Actually, archetypes are used because that's what the people willing to spend money on these games really want.
I disagree with this statement. Most of these games, as you point out, are just iterations of the P&P versions of games that already existed. These gave birth to MUDs and MOOs. I know the whole history.
Character classes aren't all bad. They get you into character quickly and are easy to understand. But that doesn't directly translate into people's money. People play what their friends are playing, (intense marketing aside). Period.
If a game is good, they will come... with their money.
Groups would have a similar dynamic. Your gang might not even know about more of the other gangs unless they were introduced to them (either through contact or plot). So if you just want to kill kill kill, you can join one of the two big gangs that just go around killing each other. Have fun! But that newbie is grey and you're not going to do anything to anyone you don't know. In fact, you can't tell the newbie from the NPC.
A lot of your ideas would work great in an MMO that's really restrictive on who they allow into the game.
Actually what I'm talking about is restricting what the character can do, not what the player can do.
For example, in the social scheme I'm suggesting, there are six levels of social contact. In the first, instead of names you see decriptions of people above their heads in grey. These are people you do not know. You can't attack them unless they attack you first (there are exceptions... but they are to detailed to get into right now.)
The other five go from love (blue), like (green), aquantance (white), dislike (orange), hate (red).
Actions you can perform on another character are limited based on your social relationship to them. You can only beat up people you don't like. You can't punch someone you like. You can only kill those you hate. Sometimes you can hate someone you don't know... for example if you are in a gang you might hate all members of another gang. If you see one flying colours, then you could attack them and try to kill them. But you'd know you were a target for them too, so joining a gang has risks and rewards.
The only way you get to know anyone in the game is through an introduction, either by another player or a plot device. Your character will react accordingly. For example, if your friend points out someone he doesn't like, you'll start off not liking them either. You may later like them if you spend time talking with them... but that would take time.
There's a lot more to this system, but basically what we're talking about here is taking the simulation down to a deeper level than it's currently at. In current games you can swing at sword at anyone, friend or foe... but your character wouldn't do that... you're doing it because you're bored or a griefer.
Limit the characters actions to what is appropriate and you severly reduce what problem players can accomplish.
Player created content need not be "build a map" ala Neverwiner Nights. The upcoming game Spore shows procedural content created by players. Basically it's the best of both Dynamic and Player content. The game does the hard part of matching plots/locations/monsters/PCs and the players call up a plot generator and ask for "Romantic Plot", "Revenge Plot", "Power Building Plot", etc etc.
This give players very interesting control over their own stories and involves other players in the game, while keeping things fresh. A romantic plot might create a love triangle or it might simply make your character fall in love with someone out of their league... Your own resolution creates the story but the game knows enough to put in the proper elements of plotlines for you to play through.
Players will very quickly discover optimum configurations which become templates for the vast number of characters on the server.
Well designed systems don't fall prey to this. Instead there's a rock/paper/scissors nature to them where you can't be optimum for all situations. Also, as you noted, you need a way to limit players from all possible combinations while not sucumbing to character classes... but this is trivial. Assume skills A, B and C are the "best" combination. You would assume that these would need "nerfing", but in the game skills A, B and C are all countered by X, Y, and Z... leading to more players with those skills. As one style grows in popularity, it increases the value of it's counter style.
I've played GURPS, but while GURPS is free of archtypes, it also fails to free itself completely. For example a player who wants to spend any amount of time in combat would be foolish not to "buy" combat reflexes.
In my ideal MMOG, you would start with skills based on your characters history, which would be created in a system similar to (blanking on the name of the game...) where you roll up your history and that gets you started. It also would give you ties into existing characters.
I've created a very interesting social system that would keep PvP servers fair and honest (you wouldn't just kill anyone, only your enemies) and give players choices that aren't overwhelming (WOW has thousands of guilds... how do you choose?)
The reason you won't see a system like that in a major MMO though is because it would be damn near impossible to balance against content or make updates to without throwing the whole thing out of whack.
Content should be player created. No one wants to save the same princess everyone else has saved. Create a dynamic content system driven by player action and interaction and you don't need to balance anything. When you run into something you can't take on, you'll know it and run... just like you should.
Did Gandalf cast magic spells because he was a Wizard, or was he a Wizard and hence could cast spells? Was Conan a Barbarian because he didn't wear armour and swung a huge weapon or was he swinging a huge weapon and not wearing armour because he was a Barbarian?
Lazy game designers simply update the last successful thing they find... and that's D&D. Now go back and think about why D&D used classes? Because it was basically a minitures system where all the pieces belonged to classes. Spearman, archers, horsemen... all classes.
Break Free!
Archtypes are boring, stiffling the one thing that MMOGs having going for them which is the ability to make a character that stands out from the crowd. They force players into cliques and alienate others ("sorry we already have a tank")...
How about a system that mimics the real world a little more? How about making your character good at what ever he does... if he goes around swinging a sword... make him a good swordsman. If he tries to cast spells, make him a spellcaster. If he wants to do both, let him, but don't let him be quite as good as someone dedicated to one thing.
I can't wait until MMOGs get what people want:
1. Persistance (When I change the world, the world stays changed) 2. Personality (My character is unique) 3. Psychology (My character isn't insane and won't do stupid things like attack randomly anyone they come across... unless he's psychotic. But that's all done by the character.)
Message me if you want me to explain this further, particularly if you want me to consult on your next game.
If you spend your life miserable working and you live for those brief moments between the hours you spend at your job, quit.
Yes, I'm talking to you.
You will always find a way to live. You'll find food, you'll find a place to live, and you'll find clothes... but if you aren't happy-- what's the point of any of that? I'd rather be happy without a job or money than sad at work.
If you want to be a slave for money that someone you don't even know gives you while you make *them* rich, so be it. Don't be suprised when they fire you to better their bottom line.
Who's fault is it if you don't like your job?
Your fault.
You accepted it. If you don't like what you are doing, quit. Right now. Quit Your Job. Just walk out.
Now find what makes you happy and do it. If you are truely happy, the money will follow. -- paraphrased from Joseph Campbell
Very good website for starting to play.
on
Chess for Kids?
·
· Score: 1
www.Schemingmind.com is a correspondence chess site:
Games are played as 'correspondence chess' and can take from a few days to a few months to complete.
'Standard' Membership of SchemingMind.com is free, however some restrictions are placed on standard accounts - for example the number of simultaneous games you can play is limited. For unrestricted use of the site, you should consider upgrading to a 'Full' account.
So for free she could be playing online with people who are friendly and happy to help new players.
But seriously, for the vast majority of people out there, this is not really a realistic option.
Quote from www.QuitYourJobDay.com:
The prevailing view is that you need a job to survive and that you need the job more than the employer needs you. What most people don't know, and those who profit from your skill and effort certainly don't want you to hear, is that your employer needs you to survive as well.
Do you really think there are less jobs than there are people? Do you really think you can't quit? Right now HR has the upperhand because the workers refuse to recognize the true value they bring to the company. That's going to change.
Case turned his head and looked up into Wage's face. It was a tanned and forgettable mask. The eyes were vatgrown sea-green Nikon transplants. Wage wore a suit of gunmetal silk and a simple bracelet of platinum on either wrist.
Interesting, but not quite the same. Have a look at the way Spore lets you create new species and then proceedurally allows them to move/walk/attack... That kind of thought process is needed in creating plots.
In game or in real life. I see problems with the first, as she'd probably kick his ass, and I see a problem with the second as she'd probably kick his ass.
You need to immediately switch her to a dworvak keyboard, preferably one that is ergonomic. It's tough love, but this will force her to pursue other entertainment sources and increase her typing speed.
If that doesn't work, your last option is to go keyboardless. I suggest a mac, with the single button mouse. Be gentle with her, this is not an easy habit to break.
If all else fails you have one last hope... CoreWars.
It's a bit of a sticky wicket. I don't think players realize what they are missing by not having a say in story lines. I mean how many times has that mayors daughter been kidnaped? Subjectively I suppose you think you're the only one who saves her, but that illusion breaks down when you find the walkthrough online.
What's missing is a decent user interface for creating new plots. Something like the creature creation in Spore, where the computer does the hard part of putting it all together, and you just intiate the action.
I'll give a brief example of what I mean. Let's say you're a 12th level wizard and you want to create a magical staff. You enter the plot creator and enter the goal. The plot creator then creates a set of sub plots that must get resolved by *other* players in order for you to get the pieces you need to make your staff. Now you have to find some nice 3rd level fighter to get the "ruby eye of helmuth" and a 6th level cleric to have your staff blessed by "Brash the fire god" at a remote temple, and finally you must find so way to get a hold of some "brass goblin teeth". All this get's generated... but there's also a counter plot that gets generated for your arch-enemy who finds out about your plan.
All done invisibly to the player once they decide they want the staff.
Despite not being able to view the movie, reviews were positive for the film, with most reviews giving it two thumbs up or four out of five stars depending on their rating systems.
What matters is how many people you can interact with at one time. It doesn't matter if the game has 1 million players if I can't see an army of 500,000 taking on another army of 500,000 at one time. The important limit if how many I can see and interact with at once.
Slashdot Mirror
I want a game like that. Jesus, what's it going to take to get decent games where I don't have a freaking gun in my hand?
Check out the original Marvel Super Heroes Role Playing Game for an idea way to use words rather than numbers to represent different power levels.
"stupendous blast" more or less damaging than "megaboom punch"?
You're Amazing Blast is higher than your "Remarkable Punch", by two steps.
Numbers without numbers.
Actually, archetypes are used because that's what the people willing to spend money on these games really want.
I disagree with this statement. Most of these games, as you point out, are just iterations of the P&P versions of games that already existed. These gave birth to MUDs and MOOs. I know the whole history.
Character classes aren't all bad. They get you into character quickly and are easy to understand. But that doesn't directly translate into people's money. People play what their friends are playing, (intense marketing aside). Period.
If a game is good, they will come... with their money.
Groups would have a similar dynamic. Your gang might not even know about more of the other gangs unless they were introduced to them (either through contact or plot). So if you just want to kill kill kill, you can join one of the two big gangs that just go around killing each other. Have fun! But that newbie is grey and you're not going to do anything to anyone you don't know. In fact, you can't tell the newbie from the NPC.
A lot of your ideas would work great in an MMO that's really restrictive on who they allow into the game.
Actually what I'm talking about is restricting what the character can do, not what the player can do.
For example, in the social scheme I'm suggesting, there are six levels of social contact. In the first, instead of names you see decriptions of people above their heads in grey. These are people you do not know. You can't attack them unless they attack you first (there are exceptions... but they are to detailed to get into right now.)
The other five go from love (blue), like (green), aquantance (white), dislike (orange), hate (red).
Actions you can perform on another character are limited based on your social relationship to them. You can only beat up people you don't like. You can't punch someone you like. You can only kill those you hate. Sometimes you can hate someone you don't know... for example if you are in a gang you might hate all members of another gang. If you see one flying colours, then you could attack them and try to kill them. But you'd know you were a target for them too, so joining a gang has risks and rewards.
The only way you get to know anyone in the game is through an introduction, either by another player or a plot device. Your character will react accordingly. For example, if your friend points out someone he doesn't like, you'll start off not liking them either. You may later like them if you spend time talking with them... but that would take time.
There's a lot more to this system, but basically what we're talking about here is taking the simulation down to a deeper level than it's currently at. In current games you can swing at sword at anyone, friend or foe... but your character wouldn't do that... you're doing it because you're bored or a griefer.
Limit the characters actions to what is appropriate and you severly reduce what problem players can accomplish.
Player created content need not be "build a map" ala Neverwiner Nights. The upcoming game Spore shows procedural content created by players. Basically it's the best of both Dynamic and Player content. The game does the hard part of matching plots/locations/monsters/PCs and the players call up a plot generator and ask for "Romantic Plot", "Revenge Plot", "Power Building Plot", etc etc.
This give players very interesting control over their own stories and involves other players in the game, while keeping things fresh. A romantic plot might create a love triangle or it might simply make your character fall in love with someone out of their league... Your own resolution creates the story but the game knows enough to put in the proper elements of plotlines for you to play through.
Players will very quickly discover optimum configurations which become templates for the vast number of characters on the server.
Well designed systems don't fall prey to this. Instead there's a rock/paper/scissors nature to them where you can't be optimum for all situations. Also, as you noted, you need a way to limit players from all possible combinations while not sucumbing to character classes... but this is trivial. Assume skills A, B and C are the "best" combination. You would assume that these would need "nerfing", but in the game skills A, B and C are all countered by X, Y, and Z... leading to more players with those skills. As one style grows in popularity, it increases the value of it's counter style.
I've played GURPS, but while GURPS is free of archtypes, it also fails to free itself completely. For example a player who wants to spend any amount of time in combat would be foolish not to "buy" combat reflexes.
In my ideal MMOG, you would start with skills based on your characters history, which would be created in a system similar to (blanking on the name of the game...) where you roll up your history and that gets you started. It also would give you ties into existing characters.
I've created a very interesting social system that would keep PvP servers fair and honest (you wouldn't just kill anyone, only your enemies) and give players choices that aren't overwhelming (WOW has thousands of guilds... how do you choose?)
The reason you won't see a system like that in a major MMO though is because it would be damn near impossible to balance against content or make updates to without throwing the whole thing out of whack.
Content should be player created. No one wants to save the same princess everyone else has saved. Create a dynamic content system driven by player action and interaction and you don't need to balance anything. When you run into something you can't take on, you'll know it and run... just like you should.
And don't get me started on non-permanent death.
Did Gandalf cast magic spells because he was a Wizard, or was he a Wizard and hence could cast spells? Was Conan a Barbarian because he didn't wear armour and swung a huge weapon or was he swinging a huge weapon and not wearing armour because he was a Barbarian?
Lazy game designers simply update the last successful thing they find... and that's D&D. Now go back and think about why D&D used classes? Because it was basically a minitures system where all the pieces belonged to classes. Spearman, archers, horsemen... all classes.
Break Free!
Archtypes are boring, stiffling the one thing that MMOGs having going for them which is the ability to make a character that stands out from the crowd. They force players into cliques and alienate others ("sorry we already have a tank")...
How about a system that mimics the real world a little more? How about making your character good at what ever he does... if he goes around swinging a sword... make him a good swordsman. If he tries to cast spells, make him a spellcaster. If he wants to do both, let him, but don't let him be quite as good as someone dedicated to one thing.
I can't wait until MMOGs get what people want:
1. Persistance (When I change the world, the world stays changed)
2. Personality (My character is unique)
3. Psychology (My character isn't insane and won't do stupid things like attack randomly anyone they come across... unless he's psychotic. But that's all done by the character.)
Message me if you want me to explain this further, particularly if you want me to consult on your next game.
If you spend your life miserable working and you live for those brief moments between the hours you spend at your job, quit.
Yes, I'm talking to you.
You will always find a way to live. You'll find food, you'll find a place to live, and you'll find clothes... but if you aren't happy-- what's the point of any of that? I'd rather be happy without a job or money than sad at work.
If you want to be a slave for money that someone you don't even know gives you while you make *them* rich, so be it. Don't be suprised when they fire you to better their bottom line.
Who's fault is it if you don't like your job?
Your fault.
You accepted it. If you don't like what you are doing, quit. Right now. Quit Your Job. Just walk out.
Now find what makes you happy and do it. If you are truely happy, the money will follow. -- paraphrased from Joseph Campbell
www.Schemingmind.com is a correspondence chess site:
Games are played as 'correspondence chess' and can take from a few days to a few months to complete.
'Standard' Membership of SchemingMind.com is free, however some restrictions are placed on standard accounts - for example the number of simultaneous games you can play is limited. For unrestricted use of the site, you should consider upgrading to a 'Full' account.
So for free she could be playing online with people who are friendly and happy to help new players.
But seriously, for the vast majority of people out there, this is not really a realistic option.
Quote from www.QuitYourJobDay.com:
The prevailing view is that you need a job to survive and that you need the job more than the employer needs you. What most people don't know, and those who profit from your skill and effort certainly don't want you to hear, is that your employer needs you to survive as well.
Do you really think there are less jobs than there are people? Do you really think you can't quit? Right now HR has the upperhand because the workers refuse to recognize the true value they bring to the company. That's going to change.
You forgot to fix the subject line.
'So easy to use you can hand it to your grandmother and send her off on her own to the local Starbucks.'
I don't want my Grandmother using a computer.
Case turned his head and looked up into Wage's face. It was a tanned and forgettable mask. The eyes were vatgrown sea-green Nikon transplants. Wage wore a suit of gunmetal silk and a simple bracelet of platinum on either wrist.
Great! Now I can finally make that shoe computer I've wanted all my life.
Interesting, but not quite the same. Have a look at the way Spore lets you create new species and then proceedurally allows them to move/walk/attack... That kind of thought process is needed in creating plots.
You must kill her.
In game or in real life. I see problems with the first, as she'd probably kick his ass, and I see a problem with the second as she'd probably kick his ass.
You need to immediately switch her to a dworvak keyboard, preferably one that is ergonomic. It's tough love, but this will force her to pursue other entertainment sources and increase her typing speed.
If that doesn't work, your last option is to go keyboardless. I suggest a mac, with the single button mouse. Be gentle with her, this is not an easy habit to break.
If all else fails you have one last hope... CoreWars.
It's a bit of a sticky wicket. I don't think players realize what they are missing by not having a say in story lines. I mean how many times has that mayors daughter been kidnaped? Subjectively I suppose you think you're the only one who saves her, but that illusion breaks down when you find the walkthrough online.
What's missing is a decent user interface for creating new plots. Something like the creature creation in Spore, where the computer does the hard part of putting it all together, and you just intiate the action.
I'll give a brief example of what I mean. Let's say you're a 12th level wizard and you want to create a magical staff. You enter the plot creator and enter the goal. The plot creator then creates a set of sub plots that must get resolved by *other* players in order for you to get the pieces you need to make your staff. Now you have to find some nice 3rd level fighter to get the "ruby eye of helmuth" and a 6th level cleric to have your staff blessed by "Brash the fire god" at a remote temple, and finally you must find so way to get a hold of some "brass goblin teeth". All this get's generated... but there's also a counter plot that gets generated for your arch-enemy who finds out about your plan.
All done invisibly to the player once they decide they want the staff.
Despite not being able to view the movie, reviews were positive for the film, with most reviews giving it two thumbs up or four out of five stars depending on their rating systems.
Now if only those damn game developers would get out of the way and let us create our own plots.
What matters is how many people you can interact with at one time. It doesn't matter if the game has 1 million players if I can't see an army of 500,000 taking on another army of 500,000 at one time. The important limit if how many I can see and interact with at once.