Slashdot Mirror


Setting a Learning Curve In MMOs

Ten Ton Hammer has an article looking at the learning curves of modern MMOs. Many of the more popular games, such as World of Warcraft, go to great lengths to make learning the game easy for new players. Others, such as EVE Online, have had success with a less forgiving introduction. But to what extent do the most fundamental game mechanics limit the more complex end-game play? "The current trend in MMOG's appears to be make the game so easy and interest-grabbing right out of the gate that even a person with the attention span of a monkey chewing on a flyswatter will be able to keep up and get into the swing of things. Depth of game mechanics is still possible with a system like this, but it needs to be introduced not only clearly, but later in the game, after a player has played enough to be hooked and is willing to put in some extra time to learn about the more intricate game mechanics available to them."

12 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. Link to results of a similar study by FinchWorld · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    "I may be full of crap about this game, and I may be wrong, and that's fine." -Jack Thompson
  2. Eve Learning Curve by adavies42 · · Score: 5, Funny
    --
    Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
    -kfg
  3. I tried Eve... by abigsmurf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And didn't make it past the tutorial. It was long, boring and suffered from information overload. Couldn't be bothered with it all really. Also not a big fan of games that are 'ruled' by super guilds.

    I think the problem isn't so much the learning curve as giving players the motivation and chance to learn. Take WoW, you're eased into skills, the early instances don't require you to be especially knowledgable of what spec you should be for your role (as at that stage there's little variation in talents and equiptment). These instances even teach you the basics about how to group (not to N on stuff you can't use or gems, how to avoid wipes etc.) FFXI lets you solo for about 8 levels before it gets into the forced grouping, there's a relatively early quest that forces you to tour the major cities.

    There's nothing wrong with having complex MMOs but you've got to ease them into the various aspects of it one stage at a time. Even simple play mechanics can suffer if everything is forced on you at once. To use WoW again as an example, one of the critisisms of the new Death Knight class is that as you're given one at lv.55, you haven't been levelling with the class but have a huge number of abilities and loads of talent points. As people haven't learnt the class in that way, it can be surprisingly difficult to play it properly and people may not realise they've bad specs or itemisation until it's pointed out to them.

    1. Re:I tried Eve... by Loki_1929 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Something you wouldn't understand without having played it for a long time is that Eve actually does ease you into it.

      It has so much depth that if it eased you in at the kind of rate you're looking for, you'd still be learning basic mechanics when you've been playing for 2 years. It's a very unforgiving world in which you can experience loss like in no other game I've ever played, right down to the skills you've spent so much (real life) time training. It's a game where success or failure can depend on how quickly you can adapt to a radically changing environment with a vast array of competing counter-measures and strategies. Gaining a deep understanding of how everything stacks together and how to counter all kinds of various tactics and tools on the fly requires that you learn at an incredible rate constantly. And just when you think you're getting the hang of it, a new expansion comes out (at the rate of two per year) that vastly changes the balance of things such that new tactics and ideas emerge.

      Really, if you don't make it through the tutorial, Eve probably isn't the game for you. That's fine, as no game should try to be perfect for everyone as it will end up being poor for anyone. Eve is really for those who want to be constantly challenged in new and different ways by intelligent adversaries using skills and tools that work together in extremely complex ways. It has within it the ability to play as openly as any life simulator, but with far more danger than anything else I've seen before it.

      If the challenge of the tutorial turns you off, then the game itself will almost certainly turn you off as well. In that sense, I think the tutorial does a great job of both educating those who truly are interested in Eve's world view and in pushing away those who ultimately won't enjoy themselves anyway.

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    2. Re:I tried Eve... by Sobrique · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In all fairness though, that tutorial is a good introduction to the game - if you don't get along with it, you won't enjoy EVE.

    3. Re:I tried Eve... by ZombieWomble · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The problem I observed with the EVE tutorial is not that there's too much information, but rather that it's presented extremely poorly and that the tutorial is not particularly engaging.

      In particular, your second and third paragraph is typical of the response given by people when asked why they play EVE - the problem is, all of this interesting and exciting content doesn't seem to be represented at all in the tutorial.

      Instead the tutorial seems to mostly just cover simple game mechanics (and often in a very poor way - does the game direct you about how to actually get back to the newbie zone if you leave it yet? That seemed to be the most mystifying thing to most people when I checked EVE out) and then dumps you with vast amounts of text-based information describing all the systems that weren't actually addressed in the tutorial.

      While you may argue that this is good because it weeds out the weak people, it has the issue that a player checking it out for the trial will probably completely fail to notice all this wonderful complexity as it can look like just poor implementation unless there's someone supplementing the tutorial and encouraging you to persevere - which seems to be almost the definition of a poorly designed new user experience.

    4. Re:I tried Eve... by Mascot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So WoWbabies can go play their little kiddie game all they like.

      No worries. We'll be off enjoying other games while you fiddle with your MMO spreadsheet thinking it makes you somehow better than "the rest". This is a surprisingly common Eve attitude. Whereas, for the rest of us, Eve is rather transparent. The only reason there's a learning curve at all is that it's intentionally obtuse.

      Saying Eve is for the intelligent is like making a VCR without a manual and no button labels and claiming intellect had anything to do with the trial and error it took to see which button does what. Perseverance, would be the word you're looking for, not intellect.

      I should point out, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Eve (I have an over four year old character there myself). It is what CCP wanted it to be, a sandbox where the players create the game around themselves. But claiming Eve is some kind of "high IQ version of an MMO" is indicative of self esteem issues, not intellect.

    5. Re:I tried Eve... by Endo13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Something you wouldn't understand without having played it for a long time is that Eve actually does ease you into it.

      So basically, you have to have played it for a long time to really understand the tutorial? Yeah, I know that's not what you meant, but it's still effectively what you're saying. Either way, the tutorial sucks. Period.

      It has so much depth that if it eased you in at the kind of rate you're looking for, you'd still be learning basic mechanics when you've been playing for 2 years. It's a very unforgiving world in which you can experience loss like in no other game I've ever played, right down to the skills you've spent so much (real life) time training. It's a game where success or failure can depend on how quickly you can adapt to a radically changing environment with a vast array of competing counter-measures and strategies. Gaining a deep understanding of how everything stacks together and how to counter all kinds of various tactics and tools on the fly requires that you learn at an incredible rate constantly. And just when you think you're getting the hang of it, a new expansion comes out (at the rate of two per year) that vastly changes the balance of things such that new tactics and ideas emerge.

      Not really "depth". Mostly just complexity and change for the sake of complexity and change. Which is great, for the small niche group of people that really get off on that kind of thing.

      Really, if you don't make it through the tutorial, Eve probably isn't the game for you.

      No doubt. But then, that means Eve just isn't for very many people, which means their ROI for the game is a lot less than it could have been. Which is basically the whole point of TFA. Sucks for them, but it doesn't really matter to me one way or another. There's plenty of other better MMOs to play.

      That's fine, as no game should try to be perfect for everyone as it will end up being poor for anyone. Eve is really for those who want to be constantly challenged in new and different ways by intelligent adversaries using skills and tools that work together in extremely complex ways. It has within it the ability to play as openly as any life simulator, but with far more danger than anything else I've seen before it.

      You're right, there's definitely not going to be a game that's going to be perfect for everyone, but it's definitely possible to make a game that's a lot more fun and appealing to a lot more people than Eve is. (There's about 11.5 million WoW players right now who could give you some insight on that.) And it's also possible to change the first stages of *any* game to make it a lot more fun and appealing to newcomers, enticing them to stay on and thereby increasing your playerbase without changing a damn thing in the last stages of the game. Eve just fails at it, that's all.

      If the challenge of the tutorial turns you off, then the game itself will almost certainly turn you off as well. In that sense, I think the tutorial does a great job of both educating those who truly are interested in Eve's world view and in pushing away those who ultimately won't enjoy themselves anyway.

      Not necessarily. Or are you trying to say the rest of the game sucks as badly as the tutorial? Because it's very possible for a tutorial to be very shitty and the game to be a lot more appealing later. For a great example, see City of Heroes/Villains. The game is interesting for about 5 minutes, and quickly becomes very frustrating - until you start getting your better powers and enhancements at about level 20 or so. Then it starts to get fun. LOTS of fun. But not many players stick around that long, because the first 10-15 levels are mostly a lesson in frustration. I'd *HOPE* Eve's failure is mostly the same, only magnified. Because quite honestly, of games I've tried that enjoyed any kind of real popularity, the Eve tutorial was easily the worst 15 minutes I've spent.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    6. Re:I tried Eve... by ultranova · · Score: 3, Funny

      Eve is perfectly happy without you. The brutal introduction is specifically designed to weed out fools, weaklings, idiots, and children afflicted with ADHD.

      Suddenly, it all becomes clear: the economic crisis was actually caused by EVE rejects who, having no outlet, decided to re-enact the game with the real stock market.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  4. I'm sick of small curves by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm getting quite sick of games with small learning curves - the ones who's mechanics you can master in less than a month without any special instruction. The ones that become a game of who went deeper into the dungeon for the better armor, who buys the more expensive weapon, who can snap-aim better (which takes skill, but is not a particularly interesting one). Give me something rewarding, where I can be playing a year or two later and still improving my skill. Items are cool, but after a while they don't cut it.

    1. Re:I'm sick of small curves by wisty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Learning to code? Learning a musical instrument? Martial arts? Latin dancing? Anything with a 2 year learning code is a hobby (or a job), not a game.

    2. Re:I'm sick of small curves by Sir+Lollerskates · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you're doing it wrong, and here's why. In the interest of full disclosure, I play WoW, Counter-Strike, and QuakeWorld. Also, I can't understand EVE (but I tried).

      I'm getting quite sick of games with small learning curves - the ones who's mechanics you can master in less than a month without any special instruction.

      Depending on your definition of "mechanics", mastering them should be quite easy in less than a month. For example, one can learn the mechanics of Chess, in a day or so. The rules aren't particularly complicated, but to reach any level of interesting play, it can take years.

      My point is that the mechanics *should* be simple. When they're complex, you end up with EVE; and I think there's a general consensus that EVE is impossible for outsiders to comprehend enough to appreciate, let alone play for themselves. I've tried playing it, and my experience is that the game is completely inaccessible to those with anything but a dedicated interest in playing EVE. My guess would be that most EVE players are probably close friends with other EVE players, or they would never have been able to overcome the learning curve (or lack thereof) in the first place.

      If you have a chance to watch the Portal "Director's Commentary", they explain precisely how the learning curve was developed for that game, and the rationale behind it based on feedback testing.

      The ones that become a game of who went deeper into the dungeon for the better armor, who buys the more expensive weapon, who can snap-aim better (which takes skill, but is not a particularly interesting one).

      But not true. At the highest levels of play, all people are geared similarly with armor and weapons, and they can all aim. It's already assumed at being at a high level of play. Competitive WoW players already have their full sets. Competitive Quake players have insanely good aim. That's why, when you reach that level of play, you no longer have to worry about armor or aim. It's built-in. Check out the discussions going on over at the Elitist Jerks forums for WoW. Or go watch some QuakeWorld videos. Or if you have the patience to setup nQuake, go download it and watch some QuakeWorld demos .. or Quake3 for that matter.

      Sure, you might find cases where the winner is decided by having a super rare WoW-drop, or where someone's lightning gun or rail gun is what wins the match based on exceptionally good aim. But for the most part, it becomes a game of strategy.

      MMO's are very big into number-crunching, like the kind you'll find at Elitist Jerks. FPS's are very big into demo watching and strategy. Keep in mind, however, that it's only at very high levels of play that you'll see this.

      The good games, in my opinion, are easy enough for anyone to pick up, but complex enough that only the most dedicated can reach the highest levels of play. WoW does this very well. Quake is too inaccessible, and suffers from a lack of players (even bad ones) as a consequence. Counter-strike has a different problem, where the game isn't very good at high levels of play, but it is very accessible. The FPS is difficult to get right in a way that doesn't alienate newbies or pros. EVE is an enigma in the sense that it even survives at all. (Someone feel free to explain this to me.)

      Give me something rewarding, where I can be playing a year or two later and still improving my skill. Items are cool, but after a while they don't cut it.

      And that's why there's a casual gaming market. You're asking that a game neither be too hard that you can't pick it up nor too easy that it doesn't feel rewarding. You should pick a game that has both a large enough following that skill makes a difference at the end-game stages, while it is accessib