on the admins, meaning you had to RP quests socially to advance. Guilds were also good to enforce RP, since most guilds were controlled by people who knew the admins, and had respected status, they enforced RP within the guilds (all of which were storied) and kicked out non-RP players and blatant PKs, and since not being in a guild wasn't advisable in our MUDs since you were fair game without backing, and got no favors from patron gods.
When I was a god on NeoGeno I offered good items to those who RPed their devotion, and did RP quests, with some in game elements and mobs included, but used within an RP framework. Also having good roleplayers causes it to spread, people want to fit in with clans/guilds who have killer rep and resources, and who RP well, and have a damn good story.
One little code snippet we were working on before we lost our server/interest was to have two classes, RP and non-RP characters, like Bad Trip did with PK/non later in its life. People who pick RP auto-ignore OCC and nonRP globals, gain levels faster, can use better EQ, and have PK free areas. Also the admins would favor the RP people in all global quests, and arguements. The nonRP people would have access to a nonRP channel, but not Tells, and could here globals and such, but not Quest channels. They couldn't Pray, and weren't safe from PK at the healers, unlike the RPers, who were safe from PK there, and there were no penalties on nonRP PKs.
As you can see the whole setup has to be indicative to RP, RP has to be a goal during the actual implementation of the code, AND you have to tweak the social enviroment to make RP better for gaining levels and eq (positive reinforcement). But I really don't think the Sony or anyother MMORPG maker cares if the game is RP or Chat, since you still pay for it, and there are more chat people out there than RP people, so it is a better market.
Personally, when I want RP I'll stick with the remaining MUDs out there, or paper&pen RPGs.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
We are a group developing from scratch a GPL'ed MUD/MUSH in Spanish based on Tolkien's Middle Earth. Of course it's not intended to be 'massive'. But we expect it to be fairly populated, and in spite of that we think that people in it will remain mainly in character.
We are working hard to achieve that goal, and we have some guidelines and ideas that hopefully will aid us to get rid of l33t people.
First of all, our targeted audience is people in the Spanish Tolkien Society. That give us a strongly motivated public, which will surely enjoy themselves more from a good role-playing than from a killing session.
Second, it will be quite a bad idea to go out there carelessly hunting orcs... because the damage/healing system is intended to be reallistic. It means that if you get hurt it won't be just some Life Points down, you'll have a broken leg or a poisoned injury, and you'll have to be in bed for in-game months to be healthfull again. And only if you don't get killed. No magic potions (remember Frodo?). So, only warrior characters will go to battle, and it will be dangerous.
Third, it will be difficult and dangerous to travel. People will stay at home, and will have social intercourse with their neighbours. Of course there will be adventures, but mostly those that just delay dinner!
Fourth, we will not ban out-of-character speaking... but we will mean it to be rude! 8-D (This is an idea of mine). We hope to introduce a culture in which newcomers, that are not aware of this social rule, will talk about not Middle Earth subjects, and then everyone will get scandalized!
In summary: our game will not be a huge graphical chat room, because it will be socially designed to be a parallel reality not a videogame, and only people in character will enjoy it. Wish me luck!
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
I would love to see more role playing in MMORPG's. However, I would not consider the lack of it "ruining". There are *lots* of reasons I really can't bring myself to log into Everquest these days. (I used to MUD then I Everquested for *cringe* about three years - I have not tried any other MMORPG but I do read the reviews...)
1. Dynamic Content. When I bought Eq, I figured some of my monthly payment would go to create a continuously changing world. The changes don't have to be major, but it's pretty crazy how well nailed down things are in Eq. People know exactly where and how frequently important monsters appear, what they drop, and what level they are. When I started there were things called "GM events" in which the rules changed and actual people ran encounters. Sure there were problems, which have been solved by basically not having such events.
2. The Time Scale - realistically I can play about 2-3 hours per week. Past a certain level, there is really no way for me to advance because no group will accept you for only a couple hours. I don't blame them. These people play for many hours straight and its too difficult to find a replacement - it may literally take hours - so I would be wasting all their time. Further, people won't take you seriously if you can only play for a couple hours per week and, since joining their group may cause them to get killed and thus waste more of their time, they will not accept me. Again, I don't blame them it is not worth the risk to join with someone who is, potentially, going to waste your time.
3. The large death penalty - I can accept my own character's death and loss of experience. However, I cannot leave (potentially) five other people to suffer the penalty just because of me. It can take a great deal of time to get "rezzed" which restores some of the lost experience and getting a "rez" must be done immediately or it is not possible. My character is quite useful at gathering together our corpses after a spate of deaths so sometimes I find myself spending more time online than I can really afford. At lower levels this was not a big deal because the penalty was smaller and people are not as intense - often it is easy to get a rez from a high level just passing through or to call on a higher level friend. However, when you are rather high level, it is very dangerous for another high level to come and help you out. A single death may take hours of time to recover from in terms of getting a rez and regaining lost exp.
4. Camping - the safest and thus most accessable way to advance is to sit in one place and kill the same creatures over and over. I wish there would be some explicit reward for utilizing more of the game. Eq has a huge world, most of it unpopulated and some of it badly crowded. There are quests which access most of the game world, but there is really no benefit from most of these quests. If I spend about 10 hours camping in a certain place I will gain a level. If I run around and do quests for 10 hours, the experience I gain will be minimal and any gear I get will be rather poor - I could spend the time camping certain trivial mosters (called farming) and sell the loot to other players (mostly for tradeskills) and get far more than enough cash to buy better gear. Note: at extreme high levels there are good quests, but I'm not there yet.
5. Training - dungeons in Eq are great! However all those twisty corridors and narrow points become death traps if a single person - usually not in your own group - makes a mistake and leads a monster (or a few...) to you. Why not make a copy of the dungeon for each group which enters? I believe other games do this. It would certainly benefit Eq. This would go great with dynamic content. Why not make random changes in dungeons each time it is created - and why not have the computer judge the strength of the party as it enters to set up challenging battles?
6. Lack of alternative paths - currently there are three paths: gaining experience, money/gear, or t
a war on terrorism? How can we end a war on a method?