Slowly but surely...

Now I understand more clearly what you meant. For story heavy games your point of view is absolutely valid.

The encounters I am designing for my own game do have some story elements in places, in fact the first one I came up with I think you will enjoy. Some are more story driven than others, but we will have to see how it all unfolds.

I have begun work on the Mayan level today, picture attached. Clearly it is very early stages.

What can be adult themed about a game?

Frankly I dont want to see nudity in my gaming anyway, nor do I have a need to see delicately cut implied sex scenes - and if any game insists I buy a joystick so that I can wank it off then I'm personally going to pickup the game studio executive who read your post on the way over to your house and let loose with a 12 gauge.

It will not change how complex the plot driven cut scenes are, because they will still get dumbed down for thick people anyway.

And I dont see how the gameplay away from these cut scenes can be adult themed. I'm trying to imagine it now...

"Oh man, I played Call of Booty last night. I has to mash the "u" key AND the "space bar", it's so out there man. No-one under 16 is gonna get that."

You do realise Kev that once I release a demo I'm going to have to pay you off so you aren't publicly pessimistic about it :P

Quote from thisnameistaken :

And since when did cutscenes constitute a game? They are short films. I've noticed the proportion of games where no action is required on the part of the player has been rising in recent years. Studios all want to create a 'cinematic' experience

I am going to find myself in the unusual, and slightly uncomfortable, position of defending the Star Wars MMO here - because in the Star Wars game specifically (and this does not necessarily apply to other games) these scenes are interactive and have consequences outside of the cut scene, they are extremely well done and are character driven.

They're all voice acted, and put together very well indeed and served not only to build atmosphere but also to develop character arc.

I was really enjoying this aspect of the Star Wars game, it was everything else that let it down.

Quote from Mustangman759 :

Seems pretty cool, it doesnt have to be that extravagant to start either. Maybe also allow people to open stores and craft items for sale

What did you have in mind when you said "opening stories" ?

I think some kind of crafting is inevitable as it goes hand in hand with the loot system, but i'm not sure how far I will take it.

Quote from Mustangman759 :

Becky keep us updated on how it goes

Sure thing, I'm sure it'll get posted here at various points. I wouldn't expect anything too soon though, I just did market research and am now in planning - and having to do a spot of overtime in the day job too so couldn't get in to any detail tonight as I was just too tired.

Did find this sketch online though which was exactly what I was looking for, I would expect to see something in 3D of this nature soon: http://www.manatee.k12.fl.us/s ... tary/samoset/chichen2.jpg

Quote from BurnOut69 :

He actually has a point. I know people getting to the max level in SWOTOR just to show off their e-penis. People are just that sad, and MMOs are worse than heroin for that kind of people.

Like most modern MMO the Star Wars game is pretty easy, progress relates mostly to time invested. Faster progress can be achieved by blitzing through the content that you don't stop to enjoy the one good thing about it, which is the cut scenes and plot lines.

I played a Sith Warrior of the dual lightsabre weilding DPS variety up to, errr, somewhere in the 40s I think, I have no idea what the game goes up too. Anyway, I can only liken the game play mechanic to the MMO equivalent of Guitar Hero. An attack lights up, you press it. As a Sith you have to balance your "rage", but that was totally trivial - you hit your rage generation attack when you needed it - and then just hit your big attacks whenever they light up.

I can think of another game like that...


I enjoyed the plot lines, but they were not enough to justify the monthly fee.

Anyone who plays a game like that through to the highest level has social development issues.

It is my view that the game was designed by somebody who had played a melee class in World of Warcraft up to about level 30 and had no idea about team work or group dynamics. They had tried an MMO for a little bit and thought they had the measure of it and then mistakenly believed that gave them free license to design the biggest MMO to be released in the last few years.

If I hadn't paid so much money for the game in the first place I would laugh about it.

Hyperactive, you are describing Second Life - and it's shit.

Quote from Mustangman759 :

Maybe allow unlocking of sone skills and items through the missions to?

Mmm. The solo skills tests will be extremely difficult, only the best players will complete them and there will be some rewards from that. eg: Completing a warrior skill test will allow the player to have slightly better warriors, doing the second stage might give their warriors a permanent piece of armour that does not get damaged, doing the third and final test might award them a title so that other players know how good they are.

The PvP will allow you to loot from players you have killed.

The raids will be where all the loot is won, and the best loot completed in the grind area/shop.

That's the basic premise, and I think addresses most of the issues with the best balance I can hope to achieve in the discussion that we've had here.

Quote from Mustangman759 :

More or less i was inquiring what genre, ie pirates knights aliens etcD

Well for me its going to be high fantasy, I have sketched out 11 adventures so far, each designed for 80 -120 players and designed to last about 2 hours and mostly based upon media I already have in my library of assets so it should be achievable.

There's little in the way of progression (no grind, no levelling), instead rewards are better gear - but better gear will not give a substantial improvement in ability. Add that on top of a small amount of solo skills testing content and a pvp sub-game, and I think that will be a good basis from which to start.

In terms of monetisation, my best idea so far is a slight variation on what I mentioned earlier. Some rewards in the game will be recipe pieces, to complete the recipe will take some traditional style solo or small group questing (dare I say it, grind). You can circumvent this grind with an in-game microtransaction to complete the recipe from the shop which will sell the recipe pieces otherwise available in the grind content. Remeber there is no other direct benefit from the grind, no levelling, no xp, just quest loot to complete recipes.

This means rewards are earned, and all I am doing is saving some convenience of doing some deliberately slow and un-challenging content.

Quote from Shotglass :

It is a very rare occurence for a small game like Counter Strike to make a splash against titles like Q3 or UT and I doubt there currently is a market tougher to break into than MMORPGS.

Yeah it is kinda late to be getting on the MMO bandwagon, but I wasnt in position to try it sooner. And I am finding myself writing in this thread like it is a done decision, it isn't. I'll knock up a design and a prototype - and once the prototype is done I will decide if it's a goer.

I just completed a prototype for a previous project, and sadly what I realised after completing the prototype was that the atmosphere area was too small and to make it bigger I needed larger planets, so the gameplay concept I had in mind would not have worked. I could have worked on making it prettier, but the gameplay wouldnt have happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrl9874i4lg

I have a fairly well considered gameplay concept for the MMO now - some of it inspired by the discussion in this thread, but I am unsure on monetisation (not out to make a profit, but would like to cover running costs) - and as I said before and your videos confirmed, monetisation needs to be considered at this stage and not just bolted on later in order to get it right.

I remain sceptical that microtransaction cosmetic enhancements will work on an indie game. I, in agreement with your videos, do not want to withhold content but if I do take that model I will at least not make it subscription but based upon active time in premium content - but the not selling power debate is interesting. I hadnt seen my earlier idea as selling power - you had to earn the reward and then make a microtransaction, but the video raised a valid perspective.

In other words, I am still not sure what to do about that aspect and will probably be thinking about it in bed tonight!

Last edited by Becky Rose, Thu 16 Feb 2012, 00:06.

Thanks for the links Shotglass, very interesting and I see your point on selling power. I will watch them through a few times before concluding my game design.

Regarding the speech on doing an MMO, I have to bring you back to the point of why I am doing this.

It is not business: I have one of those already.

My hobby for many years was making games. I've released so many that nowadays I can only guess at the number knowing it would be wildly inaccurate, but over the 3 decades that I have been coding computer games it is possible that I have released over 100 games. Most of them small and simple, and typically quite playable with reasonable graphics by indi standards.

Since becoming a professional developer about 4 years ago I have not coded any games, my last gaming project was the CTRA. And when you consider what the CTRA was, essentially, it was a form of MMO. So this isn't new territory for me.

Recently I rediscovered my passion for making games, I have somehow managed to separate out the programming I do at work from the programming I do on my hobby.

And lastly, my day job is reasonable, and my part time business is nicely profitable, so I can afford to purchase assets and spend money on my hobby.

I know the bubble has burst on MMO's, but it is something I have always wanted to do - and this project isnt about money, it is about having fun and enjoying this brilliant hobby for what it is - awesome fun.

I knew I could not write an MMO before because I couldn't afford the art asset. I feel that I am in a position now that I can acquire enough art assets to make an MMO game possible for me to develop, and I am not remotely daunted by the network side of things.

So for me the time is right for me to create a high fantasy MMO. After all, I already did it for motor sports - and high fantasy is my other big interest.

Quote from Hyperactive :

One of the things I'm having hard time understanding is the "earning something" mentality of mmorpgs. Be it experience levels like in most games, new tanks like in world of tanks or just license levels like in iracing. There is this forced sense of achievement or salary in other terms. Something you work towards. Not having fun getting there but having fun finally having it. In its most basic form it is just endless grinding but often times it is just put there as some kind of goal everybody must work towards.

I think there is nothing wrong with the concept, but an aweful lot is wrong with the current implementations. Too many games have made grind a key element in saving on the creation of new content, and the grind content just isn't interesting or challenging enough.

As a lone developer I am no better equipped to produce infinite content than anyone else, so clearly content will have to be repeated - but I think the key is to get rid of the grind content completely, and make the content that gets repeated interesting and varied as much as possible.

Quote :

I don't have problem grinding in the sense that you need to gain something by doing something as long as it isn't mindless repetitive grinding. But the goal of the game should not be about working towards goals but about the path you take to get there. Many games have taken the totally opposite route.

On this I completely agree with you. The key word here is "grind". There is no issue with repeating content - I have raced South City Classic more times than I have cooked an edible meal, but the experience wasn't soulless and empty of reward.

Quote :

It is kind of strange how deeply ingrained the whole idea of earning and leveling is with online games in general.

I think it was the easy thing to do, the genre started with high fantasy games and the precedent existed long before computer games got involved for characters to progress as part of their personal story. When EA got involved and produced Everquest (under the Verant studio which they owned) they siezed this aspect and used it as the mechanism of the game. It meant they had to produce less content, and less content makes a game cheaper to develop.

Quote :

Maybe that is just one of the basic dogmas of online games no one dares to break? To have goals of the game to have users earn them as much as have time for..?

I'll break it . I am lucky/sad enough to have enjoyed raiding back in the early days of MMO and I think that's an experience that more people should be able to enjoy.

Quote from anttt69 :

Bring back ctra & charge racers to use it. Simple.

Where is the challenge for me? Hobbies are meant to be fun, so I like to do new stuff.

Quote from sinbad :

Highscores, laptimes, stats and other quantifiable and tangible things are great. Meaningless xp numbers and levels are not.

I couldn't agree more.

It is a very interesting debate, but I think I have an idea I want to run past you - particularly those on the cynical side of the increased power debate regarding the current state of online games.

What if the game granted you a reward for completion of tasks which improved the power of your character, but that reward was not permanent. This could take several forms, be it weapons and armour that wear out, or potions and scrolls that are disposable?

This way a player is rewarded, but their achievement does not extend them in power in any permanent way such that friends cannot play together.

If all players who have completed the basic training quests are essentially the same level, or at most in a narrow band of power and abilities then this allows friends to play together regardless of level and rewards, whilst meaningful, on the whole grant no permanent or exaggerated power enhancement to characters over their friends.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Not really, no. Play should be its own reward, because once the player is shooting for 'achievements' it becomes a treadmill. Once one achievement is attained the player refocuses on the next one, any feeling of achievement is momentary.

On the flip side of this, the high fantasy genre has had the concept of leveling ever since Gary Gygax put the idea of Elves and Dwarves running around in to the concept of a "co-operative war game where you control 1 model on the board". It is part of the appeal of the genre, so I am not sure I can completely agree when you have an online game in that context - but I do see and understand your point totally.

Quote from Dajmin :

I won't ever pay for another subscription-based game (I hate feeling like I SHOULD play a game simply because I've paid for that month)

This is something I am yet to grapple in my mind. Creating the game has a cost overhead, I already blew just over £200 on 3D assets and I have nowhere near enough yet. Running a server will cost around £100 or so a month. These are costs I am happy to invest in a hobby of making a game, but at some point - especially if the game is successful and requires more servers, it is going to need to generate revenue.

I would like to keep access to the game free, but a model for generating revenue needs to be considered at this stage so that when it becomes pertinent it can be done in a reasonable and considered way.

I agree with your point about subscription gaming, I dislike it. But I dont know what should replace it.

Dungeons & Dragons Online has an interesting system where you can get a VIP pass on subscription, or you can buy content in packs, or you can do some grind and earn each content pack to keep the game completely free.

One idea I am considering is that access could be purchased not in "months of allowed access" but in "hours of content enjoyment". So wandering around is free, some basic quests are free, but each hour spent in premium content comes off of your pre-purchased account. Does that sound like a fairer model of subscription to you?

Quote from Bose321 :

• Graphics
  
• Physics
  
• Amount of players
  
• Innovative gameplay
  
• If not above, it just has to work good (think of BF3)
  
• Good netcode
  
• No cheaters
  

Graphics: Well graphically I cannot create an AAA game, firstly I lack the specific experience at coding something called shaders. Whilst I will try to use some in this project the area is new to me so I wont be of the standard of the big budget games. Also art assets are expensive, a high quality art asset can cost in the region of £1000 or so just for 1 model. I am in a cheaper end of the market then that! But I will do my best
Amount of Players: Game architecture has a lot to do with this, as well as the eventual success of the game. I have an idea in mind that will pitch 80-120 players together in a co-operative way, but I cannot guarantee the game will attract that many players. Making the content scale to different numbers of players is difficult to do well, so I will likely have "AI" to fill out the ranks during low player volumes.
Good Netcode: I think I covered this earlier really, but I'll do my best. But ultimately if a game becomes too popular for my ability to fund the server infrastructure then this will suffer. The result might be a waiting queue to join, just to keep things smooth for all the players in the game already.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

What makes multiplayer suck is people. It's a shame because it should be fun, but it isn't, because of all the ****ing people being their petty little pathetic selves all the time.

Case in point right there :P hehe. I think to a large extent this is uncontrollable, but frustrations can be directed... eg: An automated system that lets you vent your frustrations at a player and that is relatively immune to abuse. But at the end of the day people will be people, and to a large extent there is no way to fund staff for monitoring online behaviour except in the most extreme of cases.

Quote :

Also 'experience' has ruined multiplayer games by punishing anybody who doesn't want to live and breathe a computer game. Where's the logic in a game designed to pit player against player when they give one of the players an advantage?

The first point here I completely agree with and sympathise with. I still love online games, but it's been a good few years since I was "at the top" of one simply because I have a life ... some of which I appear to be about to dedicate to making an online game ... oh the irony!

The latter part is more difficult, because whilst the concept of what you say is completely right, the practice isn't. Players do need rewarding for their achievements, but I think that is a critical choice of word, "achievements" not "effort". Success, and not time invested. Would you agree with that?

Quote from Intrepid :

Karl Marx never made video games, but if he did they'd be the shittest in the world

LOL

Quote from hrtburnout :

I'd like an easy way to play with my friends. If I recall correctly, iRacing makes it difficult for you to have a race with just your buddies, for example.

A very valid point, and one I will be sure to address. I think a lot of the problem with online games comes from

• Friends on different servers who you cannot play with at all
  
• Friends of a different "level" where the game experience is negatively effected by playing together.
  

I will try to address this in my design.

Thank you for all of this feedback, it is all very valuable in understanding what the sector needs today - and what a new game might have to do to stand out in such a crowded market.

It's proving really valuable. Thanks.

Quote from Mikjen :

Being able to play cleanly,. without any lag

This is one that in so many ways is hard to control. I can write the code as best as I am able (which should be sufficient), I can throw 1 server machine at the project (more would require me to make money out of the game), and then I would have to hope the game did not grow fast than its ability to host the players!

Quote from Hahmo :

but I know what raids are and they do sound really interesting.

I have to say in all the MMO I have played raiding is by far the most fun in terms of gameplay - but I am not sure how you would open that up to public players who don't know each other, raiding is about team work and having players fail a public raid would lead to a server full of testosterone - but I already have been running with the idea of a game which basically brings the raiding to the front. I shall think on that some more and see if I can come up with a viable design.

Quote :

But when it comes to games like LFS, by events I mean races that would cover atleast 80 cars on track, but then again this needs longer and wider tracks and better server support etc.

You do realise if you make the track bigger then you reduce the car/track density back down again, so all you would be doing is increasing the chance of stumbling across a wreck.

Quote from Crashgate3 :

This is what I always liked about CTRA - the fact that you could always play a populated race without having to devote 18 hours a day to playing.

I think the pickup and play approach is important too, games have to serve an ever more casual audience these days.

Quote :

I think that's what I personally would like to see in an online game - the chance to quickly pick it up and feel involved in something with a good number of players (as opposed to just playing as if it's a single player game where everyone happens to be able to see what other players are up to) without having it become a second job.

I know exactly what you mean!

Quote from Mustangman759 :

what mmo type would you be doing?

I am about to design my next project, I am thinking of an MMO - but I havnt put pen to paper yet - I decided to do some research as to what players feel about online games first.

Quote from Shotglass :

1) dont you dare put grind into it

Hah. I think the reason grind gets put in to these games is finding a way to accommodate people who invest too much time for the amount of content you can reasonably create. There is only so much story you can tell. I agree that I hate grind, and I very much hate the fact that an element of grind sits in front of the more fun aspects of the games - but how should a game go about accommodating players with different time commitments in to the game?

Quote from senn :

being told a good story.

Is that as important in a multiplayer game? I recently tried the new Star Wars MMO from Bioware/EA and the plot lines where very good (the gameplay mechanics where rubbish though). The cinematics where very good. They where numerous, professionally and cinematically produced with expensive technqiues. But when I played with other players I felt that I should skip past them as fast as possible so as not to delay our combined progress. Everyone else just ran through them too, in a completely not interested way.

I have found in most games that the story just gets in my way, I dont want to read reams of text that was set to paper by a friggin' game dev and is about as good a read as The Sun newspaper - oh and if they try to be clever in their writing, oh it drives me nuts... and in a multiplayer game that time spent reading either wouldnt get done, or would cause a 20 minute encounter to potentially take much longer.

Quote from S.E.T.H :

should take this as a confession?

*raises an eyebrow* Like I said, I find force view distracting.

Actually my preffered view when driving a tin top is to position the camera on the bottom centre of the windscreen and adjust the camera field of view so that I am zoomed right in. So I have less peripheral visibility, but can see up the road further ahead.

Quote :

if you dont have an HD 100+cm tv then you lose some visibility.

Is this bragging? Because if so: I have a cinema under my house. Envy me, yes bow down and worship. 100cm lolz!

If not, well, what you are saying is that different setups require different configurations to get the most out of them, so a different array of screens and a different controller means you will set the game up differently.

Luckily LFS is released on a console where all the hardware is the same so we don't have to worry about that. Oh wait...

Quote from S.E.T.H :

you can see much better where the tires are, and abuse the track to its very limits.

you can see the way better, with better sight

you can gain advantage in race with it. that you can see better, find places among cars to pass.

generally, better sight gives you advantage.

one mouse player (lagger) told that he was gaining advantage with this mode too in this thread. he is s2 licensed and registered in 2008. but everyone ignored him and noone wanted to give him a hearing.

Have you not considered that the view on a monitor is MUCH more restrictive than the real thing in the first place, and that custom views - or in this case force view - is restoring some of the lost visibility that you would have in a real racing situation?

Quote from Jakg :

As a change from all the flaming.

S.E.T.H - Would you like to *clearly* explain the advantages that the "force mode" gives a driver? Is it the cameras new position, or the "at the wheels" force data, or both?

Part of me wonders if it's the name, like some kind of special Anakin Skywalker podrace mode.

Quote from Hahmo :

Massive events, with more than 80 players online at the same time

As in guild raiding? I love raids too.

I think most games that have raiding are essentially two different games, and back when Everquest was quite new I was massively in to the raiding.

But in newer games I can never be bothered to get hardcore enough to get up to raiding level or to maintain the time commitment necessary to join a big raiding guild. Do you have any thoughts on that yourself?

For me a real simulation would emulate the environment of a race, and the aerodynamic / grip debate is a key case in point.

I realise I am in the minority around here with this view, but to me racing is about dog fighting and not lap times. I am therefor more interested in the simulation of a race than I am the simulation of a car.

If you go and watch real club/national level motor sports and watch some downforce cars racing you will notice a strange trait: The cars tend to be spaced apart by a fairly equal amount. Over the course of a race a few small gaps will emerge and the cars may break away from each other, but many will remain in 1 or 2 chasing groups and all the cars in those groups will maintain a fairly even split.

I've watched a lot of club and national level racing, and this trait is fairly common in downforce races.

In LFS any race involving cars with downforce will instantly begin to spread out.

This is partly due to a wider skill gap, but mostly it is because the aerodynamics are wrong. Following cars is too easy in corners, so overtaking is relatively easier, allowing faster drivers to pass and get clear of inexperienced drivers much easier than in real racing.

The feel of the cars in LFS isn't bad. If LFS' physics were perfect (which is Scawens current mission) then the physics would still not be the real thing, and much like the physics now - would feel "not bad".

So in my mind the real error in LFS' physics is that the final result, whilst it is "not bad", does not emulate a race.

Most of the cars in LFS I will never race for real anyway, I am therefor not too worried if the cars are perfect or just "reasonably good" in terms of their physics, instead I would rather be reacting to changes to air and track temperature and other dynamic elements of the race track which no sim yet bothers to simulate - and I would rather the physics allowed for the skills differential between gamers and created a final product which was more akin to real racing - whilst still keeping the physics feeling "more or less ok".

I am passionate about motor racing, and passion is only 1% reason. Car physics is "reason".

I have always loved online games, even as far back as the days of the Amiga computer I would link them up play socially rather than on my own. Then there was the era of the PC based LAN party, before eventually we arrived at the world of MMO's that we have today. I was hooked right from the start.

Lately I have started coding 3D games stuff again, just experimental prototypes and having fun in my spare time, but it has got to thinking: Perhaps it is time that I finally put together an MMO of my own. Nothing too grand, nothing bigger than the CTRA certainly.

So I got to thinking, what do I want to see in an online game - and I realised that was the wrong question, or rather, I was asking the wrong person, I should be asking gamers...

As gamers, who already play at least 1 online racing game, what would you want to see in an online game?.

If you play other online games then I am curious to know what you like and dislike about others games, particularly those of you who have played fantasy adventure games?

Thank you.