Tag Archives: shadowrun

What makes a good MMO setting?

The recent Shadowrun Online kickstarter prompted a bit of thought on my part, as — unlike to most Shadowrun fans — I’d always felt that Shadowrun would lose a lot in translation to MMO-land. 1

So what does make for a good MMO setting, when you’re talking about existing IPs from books, movies, television and existing non-MMO game franchises? I’m not sure I know, but I do think there are some important factors to consider. (Note that all these apply to themepark MMOs, rather than sandbox games, as they’re a rather different beast.)

Books! Image CC-licensed by A30_Tsitika on Flickr

1. What makes the original IP engaging?

This is something my tabletop gaming GM 2 and I have often thrown around as a criterion when thinking about what makes for a good roleplaying campaign, 3 and I think it applies equally to MMORPGs. Think for a moment about the original IP (especially for books/movies/TV) — is it interesting because of the adventures (or personalities) of the protagonists? Or because the setting itself is interesting? Could you imagine another group of characters having an equally interesting time in that world?

Most original tabletop RPG settings succeed against this criterion (because it’s their job to provide interesting adventure and challenges for any group of characters); TVs and books and movies are more of a mixed bag. As an example: Star Wars and Star Trek both succeed, because the world is full of interesting adventure for anybody. Doctor Who, on the other hand, fails; there aren’t that many Time Lords out there, and for everyone else, life’s going to be pretty mundane. There are some cases where the story is about the protagonists yet there’s a rich backdrop behind them (such as Farscape, Firefly, or Babylon 5), but in general most character-driven stories aren’t likely to be very interesting for the people in the background.

2. Is there a power scale?

Unless you’re talking about entirely sandboxy games where players make their own fun, you need a sliding scale of antagonists. You need mooks for the characters to wade their way through, and you need Big Bads who pose a serious threat to civilisation/the world/your way of life, requiring cooperation to take them down.

This is where horror and fantasy settings shine, of course; whether classic high fantasy like the Lord of the Rings or modern fantasy horror like Buffy, the monsters can always be bigger and badder. By comparison, other genre staples like espionage thrillers or procedural crime stories fall down here — who would characters in an NCIS MMO actually fight? Other ordinary humans? That doesn’t sound compelling.

3. Does the setting suit MMO story needs?

Because of the way quest-driven MMOs are constructed, you need to be able to assume that most characters (not players) are willing to let questgivers tell them what to do, whether because they’re all motivated to be heroes (as in typical quest fantasy) or because they’re the kind of people who will accept orders from their superiors (for instance, military types).

Again, this works in most fantasy settings, because the archetype of the fantasy hero saving the world is fairly strong; even if there are plenty of characters who break the mold, it’s reasonable to assume that protagonists are heroes or champions, and to write quest and story dialogue with those assumptions front and centre. If your setting is full of characters who look askance at disinterested altruism or blindly trusting in The Man, though, that puts a lot of constraints on how characters are motivated to do your quests. This is a criterion that dystopian settings like cyberpunk and espionage tend to fail; in a grim and gritty near-future where people will do whatever they have to to survive (such as Shadowrun or Dark Angel), hoo-rah heroism tends to look somewhat out of place.

4. Does the setting constrain normal MMO mechanics?

“Death” is the obvious problem here. In high-magic fantasy settings a plethora of revival spells make sense; in science-fiction futures, cloning and personality transfers are a reasonable explanation. But in low-magic low-tech settings, you need a plausible way to explain how Joe isn’t dead any more.

LotRO got around this problem cleverly. Healing magic in the canonical setting is slow and subtle, and has no provisions for returning from death (unless you’re Gandalf, and even then he had to get help from Eru himself). So Turbine re-cast traditional health pools as Morale; when you run out of Morale you’re not dead, you’re just too demoralised to continue, and this of course allows for healing and buffing effects from those who improve your morale (such as Minstrels and Captains).

But this dodge won’t work for every setting — it’d be jarring in a pseudo-realistic urban fantasy setting like Buffy, for instance. And there are plenty of much-loved science fiction properties that don’t have handwavium-levels of technology to allow for functional interchangeable clones, such as Babylon 5 or Battlestar Galactica.

Similarly, if the setting comes from an existing tabletop game or video game, does it come attached to game mechanics that don’t translate well to MMO gameplay? WotC’s D20 system is a good example here — it’s the mechanical system behind tabletop games like Dungeons and Dragons and the Star Wars Roleplaying Game, and fidelity to it served singleplayer computer games like Neverwinter Nights and Knights of the Old Republic very well. But it didn’t translate very well to an MMORPG, where players have different expectations of the gameplay. Dungeons & Dragons Online — a sloggy clickfest — is living proof that mechanics permanently attached to a setting can be a millstone around the neck of an MMO based in that setting.

5. Does the setting still make sense when there are ten thousand protagonists?

This is where Star Wars Galaxies ran into problems when people started unlocking the ability to create Jedi characters — set between A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back, it was hard to explain away the existence of half a dozen Jedi, let alone a server full of them. SWTOR avoided this issue; in the Old Republic era, there are canonically thousands of Jedi, and seeing a party of Jedi working together (or even a space station full of them) isn’t jarring in the same way it was in SWG.

A setting passes this criterion when you can imagine that any character could do what the protagonist does — Star Trek, for instance, succeeds handily because we know that there are tens of thousands of Starfleet officers out there; there are thousands of witches and wizards in the world of Harry Potter. There aren’t that many Time Lords, though, or Vampire Slayers, or D’ni, or Tarzans. When a setting features a single protagonist whose uniqueness is the linchpin of the story, it’s almost inevitably going to fail as an MMO – what works for the Chosen One becomes nonsensical for the Chosen Ten Thousand.

…Obviously I’m not an MMO dev,4 and MMOs are based on fresh IPs as often as not, but at least these rules help to remind me that “no, that might be a great book but it’d make a terrible setting for an MMO” when I’m having pangs of wishing I could adventure in my favourite fictional worlds.

  1. I do have reasons for this opinion, but they’d be something of a digression. That’s a post for another day.
  2. Who may very well be the best GM in the entire world. Seriously, you other gamers only wish you had a GM this great.
  3. Because we are obsessive nutbags about gaming and RPGs.
  4. More’s the pity.

Shadowrun Online: when being second hurts

As I write this, Shadowrun Online has a little under three days to go before its Kickstarter-based funding drive ends, and it’s not looking good for Cliffhanger Productions. They’re about two thirds of the way to their goal; although the pledges have really ramped up in the last week, it may not be enough to get across the line.

Shadowrun Online backer banner

Shadowrun Online is, of course, based on the popular and long-lived pen-and-paper RPG Shadowrun, which has had a complicated history. First developed by Jordan Weisman at FASA Corporation (and one of FASA’s two big successes, along with Battletech), Shadowrun was licensed to Fantasy Productions when FASA closed its doors. FanPro lost the license to Catalyst Game Labs a few years later, who hold it now. Mind you, the electronic rights (that is, video games) were first spun off along with all the other FASA intellectual properties to FASA Interactive, which was then sold to Microsoft, who then produced the much-hated Shadowrun FPS. In the wake of that, Microsoft closed FASA Interactive and licensed the electronic rights to Smith and Tinker, a new company established by Jordan Weisman. (I feel I should intone “the circle is now complete”, Darth Vader-style, at this point.)

Now, I have a long-standing love affair with Shadowrun; it was the first game I wrote for professionally, back in its Third Edition era, and I’ve been playing it since University. It’s by far my favourite RPG. So seeing the Kickstarter struggling is sad, for me.

Unfortunately, it’s got a few points counting against it.

First of all, a high-profile Kickstarter for a Shadowrun video game exploded across Shadowrun fandom just a few months ago. That was back in April for Shadowrun Returns, a single-player 2D turn-based RPG from Jordan Weisman’s new company, and it did amazingly well. Over 36,000 backers, and they made over four times their funding goal – they asked for $400,000 and got $1.8 million. By comparison, Shadowrun Online has 3,800 backers and has scored (so far) about $330,000 of its $500,000 goal. It’s hard not to suspect that Shadowrun Returns has already leached out a lot of the money and enthusiasm for Shadowrun video games. (Certainly the Shadowrun fans I know are talking about SRO a lot less than they promoted Shadowrun Returns.)

Then there’s the simple fact that MMO gamers – although it feels like we’re everywhere, thanks to WoW’s phenomenal success – are only a fraction of the gaming market. There are a lot of gamers out there who don’t particularly like MMOs, and don’t want to play them. Most MMO players enjoy single-player games as well; the reverse is often not true.

Next there’s the confusion over Shadowrun Online’s subscription model. Originally the Kickstarter launched as a full free-to-play game, which of course necessitates reliance on microtransactions for funding. There was plenty of unhappiness around this, and Cliffhanger’s people put their heads together and came up with an alternative: they’d also offer a “Campaign” model, where you buy the game up-front and then pay nothing for gameplay, Guild Wars style. So as not to invalidate the pre-Campaign model pledges, they’ll be offering different servers for different game types. It’s actually fairly straightforward, and kudos to Cliffhanger for being responsive to their fans, but I suspect the sudden change created unnecessary confusion, which puts people off committing their cash.

And then there’s the setting differences. Shadowrun Online is set in the game’s “present”, in the 2070s; Shadowrun Returns is set in 2050, the setting of the earliest editions of the pen-and-paper game. That’s a huge nostalgia trip right there for long-time fans, and there’s a lot of nostalgia in the Shadowrun fanbase. The current edition of Shadowrun, 4th Edition, shook up the world and changed the playing field when it was released. 1 Although 4th Edition has done very well commercially, and was critically acclaimed, there’s a significant proportion of the fanbase who’d love an opportunity to run around in the 2050s again, and SRO just doesn’t cater to that the way Shadowrun Returns did.

Whether it’s one of these factors, or more likely a mixture of all of them, it looks like this is more of a handicap than SRO can overcome. And that’s a great shame; although I have my doubts about how well Shadowrun would fit a themepark MMO model, I’d love the chance to be proved wrong.

  1. For a sense of the magnitude of these changes, think of the Shattering in WoW’s recent Cataclysm expansion