Genesis: the world, to the players

I was looking at Vanguard's concept art and it made me think about other ideas in my dream mmorpg completely unrelated. The idea of the game world finally truly in the hands of the players.

What should this mean? You can follow what made me think again at that idea. You can go admire some of the concept art for Vanguard, the environments in this case.

People say it's cool, but at the end that's just a backdrop. Even WoW has some places that make you feel the sense of wonder, but it's still just a passive frame. Think about the capital cities for example. You just go there to get quests, take the gryphon, repair, buy/sell. At the end you aren't really there because that place is owned by passive NPCs.

The world, to the players

So the idea: whould you want to own one of those places? That's the point. I want to give that kind of awe inspiring, fantasy world to the players themselves. Not to passive NPCs. Those luscious palaces should be owned by the players. They should live there. Their homes.

What we have instead? Well, Ultima Online gives you bigger or smaller houses that you can completely customize, EQ2 gives you instanced room that you can fill with garbage, DAoC gives you a few house models that you can buy on a pre-defined, generic land. I mean, the players get the crumbs, the NPCs instead get gorgeous palaces, castles, temples and so on. How's this fair?

I want that kind of immersive and yet incredible world that you can see from the concept art in some games. But then I want to take those zones and tell the players: here, this is all yours. That's the idea.

What we have instead? We have instanced PvP spaces, where you can fight around an handful of same-looking keeps. Without context, without "feel". Just four walls and a flag in the middle. How's this fair?

So let's overthrow this status. Let's be subversive. We take the best artists and world builders and we make them create the most luscious, fascinating and awe inspiring world. Something that can totally make your jaw drop. But when it's time to populate it with mindless NPCs, we invert the trend and, as God with the Eden, we put there the players and say them: this is all yours.

That's the idea. The world, to the players. It's theirs. They do with it what they want.

The context: the war and full PvP

Then we need to give them something to do. It's a game, afterall. So we say: this world is PvP. Fight for your domains.

And it's here that you learn that the world is persistent. There's is no "castle in a pocket", no private rooms. You see that palace and you want it for you? Ok, go take it for yourself. Fight for it. Your house isn't a safe place because there's war in this world and nothing you have is secure here. You have to protect your domains, you have to find allies, you have to coordinate.

There are two factions at war (with a third not directly involved in the war), you pick your side, with the possibility to betray it, if that's your choice (permeable barriers). You can then switch sides or even establish your own faction, and fight your own war against everyone else.

The conquest system

The world is big. Too dispersive for PvP? No, because we take inspiration from wargames and use a simple conquest system: you can only conquer adiacent regions to your domain. You can then lay sieges and annex regions to expand your domain. The PvP should be easy to locate and reach because it should focus on a "battlefront", the border between one faction and the other. Always visible on a map.

You can then penetrate in enemy lands, if you want. But you cannot siege inner locations that way. To reach those places you'll have to escape patrolling guards and move past roadblocks. If the guards find you then everyone will know where you are. While you cannot siege and conquer regions outside the battlefront, you can "pillage". The pillage is a possibility, but it has also a purpose. During a pillage you can damage enemy structures and steal or destroy their resource.

Full loot and economic system

This world is full loot. But wait. You cannot kill other players and steal their hard earned magic weapons and armors. The idea is instead that you can loot or destroy the resources that are used at the higher level of the community. The economy of the conquest system. The game is based on a similar model of an RTS. You'll have to gather resources such as stone, wood, iron and gold. Build farms to produce food, horses and so on to include a degree of complexity and virtual world.

The RTS: NPC bots for the boring duties

But then it's not your character to have to be in charge of those boring duties, because we value "fun" in games and we don't want any downtime. So we wait a moment and think what we left out of this game. We left out the NPCs. And that's the idea. We take those NPCs and we use them to perform the boring tasks. We tell them to mine the gold, to go cut wood, to produce food. All this while you, as the player, can leave them work and go fight for your realm.

A completely BOTTED farm system. The paradise of goldsellers and farmers? We'll see (two paragraph below).

You will want to create groups of guards, patrols, spies to defend your territories while you aren't watching, or plan the best strategy for an offence. But those guards need the food, they need the weapons, they need armors, horses, carts to transport your goods and so on. That's the RTS level. You don't smelt iron to produce weapons to be used by players. Because the players have spiffy magic items bound to them and they would cry aloud if they'd lose them. Instead you smelt that iron because your guards need to be outfitted. You need to breed horses for them to patrol better your territories, you need to give them food so that they don't get ill and will fight strongly.

RMT out of the door

That's the purpose of the "pillage". To destroy those resources, damage buildings, weaken your enemy, kill or kidnap those guards to use them as slaves in your own mines. The world is full PvP, and full loot. Say hello to goldsellers and farmers, this is your game. But to be preys instead of predators. The iron you produce doesn't log out safely with you. There's no untouchable vault. Your enemies can pillage your city, set it on fire and destroy all you have produced. They can decide to break in your depots and instead of setting them on fire, take what they find for themselves. But their pockets cannot hold tons of wood, gold or iron. So they would need to bring there their caravans to take those resources and move them into their territories. But those caravans only move on roads and are slow and are easy to spot.

Those farmers who want to use the game for real money profit won't be banned. But they will have to play along the rules of the game. And they will have to protect what they gathered and they will have to take the risk of losing *everything* after a well executed pillage by the enemy. Say hello to all those lone farmers who aren't even capable of coordinating together. This is no solo game. You cannot conquer the world and manage your territories alone.

And those are some basic features of the "dream mmorpg", described exactly as they were originally thought, in that order.

--
I was also thinking about brainstorming sessions. The way game companies work on the inside is kind of inscrutable for me, so I don't know if they do already brainstorming sessions. The idea is that you gather all developers around a table. If the group is too big you can divide it into smaller groups but everyone should participate, not just designers. So maybe one day you take designers + programmers, the day after designers + artists and so on. During a brainstorming session everyone is at the same level and has the same right to speak. There's one coordinator and a blackboard. Each of these sessions shouldn't last much more than 30 minutes and the only purpose is to gather all kind of crazy ideas. You provide a theme, like "PvP and massive battles" for example, then everyone can raise his hand and start with an idea, while the coordinator lists all the ideas coming up on the blackboard.

The "rules" are quite simple, the ideas proposed shouldn't stay within limits such as time constraints, budget, technical possibilities and so on. You just say whatever passes in your mind and that you think could be cool, without analyzing at all. The purpose of a brainstorming session isn't about planning the development. Not all the ideas will be used. Their purpose is just to suggest someone else another idea, a source of inspiration. You go with the flow without stopping with your reason to analyze and judge the idea itself. Only after the brainstorming session the ideas will be pruned, analyzed and then, maybe, slowly enter the production.

Re: Genesis: the world, to the players

Our team's brainstorming sessions are pretty similar to what you describe. I pick a topic, distribute what design work has been worked on to this point, and anyone who wants to can pitch in on their ideas. It's pretty open and we've come up with some good ideas outside of my own brain-lock.

As for IdealGame... well, all I can say is you're either going to really love or really, really hate what I'm working on.

Re: Genesis: the world, to the players

damn.. That is nearly EXACTLY the game i've been looking for and planning in my head.

My difference is that i want full permadeath for all the beings in the game. hear me out...

Each player is controlling a "bloodline" or "society". Their first character is the founder. basically its the same as a NPC just fully controlled by the player (1st, 3rd person). You are able to lead the npcs by commanding them, as well as gaining "followers". Your account would get a number of slots for followers. You designate one follower as your "heir". When your main character dies, all the possessions pass over to the heir.. and you can swap between your followers at any time (but your main is always the "leader".

the main difference that i would add is to add a "npc political/reputation" level, and a "technology/skill" tree..

there are a number of basic skills that every npc/player would start with (craft, collect, fight, lead) and each of those can be improved and "studied". When you study a skill the improve it and use up some resources (this can be, experimenting with new designs, practicing fighting etc).. as you study you unlock new skills (like mining, wood-harversting, fishing, etc etc) These unloched skills can be taught to other npc/players.

getting taught a skill is much faster than learning it yourself, but each "being" can only have a certain number of skills (say 4-5)

to max out a skill doesn't take too long, and the "advancement" of the game is putting together the society/group - making your own town self sufficient, making a well skilled merc band, forming a outpost - etc etc.

while the individual "beings" can be killed and looted etc, you always can drop back to the heir and the followers. Instead of managing just one character, you manage a group and your skill-set would be divided amongst them, and you use NPCs and followers to "backup" your skills and equipment

Re: Genesis: the world, to the players

My difference is that i want full permadeath for all the beings in the game. hear me out...

Each player is controlling a "bloodline" or "society". Their first character is the founder. basically its the same as a NPC just fully controlled by the player (1st, 3rd person). You are able to lead the npcs by commanding them, as well as gaining "followers". Your account would get a number of slots for followers. You designate one follower as your "heir". When your main character dies, all the possessions pass over to the heir.. and you can swap between your followers at any time (but your main is always the "leader".

From the pure design perspective this idea is silly. What's the actual difference from just respawning, beside the name change? So that your enemies can brag to have permakilled Sir Diesalot XIII?

The rest it was discussed here.

While the NPC/bot system is reserved to the level of the guilds and not for the single character. This for two basic reasons:
- If each player could set one or more NPC bots, the server would just die instantly under the load.
- If each player had his own castle and domain, then there wouldn't be just enough space in the world.

My idea is closer to what Eve-Online anticipated, but within a carefully handcrafted, beautiful and immersive world.

The branching skilltree (where you use generic skills to then unblock and specialize into stiles or new areas) is instead something interesting. But again I don't see much sense in a dependence of skills between the character and the NPCs, since it's again all at the level of the guild.

Instead, for what concerns the NPCs, I'd just reply RTS mechanics. Where you upgrade your troops to be able to perform new tasks. But without that tie between character progression (which happens in the PvE portion) and NPC's abilities.

Being able to control a group of different "alts" (like building your own party) is an idea I've seen many times but not something I want for this particular idea since I still want the focus on one character only.

Instead being able to control a large army with just one player is a kind of game that fits better other, non-massive genres.

Re: Genesis: the world, to the players

oops, yeah, the "political system".

Every npc/follower is part of the leader's group

when you kill a NPC, any of its "friends" who witness the killing/attack can go back to the others and spread the word - you loose reputation with that group. (player).

whe you give gifts/rescue etc - the NPC are thankful and you gain reputation.

you also have reputation for your own NPCs, when you feed them, give them new homes/goods etc, they like the leader more - When things get tough, you are getting attacked etc, you start to loose reputation with them.

If you have a very low reputation the NPCs will start to hate you and either leave, or defect to another nearby player they like more.

You can also "trade" npcs, so long as you are above a certain reputation (slavery at low levels, and immigration at very high levels)

This also acts as a block to RMT - you can only trade to NPCs that are not unfriendly.

this opens up different types of play... some players will be focussed on "building things" and infrastucture, other on fighting and military, and yet others could concentrate on "morale" and build up reputatation with NPCs and keep cohesion, or even sending in spies to try to get very friendly with enemy NPC and turn them to your side :)

Re: Genesis: the world, to the players

When I read this post I thought you were talking about Genesis http://www.playgenesis.com/
If not that's strangly ironic. While the Genesis game with regards to that link seems like a pipedream the author has certainly accomplished a lot and seems to have a good grasp on what type of features while be needed in the next generation of MMOs.

Re: Genesis: the world, to the players

This sounds remarkably like EVE Online?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.