Chris
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 9:57:48 GMT -5
Post by Chris on Aug 10, 2006 9:57:48 GMT -5
The dynamic building ability sounds very cool, but what limits will be enforced? Since you will be able to build around trees, or just have a floating house, but can build anywhere, what would stop some one from building an extremely large building? Also, how large will the world be? The ability to build anywhere brings Ultima Online to mind, will the world end up looking similar to that (player houses in every open area of the world)?
|
|
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 10:47:11 GMT -5
Post by alexwoolery on Aug 10, 2006 10:47:11 GMT -5
I think the main reason for not including limits is that it would put more strain on the game software to calculate the forces in the house structure, and see what is possible.
I think certain limits could be enforced, without going on game physics, though. Maybe house size could be limited to reasonable sizes at first. When you gain political power in the game, the limit would go up in size, allowing a larger structure. But then, I'm not sure what would happen to your house if you lost that political power to someone else.
Another limit could be a sort of natural one, in that it takes lots of resources and labor to build a house, and perhaps a certain amount of extra labor to maintain it. Players who built really huge houses would have to spend a lot of time on it, and wouldn't have as much time for other aspects of the game.
|
|
Irish
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 11:11:54 GMT -5
Post by Irish on Aug 10, 2006 11:11:54 GMT -5
I think a natural barrier is pretty fitting with the rest of the game philosophy. If a player has the resources, time, and political clout to build, maintain, and protect a large dwelling: good for them. Rather than restrict building, however, it seems like a better option is to tweak resource handling and availability to nurture the desired sort of building environment. Later on in the development of the game (think when there are enough players to have a viable political system) restrictions such as "building codes" may also prove a natural, player-driver way to restrict building size.
|
|
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 11:36:44 GMT -5
Post by psg188 on Aug 10, 2006 11:36:44 GMT -5
but it would never be forced... if the players form a government and make building codes and someone breaks them, the guards (also players hired by the government) might impose a fine or even haul them off to jail... the players would form their own juries... i just love how this game has infinite possibilities.. where the players run everything... and also you have to watch where you build because creatures might attack you, or bandits might rob you if your not within city walls protected by guards... the one problem though is being a guard would be boring... how could you fix it so that the players run every task of the world, you'd have to make even the most menial task.. like patrolling a city, or guarding a prison.. seem fun so players want to fill that position..
|
|
Irish
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 11:46:55 GMT -5
Post by Irish on Aug 10, 2006 11:46:55 GMT -5
psg, you hit on what is quite possibly one of the biggest problems in the open world philosophy and is certainly something that, in time, will have to be addressed. One simplistic type of solution may simply be to make "boring" jobs (guard, shopkeep, etc) highly lucrative to the player. An hour of "boredom" yields days worth of money to enjoy. Another possible solution is the idea of limited NPCs which is further discussed in this thread: gavan.proboards106.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1155219621 Either way, "entirely player-driven" should be the goal; however, exceptions may need to be made in order to produce a viable game world.
|
|
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 11:56:46 GMT -5
Post by azgalor on Aug 10, 2006 11:56:46 GMT -5
Exactly! There are so many possibilties I didn't think of... Like a Baron hiring Serfs to guard his land in exchange for resources they could use to upgrade. It could become like a real world economy with jobs, executives, and such, with criminals facing prosecution by other players. Wouldn't it be interesting to have a group of players acting as guards fight a band of bandits trying to raid a castle would be really fun... especially if, as the faq says, the battles are skill based, then the Baron will have reason to hire the most skilled players for a premium wage. Wow... I can't wait!
|
|
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 12:24:05 GMT -5
Post by alexwoolery on Aug 10, 2006 12:24:05 GMT -5
Hmm. Player-driven building codes sound very cool, but that might take a lot of micromanagement and inspection. Perhaps if the government (your local lord or equivalent) set certain restrictions into the game, the game would alert players somehow if these were being violated. On the other hand, it might be fun to try and get away with violating said codes without anybody noticing.
It could be a while before rules like that develop, but in the meantime, it should be fairly easy to regulate by the time and resources necessary to put into a structure. Another consideration is that some people may try and destroy or vandalize your place while you're away, so the larger your structure is, the harder it will be to prevent or restore that. One thing that was suggested was the inclusion of "blueprints," so that if your house is modified or destroyed, it should be easier to restore it to how it was.
|
|
Irish
New Member
Posts: 22
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 12:35:19 GMT -5
Post by Irish on Aug 10, 2006 12:35:19 GMT -5
Should player-driven building codes ever be implemented I don't see them as needed extensive micromanagement due to the fact I imagine them as relatively rudimentary. For example, the entire code could might read "buildings may only reach 3 stories and occupy no more than 1,000 square feet" or something along those lines. I certainly wouldn't expect to see more "real-world-y" regulations or building restrictions. Simple rules can yield complex situations. Either way, it's a long ways off and applies more to an overall concept of player-driven government rather than any specific example.
First and foremost, the goal of any game should be fun. If it's not fun then there is no point in worrying about anything else. Vandalization is one of many things that should exist but should be limited (preferably in a natural way).
|
|
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 13:25:42 GMT -5
Post by azgalor on Aug 10, 2006 13:25:42 GMT -5
Well here is the stigma, though. The larger the house, the greater your wealth. Thusly, the higher the chance your house will be vandalized. In a player driven world like this, your choices are many. Do you keep your house smaller, and unassuming? Do you store your wealth elsewhere? If your house is that large, perhaps you could employ mercenaries?
Maybe you hide your house in a cave, maybe you don't even have a house. If your character remains substantial during logout, maybe you don't bother with a house, and switch to "squatting" (Sleeping in someone else's house, preferably while they are away". Building sanctions on size couldn't be implemented, though... What about a lord's castle, in which many players find employ? Or a particularly entrepreneurial player opts to create an inn... that inn grows in popularity, and expands indefinitely?
The chances for business are massive. Just imagine having to lodge in a particularly distant city, and paying a premium for a large inn, in which you stay in one of many rooms, and are likely to be less an individual target? The chances for business are amazing, without doubt. Just as the topic type states, the content is fully dynamic. Your own house may not be only your own.
|
|
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 15:59:17 GMT -5
Post by joshisscifi on Aug 10, 2006 15:59:17 GMT -5
From my experiences in other games where buildings are permitted, I can tell you that even if it takes a great deal of micro-management, there will still be PLENTY of people willing to do that in order to see their "dream" houses built in game. Although I enjoy fighting in games a great deal, even more important to me is the economic impact that one can have on a world. If we are able to build say, a 5 story house, then obviously it should take more resources than a 3 story house. It requires more "upkeep" and perhaps even extra costs associated with security systems, etc. Player created cities with regulations against attacking other players is feasible, as well as a taxation system, I will attempt to make a write-up of my proposals regarding these systems later tonight.
|
|
|
Limits?
Aug 10, 2006 17:02:04 GMT -5
Post by alexwoolery on Aug 10, 2006 17:02:04 GMT -5
I definitely think there will be taxation of a sort, from the land-less serfs all the way up to the Emperors (who don't pay taxes, but they're going to be busy!).
|
|