MMOG designers concerned with griefing and other antisocial activity by players have tried a variety of strategies to cope with such practices. One of the subtle things that has impressed me about World of Warcraft's endgame, besides the fact that it's relatively easy to get to that point, is that reputation alone at that stage exerts an enormous weight on players. A programming language and a programming paradigm can shape how we engineer a world. As with our natural languages perhaps there is a cognitive dimension, but without having to even reach that far it is safe to say that engineering practices establish approaches to problem-solving that bias solutions. These practices are hard to ignore in especially high-stakes, risk-adverse software development environments.
The other path is where the world changes as you climb the ladder in the world. So there you are, you pop-out of the hatch in the ceiling one day, and personal reputations count (better clean up your sloppy ways!), or more of an imposition, the crafter game you though you were in turns brutally PvP - and guess what, all new content is being used to extend the ladder vs. redecorating the lower levels: change or leave. A programming language and a programming paradigm can shape how we engineer a world.
An exchange between Timothy Burke and Mike Sellers deep in this thread suggests a question. Is there established over the course of play a "contract" between the player and the world that establishes the reasonable rate of change and the nature of change in their worlds? This question seems the more pressing for MMOGs over other game genres. Players can be considerably more invested in MMOG worlds as well the MMOG producers find themselves in long-term content commitments to their investments.
What would it feel like if with your very last hit it was not just the MOB that fell but a living breathing creature somewhere in the world died too?
At this time next week, the gaming masses--developers, publishers, journalists and fan boys--will descend upon the Los Angeles Convention Center to collectively have their hearing permanently damaged by the sound and fury of E3. We know a few things for sure: their will be announcements, sessions, unveilings, scantily clad women and large men guarding cordoned-off areas as if they housed ultra-cool partygoers sipping champagne (rather than nerds catching demos of Doom). Amidst the glitter, neon and decibles, what will matter? A programming language and a programming paradigm can shape how we engineer a world. As with our natural languages perhaps there is a cognitive dimension, but without having to even reach that far it is safe to say that engineering practices establish approaches to problem-solving that bias solutions. These practices are hard to ignore in especially high-stakes, risk-adverse software development environments.
Some highlights of this issue's content: I came across this transcript of "pirates" conversing with a GM over an anti-perching policy while reading through f13.net the other day: I thought it was brilliantly funny but I'd never really expect anyone besides hardcore players to see it as such. A programming language and a programming paradigm can shape how we engineer a world. As with our natural languages perhaps there is a cognitive dimension, but without having to even reach that far it is safe to say that engineering practices establish approaches to problem-solving that bias solutions. These practices are hard to ignore in especially high-stakes, risk-adverse software development environments. Thus our first biq question, can game software development as it is now conducted scale in the face of advances in hardware, appetite for content, and capped costs?
Humor about massively-multiplayer online games, or computer and video games in general, is notoriously an insider's art. Barely a month goes by without a pretentious independent artist or cartoonist taking a shot at the creators of PvP or Penny Arcade about the extent to which their strips require a knowledge of gaming or geek culture to be funny. My personal sounding board, aka my spouse who rigorously abstains from all knowledge of games and gaming, nevertheless finds both strips pretty amusing with some frequency.
Whether the context is PvP or PvE, that's an enormous intrinsic advantage. Stealth may also allow a player to "bypass content", e.g., to avoid battles that other players have to engage in, and therefore to farm resources and level faster. Anyway, the upshot of this is that people really, really don't like rogues now. At least they have some hope of running away if they see visible level 60s. Invisible enemies prowling around are a different matter. A programming language and a programming paradigm can shape how we engineer a world. As with our natural languages perhaps there is a cognitive dimension, but without having to even reach that far it is safe to say that engineering practices establish approaches to problem-solving that bias solutions.
Maybe the issue is the "larger" community. It's always easy to abstract and oversimplify at that level. But I know that on an individual level, there are real conversations and collaborations going on. I don't want this to turn into some rosy "it's better than we think" or "can't we all just get along" thing, but I do think that perhaps the situation is not as dire as it's hyped to be. But then again, I haven't gotte my evals back yet.
Maybe the issue is the "larger" community. It's always easy to abstract and oversimplify at that level. But I know that on an individual level, there are real conversations and collaborations going on. I don't want this to turn into some rosy "it's better than we think" or "can't we all just get along" thing, but I do think that perhaps the situation is not as dire as it's hyped to be. But then again, I haven't gotte my evals back yet.