In my opinion, not much. Many online RPGs out there have a focus on combat; that is to say that the whole point of the game is to either kill things or support the people who kill things by making killing instruments for their killing orgies -- which also happens to be a way of killing time in between the killing you do as a combat character (in other words, craftswork is your day job, killing is your hobby). Killing, killing, killing.
Killing.
The funny thing about the world today is that violence is decried, but when it comes to a tossup between sex and violence, people will instantly go ape about sex and completely forget about the violence. It's disturbing, really, how much killing plays into gaming these days.
Now, The Haven Seed does have killing. It must; a world does not function without killing. Violence is as necessary an instrument for survival as a kind word or a paycheque. But the fundamental difference between Haven and your average MMORPG (aside from Haven not being an MMORPG...) is that you can survive in the game without once raising a tool in anger. It's unlikely, since everyone gets in a fight or two in the real world, but for the most part, if you reside in a Lawfully Benevolent society (more on the twenty-five different ethical/behavioural spreads in another column), you will be free to live your life in relative happiness.
Thus arises the problem: intelligent gameplay. How is it possible to make non-combat professions require any semblance of forethought? With a combat system, you have a literal plethora of options. Several dozen weapons, many in progression in level and power, thousands of different moves, many hundreds of situational modifiers, and to top it all off, you have special factors to consider like ranged combat and magic!
My solution is twofold: to increase the strategy of non-combat professions by adding many possible techniques and customisable variables for crafting, and to decrease the strategy of combat by increasing the amount of automation that your character does.
Hopefully this works as intended...
You mean like...running a bank in a game? Who would want to do that?
| |
SuperAntx:
You'd be surprised. I've known of people who payed money to compile detailed spreadsheets of in-game resources. Everybody's fun is different. Jt: The thing is there's a paradigm (or maybe several) for in-game combat that is at least somewhat deep and satisfying AND already fairly embedded in gamer culture (HPs/health, armor, crowd control). Are you prepared to make a system as deep for every style of crafting? If so, I owe you several beers. | |
Monkey, having a few variables (ie HP, armor, MP, attack power, and magic power) doesn't mean your system is deep. It means you're slightly more complex then, say, BYOND dragon ball games, which feature single variable combat systems.
Things like crowd control and fancy spells flow from the basis of systems; they're embellishments. The basis for a smithing system can easily be boosted to a four variable system (skill in smithing, temperature of metal, difficulty of object to be made, quality of equipment, etc...). Thats not to say I'd want to play a game with a smithing system like that any more then I would a similarly simple minded combat system, but the popularity of killing things these days doesn't mean its necessarily easier to make interesting. | |
I've heard rumours that 'The Haven Seed' will be released around the time Duke Nukem Forever is released.
Is this true? If it is i'll probably end up not playing Duke Nukem. ;P Edit: To contribute: A soldier is an entropic character class whereas a craftsman is an neguentropic force in the world. A good life sim, I think, should have, for every oppertunity to anabolise the game world an opposite action to catabolise it. If a craftsman makes a house, have siege weapons and fire to burn houses down. If a blacksmith beats out swords for an army, let those swords shatter on the helms of their opponents which are similarly brained by a swift chop from an axe. Otherwise the craftsman will soon be out of work, the warrior will always have flesh to rend but what use is a swordsmith if swords can't die? What i'm trying to say is: It's important that there's always a need for new equipment and repair so crafting characters can always be assured of some work. You should not have to rely on an influx of new characters. | |
Thorg pretty much nailed it right there. Adding to the peer to peer repairs could be taken a step further by introducing farming.
Having a player plant crops on a farm then sell the goods on the market making items cheaper for the soldiers that shop there. If the enemy soldiers are burning down crops and killing farmers it would be much more costly to counter their moves. It would make for some tight teamwork between the players. =) | |
However, one problem with persistent games is that there is not the same disincentive to violence as in real life. In reality, violence can leave the actor injured or maimed and subject to punishment if the violence is non-sanctioned. You pick the wrong fight, you might end up dead. In most games, you just lose some "life" (which restores) unless you die. In which case, it still isn't that big of a deal, because you can always make a new character.
I do agree that emphasizing utility and cooperation is better than making one system less fun. Unlike most MMORPGs, it is much easier to make a living in most non-violent trades than in a violent one. However, you are then at risk from thieves and bullies. So you use some of that wealth to fund security (such as hiring your own brutes). Thus, a niche builds up for guards and the like. | |
The whole intent of Haven has been a "fantasy life simulator" first and a "roleplaying game" second. For instance, if you want to try to slay a dragon with anything less than a ballista, you'll probably make the dragon die of laughter. ;-)
As such, soldiers can only be supported by the economic portions of the game, which are actually quite substantial. A large portion of the character's generation goes into the "Assets" section which determines loans, stored funds, debts owed to you, land holdings, etc., etc. Haven is quite liable to be done only after Duke Nukem Forever IX is released. =P | |
Bdjewkes:
No, the fun and interest ins't inherent in combat. But the paradigms that people understand are already established. This CAN mean that the initial frustration SOME players feel when learning a new system and getting to the mini (or meta) game is bypassed (if done well). For smithing systems, gathering systems and even farming systems the paradigms, if not totally uninvented (which I agree is part of the attraction of designing them), not as disseminated into gaming culture as well as combat. Don't get me wrong, I think the emphasis on combat as a vehicle to fun, dramatic conflict and immersion are WAY overused. But that's my point: they're overused because the consensual mechanics are already there. I'm all for making crafting, managing and exploring systems just as widespread and I believe they can be just as fun (for some). Sid Meier's often used quote about how a good game let's characters make interesting choices has to be applied to these other systems. So, the question that I posed, put another way is how do you represent the process of, say, finding iron ore, smelting it, carbonizing it, folding it and then shaping it into a sword, in a way that is complex enough to present the would-be smith with interesting choices? Do you represent an anvil? Will you represent the heated steel in a palette of colors that the smith will come to associate with the approximate heat of the metal? Can you tie that into a mini game of the timing of when and how to douse the white hot steel? Can you place mouse hotpots on the heated blade to accurately reflect hammer strikes? Then a more important question: would anyone find that fun and engaging? I might. Thorg and SuperAntx: Again, I totally agree. The interdependence can be a very good way to build social bonds inside the game and create a content loop. Person A needs weapons because they've chosen the path of the soldier, person B sells weapons because they've chosen the life of the smith. But how do you connect person B back to depend on A? Introduce person C? Then what happens when person B drops out of the game or doesn't go online for monthes at a time? | |
Monkey:
Well yes, Person C would be a member of an apposing army that person A fights. Person A chops up person C and ends up damaging his equipment, maybe even destroying it and comes back to person B for repairs and re-arming. If person B were to drop out then person A would need to find a new smith to serve him. If there are none the soldier is likely to pay more for smith services which creates a job vacuum which sucks in budding smiths to take the desperate soldier's money. | |
A more balanced example, ala Dwarf Fortress (once again, thank you for the link, its taken over my life :P ) isn't necessarily centered around combat, but definately features it as an important gameplay element.
I can't wait to see/hear more about what you have cooking for Haven Seed, its definately one of my most anticipated BYOND projects at this point.