The Concept of "Winning" in an online RPG

[Golbez]

This topic will slowly drift back to the other thread I opened not so long ago.

What is winning? Let us take the easiest way out. Dictionary.com

1) To achieve victory or finish first in a competition.
2) To achieve success in an effort or venture.

A-ha. Very good. But in a computer game, what is winning?

Some will say, to beat the final stage, that last level, to defeat the big mean boss that mercilessly kicks our rumps around and makes us flop like a poor dirty rag doll. To watch the final scene, to find out those little elusive secrets, to try out all possible combinations and beat the game with each and every one of them.

And all of them are true! We cannot deny that we always hope to win a game we purchase or play! That is why we invest hours of our valuable time, right?

But, in a game that has no end, in a game that goes on and on permanently, such as a MMORPG...how do we win? Do we ever win? I think that we do, when certain things happen at the same time.

Firstly, let me explain to you why I do not think that levelling up leads to victory, or at least victory is not a consequence of the isolated act of advancing in one\'s skills.

The plot, in an online world, is the world itself. The backgrounds, the governmental strutcture, the economic system, the races, the history, the religion...the whole context, to make it short.

This plot is neverending, this plot goes on and on. We are certain that Yliakum will not come to a tragic end that means the extinction of all the inhabitants and the total obliteration of the world. Hydlaa will always be there. Yliakum will always be there. Those pesky monsters will always be there.

There are many sub-plots going on in the middle of all this. Some may be driven by the staff, others by players alone. An orc raid organised and set up by the moderators is a plot, albeit unoriginal, but hey! Still a plot!

One can think of many arguments to catch the players\' eye just by listing particular traits of PlaneShift\'s world. Mmm...let us see...A Vigesimi could be assassinated, or kidnapped just weeks after he publicly argued with one of his peers about his political opinion and tendencies.

Or a landslide could provoke the entrances and exits of Yliakum\'s upper level to be sealed, producing a lack of communicaction between the inhabitants of that same level and the rest of Yliakum. Rescue parties would be organised and ways to unblock the passages planned.

The Temple of Laanx could be robbed by a mysterious master thief! Or vandalised by a party of Talad fanatics! The guilty parties would be persecuted and punished, and the damage repaired.

Plots do not even have to be dramatic! Tournaments between schools of magic, exhibitions of combat skills organised and carried away by Guilds, parades, celebrations, gatherings, holidays! The imagination is your limit!

Where am I getting at? One \"wins\" in a game that involves a vast community such as this, when an event, be it either private (only you and another player), or that is public to the entire player base, is enjoyable for everyone. When a story is told, and people are drawn by the tale.

Now, sure! One needs to possess a determinate amount of skill in say...the Azure Way of Magic to be able to take part in that Magic Tournament! Or that cooking skill of x percent to be able to bake that seven foot tall cake for the celebration of The Day of Laanx.

That one is my vision of a correct application of skills in a RolePlaying game. When the skills take a secondary role, a supporting role, that backs up the storytelling.

When I level up, invest all that time killing monsters non-stop, but do -nothing- with those skills? What do I win? The satisfaction of being stronger, sure. And then? That is it?

No, no! The skills must be useful for something else other than preening and grinning proudly! And I cannot emphasise enough how useful they are for the narration of a fantastic tale.

What is your character\'s ultimate goal? \"To be stronger\", that is dull! What does he want to do with his strength? Who will he protect, who will he support? What factions is he interested in? Does he have a feud against someone? Does he plot a certain revenge against the political system? Does he hold a grudge against a determinate race? What are his motives? Has his past affected him that greatly? Who was his father? And his mother? Did he have siblings? Did he do this...? Did he do that...? And what about that? ...And all that jazz regarding that time...?

Everytime those questions are answered in game, the character\'s player wins a little bit. If you put all those small victories together, then one can say, that player has achieved victory by creating a notable persona, a character with ulterior motives and reasons for existing. Motives and reasons beyond \"an interminable thirst for killing zombies and skeletal warriors.\"

I am in no way telling you that this is the only way to play a RolePlaying game. This is the way I play a RolePlaying game, and I explain to you why. I am suggesting this because, isn\'t it worth a shot? I assure you, if well performed, it can be a pleasant and fulfilling experience.

RPing has this exciting thing about it, you never run out of stories to tell. As long as your imagination is kept vivid, you can continue your tale through your character\'s actions, through his speech, through his acquaintances, through his loyalties.

And when you run out of stories, a new, completely different character can be born inside your mind, and start from scratch.

After all, if RolePlaying is as simple as acting a character, being in a neverending RolePlaying game, is like being part of the cast of an interminable theatre play. The choices are limitless.

- Golbez

[Abemore]

Very nice essay Golbez. (good to see ya, by the way )

I had once posted my thoughts about the future of MMORPGs.  The direction they are headed.  And what I came up with is something similar to the \"The Thirteenth Floor\" or \"The Matrix\" in that what we are headed toward is the creation of a parallel reality.  Here in actual reality, there is no winning.  Is there?  Perhaps he who die\'s with the most money wins?

What I am alluding to is that one can only win victorys on the goals he or she sets for him or her self.  In a MMORPG, the goals are the completion of a quest.  Each time you accept a quest, you are deciding to play a game, a game within the MMORPG, a game that can be completed, a game that you can win.  Each time you complete a quest, you win.  

[Saethan]

Question: Isn\'t \"Yliakum\" the name of the world?  :-)

[snow_RAveN]

Nicely said

but even if there is no winning in any mmorpgs people always try to win

the Rules of engagement go some thing like this

1)if its a number make it bigger
2)if its a bar make it longer
3)if its a rare/unquie(sp) get it
4)if it moves kill it or get a quest form it
5)If its a fellow player !!~~~OWN~~~!! it

[Golbez]

Yes, Snow. Those are examples of what a vast majority of players view as \"victories\", but in reality do not hold any special meaning in itself, when it comes to playing a true RolePlaying Game.

Those are the concepts that have to be taken away from the player\'s minds. RolePlaying is about cooperative storytelling, in opposition to action games and shooters, which are competitive (either free for all, or \"blue\" against \"red\" )

Even when one player RolePlays a lawful character, and another plays a criminal, there is cooperation between them. Because both agree to play a scene in which, a roll of a dice, or an unexpected event will decide who defeats who, and both commit to the result.

I enjoyed playing the occasional bar brawler once or twice. I had pre-arranged the encounter with another character, and decided that the basics of the argument would be over X, Y and Z. During the conversation, we as players drifted it towards those points, yet we never followed a strict script.

Then the characters would brawl, the result would depend on when and how the law enforcers arrived, and we would RolePlay the situation accordingly. (We could not predict when the players of the guardsmen would be notified of the conflict). The result? My character was locked in a cell and punished for a violent crime, while the other, who had not had time to react to his attacks, was seen as a mere victim (although, given some room, he would have counter-attacked).

Had we predicted that? No way! Logic would have said that both would have been punished with jail time, but the scene played differently than in our heads!

Was it worth it? Heck yes! Do I consider it a victory? Of course! We all had heaps of fun, the \'victim\' got to roleplay his character having a broken nose for a week or two, and one of the soldiers got kicked in my character\'s struggle to continue his fight. Everyone went to bed with a smile on their faces, because a fun scene took place.

My character went to jail. He lost. But as a player, I won. I had fun. That is what this is all about.

And guess what? That game had skills, and the only one used was the Guards\' ability to restrain and drag people to the jail. Makes you think that skills are not -THAT- necessary, eh?

[druke]

ekk this shows there are two main types of players

-roleplayers (and all there extremities)
-game players (and all there extremities)

[Kixie]

Now that i think of it i never play to win. Half the games i purchase or play are games that A. I cant officially win in (like mmorpgs and morrowind, the best game ever.) Or B. Games that i can win but i get too bored. Though sometimes i do complete the stories of the B games (I.E. Knights of the old republic) But really i play for the fun of the game. Cheating in offline games is not unholy to me, as long as i have some sort of fun in it. The only game i dont really cheat in is morrowind cus i have to much fun not cheating and creating a roleplaying persona. Winning isnt a big deal to me, its having fun. Thats why im sticking to planeshift because i love these sort of games cus you cant win. They arent made to. I love MMORPGS and this seems to be the best one coming out so im sticking to it (and playing more morrowind untill Crystal Blue)

[Davis]

Well, the game players can play single-player RPGs, because in an online game created for those types of people, players are just smart NPCs that help you fight. Ever played Diablo II on Battle.net?

Winning in an MMORPG depends on the person, just like winning in life depends on the person. You may get satisfaction just in completing quests, gaining political power, or just going around having fun until you get a job. \"Winning\" should not be defined by the people who designed the game.

And yes, IMO, leveling is a means, not an end. To enforce that, the power difference between to players of different level should not be so drastic as it is in most games. I know, there are no overall levels, but what I\'m saying applies to skill levels too. In fact, I don\'t think you should be able to view the exact skill you have, just a general idea.

And Golbez, do you write for a living? If you don\'t, you could make money in your spare time writing articles for magazines etc.

[Rulzern]

Very good post, both in writing and subject.

I feel that the concept of winning in MMORPG\'s sort of defeats the purpose (depending on the player style of cource), a MMORPG is a tool to live out an image of yourself projected into a viritual world, you can do things that you would never do in the real world.

I feel that most games are RPG\'s in a sense, you play out a role that you don\'t have in real life, you make decisions based on the character you have assumed the mind of.

If the goal of the game is to finish it, i think the game is a failiure. The goal should be to play the game, and MMORPG\'s are a pretty good embodification of that philosophy, you have no real goal, other than the internal goals you set, that can drive you forward and make the experience actually fun.

MMORPG\'s really gives the player full control to shape his/her gaming experience and the game itself, only restricted by the rules set by the game.

I think all people play MMORPG\'s for different reasons, mine is (amongst others) the experience of feeling, observing and playing my part in a community that always evolves (probably why i prefer games with a small, tight community).

Also the feeling that i use my afternoon for something useful, when i really don\'t.

BTW: sorry for this post not making any sense, i\'m a bit tired and sick.

[AendarCallenlasse]

I like to think of it this way.  A single player game is simply a scene from an MMORPG.  I just think of an MMORPG in terms of what happened before and after you killed that big boss or rescued the princess?  You can still have major plot lines and goals in a game but then you get to go back to your everyday in game life and see how defeating that guy affects life.  and then something else happens.  It\'s like having an unlimited number of sequel games rolled into one.

[Otharor]

Winning is being confident about what you\'ve done (whatever that is).

Golbez, write a book.

[Golbez]

Good points! Keep the discussion alive, I think it is very constructive, personally.

Although I would feel insulted if, when playing online, someone considers me to be \"just a smart NPC\"

[Xalthar]

In the MMORPG Anarchy online, the devs have planned for one of the sides (Omni-Tek and Clan) to win the conflict, either for freedom or domination..

they botched that idea, and never got the cool story running as great as it could have... basing the game on a conflict that eventually is going to be decided can give you a sense of \"winning\" when one of the sides subdues the other..

[Rulzern]

Also, in some MMORPG\'s, having control of a certain area can be seen as winning (or breaking somebody\'s control over an area)

[Golbez]

There is a very interesting site from a certain fellow who decided to go by the name of Uncle Figgy. He has a similar approach to \"winning\" in a game such as the one we are discussing.

Allow me to quote!

Written by Uncle Figgy
It doesn\'t exist in the roleplaying world, especially when you\'re a player. Unlike video or board games, there usually is no definitive end to a roleplaying game. There may be an end to a specific adventure or an epic quest, but sometimes the end of one campaign will be just the beginning of another.

If you absolutely must focus on \"winning\", here\'s a new perspective to do it with: You\'re winning if you\'re playing your character to the best of your ability, even if that means putting him in situations where he might be killed. You\'re winning if you are involved in the game and not talking to the other players about your day at work. And most importantly, you\'re not losing if your character dies (those who\'ve read Uncle Figgy\'s Guide to Good GameMastering will remember that I\'m not very big on PC death unless it\'s totally warranted). In some games, remember, death is only a temporary inconvenience for those with enough money and/or power to get it reversed. And even if death is more serious than that, a good GM will reward a player who\'s character has died as a result of good roleplaying.

What does this mean? That disregarding whether your character comes out victorious in a battle or is defeated in the most humilliating way conceivable, or whether your faction takes over that town or the attack is foiled by the enemy, or in any other situation...If you, as a player, gave your best as a RolePlayer and the performance allowed for everyone to have fun and enjoy themselves (Both in the winning and losing side of the In Character grid), then you should consider yourself to have won that day.

Your character was defeated? Use that as a hook to affect the choices of your character! Maybe that will solve his problem with over-confidence. Or perhaps he shall dedicate his next \"x\" amount of days/weeks/months training just to get back at this one fellow that humilliated him in public. Take advantage of the possibilities of every IC action to show how your avatar is a believable person, with emotions, strengths and weaknesses.

Your character was victorious? Well hey! If he is the loud and boisterous kind of lad that preens his chest in front of the ladies and brags about his accomplishments, this will be the next tale to come out from his mouth! If he is a martial instructor, he could use this as an example for his students to explain why he was the winner and the his opponent the loser.

These reactions are obvious, each character would view his personal victory or defeat in a different way and be affected by them at a disctinct level. Some are more indifferent and aloof than the others, and so on.

A pre-concept has to be broken here. A rule that many think is absolute and universal but it is not always that way.

\"If the character wins, then the player wins.\"

To the statement above, I voice a loud and clear \"WRONG!\"

The player wins when after the gaming session, he is left with the satisfaction and elation of having had a great, memorable time. But his character may have been horribly beaten to the edge of death by five street thugs, or may have kicked the butt of those same brutes. It all depends on how the scene is RolePlayed.

So the true thesis would be...

\"If the RolePlaying was enjoyable, then the player has won.\"

This is no competition, this is cooperative storytelling. The players of the \"bad guys\" cooperate with the players of the \"good guys\" so that the scenes between their characters can be exciting, exhilarating, and thrilling for everyone. Be them involved or not.

I have seen people on the boards, particularly when skimming the Guild Boards, that did not enjoy a member of a certain guild wishing luck to the recent new guild. Or that he said \"Hope you do well!\" to X, but had said the same to Y, so that makes him a hypocrite!

I have also seen someone openly flame and reproach the quality of another homepage for a Guild, because he belongs to a bad guild, and since everyone was congratulating the maker of the organisation for a flawless presentation, he as a \"Bad guy\" had to \"Roleplay being bad\" and negatively criticise the site.

Heh. That is nonsense.

One thing is the OOC board, another, is the IC grid. From an Out of Character perspective (These forum, except the RolePlaying one), the closer and friendlier the community is, no matter who belongs to what guild or what allignment this character is, the better the RolePlaying environment.

Conflict should be In Character and In Character ONLY. There is no reason for a player of a criminal to loathe the player of a law enforcer. In fact, if you visit a MUD, you will find out that the best friends usually play characters that are on the opposite bands, and often their characters would encounter each other in a deadly duel.

IC rivalry does not imply an OOC rivalry.

That is another thing to take into account. For example, my character Golbez may have immense difficulty in getting along with Kada-El \"chaotic good\" tendencies, to the point of arguing and who knows? Maybe even draw a blade at her.

I would still think that Kada-El\'s player is a peachy person and one of the friendliest I have found in the community.

Comments? Discrepancies? Flaming?

- Golbez