“The Force is what gives the virtual world its power. It’s an energy field created by all virtual things. It surrounds us and penetrates us and binds the world together.” – Obi Wan

Reaction and rumination to the Escapist article on the NGE’s impact to Star Wars Galaxies continues.

It begins with Moorgard’s salient article.

The virtual world part [of SWG] was, for all its bugs, well done. The social aspects of SWG remain, in many ways, far ahead of their time and oodles better than what many current MMOs offer. In fact, it is likely this social factor that continues to inspire passion in those who feel they were betrayed by the NGE.

Wow. A red name that gets it. SWG, as delivered might not have been what the mass (WoW) market wanted. SWG, as initially delivered, might not have been ‘finished’ and bug free. But what it did deliver, that ‘worldy’ experience, it delivered in spades.

And there was a market for it. Perhaps not millions, but it was an extremely dedicated market nonetheless. The three primary writers of this blog spent something on the order $2,000 on SWG. One commenter on that articles seems to have spent as much as all three of us combined.

There are very few games today (arguably, EVE) that provide the same degree of virtual-world-yumminess, that SWG did. Years later, those that cherished SWG now wander mmodom homeless, pleading their case to anyone that will listen.

These former SWG fans are a market un-serviced! But what exactly is it, that SWG offered its zealous followers? What is a “virtual world”?

It’s precisely this question that Lum the Mad attempts to answer.

What is a virtual world? Let’s roll back a bit and look at what comes to mind when people think of VWs like SWG and UO.

Open character development….
Complex economy. …
Few amusement parks. … (guided gameplay_ …
Players can harvest, make, and build. …
Open player vs. player. …

While each item seems to touch upon the core nature of what is ‘worldy’, it doesn’t define it (at least not for me).

I think Lum comes close when he writes:

The players are the territory, to bastardize Marshall McLuhan. The collective creative mind of the player base can bring forth more compelling interaction than any non-VW MMO can ever hope to match.

Raph Koster helpfully provided a technical perspective.

Online game: a game played using network connectivity.
Virtual world: a simulation of space. cf long usage in the VR community, 3d viz community, etc. Somewhat deprecated since these days, everyone wants connectivity.
Online virtual world: a simulation of persistent space connected to via a network, wherein users are represented by proxies often terms avatars. Note that both “online” and “virtual” are often elided from the term.

While, no doubt, technically correct, his definitions are so devoid of the human element as to be uninformative.

It’s akin to describing the aurora borealis as “an electro-static phenomenon due to the collision of charged particles in the magnetosphere with atoms in the Earth’s upper atmosphere.” If that alone is your understanding, you simply don’t get it.

I think CuppyTalk came closest to the truth.

The major difference between an MMORPG and a single player RPG is the ENCHANCED virtual world. You have to worry about things such as inter-player relations/balance, player economy, social features such as guilds and groups, chat features, etc. The purpose of said game elements is to support and encourage the virtual world element of the MMO.

A huge chunk of the human brain is occupied with other humans: facial expressions, moods, empathizing, criticizing and competing. Our real world isn’t defined on the nightly news according to the placement of buildings and arrangement of roads. We want to know who did what to whom. It’s all about the people.

It is the same in a virtual world. A fun game is just a fun game. But a virtual world has, as Cuppy says, inter-player relationships, social hierarchy, player economy, guilds and groups. It’s all about the people.

Moorgard wrote:

Online games and virtual worlds are not the same thing. If you’re building an MMO, you better be sure which one you intend to make.

This almost suggests that virtual world and game are exclusive Boolean conditions. I don’t think they are.

Compare Second Life and Lord of the Rings Online. Is there anyone that would argue that SL is NOT more of a virtual world and less of a game than LotRO?

Clearly game vs. virtual world is measured on a continuum … probably one with many dimensions.

I’m not sure I have a useful and complete definition for virtual world today.

I think any such definition would obviously include a reference to a continuous, contiguous and persistent play space (be that text, 3D or simply charts and graphs).

Obviously, a player must have the ability to impact that play space. Gamey games typically have a static play space. Worldy games would have a fluid space that reacts to the players.

In SWG, I needed other people to achieve my goals (building my shop, building a player city). And not just any other people, I needed a persistent reliable trustable community. In LotRO, it’s nice to know that the friends will be there from time to time. But really, any chump about my level with the same quest will do.

Most importantly, therefore, a definition of virtual world must include the concept of meaningful human community: grouping, gifting, leading, following, competing, and communicating.

It’s all about the people!