Paul Barnett speaks on being "Dazed and Confused"

[tmp]

I guess it depends on the context and as such, is situational. E.g. if there's a dragon's lair and that dragon is at some point killed, it's not unreasonable for another dragon or even different kind of creature to inhabit the lair after a while. Or if a king or another prominent figure is defeated, there's typically a heir/vice-president/visier/toady de jour ready and willing to jump in and take over as soon as dust clears instead of whole structure just fall apart overnight. In this way it can imo help in making the overall world "make more sense". Of course, there's still room for recurring enemies system to run in parallel to this -- like in Star Wars with their concept of "Mandalore" being just a title for the ruler and new guy inheriting the armour/appearance together with the job, when the previous Mandalore is defeated. Or myths/belief systems which involve cyclical death and rebirth of certain deities and whatnot.

[pxib]

Moving, evolving "lairs" have been a proposed part of these games for a long time. It was what TR had in mind with the aliens flipping bases into monster spawn quest objectives. Turns out, players want stability and predictability. They want to know where to find which monster spawn who drops which equipment and satisfies which quest and levels them fastest in some particular level bracket. They want to know that when they log on tomorrow they'll be able to continue doing what they were doing when they logged off tonight.

The number of people you'd please with random content are outnumbered by the people you'd confuse and frustrate.

[Ashamanchill]

Moving, evolving "lairs" have been a proposed part of these games for a long time. It was what TR had in mind with the aliens flipping bases into monster spawn quest objectives. Turns out, players want stability and predictability. They want to know where to find which monster spawn who drops which equipment and satisfies which quest and levels them fastest in some particular level bracket. They want to know that when they log on tomorrow they'll be able to continue doing what they were doing when they logged off tonight.

The number of people you'd please with random content are outnumbered by the people you'd confuse and frustrate.

This.  Uniqueness of downing a boss or completing a dungeon crawl is cool the first time through, but by the time people start on their alts they just want to speed up the process and get to where they deem their mains are at, be it gear or something else.  That's where "Deadly Boss" mods, and "phat lootz" guides start showing up.  And of course there's those that grind play that way right from the start, but they're dochebags anyways.

[tmp]

by the time people start on their alts

I hope these games can eventually move past their legacy of locking player forever into single choice and forcing them to run through the same hoops all over again if they want to experience something new. Wonder if that's even financially sound model... i.e. if the number of players who stay and keep paying because they can have alts exceeds number of people who quit because getting these 'alts' developed to the point of 'main' means taking the same rides all over again.

[Kageru]

You can't do that with out the encounter being generic and a dull loot dispenser. The WoW raid bosses are fairly complex engagements with a group of powers thematically linked within themselves and with the theme of the dungeon. It's a long way from "roll on boss effect table A".

And yes, it is a theme park. Each boss cunningly provides some mechanism by which they can be beaten and when beaten they'll be back shortly. That would be because it's a game.

Not much to do with warhammer though.

[tmp]

You can't do that with out the encounter being generic and a dull loot dispenser. The WoW raid bosses are fairly complex engagements with a group of powers thematically linked within themselves and with the theme of the dungeon.

One fire elemental lord gets put out, another (by name) fire elemental lord gets in charge and goes in. Who says these bosses can't use same/similar set of abilities and run similar variants of fairly complex script? Especially when they both inhabit the same dungeon?

[Fordel]

You can't do that with out the encounter being generic and a dull loot dispenser. The WoW raid bosses are fairly complex engagements with a group of powers thematically linked within themselves and with the theme of the dungeon.

One fire elemental lord gets put out, another (by name) fire elemental lord gets in charge and goes in. Who says these bosses can't use same/similar set of abilities and run similar variants of fairly complex script? Especially when they both inhabit the same dungeon?

What would be the point?

[WindupAtheist]

Barthas the Lich Duke is totally different from Arthas the Lich King. He wears a different hat and does Leap, Chop, Nova, Chop instead of Chop, Leap, Nova, Leap.

[pxib]

Because defeating Thorzaniloch, fire elemental lord #1179436, is a lot more immersive and entertaining than being the 1179436th group to defeat Fire Lord Rochnar.

[Nebu]

95% of the players are far more interested in the loot table than they are the encounter.  Changing the boss is little more than giving them a different lever to push before receiving their shiny. 

Focus should be on the fun of the gameplay, not the reward.  This is where I believe MMO's have gone terribly wrong in their focus.  Granted, it takes a lot less work to generate loot than it does to generate interesting and challenging content.   

[schild]

This is where I believe MMO's have gone terribly wrong in their focus.

MMOGs did what they could with the technology available at the time. While I don't completely consider this to still be the case with power users on the other end, I think we've just fallen into a downward spiral consisting of easy to make games (content-wise) combined with "still profitable."

That said, I can't imagine most MMOG gamers would be good at games that were purely skill-based and then the market becomes much, much smaller. Possibly even PVP small.

Nebu, I'd wager YOU would hate a purely skill-based game. Where Jacktard the ADD Warrior can wipe the floor clean with anyone else on the server. And THEN he'll make fun of your mom. Just sayin.

[Nebu]

Nebu, I'd wager YOU would hate a purely skill-based game. Where Jacktard the ADD Warrior can wipe the floor clean with anyone else on the server. And THEN he'll make fun of your mom. Just sayin.

I'd LOVE a skill-based game.  My favorite games to date are BF 1942 and DAoC, both of which reward the more skilled player.  I think that we just define "skill" differently in games.  Twitch is only one type of skill.  I think a game with measured amounts of twitch and strategy would be a welcome change to the current offerings. 

[Hindenburg]

You should watch that Starcraft 2 video between pro players.

Here. Enjoy.
Might as well watch this one too.

[tmp]

What would be the point?

The point was listed on the previous page. It's still there.

[Fordel]

Nebu, I'd wager YOU would hate a purely skill-based game. Where Jacktard the ADD Warrior can wipe the floor clean with anyone else on the server. And THEN he'll make fun of your mom. Just sayin.

I'd LOVE a skill-based game.  My favorite games to date are BF 1942 and DAoC, both of which reward the more skilled player.  I think that we just define "skill" differently in games.  Twitch is only one type of skill.  I think a game with measured amounts of twitch and strategy would be a welcome change to the current offerings. 

DaoC rewarded who farmed the best gear and rolled the FotM class comps (which were decided on the current patch cycle of buffs and nerfs). The 'best' players were always the ones who were willing to reroll and regrind accordingly.

The number of times player ability mattered more then which group had the better setup, superior gear or had all their cooldowns ready were few and far between.

The playing field was never even.

[Nebu]

DaoC rewarded who farmed the best gear and rolled the FotM class comps (which were decided on the current patch cycle of buffs and nerfs). The 'best' players were always the ones who were willing to reroll and regrind accordingly.

The number of times player ability mattered more then which group had the better setup, superior gear or had all their cooldowns ready were few and far between.

The playing field was never even.

Beating superior groups in terms of both RR and gear takes skill.  Beating superior classes in 1v1 took skill.  I'm fine with you being jaded, but to say there was no skill involved in DAoC is just plain wrong.  When things were as equal as it was possible to be, the better group or soloer usually won.  This was particularly the case pre-ToA and on the classic servers. 

Gear was so stupid easy to get in DAoC that it rarely dictated the outcome of 8v8 fights.  DAoC never had the gear issues that a game like WoW has with the exception of the first month or two after ToA released.  Then the better coordinated guilds had a HUGE advantage.  In today's game, gear matters a lot less than RR. 

[Fordel]

RR took persistence, not skill.


I also never said there wasn't skill, I said it was no where near being the defining factor. Certainly no where near important enough to define DaoC as a skill based game, not compared to all the other factors.

[Nevermore]

Beating superior groups in terms of both RR and gear takes skill.  Beating superior classes in 1v1 took skill a better buffbot.

[Nebu]

RR took persistence, not skill.

It's as if you never read my posts.

It's a diku MMO.  Of course persistence (and time) is everything.  There were instances where skill did matter and I did my best to highlight them. 

[Fordel]

And I argued that those instances were so few and far between, that you could not claim DaoC was skill based.


/completes the circle 

[Nebu]

We'll juat have to agree to disagree.  In the 5 years that I played, there were MANY opportunities to see the effects of skill in the game.  I saw them on a nightly basis.  On the servers that I played on, the better (more skilled) gamers nearly always won regardless of gear or RR's.  Teamwork in 8v8 was much more defining in gameplay than almost any other factor.

Perhaps we just played the game differently. 
 

[Ingmar]

If the game for you was 8v8, then yeah you didn't play the game like Fordel (or me). DAOC was about realm warfare and keeps, not DIKU Counterstrike! (Just to Vault things up a little more.)   

EDIT: To be a bit more serious, the only real serious element of skill IMO in DAOC PVP, beyond meta-stuff like group composition, was the ability to get the drop on the other side - knowing the right hiding places, angles of attack, etc. I would venture to say that the outcome of 9 out of 10 'fair fights' in DAOC was set at the moment of engagement. Most everything else was just playing the class (or set of classes) that had the right buttons to push and pushing them at the right time. That's a kind of skill, certainly, but I don't think it is what you are talking about.

[Nebu]

The beauty of DAoC was that the game was whatever you made of it.  Be it zerg vs zerg, 1v1, 2v2, 8v8, etc.  If you didn't have the opportunity to play on a server with an 8v8 or 1v1 culture, then you missed out on some of the best tactical aspects of the game.  The sandbox aspects are one of the things that other, newer games really miss out on with their more linear progression. 

Andred and Mordred were particularly interesting in that you could fight groups/solos with identical setups... that made it more obvious to see who the better players were. 

[Ingmar]

I played a thane, so 8v8 groups weren't exactly beating down my door to get me to come with them. 

[Redgiant]

If the game for you was 8v8, then yeah you didn't play the game like Fordel (or me). DAOC was about realm warfare and keeps, not DIKU Counterstrike! (Just to Vault things up a little more.)   

EDIT: To be a bit more serious, the only real serious element of skill IMO in DAOC PVP, beyond meta-stuff like group composition, was the ability to get the drop on the other side - knowing the right hiding places, angles of attack, etc. I would venture to say that the outcome of 9 out of 10 'fair fights' in DAOC was set at the moment of engagement. Most everything else was just playing the class (or set of classes) that had the right buttons to push and pushing them at the right time. That's a kind of skill, certainly, but I don't think it is what you are talking about.

Here's my take on what Nebu says, which I agree with about old DAoC overall rewarding the skillful.

If you take two players who are different RR, reduce them to the SAME RR and let them duke it out, the one who had earned a higher RR would still win based on skill level that got them the RR, not on the presence of the RR itself.

In most games since then that I have played that claim to be skill-based, what I just said isn't true. In those games, the higher geared and RR player will still win IF they get to keep their gear and RR and its conferred advantages. SO RR in and of itself is why  people seem better.

Now, I'm not saying lets get all socialist and distribute everyone's equipment around. I'm just saying that gear and RR in a game like DAoC was more a badge of honor showing what you have done and are capable of doing, and not as much the reason itself. Sure it gave advantages for achieving ranks, but until ToA the whole gear and RA-dependence so hallowed by Dikudom was a backseat to skill and coordination and tactics.

All you had to do was look at the dominance even when outnumbered and practically the same gear by guilds such as Nimue's Retribution (esp. Jander/Hod) or Guinevere's Xukuth d'Oloth (esp. Tyfud) to see how much skill mattered in early DAoC. Hell, they didn't so much "get the jump", they would actually advertise and taunt the other 2 realms to come and try to take back a relic, keep or just squad skirmish with them. The right spells or actions at the right precise moments, in concert with others on your team - isn't that what skill means? If not, what exactly does it mean?

[Ingmar]

Again, nobody is saying skill wasn't involved at all - but IMO it took a major backseat to class choice, RAs (especially when they rebalanced the tanks and introduced the special RR5 RAs), access to buffbots, and eventually gear, as happens in nearly every diku PVP game.

EDIT: Something like GW pvp, where every player has access to everything, and people can shift builds and comps as needed as the 'metagame' shifts, that's a much better skill test than anything DAOC ever threw at us. My guess as to why it isn't more popular has something to do with a lack of sheep for the wolves to prey upon.

[Nevermore]

Ingmar had a good point about getting the drop on the opponent, so I'll revise my snarky comment with more added snark:

Beating superior groups in terms of both RR and gear takes skill radar hacking.  Beating superior classes in 1v1 took skill a better buffbot.

[Fordel]

I did my fair share of 8v8, the number of times we won or lost because one side was actually just better players... compared to the number of times we won because their purge was down, or our <insert overpowered ability> was up, or one side had full master level abilities and gear while the other side was still in their epic quest armor...


Even among the top tier gank groups, which all had everything farmed out the ass rr12 guaranteed or whatever. There was almost always a slew of external variables that prevented a fair fight. It's not just coincidence that after a big fight, the wining group would run off into the bushes and hide for 15 minutes.

[Mrbloodworth]

What game/s is Sanya playing now days, consistently?  I don't keep up with her blog, but I wonder what games are soooo much better than WoW that she couldn't make it a few days into the story?

http://www.mmorpg.com/profile.cfm/username/Sanya


I'm catching up in this thread. And resiting commenting on some of the LOTRO stuff, specifically, the wow clone comments.

[Nebu]

I did my fair share of 8v8, the number of times we won or lost because one side was actually just better players... compared to the number of times we won because their purge was down, or our <insert overpowered ability> was up, or one side had full master level abilities and gear while the other side was still in their epic quest armor...


Even among the top tier gank groups, which all had everything farmed out the ass rr12 guaranteed or whatever. There was almost always a slew of external variables that prevented a fair fight. It's not just coincidence that after a big fight, the wining group would run off into the bushes and hide for 15 minutes.

I'm going to guess that you never played on the classic servers or on Mordred/Andred.  Very different game than what you describe.  Either no ToA or the ability to build identical groups.  Did you play on the Euro servers?  That may explain a lot. 

Like I said... just seems we had very different experiences with the game. 

Edit: It's sad that I enjoy rehashing DAoC more than I do discussing WAR.  So very sad. 

[Delmania]

I'm catching up in this thread. And resiting commenting on some of the LOTRO stuff, specifically, the wow clone comments.

Fanboism alert!

I did not mean the clone comments in any derogatory fashion.  Like it or not, if you take away the LotR and Warcraft elements, you are left with 2 games that are designed almost identically.  Both use a quest system to level, the primary activities once you hit the current level cap are to either raid or participate in some form of PvP.  Clearly, Turbine was able in inject enough of it's own design into that design to build a game that is successful in the shadow of the 8,000 ton gorilla.

[Fordel]

I was long gone by the time classic servers went up, quit maybe 6months or a year after ToA? I dunno exactly.


I dabbled on the dreds but that environment wasn't for me. I don't need the "thrill" of being ganked while I try to ding 38 or whatever.



I Played on Igraine (North America). Most of my time as a Hib, then tried Mid before going to WoW like everyone else.  Igraine wasn't a large server by any means, not compared to the 2-3 Big ones at the top.

[Mrbloodworth]

I'm catching up in this thread. And resiting commenting on some of the LOTRO stuff, specifically, the wow clone comments.

Fanboism alert!

No, just a difference of opinion and observations.

[Nebu]

I was long gone by the time classic servers went up, quit maybe 6months or a year after ToA? I dunno exactly.

I think this explains our disagreement.  The classic servers solved many of the issues that we experienced in the year after ToA came along. With no ToA and no Master levels the game become a lot more tactical.  The 8v8 fights often lasted 5 minutes between good groups... long enough that their outcome wasn't dictated so much by RA's and gear timers.  At their peak, Lamorak and Gareth were very competitive and fun. 

[Sjofn]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The only truly "skilled" PvP offered in an MMO is in Puzzle Pirates. It's just you and the puzzle, man.