First off, I suppose I should reveal the specific nature of the game(There's a tl;dr 4 paragraphs down if you want to skip it).
The basic premise is that you(and everyone else) were part of the first and only scientific team sent to a planet that was thought to be inhabitable. Your job was to research the planet, and, if it is found to be suitable, begin settling it.
Since there's a game being made about it, something went wrong. Your ship crash landed on the planet. You and your crew-mates find the hard way that the land is similar to earth, but there are some major differences. The air is clean(earth is heavily polluted at this point in time), the water is clear(though a trace of purple can be seen in deeper parts), and the animals are large and vicious.
Most of the crew has survived the crash due to safety equipment, and the main bulk of the ship made it through the landing. Though it is no longer functional as a ship, it can still produce enough power to run emergency services and can house some of the survivors. The ship acts as the base of civilization in the game, and is central to the concepts that will be discussed in this post.
So, with the back story out of the way, the goal of the game is to survive and settle the planet with your fellow survivors. Death is imminent, and money has no direct value in this civilization.
tl;dr - Survive on an uninhabited planet with a broken spaceship base.
On to the concepts that will hopefully be discussed, debated, and receive input from the readers.
Respawning, it's a pretty immersion breaking concept, mainly because it involves the death and reanimation of the PC. My first idea for respawning was a child/reproduction based system, wherein the player has children, they take on a certain set of bonuses depending on their parents, and follow around one of them, learning from what they do(gaining the same skill levels). Once the player dies, rather than simply coming back to life with a minor penalty, their character is permanently dead, and they take over their child.
Pros:
+Doesn't involve bringing people back to life.
+Allows family structures to be developed within the game.
+Good for RPs that would be ruined by a character dying and just popping back to life.
Cons:
-Not very intuitive.
-Relatively random(genetics).
-More difficult to program(extra AI scripts for children).
The second idea I had was cloning(the game is set far in the future anyway). Cloning would involve returning to the base(ship) to sync with your clone, thus saving your game(when you log off, your avatar goes to sleep, stopping its metabolism, saving is not necessary to leave the game, only if the player dies). It could be free, or cost some amount of money(either set or determined by your stats). There could also be the option of allowing multiple clones for a hefty fee, which could be synched only to certain stats and not others(ignore some skills and keep others), if a total skill level cap is ever implemented. At a certain point, players could build or buy their own personal cloning machines(which fit one clone), and place them inside of their house.
Pros:
+Acts as a sort of tether for newer players, giving them a good reason to stay near base for a while.
+More versatile in general.
+More intuitive.
+Children are not required.
+Allows for a more controlled form of saving.
Cons:
-Less RP friendly in some scenarios.
-Fewer options for family structures unless children are added as a non necessary aspect of play.
-Less realistic(even if it is the future).
-Limits freedom early in the game.
As for economics, there are 2 viable options. The first of which involves the base acting as a sort of store, you can sell items there for credit, and buy items for credit. The credit can be traded between players and is digital(not lost via death).
Pros:
+More controllable, items have a tangible, if dynamic, value.
+Allows player made shops.
+Allows shops in the base.
+No need to spend 5 minutes looking for that one rock you need to make a stone hammer.
Cons:
-Less player made economy.
The second is the pure player made economy, aka the barter system. Players trade items to one another in order to obtain things they need.
Pros:
+Entirely player constructed.
+RP friendly.
Cons:
-Less developer control over economy(instability anyone?).
-Less economic interaction in general.
-No tangible values on items.
Everything is up for debate/discussion/suggestions/criticism, should anyone ever decide that they're bored enough to read through all of that. Tell me what you think, be it good or bad.
ID:151388
 Mar 18 2011, 11:39 am (Edited on Mar 18 2011, 1:23 pm)
|
|
Well, since posting this I've begun to lean more towards the idea of including children as an option that the host can choose to make the primary method of respawning(they'll be available regardless), as well as making the AI shop an option for the host. This way, there can be more RP centric servers, as well as servers based on non RP gameplay. The game itself isn't going to be created around roleplays, but I do want it to be as RP friendly as possible.
Thanks for your opinion though, seeing that there are a decent amount of people interested in a more RP focused experience(I've talked to several others who would like to roleplay in the game) tells me that I should pay a fair amount of attention to those choices while doing further design. My next task is going to be figuring out how to smoothly incorporate children into the game... | |
Robertbanks2 wrote:
On to the concepts that will hopefully be discussed, debated, and receive input from the readers. It looks like you have to make one single decision from the start: is this game designed for roleplayer's in mind or those just looking for a casual gaming experience. Once you have that question answered I think you have a pretty good idea where to go from there. You have a lot of interesting ideas and personally I would advise you to do something besides the road most traveled / simplest to implement (ie cloning). Personally I would play, but only if you went the role play centric route. As for how a character is re-spawned I have an idea for you. Since the game is about settling a planet I imagine there are enough people on the ship for settlement. Maybe there is a cryo-stasis chamber that houses people that haven't been re-animated yet. What I might do, and a lot of RP oriented MUDs do, is make it so when your character dies they have to make a completely new character in chargen. Then make it part of the server rules that as part of the role play environment being created each new character that has been revived from cryo-stasis does not ICly know anything about whats going on or the previous characters they were interacting with. Another option for player revival is to allow players to take control of NPCs upon their death. A player, once killed, could go through a list of various NPCs with descriptions of their backgrounds, character traits, etc. Once the player finds one that he likes he can then take control of that NPC and play its character. As far as the economy goes I would go for as much of a player made economy as possible, especially if you decide to focus your game on real role playing and not casual gaming. I'm also not so sure your cons for a player made economy hold much water, unless I missed what you were getting at. Addressing developer control over economy: You would still have a great amount of control as you would be able to determine the raw materials in the surrounding environment (fertile soil, food, ore, wood, etc). There would be price instability as surpluses and shortages arise in supply and demand. However, in my opinion this just makes things more interesting. If there's a shortage of food how will the character react? Will they ban together to try and produce/find more food or will they fight with each other to control the current food supply? Addressing the issue of less economic interaction in general: I'm not quite certain how a player driven economy would make there be less economic activity? Maybe you can elaborate on what you were thinking. Addressing no tangible value on items: I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you refer to tangible value, but in a player run economy every good or service has tangible value - its just the player's (the market) that decide what its worth. I think you have a lot of interesting ideas and from my point of view I would suggest you break the mold and don't go with the "standard" formula already out there - go with your imagination and originality. If you have any questions or concerns in regards to designing a sound economic system feel free to get in contact with me as I have a relatively sound understanding of economics. In the end remember that economics is simply the study of allocation of scarce resources. The only difference is in the real world most goods are scarce, in our games we create the scarcity. | |
Thanks for the response. A big part of the explanation for this game is the answer to your initial question of RP vs casual gaming. Since posting this and after several quite long discussions with some of the people helping out on the project, we've decided that we aim to make the game lend itself to both types of players. We intend to make all of these things available options that can be turned off or on by the host/moderators, meaning some servers could lean heavily toward RP, and others could lean more towards casual gaming.
A big issue with RP in this game is that it does place a decent amount of importance on stats/skills, though not nearly to the extent of some games. You can technically do anything you want from the start, but your skill set and stats, which improve through being used, determine the chances of your success/failure. With that in mind, giving someone control of a new mob every time they die(something I expect to be relatively common) would be frustrating on a casual server(where stats/skills are more important), but less so for a more RP focused server(where the focus is on role playing, rather than progressing through the game), which is why there will be multiple servers. As for going the road less traveled, I'm trying to do that more and more throughout the game, but respawning is kind of hard to innovate with when you need to preserve someone's stats. There is always going to be some fallacy in the logic of it all, unless you go with the RP method and just stick them in a new body with all new stats and skills. As for economics, well, I've personally had horrible experiences with player built economies in the past, especially on byond. I feel like the relatively small player base simply doesn't lend itself to a truly player based economy. With that in mind, it will still be an option for hosts/mods to consider, and I do intend to have player created shops under any circumstance. Basically, the host/moderators will have the power to toggle the ship's supply depot, and thus removing or enabling the automated store, which will work on a relatively simple supply/demand AI script. tl;dr - I'm going to be implementing everything discussed in this thread as a host/moderator option for individual servers, in an attempt to make the game enjoyable for everyone who wants to play, but I'm definitely enjoying the support for an RP friendly environment. I'll definitely be considering the RP community's needs during design/development. | |
As for going the road less traveled, I'm trying to do that more and more throughout the game, but respawning is kind of hard to innovate with when you need to preserve someone's stats. There is always going to be some fallacy in the logic of it all, unless you go with the RP method and just stick them in a new body with all new stats and skills. From my point of view I have to say its definitely refreshing to see someone working on something original and unique and not just some generic casual rpg based off an anime franchise. Hopefully too much offense won't be taken by those in the BYOND community who have developed those games... it just seems that is what primarily dominates the BYOND "eco-system" There was an interesting mechanic used on one of the earlier MUDs I played on in dealing with player death and skills in a RP oriented environment. Basically when an administrator saw another player engaging in good roleplay they were given RP points, and these RP points could then be allocated to skills and stats. It was very interesting because it got rid of the whole concept of the grind and encouraged more robust RP. Other players could also give +1 RP point to another player through the +nom command (basically a command to nominate a player for good roleplay). To prevent abuse the +nom command could only be used once per week on any given player. Then when the player died and had to create a new character they could use their roleplay points and allocate them to various stats and skills, so in the end as long as the player was a good role-player then even if they died they would lose all their material possessions, but not necessarily their stats and skills. So, it got rid of any kind of grind, encouraged roleplay, and made it so even though the player's original character might be dead their second character would still reap many of the benefits that the player put in on their first character. | |
That's definitely an interesting method. I'll have to look into a similar system for keeping stats for RP servers. I suppose that also allows for more dynamic play as well, as you don't have to create characters with the same skill sets every time you die.
Maybe as a player gets more standing within the community, they gain ranks in game and access to more specialized IC jobs, for example, starting off they might be just a settler, but after a while of good conduct/RP they get lab assistant/security guard choices when they log in/die, and a bit longer and they get more(various science positions, officer/leadership jobs, etc). Thanks for the idea, it definitely looks promising so far. | |
Robertbanks2 wrote:
That's definitely an interesting method. I'll have to look into a similar system for keeping stats for RP servers. I suppose that also allows for more dynamic play as well, as you don't have to create characters with the same skill sets every time you die. Actually thats some really interesting thinking you have going there. That way once their first character dies (or second, third, etc) they still retain the "rank" for higher level jobs in their new character as well as being able to roll over points to allocate across skills/stats. You also have the added advantage that anyone occupying a high level job (like a leadership role) is a veteran player and has been a part of the community for a good while. Keep the ideas flowing, I think you could wind up with a really interesting game. If you ever decide to enter a closed alpha/beta before release I would love to be a part of it. | |
Off-topic, but try not to quote gigantic posts like that in their entirety. Makes this thread a pain to read.
| |
Toadfish wrote:
Off-topic, but try not to quote gigantic posts like that in their entirety. Makes this thread a pain to read. Will do, you'll have to forgive me in one of the other threads for doing the same thing ;-P In the future I'll definitely make sure to truncate my quotes down. Edit: Ahh...the edit buton, I had to keep most of the quote though because most of it is what I was responding to. | |
Will do, you'll have to forgive me in one of the other threads for doing the same thing ;-P In the future I'll definitely make sure to truncate my quotes down. Cool, thank you. Edit: Ahh...the edit buton, I had to keep most of the quote though because most of it is what I was responding to. What's nice about these forums is they structure threads according to which post you press 'reply' to, so we know who you're responding to quote or not. Quotes are useful when you want to reply to specific things the author wrote (in which case I recommend writing your response directly underneath the relevant part, like I'm doing now) and letting us know who you're talking to without having to look at the thread structure, in which case, if I was quoting a magnum opus like the OP's, I would do something like: So and so wrote: ...(Reply here) | |
Respawning:
You take control of your child, but if you decide not to have one, you can take control of another players child. Either way, it lets you continue playing and keep the RP value of the game. To me, It's all about how realistic the game is. It helps me get involved if there are more real aspects to the game rather than cloning or simply explaining why there's suddenly this new guy/girl running around the camp.
Economics:
If you're really worried about instability in a totally player controlled market, simply look at WoW's Auction House System. It's the largest MMORPG in the world and the market is 100% PLAYER CONTROLLED!! The point is like real economics. You can charge whatever you want for a service or item, but weather people buy from you is dependent on your prices. They'll be thinking weather it's Worth the money or not. If so, they buy, if not, they go elsewhere. This keeps the business owners under control of the public. If they want the money, they need to keep everything at a reasonable price. Or else they won't sell squat.
I hope this helps you make those tough decisions. In my personal opinion. Try to keep everything as realistic as possible, to make it the best for Roleplaying.