Despite the persistence of most MMOs, there's one thing that the majority of them lack. I am, of course, speaking about consequences for your actions. Sure, you can kill some NPCs for experience and you yourself level up, but what about the world? The NPC just respawns and continues on his merry way, ready to become fodder for another adventurers weapons and skills. You gain some money and items. There's no real tangible effect on the world as a whole. What about exploring the truly excellent part of MMOs, the persistence? What about making a player's choice actually affect the game world?
Part of the current status quo comes from the fact that, when given anonymity, people turn into real jerks. They gank, they insult, they act like little children. If you let players kill important NPCs or creatures and they never respawn, you're going to end up with a lot of upset people. But this respawning of important characters almost makes the players do it more, because they know there is no repercussions for their actions. They will not be hunted by furious players and the world will not have changed because of their awful deeds.
The other side of this is to have no respawns. But they you have entire outposts of slaughtered people, no ability to do anything outside of player interaction, and a lot of people no longer playing your game. If every valuable NPC didn't respawn, you'd have a dead MMO, ruined by the jerks who love to do that sort of thing. This is only one of the two extremes, though. There is a middle ground.
EVE Online is one of the MMOs that sits on the middle ground because player choice and player consequences are balanced. In normal space, it plays much like a normal MMO. You can't really destroy factional stations or do incredibly destructive things. However, in the dangerous world of 0.0 space, stations are destroyed all the time in the wars between the different alliances. This works for EVE as it has a very heavily player-run economy, but it doesn't work very well for other MMOs as they do not have the player-run system that EVE has. So what's another choice?
The other form of middle ground is a minor change from the extreme of having constantly respawning NPCs, but this minor change can make a big difference. Make it so that new NPCs are generated from whatever the main faction city is and walk or travel to their location. Make it so that the names are procedurally generated, so when you go into town to buy potions and the potion-seller has a different name, you know that somebody took the time to eliminate him from the game world. This sort of persistence would greatly heighten the feeling of affecting the world and improve things overall.
In the end, much like choices themselves, it comes right down to personal preference. Whether you play somewhere that has towns wiped from the face of the game world or consistently respawning baddies, it's up to you to choose and decide whether you want the constantly shifting world or the static, familiar one. And no choice is wrong.
Each week James Murff writes Under The Hood, a deeper look at MMO game mechanics and how they affect players, games, and the industry
Reader Comments (4)
Posted: Jun 14th 2008 11:48AM (Unverified) said
oh, this was a good article. Thanks for sharing.
Posted: Jun 14th 2008 1:19PM Jeromai said
Another reason for status quo might be the desire to "see it all" and "do it all" on one character. If you're going to have a significant choice in-game that yields consequences that might restrict a character from certain options, then alt-making had better be supported for those people who need to compulsively experience it all.
Due to the massive nature of an MMO, we may never get a world where one individual can disrupt something significantly, since the number of online jerks dictate that we'll end up with a rapidly see-sawing world tipping towards death.
However, one interesting trend is to let big communities of players start to influence the gameworld and create a meta-storyline. Eve does it well. And AoC and WAR look to be leaning towards this direction in the future.
Due to the massive nature of an MMO, we may never get a world where one individual can disrupt something significantly, since the number of online jerks dictate that we'll end up with a rapidly see-sawing world tipping towards death.
However, one interesting trend is to let big communities of players start to influence the gameworld and create a meta-storyline. Eve does it well. And AoC and WAR look to be leaning towards this direction in the future.
Posted: Jun 14th 2008 1:48PM (Unverified) said
I have another solution to this.
Quotas.
The devs announce that orcs (or whatever) are beginning to overrun a certain zone, then post a number of orc mobs that have to be killed collectively by the players by the end of the month. If the players make the quota, the orc population in that zone lessens the next month and they get rewards (personal rewards for number of orcs they personally killed, and global rewards like new dungeons opening up, tougher bosses appearing.) If they fail, the orc population grows, and it's harder to reach quest goals, vendors are off line because their towns are overrun, etc.
When a zone is finally cleared, the orcs move into another zone, and after a couple months some new threat begins creeping into the first zone again. "Oh no! Now it's zombies!"
This requires a more hands-on approach to content by the devs, who will have to be updating spawn rates every month, but gives a satisfying illusion that players are making a difference in the world.
Quotas.
The devs announce that orcs (or whatever) are beginning to overrun a certain zone, then post a number of orc mobs that have to be killed collectively by the players by the end of the month. If the players make the quota, the orc population in that zone lessens the next month and they get rewards (personal rewards for number of orcs they personally killed, and global rewards like new dungeons opening up, tougher bosses appearing.) If they fail, the orc population grows, and it's harder to reach quest goals, vendors are off line because their towns are overrun, etc.
When a zone is finally cleared, the orcs move into another zone, and after a couple months some new threat begins creeping into the first zone again. "Oh no! Now it's zombies!"
This requires a more hands-on approach to content by the devs, who will have to be updating spawn rates every month, but gives a satisfying illusion that players are making a difference in the world.
Posted: Jun 22nd 2008 6:50PM Brendan Drain said
I really liked this article but I spotted a small mistake in it:
In EVE, stations aren't destructible. Player owned structures at moons are destructable but outposts (proper space stations) can only be captured.
In EVE, stations aren't destructible. Player owned structures at moons are destructable but outposts (proper space stations) can only be captured.
Featured Stories
The Summoner's Guidebook: Improving your game through spectator mode
Posted on May 24th 2012 11:00AM






