Once Upon a Tank and a Time

In and around 1997 I played in a vast MMOG world, now only a brave shadow, a place of "magenta sunsets, vast lines of fortresses, and choreographed tank battles that took hours to resolve."  It never had more than a couple of hundred players.  I'm not exactly sure if it was my first graphical MMO (I was involved in UO somewhere about that time as well as online air sims) but it left the largest, earliest mark.   All the earlier video games, board games, pen and paper games,  were just preparation it seemed.  Enter the age of redemption.

It is amazing how much I've forgotten  - not the details of the game design, the people, the events, or the stories.  But of the inspiration...

Over on IFTF is discussion ("Is World of Warcraft the American Dream?") that again  resurrects that ancient idea, cliched yet profound.  Quoting Blizzard's community manager (Della Bitta):

"You literally can see a 68-year-old doctor arguing with a 13-year-old about some obscure gameplay issue, like how paladins should be nerfed,"

Said a million times, often more eloquently.  Yet these days, it doesn't seem stated enough.  Perhaps we're just too distracted.   Or maybe the nature of the worlds themselves have changed.  A long time ago a grandfather used to dungeon-master AD&D (pen-paper) games to a band of us.    Upon reflection, this game was a generational "leveler" - we were all equals.

So today, just to remember...

Once upon a time, there was to be a place, many places in fact where people got together and co-mingled their lives in many intricate and playful ways.  These were places where real world disability, age, race, income etc. etc. really didn't matter...

Comments

[Raph]

1.

The "gamier" we make the worlds, the less this will be true.

IMHO.

[Abalieno]

2.

I agree with Raph but you could also use some "gameish" parts to lure in every kind of players and then show to all of them how much "world" games are way more compelling, deep and, ultimately, fun.

My bet is that the exact same huge audience can appreciate the other type of game. When done right.

[Jim]

3.

One of the reasons players get the "brothers in arms" feeling from pen and paper RPG's is that players almost always depended on each other, and of course they've actually met in real life.

MMOG's today have to play to a different element - the soloist. This is almost out of necessity too, since making newbies dependent on their ability to form groups out of total strangers, most of whom will not be repeat partners, makes for a VERY steep beginning curve.

My personal experience is in MUDs. I've played most of the code bases and play styles. The muds that restricted the soloist in some way, like Achaea (might have heard of that one) made me wish I depended less on this group of strangers I might not even want as friends.

On the other hand, MUDs that allow full soloing leave me wanting something more... like membership in a group or organization. After all, if all you do is solo, you take the MMO out of MMOG.

The best answer I've seen is optional clans. The guilds of Achaea are, IMO, too restrictive, since you must play by their rules to have a class. Optional clans who have an ideal, a personality or reputation, or an RP purpose usually give players a place to form a group of comrades.

These clans don't force you to make friends to progress, but they do give you a group of like-minded people that you grow closer to slowly... like in real life. That's what I've found to be true.

My MUD experience has even worked in the reverse of your pen and paper one... I've made real-life friends from the people I met in optional clans. That's proof enough for me that it works.