Death by aging.

[Nejmelu]

I have been wondering about the aging system in MO. Will characters be able to age like in the real world and will they be able to die from old age? Perhaps different classes live longer, age differently, or don't age at all. I hope that aging can kill characters once they get to their maximum lifespan determined by your health and race. And then players can reincarnate themselves into a new young character with the same skills and experience but a new body. Or maybe offspring with the same type of traits and genes can go on as your character.

[Tzacharu]

I don't really see the point. I haven't read anything indicating aging at all.

Too much realism isn't good for a MMO. I'll leave it at that.

[Landor]

Nejmelu the devs have stated somewhere on the forums or on the IRC that there will be no aging at all in this game.

[Rhygar]

Originally Posted by Nejmelu

I have been wondering about the aging system in MO. Will characters be able to age like in the real world and will they be able to die from old age? Perhaps different classes live longer, age differently, or don't age at all. I hope that aging can kill characters once they get to their maximum lifespan determined by your health and race. And then players can reincarnate themselves into a new young character with the same skills and experience but a new body. Or maybe offspring with the same type of traits and genes can go on as your character.

What ever you read on the forums about aging it was probably just me posting ideas. They're dotted all over!

The developers say there is no permanent death in the developers question threads. I would guess and say that if there was death by aging they would at least have said "sort of/too soon to tell". So it's highly unlikely.

[Lachrymose]

could people stop posting threads about aging? you're getting rhygar riled up..

[Rhygar]

[mikesanimation]

aging? Doesn't sound fun to have to worry about a bad knee in the heat of battle...lol

[Rhygar]

Originally Posted by mikesanimation

aging? Doesn't sound fun to have to worry about a bad knee in the heat of battle...lol

We would be super-human old people. No bad joints or arthritis. Only pwnage to the young ones.

[SkirmCard]

Aging is the most depressing thing in the real world, why would we want it in our fake fantasy world?

[Rhygar]

Originally Posted by SkirmCard

Aging is the most depressing thing in the real world, why would we want it in our fake fantasy world?

Yes ageing can be a depressing thought. Now please bear with me...

Let me ask you this, have you ever watched one of those movies where the movie spans several decades of the main characters lives?

Often there are scenes that invoke flashbacks or memories from a character while looking at photos or meeting another character again after many years. Often only music without any visual cues. The scene would use the struggles they endured and the regret they have now, but also the joy they had experienced and the camaraderie/relationship they had shared to create a poignant sense of nostalgia/joy/sadness.
(the exact terminology to explain this escapes me unfortunately )

Well in real life it is the same. I have many fond memories that invoke strong emotions. Mostly because I'm now several years on and those days are gone. If I hadn't aged that intense feeling regarding my own life and how important it is to make the most of it would not be possible.

Obviously this is a game and the emotions cannot be as intense, but it can approximate it. You are that character when you play and if he is destined to pass away you will automatically transfer some of that to your character.

If character progression and immersion is important to you as a player then ageing will assuredly make the experience so much more rewarding.

[Lachrymose]

*edited to prevent the spread of sensitive information*

[Archaaz]

Well, I am with you on this one, Rhygar and Nejmelu. I think that the notion of character aging has much merit, and that its inherent potential is worthy of exploration. Knowing that one’s character has an approximate lifespan, and thus a limited time to accomplish whatever goals the player may have set, could perhaps lend a greater sense of purpose to a players actions. It would give one an ultimate sense of completion with each character. It would also likely create an entirely new paradigm.

For example, if a player knows that his character will die, he might put far less emphasis on collecting items, knowing that when the character dies, the items will not remain in the player’s possession. Or he might put more emphasis on building his fortune, just to see what he can accomplish within the life of this particular character. Throw in heirs and you move everything in still another direction. With the addition of each new feature we have the potential to reshape traditional notions of the way MMOs are or should or can be played, and on where the emphasis should be. Most certainly it would shift the focus from any traditional notion of achievement. By way of example, you can observe the distinction, and subsequent impact on gameplay and community, between a level-based system and a skills-based, or between partial looting and full.

There can be no doubt, aging is a rather depressing real world subject to many, and one that contributes much to human behavior, both positive and negative. If we are to relegate MMORPG to the status of nothing more than a game whose primary goal should be “fun,” (a more subjective word was never wrought) then the addition of potentially unpopular real-world concepts such as aging and death become unnecessary, even detrimental (to many). And yet, when you consider that such features as thievery and brutal violence, both generally considered undesirable in the real world, are not only included in most games, but usually considered an integral part of the game experience, then you see a sort of Pandora’s Box open up, releasing every possibility, regardless of how undesirable it may seem.

Any statement such as “too much realism in an MMO is not a good thing” begs the question: where do we set the bar of realism? How much realism is enough? How much is too much? Do we stop due to technological constraints, or is there some actual, quantifiable level of realism that is, after all, that last, damnable straw. I think most people gathered here would agree that WoW’s level of realism borders on the laughable, and that it is much more “game-like“ than a game such as UO. By the same token, I feel that the vast majority of us who have played UO are rather enamored with the level of freedom and realism inherent in that game, but that some would push for more, some for less. I would imagine that each of us would set his or her bar at a different level.

My point being that the bar is arbitrary. For example, I would set my own realism bar at least at the level of character aging and permadeath, but would be extremely tempted to stop somewhat short of having my character work in an cubicle making photo copies and flinging poo at the walls, simple because that would hit a bit close to home, and I am not convinced that I would enjoy it (the cubicle, not the poo). That said, I would not dismiss the notion out of hand because it has merits on a certain level, and the undeniable potential to spur further ideas. Basically, I am not convinced that playing a cog in a game, with a particular, limited function in society, could not be made somehow interesting and even fun depending upon how it was implemented.

As part of a simulated environment, a blend of game and sociological experiment, I think the concept of character aging could unlock a wealth of possibilities. For example: beginning as a child and progressing through adolescence, young adulthood, old age, etc. Other possibilities include: character heirs (as mentioned by Nejmelu), an in-game couple producing offspring (to be played by either, or by an entirely new player), etc.
Bear in mind, character aging (like perm death) caters to a certain pay style. In this case those who view MMOs more as social experiments, those who simply want to push the envelope, players such as myself who are less keen on “maxing” a character out and thus are forever rolling new characters, and various other types. I do think it is an interesting idea and one that could be made palatable to a wider base, depending on the method of its implementation.

Speaking of movies/television shows such as the one you mention, there was an episode of Star Trek I saw once that put me in mind of the whole character aging thing. It featured Captain Picard beaming down to a planet and somehow becoming stranded. He meets a tribe of humans, joins them, and eventually marries one of them, thinking he will not be rescued. He has children, grows old, and just as he is on his death bead, he awakens from an illness on the Enterprise and realizes it was all nothing but a dream.

[Lachrymose]

archaaz, i think the point where the game becomes too real is the point where realism begins to detract from gameplay and/or freedom. the problem here is, something like that has no operational definition.. not everyone would agree on where that line is drawn, or how much realism is "too much." some say that having local banks is too much realism, as it detract from convenience and gameplay time is wasted having to travel to a specific bank. others might say that forcing players to eat/drink to stay healthy is too realistic, as those people would probably call it inconvenient.

for me, character aging ending in death crosses that boundary between realistic gameplay and simulation.. and personally, i plan on playing a revolutionary sandbox MMO, not the next evolution of The Sims. i don't like the idea of creating a character and spending time and effort at making him successful, only for him to become old and pass away.

but then again, that's me, and others (like rhygar) have their own intentions for this game.

[Rhygar]

Originally Posted by Lachrymose

for me, character aging ending in death crosses that boundary between realistic gameplay and simulation.. and personally, i plan on playing a revolutionary sandbox MMO, not the next evolution of The Sims.

I think the Sims comparison should be declared illegal.

In Sims you direct your character and if you don't he will just carry on. Obviously a MMO doesn't work like that at all.

But, yes, as Archaaz said everyone will set there realism bar at a different level.

Originally Posted by Lachrymose

i don't like the idea of creating a character and spending time and effort at making him successful, only for him to become old and pass away.

This is something I just cannot understand. Or I do understand, because initially it bothered me too. However, when you stop playing a game that character dies whether the game mechanics allow it or not. The majority of people stop playing a game, or change to a new one, after 1 or 2 years. So in the end you cannot keep that character forever.

Due to the current habit of people making alts, most players wouldn't even notice the age death. They would have ended up playing with three or four characters same as before and then moved on to another game.

I just can't see it having a negative effect.

[Lachrymose]

Originally Posted by Rhygar

I think the Sims comparison should be declared illegal.

lol, i put that in just for you. but actually, i do feel like it's a real too realistic. as far as not having a negative effect, i disagree. a lot of people make like 20 alts and play every single possible character to try out every class in a game. first of all, in MO people could recreate their character at any time without having to create an entirely new one. secondly, even in WoW i kept the same character for pretty much the whole time i was playing. i don't like having multiple characters personally.. i prefer to have one character that i'm satisfied with and sticking with him.

[Traceur]

i have to admit if i was on the fence about this (and couldn't see the point of aging as anything other then an expansion of PD), archaaz has tipped me over to the aging-supporters, of how it would inflounce player psychology on focusing about "impacting the world" or "experiencing it to the fullest" rather then accomplishment based... this might be exactly what we need to shift the mentality into sandbox mentality to the game's gaming community.

[Rhygar]

Originally Posted by Traceur

i have to admit if i was on the fence about this (and couldn't see the point of aging as anything other then an expansion of PD), archaaz has tipped me over to the aging-supporters, of how it would inflounce player psychology on focusing about "impacting the world" or "experiencing it to the fullest" rather then accomplishment based... this might be exactly what we need to shift the mentality into sandbox mentality to the game's gaming community.

+1 to Archaaz!

EDIT: ah, already gave him...

[Amazing]

Originally Posted by Archaaz

For example, if a player knows that his character will die, he might put far less emphasis on collecting items, knowing that when the character dies, the items will not remain in the player’s possession. Or he might put more emphasis on building his fortune, just to see what he can accomplish within the life of this particular character. Throw in heirs and you move everything in still another direction. With the addition of each new feature we have the potential to reshape traditional notions of the way MMOs are or should or can be played, and on where the emphasis should be. Most certainly it would shift the focus from any traditional notion of achievement. By way of example, you can observe the distinction, and subsequent impact on gameplay and community, between a level-based system and a skills-based, or between partial looting and full.

Wait,what?"the items will not remain in the player’s possession"?!So I work for 3-4-5-6 months to get my items(maybe even get some unique items-from special *one-life* monsters-and never being able to get them back) and then just *poof* everything vanishes and I am suppose to be happy because ofthe new start?

Originally Posted by Archaaz

There can be no doubt, aging is a rather depressing real world subject to many, and one that contributes much to human behavior, both positive and negative. If we are to relegate MMORPG to the status of nothing more than a game whose primary goal should be “fun,” (a more subjective word was never wrought) then the addition of potentially unpopular real-world concepts such as aging and death become unnecessary, even detrimental (to many). And yet, when you consider that such features as thievery and brutal violence, both generally considered undesirable in the real world, are not only included in most games, but usually considered an integral part of the game experience, then you see a sort of Pandora’s Box open up, releasing every possibility, regardless of how undesirable it may seem.

What are you talking about...If it weren't for the law and the sin(you know what I'm talking about-religion) I would love to steal from a bank or something just to know how it's like,to feel that adrenaline and I can asure you MANY other people would love to do that,AND many other people really enjoy doing it...But how many people that live up to the age of 100 years old,enjoy their last 30-40 years of life?How many people are anxious to get pass their youth so they can be old...I think I can call this a retorical question...IMO it's really really silly to compare thievery/violence with aging.

Originally Posted by Archaaz

Any statement such as “too much realism in an MMO is not a good thing” begs the question: where do we set the bar of realism? How much realism is enough? How much is too much? Do we stop due to technological constraints, or is there some actual, quantifiable level of realism that is, after all, that last, damnable straw. I think most people gathered here would agree that WoW’s level of realism borders on the laughable, and that it is much more “game-like“ than a game such as UO. By the same token, I feel that the vast majority of us who have played UO are rather enamored with the level of freedom and realism inherent in that game, but that some would push for more, some for less. I would imagine that each of us would set his or her bar at a different level.

I think the limit would be where the game starts to be ridiculous because it seems as it wants to become life itself.It's an ideal that the game will never get to.It's like someone wanting to be perfect...You can never be perfect no matter what,because you are still imperfect by nature,and no matter how hard you try you will still fail.So if you try really really hard to be perfect you end up being rediculous because you don't realize that you have abolutely no chance to achieve perfection.

The same thing applies to your question...It's rediculous to age because a game should have it's limits,not try so desperately to copy life...A game should be really realistic because then you can put yourself in your characters' shoes really easy and enjoy every bit of the game much more intensely,but IMO aging is bad for this.Because all the realistic features of the game help me to be one with the character,and then age comes and kills my character...it does the exact opposite of what a realistic feature should do.Realism in a game bounds you with your character,age takes your character away...I really think this is a logical limit to realism.(you know...where most of the sane people would say 'Whow...enough is enough')

Originally Posted by Archaaz

As part of a simulated environment, a blend of game and sociological experiment, I think the concept of character aging could unlock a wealth of possibilities. For example: beginning as a child and progressing through adolescence, young adulthood, old age, etc. Other possibilities include: character heirs (as mentioned by Nejmelu), an in-game couple producing offspring (to be played by either, or by an entirely new player), etc.
Bear in mind, character aging (like perm death) caters to a certain pay style. In this case those who view MMOs more as social experiments, those who simply want to push the envelope, players such as myself who are less keen on “maxing” a character out and thus are forever rolling new characters, and various other types. I do think it is an interesting idea and one that could be made palatable to a wider base, depending on the method of its implementation.

You think it's an interesting idea because you like constant-change,you like having many characters,alts,or call them how you like and you can't stand something so permanent as 1-2 characters for 3-4 years.It's all a matter of taste and personnality.But think of the people(like myself) who are the 1-character type.I personnaly create a character really carefully and stick with it forever(or as long as possible ),I respect my character,I love my character,and I don't want all my work to be in vain because my character is old and will die.

I am the kind of guy that doesn't want his character dead so he can start a new one,nor do I like aging affecting it's stats so that if I am really old I have to start a new character because my old one is too old to walk from one town to the other without stopping to massage his feet or whatever other sick penalty is applied to old characters.

I say damn this aging idea and all the sick downsides it drags with it!(note:it has a lot more downsides then upsides IMO)

[Lachrymose]

i'm with amazing. i'd much rather just have one character and stick with him the whole time. even with archaaz's post, i still don't see the point. i don't think there would be any added desire to "change the world" or any need to "live life to the fullest." it's not like you'll be dead forever. your character dies, and you just recreate him. it's not even like you're being reborn with a new consciousness... i just see it as an inconvenience. every x number of in-game years, my character dies and i have to give all my items to an alt account, recreate my recently deceased character, and get all my old belongings back from my newly created alt.

if player's stats are affected in a way that i don't really like once he gets older, i'd probably rather just delete my character (after transferring his belongings) and then recreate him, but as a younger version.

i guess i still just don't see any benefit coming out of an aging system.. but i suppose i could understand how it would be something a roleplayer would want to see, just because it's more realistic.

[Traceur]

attributes being affected by aging are another thing - which can be done well but requires special attention: you simply can't do the classical attribute mechanism of "governing attributes" for each per of skills, your character should be able to keep it's skills, meaning for this to work all attributes should affect all skills in different ways. you could have very strong swings with the swords, or very agile and accurate with it, or be able to perform very complicated and intelligent moves. further more the gradual move of attributes can be used to adapt the game and keep it increasingly challenging: you where once a very strong warrior, your not as strong anymore in your age and each blow is not as meaningful, so you'll need to use the bigger diversity of possible moves to make them count" most importantly for an RPG: it should be still based on player actions and behavior. meaning rather then the actual attributes shifting, it would be the rate in which you gain/loose the different attributes.

[oophus]

What about this?

There IS death by ageing in the game, but once you die, you start out as your son or daughter.
And that 2'nd toon inherit some of the possessions and skills from your first character, thus making you advance like in normal games all the time, but with different chars.

Maybe make the sklllcap on the skills you inherit a bit higher so that the next toon can be abit stronger then the first, thus rewarding you to follow your fathers/mothers footsteps.

So if your 1'st toon got to level 100 in running where the cap is 100, the next toon could inherit 30% of that pool, and that that pool could increase its levelcap to 130 or something like that, thus rewarding people that have played for a while.

[Amazing]

But whats the point?I still don't feel any better about it.Sure it would be more realistic,but you know what wouldn't be realistic?Too see my old grandpa fighting for his people heroicly in his mid 80's against 20-30 years old players and owning their arses...I think that pretty much neutralizes the effect of 'realism' that death by aging gives...Just my opinion,I really find it hard work for nothing.I don't want to let go of my char so I can be a young teenager or anything like that...If I wanted my char dead I would at least go play on a perma-death server!At least there I know why I die(because I was dumb enough to think I can kill 3 players at once :P ) ,not because I am too old,bleh!Thats the worst death a player could have in a fantasy game...At least in a PD server I can make my death heroic,not a ill,lonely death caused by age.

All of you who want death caused by aging in the game would still enjoy the game even without it(and the reason is because the game doesn't NEED it,like it needs all the other awesome realistic features) but the rest of us who don't want it in the game would be seriously affected by it's presence(in a negative way).Taking that into consideration,if I was a DEV member I wouldn't bother with all this death by aging thingie.

[Gungrave]

I'm with Lachrymose here. I'm hoping to play the next evolution UO, notably the PvP part ^^ Not the next evolution of Second Life or smtn. Yes, such features will be very cool in closed ending single RPG's like Fable, but clearly out of place in MMO not specially developed for such things. And MO never indicated smtn in that direction.
Although i kinda understand the urge some ppl have to chitchat about every possible feature..

And yeah, when i create a hero, i would like it to persist unless i decide to get rid of him/her. Not to worry about some needless feature added to satisfy some small group of ppl who are eager to experience cyber death(last line is cos ageing without permadeath is pretty much pointless even as an feature).