Multiplayer Interactive-Fiction Game-Design Blog


More thoughts on the strengths of text



Download 8.87 Mb.
Page58/151
Date02.02.2017
Size8.87 Mb.
#15199
1   ...   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   ...   151

More thoughts on the strengths of text


(Back to TOC)

15 November 2005

by Mike Rozak

Here are some more thoughts on the strengths of a text/verbal world, as opposed to a 3D eye-candy centric world:



  • Narration - In some ways, text/verbal systems are much better at narration than 3D (eye-candy laden) worlds because text narration is infinitely cheaper than 3D, and can be used to convey subtleties that are difficult in 3D. Narrating what characters do (and what they're thinking) is particularly powerful when words are used. Such narration can be used to help players empathise with NPCs and internalise the goals handed out by them.

  • Conversations - Likewise, conversations work well with text because it's cheaper; there's no lip sync, facial animation, gestures, voice recordings, etc. to worry about.

  • Wasted content and choices - Contemporary virtual worlds ensure that all content is ultimately accessible to all players. They almost never block off content to players based on the choices players make. The reason: Content (all that eye candy) is so expensive to produce that none of it is wasted. Text, on the other hand, is cheap to produce, which means that designers can allow players' decisions to block off content, providing yet another way that players can make choices. Personal NPCs, for example, aren't possible without wasted content.

  • Slow-paced and cameo sub-games - Text is lousy for high-speed adrenaline-packed sub-games. Its low production costs and flexibility make it ideal for slow-paced and cameo sub-games. Adventure game puzzles are one such sub-game.

Some other strengths keep reoccurring every time I reconsider the issue:

  • Niche markets - Because of the low cost, text worlds can target niche markets and communities.

  • Depth of physics - A natural-language command line provides (in many ways) more complex user input than a mouse. This extra/different input ability allows the underlying world physics to be more complicated... "Kick sand in the orc's eyes" is very difficult to convey with a mouse click, but easy to type or speak.

  • One author - Since text is cheap, worlds based on text can be produced by one author (or a small group of friends), resulting in a significantly different "feel" to the game than a large title, produced by committee.

  • User created content - Worlds with large amounts of eye candy require armies of skilled people to create content. While amateur users can run a 3D world editor and place monsters where they wish, they can't significantly change a world (and accompanying eye candy) that took hundreds of professionals to produce. Most players won't find a world with only minor changes worth playing since they've "been there, done that."

For previous articles, see Of mice and elephants and Small VW operators vs. large, and Text vs. graphics.

Avoiding elves, orcs, and hobbits


(Back to TOC)

15 November 2005

by Mike Rozak

If you were to invent a world, how could you break out of the stereotypical fantasy mold? Here's a brief survey of different aspects of worlds that might help.

Physics

When you create the physics of your world, you have four choices:



  • Real-world physics - Your world acts (as much as possible), like the real world. Most importantly: There is no magic.

  • Some magic (low-entropy worlds) - Magic (aka: unusual physics) exists, but it's not very common. For the most part, the world's inhabitants are still constrained by real-world physics, but occasionally something miraculous happens. In terms of science fiction, this means that warp drives have been invented, but they're too expensive for most people to use.

  • High magic (high-entropy worlds) - Magic is very common; wizards are everywhere. People use ever-glow spells instead of candles. They don't use horses or cars for transportation, but get from place to place on magic carpets. In science fiction settings, people have personal teleporters.

  • Dreamlike - Anything can and does happen.

"Some magic" and "High magic" seem to attract the most players. Real-world physics is probably too boring (for the players attracted to today's games) and dreamlike worlds are just too weird.

Races


The standard fantasy (and science fiction) game is based around humans. Sure, some of the humans have pointy ears (elves), others are ugly and mean (orcs), and some a short (hobbits). In the end, they're humans, just like Star Trek's Klingons (ugly and mean) and Romulans (pointy ears) are human.

Living in a homo-centric urbanised world, most people probably don't understand the point I'm trying to make. Therefore, I'll explain some non-human alternatives. (Most people still won't understand what I'm saying, but then again, you can't explain colour to someone who has been blind their whole life. Unless you've dealt with a number of different animal species, you can't quite understand how different species react differently and how their personalities differ from people's.)

If I take one step away from humans, I come up with two new types of races:


  • Humanoid animals - These are humans with animal heads, hands, and feet. They are basically human, although they wear flea collars and occasionally howl. Most CRPGs and MMORPGs include one humanoid animal race, often based on a large cat or canine.

  • Android - You guessed it; androids are humans that are made of synthetic materials. Again, their personality is largely human except for their stereotypical lack of emotions and desire to become human (Commander Data in Star Trek.) Androids also come with cool "features", like the ability to unscrew their arm and replace it with a special device, like a laser cannon.

Ultimately, humanoid animals and androids feel and play like humans. They have a head, two arms, two feet, and can talk. They are mass-market fare, and using them in a design is a safe option.

If you want to get more radical, you can include:



  • Animals - Unfortunately, most animals can't grab objects, can't talk, and aren't particularly intelligent. As soon as they can grab objects, talk, and become intelligent, most authors quickly turn them into humanoid animals.

    They also lose their non-human personality because most authors haven't ever worked with animals (other than a pet cat or dog), and most game players don't know the difference either. For example: Having worked with parrots, I can tell you that they have a very different personality than humans, including some emotional states that don't exactly correspond to human emotions. However, I don't think I could verbally pin down the differences; it's more of a, "I know it when I see it."

    As an example of non-personality differences: Animals don't always see in colour or stereo. Smell is very important, as well as other senses like ultrasound and magnetic field detection; humans are mostly incapable of understanding these other senses.


  • Werewolves, etc. - If you want an animal experience but don't want to completely alienate your players, allow them to be werewolves, human half the time and wolf the rest.

  • Aliens - I'm not talking about Star Trek or Star Wars aliens. Think of the "Puppeteers" from Larry Niven's Ringworld series; they have two snake-like heads on a round body with three legs. Aliens have many of the same playability problems as animals, except they're intelligent (probably more so than most humans) and may have radically different emotions. Babylon 5 also includes a few good non-human races.

  • Robots - Taking androids to the next level produces robots, which don't look human nor do they have aspirations to become human. They can upgrade body parts however and whenever they wish.

  • Genetic modification - If people could genetically modify themselves (or their offspring) to have any shape, personality, or intelligence, what would society be like? After a few generations, humans certainly wouldn't look or act "human".

I suspect that if you base your world on any of the above races you'll wind up with a very small market; In the 1980's I bought "Bunnies and Burrows", a pen-and-paper role-playing game based on Watership Down. One of my friends got so frustrated with the experience of role playing a rabbit (no hands, no intelligence) that he made his character go crazy and attack the rest of the party.

If you're really brave (and want practically no players), you could experiment with even more un-human races:



  • Plants - What exactly does a 100' sequoia do as a player character? Secret toxins in the soil to kill off termites? I really don't know.

  • Hive - What is it like to play an army of ants or a hive of bees? Real-time strategy games are based around a hive character. Humans don't find hive-minds that difficult to play. After all, over the last 10,000 years, humans have become more and more ant-like.

    If you really want to bend your mind, consider this: You have at least three semi-independent brains (left, right, and spinal cord), and your body is composed of billions of cells; You are already a hive.



  • Reincarnation - Your character is a series of lives.

  • Non-corporeal bodies - Why is it that spirits are almost always depicted as transparent humans? Glowing balls of light are (so to speak) more realistic. But, if a spirit is a glowing ball of light without any "face", doest it see 360 degrees around it? Does it see at all, or merely sense nearby objects?

Technology

Technology is what the inhabitants of the world can create. You basically have the following choices when it comes to technology:



  • None - The races run around naked and without tools (weapons, transport, etc.). Unfortunately, people find this level of primitiveness difficult because they are so used to tools that they can't imagine life without it... "What do you mean I can't pick up a bone and hit my enemy with it?"

  • Hunter/gatherer - Races have simple tools, such as stone axes, bags, and (maybe) bridles for beasts of burden. Modern people have a difficult time playing in such worlds... "What do you mean I can't make a wheel? It's the most obvious invention in the world."

  • Medieval - As far as technologies, medieval technology seems ideal for most players. One reason might be that people are most comfortable around medieval technology; If you show an average person how a medieval technology (such as making a pair of boots, or plowing a field) works, they will quickly understand it and be able to recreate it, albeit not as well as an expert. If you show the average person how a DVD player works, or even a digital watch, they will pretend to understand the principles. However, if you actually provide them with a VLSI design program and the tools to manufacture the DVD player or digital watch, they will show their ignorance and produce nothing.

  • Modern world - The modern world works as a setting, although players know too much about modern life. Quasi-medieval settings like World of Warcraft ignore many aspects of medieval life. Modern players fail to notice the omissions because they have no clue what it was like to live in the middle ages, or with medieval technology. Modern players know exactly what to expect from contemporary technology, and will become consciously or subconsciously annoyed by any shortcuts the developer takes. "What do you mean a level-50 pistol will cost me $50,000. In real life I can purchase the best pistol there is for only $5000, and it's only marginally more accurate than a $50 one."

  • Near futuristic - Think Star Trek. This setting is a definite possibility, but doesn't seem to be as popular as medieval technology. Perhaps it's too close to modern technology in some aspects; A medieval world can make powerful (magic) swords rare because they're enchanted by hard-to-find wizards, or made from hard-to find steel (iron being the norm). It's difficult to explain why laser pistols would be rare since millions would be manufactured at a factory.

  • Far futuristic - "Any technology that is sufficiently advanced appears to be magic"... If players don't understand the fundamental concepts behind digital watches, you can't easily explain to them that their character just died because a manufactured nanobot, injected by robotic gnat they barely saw, only took 15 seconds to find the nerve to their heart and severed it with a small thermonuclear explosion the size of a mustard seed.

Setting

The most common locations in virtual worlds are:



  • Earth-like terrain - Rolling hills, stunning mountains, waterfalls, trees, etc. Since most players dream of taking holidays on tropical islands, the more tropical the location, the better its feel. Tundra, antarctic glaciers, and volcanic lava flows are less common.

  • Inside buildings

  • Caves

Less common, but still acceptable are:

  • Extra-planetary terrain - Mars and the moon. The moons of Jupiter. Etc.

  • Inside vehicles (such as spaceships)

  • In an earth-like atmosphere - Flight simulators employ this space.

  • In space - Space simulators.

  • Under water

Some really bizarre ones are:

  • A series of planets, terrains, or vehicles connected via "gateways"

  • Inside other living creatures

  • Burrowing into the ground

  • In a virtual space with no connection to reality, populated by geometric shapes floating around, etc.

  • Time travel

  • High-dimensional space - 4 or more dimensions with hypercubes and whatnot.

  • Two-dimensional space (not just two dimensional representations of 3D space)

  • Non-Euclidean space, such as curved space or pockets.

  • Wandering around inside the topology of a computer

The more bizarre the location, the less that players will be able to empathise or even comprehend it, and the fewer players there'll be.

Cultures


The races of the world can have different political systems:

  • Nothing offensive - A political system so unobtrusive that it's invisible.

  • Anarchy

  • Bureaucracy

  • Democracy

  • Dictatorship

  • Empire

  • Extreme capitalism - Where corporations rule the country, like the East India Company.

  • Feudal

  • Theocracy

  • Tribal

Likewise, you could include:

  • Different religions, not just polytheism or monotheism.

  • Different cultural beliefs - Does one butter the top of one's piece of toast, or the bottom?

  • Different words for common objects.

  • Etc.

Most worlds limit themselves to "nothing offensive" and have no defined political system or culture. Basing a world on a theocracy might show players what it's like to live in Iran, but they wouldn't play for very long.

World events

What's happening in the segment of the world that the players occupy?


  • Colonisation

  • Invasion

  • Evacuation

  • Natural disaster

  • Peace

  • Revolution

  • War

  • Etc.

What players do and why they do it

What do players do in the world?



  • Be a detective

  • Combat

  • Compose music

  • Farm

  • Mine

  • Politics

  • Race vehicles

  • Role play

  • Social interaction with NPCs

  • Solve problems

  • Etc.

And why do they do it?

  • For the player's own self.

  • For the group.

  • For NPCs.

  • Etc.

The cliche...

A standard MMORPG or CRPG is based on a world with:



  • Some magic

  • Humans (with or without pointy ears)

  • Medieval or near-future technology

  • Earth-like terrain, in buildings, and in caves

  • No political system or culture is evident.

  • Most MMORPGs/CRPGs are in a state of war.

  • Players spend their time in hunting and gathering, for themselves and their guild.

Thus, The game with a thousand faces.

Download 8.87 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   ...   151




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page