Build Your Own MMOG

yebb writes "CNet reports about a company called Multiverse that has just begun beta testing of its platform for creating and integrating online virtual worlds. They are allowing developers and companies to use their online framework to expedite development of online games. Their network is free to use as long as you don't make any money from it's usage, but they also provide open source client applications to use or modify as you see fit." From the article: "'The business model is long-term,' said Richard Bartle, one of the pioneers of online games and an editor of Terra Nova, a leading Web site about virtual worlds. 'Although Multiverse's software will help speed up the to-market time for companies, it's still going to take developers ages to create content.' While Bartle is cautious about Multiverse's business model, he's fascinated by its potential."

Comments

Distributed MMORPGs

[VGPowerlord]

I wonder if anyone will ever get around to making a distributed MMORPG. Something where different parts of the game world would be hosted by different operators.

I suppose that would open a whole new slew of issues, though.

Re:Distributed MMORPGs

[bigpat]

I started working on the Varium MUD server with a couple other guys over 5 years ago, but frankly I wasn't a very good programmer at the time and I was supposed to implement the distributed stuff. It was written in Python, but we never got the distributed part working (my fault). But I had thought that we could put a graphical layer on top of the underlying game engine, to make a distributed MMORPG.

The goal was to have a server that could be distributed, so that say you direct your avatar to go through portals which would transfer your avatar and any compatible objects you were carrying to the linked server. Really the idea was to make the equivalent of hyperlinks, but that the servers would negotiate a transfer of the avatar and in game objects.

Some of the issues that came up (all solvable)

*security - ensuring that game objects could be transferred from one server to another without violating any rules of the local server.
      - we looked at parsing the incoming python for undesirable code in the same way that "Wizard" created code would be validated on the local server.
      - also having several levels of trust available between servers. (ie peered servers, trusted servers, unknown servers, banned servers and the ability to specify what individual privileges would transfer and correlate between servers)

*saving game state - assuming what if the remote server crashes, would we save any game state in the client (but what about cheats?) Probably just leave reliability up to the local admin and have a inactive copy of the avatar left on recently visited world servers so that you could just reconnect and pick up where you left off (more or less)

*also, game experience. What would you do about themed world servers? So, that if I was say on a Star Wars themed virtual world, and then went through a portal to a Barney themed world server, would my Chewy avatar suddenly turn into a Purple dinosour or would there be some sort of "Customs" border process where by you went through and specified preferences the first time you visited someplace. But that might really interfere with game play...

Anyway, those are a few of the things we talked about. The project is dead, codebase didn't include any distributable elements. Seems like distributed MMORPGs are wide open for an open licensed and non proprietary standard for connecting MMORPGs together to really create a workable metaverse.

Re:Distributed MMORPGs

[Lonath]

Blizzard sort of did this with Diablo 1. They allowed people load characters from their home computers to play against each other online. I don't recall if there were any issues with exploits or cheats, however.

Umm...

[ndansmith]

I guess by Massively Multiplayer they mean "like 5 or 6 of your buddies."

I just cannot see anyone getting a large community of players together without a large development and advertising budget. Large development budgets also lead to independent, customized systems with total control, which is the opposite of the Multiverse concept.

Re:Umm...

[swilde23]

I just cannot see anyone getting a large community of players together without a large development and advertising budget. Large development budgets also lead to independent, customized systems with total control, which is the opposite of the Multiverse concept.

Didn't people say the same thing about Linux (and its variations)? Look at all the different flavors, and then consider the select few that have a reasonable following. I imagine that's what will happen here, assuming the base code is worthwhile. We'll see a handful of good games emerge from a cool idea, but we'll also see several thousand others that die.

Re:Umm...

[podperson]

Plenty of NeverWinter Nights servers attract larger consistent followings with no advertising.

Re:Umm...

[_Sharp'r_]

Apparently I'm starting to get too old for the /. crowd.

I made it through the entire page of comments (ok, only 2+, didn't read the others) and not a single person mentioned where this has all been done before in the MU* (MUSH/MUX/MUD/etc..) realm. You know, hundreds of players at a time in a multi-user game. Game services that did nothing but rent game accounts for you to build and run your own. All of the software highly customizable, with the better ones (Like PennMush, TinyMU*, etc..) having an in-game programming language that still has list and string functions easier to use than most high-level languages today have.

You know, the things that today's MMOG are built on top of? Heck, if you looked at Everquest, you could tell it was just a MUD with a GUI thrown on top.

This "Multiverse" is simply bringing the current crop of graphical MUDs back to the previous realm of how things were before some big budget guys starting spending the cash necessary to stick a GUI on top of some MUD software.

Oh great

[jackcarter]

Just what I need: joining some guy's MMOG and start standing inside the goatse guy's ass.

Let Users create content

[glengineer]

How about an MMORPG wherein the users can create content? So, after I play a while and become famous, rich whatever, I can build my own dungeon, castle, create my own army, my own artifact, create my own quests that other players undertake... There are a LOT of users out there with good content ideas who cannot get past the large undertaking to create their own game system, but who would love to create their own content in an existing one.

Re:Let Users create content

[John Hurliman]

Second Life

Re:Let Users create content

[zoomba]

Sounds sorta like the dream behind Neverwinter Nights multiplayer where you could build your world and link it to other servers via portals. In theory it would create a zoned MMORPG if you had enough people working together to build and host content. In reality though, it never came to be since it required more work than the average user wanted to put in.

User generated content is only good if it's made so insanely easy to do that it's a no-brainer. As soon as you make it so users "design" the content, you're toast.

The general solution is to have pre-fab structures and templates for users to plop down and then to some limited extent fill in *some* custom content (usually smaller prebuilt objects the devs provide).

Player generated content is the holy grail of a lot of MMORPGs, but the trade off in a system like that is so much work has to go into making a workable world for players to create within, and a system robust and simple enough to make creation accessable to players, that there is almost always very little GAME built. Look at Star Wars Galaxies for an example of that. It's a beautiful sandbox system (prior to NGE) that allowed the users to define a vast majority of the game world through the economy, player towns etc... But there wasn't any gameplay or real content in there.

The portion of MMO players who want a toolset to create a universe is vanishingly small. Most people want a game to play, so devs like Blizzard don't bother with the player creation and focus solely on game content.

Re:Let Users create content

[Solder Fumes]

Obviously.

Scrolling through the comments, I see:
1. People who read about a similar universe in a book.
2. People who think this is a new great idea.

Seriously, guys, anyone interested in a collaborative freeform 3D world should have already registered an account at Second Life. It's been out there for a couple years already. The client *is* a 3D modeling tool, everything from clothes to massive Klingon spacecraft are built inworld. You can build anything you want in one of the sandbox areas if you don't own land. You can attach scripts to do almost anything to almost any object; everything from animating a sculpture to running a store or party game.

Second Life is now free. That is, you can register, have an avatar, get a weekly stipend, build anything you want, but you can't own land. No excuse not to try it out. One hint: turn off local lighting to speed up the framerate, Second Life is CPU-bound.

Acronym translation

[Otto]

Sadly, I understood that and I've never played that game.

SWG = Star Wars Galaxies
CU = Combat Upgrade, which changed SWG in large ways, making it incompatible with previous versions. This led to pre-CU servers being made for people who preferred the old way
NGE = New Game Enchancements, which did much the same thing in terms of splitting the userbase.

I read too damn much gaming news.

Re:Acronym translation

[cnelzie]

The CU (Combat Upgrade) lead to calls for Pre-CU servers, but that never happened and never will happen as SOE (Sony Online Entertainment) isn't interested in making pre-CU Servers available.

    The rest is accurate.

I suppose it has merit...

[design by michael]

Somehow I think you'd be subject to a lot of loading screens -- like switching from a fantasy theme to say a WWII shoot-em-up setting. I can see how some things might be used centrally, like the engine itself; but other visual and audio resources?

Somehow I find it hard to imagine how they could provide enough universal resources to accommodate many possible different themes and gaming environments -- unless you don't mind using a "thud" sound for your AK-47 as you storm the beaches of Normandy on your shimmering unicorn.

TomeNet engine is open

[Lord Satri]

If you take a look a TomeNet, you get a MMORPG open engine. The sad thing is, you must go to the forums to learn anything about it because the website isn't updated often.

TomeNet is a roguelike multiplayer online rolepaying game based on Tolkien's work. The single player game is also getting closer to version 3.0, with a revamped game engine (open, with source code available). Great game and great community.

Re:Umm... Right

[Esteanil]

Yeah, like for instance Planetarion, a small browser-based game with absolutely no advertising, which grew from 0 to 200 000 users in a couple of months.
Seriously, word of mouth is and remains the main way to recruit new customers.
Just make a good enough product and your customers are more than happy to do the advertising for you.

WoW

[cmburns69]

How long before somebody creates a knockoff of World of Warcraft (ala the bnetd fiasco), and this company gets sued by [insert Blizzard parent company here]?

But seriously, what's to stop people from implementing their favorite games here, and what kind of liability is assumed by this company for providing the platform? With the current legal climate, services (such as Kazaa, morpheus, even bit-torrent) have been held accountable for copyright violations despite not having any control over the contents.

How long until the same issue effects this system?

Hasn't this been done?

[gtshafted]

I could be wrong, but doesn't Neverwinter Nights and Second Life already let you do this?

What goes around

[Zatar]

You mean like so many text-based MUDs have done since forever?

I remember playing a MUD in the early 90s where when you hit the max level you could plant a dungeon somewhere (just connected your dungeon to an existing room node) and write object oriented code to implement monsters, puzzles and treasure. I always figured it would be a good way to teach OO design since it's a lot easier to think of a monster or a magical scepter as an object with attributes than it is to start with abstract data structures...

Anyway, like all games, MUDs have had a large drop in the ability for users to affect them as the graphics and detail went up. Back in the day everyone could easily make levels for Lode Runner or Wolf 3d without any training or learning curve. Nowdays you need a degree in 4th dimensional geometry and several days of free time to make a good FPS level, never mind a virtual world...

NeverWinter Nights?

[podperson]

The only real difference between this idea and NeverWinter Nights is that:

This product supports ANY setting (although it probably requires a ton of work to make it support anything other than the vanilla fantasy setting they first thought of)

This product supports ANY ruleset (although it probably requires a ton of work to make it not support something other than the default fantasy ruleset)

This product is MASSIVE whereas NWN isn't. Although NWN or a descendant probably will be before they ship anything.

This product provides developers with an SDK. NWN provides developers with a fully functional IDE allowing a person only one skill (e.g. writing / programming / art) to contribute to or create a world.

This product provides a revenue model for content developers. NWN kind of does (they can commercialise a module you develop) but so far this hasn't worked out well for anyone except the developers of NWN.

This product doesn't exist. NWN does.