Should MMOs Stop Telling Us We're Unique?

Great article. I always loved being a part of something big rather than being the big potato himself. So maybe that’s why I love MMO’s so much.

I think one factor is the setting and IP.   For example, MMOs like City of Heroes/Champions make little sense with thousands of superheroes running around when no comic book has ever portrayed a setting like that (except in parodies).

On the other hand, it would make sense in a Warhammer MMO where there are thousands of Space Marines in the galaxy.   Your character may be one of many but they are still an elite, insanely powerful, super-soldier fighting against foes that will destroy all Humanity if you lose.

It’s possible for an online game give a sense of importance even if they are just one warrior in an army but only on a personal level.     Making the character’s story personal and the choices have impact gives a sense that you are directing their journey.   

Server-wide recognition is another thing but people have always found ways to that in MMOs whether it’s through PvP, crafting or simply running an active and noteworthy guild.   And perhaps that is a good thing because it offers a variety of ways which the developers could never forsee.   We have seen guilds run in-game contests and events for example, perhaps we will see social networking start playing a role as players strive for recognition in their community.

In a multiplayer environment it really is up to the players to figure out how to gain recognition in their community if that is what they want, it simply isn’t something the game can easily provide.
(As I write this I think about TERA’s political system and wonder how that is working)

There are (at least) two issues here. One is whether or not games should treat you (your character) as someone unique. The other is how they should go about doing that.

In my opinion, yes, games (especially MMORPGs) should give you the opportunity to feel that you are unique. That’s one of the main differences between an RPG and an “adventure” game. In the latter you’re just following a story, in the former you’re shaping your own story, as freely as the game world allows. Note that by “unique” I don’t just mean “become the great hero”. If everyone becomes “the great hero”, they’re not actually becoming unique. 

Then there’s the path to uniqueness (or even the path to greatness). The worst thing a game can do is what GW2 does with its personal stories: Start treating you as “the great hero” (or at least as a VIP within the game world) right at the start, before you’ve achieved anything. A basic principle of heroic narratives is that the hero can only achieve that status after rebounding from failure or loss. The trailer “Siege of Neverwinter – Part 2″ is a great example of this. Girl sees her world collapse around her and is powerless to stop it. Years later, after gaining experience, she faces the same enemy again, and (presumably) defeats the ghosts from her past. The stupid shot of a dragon at the end spoils it, but it’s still a great example of a heroic narrative condensed into 90 seconds.

Some people seem to confuse “being the great hero” with “participating in epic events”, or at least assume that both are inseparable, which simply isn’t true. A good example of a game that gets it right (conceptually, at least) is… WoW. Specifically, the Death Knight opening missions, where players are treated just as one of many, but are given a chance to witness and even participate in the epic battle at the end. That makes them “special” but not unique. They were there, they knew what it was like, but they’re not hailed by all NPCs as having won the battle on their own. In fact, they’re booed and get rotten fruit thrown at them, and feel that they must overcome their past. Sadly then they have to go play WoW, but that’s another issue.

Then there’s instancing & phasing. Those are basically mechanisms to wrap single-player content and inject it into an MMO. It might be a necessity when trying to tell the story, but it’s still an ugly hack in a multi-player game with a (supposedly) consistent and persistent world.

For example, in GW2, it’s like having split personality. NPCs treat you in completely different ways depending on whether you’re inside a personal story instance or in the main game world. 

In The Secret World, it’s as if the game forgets it’s an MMO whenever you go into a mission instance. Other players (even the ones in your party) disappear, with no explanation, and only reappear when you finish that part of the quest.

In WoW, phasing makes players (and parts of the game world) visible or invisible based on whether or not they’re in the same “quest stage” as you. In a way it’s not as jarring as the other approaches, but can lead to a lot of confusion when you try to interact with players in different phases.

Ideally, MMOs should avoid any of those things. If a player’s actions are supposed to change the world, then they should actually change the world, for everyone, at least temporarily (and there should be a realistic mechanism – either automated or player-triggered – to change them back). This is what GW2 does with some of its big world events, and hopefully future games will follow that lead and do it even better. IMO, this is the biggest conceptual change to happen in MMORPG design since… well, ever.

Another good thing with this approach is that it creates plenty of opportunities for large scale multi-player “epic achievements”, where the world is changed not by the actions of a single player but by the actions of a large group, possibly over a long period of time. There are examples of this in older games (ex., the “war effort” leading to the opening of the gates of Ahn’Qiraj or the taking of the isle of Quel’Danas, in WoW). Despite being repetitive and completely irreversible (bad implementation), those were world changes that every player could see, participate in and feel proud of (good concept). They were also very, very slow. GW2 suffers from the opposite problem (world states change too quickly), but maybe that was just accelerated in the beta weekends for testing purposes.

So, to sum it up: Uniqueness is a good thing (I’d say an essential thing) in RPGs, but it shouldn’t be confused with greatness, just as greatness should not be confused with participation in epic events. MMORPGs should be designed as consistent worlds where players can share experiences and not feel like they’re constantly being pulled into their own “private realities”. If the story requires isolating players, then that story is probably best saved for a different (single-player) game. 

In the beggining there were single player RPGs. Then the internet allow us to have MMORPGs and in the beggining you were not THE hero in these games, just one in many. Recognition came from playing with others and making a name for yourself.
Then developers noticed the casual player wasnt enjoying the MMO because they played by themselves and had no recognition from other players or the game. So, in the name of more sub money, personal story and YOU ARE THE HERO was put into MMOs to please the casual player.

Story over.

Yes. It’s stupid when every one is the “chosen one”. It would be allot better if every one starts out and a “no one” and then you have the chance to climb to becoming the “chosen one” through the end game.