Interesting Age of Conan Player Poll Results

[Margalis]

Just a note, when I'm talking about 'raid content' I'm not specifically meaning WoW raid content. I'm defining 'raid content' as any encounter that is a harder than average scripted encounter with a better than average reward built in. WoW instances are an example of that but so are DAoC artifact encounters or EvE complexes. Raid content can be soloable and still count as a raid encounter for the purposes of my points above.

This is apparently a very difficult concept since nobody is getting it, but if people are choosing not to do these "raids" it means the "better than average reward" is not better enough.

Why would I do a mid-level instance in WOW to get an item I'll outlevel in less time than it took me to get the item in the first place?

[IainC]

Just a note, when I'm talking about 'raid content' I'm not specifically meaning WoW raid content. I'm defining 'raid content' as any encounter that is a harder than average scripted encounter with a better than average reward built in. WoW instances are an example of that but so are DAoC artifact encounters or EvE complexes. Raid content can be soloable and still count as a raid encounter for the purposes of my points above.

This is apparently a very difficult concept since nobody is getting it, but if people are choosing not to do these "raids" it means the "better than average reward" is not better enough.

Ziggackly! So when faced with a choice between a 'challenging' (or 'fun' if you prefer) encounter with a better reward or a dull encounter with a worse reward, players tend to choose the second one. Hmm... sounds eerily similar to what I said a few pages back.

Increasing the reward brings a whole new set of issues to the table. Limited spawns for 'must have' items? Hard to get for solo/socially challenged players? Payday for RMT farming organisations? Complaints about the level of required PvE for PvP viability? The list goes on.

[Venkman]

but if people are choosing not to do these "raids" it means the "better than average reward" is not better enough.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, but it sounds like you're thinking people aren't raiding because the rewards aren't good enough.

If that's the case, then I disagree. The best items in games are usually locked behind Raids mostly. They don't get distributed gamewide because it's the act of Raiding at all that is the barrier (# of people, schedule, limited ROI, etc).

WoW raids are simply succeed/fail.

This is why I like the Badge drops system implemented in BC. Even if you failed do down the later Bosses, the earlier bosses gave everyone Badges they can accrue to turn in for loot (at that G'eras guy in Shattrah). This reminds me of the Darkness Falls badges from early DAoC, though these here drop a lot less and accrue for items that cost a lot less.

It's not perfect, but it's better than the old style binary condition.

[Margalis]

Ziggackly! So when faced with a choice between a 'challenging' (or 'fun' if you prefer) encounter with a better reward or a dull encounter with a worse reward, players tend to choose the second one. Hmm... sounds eerily similar to what I said a few pages back.

Amazingly you still aren't getting it. They choose the second one because the payoff is better, when you take into account the reward vs. the time and effort.

Increasing the reward brings a whole new set of issues to the table. Limited spawns for 'must have' items? Hard to get for solo/socially challenged players? Payday for RMT farming organisations? Complaints about the level of required PvE for PvP viability? The list goes on.

It really is amazing how people will fight to the death to defend the status quo, as if the tiniest change will sink the ship. I guess you think quests with meaningful rewards is a bad idea too right, since before WOW and EQ2 the norm was for quests to be worthless. In older games people didn't do quests. Then WOW and EQ2 upped the rewards to make them worthwhile. Now people do quests - THE HORROR! OH NOES THE MMORPG GENRE IS COLLAPSING!

Lol. God forbid we up the reward for "raids" nobody does or change the hate rules slightly, clearly that would ruin everything and our only choice is to exactly copy existing products made by smarter people. If WOW proved anything it proved that deviating from the formula equals death...right?

This is not rocket science. If people are not doing the challenging things it's because the payouts suck and need to be adjusted upwards. This is like the first 15 minutes of an introductory game theory class, not some radical concept you should be scared to death of.

I have a great idea for game: let's create a bunch of "raid" encounters that have crap rewards and that nobody will be interested in doing. Great design! Time well spent!

Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, but it sounds like you're thinking people aren't raiding because the rewards aren't good enough.

I'm not talking about raiding, I'm talking about "raiding" as cleverly redefined by the red name. In other words, doing anything other than grinding for XP on the easiest mobs.

[Merusk]

I just remembered, people (specifically Bards/ Enchanters) used to do that kind of "raiding" in EQ all the time.  Charm a red-con mob and solo it's buddies?  Round-up a pack of red-cons and spend 45 minutes burning them down?  You bet they did it.. why? Because the XP/ AAXP was incredible if they didn't get squished.

 It wasn't grinding away on easy blue/ green mobs for hours on end, it was an actual challenge and it was rewarded.. untill players who COULDN'T do it bitched and got the xp gain nerfed.  When the gravy-train stopped, so did the behavior.   If, instead, the other classes had been given a similar way of doing intensely difficult challenges for similar xp, it also would have silenced the outcry.  Of course, the first reaction is always "nerf it, it's simpler."

[IainC]

Amazingly you still aren't getting it. They choose the second one because the payoff is better, when you take into account the reward vs. the time and effort.

Again exactly what I said. People want reliable and easy XP/stuff. If they can have one hard fight or two easy ones for the same level of reward which do they choose?

It really is amazing how people will fight to the death to defend the status quo, as if the tiniest change will sink the ship. I guess you think quests with meaningful rewards is a bad idea too right, since before WOW and EQ2 the norm was for quests to be worthless. In older games people didn't do quests. Then WOW and EQ2 upped the rewards to make them worthwhile. Now people do quests - THE HORROR! OH NOES THE MMORPG GENRE IS COLLAPSING!

Lol. God forbid we up the reward for "raids" nobody does or change the hate rules slightly, clearly that would ruin everything and our only choice is to exactly copy existing products made by smarter people. If WOW proved anything it proved that deviating from the formula equals death...right?

This is not rocket science. If people are not doing the challenging things it's because the payouts suck and need to be adjusted upwards. This is like the first 15 minutes of an introductory game theory class, not some radical concept you should be scared to death of.

I have a great idea for game: let's create a bunch of "raid" encounters that have crap rewards and that nobody will be interested in doing. Great design! Time well spent!

I'm not defending anything. I'm just saying that making upping rewards to encourage players to do the harder encounters isn't a panacea. There are tradeoffs to that and it may or may not be desirable depending on other factors in your game of choice.

I'm not talking about raiding, I'm talking about "raiding" as cleverly redefined by the red name. In other words, doing anything other than grinding for XP on the easiest mobs.

I don't really care what EQ or WoW players think raiding is. I'm using 'raid' as a catch all term to avoid writing out 'scripted encounter for a variable number of people that tends to be more challenging than the average world mobs'. As in fact I pointed out the first time I used it in this context.

Edit - fixxored missing /quote tag.

[tmp]

Consider this, different, model: all raids will probably be successful (in the sense that the bosses will be killed).  Likelihood of a complete wipe is very low.  The payout for an 'unsuccessful' raid (bosses die, but slowly and after a few player deaths) is low.  The payout for a 'very successful' raid (bosses are killed quickly with few or no player deaths) is very high.  Just scale the gear and xp drops to how well the raid did.  Now your penalty for failure is small.  In fact, it's not even a boolean pass/fail anymore.  It's a spectrum of success, like a leaderboard.  People love leaderboards because you don't have to be first to feel like you're doing well, or improving, or at least better than the schmucks below you.

This sounds good... the rating aspect and better rewards attached to better performance might be good incentive for people to try and repeat the encounters, and beating your older "scores" is fun in itself for many. Then you have also the "challenge" versions where you do the same thing but with extra limitations or changed conditions, vide Portal bonus maps.

I think there's encounter like that in WoW actually, where people who beat certain boss in some 'good enough' time, get a special mount to show off? Don't know the details, just sounded like that from posted mentions of it.

edit: thinking about it some more, maybe part of fixed loot drops could be changed to some sort of "fame points" or whatever, that people would gain in amount depending on how thier encounter went. Then it's up to player to convert their accumulated points into specific gear as they see fit, rather than be at total mercy of the random number generator.

[Venkman]

That's why I mentioned the Badges. Even raids that don't clear an instance, even people who don't win a roll, walk away with something. They probably realized the benefits of positive reinforcement from the pre-BC BG days where even the losers advanced in some way.

since before WOW and EQ2 the norm was for quests to be worthless

Minor quibble, but didn't the pre-EQ2 game quests only become worthless when they didn't get tuned with the mudflation that evolved? I'm specifically thinking of how I was able to gear up on DAoC quests alone. Later that woulda been foolish, but it was fine at launch. And that's actually the case now in WoW and EQ2, for the same reason.

[Ratman_tf]

I just remembered, people (specifically Bards/ Enchanters) used to do that kind of "raiding" in EQ all the time.  Charm a red-con mob and solo it's buddies?  Round-up a pack of red-cons and spend 45 minutes burning them down?  You bet they did it.. why? Because the XP/ AAXP was incredible if they didn't get squished.

 It wasn't grinding away on easy blue/ green mobs for hours on end, it was an actual challenge and it was rewarded.. untill players who COULDN'T do it bitched and got the xp gain nerfed.  When the gravy-train stopped, so did the behavior.   If, instead, the other classes had been given a similar way of doing intensely difficult challenges for similar xp, it also would have silenced the outcry.  Of course, the first reaction is always "nerf it, it's simpler."

Well, we all know that for a long time, EQ punished success. Which is a bizarro way of tweaking a game, and got bizzaro results. 

[Slayerik]

Basically, I don't really like RPG's too much.  What I do like about them is the story, the world, getting to read/watch something unfold that you are directly influence.  RPG's are like those old books where you pick a choice and turn to the page, but a little bit more cool, sometimes.

Guess what is missing from MMO's?  The only part of the RPG experience that really impresses me.  This is why RPG bastard child MMO's are fucking failuresuck in my eyes.  Can't wait until people start taking FPS, RTS, Adventure, Puzzle, CCG, whateverthefuck else and turning them into persistent worlds/games where you can play with lots of people.

P.S.  I also agree mostly with what Slayer said 2 pages back.

Thanks Hoax, nothing like having what you think is a solid rant get totally ignored :) I owe ya one!

[Venkman]

Heh, it was a fine rant and all, but the market doesn't support that sorta thing. The noise of WoW is too loud. I do long for a real UO-as-envisioned within a 3D world. But unless we get to the point where the average indie can drum up $30mil or so, I expect such an attempt would either be ugly as sin, browser-based for the kiddies, or broken in all sorts of non-interesting ways.

[tmp]

Heh, it was a fine rant and all, but the market doesn't support that sorta thing. The noise of WoW is too loud. I do long for a real UO-as-envisioned within a 3D world. But unless we get to the point where the average indie can drum up $30mil or so, I expect such an attempt would either be ugly as sin, browser-based for the kiddies, or broken in all sorts of non-interesting ways.

Darkfall 

Suspect the problem with UO-like experience nowadays would be kinda the same why you can't anymore pull off shit like stab-you-in-the-cock grind from early MMOs and expect people to put up with it: they already tried easier/better and don't find their appendages repeatedly stabbed anywhere near as funny as it once seemed to be. With the open "meet people and kill them" game you'd have fun come from two things: screwing other people and seeing other people getting screwed. These two haven't changed and probably never will, but people have much less (if any) patience for being put on receiving end of said screwing.

Of course there's always EVE. But even with it in the picture, talking of WoW like numbers seems to be madness. Unless --apparently-- the game is put in China.

[DarkSign]

Darkfall will never surface. Sorry to disappoint you.

[Valmorian]

I should add that this is why I hate survival horror.  Increased lethality means increased play safety.  I have to peek around every corner fifteen times and carefully aim for headshots to conserve ammo.  Guess what?  Not fun.

The odd thing about survival horror games is that they so rarely echo the source material.  A good look at any of the "X of the Living Dead" films shows that the real source of conflict is intra-personal squabbles within a group.  The Zombies wouldn't be  particularly dangerous only that dick you're holding out at the farm with is arguing with you about where to hide..

[KallDrexx]

Minor quibble, but didn't the pre-EQ2 game quests only become worthless when they didn't get tuned with the mudflation that evolved? I'm specifically thinking of how I was able to gear up on DAoC quests alone. Later that woulda been foolish, but it was fine at launch. And that's actually the case now in WoW and EQ2, for the same reason.

I think you are right. I pretty much remember the same thing from my pre-catacombs days.

[Signe]

Darkfall will never surface. Sorry to disappoint you.

You fell in to his Sarchasm!

[DarkSign]

Ahhh. That's what the smilie was for. Gotcha.

[Count Nerfedalot]

The odd thing about survival horror games is that they so rarely echo the source material.  A good look at any of the "X of the Living Dead" films shows that the real source of conflict is intra-personal squabbles within a group.  The Zombies wouldn't be  particularly dangerous only that dick you're holding out at the farm with is arguing with you about where to hide..

Existing MMOs have that material covered already, called PUGs.   

[Azazel]

 

[DarkSign]

The odd thing about survival horror games is that they so rarely echo the source material.  A good look at any of the "X of the Living Dead" films shows that the real source of conflict is intra-personal squabbles within a group.  The Zombies wouldn't be  particularly dangerous only that dick you're holding out at the farm with is arguing with you about where to hide..

Wouldnt your inter-personal dynamics in your personal group accomplish that if the scary stuff around you were crafted right? You'd say go west...your buddy would say go east...and your other buddy would get snatched because he was running behind? :)

[Draegan]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=178652

Interesting write up.  The author previously bashed the game and and changed his tune about the game.

[Archimedian]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=178652

Interesting write up.  The author previously bashed the game and and changed his tune about the game.

From his description of the siege mechanics it sounds extremely familiar to AOs tower system.  Those mechanics in AO went through some growing pains but in the end it was pretty robust and allowed for some interesting social dynamics (you wanted your buffs up to raid so people had agreements not to nuke your base kind of thing).  Makes sense for them since they have basically 5+ years of feedback on this game mechanic.

I'll probably pick this game up just to experience their combat system.  If they actually make mounted combat work well I will say that will be "revolutionary".  It seems to still be standard diku but who knows they might mask it well enough :)

[Venkman]

It's kicking away at the fundamentals of the MMO genre by allowing players to interact with the world in a new and far more tactile way

That article talks about Shadowbane and a (somewhat gimmicky-sounding) mounted combat system. I chalk that up to the usual inexperience and/or lack of research thing.

Otherwise, there's some, err, "telling" stuff in there, but :NDA:

[SnakeCharmer]

:NDA:

Bastid.

[Draegan]

Just mentioning NDA is breaking the NDA since you're not allowed to say you're in BETA! 

[Hoax]

aside:
It wasn't supposed to say that word, but for some reason the smiley didn't activate.  That's my guess at least.

Interestingly, by day Tortage is a multiplayer arena, but find a bed to sleep in and you'll wake up at night, where Age of Conan becomes an entirely single-player experience. You can flip between single and multiplayer just by hopping into bed.

More proof that at least Funcom comes up with new interesting ideas, unlike damn near anyone else.  Will any of it work?  Doubtful.  There is a fuckton of hugely ambitious never before accomplished well shit in here.  I think that the AO tower system comparison is a good one but depressing.  SB > AO when it comes to siege mechanics obviously.  But still if they have half the promised gameplay diversity at launch actually working: bar brawl minigame, mounted, pvp, siege, npc city attacks, ctf, combos done well {suck dick DAOC}, bloody bits, titties, etc.  I'm going to be quite pleased with AoC.

I'll be buying the box and subbing no matter what because I really want Funcom to make that other MMO, here's hoping they have greatly improved their execution and ability to deliver on promises since AO while retaining their creativity and having the balls to commit to new gameplay ideas.  The only established company I get more excited about is CCP.

*edited for clarification, msg unchanged*

[tazelbain]

Its interesting that both AoC and WAR both stepping on the shoulders of their older siblings for PvP.  PvP is a hard social engineering problem. I guess neither wants to restart the social engineering from 0. It re-enforces my opinion in the we are the "need to learn to walk before we can run" stage PvP MMOG design.

[Venkman]

Just mentioning NDA is breaking the NDA since you're not allowed to say you're in BETA! 

If you know that, then you're in the beta, and commiting the worse sin of talking about the NDA!

[Signe]

It is a Klein bottle argument!  RUN!

PS  I would SO buy Klein bottle wine glasses. 

[Stephen Zepp]

It is a Klein bottle argument!  RUN!

PS  I would SO buy Klein bottle wine glasses. 

How would you drink out of them? Wouldn't everything spill?

[Merusk]

So we're sacrificing practicality in the name of looking awesome? Fine by us.
"We have a specific role for horseback combat in the game," continues Godager, "it's for camp-breaking. We're making camps which are like walls - you need to have players ramming it with their horses and lances in order to smash it down."

   So I run my horse - at full speed - to a wall.. then do it again.. and again... and again until I break the wall, THEN I get to fight?  I like the idea of a specific role for mounted combat, but the execution here sounds terrible.   Was it so hard to look at what light calvary was ACTUALLY used for and do that?

[DarkSign]

It is a Klein bottle argument!  RUN!

PS  I would SO buy Klein bottle wine glasses. 

How would you drink out of them? Wouldn't everything spill?

The mouth of the hole goes turns the rest of the glass into a reservoir, doesn't it?

[Rendakor]

It is a Klein bottle argument!  RUN!

PS  I would SO buy Klein bottle wine glasses. 

Divided by 0! Oh shi-