**** wrote:Mistake? How can you say it is a mistake?
Whether you want it or not, Nevrax has been railroading you for one year through defined events. Players are more and more excited about what will happen and are asking the next plot.
I can say it is a mistake because I am a roleplayer of 20+ years experience and a professional RPG designer, because of direct experience, knowledge and understanding.
Linearity is the reason Adventure Books sell poorly, it is the number one reason for the failure of campaigns (GMs forcing players to play a certain way and using deus ex machina to do so).
This is why it has the term 'railroading' attached to it. The GM has a vision and you are not really guiding your own way through the world, you are just acting out the role assigned to you. This is thought of as a bad thing in almost all cases.
It is possible to railroad invisibly, to create the illusion of choice while still restricting people to moving in the general direction you want but this takes considerable skill.
Standard computer games are only capable of extremely basic tricks in terms of non-linear play. Of those games Arcanum, KOTOR, Fallout and Deus Ex are the only ones to really manage it successfuly and, even then, the choices are still fairly basic. In the 'RPG' games mentioned your choices are good/evil, light/dark, Magic/machines/good/evil and their effect on the overall story is minimal.
Standard computer games lack the ability to craft plots on the fly, to react to unexpected player actions (or to allow them) and this is why TTRPGs remain superior in many ways to any computer game - simply because of the freedom. This will remain the same until AI comes along and, even then, it'll likely have better things to do than run games for people.
MMORPGs exist somewhere between TTRPGs and computer RPGs. In a lot of ways they are like large scale LARPS (live action roleplay games) which I also have 10+ years experience in. They have many restrictions due to the nature of computer games but they also have a lot of freedom since they are constantly developing over time and the developers and GMs _should_ have the opportunity to react to player's desires and actions. Within individual events this may be reduced to a binary win/lose situation but over time the accumulated effect can be considerable.
**** wrote:In terms of Game Design, if you have the chance to once study Game Design, you'll see the error of many MMORPG is to let the players do whatever they want to. I won't explain you by writing a whole book on this topic, but to sum it up, the players ask for freedom and freedom looses them. Linearity in a game is the best way to please the players even if they yell they want freedom. It's not from me, you can ask Gamedesigners. And in MMORPG, if you let players do their own adventures, a lot of them will be very annoyed. You have to give them a story, an adventure by yourself.
Utterly and completely wrong. All RPGs basically feed on the thought one can have watching a movie, you see the hero do something stupid and you say to yourself "I would do it differently." In an RPG, you can. The widest freedom to act possible is the best hook you can have. Linearity is the death of roleplaying, particularly in an MMORPG where the expectations are different.
Ryzom Ring _will_ be letting people craft their own content and there lies the true hope or damnation of Ryzom depending on the quality control and the emerging modding community.
I _am_ a game designer, albeit in a related field - there is a ton that MMORPGs could learn from 30+ years of TTRPGs to get them out of the rut they're in.
To make TRULY interactive fiction you _cannot_ and _must_not_ tell a story, you absolutely must make the players, the _communuty_ (Important word) part of the process. They must make impact, they must leave footprints, they must craft their own legends.
Only in the broadest sense can you 'tell a story' and that is largely made up of events which may or may not be changed, defined, diverted or overcome by player efforts.
One such event in Ryzom terms could be the coming of Jena.
What if the Matis people COULD reject the Karavan religion, depose their king and stand against the Karavan? How much more interesting would that be?
We've been told we can make an impact in the next episode, I remain slightly skeptical as CRPGs are always disappointing on the depth of effect you can have, but we'll see.
**** wrote:Well, that's OOC view. You know that Nevrax won't make perma-death even if you yell everywhere that Kara/Kamis are both the ennemy.
Or, perhaps they have some use for us we can't envision, perhaps the resurrection has nothing _directly_ to do with either faction, perhaps they hope these people's minds can be changed.
**** wrote:You're wrong. See the last events in Pyr. There were perma-deads. It was on NPC side because OOCly speaking Nevrax don't want to kill a PC. Death exists and is still in Homins' hearts.
The announcements, the commandments of each race contradict you. Personally I find such permadeath in events counter to the lore as given but make the mental step in my head that the killer has somehow destroyed the nanoseed or used some manner of special weapon to excuse the lack.
**** wrote:On another side they are defenders of beauty, elegancy, and prefer diplomacy upon direct fight, contrary to the Fyros that are considered as brutal. Isn't it nice?
Heh heh, they consider THEMSELVES that way, but it isn't bourne out by the actions of the race in the lore. They are the violent expansionists. Fyros may be individually brutal and they may call themselves an Empire, but the lore doesn't bear them out as a brutal _society_.
**** wrote:You forgot Zoraïs enslaved Trykers and let them die in front of their city gates while kitins were attacking. Well, it *could* be a part of history Trykers learn by their parents.
The Matis enslaved the Tryker you'll find. If you can give me a website reference for the above it'd be appreciated. Needless to say, the Matis enslavement and invasion of the Tryker homelands makes their alliance with the Matis somewhat bewildering in the context of the lore. If those two can kiss and make up then ANYONE can - which supports the hominist perspective.
**** wrote:No. That's totally wrong. PvP is not necessarily open, full and free. Stop reducing PvP to ganking and cheating.
In the end that IS what it boils down to.
The strong killing the weak with no chance of failure due to level based systems.
Players going for the most effective character build for PvP (Cheating the system, Min-Maxing it is called in TTRPGs).
It encourages bad behaviour and causes OOC disruption in the community - the most important part of the game.
Your examples are idealistic. The honour system - expecting everyone to behave - doesn't work. Even with the limited PvP in game we have already seen recriminations in the forums, bad behaviour, ganking, threats, nastiness and an overabundance of one 'build' of character that has, up to this point, been most effective at PvP (and everything else).
You have had a few isolated good experiences with PvP. So have I but overall I still believe its effect to be negative.
My best example? For the greater part of a decade I was part of a large international LARP organisation called The Camarilla, running monthly, sometimes weekly, live-action roleplaying games set in the continuity of White Wolf's World of Darkness (old edition).
Basically, imagine a world-scale MMORPG played out in real life at scheduled meetings as well as over IRC, e-mail, phonecalls etc with full PvP (subject to clearance through GMs) and almost complete freedom within the ability of your character.
These games stem from TTRPG games so everyone involved is a roleplayer, the Storyteller series of games by and large encourages a more story and interaction style of play than - say - D&D as well, everyone involved was a roleplayer. Imagine such an ideal situation in an MMO!
What tore it apart so much that I eventually left? The fallout from PvP actions and the OOC politiking resulting from that. And that's in a theoretically 'ideal' situation!
It was worst in the game setting of the mileu that most encouraged the PvP action (Vampire), it was least bad in the games that discouraged PvP the most (Mage, Werewolf).
And the worst plots? The deus ex machina handed down from on high, unaffectable and unchanged no matter what you did. People making the same classic mistake, TELLING stories, not crafting them with people.
Here we don't have an ideal situation, not everyone is a roleplayer (even those who consider themselves to be!) but, for an MMORPG we have a great community, the BEST community of any MMORPG I've even seen or heard about. We're risking what, at the moment, is the killer asset of Ryzom on the dubious promise of PvP - something that many of us KNOW will have a deleterious effect on the community and the game.
**** wrote:If you believe Kamis and Karavan can accept that, you didn't understand the Lore IMHO. Basically without PvP, you can wipe K/K right now. I know that in MMORPG, players tend to gather to defend their world. But how sad would be the world if we would be all friends against the evil kitins. That smells big time and I wouldn't play.
It would strengthen the community enormously and make for a far more enjoyable experience overall. Indeed, that was what a great many people were mostly expecting when they joined Ryzom - the Kitin being the great threat. As I said before, nothing unites people and makes them tolerate each other like a common enemy.
**** wrote:But when a player wants to be THE hero, that mess people enjoyment. Otherwise there would be no problem to gank and to cheat
Seriously, if the game gives Joe Schmoe a feeling of recognition (through missions, event, whatever), the player won't search for glory by the sword. That's how the game rewards players that makes players want to be a hero or not. Well that's another topic.
Everyone is the hero of their own personal story, mess with that and you mess with their enjoyment of the game and they lose interest. Everyone must be given as engaging a story as possible. Not be belittled by a 15 year old powerleveller taking time off from script-attacking IRC rooms.
**** wrote:Whatever? Board games are PvP most of the time, even when they are RP. There are pen&paper RPGs where a player can play a traitor thus play against the other players. And there are MMORPG where PvP is the best ally of RP, like Ultima Online. I would be very pissed off if I couldn't play war between Vesper and Trinsic, if a ruffian could spit on my shoes without fearing my sword. Roleplaying tradition... please don't speak about traditions thank you...
Board games are limited and finite games that determine a winner and losers. They do not have the investment of time, energy and emotion that goes into an RPG nor do they have the attachment to characters that RPGs have. Getting upset because your boot went to jail in monopoly is silly, getting upset because your Warrior you've been playing since high school got crushed by a rockfall and killed isn't.
There ARE P&P games where you can play a traitor, well, one Paranoia. But in that that is the whole point of the game, it is a comedy, you get clones and it is not designed for sustained play.
Having traitors in the player party in other RPGs is always risky and, most often, done at the GMs behest with strict controls and oversight on what the GM's 'stooge' is doing. It is not the default style of play which is cooperative rather than competetive - something that is a major strength of TTRPGs.
People do exploit the lack of PvP response to act like nuggets, dancing naked in front of guides when they're trying to deliver lore information and so on, but I'd rather watch someone dancing naked than put up with random PvP going off everywhere.
Most people AREN'T ROLEPLAYERS. Even here where we live in a relative bliss of maturity and pro-RP. PvP is not going to help, really, honestly, truly, I mean it, I speak with the voice of authority and experience on this matter. Thank you
**** wrote:I totally agree. I said it before. Ryzom's level system isn't designed for PvP. That's why I take part to balances in order to lower the barriers. That's the problem for PvP in Ryzom. Not gankers and griefers. I understand your fears, but there's already PvP in Ryzom and I don't see any forum board fights about it like in badly designed MMORPG with full PvP.
Look a little harder.
And sorry about having to flop out the game designer/experience credentials at the start, but you sort of forced my hand there.
