glorfindel wrote:
I know people enjoy the social networking part of this game, and that's a really good thing. But I think that the social community here kind of dominates the feel of the game |
Since UiV2 was launched, social networking has become increasingly popular within Illyriad. Alongside that has been the increase in female players who have found space to not only express themselves and take on prominent roles in alliances but are now starting to assert themselves as leading influences in the community. At the community base is broadening out and becoming more and more global as the word spreads though the gaming world that Illyriad different and worth trying out. These are all positive indicators which I hope will be increased. Yet robust social networking has brought negative effects also.
The problem for me is that I agree with Glorfindel. Social networking is beginning to dominate the game. It is starting to take such a hold on the game, that I can see certain individual players actually attempting to develop a cult of personality . Consequently where conflicts do take place they tend to be wholly personalised and based on personal dislike and can become highly emotional. I think that this is neither good for the game nor the individual players involved and it would be far healthier if major conflicts were driven by external factors related to game lore or the codex. I share the principals of Glorfindel's arguement below.
glorfindel wrote:
I think this game would be well-served to make Tolkein's battle between good and evil a very real driving force in the gameplay. Just as in other role playing games, where you can choose to be good, evil, or somewhere in the middle, so too should that be a choosable option that has consequences. It should place you on some sort of "side," and the game platform should dictate that the Illyriad universe is in some kind of implicit struggle between good and evil -- just as it is in Middle Earth. |
Of course glorfindel is wrong to assert that Tolkien is the major influence on Illyriad as Gromsh and others were quick to point out. Yet Glorfindel's point about the need to establish "the battle between good and evil as a very real driving force in the gameplay" stands because I feel that the predominance of social networking is in danger of devaluing the game and all the hard work, apps, technical and narrative development that has gone into it. However Gromsh states:
Gromsh wrote:
As for the "good vs evil" theme, you can find lots of that here in the forums with tons of wonderful hyperbole about alliances and players designating each other as good or bad, dishonourable or men/women of their word. Again the sandbox comes in with the players making their own arch nemesi, bloodfeuds and so on. |
For me this argument doesn't stand up. If, when referring to community generated "good vs evil" themes, in the forums, Gromsh means; The Daily Dose of Drama; ~KT~ v Havoc; Lorre v Valar etc - then these are poor examples of the "driving" strategic gameplay. They have no direction, no quality and all those threads have degenerated into off topic conversations a la social networking.
By using the Illyriad factions, codex and game lore it would be quite simple for the development team to construct it's own overarching "driving" set of objectives for each race that would bring them into conflict with other races eg:
Dwarves (see Dwarven Origins in Codex)
Objectives could be set to:
1. find the lost city of Duraz Karak ( by a series diplomatic quests)
2. Seize the city from the parvacones and also from an opposing insurgent Orc hordes ( by campaign)
3. locate the eternal crown (by a series of diplomatic quests and one campaign against Clan Moedagh and Treggars Crow's)
4. Thus become the one TRUE High King of the Dwarves as foretold in the Codex.
Other examples could set for Humans Orcs and Elves.
Social networking is great at first with all benefits it brings for new players coming to Illyriad but will it keep players interests in the long term. Without an overarching theme - I doubt it.