As I said in my introduction post, I'm a fellow game designer. I enjoy game design and game theory. I'm sort of in gameplay analysis mood today, and I hope you won't mind if critique your game design. I want you to know ahead of time that I enjoy this game very much, and I think it has great potential. I also want you to know that you may openly criticize any of my projects constructively if you wish. I hope you find this post constructive as well.

One of my main influences on online game design is guy named Richard Bartle. He did a bunch of research on MUDs back in the 70's and 80's, and his ideas still influence modern multiuser environments. [See here]

Basically, he said that you've got four kinds of activities that engage players of online games. He group online game players into: Achievers, Explorers, Socializers and Killers.

Achievers want to max the game out in terms of obtainable units (eg. money, land, items, equipment, etc.) They want all the best swords. They want all the best armor. They want to have every single piece of every kind of weapon and armor. They want as much gold as they can get their hands on, and if there are quests, or other achievements based on completion of tasks, they want to find and complete them all.

Explorers want a vast world, full of secret nooks and crannies that they can discover. Explorers love to go into areas -- having no idea what they'll find -- and find something interesting. They relish being the first to discover something new.

Socializers want to use the game world as a medium to interact with other real-life players. Usually this happens in the form of messaging or PvP combat.

Killers want to everything in the world to die. If it's another player or an NPC, it doesn't matter. It needs to go down in blazes.

Bartle said that all players will exhibit some of these characteristics and each to a varying degree. So, for example, someone could be 30% Achiever, 20% Explorer, 80% Socializer and 10% Killer. In order to achieve a high degree of appeal, you have to consider all different types. Even Killer players can be valuable if you funnel their desires into productive behavior. World of Warcraft, I think, is one of the best examples of what happens when Killer-style players are not given a way to productively channel their energies. You end up with gankers.

Now, I'm going to talk about Mythici in terms of all four types.

Mythici in terms of "Achievement":
You've got this one down quite well. I like the tier system and land system. I think the relic system works quite well too. I would suggest, for the relics, that you leave some log of which relics the player has acquired and used. Perhaps users could view a list of which relics other players have found and used. The system of 'power' is good. Although, I have to admit, I don't pay much attention to which monsters are good at what. I would prefer to have more tiers and fewer monsters per tier. Also, I was able to reach the forest (tier two) on my first time playing the game. This shouldn't be possible. I skipped tier 1 completely. My suggestion: have more tiers, make it a lot harder to progress up the tier ladder, and lower the number of monsters at each tier. The weaknesses/strengths versus other monsters are good, but unless players have time to actually see those strengths and weaknesses in action, I don't think they will really care (although I could be wrong).

Mythici in terms of "Exploration":
This is where I see Mythici really needing improvement for long term playability. Mythici doesn't have a 'world' persay. This isn't necessarily a problem. You could make one up. Perhaps you could move an avatar through a world you design and that Mystic Hunts would happen as you encounter monsters in that world. You don't need flash or anything fancy to do something like this. I've done one with a simple hierarchy of areas. See my game link below. Also, I've seen them done with javascript. If you choose to do something like this, the world you create needs to have secret areas that can only be discovered by figuring out puzzles or completing other challenges.

Mythici in terms of "Socializing":
The PvP element looks good. I haven't had a chance to use it yet. I will try it out as soon as possible. I have to admit, I'm not much of a socializer in games. I don't particularly enjoy PvP. But, I understand it's an important element for online games. I would suggest some kind of in-game messaging system. If you choose to create a world, add areas that all players can impact. A grafitti board, multiplayer games, something.

Mythici in terms of "Killing":
Well, the ability to steal other players land is good. In PvP, can you kill a person's monsters? Maybe it should be possible to simply attack, poison, undermine or otherwise damage a players defenses instead. Should it be possible to destroy land instead of steal it? Make it so that no one can live there? These kinds of options are ones that you need to consider carefully. Killer players need to be given outlets for their desires, but not ones that let them unfairly torment lower level players. Bartle noticed that -most- (but not all) of Killer-style players want to achieve a kill fairly, through the use of skill, not force.

I hope you've found this analysis helpful. I enjoyed writing it, and I enjoy playing this game. Keep up the good work. Also, I've been clicking links. I know that they're the lifeblood of an online game. I'm running one myself. If you have any follow-up questions or comments for me, I'd be happy to answer too.

---

- Matt
http://onlinerpg.ikimashoz.com/