I have always loved online games, even as far back as the days of the Amiga computer I would link them up play socially rather than on my own. Then there was the era of the PC based LAN party, before eventually we arrived at the world of MMO's that we have today. I was hooked right from the start.

Lately I have started coding 3D games stuff again, just experimental prototypes and having fun in my spare time, but it has got to thinking: Perhaps it is time that I finally put together an MMO of my own. Nothing too grand, nothing bigger than the CTRA certainly.

So I got to thinking, what do I want to see in an online game - and I realised that was the wrong question, or rather, I was asking the wrong person, I should be asking gamers...

As gamers, who already play at least 1 online racing game, what would you want to see in an online game?.

If you play other online games then I am curious to know what you like and dislike about others games, particularly those of you who have played fantasy adventure games?

Thank you.

Massive events, with more than 80 players online at the same time

Being able to play cleanly,. without any lag, this is why people like LFS so much, you can race against other players and not be jumping all over the place, ** who cares about tyre phsyics **

Quote from Hahmo :

Massive events, with more than 80 players online at the same time

As in guild raiding? I love raids too.

I think most games that have raiding are essentially two different games, and back when Everquest was quite new I was massively in to the raiding.

But in newer games I can never be bothered to get hardcore enough to get up to raiding level or to maintain the time commitment necessary to join a big raiding guild. Do you have any thoughts on that yourself?

Cant really give an opinion on that one since I haven't played games like that myself a lot, but I know what raids are and they do sound really interesting.

But when it comes to games like LFS, by events I mean races that would cover atleast 80 cars on track, but then again this needs longer and wider tracks and better server support etc.

Quote from Becky Rose :

As in guild raiding? I love raids too.

I think most games that have raiding are essentially two different games, and back when Everquest was quite new I was massively in to the raiding.

But in newer games I can never be bothered to get hardcore enough to get up to raiding level or to maintain the time commitment necessary to join a big raiding guild. Do you have any thoughts on that yourself?

This is what I always liked about CTRA - the fact that you could always play a populated race without having to devote 18 hours a day to playing.

I think that's what I personally would like to see in an online game - the chance to quickly pick it up and feel involved in something with a good number of players (as opposed to just playing as if it's a single player game where everyone happens to be able to see what other players are up to) without having it become a second job.

A mechanical boxing glove attachment.

what mmo type would you be doing?

1) dont you dare put grind into it
2) the thing that worked best in jumpgate to up the fun level was messing up patches right before the weekend to the point where they had to reset the whole server to the state before the patch and announced that the weekend would be anarchy weekend where everything you did was going to be without consequence leading to massive massive wars

Quote from Hahmo :

Massive events, with more than 80 players online at the same time

Arma would be unbelieveable with this.... or LFS in a BIG track

Regnum Online would be my ideal for gameplay, lot of grinding and not much to do other than battles and pvp though. Often hundreds in battles, runs smooth, where a lot of network issues to handle all that but more or less fixed now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCHAzESsqfM
Horus, Alsius BTW

What makes it great? Meeting new people, making friends, having fun.

Mastering in game skills, being told a good story.

As to the specifics, well thats a matter of personal taste.

-other players

Quote from Mikjen :

Being able to play cleanly,. without any lag

This is one that in so many ways is hard to control. I can write the code as best as I am able (which should be sufficient), I can throw 1 server machine at the project (more would require me to make money out of the game), and then I would have to hope the game did not grow fast than its ability to host the players!

Quote from Hahmo :

but I know what raids are and they do sound really interesting.

I have to say in all the MMO I have played raiding is by far the most fun in terms of gameplay - but I am not sure how you would open that up to public players who don't know each other, raiding is about team work and having players fail a public raid would lead to a server full of testosterone - but I already have been running with the idea of a game which basically brings the raiding to the front. I shall think on that some more and see if I can come up with a viable design.

Quote :

But when it comes to games like LFS, by events I mean races that would cover atleast 80 cars on track, but then again this needs longer and wider tracks and better server support etc.

You do realise if you make the track bigger then you reduce the car/track density back down again, so all you would be doing is increasing the chance of stumbling across a wreck.

Quote from Crashgate3 :

This is what I always liked about CTRA - the fact that you could always play a populated race without having to devote 18 hours a day to playing.

I think the pickup and play approach is important too, games have to serve an ever more casual audience these days.

Quote :

I think that's what I personally would like to see in an online game - the chance to quickly pick it up and feel involved in something with a good number of players (as opposed to just playing as if it's a single player game where everyone happens to be able to see what other players are up to) without having it become a second job.

I know exactly what you mean!

Quote from Mustangman759 :

what mmo type would you be doing?

I am about to design my next project, I am thinking of an MMO - but I havnt put pen to paper yet - I decided to do some research as to what players feel about online games first.

Quote from Shotglass :

1) dont you dare put grind into it

Hah. I think the reason grind gets put in to these games is finding a way to accommodate people who invest too much time for the amount of content you can reasonably create. There is only so much story you can tell. I agree that I hate grind, and I very much hate the fact that an element of grind sits in front of the more fun aspects of the games - but how should a game go about accommodating players with different time commitments in to the game?

Quote from senn :

being told a good story.

Is that as important in a multiplayer game? I recently tried the new Star Wars MMO from Bioware/EA and the plot lines where very good (the gameplay mechanics where rubbish though). The cinematics where very good. They where numerous, professionally and cinematically produced with expensive technqiues. But when I played with other players I felt that I should skip past them as fast as possible so as not to delay our combined progress. Everyone else just ran through them too, in a completely not interested way.

I have found in most games that the story just gets in my way, I dont want to read reams of text that was set to paper by a friggin' game dev and is about as good a read as The Sun newspaper - oh and if they try to be clever in their writing, oh it drives me nuts... and in a multiplayer game that time spent reading either wouldnt get done, or would cause a 20 minute encounter to potentially take much longer.

What makes online gaming great? The competitiveness and knowing the other player is real.

Thats why I love online racing games more than other games. You can compete head to head, wheel to wheel against a real person and personally I feel much more excitement and pressure in racing games than for example in shooting games. When Im having a tight, close race in lfs/iracing/whatever, absolutely nothing could beat it. When I play battlefield, it just doesnt feel as exciting.

What would I want to see in an online racing game?

Dunnolol, lfs styled online racing game is pretty perfect imo. Simple but still so good.

Perhaps a random question IMO. The answer to this question does not work on all types of games I think.

What makes a great online game for me:

• Graphics
  
• Physics
  
• Amount of players
  
• Innovative gameplay
  
• If not above, it just has to work good (think of BF3)
  
• Good netcode
  
• No cheaters
  

What makes multiplayer suck is people. It's a shame because it should be fun, but it isn't, because of all the ****ing people being their petty little pathetic selves all the time.

Also 'experience' has ruined multiplayer games by punishing anybody who doesn't want to live and breathe a computer game. Where's the logic in a game designed to pit player against player when they give one of the players an advantage? If anything they should be crippling the people who play all the time to offset their vast experience and keep the competition closer. Of course that mechanic exists to make money from subscription-based games and it clearly works very well for the studios, but it's shit for gamers.

My 2p.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

What makes multiplayer suck is people. It's a shame because it should be fun, but it isn't, because of all the ****ing people being their petty little pathetic selves all the time.

Also 'experience' has ruined multiplayer games by punishing anybody who doesn't want to live and breathe a computer game. Where's the logic in a game designed to pit player against player when they give one of the players an advantage? If anything they should be crippling the people who play all the time to offset their vast experience and keep the competition closer. Of course that mechanic exists to make money from subscription-based games and it clearly works very well for the studios, but it's shit for gamers.

My 2p.

Karl Marx never made video games, but if he did they'd be the shittest in the world

If a player is not rewarded for the extra time and effort they put into something, then there really isn't any point in them spending more than a few hours on it. It would render the point of gaming useless.

Having a measurable improvement in something is what makes people get addicted to something. It's not fun getting good at something only to be punished for it.

I'd like an easy way to play with my friends. If I recall correctly, iRacing makes it difficult for you to have a race with just your buddies, for example.

Quote from Intrepid :

If a player is not rewarded for the extra time and effort they put into something, then there really isn't any point in them spending more than a few hours on it. It would render the point of gaming useless.

Call me old fashioned but I remember when people played games for fun. Remember fun? Fun was great. Now we've got progress bars and gamers are more concerned with using their time efficiently than having fun. Ridiculous.

Quote from Bose321 :

• Graphics
  
• Physics
  
• Amount of players
  
• Innovative gameplay
  
• If not above, it just has to work good (think of BF3)
  
• Good netcode
  
• No cheaters
  

Graphics: Well graphically I cannot create an AAA game, firstly I lack the specific experience at coding something called shaders. Whilst I will try to use some in this project the area is new to me so I wont be of the standard of the big budget games. Also art assets are expensive, a high quality art asset can cost in the region of £1000 or so just for 1 model. I am in a cheaper end of the market then that! But I will do my best
Amount of Players: Game architecture has a lot to do with this, as well as the eventual success of the game. I have an idea in mind that will pitch 80-120 players together in a co-operative way, but I cannot guarantee the game will attract that many players. Making the content scale to different numbers of players is difficult to do well, so I will likely have "AI" to fill out the ranks during low player volumes.
Good Netcode: I think I covered this earlier really, but I'll do my best. But ultimately if a game becomes too popular for my ability to fund the server infrastructure then this will suffer. The result might be a waiting queue to join, just to keep things smooth for all the players in the game already.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

What makes multiplayer suck is people. It's a shame because it should be fun, but it isn't, because of all the ****ing people being their petty little pathetic selves all the time.

Case in point right there :P hehe. I think to a large extent this is uncontrollable, but frustrations can be directed... eg: An automated system that lets you vent your frustrations at a player and that is relatively immune to abuse. But at the end of the day people will be people, and to a large extent there is no way to fund staff for monitoring online behaviour except in the most extreme of cases.

Quote :

Also 'experience' has ruined multiplayer games by punishing anybody who doesn't want to live and breathe a computer game. Where's the logic in a game designed to pit player against player when they give one of the players an advantage?

The first point here I completely agree with and sympathise with. I still love online games, but it's been a good few years since I was "at the top" of one simply because I have a life ... some of which I appear to be about to dedicate to making an online game ... oh the irony!

The latter part is more difficult, because whilst the concept of what you say is completely right, the practice isn't. Players do need rewarding for their achievements, but I think that is a critical choice of word, "achievements" not "effort". Success, and not time invested. Would you agree with that?

Quote from Intrepid :

Karl Marx never made video games, but if he did they'd be the shittest in the world

LOL

Quote from hrtburnout :

I'd like an easy way to play with my friends. If I recall correctly, iRacing makes it difficult for you to have a race with just your buddies, for example.

A very valid point, and one I will be sure to address. I think a lot of the problem with online games comes from

• Friends on different servers who you cannot play with at all
  
• Friends of a different "level" where the game experience is negatively effected by playing together.
  

I will try to address this in my design.

Thank you for all of this feedback, it is all very valuable in understanding what the sector needs today - and what a new game might have to do to stand out in such a crowded market.

It's proving really valuable. Thanks.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Call me old fashioned but I remember when people played games for fun. Remember fun? Fun was great. Now we've got progress bars and gamers are more concerned with using their time efficiently than having fun. Ridiculous.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Every game nowadays seems to have "XP" and "levelling up" or an equivalent, like "Rep". As devices to keep people playing once they've already invested time and effort in "achieving", they might work well, but I honestly have no idea what fun they actually bring to anybody.

I'm tired of it, especially when it just seems like it has been tacked on at the end in some token attempt to appeal to "XP" fans (Gran Turismo 5).

Anyway, as to the OP. A good online game is one you play with your friends, you beat them, they beat you, you laugh about it.

I think most of what I love about online gaming has already been covered and applies to almost every genre.

Unpredictable opponents, the sense of accomplishment when you win, the option of hanging out with friends.

Warning: Epic Post Incoming

The problem is that most online games also suffer from the same problem - grind. There's invariably some form of experience system and to increase in level you need to grind (quests, races, kills). Once you level up, you get access to a whole new set of quests, races or kills to grind through.

I appreciate the need for some kind of tiered difficulty, but I don't think you should need to repeat the same actions so often you could do it blindfolded. That's not difficulty, that's an unimaginative delaying system. Events should keep you on your toes and have an element of randomness to them.

Obviously racing games are a little different, and the elements of randomness there come from human error and/or a changing environment (weather conditions or day/night cycles). But those things keep the play dynamic, and that's something I feel is missing from most online games.

I won't ever pay for another subscription-based game (I hate feeling like I SHOULD play a game simply because I've paid for that month), but my ideal online racing sim would have the feel of LFS, the look and customisability of Forza 3 and the dynamic environments of GT5. But taken to the next level so that any track has changing conditions, almost any part can be replaced and it all has a noticeable effect on the drive.

Experience: 6 years of EverQuest, 2 years Motor City Online, 4 years Guild Wars, many rounds of Planetarion, beta tested more MMOs than any human has the right to, average LFS player since 2006.

Quote from Dajmin :

I won't ever pay for another subscription-based game (I hate feeling like I SHOULD play a game simply because I've paid for that month)

This is something I am yet to grapple in my mind. Creating the game has a cost overhead, I already blew just over £200 on 3D assets and I have nowhere near enough yet. Running a server will cost around £100 or so a month. These are costs I am happy to invest in a hobby of making a game, but at some point - especially if the game is successful and requires more servers, it is going to need to generate revenue.

I would like to keep access to the game free, but a model for generating revenue needs to be considered at this stage so that when it becomes pertinent it can be done in a reasonable and considered way.

I agree with your point about subscription gaming, I dislike it. But I dont know what should replace it.

Dungeons & Dragons Online has an interesting system where you can get a VIP pass on subscription, or you can buy content in packs, or you can do some grind and earn each content pack to keep the game completely free.

One idea I am considering is that access could be purchased not in "months of allowed access" but in "hours of content enjoyment". So wandering around is free, some basic quests are free, but each hour spent in premium content comes off of your pre-purchased account. Does that sound like a fairer model of subscription to you?

Quote from Becky Rose :

whilst the concept of what you say is completely right, the practice isn't. Players do need rewarding for their achievements, but I think that is a critical choice of word, "achievements" not "effort". Success, and not time invested. Would you agree with that?

Not really, no. Play should be its own reward, because once the player is shooting for 'achievements' it becomes a treadmill. Once one achievement is attained the player refocuses on the next one, any feeling of achievement is momentary.

And what rewards are appropriate? Rewards that make the player more powerful? By all means give them pink pvc trousers if they absolutely crave status symbols but not pink pvc trousers of invincibility. That's the equivalent of penalising everybody else for not 'achieving' the same thing.