Raph Koster's _A Theory of Fun_ available for pre-order

[El Gallo]

Thanks for the heads up on the book.

PS: raidal menus are teh debil.

[HaemishM]

Jedi was an easily, IMO, solvable problem.

Except that on one hand you had LucasArts insisting on a particular timeline and continuity that is set in stone for everyone except himself. On the other hand, you had the idea of game balance, which would be completely fucked by a continuity-laden Jedi class.

Had SWG been allowed to exist in the pre-Clone Wars or even the Clone Wars days, Jedi would have been a fun PVE AND PVP class to play, provided the game mechanics were solid, not to mention could have been done in a balanced fashion. After all, Jedi were da bomb, but a good professional like Jango Fett could give them a run for their money. But with most Jedi being dead for a good 10-20 years in the SWG timeline, there's no way you could get away with saying anyone was a match for a Jedi, other than as a game balance choice. And with the restrictive continuity....

[Dark Vengeance]

You're saying that the reason games follow a limited formula (eg kill bad guys to end of level. Kill bigger bad guy) is because our ancestors had to seperate the things that could kill them from the things that would keep them alive within their various environments?

Sorry if someone already answered this....but I think it comes down to the old caveman mentality. In other words, "if you can't fuck it, kill it". Unless Raph wants to get into making new gaming .....um....peripherals, that means that most of the action in MMOGs will involve killing stuff. You're either killing other players or AI, no way around that.

I mean, you can boil most automated quests down to a few simple formulas, and only a small chunk of the base is going to embrace the player economy or crafting.....so if you look at it with a wide enough angle lens, every game looks like it only has a few basic things to do.

Bring the noise.
Cheers............

[Faust]

I've given up on Raph.  If I were to read his book it would only be for a laugh at his psychobabble bullshit or to gear up for another Raph induced Rant.  Raph reminds me of one of those complete posuers who come out of a fancy business school spouting non-stop crap about how things should work, but having absolutely no clue about how to realistically implement it.  

Beating him up about his arrogance, however, is boring.  He just doesn't listen and when he does he doesn't understand what he's listening to.

Good luck with your book, Raph.  I hope you get rich buffaloing another round of executives.  Your customer base, however, thinks you make shitty games and personally, I don't think you can define fun for real people.

[Righ]

about his arrogance

Pot, meet kettle.

[Signe]

I've never noticed Raph being particularly arrogant, or maybe I'm immune to arrogance from reading this forum.  I do remember, however, Raph saying in a post above that he DID listen and that he wrote this book in an attempt to 'get back to basics'.  That sounds decidedly unarrogant, doesn't it?  I guess you didn't notice that bit, Faust.  I may not have enjoyed SWG but I find this bit of your post

Your customer base, however, thinks you make shitty games and personally, I don't think you can define fun for real people.

to be arrogant, in itself.  

Enough people seem to play this game to make that statement erroneous, at the very least.  Anyway, the people who hate his game are not part of his customer base any longer, are they?  

What exactly made you this angry?

[Ironwood]

 
What exactly made you this angry?

I'm guessing, of course, but it's possibly listening to all the fantastic theories of what SWG was going to be during the development process only to find that it was a complete turd on playing.

I mean, irredeemably bad.

I used the phrase 'sucked the marrow from the Earth' earlier.  It's really, really, really a BAD game.

And he told us it would be better.

[Roac]

 
What exactly made you this angry?

I'm guessing, of course, but it's possibly listening to all the fantastic theories of what SWG was going to be during the development process only to find that it was a complete turd on playing.

I mean, irredeemably bad.

I used the phrase 'sucked the marrow from the Earth' earlier.  It's really, really, really a BAD game.

And he told us it would be better.

To defend him somewhat, SWG is highly successful from a MMOG pov.  Many MMOGs are surviving with 50-80k subscribers, and SWG has several hundred thousand.  There's a lot I liked about it too; it was gorgeous, I thought the skill tree system was innovative, housing (which I didn't get to try) looked interesting.  But I hated its combat system, and PvP was an abortion, and those two points are deal breakers for me.  I don't need several hundred thousand other people if I can't challenge them and be challenged by them; everything else can be done (usually, for some reason, better) in a standalone.

[Paelos]

If someone else could innovate combat in MMOs to make it more fun and then rip out the economy, auction, graphics, and crafting from SWG, the game is pure gold.

You are correct that combat, PVP, and to a larger extent the unnecessary promises of the devs that turned out to be just another grind were what killed the game for me. Oh, and the guild system majorly sucked at release.

[WonderBrick]

It would be interesting to have a dual interview/discussion with Raph and Claus Grovdal(Darkfall).  Raph helped create the MMORPG era that many(including myself) enjoyed most.  It was also an era that heavily influences the philosophies that Claus holds.  From Claus, who is nurturing and progressing that era, to Raph, who has declared it a mistake(correct me if I am wrong), it would be interesting to see what they can teach each other.  We want to listen in on the conversation, though.  :)

[Roac]

From Claus, who is nurturing and progressing that era, to Raph, who has declared it a mistake(correct me if I am wrong), it would be interesting to see what they can teach each other.

I don't think there is one "right way" to do a MMOG.  It's obvious that something along the lines of a "carebear" game are enjoyed by consumers, even if it's something I and others here don't care for.  Many of the design choices are matters of taste.

[Paelos]

I think that is the real reason that "good" MMOG's according to this community's needs will always be niche products, which I believe is something Haemish has expounded upon before. The idea that you can appease the masses will always lead to the LCD of gaming. That's why we get the games like EQ that have the massive numbers but don't appeal to the jaded gamer looking for more.

To get what we are really looking for, I doubt the game would ever have the same kind of massive appeal. Lots of people eat tons of Kraft processed cheese every year. That doesn't mean its the best cheese on the market for the educated consumer out for a great experience.

[WonderBrick]

Alot of people buy Quake3 and Unreal Tournament 2004, and they are the best at what they offer.  For every remaining FPS that captures the remaining niche areas, the MMOG industry has a corresponding gapping hole.

Tomb Raider 1 sold like crazy, after blending genres to create a new hybrid genre.

I do think the key is to blend an existing genre, like a RTS or FPS, with the MMOG genre.

Don't give up.

[Jayce]

To stretch the analogy a bit further, Britney Spears* outsells by an order of magnitude a lot of really good, solid, musically innovative bands.

Moral of the story: people like crap.  If you don't like crap, I suggest you buy indie and/or niche.



*<old guy>or whatever the kids are listening to these days</old guy>

[Roac]

I think that is the real reason that "good" MMOG's according to this community's needs will always be niche products

I would disagree, to a point.  Generally, people in the movie business have said the same kinds of things regarding sci-fi/fantasy movies.  That is, they are niche, and the big hits (Star Wars) are exceedingly rare.  Mostly, they don't do as well as the competition.  While a lot of people here are going to look on Princess' Bride with fondness (inc. me), it wasn't that great a film, either looking at it critically or financially.

However, I disagree that this means sci-fi/fantasy cannot or are not mainstream; instead, I feel that this means people don't know how to write good sci-fi/fantasy.  Star Wars should already be a good hint that this was the case.  Lord of the Rings should have blown that idea totally out of the water.  Many literary critics have tried for a long time to relegate those books to "niche" or "geeky" because of their genre.  They're either wrong, or people are a lot less cool than we'd like to believe.

I think we're in the same boat with MMOGs.  At one point, the RTS was considered niche - until WarCraft came out.  It just took a good RTS to make a game in the genre make money, and man did it make money.  MMOGs were considered niche, but that's a harder argument to make nowadays.  PvP is considered niche, but again, I think this has to do with design and not PvP as a concept.

Sure, some of the hardcore fanbase of LoTR disliked the movies, but most of them who I know (and I have followed LoTR for a long time - look up my handle) did enjoy them overall, despite their grievances.  I think PvP can, and will, hit the same point.  At some point, someone is going to take a serious look at why there is a sizable niche group who is touting PvP, and work out why they like it, most people don't, and make a good game to include most people on both sides.  The limiting factor here is the number of people willing to consider radically new designs, beyond the standard crop of PvP zones and switches.

[Shannow]

Damn Roac stole my thunder.
Just because something is commercially a success doesnt mean it has to be bland crap.
There are plenty of good bands and good movies out there that DO make bucketloads of money. Sure they are rarer than the bland commercial crap but its not tHAT uncommon.
There are also different dynamics to a MMOLG as compared to bands/films so it doesnt make a perfect analogy but I truely believe that different types of games wont be niche forever.
Right now its a convienent excuse (and yes a commercially viable one) for game designers not to push the envelope.

[Faust]

What exactly made you this angry?

Necromancy, Jedi, & everything in between.

[Signe]

Then you are also to blame, Faust.  It only sucked because you experienced the suck.  Had you not chosen to play those games, you would have been blissfully unaware of the suck.  You and Raph are equally at fault.

I hope I made you both feel better.

[Riggswolfe]

[ PvP is considered niche, but again, I think this has to do with design and not PvP as a concept.
.

See this is the one point of your generally well thought out post I disagree with. PvP enthusiasts continually insist that if PvP is made well enough that PvE enthusiasts will suddenly convert and come to enjoy it. This is not necessarily true. I for one would be very, very hard to convert to PvP because it is frankly not what I play MMOs for. I think alot of other people are the same and this is why PvP is a niche.

The issue with PvP isn't so much design (though that is a huge issue since modern PvP is all about time invested and not skill ) but with people. The only game I can think of that came close to fixing this issue is DAOC (and possibly WoW since it seems they are going the route of not letting the factions talk to each other). The problem is, in PvP, the lowest common denominator is going to set the tone. Period. There may be lots of decent people who enjoy PvP but it's the little retards that everyone remembers and that make it so only a small crowd will enjoy PvP.

Solve the human element and maybe, just maybe, you'll see pvp grow. Of course, the day you do that is the day we achieve world peace.

[Roac]

I for one would be very, very hard to convert to PvP because it is frankly not what I play MMOs for. I think alot of other people are the same and this is why PvP is a niche.

It could be.  You play MMOGs to have fun, regardless of the details.  If there was such a thing as "fun PvP", at least in your mind, you'd play it.

[WonderBrick]

I'd certainly argue the point that MMOGs often present an atmosphere that make PVP unpleasant to otherwise PVP-willing players.  I am not talking about everyone that plays MMOGs, but I am refering to those that enjoy FPSs, yet don't find anything remotely as balanced or action packed(time spent preparing vs reward of fight) in a MMOG.  

I experience more fun, memorable moments in one evening of non-MMOG games, then I do in a week of playing MMOGs.  Does this mean MMOGs are not for me?  No, because I like what I see.  And I really like those moments that I do occasionally get.  But a MMOG cannot give me enough of what I want in any reasonable time period.  It is crack being drip-feed to me.  Part of it is intentional timesinks, and part of it is design issues.

I do agree that you have to be aware of the lowest common denominator.  That is why I think that the Planetside/Savage approach works so well.  Everyone is balanced, but success equals more options.  One might argue the same for Counterstrike.  I have yet to play Guild Wars(so I might be way off base), but it sounds like there might be a similiar approach, only allowing a certain number of spells at a time, to be carried out to a fight.

MMOG persistance can add housing/storage, guild functionality, matchmaking, and longterm goals ontop of the existing shortterm FPS goals, and you have a solid foundation to later build on. Imo.

[Riggswolfe]

I for one would be very, very hard to convert to PvP because it is frankly not what I play MMOs for. I think alot of other people are the same and this is why PvP is a niche.

It could be.  You play MMOGs to have fun, regardless of the details.  If there was such a thing as "fun PvP", at least in your mind, you'd play it.

There is such a thing as fun PvP. I get it in FPS and RTS. I don't believe it'll ever be present in MMOs.

It is a matter of this:

FPS/RTS:
1) No time investment in my "character"
2) Skill = win

MMO:
1) lots of time investment in my character
2) Time invested = win

[Trippy]

[It is a matter of this:

FPS/RTS:
1) No time investment in my "character"
2) Skill = win

MMO:
1) lots of time investment in my character
2) Time invested = win

Actually you could argue for both that "Time invested = win". I used to practice my QuakeWorld CTF skills 8+ hours a day and I got pretty damn good at it. And you read about the top Counter-Strike clans and they play a lot together honing both their individual and team skills. Being a top FPS or RTS player is more than just having excellent hand-eye coordination. You have to spend the time to learn the nuances of all the maps, learn lots of different strategies and tactics, learn how to anticipate your opponent's actions and so on. So even in FPS and RTS games, the more you play the better you get. The difference with online RPGs is that time invested also raises the starting power of your character so the playing field usually isn't even, and then there's the issue of uneven teams.

[WonderBrick]

I still think there can be a medium.  For example, if a mage or a warrior can only take 10 spells/special-moves/slots out onto the battlefield.  Each slot is fairly balanced, be it defensive, offensive, buff, counter, etc.  The MMOG-timesink nature of the game can still use timesinks and character development to help players flesh out their characters with more options.  No leveling.  No uber spells.  Just different approaches to each slot.  Depending on the type of game(RPG, sci-fi/action, etc), you can split some of those slots into seperate skills and inventory slots, to help maintain RP feasibility.

Big, but slow fireball.  Rapid fire, disruptive fireball.  Long-range power fireball(straight shooting).  etc.

Like Planetside:  access to more weapons and vehicles.

Like Savage:  access to better weapons and "tank" classes.

Longtime players just get more options.  Sure I can have fun with fireball, mini-heal, cure, and feeblemind.  But I am more effective with access to Lightning, Greater Heal, Reasurection, Reveal.  I can flesh myself out in ways to fit my playstyle.

Longtime players get housing/storage, status/rank, customization perks, etc.

Personally, for me, if a game has enough unique areas to make placing a house in an area feel special, that hook alone will keep my account open, even during slow periods.  I don't want to lose my house.  Add on resource control, and you add value to certain areas.  Add on player-created towns to let guildmembers live near each other, and that further enhances the housing hook.  Housing is the only hook that works on me.  Keep timesinks away and the fun coming.

[Kageru]

Sounds a lot like planetside, and will probably have the same durability. If you can't offer some form of progression the range of carrots you can offer is drastically reduced.

[WonderBrick]

I can't wait til the day that Planetside's player skills and action meet MMORPG's persistance and mythology.

[Ironwood]

Then you are also to blame, Faust.  It only sucked because you experienced the suck.  Had you not chosen to play those games, you would have been blissfully unaware of the suck.  You and Raph are equally at fault.

I hope I made you both feel better.

How the fuck did you come up with that full of shit argument ?

[Kageru]

I have no idea what you mean. Mythology in MMORPG's is entirely optional and disposable. WoW with it's quest centric progression will probably be the closest to having lore tied to action but even there most tasks devolve to repetitive action. As is inevitable because of the volume of content a player will consume.

In any case planetside, as I understand it, has both lore and persistance. And it also has a terrible retention rate. That's because adrenal oriented players get bored easily. Whereas strategically oriented players will happily do repetitive tasks as steps to a long term goal. That's why there's flat progression, no crafting, minimal travel time and low set-up in planetside and it's why your idea doesn't fly.

I was going to say something like that in the other thread you started, but it had already got far too surreal for me.

[WonderBrick]

First, I need to address some issues that plague Planetside, as it stands by itself.

The continents and bases lack any specific meaning, personality, or reason for players to "feel at home".  The landscape is meaningless and does not envoke any strong feelings, like one would have for defending their home terf.  I don't know if it was/is game engine issues, or network code issues, but the game still remains a standard form of CTF, and makes no effort to bond the player to the territory they battle over.  This all takes place over a non-interactive landscape.  The landscape design makes little attempt at any form of grandly-designed battleground.  Buildings are non-deformable.  There is no constructable, strategic structures.  Except for the Vanu, a few aspects of the Core Combat expansion, and one, maybe two, landmarks, the game's alien mythology fails to show itself in the world.  One continent plays fairly much like the next.

These all contribute to retention issues, albiet at a smaller, more subtle level.

I think there can be a medium between Planetside's lack of retention methods/larger-goals, and the stop-gap goals MMORPGs have to come up with for retention reasons.

Just for the sake of arguement, lets say that this future, theoretical, medium-finding game is set in an RPG-ish setting.  You can have fast, realtime combat between mages, archers, warriors, thieves, tamers, etc.  There is no level-based combat, instead a skill system, or a slot/certification system, giving more toys for players to use on a level playing field.  You can have territorial control over resources, and all the conflict that arises from that.  You can have crafting of disposable items (or even non-drop items, if the game takes that approach).  You can build and destroy structures.  You can build player towns, and enjoy the protection that having friends around you will allow.  Your housing and/or banking allows a certain amount of storage/packratting.  You have a game designed around PVP, but allows plenty of recreational PVM.

You have longterm territorial goals, and shortterm conflict.

Now I have just inadvertently described Darkfall.  Because Darkfall may have found that perfect medium.  It is still abit to early to tell if Darkfall will have enough retention factors for the playerbase it is aimed for.  But I can tell you that it has plenty of retention factors that both offer me the enjoyment of Planetside, and keep me playing longterm.

This might not be what you are looking for in your next game, but this seems to be an approach many have been asking for.

[AlteredOne]

When DAOC introduced "trophies" for houses, I was utterly amazed at the response.  Some of the most serious powergamers on the server switched their focus from RvR and powerlevels, and suddenly became collectors of bug heads and mounted skeletons.

Of course, there was a limited supply of these things, and once everybody had gotten a dozen or so, they went back to their usual pursuits.

So it occurred to me, what if a game had no levels, but had *thousands* of silly "collectible" items, mainly for decorative and prestige purposes.  And the developers added a couple dozen such items every couple of weeks, so that the hunt never ran dry...

I could picture a game like Planetside or Guildwars, adding such an "itemquest" concept, and it would be a huge hit.  PvP is all about competition, and collecting silly junk is just another less violent form of competition.

[Jayce]

once everybody had gotten a dozen or so, they went back to their usual pursuits.

This is why *thousands* of collectible items won't work.  Most people only want "a dozen or so" -- or less -- of things like this.  Thousands just cheapens them and makes people want them less.

Not that I think it's entirely a bad idea. For example, look at the UO rares market.  There are enough rares for everyone who -really- wants one, but they are still rare enough that they command high prices.  Voila, a cottage industry is born.

But if you flood the market, I think you'd find that demand would drop significantly.

[Ookii]

The best thing about rare items, is that you can screw people over by buying them online using paypal's loophole for non-physical merchandise.

[Signe]

Then you are also to blame, Faust.  It only sucked because you experienced the suck.  Had you not chosen to play those games, you would have been blissfully unaware of the suck.  You and Raph are equally at fault.

I hope I made you both feel better.

How the fuck did you come up with that full of shit argument ?

I was trying to be kind.  Obviously, I need to work on it.

[AlteredOne]

The best thing about rare items, is that you can screw people over by buying them online using paypal's loophole for non-physical merchandise.

If somebody is willing to pay real $$$ for a wall trophie or pink panties, probably they deserve to be screwed over :P  I'm talking about silly decorative stuff, not the Megawanker Enhanced Ballblasting Sword of PvP Gankness....

[Shannow]

First, I need to address some issues that plague Planetside, as it stands by itself.

The continents and bases lack any specific meaning, personality, or reason for players to "feel at home".  The landscape is meaningless and does not envoke any strong feelings, like one would have for defending their home terf.  

Maybe thats one reason people keep playing ww2ol, there is at least a historical and real world geographical context to the towns we capture and defend. Nothing like defending tienan'grad' for two weeks straight, allied moral usually goes in the crapper when we lose Brussels and Antwerp etc. Its still not perfect either but the addition of the NA theatre should make things interesting.