GuestBloggerMania’10: A Player-Driven World

Today’s guest blogger, Oliver, hails not from the land of MMOs but of online strategy games.  Even so, Oliver has a thought about MMOs in his pocket, as well as his Pulitzer prize.  Let’s give him a warm welcome!

A Player-Driven World by Oliver

First off, hello! It’s an honor to step in for Syp and share my random MMO thoughts with you. Personally, I come from a background of strategy games (Civilization, Travian, etc), and have just started to notice an overlap between these and MMORPG’s. One aspect that a lot of MMO’s really fall short on, that hopefully OSG’s can help with, is presenting a player-driven world.

Most MMORPG’s present worlds in which thousands of epic heroes are running around completing treacherous quests, none of which seem to have any impact. No matter how many times I save Iverron in the Shadowglen, he somehow keeps getting bit by those vicious Webwood spiders and needs more antidote. No matter how many times I recover the Gilded Scroll in Korthos, Linus keeps locking it back up in the storehouse, and resetting all the traps as well. Oppositely, even though Captain Calhaan says the Charr are preparing to attack the Great Northern Wall, they never actually get around to it unless I show up.

Of course, a certain amount of this is necessary. No one would want to play a game where you approached a quest giver who shrugs “I had lost my family heirloom in an awesome dungeon instance, but that other guy just returned it to me.” On the other hand, how satisfying would it be if a guild got together and was able to finally slay the necromancer that was responsible for all the skeletons plaguing the local town and then BAM: no more skeletons, some new areas open up to all players, and all the NPC’s in town recognize you as a hero and give your guild a special discount on all items. Granted, the game might grow boring as quests are slowly “checked off”, so there would have to be a constant stream of new quests and content.

A cheaper way to do this of course is PVP, and PVP that actually affects the world. Global Agenda has done this very well with their Agency system, which pulls a lot from online strategy games. In Global Agenda, each agency (i.e. guild) controls part of the persistent game world. With the land they control Agencies can build weapons, shields, mounts, etc. Agencies battle each other and can conquer territories, and eventually take over and win the whole server. Square’s latest free-to-play MMORPG, Fantasy Earth Zero, uses a similar system with it’s “Realm vs Realm”. Guild Wars 2 is attempting to accomplish a player driven world using Dynamic Events, where “if a character tells you ogres are coming to destroy a house, they will really come and smash down the house if you don’t stop them!” I have high hopes for that game.

Having player-action affect the world, in whatever form, really takes the game in a whole new direction. You’re no longer going on raids just for loot or experience, but because completing the quest or defeating the other alliance on the battlefield actually matters. It’s something that also helps with game emersion, when your character is actually involved in the world instead of, essentially, a very busy observer. This type of player driven-world is something I really appreciate in the few MMO’s that utilize it, and something I hope to see more of in the future.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “GuestBloggerMania’10: A Player-Driven World

  1. evizaer July 10, 2010 / 8:30 am

    It’s funny that you used the Overload AvA Map in Global Agenda as the image for this post, because AvA in GA (especially on Overlord and other American zones) illustrates a “player-driven” system that has failed. Collusion is always rewarded much more than competition in a “winner-takes-all”-style system like AvA, so you’ll have situations like the map you have here where one faction controls everything that matters. All the good players collude in order to win. Since there’s no reward for second place, there’s no reason to compete when you can just join them and win.

  2. Noz July 10, 2010 / 9:08 am

    What you like about Global Agenda (so do I) sounds a lot like what Earthrise promised, just more MMO-like. They want to give players control over territory as well, and that without instances but spots on a global map.
    Also, have you heard of End of Nations? It will be an RTS game with a persistent world, sounds quite interesting:
    http://www.neoseeker.com/news/14220-e3-2010-rts-meets-mmo-in-end-of-nations/

  3. olivergodfreed July 10, 2010 / 8:00 pm

    Yeah, I saw a little bit of End of Nations at E3. It was right next to the Global Agenda booth. Definitely looking forward to it.

    That’s a good point about collusion. Obviously PvP games need systems in place to prevent everyone from just joining the winning team. Really that’s a game balance issue though, that doesn’t necessarily indicate a failure of a Player-Driven world in general.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s