Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: New Column: Why Not Historical MMOs?
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Then it is not historical. It would then be an alternate history. AKA historical video GAME
fixed.
its a video game, a mmorpg at that. A game where PLAYERS choose what they do. Would you consider World war 2 online to be fantasy, because nazi's win fictional battles?
You didn't "fix" anything. So if I make a game based on the Civil War, and the south stomps the north, that still historical? How about I decide Gen.Lee invented the AK47, do I still get to call it a historical game?
Edit: I bet you believe ancient Chinese battled demons with fireballs and swords while flying on magical mounts like all the asian grinders based in "historical China" propose.
You must not have attended that meeting between SOE and Pirates of the Burning Sea developer FLS. Let me recap part of it for you.......
SOE: "WOW has magic spells, you need magic spells."
FLS: "Ah....okay."
SOE: "WOW has avcom, you need avcom."
FLS: "Ah....okay."
SOE: "WOW has quests, you need quests."
FLS: "Ah......okay"
SOE: WOW has crafting, you need crafting."
FLS: "Ah.....okay."
SOE: WOW has elves, you need elves."
FLS: "Ah.....look guys, this is supposed to be a historical based game."
SOE: "No problem, we'll just add elves, orcs, and halflings in an expansion."
Others have sort of said it already, but you basically have a dilemma:
Only a AAA class studio could make a historical game worth playing (see Roma Victor and other basically failed indy projects for lack of resources)
+Even a AAA studio can make mistakes in development that wreck a game and cause it to fail (see PotBS)
+The market for any given "historical" setting is smaller than that for "generic fantasy" or Sci-Fi
= Most AAA Studios don't want to take the risks for the smaller market...so we are left with under capitalized and barely capable indy studios.
Because history has already happened. When you make history interactive, it ceases to be history, anyway.
I don't think recreating cultures that have existed on Earth and renaming them is a cop-out so much as a measure to ensure that it doesn't seem quite so absurd when the Greeks conquer the Americas and Japan has telephones in the 16th century. We know this shit didn't happen. Detaching it further from Earth makes suspension of disbelief easier, whether it is a perfect replica of that era or not.
This is true for me, anyway.
Well, let's assume that companies and investors will only support games that draw in a crowd. Then let's ask which answer we should assume belongs to "Why not?" It'd have to be, because companies and investors don't think there's any money in it. Now while I'm a huge history fan, I always wasn't, but growing up and seeing the world has made me a fan of history.
Now this is just a theory, and I haven't gotten to test it much, but from the few tests I have done have all pointed to the same answer, that most kids just aren't interested in history. Again, it's just a theory, so I could very well be wrong, but think about this. Also keep in mind that MMO's, since WoW, seem to be geared towards children. I vaguely recall various developers in the genre saying that they target children still living at home with their parents. That's a hard thing for me to say too, because that requires me to admit that I'm out of place in this genre.
Anyways, as for History MMO's, I'd greatly be interested. I once created a thread in the developer discussion thread a year ago, that suggested a historical game that took you to the first years of humans, and let the player progress throuh history on their own. Eventually, through expansion packs and by just playing the game and discovering things, players would venture into space. So you have a game that could very well last decades, because there's such a huge timeline that you're letting people play through and reinvent themselves in a way.
Now I realize that there are technical limitations, but that's where your ideas are interesting. If you broke up the game into many different games, which are sequels for each previous game, then you have a game that could very well span the length of a persons real life. You could start with our caveman days; imagine the dinosaurs and stuff. There's the ancient times, the bronze age, and so on. I thought my idea was a fantastic one (don't we usually) and couldn't believe no one was interested in it. But we'll see how much interest this thread generates.
i would love to see more historical MMOs! its a wonderful idea. and personaly, if someone invented a 12 century japan MMO that was historicaly correct i would be running cartwheels. i would even spend the hundreds of dollers needed to get my desktop working!
but seriously, i think there is a huge oppourtunity here for the big companys. some of the games (caveman for instance) would take a while to catch on but a mideval game with seige equipent? a game centered historicaly arround ninjas and samurai? roman solders and gladiators? i beleve the term is "hellz yeah" 
i mean, just look at how long i've been waitin to tatsumaki: land at war.
cheers, MacBurl.
Signature
(optional)
BBML Allowed
500 characters max
One major problem with pursuing this type of game content is that it seems very limited in the field of character development. The reason why Sci fi and Fantasy are so easily adopted is that it allows for a 'more-than-human' growth of character. In such fantasy worlds/context we aren't limited by what would otherwise be extremely constricting: being mere humans within a very predictable and static world (as it is coming from a part of our history).
Historical MMOs have popped up, like WW2Online, Roma Victor,etc., but one of the big draw backs is that it doesn't fill the escapist void that MMORPGs are intended to fill. We don't want to be limited when we play MMOs, we're limited enough in our real lives -- obviously an unfortunate necessity in MMORPGs.
The only real way for a historical MMO to be successful is a shift in the psychological constitution of the average gamer which allows for finding enjoyment within the constraints of a human-based historical context, and that is not likely to happen. We have to remember, MMORPGs are meant to allow us to fill a role in our lives that we would otherwise not be in touch with (i.e. the 'uber l33t condition'). That is likely something that historical MMOs will never be able to fill since they are inherently highly limited if they are to be accurate.
Edit: I'd just like to add that for those people arguing for any form of combat based historical MMORPG that 1 arrow, 1 cut, 1 rusty dagger, one bad piece of pork, would likely kill you. Unless there are 'tweaks' that make people more than just mere humans within a hisotrical context, such games would have to be either economy based, political based, or a RTS system. Again, a huge problem with historical MMOs is that if they are to be remotely accurate, you're going to be dead faster than you know it, and if it's changed to allow for easier survival then it's not likely to be all that accurate. In what world were the majority of people running around gladiators who never seemed to die? Or what world where the majority of the population for samurai somehow living after being nailed with arrows? Accurate history and MMORPGs don't seeem to fit well together unfortunately.
Historical MMOs are something I'm sure will come into their own in the next 10 to 20 years or so..give or take a decade or so. The problem now is that theres such a disparity between what people imagine and want from a Historical MMO of lets say ancient Rome and what's deliverable both technologically and creatively. Maybe one day though.
Sorry, I just don't see historical MMO's working very well anytime soon in the MMo genre. This genre is already extremely oversaturated with a bazillion lackluster and crappy MMO games and I feel that historical MMO's would either be to rigid in design and gameplay to interest more than a very tiny portion of players or, would deviate too much from the intended historical period to really be called historical MMO's. A true historical MMO would pretty much hav to force players in certain directions to keep to the path of history based on whatever period is being played out, otherwise you end up having a "What If" MMO that is merely based on a period in history. I just don't see any historical MMO's ever being exciting or interesting enough to gather a good amount of players and still manage to stay true to any historical timeline. Even Lotro, which has a pretty well established timeline of events and such still deviaties from the whole continuity of that time in Middle Earth's history, but I still play it and enjoy the hell out of it.
That being said I don't want to come off like I am anti-historical MMO's, if it could be done and stay accurate to a historical timeline of events it would be a pretty cool accomplishment. Frankly (and I'm sorry for this) but most of the ideas presented sound like they would be kinda boring and nothing I could bring myself to pay a monthly fee for; in the end amounting to little more than large scale online historical simulations, not MMO's in a true sense (except for Pirates vs. Ninjas...ohhhh yeeeaaaah I'd buy that for a dollar!...or more) I find it odd that no one mentioned anything about having a historical MMO set in the time of the ancient Celtic civilization, a time period that is not so well documented, could allow for more freedome of development and showcases a time in history when there still was some "magic" in the world.
Who knows though, maybe historical (or historically based) MMO's will be the next big thing when the fantasy/sci-fi MMO genre plays itself out.
Then it is not historical. It would then be an alternate history. AKA historical video GAME
fixed.
its a video game, a mmorpg at that. A game where PLAYERS choose what they do. Would you consider World war 2 online to be fantasy, because nazi's win fictional battles?
You didn't "fix" anything. So if I make a game based on the Civil War, and the south stomps the north, that still historical? How about I decide Gen.Lee invented the AK47, do I still get to call it a historical game?
Edit: I bet you believe ancient Chinese battled demons with fireballs and swords while flying on magical mounts like all the asian grinders based in "historical China" propose.
Bah! Why can't you people take anything with a grain of salt?!?!?!
Wise, you're right, it would be an alternate timeline. And yes, it would be a historical video game.
newsflash: THEY'RE ALL GAMES! Ever heard of historical fiction?
I know they're not MMORPGS, but any of the Call Of Duty or Battlefield games have historically accurate settings without historically accurate outcomes. Sometimes the US soldiers win, sometimes they don't. We know the real outcome, but we're playing a game - we're allowed to bend the rules. It's just a matter of deciding when the rules have been bent too far.
-------------
The less you expect, the more you'll be surprised. Hopefully, pleasantly so.
Many players can't even accept adherence to the lore in The Lord of the Rings and have cited the lack of races and "big magic" as being boring.
I can see it now, a historical game set during the Roman empire:
I want to be a centaur
you can't be a centaur
Why not?
Because there were no Centaurs
But it's Roman and Greek Mythology
No, it's not Mythology it's historical
But it's a game and games are for entertainment so I don't see why they can't add Centaurs.
Centaurs didn't exist and this is a historical game
Then I want to be a Minotaur
Didn't exist
This game blows!
etc.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Again, when I wrote about "historical MMOs" I wasn't talking about historical reenactments. I was talking about games set in a historical period, but that are first and foremost entertainment.
No one is annoyed that Gladiator took history and turned it on its ear.
No one gets mad when Hibernia takes Albion castles in DAoC.
You can make a game with historical context that allows just as much freedom to players as any regular MMO.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
Agreed. Besides when talking about fantasy or mythological elements.... once upon a time in history... the world was thought to be flat. St. George killed a dragon. Fact or Myth? Dinosaurs were considered a myth once upon a time.... and the Kraken (giant squid) thought a myth as well.
Oh yes... magic. Voodoo. Real or make believe? Ghosts? They are all aspects of life today as well as of our past - in the broadest sense. A game set in a historical period in any culture / land would be remiss if the people's believes of the time were not included.
This accounts for the Ghost ships in Pirates of the Burning Sea and Voodoo in Pirates of the Caribbean Online.
Notice: The views expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of MMORPG.com or its management.
I'm sure it won't get read, but I will bite. "Why hasn't this been done?" (Using Rome as a generic example):
Normal life is boring for your average person. Lots of people play MMOs to escape reality and live a heroic fantasy vicariously. Anything even remotely related to real life would subconsciously lead back their (perceived) menial existence. You would have a game filled with soldiers, gladiators, and senators with nothing much to do. There would be daily raids of Gaul and hour long orations by Lxexgxoxlxaxs69 that go something like "hey daloran! yestrday my mom bauht me this gaem well its rly an xpanshun 2 a gam..." As a buddy of mine put it: "How would you make the life of an Aqueduct worker interesting?" Quite frankly, you can't, unless it's his job to fight off brigands, zombies and/or monster zombie brigands that are trying to pollute/poison/radiate the waterworks of Rome. If that is the case, would not the aqueduct worker just send a letter to the generals and ask them for military assistance?
I mean, yes there could be a Rome-centric game that is historically accurate on the outside, but to make it interesting and fun for people without being repetitive you'd have to break historical context or settle for a very small niche market. I'm sure a lot of people would find it fun, but there's only so much you can do to make that fun lasting. Rome ends. You don't make MMOs based of stories with an ending. That's one of WoW's biggest reasons for success. Open ended and internally owned intellectual property. You can't get that from Rome. You've finite limits both physically and chronologically.
You can raid the Gaulic tribes, the Huns and Norse so much. As for the internal operations of the city, and player control of that. Also repetitive. Coup d'etats can only be carried out so many times before it gets annoying. Large organizations of players (guilds/legions/clans/whatever) would control the entire game. You would basically make the success of the game reliant on the population that plays it. Player run everything. That's the only way I can see you getting longevity out of a game like this. That is a recipe for disaster.
Just my two cents.
Many here are putting support to a Wild West MMO but really don't see the limitations of that setting. Living on the open wild of America was boring and dangerous. It was the Yellow Dime Novels that made it seem exciting. An MMO based on this setting would need to evolve with much of the American West Lore of Paul Bunyan, Pecos Bill and John Henry. The Table Top RPG of "Dead Lands" is something to consider but really just reskins the Fantasy genera. In most cases a Wild West MMO would be nich market without some historical twists. Wizards of the Coast/TSR hardest to sell RPG was "Boot Hill". If someone put a Wild West MMO out, I would buy it but I just don't see it going far.
What many here are desiring is the straight conflict depitcted in most Western stories but there has to be more substance.
Then it is not historical. It would then be an alternate history. AKA historical video GAME
fixed.
its a video game, a mmorpg at that. A game where PLAYERS choose what they do. Would you consider World war 2 online to be fantasy, because nazi's win fictional battles?
You didn't "fix" anything. So if I make a game based on the Civil War, and the south stomps the north, that still historical? How about I decide Gen.Lee invented the AK47, do I still get to call it a historical game?
Edit: I bet you believe ancient Chinese battled demons with fireballs and swords while flying on magical mounts like all the asian grinders based in "historical China" propose.
Bah! Why can't you people take anything with a grain of salt?!?!?!
Wise, you're right, it would be an alternate timeline. And yes, it would be a historical video game.
newsflash: THEY'RE ALL GAMES! Ever heard of historical fiction?
I know they're not MMORPGS, but any of the Call Of Duty or Battlefield games have historically accurate settings without historically accurate outcomes. Sometimes the US soldiers win, sometimes they don't. We know the real outcome, but we're playing a game - we're allowed to bend the rules. It's just a matter of deciding when the rules have been bent too far.
Thing with Call of Duty, for example, is there were many small battles that took place during the war that never made a footnote in history, so the Germans winning some battles isn't historically innacurate. But you'll notice, no matter how you play, the Germans lose on D-Day. ( You'll note that I frowned upon the addition of zombies in World at War
).
I'm not against an "alternate Earth" type of game. I'd love one in fact. I'm just a stickler for accuracy in descriptions. There is a difference between "historical themed" and actually "historical".
Thing is I'm a stickler for the accurate description because i'm probably one of the few who would play a truly historical game if it could be done completely accurate. If Roma Victor had been made by someone with talent and drive, I'd probably be playing that today. Because they did manage to come close to what I'd call a "historical" game, compared to Pirates of the Burning Sea with "Here there be monsters" and "magic", just more fantasy fluff incorrectly labeled "historical".
Edit: @ Dana:
It's easy to overlook Hibernia defeating Albion in Dark Age of Camelot, as there is nothing even remotely "historical" about a game focused on King Arthur fairy tales. I don't think anyone with an I.Q. higher than 10 would claim King Arthur, Merlin, or Camelot were historically based, much less historically accurate.
Well I agree except that there will be players who would not understand and who would ask for things that just weren't in that time period. What I posted was a joke as it's similiar to what I have seen in LOTRO when players ask for things that just weren't there.
However, I will say this, I am a bit dissapointed that Gladiator took turned history on its ear. I love the movie but some of the gentle historical twisting does feel cheap. To that end I love Braveheart but I have to completely immerse myself in the world of the movie and accept that it is not a historical account of William Wallace's life.
There are people who can't do that and refuse to watch either Gladiator or Braveheart...
And "300" is way out (for them, I enjoyed it )
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Well I agree except that there will be players who would not understand and who would ask for things that just weren't in that time period. What I posted was a joke as it's similiar to what I have seen in LOTRO when players ask for things that just weren't there.
However, I will say this, I am a bit dissapointed that Gladiator took turned history on its ear. I love the movie but some of the gentle historical twisting does feel cheap. To that end I love Braveheart but I have to completely immerse myself in the world of the movie and accept that it is not a historical account of William Wallace's life.
There are people who can't do that and refuse to watch either Gladiator or Braveheart...
And "300" is way out (for them, I enjoyed it )
This is true, some purists would rebel when a year had passed and Henry didn't disolve the Abbeys or whatever.
But they are the minority. The entire point was that someone should do a mass market MMO set in a historic period. It's still a game, and players still have the freedom to play. It's not like everyone sits around hoping not to get the plague.
Any MMO that tries to recreate history, will end up as an educational tool. But an MMO that builds a historical world and lets people play in it, that could do well.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
Personally, I'd kill for a game set in a old western setting.
Allowing people to be indians, gunslingers, smiths, soldiers, bartenders and even farmers.
Many people only see limitations, just like they saw SWG's "canon" expansion values limited.... Despite that the Star Wars galaxy had millions of planets, millions of untold stories..most of wich included much of the "iconic" persona from this era in Star Wars. Like Imperials fighting pirates, rebels, criminal syndicates and whatnot. But people only saw limitations, and instead of using their imagination and knowledge of the Star Wars universe, they now instead cheer when SOE invents pink care-ewoks, or add KOTOR/Clone War content to the game.
In a western setting, there could be wars, exploration, colonization, rebuilding, cooperation, crafting, farming... Well, quite alot, and most of wich could be used by all sides in a "western setting" MMO. Indians can build, criminals can colonize and settlers can explore.
Whats even better for a western MMO setting, is that even things that combat wombat players despise, as in social stuff, like bartending, wenching, crafting... the setting alone makes great uses of it and opens for dependensies that would make a game built on it a "civilization" instead of a combat arcade only.
But, I guess I should limit myself to only seeing limitations, and go cheer for pink care-ewoks in SWG, since by seing only limitations, I can only be open for the redicolous additions to a game setting frozen in a small era of time.
I think next week I basically have to lay out a Wild Western MMO based on the feedback here
Insanity coming next Thursday
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
As long as it has the option for me as a player of such a MMO to be a cavalry man instead of a blackdressed drawhappy psycho gunslinger, that could go to the bar in the nearest town and get both a beer from a player bartender and a dance from a player wench... and both are happenings that enhance the gameplay and makes the bartender and wench feel just as needed as players as the psycho gunslinger who spends his days shootin bears and rabbits. :P
*cough* Deadlands *cough*
Hey, you did say insanity and, well, Deadlands has the Wild West AND insanity, lol!
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Then it is not historical. It would then be an alternate history. AKA historical video GAME
fixed.
its a video game, a mmorpg at that. A game where PLAYERS choose what they do. Would you consider World war 2 online to be fantasy, because nazi's win fictional battles?
You didn't "fix" anything. So if I make a game based on the Civil War, and the south stomps the north, that still historical? How about I decide Gen.Lee invented the AK47, do I still get to call it a historical game?
Edit: I bet you believe ancient Chinese battled demons with fireballs and swords while flying on magical mounts like all the asian grinders based in "historical China" propose.
In what game has one side officially won in a MMORPG? Do you play MMORPGS?
Oh and ak47's? Where did this come from? You have more creativity in knocking down a historical game then thinking of one and its features.
Playing: EVE Online
Favorite MMOs: WoW, SWG Pre-cu, Lineage 2, UO, EQ, EVE online
Looking forward to: Archeage, Kingdom Under Fire 2
KUF2's Official Website - http://www.kufii.com/ENG/ -
The main issue with historical MMO's, no depth. Now before you start blasing me with responses let me lay out what I mean by depth.
Take any of the fantasy or sci-fi MMORPG's out there and place it next to a historical concept. What's the difference? One has the ability to create anything from creatures, zones, classes, monsters, weapons while the other must stay in history, which limits the 'DEPTH' of the concept. Let me take it a step further an add, persistency.
The two major factors for a successful MMORPG are depth and persistency. Graphics are not a major factor? No. What about coolness factor? Nope. What about originality? Not even close. With this in mind you can see where the limits of historical MMO's have trouble. Some of you might say, "You just have to be creative with historical data to give it depth, it can be done." Really? I propose a design doc I came up with for an MMORPG as an example (I don't mine it someone takes the idea because it wouldn't wok as you will see).
Death and Dust - A MMORPG set in the old Wild West. An online world set when times were tough and life was a challenge. Amidst the beauty of red rock cliffs, long drifting plains, canyon rims, pine tree forests, lush valley’s, running streams and rivers, there is a struggle, one of life and death. The beauty of the west can turn deadly in a harsh dry environment when law an order, nature, and the vast resources of a new land collide with the forces of greed and expansion.
Sounds cool! Sounds different! As I found out when I designed this concept, there was only so much depth to historical material. I had to go of the beaten path (no pun) and encompass the ancient Native American Indian lore. I had spirit animals and netherworld dimensions that you could go to that expanded on the 'animal life' of the old west. You can only battle so many wolves, mountain lions, coyotes, bison, deer or ravenous badgers before you won't more. Sure this wild west world world had great professions and classes but it was limited for quests/items/mobs/zones. It's not because I wasn't creative but rather limited in where I could go with the game with out making it out to be like that great Academy Award winning movie, Wild West with Will Smith.
I found myself limited by the historical elements and had to add a twist of fantasy to give it...here are the key words, more depth and persistency.
So do all games need to be like WOW, no but you better come prepared to make a game as deep and persistent or your submission base will drop off. An MMORPG starts with a concept and a genre. This is why fantasy and sci-fi make for the best MMORPG's out there, the skies are the limited when it comes to persistent and deep content. Content is king!
Take a look at French and Indian War/Last of the Mohicans arena, not as much technology difference between groups allows for more of a mix between firearms and melee combat. Your flintlock gets one shot, then it's close to tomahawk range.
Of course, then you can present your idea to SOE:
SOE: "WOW has magic, where's your games magic"?
SOE: "WOW has crafting, where's your games crafting"?
SOE: "WOW has elves, where is your games elves"?
You get the drift........no sense wasting your time creating a game unless it is like WOW.