[MUD-Dev] Winnable MMO
archer at frmug.org
Thu Apr 3 12:03:10 New Zealand Daylight Time 2003
According to Edward Glowacki:
> The real question is, every time you start a new game, will it be
> sufficiently challenging and enjoyable for returning players who
> have essentially had all their property and skills taken from
> them? Do you need to add new areas, different maps, a different
> subset of skills, or anything else to make the next game as fresh
> as the previous one? Would such a game truly be a MMORPG, or
> would you end up with a RPG/FPS/RTS/whatever hybrid which might
> attract a different crowd?
There's also the other problem that is latent in a MMOG and that was
underlined in another reply about the Battletech MUD.
Namely different player schedules. If the game is "winnable", then,
by definition, the side (if there are sides) or the guild (if it's
PvE) who can invest the more time will end up ending the world for
all the other players who can't put 50h/week in the game.
After one of two iterations, the casual gamers will quickly come to
realise that they will never ever be able to win the game, as the
game ends before they can develop their
character/faction/base/fleet/whatever to a "good" point. Thus, the
"gimmick" of the game becomes lost on them.
That's when these people (who are, by definition, the most
profitable ones, as they pay their subscription but incur
low-moderate resource costs) start to leave the game.
Vincent Archer Email: archer at frmug.org
All men are mortal. Socrates was mortal. Therefore, all men are Socrates.
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
More information about the MUD-Dev