Slashdot Mirror
The Lameness of Warcraft
Slate is running an article lamenting the fact that, despite World of Warcraft's popularity, it is a deeply flawed game. Author Chris Dahlen makes the statement that Blizzard's MMOG should take its cues from single-player RPGs by offering further customization, morality based choices, and dynamic events. From the article: "Blizzard has written new storylines before. Last winter, it challenged players to team up and fuel a worldwide war effort. As a payoff, it unlocked new territory. This was a good example of letting the users drive a story, but Warcraft needs more of them. New wars should break out, cities should rise and fall, and all hell should break loose at least once a month--and the players should be the ones to make it happen. After all, in a world that never changes, you can never make your mark." I want to be snarky and point out that this guy obviously has no idea how these games are designed, but I think he pretty much nails what every MMOG player really wants out of a game. Now, if only it were feasible within the bounds of money, time, and talent.
Warcraft 2 was probably the last best game in the series and the greatest game Blizzard ever made.
One thing that all MMO games need is self-generating content regardless of whether that content is procedural or combinatorial; procedural is where content is created through an algorithm, combinatorial is where you have content that is split into a bunch of independant sections where the final product is a combination of all of the sections. This is so important because it would free up resources to produce more "crafted" experiences.
Asheron's Call did it right with motes. Collect 2 and it forms a bigger one. Do this for elemental immunity %. 2^100 is a lot of motes to find. Sure you can find ones in higher #s but its a collect game that will never stop.
Castles that rule housings. You have to conquer the castle to get it, then people who farm the land and run crafthouses pay tithes to you. Any band of adventurers can try and steal your Castle off you, but your offline guildmates show up and defend it.
Real time combat like Mortal Kombat or Tekken. It'd be like Zelda Ocariana of time MMOG. You would have to do all sorts of sword play or aiming bows like a FPS.
Those are just 3 of my big ideas.
I already did #3, but I'm making it multiplayer over the next couple months. I got some bugs with directdraw not working, but it doesn't stop the 3d action combat.
God spoke to me.
You're a rat, and the game keeps sending you to look for bigger pellets.
People never tire of making that analogy, do they? But it's probably about the most worthless analogy you could make. Reducing an activity to stimulus/response may seem clever, but the trouble is that it works for pretty much every human behavior imaginable. And it certainly works for every leisure activity.
The problem is that games are supposed to be fun. You're going to have to work really hard to come up with an alternative criteria. And since fun is pretty subjective, there's really not much room for criticism.
Art, literature, poetry, drama and film all have associate bodies of academic criticism and pop-derivatives. So there's a semi-objective framework from which you can criticize these works even if they are popular. Everyone rushes out to see "Titanic", but it still had some really, really lame dialog.
Unless you're going to make a similar attack on gaming (e.g. lame dialog, bad graphics, etc.) it's really hard to make any criticism that doesn't reduce to petulant whining. There simple is no cohesive theory of gaming criticism (outside of technical elements), and so before you start slinging criticisms you need to build the framework. I don't see that happening in this article.
So basically, it's just whining.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
...Blizzard got it all wrong that is why nobody is playing it. Blizzard, Listen up! If you want people to play this little game you devised, you better start listening to random internet guy or else it will never take off.
You have been warned
So basically, he's saying that WoW is a deeply flawed game because it's not absolutely perfect? Can anyone think of a game that features all of the aspects he claims WoW lacks, plus the ones it already has? While we're at it, does anybody have the waaaaambulance on speed dail? Let's face it, WoW is the best MMO out there right now. It's also *arguably* the best ever. If you can manage to complain about it, at the risk of being labeled a troll I'm gonna assume you're a wanker.
Seeing as how the entire Vivendi company's profits rose by 190% mainly on the "higher margin of the World of Warcraft business," I think Blizzard's standard response about money being a problem in the creation of dynamic events rings a little hollow.
One example (fta):
... yeah. There is no overarching story to WoW. Or at least not a long, drawn-out historical one. Like EQ or EQ2. Not sure about Vanguard. EQ had tomes and books found in libraries, spawn points and dropped off of mobs that painted a clear picture of the historical timeline and the relevance of various events. And there **were** one-time events that occured in-line with the history of the world (for example, the waking of the Sleeper).
...
Players never face moral quandaries and never get to choose between an upstanding act and an evil one.
Everquest allowed you to do this on a daily basis. EQ2 as well. Vanguard (will be released Q1 2007) will have this element as well.
And on storytelling
And Vanguard is doing away with static spawns. It should be a good thing
No, sorry to burst your bubble, but not every game, by far, wants a world which is torn asunder monthly.
Warcraft succeeds because blizzard realizes something the pundits don't, people still play games for fun.
Logging into an unknown situation isn't what most gamers want, if so many other games would have done well that haven't. For the most part players cannot be trusted, especially those who want anarchy and the like. Oh yeah they will repackage it as something other than anarchy but that is all they really want. Fun at someone else's expense drives that other off.
His ideas for character customization are fine, many would like that. Housing can wait, if ever. The game doesn't need it. As for the morals section, most players still wouldn't care. They will do the task presented. While it might be interesting to have the choice to cheat a NPC what real point is there? A lot of his ideas are best suited to PvP aspects of the game.
For the most part he seems to be lamenting that WOW does not have features he found interesting in another game. It goes without saying that that other game obviously is lacking in the rest of the department that he'd rather play WOW - just with some things added. WOW is a very good game. That people want to add features to it only proves that point. Unpopular games rarely get lauded and have recommendations placed to them as much as WOW does.
Look at it this way, there are games that do offer what he wants, and some are coming that will also. Will they succeed? Well it really comes down to one important factor : Is it fun? WOW still passes that test more than any other game for a majority of MMORPG players.
For everyone claim of WOW being lame I just have to ask, with population numbers like it has what does that make the other games?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
The reason I never really got into MMORPGs, despite trying several including WOW was that you're living in a world where every real person is a hero. It reminded me of nothing so much as that Monty Python sketch where there's a world full of supermen. An offline RPG, on the other hand, lets you be the only hero or at least one of a small band of heroes, the fate of the world in your hands. Online, you're not really making any difference at all. No matter how many orcs you slay there'll always be more and more.
The problem with this type of dynamic world alteration is that newer characters are subject to the mercy or malice of the majority of the top-level characters. While this may not seem like huge deal, it would suck really bad if you could no longer get your whatever-thingamajig because punks destroyed the place to get it. Also, on most servers, there is a huge imbalance between the number of alliance characters vs. horde characters, so the world (in most cases) would tip toward the alliance's favor time and time again.
========
77 77 77 2e 6d 65 6c 76 69 6e 73 2e 63 6f 6d
Indeed. How lame is chess--all you do is move the same pieces the same way over and over again. Obviously the game would be better if there were more options. If people didn't find the game fun, they probably wouldn't play it. While there are things it could have done better, it's hard to think of WOW as a failure. And there is no guarantee that a more complicated game, like the author desires, would actually attract a bigger audience. In fact, I would argue it would do less. If you make it more possible for people to "Leave Their Mark" you are, in the process, going to create a lot of users who fail to make their mark and are frustrated.
What is the motivation for this kind of change??? In other words, why should Blizzard care? They are making money hand over fist with the current model, why change? Yes, some people are getting tired and leaving, but it seems like they are being replaced with new people just as fast. http://www.tomandemily.com/
http://www.tomandemily.com
Congratulations, you've just been successfully manipulated.
If there's anything thought provoking about this article, it's made me wonder how WoW stacks up in profitability versus OFFLINE RPGS.
How much money did Neverwinter Nights make?
It's almost unthinkable that an online RPG could reach that critical mass, it seems like only yesterday I was outraged when I bought Ultima Online and learned it had a monthly fee.
Does anyone have that kind of information on hand?
Personally, I would like to have seen a massive zombie invasion this last Halloween, but the author does have a legit point... This game sucks (Even when playing my 60 Priest) when all your quests are the same old repetitive killing/traveling/grinding/farming.
This is why I'm quitting the game after 16 months of playing.
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
In EQ1 I was disappointed that the war of Evil vs Good races never went anywhere. The backstory told of an attack on Freeport by the Evil races. I wanted to be able to take Freeport, get a group of PCs and enough strength to take out the Freeport guards and other NPCs.
Was never going to happen.
DAoC had the territory system and that was good, though organising 100s of people to do a raid was always a bit random.
Dynamic systems are a tricky business though. Keeping the balance right is an obvious challenge.
Eventually it will work out, all the MMO people know it. It's just a matter of time.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I hope you're not just trolling and are genuinely curious, so here goes:
When you are killed by a monster, all of your equipped items lose 10% of their maximum durability. If you've ever played Diablo 2, the system is similar - item repairs are rarely going to be hugely prohibitive, but they add up, and aren't something you want to do needlessly. If killed by a player, you lose no durability.
You then have the option of waiting to be resurrected by another player, or releasing your spirit from your body Releasing doesn't keep someone from resurrecting you, but it will prevent you from getting credit for any monsters killed by your group between the time you release and the time you come back to your body. This is relevant for things like quests, and making sure you can loot an item off a boss.
If you are raised by another player, you come back to life with an amount of health and mana based on the spell or effect used to raise you. If you release, you respawn as a ghost at the closest graveyard. There's usually at least one graveyard in each zone, and it generally won't take more than 5 minutes to get back to your body. As a ghost, you can't interact with the world around you, but you don't have to worry about being attacked by wandering monsters. You can either run back to your body and get raised with 50% health and mana, or speak with an NPC called a Spirit Healer. There's a Spirit Healer at each graveyard where you respawn, and it can return you to life, but will cause all of your equipment to suffer an additional 25% durability loss, as well as giving you a debuff that reduces your stats by 75% (I think) for the next 10 minutes (one minute less for every level under 20 that you are).
There's a couple of minor exceptions, but that's the basic system. As a mostly casual player, I think the system is pretty good because it discourages carelessness that could lead to dying, but doesn't impose excessively harsh penalties for a little bit of bad luck, or the stupidity of your teammates.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
I don't think Dahlen has any idea how "grinds" are created. They aren't part of the designs of the game: they are emergent phenomena that occur when players seek to isolate the most efficient method of achieving a goal, and then repeat that method.
By their very nature as rule-constituted software systems, games will tend to instrumental play. There is already one exception: Second Life, which is already available. My question is: why hasn't the world flocked there? Could it be that, despite protests to the contrary, we like a well-defined achievement path, and enjoy finding efficient methods for progressing on them? Could the grind be part of the pleasure, even if it doesn't "feel" like it is?
'Players never face moral quandaries and never get to choose between an upstanding act and an evil one.'
Obviously this person has never been ninja'ed out of loot, had a priest suddenly drop out mid-instance, or had a gold-farmer train him. =P
Clearly this guy has barely played world of warcraft at all and doesn't understand what keeps people playing once they hit the level cap.
1. 90% of the people who play this game don't give a rats ass about the story and when presented with a quest, skip the text and just try to finish it as fast as possible as the means to level up or get an item that they need.
2. The real appeal of the game is the challenging raid encounters and the social environment that has evolved around beating said encounters. People end up in every social guilds that all work together to defeat very difficult content. It's like the same reason people play team sports, there is no story around the sport that makes it interesting, it's the strategy, the socializing, the working together that makes people keep playing team sports. Also, imagine a team sport where once you have mastered one level of the sport you are presented with new and even more difficult challenges. If your "team" is good enough and cohesive enough, there is even the thrill of being able to spend months working on encounters and being the first group of people in the world to beat them. This teamplay/challenge comes into play in both PVE and PVP aspects of the game. This is what bridges the gap between the FPS/RTS type players and the RPG type players out there (being able to fullfil a class based roll in a highly strategy scenario and evolve your class/gear over time).
He clearly has misconceptions about WoW and would like to play a game that involves more role playing gayness and less strategy/teamwork/progression.
I don't want an f'n house. I want to be challenged 100% of the time.
Item finding isn't even one of the major categories of play in an RPG. There are three types of players: Dice Rollers, Problem Solvers, and Role Players. A good DM knows his players and can juggle the desires of everyone in a group. When someone looks bored, the DM can throw in a challenge suited to that player.
Dice Rollers are numbers wranglers who want a good game of chance. The most common sub-species is the Hack-n-Slasher, but that's just because most rule sets lend themselves to that kind of dice rolling. In games that have skill rolls, you'll find these guys rolling for damn near every feat up to and including getting up in the morning. "An 18?!? I spring from my bed and land in my shoes in one smooth motion! Hurrah!"
Problem Solvers like puzzles and planning. These are the guys who calculate exactly how many miles your party will average per day trekking across the Great Arid Waste and know exactly how much food and water to pack. When the party stumbles across a series of levers and switches in the dungeon, these are the guys to call. "Gruntmore the Dwarf pulls the red lever, goes through the blue door, pushes the star shaped switch, coems back out, pushes the green lever to a 45 degree angle disabling the secret blade trap and we all go merrily on our way!"
Role Players like to have long, drawn out in-character conversations with every shopkeeper and passing peasant they encounter. Whereas Dice Rollers will do whatever it takes to win, and Problem Solvers playing stupid characters will still come up with genius plans, these guys are apt to do utterly stupid things if they think that's what their character would do. They also tend to talk about their characters in the first person. "I leap from behind the tree and run screaming at the horde of orcs- What? Yes, I know the plan was to sneak up on them, but I'm overconfident with anger management issues. But you should really say that in character..."
But perhaps I missed your point, were you saying RPGs are about item finding or RTSs are? In any case, I think the real trick to either is actually basing it on a good simulation of some sort, but having story telling hooks that can effect the sim in the scripting interface, and have those hooks have flexible triggers and random details so that the same basic plotline can be activated from many different starting points using characters and locations tailored to the individual players. But I understand how hard it would be to scale a system like that up to WoW levels.
The real problem with WoW is that it isn't an RPG and it isn't for people who traditionally like RPGs so the players who would bring real quality to the game are driven away by all the Azkiker4921s and l33tWariers in the game.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Yes it would be pretty cool if you could make your character look different from all the other male Trolls running around, but keeping it just a few simple bodies that are only wearing different things is how the game stays so fast. If everyone looks completely different, every time you run through a city, your computer would have to load the graphic(and therefore need to be given the specs) for every character in the city instead of just which outline they chose and what the character is wearing. This would increase lag a ton and make it much harder for the game to run at fast speeds.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Not only I beg to differ, but furthermore, I cannot find words to express my disgust with that event. Let me explain.
Ok, Blizzard announced that in next content patch there will be some huge event, which everyone can take part which will unlock some new content. Content patch arrived, and for each server both factions (alliance and horde) needed to chinese-farm *ridiculous* amounts of materials (which drop from monster, can be gathered etc). Then, when all the materials were gathered, the Guy-with-the-key can open the gates of the new content ("Ahn'Qiraj"), which everyone should enjoy. Well, that one can sound kinda fun, but lets see some facts first.
Amount of materials were too much for like 98% of servers (look at the sheer number of materials here: http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/wareffort/wareffor
At the same time with those huge farming effort, there was a quest line which could effectively be only taken by one(!) person in the whole server. Only that guy could initiate the boss fights, pick rewards, see quest text etc. But that guy needed help from his guild (best guild on the server) and other guilds in defeating some bosses. On some boss fights there was such a big slowdowns that server(s) couldn't handle it and crashed repeatedly. At the end of that ridiculously long quest line (for just that one guy), he got [Scepter of the Shifting Sands] by which he could open the gates of Ahn'Qiraj and ultimately unlock the new content (assuming that war effort - materials gathering was done). So what happened on our server (Ragnaros, EU)? Our server was average in gathering materials so after a month or more, they gathered them "for us". But there was a problem with the guy who needed to open the gates. Some major guilds (me included) helped him and his guild defeat some bosses and make that Scepter. When he finished the scepter somewhere in the middle of the night, he didn't came online for days, telling on the realm servers that whole realm population didn't "deserve" the gates to be opened, that he will not do it, generally flexing his e-peen. The guy single handedly held whole realm as a fools. Some seven days later guy opened the doors after some ass licking by his guild mates on forums. And this was not the one and only incident, there were a lot of them on other servers.
So to conclude, the event was total fiasco because of server crashes, non-existent story for 99.999% of players, e-peen flexing moron with the key, nolife kids telling others that they should farm materials more so they (nolifers) can go into the new instance, mind-puzzling number of materials to farm for *all* of the population etc.
We'll, that was my take on that glorious event.
PS Sorry for the grammar
Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
But the land is what's magic about Wurm. You can terraform almost everything in the game - chop down forests and make plains, plant trees and make plains into forests, dig canals, flatten mountaintops and build fortification, dig tunnel labyrinths, and more. About the only thing players haven't done yet is fill in the ocean with dirt, but that should be possible the way the game engine is written :-) . So it is more than a war game, in fact the war is almost incidental to building the villages that fight the wars.
Oooo, screenshots
New wars should break out, cities should rise and fall, and all hell should break loose at least once a month--and the players should be the ones to make it happen. After all, in a world that never changes, you can never make your mark.
Well, not in such a violent fashion, but this sort of thing is the plan for Uru Live.
Every day, there's a small change. Every week, a slightly larger change. Every month, a major change - a new area of the city opens, or you get access to a new Age.
A new story element is introduced roughly once each quarter... what the players do with it in the interim is entirely up to them. The players truly develop the story. There are no NPCs (in the computer-controlled sense), however Cyan does have actors who play the role of certain important people, ready to answer questions and react to whatever it is the players are doing.
This is a lot more impressive to me than Warcraft, although I do enjoy a good quest now and again.
Soylens viridis homines es
... hold on, this really isn't impossible.
Asheron's Call had new earth-shaking player-driven events every month, and they had - what - 1/100th of the income and staff that World of Warcraft does?
World of Warcraft is making tens millions of dollars a month in subscription fees alone, and has an unimaginably large staff.
Asheron's Call made significantly less each month, and yet they'd make sure that every month there was something new and player driven. In some events, they would even have developers and admins manually control NPCs who helped or hindered players in person for the quests.
So don't tell me it isn't possible. I've seen it done much better with many less resources. The WoW team is just making so much money without doing it that they don't feel the need to. If WoW was struggling at 30k users and barely paying for their servers, you can bet they'd try harder with monthly dynamic content to try and get a larger market share.
-Vendal Thornheart
It's doubtful whether the author ever actually played World of Warcraft, but coming from a veteran of 1 and 3/4 years World of Warcraft basically has lost all fun that it initially had. The only point of the game is to get the next upgrade. A game that's entirely focused around gear upgrades and the next new shiny is appealing at first but after a year it gets really, really old. As a healer in numerous raids in MC, BWL and AQ40 the game requires a great deal of attention and energy to keep everyone alive. The fact that the game becomes like a job is also a factor in what makes the game lose a great deal of fun. I play games to get away from work not create a job which I am not even paid for.
I feel Blizzard did a lot right with the game but there is one major flaw: they did not create end-game content for the solo player or for small groups outside of PvP (which I don't really consider "content")
I am a casual player in theory but when I would get involved with my guild in raid groups, the only way I could get a possibility of an upgrade was to go to every raid every night, which often lasted 4+ hours. I eventually got very sick and was unable to work or go to school and this made me realize how ridiculous a game World of Warcraft is. When it requires that you spend 4+ hours in order to accomplish anything, you know something is wrong.
I want a game where I can spend 30 minutes playing and feel like I've accomplished something. And pretty much the only games that satisfy that are single player games at this point.
I think what the author describes is really a problem with the entire MMORPG genre and not WoW specifically. The dilemma is, how do you create content that will push the genre in a new direction while pleasing 7 million casual to hardcore gamers and keep them paying a monthly fee? While adding interesting events is definitely a good idea, it really is not feasible. Take the AQ war effort for example, an interesting WoW event that required people to contribute to unlock a new area of the game. IMHO, this feature was a complete failure because it really only appealed to a small percentage of the community. The area being unlocked required months of preparation to even be able to tackle, so immediately any casual gamer that wasn't geared from head to toe had no shot at it. The end result? The casuals did almost no work and the hardcore teams did the lions share of the war effort, so they could unlock things for themselves... What's the moral of that story? Simply that adding dynamic and shifting content like that sounds good on paper, but adding a new multi-tiered dungeon that never changes or improving the PvP laddering system both have much wider reach and are a better use of the developers time. Adding time sinks that are repetitive and consume a players time are a better way to keep the monthly fees flowing. Thats the bottom line...
"Blizzard has written new storylines before. Last winter, it challenged players to team up and fuel a worldwide war effort. As a payoff, it unlocked new territory. This was a good example of letting the users drive a story, but Warcraft needs more of them. New wars should break out, cities should rise and fall, and all hell should break loose at least once a month--and the players should be the ones to make it happen. After all, in a world that never changes, you can never make your mark."
There ARE mmorpgs that have non-static worlds that the players feel like they can change. (Because they can)
Might I reccomend some, such as a tale in the desert or possibly eve...
Because Goddess knows, players in Everquest never needed to "grind"...
Seriously, WoW is the largest game out there for a reason, and there are many other games out there trying to appeal to different audiences. Someone in this thread mentioned that travel took too long in WoW - surf over to the Vanguard forums and see what people there think about that (hint: they believe EQ1 was the golden age of gaming and auction houses and fast travel destroyed the genre).
There's only so much you can do in an online game. FFXI actually had a great story, and let the players feel very much like the hero altering world events. But the grind and forced grouping in that game were insane. EQ2 doesn't know what it is: right now it's trying to be WoW, and not doing a very good job of it. Warhammer should be a great PvP game, and Age of Conan also looks very intersting.
And of course don't miss this gem.
Loads and loads of great games on the horizon, if you just pick your head up and look around.
In the end, a GM, in some rare NPC form finally had to come along and destroy the gate the guild was defending.
Turbine finally conceded and raised statues dedicated to the defenders of that certain server's gate. The statues were viewable on all servers, and it showed everyone who played AC just how much a player's actions actually affected a game.
It's a shame more MMORPG's aren't like AC.
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Very exciting, thrilling and just like in the movies but only if you allow yourselve to be swept along. If you pay even the slightest bit of attention you notice that all collapses are rather weak and obviously designed to be pulled right back up once the show is over, that explosions don't ever destroy anything and that in fact you are in carefully constructed machine designed to "collapse" over and over again only to be reset each time the audience has left. Sometimes even before the little cart has left the area (never ever look behind you in one of these rides)
WoW is like this. Put blinders on and it almost looks like your in a real RPG. There is a world out there waiting for YOU the hero to explore, creatures to fight, villains to slaughter, things to blow up. But they will reset in a few moments for the next audience only WoW never got the timing of the little carts with tourists right so the reset may trigger while you are still watching the show.
On the dock of the first main area for the night elves is a dude whose wive is ghost. The story itself is not that bad but this ain't a rpg. It is a adventure ride pretending to be an rpg, so you do not actually get any choice except to get out of the ride. But if you follow the ride there is only one conclusion wich is the same for everyone. Since you will pass this spot a lot you will more then likely see other players on the same ride. You might even be "turning in your quest" while someone else is seeing the touching reunion scene.
Offcourse single player RPG's are in essence the same. But here at least the "reset" for the next adventurer is hidden from your eyes. Only on replay will you suddenly find this magical world with all the same people wanting you to do the same thing you already done in a previous life.
But in a MMORPG you will be the 1000000th to discover the dying soldier who has been dying since game launch 3 years ago and will be breathing his last breath for years to come, get a unique blue stone for deliviring a broom (eq2) just like everyone else who got the same unique blue stone for the same broom.
It is kinda hard to then feel unique.
Is WoW wrong for being like this? Well, no. It is just the way MMORPG's play. While other ways are possible they are far more difficult to implement. Remember, Star Wars tried to be different and look how it ended up, a crap WoW clone desperate to get even a fraction of the players.
Second life and Eve Online are often mentioned but both are pathetic compared to the subscription numbers of WoW.
Theather gives you a far more personal experience then an adventure theme park ride BUT just how many theather productions can compete with the visitor numbers of even a small themepark?
Because if you can allow yourselve to ignore the obvious resets and that you are just the 1 millionth customer being services you get a fairly good fun experience.
It is just like life. We like to think the mega superstar waved at US in the 100.000+ audience, that the actor acted for us, that a <fill in your country here> audience really is special to a performer, that we are the best lover of your lover and we most certainly don't like to know that we are the 100th and that number 101 is already waiting in the hall.
But lets not forget that WoW is already amazing customized to you the player. An awfull lot of the NPC talk mentions your race and sex and proffesion. A feat many a single player RPG cannot even handle.
WoW is the current leader, it is not the most ambitious but it shows what can be done succesfully with todays technology and todays audience.
Todays audience? Why yes. What after all is the point of writing complex plots even allowing you to make complex moral decissions if the majority of g
Sure, if you just want to let off steam, get feel-good feedback, put a few ideas out there, then perfect. You've done your job.
But if you want to make a change, if you want big game companies to start listening and innovating and implementing your ideas, you've got to frame it all differently by talking to them. Not the fanboys and the serious gamers. Sure you might be saying what fans want, but you have to present it for the companies.
I don't work for any game companies, but these feature suggestions lack the justifications that they would look for. These guys want to deliver quality product on time and on budget. A big part of that involves balancing the pros and cons of implementing features.
Look at customization for example. I would love to trick out my avatar too, but the cons are huge. Large gatherings would generate massive lag (because that kind of data compounds fast), lots of users can't benefit much (using older computers with poor graphics), and not to mention the Myspace factor (give non-designers design power, get migraines). Suggesting possible caveats in the article (and possible solutions) goes a long way toward answering objections before they're even raised.
For big time MMOG devs it all comes down to this: Any feature is worth it, so long as the return it makes from users signups and/or retention is greater than the cost of development/maintenance. Show directly how each feature accomplishes these goals and you just might end up as a creative consultant. :)
For everyone who hates WoW there is someone who will love Darkfall.
I love the fps nature of this game, and the persistent mmorpg aspect is a nice bonus.
It should be entering beta soon and be released next year.
Well worth the wait if you ask me.
I ripped this from the game's forum.
just some points of interest:
* full pk/pvp - no restrictions to who you can kill
* full loot - even items equipped
* item deterioration - items will be lost (making crafting lucrative)
* complex crafting construct
* instant travel will be difficult - opening up more pvp/pk confrontation
* player/guild run cities - capturable / siegeable / destroyable
* 100's of weapon designs for customization and personalizing your chars
* no levels!
* skill based structure - skill gain by use, skill loss by neglecting to use
* instant interaction - you do not have to grind before you play the game
* dismemberment - after unconscious, dismember (a killing blow) or revive/res
* no floating names - terrain cover actually works
* no targetting - you have to aim at who you want to hit
* no health bars - you have to judge by appearance how someone's doing
* ships - pirates / pirate guilds / sea transportation and storage for merchants
* huge underwater environment - no wasted space by a large part of the world
* 100's of underground environments - dungeons etc
* no instances
* zerg based guilds will have drawbacks
* party members take AOE damage; and radius mellee damage - from their group
* manual blocking
* manual attacking
* usable "moves"/"skills"/"spells" like in most games we're familiar with now
* manual parrying
* move while blocking
* increased damage from behind
* close range 3/4 mellee view
* FPS view for ranged (bow&arrow / magery)
* cookie cutter free - invest time in any skill you want to
* collision - no more walking through anyone (bodyblocking does apply)
* pushing
* formations will be key
* strategy and co-op for large battles will be key
* playing as an individual will be feasible
* griefing friendly
* racial anamosity and NPC faction - A and B get along, but not with C, D or E guards apply
* character appearance extremely customizable
* unique playstyles or tactics will be important
* minimal playerbase spread - no overabundance of servers
* limitless things to do during downtime
* racial benefits and drawbacks
* no classes
* shit talking friendly
You may find EVE online a little more fun. There is no skill cap which does in some ways mean that "everyone who started playing before I did is automatically better than me", but it also means that the game doesn't just end after your character reaches a certain point. The skill tree and market and the vast multitude of ways someone can fit their ships adds an extreme amount of flexibility to the situation so fighting someone who has been playing for longer than you is not an automatic loss. EVE also has the "dynamics" that you crave. The players have a large degree of control over the markets. Territory in "alliance space" can be won and lost as Alliances go to war - these are entirely player controlled events. Finally, if I understand it correctly, there are a number of "event actors" working for CCP which help to move the main storyline of EVE along, again, with player input of course. You'll see these events and their outcomes in the news item that you see every time you pick your character when logging in.
e et=1
I feel it is fair to mention some of the downsides as well: skill training takes a really long time. It runs 23/7 (one hour of downtime every day), whether you're logged in or not. Simple skills take 20 minutes. Complex skills take 15 days to a month. Insane skills... I don't even want to know.
While the storyline of Eve is somewhat dynamic, the missions are completely static, at least as far as I can tell. A few variables may change but as far as I can tell the missions are completely based off templates: "kill 10 grue", "deliver this stuff there", etc. Of course, I counter my own negative point: at a certain point the player interaction can help with this a lot, there is a fully open player controlled courier and escrow section of the game, where the missions are obviously unique (CCP is also supposedly planning some sort of contract support in the near future). Mercenaries and pirates are extremely common and while they don't have something built directly into the UI for managing relationships they are very much a part of the game. Need your expensive cargo hauled through space infested by other people playing as pirates? Better hire a good hauler, who will in turn hire a good merc corp.
Finally, yes, the grind still exists. I don't think this will ever be done away with in MMOs. The simple fact of the matter is that the more time you throw at any MMO the better your character is going to get, be it money, skill, rep, connections, whatever.
CCP is offering free 14 day trials. If you ever do give the game a shot, fire me off an email and we can perhaps converse in-game.
Trial link: https://secure.eve-online.com/ft/?aid=100972&nogr
Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
The problem here is that this is a great idea for L60 players with nowhere else to go. But for someone new to the game just trying to level up, well you're just making it harder for them than for the established players. Maybe you need starter worlds (servers), each of which evolve over time into more challenging storylines that everyone can move to together.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I just wanted to elaborate a bit more on the EVE skill system for those that aren't familiar with it. What you say is true, "everyone who started playing before I did is automatically better than me," but in a different way than that statement implies. Having more skill points for the most part simply opens more doors for you (more ships to fly, bigger and better weapons to use, etc.). This causes the game to tend to specialization for most players. A new player that decides to specialize in their race's primary combat frigate will, after only a few weeks time (that is, real-life time), be able to put up a very respectable fight against a much older player in a similarly classed ship. And several new players banding together can easily destroy an older player in a larger ship.
;). It still does not make you invincible though; having lots of ISK really just eases your burden in your virtual life. It can give you that extra edge in combat if you have the best gear, and make it less of a problem when your uber expensive ship gets pwned because you thought you were hot stuff. So, in my opinion anyway, that shortens the gap between the power gamers and the casual gamers.
There is definitely a certain amount of grind though, as with any MMORPG. For EVE, this is really almost entirely related to ISK (the game's currency), however. If you have the ISK, you can buy more skills for your characters and better weapons and ships (read "gear"
Finally, as an aside, I think skill training is 24/7. Unless I'm mistaken, training time continues even during downtime (hence CCP always suggesting setting a long skill to train when there will be an extended DT for hardware upgrades or patches - so your skill doesn't finish in the middle of DT and then you lose the rest of DT for training).
Anyway, I also highly recommend EVE Online. It can be a lot of fun and there are so many things to do that it will likely please most people.