What Is DynamicMUD?

Back when I was in high school I was an avid reader of PC Gamer. During this time I came across a very interesting advertisement. This full page add was entirely text, and described a game without graphics. A book you could write yourself while playing with other individuals on the internet. Needless to say I tried it out and got hooked on this genre of games.

While I no longer play this afforementioned game, it still invoked in me a desire to create. The feature of this game that stood out the most to me was the wilderness. This ASCII representation of a game world was the perfect set up for a game in my opinion, and had so much potential. Soon after the base concept for a new game was already forming. I would create a game that unlike it's predecessors would rely entirely on this representation to present the game world to it's players. At the time I had no programming skills, I made a few attempts at current codebases, but ultimately none of these would do, I grew bored and my ideas shrunk back to the back of my head.

Over the next few years my ideas expanded. I wanted not only a game where a wilderness was the whole game, I wanted a changeable wilderness. I thought, why not let the player deform the terrain, build their own structures, and blaze their own trails. DynamicMUD was born.

Since then the concept has grown into an even larger plan. During my summer before college I first experienced python and began coding haphazardly the game that I wanted. Much was learned from this experience, including the lesson that planning helps a lot in design. And more importantly, even though python was great for coding quick, it lead to many shortcuts. I realized that I needed to start over, this time with a plan to write a specification first, and dictate every feature I wanted first. Around that time I started this blog to document the journey from concept to specification to code.

I started over in java, planning everything to be modular and maintainable. Coding has been slow going, and I have yet to get to the level of completeness that was available in my python version. Despite this things continue to move, though very slowly, and someday DynamicMUD will be finished.

Dynamic is based on one primary concept, change. Nothing should ever be set in stone in a game. National boundaries wax and wane with wars, the landscape is shaped by these conflicts as well as the weather. Resources can be scarce. This will drive an in game economy and be the source of constant change, creating the history of the DynamicMUD game world.

Unlike most other MMORPGs currently on the market, players will suffer from finality when they die. They wont be resurrected, or brought back to life by any other means. Life spans will be short, and in the course of several years of game play many generations will live and die, adding to the flowing changes that take place in the world.

Players will rise to become great leaders, unite several tribes, and wage war for the land. Players may be betrayed and politics will be an ever present part of life in DynamicMUD. Essentially welcome to another world, where what you do is your choice. Live the life of a farmer, live in a quiet village and help supply your surrounding villages with food. Be a sword smith and become known across the land for producing the strongest cutting blades, outfit your nation's troops, and equip the war machine. Or be the soldier, command armies of troops and do the bidding of your lord. Destroy your enemies and burn their homes to the ground. These lifestyles as well as any others you can think of are yours to play out. The choice is yours.

Why Tomorrow's MMOs Continue to Suck

With all the new games being released, especially in the MMO genre, you would think that the genre would evolve. In reality so many of these games appear to be just as crappy as the ones that came before them. While there are exceptions out there, games almost always follow the same pattern as the ones that come before them.

Do you remember the first major real time strategy games? You had Command and Conquer and Warcraft leading the way. Starcraft came along, and so did Command & Conquer Red Alert. What changed here? Not much: settings, characters and visuals mostly. Of course there were small improvements to game play, but where was the innovation? Ultimately you can't really complain about these games, they were the innovators in their genre. But what about the countless clones that followed? Too many game developers develop in a fearful manner, afraid of what would happen if they tried something new. Flash forward to today and the genre is largely unchanged. Of course a few games started to try and break the mold and try new thing, Company of Heroes for example pushed things to the next level. But ultimately we are still stuck with the same games we played 10 years ago.

Lets flash to a new genre, how many Role Playing Games really broke the mold? Theres always a first, and a million clones to follow. This is great if your so in love with a specific game that you just want more of. But what about us who thirst for something new? Some players want to see innovative game play and not just the tried and tested. I could go on about the First Person Shooter genre too, but I will stop here.

Coming back to MMO games, they follow the same boring pattern. Unfortunately here however the mold hasn't changed in almost 30 years instead of 10 or 5. Yes I said 30. I wasn't even alive back then but I know BBS systems existed back then and players dialed in to play games. These games eventually evolved into multi user dungeons.

Heres how about 95 percent of these games work: You create a character, level up, communicate with friends, group up and run zones. You kill things, get exp, and level up. Some zones are meant for higher levels, and others for lower levels, and these same zones never change between each visit. In the larger games you have griefers, newbies, and just about every other category of player all playing in the same game. Sound familiar? With a few exceptions every MMO from Everquest to World of Warcraft follows this same model. To the extent that there were allegations that Everquest was modified from Diku MUD, the first mud out there.

Please someone do something new and different. I'm sick of seeing people run zones that don't change. I'm sick of seeing static worlds, essentially chatrooms instead of thriving worlds like we should see. And most of all I'm sick of the hype these games that are more of the same get. They haven't done anything spectacular for a while. So go ahead, pay 15 dollars a month for something you could have done for free since before 1990.

So go ahead, get in line behind all those other people... to kill the goblin king... in the goblin castle... again... for the second time today.

-Toraux

Tags: Game, Games, MUDS, Multi User Dungeon, Online Games, Game Design, Programming

The Free MMO Business Model, an Alternative to Pay-to-Play

Intro:

Commercial MMO games all seem to have the same plan for earning money. These publishers rely on subscriptions from their players to pay for their upkeep and development. This is the tried and tested model, any many publishers are afraid of change. This model of operation however does not necessarily mean it is the best, or most profitable. This article will discuss some alternatives that could revolutionize how we play MMO games.

Free vs. Pay-to-Play:

How many times when bored and looking for a new game to play, do you look for free games? How many times have you wanted to play a new game that seemed cool, but couldn't justify the steep monthly payments? Many of the MMO games currently on the market are quite enticing, offering human interaction, cool features and multiplayer quests. Unfortunately the majority of these games all charge a significant monthly fee, generally averaging between 10 and 15 USD per month, on top of the cost of the game itself and expansions.

A lot of people I know, including myself would be much more inclined to try and play these games if the cost to play was much cheaper, or completely free. The free model allows a game to attract a much larger audience. How many of us thought about playing Blizzard's World of Warcraft but decided it wasn't worth the money? I know I did. If these publishers were to offer their games free of charge they could quite easily double or triple their player bases.

This theory expands even more so for the small time publishers, and indie game developers. A free game is more easily played by a new player. That new player is more likely to recommend it to his or her friends, and the trend continues. There is nothing better a new developer can do to expand their exposure then by offering their game for free to the world. Besides, there are plenty of ways to make money from a game without actually charging for it.

Alternative Income Sources:

A good collection of money making strategies can make a free game worth far more then the best pay-to-play game. After all, we can use this new found exposure and traffic to fuel our other income sources.

Advertising is one of the most popular money making strategies on the Internet to date. Very few websites don't capitalize on advertisements. Provide game features that require use of the website: account management, forums, and online item markets will drive your players back to your website on a regular basis. You can then quite easily convert this traffic back into income. Most players would be more then happy to deal with a few small ads then pay for a game. If complaints about the ads worry you then you can go even further and let them pay to opt out of the advertisements.

The website isn't the only way to optimize your profit. A lot of games have loading screens. Why not replace these loading screens with some sort of advertisement. Another approach: let companies sponsor individual zones, instances, and areas in the game. Then the load screen could display that information, this area brought to you by "You Company Here".

Another strategy MMOs has been used in movies for years, and even in some games already. If your MMO has a modern theme then product placement is a good way to let companies display their products in a less direct manner inside your game. A lot of contemporary commercial games are jumping on to this trend (think about in game billboards, or race car sponsors). Unfortunately many of these developers just pocket the extra income, and don't use it to subsidize their games.

People who play MMOs often state how addicted they are to the games they play. The next logical method to earn from an MMO would be official game merchandise. With such services as cafepress.com available, this isn't a hard task for even the smallest indie game developer. Of course this like the other features is dependant on the number of regular players you can maintain. Anything from soundtracks, to game posters (and game world maps in poster form), to the standard T-shirts and hats. Not to mention that this can even generate more new players if used correctly..

The merchandise method can also extend into your virtual world itself. This combined with what is generally referred to as pay-for-perks. Why not offer cool equipment to your players for real money. If they play enough then they're bound to want the best they can get. One of the keys with pay-for-perks, however, is to manage how these cash items affect the balance of gameplay, poor balance will result in less players. A good cash item might have the same stats as the highest tier of in game items, and just have a cooler more unique appearance. Another option might be customized items, tweaked to a character's play or visual style. Pay-for-perks has been used many times before for free games, but unfortunately it is often poorly implemented, either resulting in a lack of balance, or hurting player sentiments. I will discuss this in more detail in the next section.

Other good pay for perks items are things that may not actually effect gameplay. Like the previous example of just cooler looking 'stuff' for players, you could offer a private home, or custom avatars for players. Status symbols that won't impact which player has the advantage. I would even consider some sort of service to update a player of in game events, say via an instant messenger program, letting them jump in when a fun event is about to happen. These services give the player more enjoyment while not hurting the enjoyment of those who would rather play for free.

Pitfalls:

As mentioned before, pay-for-perks can unbalance a game. Some games for example let you purchase equipment far superior to the equipment players can acquire through in game means. This generally hurts other player's experiences, and in the long run will hurt the game's player base, the lifeblood of the free MMO. A safer version of this kind of pay-for-perk is to allow players to directly or indirectly purchase these items with in game money, or instead let players purchase game money using real money. This allows players with less time, and more pocket change play at the same level as those among us who avoid real human interaction as much as possible and haven't left our computer in days.

Another major issue with abandoning the pay-to-play model is the potential for over commercialization. In an attempt to keep ahead of costs a publisher could over do it and place too many ads, or try too hard to get referrals. The efforts to bring in a profit need to be balanced just as much as the character classes. If you try too hard you will loose players. If you don't try hard enough you loose potential profit.

One of the top customers for purchasing ad space on a game website is other game publishers. This can put a publisher relying on ads in a bind. If we need to rely on users visiting the advertised, then we are potentially handing over our audience to these advertisers. To avoid this, competing ads need to be limited. This means a focus on getting advertisers from outside of the industry will be important for survival of the game. Complementary products are also a good solution. Generally someone won't leave a MMO because they found out about a new gamer forum or chat site, especially if it is directly target towards players of that game. Make intelligent choices when taking on advertisers, and competition should be a minimal problem.

The last hurdle to overcome with this model (as with the pay-to-play) is the issue of critical mass. This is really a vicious cycle. In order to sell advertising space you need players. To get players you need servers. Servers cost money. Money comes from advertising. Advertising space must be sold, and is often hard to sell without players (and thus traffic). Rinse and repeat. Any way you slice it, some sort of start up capital will be helpful. A good plan to aquire players to begin with will be needed, and acted upon efficiently. Contrary to what you think, this situation can favor the free model. Players are more likely to try and keep playing a game they can play for free.

Conclusions:

Whether publishing an indie game or a full on commercial release an online game can and probably should be offered for free. In fact most other games probably can work on a similar model, but either require more preparation of sponsors before release, or something else to keep the users coming to the site for information and updates. The key to remember here is that we are generating traffic, and entertaining an audience. This principle is used by network tv, radio, as well as many websites.

A good business plan and plan of attack are the most important tools for this model of operation. The hardest task for a game publisher in this case, especially the indie developer is to get the sponsorship. You must be able to sell yourself and your product to the right people to ensure that the project is profitable. I hope this model catches on, it really is the best for all three parties involved, the gamer, the developer, and the advertisers. I'll be waiting for your free game.

-Toraux

Tags: MMORPG, Game, Games, MUDS, Multi User Dungeon, Online Games, Game Design, Programming