Yet another MORPG... (with different approach)

[Ethnar]

Ok, I guess some of you may actually remember my "wall of text" regarding my project back then, before the forum crash.

Well, here I come again.

To cut long story short: I have an idea for a multiplayer online role playing game. The game is meant to be non-combat oriented and put an interesting twist to the matters of character progress - requiring actually some intelligence from the player.
To those who wish to calm my enthusiasm: I'm programmer for few years already, I know such things are huge and take a lot of time, effort, pain and self-motivation. It's not as spontaneous as it may seem.

Thus, I came to this forum asking for some comments, for some feedback regarding the concept and each part of this game. Anything you can tell, regarding this concept, is valuable for me.
I'm not looking for coders nor graphics, it's not on that stage yet. This game is rather unique and for now it's not sure if this concept can be actually used to create a game, I simply don't know if it doesn't have any major flaws.

Now, different to what I wrote in previous incarnation of this topic, and following advice already given to me on this forum, I made the wiki describing the concept public. So anyone can visit it, anytime he likes and read anything he likes. I didn't give full access to visitors, just read-only, I'm kind of paranoid that some kind of bot will turn it into wow-gold advertising.

The link:
http://ethnar.eu.org/gee-wiki/doku.php

You can contact me here in this topic, via PM or e-mail (address provided on the wiki), every comment is welcome! What I'd appreciate most is some critical view on this idea: what points seem to invalid, unrealistic, possibly annoying for players etc.

Please, give me a hand with this one. Pretty please...

[Ethnar]

Heh, and here goes the same scenario as the last time. I really hoped I addressed problems that were brought here the last time (problems: wall of text, wiki being private)
I see quite a view count in this topic, I have been waiting for some time, but sadly for me, there's no feedback. Nothing at all.

And just like the last time, I'm simply asking for the reason for which this projects doesn't get slightest attention.
Why do you, dear reader, didn't consider an option to give some kind of reply? Is that because the idea is too repetitive? Or perhaps unrealistic? Or that you have seen many projects like this to fail? Or perhaps you are taking your time to read the whole wiki carefully (well... who am I kidding...)?
Maybe you just don't like me, don't know what to say or don't feel like sharing ideas that spring to your mind?

I kindly ask those reading this thread, please, tell me at least what's the reason for not responding to this topic. It can be trivial, it may be offensive, I don't mind. I just wish I could know.

[Livor]

I'm lazy and have little knowledge of game design.

[Ethnar]

I'm lazy and have little knowledge of game design.

Thank you! A cookie for you.

[zookeeper]

Why do you, dear reader, didn't consider an option to give some kind of reply? Is that because the idea is too repetitive? Or perhaps unrealistic? Or that you have seen many projects like this to fail?

Yes. If someone says that they're going to make a "multiplayer online role playing game", then experience tells me their chances of getting something playable and interesting is going to be about 5%.

[Ethnar]

Yes. If someone says that they're going to make a "multiplayer online role playing game", then experience tells me their chances of getting something playable and interesting is going to be about 5%.

Doh... you are right. Such statements won't make my project popular by any tiny bit. Sadly, all I can do would be to avoid naming the genre at all, because no matter how do I look at it, it's MORPG. However, it might be worth mentioning, that there are almost no MORPG (nor MMORPG if you ask me, they are just action games) out there to play.

Moreover, I'm not really sure what are the chances of getting it to a playable stage, but all I can say is that during last seven years, I spent lots of days thinking and tweaking the concept and my will to work on this game didn't get down by a tiny bit.

Perhaps I should also stress (I'll edit the first post) that I'm not looking for graphics/coders/musicians/masseur to help me with that project. All I really hope for is some feedback regarding the general concept of the game. Simply, if people would find it fun, and how they perceive some each part of this game.

Zookeeper, can I ask you to tell me if what I wrote here makes the chances it might be something interesting at least few percentages up? (as I mentioned, I don't really calculate chances that it will be playable one day)

[Turuk]

I will give you an honest answer, or best I can.

I did read through your wiki, and my initial reaction was a negative, especially given some of the text on the front page. You noted that you don't plan to finish the project, and by that you noted even make it playable in the next 2-5 years. That kind of specificity is realistic, honest, and I would say fair to the user on your part to assess your time and ability at completing the game. However, it's an instant buzz kill to any interest any one would have because most readers on this forum would probably only show interest/respond if they felt it would be in the 5% succession rate that zookeeper mentioned.

My second impression was that you are organized, you laid out your class, abilities, magic, etc. Hell you even talked about cheating. However, and this is no slight to you, as I do not doubt that you have put time into this project, most of what you outlined can be pulled from any standard RPG game, especially given the large examples that exist readily today. I am not claiming that yours will not work differently or in a way that I am not familiar with, but most players see a basic layout they are already familiar with (which I know is important, as it allows for a better learning curve).

So my final thought is that you have a great start, but I think that that is the stage that it is at, just a start, and so it is hard for people to do the following:

What I'd appreciate most is some critical view on this idea: what points seem to invalid, unrealistic, possibly annoying for players etc.

If you are still dealing in concepts in ideas, players know that can be bandied back and forth, all around, changed, modified, or adapted indefinitely (there are plenty of examples throughout this forum). I think that for the type of feedback you desire, you have to show a bit more forward progress, start to work in concretes to get a base, and then if you find out through player comments or critiques that something does not work a certain way, you can always work to change it.

I would use Wesnoth for an example. There is now a 1.4.6 stable version. It is still being refined, tweaked, tuned towards that unreachable perfection. So I think you should run with what you have, and then see what the players think of your progress.

My two cents, for better or worse. Apologies for the long post.

[Ethnar]

I will give you an honest answer, or best I can.

I did read through your wiki, and my initial reaction was a negative, especially given some of the text on the front page. You noted that you don't plan to finish the project, and by that you noted even make it playable in the next 2-5 years. That kind of specificity is realistic, honest, and I would say fair to the user on your part to assess your time and ability at completing the game. However, it's an instant buzz kill to any interest any one would have because most readers on this forum would probably only show interest/respond if they felt it would be in the 5% succession rate that zookeeper mentioned.

I realized that by all means, you are probably right. I should have pumped some energy in the "welcome" text. Guess it's rather bit too late for that, but nevertheless, you gave me some more comment that will actually help me despite that buzz kill. So...

My second impression was that you are organized, you laid out your class, abilities, magic, etc. Hell you even talked about cheating. However, and this is no slight to you, as I do not doubt that you have put time into this project, most of what you outlined can be pulled from any standard RPG game, especially given the large examples that exist readily today. I am not claiming that yours will not work differently or in a way that I am not familiar with, but most players see a basic layout they are already familiar with (which I know is important, as it allows for a better learning curve).

You are right again. Yet for a player as I am, having a game, medieval multiplayer online game, in which killing is only little, little part of it sounds really good. I also found some comments on few game forums that people strive and hunger for a game like. I really thought that this will actually add some value to this project in eyes of some players (that wasn't the purpose of reducing the combat element in the first place, only that I thought stressing this point really makes that difference). Guess it turned out a little bit different.

So my final thought is that you have a great start, but I think that that is the stage that it is at, just a start, and so it is hard for people to do the following:

What I'd appreciate most is some critical view on this idea: what points seem to invalid, unrealistic, possibly annoying for players etc.

If you are still dealing in concepts in ideas, players know that can be bandied back and forth, all around, changed, modified, or adapted indefinitely (there are plenty of examples throughout this forum). I think that for the type of feedback you desire, you have to show a bit more forward progress, start to work in concretes to get a base, and then if you find out through player comments or critiques that something does not work a certain way, you can always work to change it.

That's something really invaluable for me - stating clearly that the concept is too rough to actually ask widely for opinions. However, I wish to ask you if you could tell me what do you consider as "concretes". Would that be a concept written top to bottom (I know I lack quite a lot in this matter), few mock-up screen-shots, working graphic client, client-server architecture with basic functions (walking, collisions, talking) or working alpha (few skills, interactions)?

I would use Wesnoth for an example. There is now a 1.4.6 stable version. It is still being refined, tweaked, tuned towards that unreachable perfection. So I think you should run with what you have, and then see what the players think of your progress.

Polishing the game will surely take place, but with my concept there's a little issue because of which I can't really work the way Wesnoth was developed. In my game there's some mystery to be revealed (each new technology) and I can't really make that part of the code open source, nor allow repetitive testing. So I'll need something rather big and quite polished (I know there's no such thing as bug-free software excluding "Hello world") before it will be launched. Thus, it's quite risky business.

My two cents, for better or worse. Apologies for the long post.

That was really helpful. You have my thanks for the length of your post and the time you took to read the wiki. Much appreciated.

[zookeeper]

Yes. If someone says that they're going to make a "multiplayer online role playing game", then experience tells me their chances of getting something playable and interesting is going to be about 5%.

Doh... you are right. Such statements won't make my project popular by any tiny bit. Sadly, all I can do would be to avoid naming the genre at all, because no matter how do I look at it, it's MORPG. However, it might be worth mentioning, that there are almost no MORPG (nor MMORPG if you ask me, they are just action games) out there to play.

Moreover, I'm not really sure what are the chances of getting it to a playable stage, but all I can say is that during last seven years, I spent lots of days thinking and tweaking the concept and my will to work on this game didn't get down by a tiny bit.

Perhaps I should also stress (I'll edit the first post) that I'm not looking for graphics/coders/musicians/masseur to help me with that project. All I really hope for is some feedback regarding the general concept of the game. Simply, if people would find it fun, and how they perceive some each part of this game.

Zookeeper, can I ask you to tell me if what I wrote here makes the chances it might be something interesting at least few percentages up? (as I mentioned, I don't really calculate chances that it will be playable one day)

A bit.

The problem is that plans are cheap: pretty much anyone can write plans for a game like that (no offense), with elaborate designs for skills, character stats and what all cool stuff you'll be able to do in the game. Therefore, there's nothing especially interesting about plans.

Now, I'm not saying I couldn't be interested in mere plans or concepts, just that my interest would be rather limited to the really unique and fresh ideas. Your MMORPG idea doesn't sound particularly different from the average MMORPG - or at least I didn't get that impression, despite all that stuff about being able to build and mold the landscape and develop technology (there were no details on how exactly it'd actually work, either). It could be cool, but it's entirely up to the actual implementation.

[JW]

I have to agree...it sounded interesting, yet there is little to comment on. If everything is truly changable, i.e. cities can be razed and what not, how will you prevent the game from reverting to any other game where combat is the focus? Will diplomacy be the key factor in determining how cities are developed/destroyed?

Anyway, I like the ocncept of everything being chagable, and how skills degenerate over time, yet I'm not sure that in actuality such a system will work, at least the way you want it to, for the reason I state above.

I'd write more, but it'd just be repetition.

[Ethnar]

Zookeeper:

I hope it won't sound rude of me, but let me give you a link to a part of the wiki:
http://ethnar.eu.org/gee-wiki/doku.php? ... iscussion6
Please click "Expand" under "Character knowledge"/"Discussion".
I assume you haven't read it all (it's quite a bit of text, and such amount is not that pleasant to read) thus I bring the link. Is that a bit more precise description, something you felt that was missing?

JW, thanks for the comment.
The combat will never be main aspect, as combat doesn't bring enough food, doesn't provide a shelter and doesn't provide tools, weapons or armors - you won't find those in animals, while weapons and armors you will get early will need repairing and replacement at some point.
Razing a city will take time, a lot of time. When thinking about the project I know that it's very important to make destroying harder than building (not literally - walls can be used in destructive manner). So simply having a spy in hostile city may bring you huge benefit if he opens he gate at the right moment - if that city allows anyone to manipulate the gate, that is (doors, keys, traps, but on the other hand - underground tunnels, bribing carpenter, switching locks).

[Turuk]

I realized that by all means, you are probably right. I should have pumped some energy in the "welcome" text. Guess it's rather bit too late for that, but nevertheless, you gave me some more comment that will actually help me despite that buzz kill. So...

I would not say that it is a bit too late for that, but rather change the time frame to something a bit more vague or a bit more optimistic. It's more the choice of words as people see 5 years and think, well, I'll never remember this game in 5 years. Though I know a considerable amount of time is spent developing commercially made games, it sounds like a long time for something user driven. So maybe a change of wording, but just a thought.

You are right again. Yet for a player as I am, having a game, medieval multiplayer online game, in which killing is only little, little part of it sounds really good. I also found some comments on few game forums that people strive and hunger for a game like. I really thought that this will actually add some value to this project in eyes of some players (that wasn't the purpose of reducing the combat element in the first place, only that I thought stressing this point really makes that difference). Guess it turned out a little bit different.

I would not say that you failed to accomplish your purpose, I do think that people enjoy games where you spend just as much time working on trade skills or interacting as you do killing a few nasty goblins. I used to play a rather basic 2D game where players were required to learn and use trade skills or barter them from other players in order to make/maintain everything from houses and weapons to food and magic. I would not stray from your idea. You will always find people who want to play a certain type of game.

That's something really invaluable for me - stating clearly that the concept is too rough to actually ask widely for opinions. However, I wish to ask you if you could tell me what do you consider as "concretes". Would that be a concept written top to bottom (I know I lack quite a lot in this matter), few mock-up screen-shots, working graphic client, client-server architecture with basic functions (walking, collisions, talking) or working alpha (few skills, interactions)?

Hmm. This is a tough one because concrete means different aspects to different people. I think zookeeper said it best.

It could be cool, but it's entirely up to the actual implementation.

The concept doesn't have to be fully outlined (though this would help), but you need to give some sort of client for people to see how the skills work, how the building/razing actually functions, the manipulation of locks, the diplomacy, the degeneration, something for people to get an idea of what you are working towards. I also understand that that takes considerable time, and you are really going to have to find some way to sell people your idea, to convince them that your game is worth keeping track of, keeping an eye on, that it will turn into something.

Polishing the game will surely take place, but with my concept there's a little issue because of which I can't really work the way Wesnoth was developed. In my game there's some mystery to be revealed (each new technology) and I can't really make that part of the code open source, nor allow repetitive testing. So I'll need something rather big and quite polished (I know there's no such thing as bug-free software excluding "Hello world") before it will be launched. Thus, it's quite risky business.

I can understand what you are working towards, and the difference, so it sounds like you will need a core group of designers/testers/friends that will be willing to help you work through problems, test everything out, evaluate the aspects of the game. So your two biggest hurdles are really having enough implemented so that people can make constructive comments, and then finding people who would stick around for the long run.

[Viliam]

Why do you, dear reader, didn't consider an option to give some kind of reply? Is that because the idea is too repetitive?

When I read your text, I was not able to answer "why should this game be special, compared with other online RPGs (which I do not play anyway)?". If you know the answer, and if you can tell it in one sentence, you should probably make it the first sentence of the article.

One of the first sentences starts with "The game is meant to be non-combat oriented...", and then in the wiki you write things like this:

Strength - It’s very important statistic in melee combat (damage/blocking)
Dexterity - Helpful statistic for melee combatant (speed and precision); Obligatory for distance fighting
Skills list - Combat - Blade (one-handed, two-handed and dual wield); Axe (one-handed, two-handed and dual wield); Blunt (one-handed, two-handed and dual wield); Flail (one-handed, two-handed and dual wield); Polearm; Shield; Bow; Crossbow; Firearm; Dodge

No sir, you did not convince me. At best I am willing to believe that this game will be "combat + something else". That's not exceptional. For me, this is "just another online RPG". It does not mean it would be bad, if someone likes the genre (but I personally do not). But it absolutely does not inspire my curiosity, so I see no reason why should I discuss it, or even try to help you. -- I am sorry for being harsh, but this is very honestly what I felt reading this text.


If I tried to say something constructive, it would be:

1) try looking for help somewhere else. Are the some forums for online RPG fans enjoying endless discussions about these games? That could be the right place. You could even find testers and players there.

2) do something more original. For example design a game where there is absolutely no combat, and therefore no weapons, not combat skills, etc. You can only do business, solve quests, maybe solve automatically generated puzzles. You would not be the first one to do this, but you would at least have less competition.

3) do something else. Normally I would not say that, because I hate to discourage people, but if you doubt your own abilities to do the game in the following years, then perhaps you should try doing something else (something more simple and shorter?) where you feel more skilled and motivated. And you could return to this idea later; or maybe never.

[Ethnar]

Why do you, dear reader, didn't consider an option to give some kind of reply? Is that because the idea is too repetitive?

When I read your text, I was not able to answer "why should this game be special, compared with other online RPGs (which I do not play anyway)?". If you know the answer, and if you can tell it in one sentence, you should probably make it the first sentence of the article.

Thanks for some additional feedback, there's never enough really.
Your point made me think intensively if this concept actually produces something special. I can feel it, but it's hard to lay it out, and simply because it's hard - I should reevaluate the uniqueness of this concept.

One of the first sentences starts with "The game is meant to be non-combat oriented...", and then in the wiki you write things like this:

Strength - It’s very important statistic in melee combat (damage/blocking)
Dexterity - Helpful statistic for melee combatant (speed and precision); Obligatory for distance fighting
Skills list - Combat - Blade (one-handed, two-handed and dual wield); Axe (one-handed, two-handed and dual wield); Blunt (one-handed, two-handed and dual wield); Flail (one-handed, two-handed and dual wield); Polearm; Shield; Bow; Crossbow; Firearm; Dodge

No sir, you did not convince me. At best I am willing to believe that this game will be "combat + something else". That's not exceptional. For me, this is "just another online RPG". It does not mean it would be bad, if someone likes the genre (but I personally do not). But it absolutely does not inspire my curiosity, so I see no reason why should I discuss it, or even try to help you.

I can bet that you do know what RPG stands for and that you have at least vague (perhaps more than vague) picture of how classic P'n'P RPG game looks like.
Let me just ask you this: is there any multiplayer roleplaying game out there? WoW definitely isn't one, nor D'n'D online, nor Warhammer Online, Age of Concan, etc.
Now does the concept I brought here and what you can read about it (many crafting skills, hunger, thirst and fear, art, dynamic world, unknown world - items, animals, characters) give it at slight hope for it to be multiplayer roleplaying game? Honestly asking for yuor personal views.

I am sorry for being harsh, but this is very honestly what I felt reading this text.

I must admit that reading this made my throat a bit sore for a moment, but I'll live with that. Thanks for being honest on this one.

If I tried to say something constructive, it would be: (...)

1) I cannot find a nest of RPG fans who like computer games. There are loads of people who enjoy so called MMORPGs, but that's not the sort of people I'm looking for. They just like their swords, and the bigger the better... If you could actually point me to a forum (or another instance of mass-communication interface) where I can find intelligent people who are interesting in fantasy games, and additionally they enjoy roleplaying, then what's left is to hope I'd get a chance to buy you a beer someday.

2) This game, if made properly will be original enough to be proud of. And I always enjoy medieval atmosphere (perhaps stripped off of church ) and fantasy genre, and there you can't drop the idea of a fight without loosing some essence. Or am I mistaken?
As for competition part: I'm not really interesting in making something really popular either. I know that with the kind of game I'm hoping to do, I won't get loads of players (100 players online at peak times?). And I think it'll be fine enough.

3) I won't. I already did few games and mini-games and some serious software (that's my current job anyway) - there's not that much in it, really. Another reason is that in fact, I love this idea and I'm passionate about it. On a side note - I know few (but still) people with almost the same passion so I know I'm not alone here.
As for skills: it's more of a time-management problem, not the actual skills. At least not by now - back when I was 14 it was definitely too big for me to take on this project and I was also aware of it back then.

[zookeeper]

I bet most professional game designers would agree that making an interesting non-combat oriented MMORPG is one really tough game design challenge. At least so that it would attract and keep enough gamers to keep things rolling in-world. How does the economy work? How does player-vs-player combat work? How do new players survive in the midst of old and more powerful player characters? If there's technological development, what happens when you reach the max? And so on. I don't seem to see much in your plan that would show that you have solutions to all kinds of major issues that need solving when creating such a game.

One thing you could do is to write a couple of paragraphs describing a typical gaming session. What might a typical player do and achieve in an hour or two of play, for instance?