Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Player created content Poll

AarorAaror Member Posts: 25

Wanted to find out whether I'm whistling in the breeze here.  How does everyone feel about creating our own adventures?

Comments

  • jadedlevirjadedlevir Member Posts: 628

    I picked option number 3. The sieging, houses, castles would be *some* of the content a developer makes. And it would have so much replayability compared to your average content devs dish out...like instanced dungeons. Throw in some player created quest, bounty hunting, ect and you got a lot of tools to make your own adventure.

    I'm not really sure if calling it player created content is the correct phrase tho, it's dev created content, it just gives the players the ability to make their own adventure.

  • DisdenaDisdena Member UncommonPosts: 1,093

    In my opinion, player-created content causes more problems than it solves. Balancing risk-vs-reward, weeding out inappropriate content, explaining the canonicity of official lore versus player-made lore, issues over who owns the content, etc. I see all of these as potential hurdles, and being able to play though someone else's dungeon isn't nearly appealing enough to offset them.

    Player housing by itself raises far fewer issues, but I don't get any enjoyment out of that either.

    image
  • JB47394JB47394 Member Posts: 409

    I think that it's entirely practical to have player-made content when the player creating the content is doing so for his own benefit.  That is, creating the castle that a guild wants to operate for itself, complete with villages, farms and such.  Meanwhile, other players are trading with their castle (livestock, weapons, farm supplies), invading their castle, helping to extend the castle (labor, stone, tools), hiring out their own NPCs to help clear fields, jointly fighting off monster attacks, etc, etc.  That's the sandbox  ethic - the players create content that they want to use, and in the process of using it, they interact with each other.

    As for players creating content for the expressed purpose of having other players consume it, well, that's much more complicated.  I think we're still 10 years away from having something like that go mainstream, Neverwinter Nights not withstanding.  The castle sandbox is practical today.  In fact, the independent MMO Infinity is hoping to implement that very approach, but in a science fiction setting.  Guilds build settlements and cities on planets and try to operate them for their benefit, etc.

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,852

    Originally posted by JB47394

    I think that it's entirely practical to have player-made content when the player creating the content is doing so for his own benefit.  That is, creating the castle that a guild wants to operate for itself, complete with villages, farms and such.  Meanwhile, other players are trading with their castle (livestock, weapons, farm supplies), invading their castle, helping to extend the castle (labor, stone, tools), hiring out their own NPCs to help clear fields, jointly fighting off monster attacks, etc, etc.  That's the sandbox  ethic - the players create content that they want to use, and in the process of using it, they interact with each other.

    As for players creating content for the expressed purpose of having other players consume it, well, that's much more complicated.  I think we're still 10 years away from having something like that go mainstream, Neverwinter Nights not withstanding.  The castle sandbox is practical today.  In fact, the independent MMO Infinity is hoping to implement that very approach, but in a science fiction setting.  Guilds build settlements and cities on planets and try to operate them for their benefit, etc.

    I totally agree with the first part of this, the Sandbox content created by players doing things in a world.

    As for player created content for consumption, I think that's a no-no. Whatever the game company allows players to do, they have to maintain control so the game doesn't start to lose consistency. And I don't think allowing this is a good idea at all. However, I think it might be possible to allow a strictly controlled system in very narrowly defined "spaces"...but I'm not totally sure of this. And example would be to allow a guild to create an "enemy" cult or choose an enemy species, to attract them to a nearby "den" in the world, and control this by certain construction required by a guild center (castle, player built village..).

    Generally speaking, if you allow players to add to your world, you can bet some of them will add things that don't fit or try to get away with lame crap just to do it. Some players will grief the developer whenever they can. And some just have no consept of what fits into a well designed world.

    Once upon a time....

  • AarorAaror Member Posts: 25

    In a few other threads I have been playing with "how to control player created content."

    Some of the issues I see:

    "Uber rewards dungeon."  I make a dungeon where you have to kill a sick, one-armed kobald in order to get the sword of godslaying.

    Solution, make the rewards track to observed difficulty.  In other words, look at what levels die in the dungeon, and how much HP damage others take, and figure out what "level," the dungeon is, then give rewards that are "standard for that level."

    "Offensive content."  Sex, racist comments, etc.  Maybe even some political or religious drek.

    Solution, give a reporting option, warn players it isn't tolerated, and terminate accounts (without refunds) for second offenses.

    "Crappy design."  No path to the reward, repetative, insane difficulty spikes, etc.

    Solution, rate the dungeon, and haveing some word of mouth.  Also, reward players for good dungeons with a small stipend based on how many players you get (making sure you avoid uber rewards), and you give people a reason to do their best.  A basic pathfinding to make sure there is at least one path to the treasure would be nice if doable, maybe require the designer to prove the path by walking it themselves?

    "Interface/graphics issues."  Lumping two problems together because one solution fixes both.  Basically, designing a dungeon could be a nightmare, putting up walls, streams, etc. in a way that works?  At the same time, all these graphic objects can be hard for a graphics card.

    Solution, use "standard tiles," a 10X10X10 "object," that has walls, floor, and ceiling.  Some tiles have stairs or ladders, some have water or lava.  Players can petition to get new tiles created by the devs, but each tile is evaluated on demand, coolness, and work required, only the best ones are created.  Design is a simple matter of dropping tiles onto a field, and then walking through your creation to make sure it works.

    One difficulty that I can't find a solution to is "player knowledge."  If your friend maps the dungeon, you may be able to avoid traps and monsters and get the treasure with less difficulty.  Arguably this is true of developer dungeons too, but they tend to be made so that avoiding something is a choice, not chance.  I don't think it is a huge issue though.

    If I missed an issue, let me know, I'd love to take a shot at solving it!

Sign In or Register to comment.