PDA

View Full Version : Traffic and Pipes - #43


srand
02-23-2006, 01:17 PM
You don't have to look at games that allow players to build physical in-game buildings wherever they like to see examples of this behavior and its outcomes. Even when players can't build buidlings, they can and do build in-game businesses around their character. And they usually have much greater flexibility as to where to place their character. One of my favorite examples is Asheron's Call 1.

Early in the game, many players gathered in the town of Arwic because it was conveniently located near a portal hub and was itself on a useful portal circuit, had good NPC buy/sell rates, and was near popular hunting spots. Because people gathered there, Arwic quickly became the place to be to hawk your in-game wares. Because it was the most popular place to sell items to other players, it obviously also became the one place you'd go when you wanted to buy something. All this activity also made it the best place to find groups and vassals and people to talk to, and the place got very crowded and very laggy.

Then, for various reasons, the live team nuked Arwic. As part of the ongoing story the town was entirely destroyed by a shadow spire. The players responded by moving their virtual business elsewhere. I talk a bit about what happened then in my blog entry on social centers (http://arcanepowers.blogspot.com/2006/01/social-centers_19.html).

But had Arwic remained, I think you would have seen an ongoing tension between being-the-place-people-go-to-trade and being-too-laggy-to-move. Arwic would have remained the premier trading location, but it would have frustrated a lot of players too. Some would have organized other trading centers, probably centered around their allegiances or (later) housing communities. Most of these would have failed, but some might have enough pull to stabilize, especially if they specialized their wares as well. I saw this happen briefly with weapons in the town of Qalabar, although it didn't last.

At any rate, my point is that you don't need virtual buildings to watch these dynamics in action, although obviously virtual buildings will change some of the details. A more interesting question to me is: Are the social dynamics engendered by this situation more valuable to the game than the frustration caused by it? I suspect that in social-heavy games the answer might be yes. But that depends entirely on your game.

TonyD
02-23-2006, 03:18 PM
A good solution to me, for this problem, would be to use the sim-city cellular modelling structure.

Think of it like this. You have a town. You build a bank there (commercial). Your bank grows (and can therefore offter more banking options etc.) depending not on your own business practices, or player level, but based on how the other buildings around it are thriving. Build another bank in the same place, and there are two commercial blocks...go too commercial, and they all suffer, reducing in value.
Build your bank among industrial areas (near a blacksmith, for example), and you will get a more successful bank. Build your residential area (your houses) near commercial areas, and you get a bigger house. Build your industry near residential and you get better industry.

Obviously the rules need to be more complex than this (more stalls can be supported than banks. Very few hospitals can be supported) but - like sim city, you could get some very complex behavior from very simple rules. (I think there was some other article discussing this cellular modelling)

This means the players could (intentionally or accidentally) build slums. They could build thriving commerce centers. Careful planning could turn some empty land into a thriving city. Most of it...it would always be changing. Like Sim City there is no way to "win" since all types of areas are necessary, and since the areas go through cycles and changes quite naturally. This isn't even taking into account the player dynamics (I want you to build houses in this town, so my bank does well!)

Most of all, it would lead to a growing, constantly evolving world where the players have an influence.

And, it also leads to property barons. Buy up a few acres of slums, develop it, and voila, high class housing in a good suburb that you can sell on at a huge profit. When game actions, motivated by the game system, mimics the real world, I figure that means you're doing something right with your simulation.