Many of our thoughts about the game come in the form of features we want to implement.
Continuing to assume a space MMOG with strong sim and RP attributes.
- /Locomotion Travel methods
- /The Ever Unfolding Universe. Physical extent
- /Dynamic Environment Motivating elements, "story" bits, to use an overused concept
- /Economy and Trading
- /Player Roles and Roleplaying
- /Internal Ship Interface Flight and widget control, perhaps the main player interface
- /Internal Station Interface Station management, or access to other functional systems
- /Widgets Player-controlled non-ship objects, including equipment and components
General Feature Ideas
Stuff not yet categorized...
- Restricting information flow. I think it could add a lot to the game if the flow of information was limited. There could be a market for the transport of market data and news, for instance. (Idea due to C. J. Cherryh's books.) Communications between widely dispersed team members could be a major tactical consideration. However, it's very easy for information to flow instantaneously outside the game. (Chat, email, voice comms.) Is there any way to reconcile this and still make this a feature of the game?
Istvan Metagame information flow is a critical problem: there are no secrets on the Internet. Reconciliation probably has to be on the level of information duration: Keeping valuable information short-term escalates the information war in your favor over the fansites, which usually can't be updated fast enough to keep up with the changing world. Information that does not somehow grant advantage over other players would be important to make available freely, through in-game interfaces (further reducing the community recourse to fansites). DWM Aside from short-shelf-life data, abstracted data can also be kept in-game. For instance, you've gotten the cryptographic keys to a rival's comms. The game doesn't ever tell you what the key is, just that you have it. And of course, the game gives you tools for doing things with it, including (probably) sharing it with others. Istvan Perfect. Abstracted data, with in-game tools, fits this need very well.
- AI with likes, dislikes, and a memory as good as your spouse's. I think it would be neat to have NPCs (other pilots, crew members, company market agents, station personnel...) that over time develop and keep attitudes towards other characters (including players), and react appropriately. Also, attitudes can be influenced by others. (The mechanic in Bay 5 heard what a butt-head you were to the mechanic in Bay 3 the last time you were in dock, so don't expect quick turnaround time on your ship.)
Istvan If reactions were dependent upon a small number of variable player-object prestige or reputation attributes (in example, a low prestige with maintenance workers), the AI would only reference one or more player attributes to determine behavior. Keeping the number of these attributes small might be a necessary consideration. Detail is good for realism and immersion, but I've usually thought about this kind of thing on the government or organization level. DWM Yeah, this is a bit 'out there' in terms of programming complexity and, perhaps, storage needs. Not sure though. From a programming perspective, it's appealing to think of AI entities as independent programmatic units that have the same interface to the game that players do (at a binary level). This prevents AI 'cheating', keeps AI complexities from creeping into other parts of the game, and leverages off existing interfaces within the game program. (The latter point is fairly important; my preferred approach to organizing programming projects puts a big emphasis and a lot of effort into cooperative interface design. Individual programmers have a relatively free hand in implementing subsystems behind these interfaces.) Istvan I'd propose starting with AI on a "larger entity" - corp and govt management - level, but leaving "hooks" in objects such as stations and ships such that AI "operators" can be brought in as we are comfortable with the complexity. A simple early ship AI should be implemented for orbital shuttles, which are part "color", part economic visibility: since planets are intended to be outside the scope, shuttle objects would move station-to-surface and back and conduct transfer of commoditiies from stations. That transfer would be from the stations proper to a government's or corp's (controlling the plants) abstract inventories/repositories. Destroying shuttles would be both possible and have a direct impact on (A) resource movement, and (B) attitude of the owning entity toward the destroyer.
- Exploration, supported by game mechanics. Knee-jerk typical statement from me (Istvan), because I always want player activities to be supported by some sort of mechanics-based infrastructure. However, I have trouble coming up with good ways to benefit players who just want to sightsee. Here's my best shot so far: (A) "Science missions" - ships may be outfitted with expensive scientific sensor suites. Missions may be taken for governments or corps (I suspect players will be more goal-oriented and unlikely to sponsor this sort of activity for other players) to go make flyby observations or take samples from certain objects or locations. Targets for these missions would be in out-of-the-way coordinates, and may require significant travel times. Logical objects would be outer moons, comets in interesting orbits, and general unclaimed asteroids and Kuiper Belt objects. Benefits to the explorer player would be seeing something off the beaten path - and we'd also want interesting levels of pretty detail as intangible reward - and the direct mission payouts. It might be interesting to incorporate a sort of "research point" system behind the "science missions", which we could use in some manner behind the scenes. I hesitate to patch in new game adds on the basis of pure research, but we might come up with some other application. Better in my thinking would be a reversal of this mission-based scheme (B), wherein a roving player with a ship full of science equipment might be able to gather "science points" for various actions (depending on the equipment possessed) - effectively taking scans and photos, sample returns, maybe analyzing the solar wind in deep space, I don't know what the explorer players will think is fun, and what would be boring, because I mostly don't think that way. Once a player has accrued "data" in science points, I should think they ought to be able to turn them in to a corp or government's research office for some kind of reward, or maybe it goes straight to Prestige/PR, which might let them earn grants for funding better research equipment.... Science point "harvesting" (ugly word) would be dependent upon quality of your equiopment, time spent at any target location, AND on some sort of game-based rating of the value of the region you chose as a target - which latter information would NOT be openly published. This game based rating might be related to player traffic in the area, and/or distance from busy space, or what-have-you. Automated sensor packages or probes (point above) could be incorporated, assuming that the rate of accumulation of science data is not rapid - so the "cheap science" is done by ships on flyby, while the real expensive investment is in automated probes that either need to be left and retrieved, or which send radio telemetry to a receiver (on a player's ship?, rented from a station?), but which provide a greater "harvest" of "data" per unit time. The beauty here is that if the widgets shut down after a while, someone else might find value in coming along to salvage them (assuming you don't pick them up for reprogramming) - and what happens if a zealous salvage team finds and junks your probe while it's still providing valuable data...? On a related note, (C) prospecting should be fully supported by any mining mechanics in the game. Explorer-players might prospect, with no intention of ever exploiting. They might find and assay a certain asteroid, report "asteroid 2008-223J has ferrous ores at 24%" to some corp, take a fee, and let the corp go do the mining. Or they might take a step further, assay and characterize the rock completely, and stake a claim, in which case they might try selling the claim, or try convincing someone that their rock is SO nice they should be paid for the mining rights.... All of which assumes a robust in-game bulletin-board type system.