Egosoft without desire for growth?

[esd]

Ah yes, but when they get to 10 are they gonna call it XX?

[The_Seeker]

Ah yes, but when they get to 10 are they gonna call it XX?

You're silly! Of course not! They'll just reuse the X-TENsion name.

[Nanook]

I have to agree on the multiplayer side of things. Even though CJB mentioned it all needs CASH to fund it in the first place, which is a valid point taken onboard. We should also remember that multiplayer option helps sell more copies of a game which means more revenue for Egosoft .

Some people played Freelancer and finished the single player game within 7-14 days, but still played it for years later because it had a great Multiplayer option.

That says a lot to me, also how many people here when they buy a game check to see if it can be played online. And that being part of your decission in buying it!

Your second paragraph says it all. Freelancer single-player was completed in a week or two. The only thing in X2 you might complete that fast is the mini plot. While you could do more in single player in Freelancer once the plot was complete, it was relatively pointless. So they added multiplayer to improve longevity.

But with X2, that crutch isn't needed, nor is it really desired. To add multiplayer to X2 would mean having to cut out a lot of what makes the game special. Only an MMO can hope to emulate what X2 does in single player mode. And probably not very well in its current incarnation. And the reasons for no current MMO version are very well detailed above.

Not all games need a multiplayer aspect. In fact, some games wouldn't be the same if multiplayer were added. Morrowind and X2 are two prime examples.

[pixel]

If Blizzard maintains 1.5M subsribers (and number will increase),

and then it will fall sharply as people a) end their initial one month subscription and decide they had enough, and b) people end their subscription after a couple of months and go onto something new.

Ignoring all that though, 15$ for one month access to the servers.

RIP-OFF in extremis.

[Lord_Darkstar]

Other then money, probably the main thing stomping them is this:
What element should XOU sacrifice from Xverse SP gameplay?

That's right. In an MMO environment, you cannot having PvP and empire building, and still allow for casual play.

I've played a lot of space sims, that allowed for empire building as well as player fighting. Nothing was more irritating then spending 3 weeks, building up an empire in an out of the way place or server, then have some griefing clan come through, and destroy it all while I was out at school or work.

So, do we remove fighting? No more capping, killing each other, killing aliens? That doesn't sound like a lot of fun, does it? That would provide the best Head to Head experience.

So that means??? No empires. That's right. No owning your own factory empire. You are limited to ships only, and they can only be active while you are signed in. You go off line, they go and park in the nearest "almost indestructable" facility nearby. That allows all players to keep their assets when they aren't around to defend them. Now, people are only at risk when they are online, and making themselves vulnerable (flying to start with).

Think it thru. It's the only way they can preserve any of the Xverse play experience. By making all factories owned by them, players can still build up an empire of trading, mining, and fighting ships. Players can form clans and guilds. You can still take jobs (heck, you can post your own jobs). All the Xverse... except for factory building.

Not quite the super experience of the Xverse. But it would allow for most of the flavor. And you'd get the fun of dealing with live people, rather then scripted plots or simple AI. Not a bad game... but not one I'd probably sink serious $$$ into. I'd rather play the SP version of the Xverse. But that's just me.

Just my thoughts on how you make a game that allows the casual gamer to enjoy an XOU while still allowing for the full flavor of the MORPORK experience.

[pjknibbs]

Er...surely you've highlighted the best possible answer to your own problem there. If factories are practically indestructible then there's no reason that a player WOULDN'T be able to own them, because they'd be safe while the player was offline! All you'd be removing from the game then is the ability to destroy factories--one on one space battles between players could still happen no problem.

[Apoch]

Actually I think there only needs to be a limit on gameplay if the game is locked into MMO conventions and standards, which is by no means necessary. Factories could be destructible (with a large amount of effort) with no problem if there are clearly defined legal channels for retribution. If an Argon player destroys another Argon player's factory, the Argon military (possibly a mixed group of NPCs and PCs who have chosen to play military characters) comes and smacks them around a bit. If an Argon player destroys a Pirate character's factory in pirate space, the Argon may pay him a tidy reward - but he'll have to look out for the wrath of a pirate clan who may have no trouble wiping him off the map.

IMHO it is "bad" for a game to solve problems by making things impossible. Destroying a factory is a momentous action and essentially an act of war; if the game handles it as such, I think it is perfectly possible to allow factory destruction without creating major gameplay problems. In real life, the sovereign nation of Columbia has the technological capacity to invade the United States - but they would never do it because the US military would massacre them. The possibility is there, but the reality of retribution is a more than effective deterrent. I think this same pattern could effectively be applied to acts of war in an MMO universe.

[pjknibbs]

That's fine, provided the various factions DO have equal capability. That would mean pirates would have to be organised enough to have cap ships, because otherwise a player with a cap ship could run rough-shod over them without a problem.

If you're saying that the players should be doing ALL of the balancing, then I strongly, strongly disagree. As soon as you start doing that you're immediately handing the game over to people who have no jobs or lives and who can play it 24/7, leaving the more casual player in a "sucks to be you" position.

[Apoch]

If you're saying that the players should be doing ALL of the balancing...

Oh, certainly not. What I tried to allude to (but not well enough) is that balancing should largely be controlled by automatic NPC (or GM) actions, but players who wish to can take up the role of characters who perform those actions at will. To extend the example I gave above, the Argon military (or pirate factions) would have sizable and considerable NPC force that would provide the deterrent factor. However, if a player wants to play as an Argon Navy pilot, for example, he has that option. If the player is offline when retaliatory force is needed, an NPC is sent in his stead.

That's fine, provided the various factions DO have equal capability. That would mean pirates would have to be organised enough to have cap ships, because otherwise a player with a cap ship could run rough-shod over them without a problem.

Absolutely - but only to a point. If every character or guild or faction is identical in power and resource to every other, then the game is boring. There should definitely be room for some inequality, but there should always be enough strong characters to protect the weak - whether they are PC, NPC, or GM.

For instance, if a guild of players manages to accumulate enough firepower to take on a portion of the Argon Navy, they should be allowed to have a degree of impunity. But if this gets out of hand, a larger entity (Profit Guild, massive Pirate clans, the Old Ones... basically anything convenient) should be available to put them back in their place. So really there is freedom and power that increases with one's personal might (or associative might within a guild/faction/etc.) but this is never allowed to be so totally overwhelming that the hardcore players can abuse the casual players.

[Some Strange Man]

GM huh?

Hmmm....

Taxes. - They become more oppressive as the leaders of the faction realise that things are going good, but by increasing the taxes, any players need to spend time tweaking things to keep their factories running as the leaders will tax goods in addition to money. Conversely, things will operate the opposite way when things are going bad, since the leaders realise that they need you on their side, so let you increase production and make more money to get good ships.

[Lord_Darkstar]

pjknibbs, I think it is the only way to maintain the Xverse overall flavor.

Players cannot build stations and they cannot destroy them. At least, not under *normal* game play situations. This one change means that the core economics stays however Ego sets it (leaving the trade layout however they want it). But that players can affect the Xverse (locally and globally) by creating artificial shortages by pirating, blockading, and hording.

Ego could add a new station whenever they choose, wherever they choose. Ego could award that ownership of said stations however they wanted. If it isn't a factory, then Ego could have minor "garage" and "showroom" stations that are given to players or even purchased for a bit of extra real world $$$. However, anytime you let players own stations, you'll get customers wanting to know why they cannot blow up stations (like you can in the SP versions of the Xverse). For non-economic related stations, destroying player owned stations wouldn't affect the economy of the XOU. So the trading game isn't harmed by the destruction of a player owned facility.

However, I think that to make it all work well, that no player ever ends up owning their own station, not directly. Guilds/Companies could, but not an individual player. If the player was the only active member of a particular guild, then that facility would effectively belong to him. But only until more people join up with that organization.

Now, why shouldn't players ever own a station? Because it would then be a possession, an attribute, of your character. This has serious repercussions, emotionally to the player, with possible legal and financial repercussions to Egosoft. Consider, it really ticks off the player to have their possessions destroyed, especially when they aren't playing the game. If you had to go away for a few days (due to a death in the family or business trips or whatever), how would you feel to coming back to find your hard built empire you've spent 6 months of yoru free time gone because some griefing dweebs used a recently publicized exploit to get a mega-armada and then waste you and your clan?

That's the key. Whatever you build in the Xverse, that's part of your possessions. You shouldn't be able to loose your possessions except when you are online. Indeed, there is a growing body in case law that whatever you own in a MORPORK is actually your legal property. Ultimately, that is going to evolve where you will never be able to be "robbed" or have your possesions "destroyed" in a persistant world game, because that would make the company financially and legally responsible for allowing it. Courts are more and more viewing virtual possesions the same as bought ring-tones, purchased songs, and any other data you "own" a personal copy of. Courts are now also recognizing that due to the rarity of some game based virtual possessions, such virtual possessions have significant real world value, and are punishing crimes involving such according to those views. There are real world criminals who have hacked game accounts so that they could trade or sell rare in-game items and once caught and prosecuted, recieved sentences for their various computer crimes as well as for burglary and grand larceny (the virtual items)! Think about that. Grand larceny, for stealing a rare in-game MORPORK item. A bit of data.

if EOU doesn't happen soon, it risks facing a business reality where an unhappy customer who had one of his factories destroyed sues them for allowing his property to be destroyed (for monetary recompanse and emotional damages), and that customer will have a good chance of winning the ruling. Especially if any real world money exchanges hands for similar items in their game world. IE, Egosoft allows players to buy and sell the ownership of factories on one of the virtual game item exchange, or they provide such a market themselves.

Sounds crazy, but it is true.

[Apoch]

Now, why shouldn't players ever own a station? Because it would then be a possession, an attribute, of your character. This has serious repercussions, emotionally to the player, with possible legal and financial repercussions to Egosoft. Consider, it really ticks off the player to have their possessions destroyed, especially when they aren't playing the game. If you had to go away for a few days (due to a death in the family or business trips or whatever), how would you feel to coming back to find your hard built empire you've spent 6 months of yoru free time gone because some griefing dweebs used a recently publicized exploit to get a mega-armada and then waste you and your clan?

... which is why you make it extremely difficult for people to destroy that kind of property, and include repercussions for anyone who manages it (both in-game and out-of-game). Any game where griefers and exploiters are not outright banned for their actions is a crappy game in any case, so I honestly see no real reason for concern about this. In any case there is nowhere near enough concern to warrant totally neutering and demolishing the gameplay.

Indeed, there is a growing body in case law that whatever you own in a MORPORK is actually your legal property.

In what country? I've never heard of such a preposterous and utterly backwards legal ruling. Cases where people are banned and/or legally punished for cloning, hacking, or otherwise exploiting rare items are related purely to electronic crime legislation and violation of terms of use contracts; they have absolutely nothing to do with make-believe items in a game.

if EOU doesn't happen soon, it risks facing a business reality where an unhappy customer who had one of his factories destroyed sues them for allowing his property to be destroyed (for monetary recompanse and emotional damages), and that customer will have a good chance of winning the ruling.

Again, in what country? I can't think of a single judge who would even hear such a ridiculously stupid case, let alone rule in favor of the plaintiff. That kind of utterly absurd lawsuit would be laughed out of court.

Sounds crazy, but it is true.

No, it's just crazy, and false

[giskard]

I agree with Apoch.

If the game handles it then it should work ok. I do believe articially created rules players make up are bad though, people disagree with them and break them and that leads to a majority of arguements on most online games.

If the game controls all the rules and leaves no room for people to invent accepted behavour patterns then everything should be fine.

Though i do believe a mmog will quickly become more factory than space using the X system we know to do. You will be able to walk across sector on factories eventually.

Giskard

[Lord_Darkstar]

Apoch, case law is now building in Korea, America, and Japan. Each has now sentenced people for stealing or destroying virtual property that was worth real world dollars. Anywhere a prosecutor or a citizen can show that something has real world value to a court, you will get punishments for stealing or destroying an item worth real world money. Remember, data is just another item in court. Like any other form of stored information (paper, tape, vinyl, etc). Cloning an item isn't viewed as stealing, as the original owner still has their assets. That's why every country has special rules against unlawful copying of legally protected/controlled information (music, programs, movies, etc).

If you allow players to destroy a base, then you will inevitably have the "Weed Monopoly" that wants to destroy all other Weed suppliers. And they will. If they need to have 100 M6s to destroy a single station, they'll be able to muster the firepower. If you allow players to own more then 1 ship, then it will take fewer players working together to kill a station. The fewer the needed players to do it, the more that will do it, causing more customers to be unhappy.

Couple it with the point Giskard points out, which I agree with and included in my formulation of how to keep the Xverse Online to retain the most flavor of the Xverse, and I believe you can see why Egosoft would have to maintain the stations! The stations are the underpinnings of the trade part of the game.

Note that cutting out ownership of stations does not neuter or destroy the Xverse gameplay. Not so long as you can still own your own fleet of ships. No player ownership of factories mean more players buying ships. Players will get over it quickly, if they can make money running goods.

The Xverse has the problem that "griefing" is a big part of its structure. Attacking ships (and stations) to kill things and plunder what's left over or dumped as they run, that's just part of its fun. PvP is the big point for most people wanting XO in the first place. XO is going to reward griefing, if it is going to stay true to the Xverse. Therefore, Ego will have to highly control things if they don't want the game to be primarily about PvP/griefing. That means, not have a couple of Titans cruising near TerraCorp Solar Plant 1 that will take a few shots at griefers after they've killed something, instead it will be a "no weapons work" zone.

To get the traders outside the "protected" zones, Ego will want to set up the profitable trade runs that cross or end outside of the no fire possible zones. This gives the griefing hawks something to raid. This should eventually lead to conveys and wolf packs looking for conveys to prey upon. All quite fun for players that like that type of action, but it will bore the crap out of simple traders that just want to make a better buck.

XO will need to allow players to own and control multiple ships. This will yield that empire building feeling. Trading, defense, offense. That sort of setting would retain the overall flavor of the SP Xverse. But it won't be Xverse. The online version will never yeild the same experience. I doubt that Ego will really be able to get it close. And if they don't get it close, then they won't get a significant cross-over to the XO.

Think about it. Think about all the posters that have stated they love to kill the Split or the Boron or just everyone, because they can. You'd be sharing a world with them. Consider that a large portion of players are primarily assassin, XI, and cap people. Your ship is as valuable as any other of their cap targets. Probably more so, because your ship won't stay a stock model for long. Ego will not be able to make all the "settled" zones/sectors weapon safe, as so much of the player base of SP Xverse would get mad that they cannot attack what they want (grief to you, fun for them).

Remember... builders hate griefers. But Xverse is significantly about griefing! Consider the artificiality that the game will have to take to provide for allowing both. I think sacrificing player ownership of stations yeilds the least disturbance. I welcome others suggestions and visions on how Ego may be able to move the SP Xverse experience into a MMO Xverse experience that retains all of the original flavor.

[The_Abyss]

Apoch, case law is now building in Korea, America, and Japan. Each has now sentenced people for stealing or destroying virtual property that was worth real world dollars. Anywhere a prosecutor or a citizen can show that something has real world value to a court, you will get punishments for stealing or destroying an item worth real world money. Remember, data is just another item in court. Like any other form of stored information (paper, tape, vinyl, etc). Cloning an item isn't viewed as stealing, as the original owner still has their assets. That's why every country has special rules against unlawful copying of legally protected/controlled information (music, programs, movies, etc).

I'll ignore the rest of the post to just look at the above.

This is rubbish.

Within the game, anything goes. You (and everyone else) plays the game according to it's restrictions and rules. If someone goes outside those to disadvantage a player, well, take them to court then and only then if it is really so important. Afterall, outside the game is where a player would have to take the data to make a real life profit from it.

The quoted statement really is nonsense. I have a UK based investment in real life. It has gone down - a loss. Who exactly do I prosecute? The investment manager? The companies he/she invested in? Their manufacturers? Their suppliers? The central bank for moving the borrowing rate? Their bankers? The traders that bought and sold the bonds of the central bank? The courier that delivered the bond certificates 5 minutes late? The driver that got in his way to make him late?

Please. Be serious.

[Drainy]

Sorry I think I know the stories you mean and you have got horribly confused.

As has been said, those were cases based on people hacking accounts, using jilted lovers login details etc. Those were the cases that you are thinking of.

How could someone sue for a player destroying their station?
"Well in the game I paid 100,000 credits for it so im sueing for £10,000 for mental torment and the month I wasted paying for my account to get that!"

[Penfold153]

please dont make X3 pay-per-month like the new warcraft or matrix games cos i just cant afford it spend all my keeping my computer up to scratch as it is, not every1 has money to tip down the drain.

and secordly most MMOG game operaters make there money from there advertisment on site not from the monthly fee if they did it would cost 5 times as much

penfold

[pjknibbs]

Sorry, that's nonsense. I pay £9 a month for World of Warcraft--there is absolutely no way any adverts on the WoW site (which there aren't anyway) could come close to making that sort of money. The days when you could get rich just by selling click-through time on Web adverts are LONG gone...

So, since you have to finance the continual operation of all the servers, maintenance on same, updates to the game to keep it fresh etc, you have to charge a monthly fee. They don't do this because they hate you and don't want you to play, they do it because they have to--game companies need to earn money to develop new games and keep their staff paid!

[DurAlvar]

Ahh... a legal debate...

First of all, as current law stands, one can only be sued if an item was stolen due to hacking ect, not just if something completely within the rules of the game resulted in loss of property.

However, there have been numerous cases in several places (most notably in america) where parents have tried to sue videogame companies because their children have offed themselves because of ingame losses, or because they've gone and shot someone after playing GTA... fortunately, I dont think any of these has been pulled all the way through court, so thats fairly safe.

However, criminal law is very often incredibly stupid, as laws are evolved from cases where one barrister has been far inferiour to their opposition. Afterall, a burgler has successfully sued for tripping up on an object left on the floor of a house he was breaking into... so anythings possible...

[esd]

Sorry, that's nonsense. I pay £9 a month for World of Warcraft--there is absolutely no way any adverts on the WoW site (which there aren't anyway) could come close to making that sort of money. The days when you could get rich just by selling click-through time on Web adverts are LONG gone...

So, since you have to finance the continual operation of all the servers, maintenance on same, updates to the game to keep it fresh etc, you have to charge a monthly fee. They don't do this because they hate you and don't want you to play, they do it because they have to--game companies need to earn money to develop new games and keep their staff paid!

Meh, as long as they don't charge for the client. Otherwise it's just ripping people off.