How To Conquer the Flight Sim Market

[ISHMAEL]

Frustrated by the lack of realism in player behavior witnessed in Massive Multiplayer (MMP) flight simulation online arenas (as
opposed to the more often expressed concern over realism in flight modeling), a group of like-minded players began to do a little
collective brain-storming on the Delphi Flight Sim forum (http://www.delphi.com/flight). We set out to first identify the "problems"
with online flight-simming, then develop a means of addressing those problems.

As I said, our exclusive focus was realism (or lack thereof) in player behavior. We were NOT interested in hardware or software
issues, or any other element related to the creation of realistic and believable online worlds. Primarily, our discussion began with
the lack of willingness on the part of most players to "disengage" from no-win combats (where real world fighter pilots would
desperately run for their lives, most virtual pilots will continue to fight to the death). From there, we proceeded to identify a
number of other "problems." A brief list follows.

1. No, little, or insufficient reward for preservation of the player pilot's "life," promoting "to-the-death" fighter tactics
2. No modeling of the novice-to-veteran-to-elite skill growth of long-lived pilots
3. Over-emphasis upon aircraft modeling as opposed to "pilot modeling" (all the Hardware but no Software). Players fly aircraft
but do not "become" pilots - resulting in a lack of immersion.
4. No >personal< rewards for success

Having identified the problems, I began to brain storm some solutions. The result of my work can be found at this url:  http://www.netvector.com/redbaron/  - The Red Baron Historical War. The Historical War (HW) was an experiment to find out if
I could design a >better< MMP system for Flight Simulations - a system that would:

1. Encourage pilots to "fear" death (and thus promote evasion and retreat)
2. Model the increased value of long-lived veteran or elite pilots over that of inexperienced new recruits
3. Increase the immersion players feel when participating in the MMP environment (making players feel that they really are pilots
participating in an air war).
4. Reward each player >personally< for his own successes

The rule set that emerged probably owes more to ULTIMA ONLINE or EVERQUEST than it does to any flight simulation
here-to-fore brought to the market. Here is a brief synopsis of the concepts devised.

1. Players create an Online Alter Ego (OAE) pilot
2. The OAE pilot dies when the player is shot down or crashes
3. The longer the player survives (the more time the player spends in the online war world without being shot down) the higher his
OAE pilot's "experience rating" climbs.
4. A player with an experienced OAE pilot scores more points (for his/herself and team) for the same action than a player with a
less experienced OAE pilot.
5. Players with experienced OAE pilots are awarded additional "skills and powers" unavailable to players with less experienced
OAE pilots.
6. A player with a high scoring OAE pilot is rewarded with a higher rank relative to player's with low scoring OAE
7. Command responsibility conveys the ability to plan missions for other players and confer medals to other player OAE pilots.
8. Medals reward the player's OAE with increased "skills and powers," increased experience ratings, and increased scoring
potential.

This system was play tested over 10 weeks and 20 game "sessions" of 2.5 hours each, totaling 50 hours of play test time. The test
involved thirty participants and by all accounts, was a perfect success (I acted as referee and record keeper). The participants
were unanimous in their praise for the system, agreeing that it was the "best" MMP experience they had ever had online.

Our testing now continues with a further expansion of these concepts.

Based upon our experience with the Historical War, I believe that the first Sim Company that incorporates the Online Alter Ego concept into the MMP server architecture will CONQUER the flight sim market!

ISHMAEL

[-sudz-]

My problem with the OAE is two-fold:

1)  I've encountered pilots who don't care
    about living and will head-on, crash
    into, or otherwise make you die by
    "gaming the game".  This makes you lose
    any build up you have for the character
    just because the other guy got pissed or
    is drunk and just wants to be a nuisance.

2)  The build up discourages country defense.
    I would bail on a field in trouble
    because I might get vulched and lose my
    character.  If the last field is the
    only one left I may just log until reset
    for the same reasons.

Pilot realism may have its virtues, but unless you can guarantee every other pilot flying around has the same dedication (and isn't just jacking around) I think I'll stick with the fun of fight-to-the-death.

-sudz-

[ISHMAEL]

Pilot realism may have its virtues, but unless you can guarantee every other pilot flying around has the same dedication (and isn't just jacking around) I think I'll stick with the fun of fight-to-the-death.
----------

Your point is well taken. This is one of the problems we endeavoured to address with the system's built-in rewards and penalties (under the test run through).

The OAE system was devised as a MEANS of encouraging the participants to seek long lives. The current systems (really a complete lack of any system) actually REWARD foolhardiness and encourage players to take unnecissary risks (even to the point of "kamikazee" attacks).

Player devotion to longevity increases relative to the desirability of the rewards offered as a consquence of survival - and the undesirability of the consequences of death. Obviously, if the rewards of long life are appealing to the player, he will endeavour to achieve them through the available means (survival).

It is neccissary then to think long and hard as to how long life might be rewarded within the confines of the game (and how short life - or intentionally self-destructive behaviour may be discouraged).

Some options include:

REWARDS OF LONGEVITY
1. Players with long-lived pilot OAEs may enjoy a financial DISCOUNT on their participation fees!
2. The longer a pilot survives, the higher his scoring potential (multipliers are applied to his/her game points).
3. Only the highest scoring OAEs have access to the high-performance aircraft (high scores being attainable only by pilots with large score multipliers). Certain "experimental" aircraft or "short supply" aircraft may be available only to high-ranked OAEs (rank being dependant on relative scores)
5. "Situational Awareness" (SA) view-keys may be increased in power in proportion to the OAEs current life-span (ie. Experienced OAEs can track enemy aircraft with "slew views" at longer ranges). This implies that newly-created OAEs will have much less SA power at their disposal (making it harder for them to attack and destroy experienced opponents).
6. 5% boost to engine horsepower, turn rate, climbing ability, roll, or firepower at the player's descretion (representing customization of aircraft)
7. Command positions are dependent upon high scores (which require large score multipliers) and a living alter ego (death ends the command).

NEGATIVES OF DEATH/SHORT LIFE
1. Must create new, bottom-ranked, zero-experience pilot OAE.
2. Access granted only to most ineffective aircraft types.
3. No command ability
4. Poor SA abilities (short ranges for all "slew mode" tracking keys)
5. Newly created alter egos have a 5% penaltiy applied to their aircraft's speed, turn rate, climbing ability, roll, or firepower (player's descretion). This effect disappears after the player has flown X number of hours online.

ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR PENALTIES
As kamikazee tactics remain a potential sore-spot, any player with an OAE that dies due to an air-to-air collision before X number of survived hours could be penalized when creating his or her next OAE. Penalties might include a 10% across the board cut in all aspects of aircraft performance for the player's next OAE. Again though, this effect would disappear after X number of hours survived in game.

-------------------

These are just some of the ways in which longevity can be encouraged to the point where anti-social hoolaganism becomes a self-destructive tactic. The system itself, through rewards and penalties, gently nudges players toward historically accurate combat behaviors. It also realistically simulates the high value of experienced pilots.

Most importantly, it dramatically increases the level of immersion for all participants.

ISHMAEL

[chester]

well said ish!
his war concept is truly much better play.quite frankly it causes greater belivabilty.we as simmers do have some responsiblty.input real,you get more real.fly to live.belive you are really that cyber-guy in the plane.remember in real live theres no re-start key......try it....or have more of the same.

[Kats]

I think he hit on something, the key word being $cash$ - the second closest thing to death  

Hows this:

 (Flat Rate Charge)-(Longest Streak X 1/3)= Payment Due.

Or something along those lines.

[Windle]

I'm with Ishmael on this one - great concept!

 

------------------
Lt. Jg. Windle
VF-17 'The Jolly Rogers' 8X
  Skychrgr@aol.com  

[hitech]

This concept is nothing realy new and a form of it was tried by AW many years back. What it realy comes down to is how arena play functions unlike real war. In real life pilots do not have a choice of weather to engage or run, they are given a mission and commanded to go do it with major consiquences if they dont try and complete the mission.

In arena play that's not missioned based (and we are keeping it that way) you can decided to run or fight at any time without any bad things happening if you run. So the net effect is when you make living of such great importance people always choose to run when they have a fair chance of dieing.

Theres also major problems when it comes to disco's and such , is a disco a death or not?

If it's not a death what whould you do if you were about to die and end a 4 week streak?

If it is a death how do you think you would react when you had a disco after a 4 week streak.

What happens in the end is you spend hours chacing people and never have a fight.


HiTech

[ISHMAEL]

In arena play that's not missioned based (and we are keeping it that way) you can decided to run or fight at any time without any bad things happening if you run. So the net effect is when you make living of such great
importance people always choose to run when they have a fair chance of dieing.
---------

How do you know this?

You have here stated what is only an HYPOTHESIS concerning player behaviour. I DARE you to test it.

I did.

The results of my test:

It took WEEKS before pilots even began to learn how to be cautious. Self preservation required a constant battle against the urge for game "action."

What you forget is that players don't log on to a COMBAT arena in order to fly around and look at the scenery. They participate for the thrill of combat! Action... for the simmer... is it's own reward.

Therefore, our goal was to redress the imbalance and provide an incentive for survival - so as to promote combat disengagement or even avoidance.

We were NOT trying to throw the pendulum the other way (note that players did not receive electric shocks when mortally wounded). The rewards of survival were calculated and adjusted (based on testing) to balance out against the player's desire to fight.

With regard to pilots running from a situation where they have a "fair chance" (read "reasonable") of dying, that's called REALISM!!! Even so, our beta test (and testing continues) revealed that pilots were still more than willing to take "reasonable" risks (and many foolhardy ones) - especially when their side was in mortal danger of loosing a major asset. If player's prove (in the tests I assume you will run to prove your hypothesis) unwilling to take risks to assist their side in "winning" the war, i humbly submit that some game based reward needs to be present to give players a personal stake in the advancement of their team's long term goals.

As for the problem of "discos" which you raise, I submit that there ARE solutions to this quandry.

In our beta test, we assumed that a "disco" (disconnect) modeled random engine failures (Mechanical problems, or "Mechs" for short, were a real world problem and often required pilots to scrub their missions in flight and return to base).

Under our OAE system, "Engine Failures" occuring during combat (within range of enemy guns) resulted in death. "Engine Failures" at any other time did not result in death (the pilot was assumed to have been able to fly his crippled aircraft home).

Alternative solutions also exist. Some of these include:

1. Disconnects over enemy territory (while not in combat) result in loss of any experience gained from that gaming session.
2. Disconnects over enemy territory (while not in combat) result in a small, random chance of "capture."
3. All other disconnects in flight (but not in combat) result in the loss of all points gained during the flight.
4. Any pilots "killed" by a pilot who disconnects in flight, during the same mission, are miraculously resurected - and all points for the kills are lost.
5. If the pilot has a parachute, a disconnect in combat is treated exactly like a parachute attempt.

Of course, these are just some of the ways that connection difficulties can be addressed (and pilots prevented inducing diconnections in order to escape death). There are perhaps better solutions. I invite the members of this forum to suggest some.

Most people put only the amount of thought into a problem necissary to conclude that it is insurmountable. Our group simply went the one step further and looked for solutions. We found many of them.

It's amazing what you can think of, if you actually put your brain to active use.

In your message, you stated that "we are keeping it [Aces High] that way." Am I to assume then, based on this comment, that you are one of the developers of Aces High? If so...please confirm.

I will immediatly stop wasting my time trying to make you money.

ISHMAEL

p.s. We are continuing to test this concept. Any readers of this forum (or members of the Aces High development team) who would like to take part - and see FIRST HAND what I am ranting about - are invited to enquire at this URL: http://forums.delphi.com/airwar/

Simply post a message informing the participants who you are and why you are interested in signing up.

[Brazos]

Whew,

When's your game coming out Ishmael? And what language did you write these wonderful new ideas in? Java-rant?

[ISHMAEL]

"My game" was simply a test of the OAE concept, and a methodology by which it could be implemented into a persitant online universe. I am NOT a game developer - but someone with half a brain could see the wisdom of these ideas and make a million buckaroos off of 'em!

To test the concept, I used the Red Baron 3D game by Sierra Dynamix, as the server software is free and alows up to 64 players to be active at one time.

You can find the rules and system outline at this url: http://www.netvector.com/redbaron/

As for the charge (made by "Hitech") that this idea is not "new," I suppose Copernicus wasn't the first to propose the helocentric universe either - but it was his model of how it worked that changed the world. This idea of the OAE will do the same for MMP gaming.

Why?

Because it bridges the gap between man and machine.

Most sim companies simply son't get it! They have NO idea WHY people play their games - they just keep churning out variations on what people bought last year - with no idea as to why last year's sim was successful.

Well I will let you in on the secret...

People don't play sims for blinking lights or whirly-whirly sounds. They play sims to live an experience they could not otherwise have. "Realism" in graphics, sounds - and even flight model - is only desired as a means of suspending disbelief - so the "gamer" can partake in the illusion that >he< is really >there<.

But the sim companies think that cool graphics, realistic sounds, and "authentic" flight models (blah, blah, blah) are an end in and of themselves. They miss what the sim player is really after:

IMMERSION.

And it is the Online Alter Ego (OAE) that is the KEY to immersion. Without it - the player has no means of actually entering the online game universe. He interacts with it. He pushes buttons and things blow up in it. But he is himself completely alienated from it. The sim world does not invite him in. It remians a cold, post-human universe inhabited only by virtual machines partacing in endless unfeeling combat.

But the OAE, like a mental avitar, alows the user to trancend the confines of his computer screen. The OAE is AFFECTED by the universe he inhabits. He grows and matures with each experience within the gaming world.

The fate of the alter ego is intrinsically entwined with that of the game universe he inhabits. The player, in turn, identifies his own fate with that of his alter ego. In this way, the player himself is able to LIVE an alternate life!!!

This is the holy grail of sim players everywhere - if the game companies would but know it!!! But...they'll ignore me. And churn out the same stuff we've been playing for 10 years....oh yeah...but the graphics will be better and flight model improved.

yay

ISHMAEL

[chester]

completly agree with ish.the thing that ruins ALL on-line sims are the players flying in a completly unrealist manner.if AH is just more low level massive furballing then you have done nothing to move foward in multi-play sims.the need to cause the players to fly in a realist fashion is of great importance.ish's concept causes this kind of action.in fact i belive a VERY strong death penilty needs to be programed into all on-line sims.we fight about flight modles ,balistics,weather effects,paint,every thing,then fly the planes like a bunch of grade schoolers.I dont know about others,but the combat i was in was more about staying alive than anything else.the glory of the mission,get real guys,there is no glory in combat.no winners,no losers. there is alive and dead.

[Sascha JG 77]

On paper this system might look good but like Hitech point out, it didn t stand the test of the realities of online gaming (AW). The test that was done by Ishmael can in no way represent the reaction of a full blown community with a high "dweeb-percentage".
I would imagine that a lot of guys would use the system to do exactly what Hitech said: Piss others off. I remember AW which didn t have a killshooter and there were a lot of prettythangholes that would shoot countrymen returning to base after a successful mission.

Re-read Hitech's post and ask yourself what you would do/how you would feel in the situations described. I totally agree that we don't need another big low alt furball diguised as an onlin sim though, and I'm anxious to see if/how HTC will prevent it from happening.

Sascha JG 77 "Herz As!"



[This message has been edited by Sascha JG 77 (edited 09-17-1999).]

[ISHMAEL]

On paper this system might look good but like Hitech point out, it didn t stand the test
of the realities of online gaming (AW).
-----

I don't know how AW attempted to implement this feature. I submit that if it failed, it was due to poorly-thought out implementation.

Remember, the "dweeb factor" exists now PRECICELY BECAUSE there is no means by which to discourage such behaviour. The system we created (and continue to test) was designed to eliminate the "dweeb factor" - by introducing built in checks and balances upon player behaviour.

What is the most important role of an online simulation organizer/organization?

I submit that their MOST IMPORTANT role - more important than designing a game with cool graphics and realistic flight models - is to facilitate interesting game play!!!

The organizer's most important role is to facilitate realistic game play, by creating a rule set to govern actions taking place on the field - and providing referees to insure that the rules are followed.

In an online simulation, the referees are automated and apply evenly the rule set incorporated into the server software. The effectivness of the rule system for a WW2 simulation can be judged in accordance with how immersive the resulting experience is for players.

I insist that if players are NOT acting in ways that corrispond to real-world behaviour THE FAULT LIES IN THE RULE SYSTEM - not the players.

Sim companies need to wake up to their role as facilitators of battle simulations and put some actual effort into modeling player behaviour - rather than just modeling aircraft performance.

ISHMAEL
 

[Downtown]

I can tell you why it fails Ish.

The lowest common denomenator.

The virtual pilot that doesn't care about experience points.

He will still HO and fly Poor Tactics, and game the game.

And will still take out the pilot that is trying to up his OAE score.

People will be working to take out the Pilots with the Higher OAE.

People will be upset cause So-N-So has the hottest ride, and best ammo, and has a 10% performance modifier, so he will whine, and the other whiners will get together and hunt So-N-So down.

Now this sim may have a higher class of Player, all Chilvarous Knights of the Air that will salute an injured Pilot who is out of Ammo and let him RTB cause of a Good Fight.

But there will always be BnZrs. (No offense to the BnZ flyer, but you are going for the kill, not the fight.)

In RL I would try to kill my enemy.  I would'nt be a Knight of the AIr.

In RL I would run if outnumbered, and do whatever it takes to survive.

In the Virtual SKies I try to fly the aircraft in accordance to what I have read has historically accurate tactics and manuvers, and watched AckStars, Stick Stirrers, 12/6 Cheaters.

There are bunches of them out there, and it only takes one or two to "RUIN" your whole thing.

Now yes this can be defeated, but not by Knights of the Air, it has to be done by merciless bastards that Dish OUt more to the lowest common denomenator types.  ANd there will be no reward for the Merciless Bastards because they will have to use the same tactics as the LCDs, which will result in the Death of their OAE Pilot more often than they desire.

As to countries Instead of Knights, Rooks, Bishops.

Knight, LCDs, and MBs.


------------------
"I could feel the 20MM Cannon impacting behind me so I made myself small behind the pilot armor" Charlie Bond AVG

[bod]

This *really* was a refreshing thread.

Why not use on arena and at least try the concept? With ISHMAEL as the project leader of cource.


Bod