Richard Bartle on MMO design (IMGDC 09)

[Lum]

Because I think the above example of yours is taking something which is demonstrably done *right* and insisting it's derivative crap.

Considering most advanced players mod out that part of the interface and replace it with something else, I'd say "demonstrably done *right*" is at the very least debatable.

On top of *that*, you're roundabout saying we need to change something that works exceedingly well because WoW does it which is every bit as bad as making a clone because WoW does it. Which puts us right back at square one even if bottom is now top.

No, I'm not. I'm saying that cloning 100% of WoW's interface is a sign that you're not paying attention to the needs of your own game. If you're making a game that has a character with three variable combat pools and nothing else that needs to be communicated, great! Knock yourself out (although, you know, at least make the portrait a square or something just so you have some fig leaf of originality). But an interface's function is to communicate gameplay feedback, and unless your gameplay is 100% identical to WoW, your interface should not be.

[Modern Angel]

I can tell you right now that if you remove that portrait plus bars doodad in your shiny new over the shoulder perspective MMORPG you have immediately limited your audience and you've done so more than you would think at first blush.

And not a single game you showed copied 100% of WoW's UI. Not a one. To various degrees, sure, but not wholly. We're not talking about total lifting of UIs anyway; you very specifically were talking about the healthbar/portrait combo. You're essentially arguing that every fighting game is a Street Fighter clone because all fighting games have two health bars across the top. That's not true, either: the health bars across the top both work and are expected.

[Draegan]

Lum you're being a little pig headed with this player portrait UI frame thing.  You're wrong.  It's ok though.

[WindupAtheist]

UO has had a little round radar map forever as Lum certainly must know. The only thing changed in the new version is the addition of the ability to zoom, a concrete bit of functionality that I'm pretty sure WoW didn't invent anyway. Portraits next to health bars are one thing, but the little round radar map is literally as old as the genre.

[tmp]

There's a bit of a difference between "hm, let's display the character's headshot as a reminder of their avatar identity" and "hm, let's display the character's headshot in a circular window on the left hand side, with three bars representing health, mana, and something else extending to the right, as a reminder of some other game".

Certainly, but maybe we shouldn't just write it off as the case of "these people just don't know what they're doing, cloning pointless stuff lol", where it might well be the case of more educated "hey, that's a neat enhancement well worth copying". Also, as far as the 'three bars of whatever' go this is definitely not UI element coined by WoW, of course:

[tmp]

Considering most advanced players mod out that part of the interface and replace it with something else, I'd say "demonstrably done *right*" is at the very least debatable.

It can definitely be said that there's group of MMO players who have no interest in this feature, yes. But this is --to put it slightly closer to original topic-- like declaring that since Achievers have no interest in some particular feature of the game, then apparently this feature isn't "done right". Even though meanwhile the Socializers or whoever may be all squee! about it.

Incidentally, this is WoW UI as preferred by sample of most advanced players. Suspect for large group of not as advanced players it could be all replaced with large "Unsubscribe" button.

[Nebu]

Unless you're a healer... in which case players are forced to play the interface rather than the game.

If an MMO can make healing more interactive with the game itself, they should have some success.

[schild]

Of course, saying a GUI is bad or poorly designed in any way because advance players mod it is a pretty piss-poor straw man.

There are always folks like me who 9 times out of 10 will quit a game in which modding is necessary to find the fun. Lucky for Age of Conan, WoW, and WAR, I never really had to fight with the GUI. All that I ask is that I be able to reposition things. Generally speaking, a 24" monitor needs things more compact. But I can't fault the devs for designing something that my brain needs in a tighter space. But I'll stop with that talk since it's straying off point. Much as I don't want programmers in my games, I don't really want systems or content designers designing my GUIs. If you're wondering what I'm talking about, look at Eve. Pretty sure that's what happens when designers make a GUI. There is no way a skilled (art/GUI) designer designed that. If it was a pure GUI designer, he's almost certainly the worst in the industry.

If an MMO can make healing more interactive with the game itself, they should have some success.

I refuse to derail this from the previous conversation, but I don't mind saying that long before healers become more interactive we'll see them go the way of the dinosaur and everyone else will get better pots, buffs, and self-heals. No one likes a priest. It's a relatively ridiculous archetype anyway in a game structured like an MMO.

/ends priest talk - oh, edit to add: Of course, really, how interactive is a diku anyway? Not very. So the argument is flawed anyway. NOW, /end priest talk.

[Nebu]

I didn't mean to start a "priest discussion" rather that the importance and structure of any UI is dependent on the needs of the subclass using it.  My goal would be to minimize the importance of the UI such that players are looking for cues within the game rather than staring at bars on their UI for hours on end. 

My suggestion is one of making the UI less vital (less like a HUD in a flight sim) to gameplay. 

[schild]

My suggestion is one of making the UI less vital (less like a HUD in a flight sim) to gameplay.

Yea, that'll happen when a player can rely on skill instead of refreshing hotbars and life bars. I guarantee you the moment that day comes, you'll either run screaming or quickly learn to embrace twitch. Until then, people should be happy games have made ANY progress in GUIs considering the complete lack of decent GUI designers out there.

[Nebu]

You can have in game cues without going to full blown twitch.  There are many alternatives out there, it's just not the easiest way to go. 

The design of the game could reduce the need for many aspects of the standard MMO UI elements.  It would just require that we shed the constraints of the diku mold... which may take a while.

[tmp]

I refuse to derail this from the previous conversation, but I don't mind saying that long before healers become more interactive we'll see them go the way of the dinosaur and everyone else will get better pots, buffs, and self-heals. No one likes a priest. It's a relatively ridiculous archetype anyway in a game structured like an MMO.

Mass Effect is interesting in this context since it's almost like a prototype of that. There's the "oh shit" group heal and rezz in hands of the group leader, but aside from that every character is just left to fend for themselves with abilities to soak up some damage, increase mitigations for brief while, fast shield recharge, cover system and having brains bigger than Leeroy Jenkins.

It's pretty fun. Could see it work decent in a modern MMO too, admittedly more complicated in these medieval sword-swinging things.

[schild]

You can have in game cues without going to full blown twitch.  There are many alternatives out there, it's just not the easiest way to go. 

The design of the game could reduce the need for many aspects of the standard MMO UI elements.  It would just require that we shed the constraints of the diku mold... which may take a while.

We already saw what happens when we don't go "full-blown" twitch.

Mass Effect is interesting in this context since it's almost like a prototype of that. There's the "oh shit" group heal and rezz in hands of the group leader, but aside from that every character is just left to fend for themselves with abilities to soak up some damage, increase mitigations for brief while, fast shield recharge, cover system and having brains bigger than Leeroy Jenkins.

It's pretty fun. Could see it work decent in a modern MMO too, admittedly more complicated in these medieval sword-swinging things.

Perhaps, but Mass Effect was an unbalanced mess. And I'd say it's not going to get even a tiny bit more balanced in Mass Effect 2. The class structure and skillsets are just too flawed and the growth rates were funky. I liked Mass Effect, but fixing that system for an MMOG would take years of testing and a legion of REAL testers.

[Nebu]

We already saw what happens when we don't go "full-blown" twitch.

Twitch suggest reaction based on short timers.  Increase the timer length and you open up the ability to mix reaction with strategy (skill choice).  I think this is a middle ground that games like DAoC and BF1942 hit the sweet spot in.  You just need to be quick in your decision making, not necessarily in your reactions.  They are different types of twitch... maybe I'm just splitting hairs.

[schild]

We already saw what happens when we don't go "full-blown" twitch.

Twitch suggest reaction based on short timers.  Increase the timer length and you open up the ability to mix reaction with strategy (skill choice).  I think this is a middle ground that games like DAoC and BF1942 hit the sweet spot in.  You just need to be quick in your decision making, not necessarily in your reactions.  They are different types of twitch... maybe I'm just splitting hairs.

Twitch and strategic response are two completely different sides of thinking design methodologies. Strategic response requires a much deeper level of balance than twitch, where the end result is "make sure your items, weapons, and leveling scale have some modicum of balance and the players will make up for the rest" versus "a pile of skills that the player may or may not use once he figures out how to maximize output damage and minimize damage taken that will be impossible to balance in the long term."

[Venkman]

There's a bit of a difference between "hm, let's display the character's headshot as a reminder of their avatar identity" and "hm, let's display the character's headshot in a circular window on the left hand side, with three bars representing health, mana, and something else extending to the right, as a reminder of some other game".

At one time, hotbars weren't across the bottom and tied to the number keys.
At one time, the / key was not the default for entering line commands.
At one time, there was no global chat channel, nor trade channel.
At one time, the entire UI was unconfigurable and immovable (ironic considering that in almost every other genre, that's still the case)

The list goes on. History is precedent set by the victor, but it's not about copying. It's about lowering the barrier of entry for folks you hope to leach away from the prior king of the genre. Which is easy when 90% of the games launched all share the same basic experience, separate more by foozles and side activities than anything at the core.

When a game is different than the establishment, then you have the latitude to create a new UI. But even there, "different" in this medium is more "how do we modify another genre but get people to pay for it". For example, I'd be shocked if the incockpit view in JG:E doesn't resemble Freelancer in some form.

But that's not because it's hoping to get decade-old Freelancer users. It's more because that's what's already been proven to work, so why not use a pre-solved problem?

[Ratman_tf]

If you make a list of the big design lessons to learn from WoW ordered by importance then 'Hey, let's copy their UI elements' has to be pretty low on that list. Taking the superficial parts while ignoring the deeper elements isn't likely to end in success.

But the stuff that seems superficial had some thought and purpose put into it. It's the thought process that people should be paying attention to, not the end results.

The UI is one of the most prominent things about the game. Every player is going to encounter it (at least in the beginning, in the case of UI modders who use addons and such) and it's going to be in a lot of publicity shots. It's the first handshake when a player logs into WoW. You don't want a sweaty, trembling handshake.

[IainC]

If you make a list of the big design lessons to learn from WoW ordered by importance then 'Hey, let's copy their UI elements' has to be pretty low on that list. Taking the superficial parts while ignoring the deeper elements isn't likely to end in success.

But the stuff that seems superficial had some thought and purpose put into it. It's the thought process that people should be paying attention to, not the end results.

That was my point too.

[Ratman_tf]

If you make a list of the big design lessons to learn from WoW ordered by importance then 'Hey, let's copy their UI elements' has to be pretty low on that list. Taking the superficial parts while ignoring the deeper elements isn't likely to end in success.

But the stuff that seems superficial had some thought and purpose put into it. It's the thought process that people should be paying attention to, not the end results.

That was my point too.

Yes. On the whole, Blizz tends to take every part of a game equally seriously. UI, gameplay, sound, graphics, etc... Maybe everything doesn't always work out for them, but their average performance usually beats the shit out of other development companies.

[Ratman_tf]

But an interface's function is to communicate gameplay feedback, and unless your gameplay is 100% identical to WoW, your interface should not be.

Most games that ape WoW are also basing themselves off of D&D style DIKU gameplay anyway. It's small wonder that they can steal WoW's UI and have it work for thier game.

Mobs, hit points, mana, xp, etc...

There really isn't a need for a different UI for WAR or LOTRO, for example.

[Margalis]

It's strange to have lamaros agree with me. 

I guess peoples' ideas of the word "clone" is different, to me it means "clone", not "poorly replicate." But even if you take it to mean poorly replicate I still don't see meaning in the argument. If a team tries to copy WoW and does it poorly because they don't understand the game very well would that team alternately have produced an awesome game by doing their own thing? I would guess not.

Saying that most clones will be poor is another variation on most clones will fail - statements that apply equally well to original games.

Isn't LOTRO the most successful recent major MMO to be released in NA? (Excluding kids stuff) And that game seems to be the most WoW-like. It also seems to be doing better than DDO, if expansion activity is any indication - a game made by the same company that didn't copy WoW.

Perhaps the root problem is less that too many people want to copy WoW and more that too many people simply aren't as talented as the WoW devs. Which isn't a problem that can be fixed by reading powerpoint slides or adopting different game designs. I would go as far as to claim that *that's* an obvious truth. Instead of asking "how do we come up with better designs" perhaps the better question is "how do we find better personnel?" One of the key things that sticks out about WoW is that it didn't recycle all the usual suspects or employ people like Barnett.

Edit: Having portraits next to energy bars was in SSF2:Turbo (or maybe even in Super) in 95 and was also pretty standard in Capcom beat-em-ups like AvP. It's not like it's a new thing or solely an MMO thing. In X-Men: Children of the Atom it even served a gameplay purpose since the background color would indicate how close you were to being dizzy.

[Sheepherder]

One of the key things that sticks out about WoW is that it didn't recycle all the usual suspects or employ people like Barnett.

Chilton
Pardo
Kaplan

2/3 are from a catass EQ guild, two are Blizzard higher-ups and one is their world designer.  Previous experience is a false cause, what they might have learned there may be closer to the mark.  I'd even go so far as to say that Barnett is a symptom of the problem rather than the problem, because really all most people have against him that they can substantiate is that he's a blowhard that talks too much, which means he might fit in right here if he'd burn his own heresy.

[tazelbain]

Yes. On the whole, Blizz tends to take every part of a game equally seriously. UI, gameplay, sound, graphics, etc... Maybe everything doesn't always work out for them, but their average performance usually beats the shit out of other development companies.

Google does the same.

[Sheepherder]

Exhuming Old Corpses:

"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."

Kant is fucking grindy.

...Or were you going for the irony?

[Phred]

And not a single game you showed copied 100% of WoW's UI. Not a one. To various degrees, sure, but not wholly.

Most Certainly. For one, that I am familiar with, LoTR, dispite it's superficial resemblence to WoW's ui, it was a total mess to use, for a tank at least. You can even see it in this posted picture. Notice the row of tiny icons under your portrait. See how tiny they are? They are your buff and debuff icons. They are actively sorted and more around on your bar as buffs fade or are refreshed. Now, quick. Pick up the poison debuff that will kill you in 5 tics.

I think there was a reason WoW put the buffs and debuffs for your character on the right side and made then 4x bigger than all the rest of your group. And WoW isnt perfect by any means. Ask any player  who can cast a cure spell how they identify and cure spells on their group members.

[kildorn]

So wait, I'm confused here. Copying a functional UI is a bad thing?

I'm assuming the next comment is how people picked up WASD improperly as movement keys and all those copying fuckers didn't just see a functional keyboard layout and go "hey, this is a good idea"? As far as I can tell, MMO UIs are moving heavily into the "this is your basic UI. Now mod the fuck out of it however you like", just like keyboard controls became X is standard, and you can bind whatever if you don't like that.

But to misphrase an old catchphrase: what does this have to do with shadowbane?

[Khaldun]

This UI discussion is a good example of where there are some tools in various academic toolboxes that get the conversation into a bigger context.

1. Path-dependency, especially the way that economics uses the concept. E.g., why do we mostly use QWERTY keyboards when there are layouts with higher utility (theoretical speed and ease of use, better ergonomics). We do because the original  QWERTY layout won out in a different technological environment, partly because it had specific utility in that context (it reduced tendency of typewriter keys to clash during typing) but also because its original producer was skillful about establishing it as a market-dominant product in the face of other arguably superior designs. See also VHS and Windows. Path-dependency says, "Look, at a certain point, even a product with less absolute utility than an alternative has more utility because it would cost so much to undo production processes that are highly adapted to the dominant product and in the labor time of workers or end consumers who would have to learn to use the alternative". So new products end up stuck on that path, and only occasionally does an opportunity come along which opens up the space for an alternative. (Say, for example, a text-entering technology which is no longer based on a keyboard at all.)

So you could look at something like a virtual world UI that has a portrait of a character plus name plus health and mana bars as an example of path-dependency. This gets us off of the assertion that designers are simply lazy or derivative to something messier--that they're going with a convention whose origins are semi-arbitrary because any alternative takes real time to design and real time for players to learn, and the utility you deliver with any such rethinking had better well be worth it. If it's just a tweaking of UI while the mechanics of the design remain the same, it's hard to say that such a tweak would be warranted.

2. A lot of academic work on virtual worlds focuses on the underlying grammar of play and practice in them, and the extent to which it has become second nature for consumers of the form. If I'm teaching a class on film theory, I can get you to really "see" things you've always seen while you're watching films: scene transitions, montages, close-ups, tracking shots, and I can get you to think about why they work but also show you concretely where they came from, how they developed in the history of film. I think that's an important precondition of innovation in film: to know something about the total toolkit of devices, techniques and so on that filmmakers use AND to know how they're inherited from past films. That last is especially important because a contemporary filmmaker may not always know where a technique came from, and may take it for granted or see it as necessary. Once you know that it came *from* somewhere, and that films didn't always have it, you're in a much better position to use that technique in new ways--or to stop using it. In some ways a film historian or film theorist is better positioned to understand some of those things than a filmmaker, unless that filmmaker is also thoughtful and knowledgeable about the medium (as many are). So surely we can do the same things with virtual worlds or MMOGs. A lot of posters here have long experience with games, so thinking about the history of digital games comes easily to you through your own experience. It doesn't necessarily come easily to younger players or for that matter to younger designers. I think there's plenty to do along these lines--and you no more need to have made games yourself than have made films yourself to know something important worth sharing in this sense. Take the issue of healers: the holy trinity (or classes period) is as much a MMOG convention as a dissolve or a montage. Imagining a new grammar or arrangement first takes understanding how we inherited this one, and the patterns and practices of play that it has generated.

[schild]

You get equipped with a wall of text this morning, chief?

[Lantyssa]

Take the issue of healers: the holy trinity (or classes period) is as much a MMOG convention as a dissolve or a montage. Imagining a new grammar or arrangement first takes understanding how we inherited this one, and the patterns and practices of play that it has generated.

Let's not.  I've mostly been staying out of this thread and few things in design get me riled up like the Holy Trinity.

[Tmon]

Yes copying functioning UI is bad, if you don't have the same functions behind it.  Look at Mythic and the creation of their Mythic second, this was done because the UI was telling players that their abilities were ready to use again when they weren't.  You can say that it's due to Mythic's design and implementation errors, but you could also say it's because Mythic tried to shoehorn WAR functionality into WoW's GUI.  They may have been better off to look at the way their systems actually worked and then developed the GUI in a way that got the important information for their systems to the player.

[Lantyssa]

As someone said earlier, they weren't competent enough to pull off copying someone.  What makes you think their own designs would have yielded better results?  Actually we know what happens when they try to think creatively, so that's a completely rhetorical question.

[Lietgardis]

Though I'm sure SOME dev here heard the speech.

I spoke at the conference the day before, but I had a plane to catch and missed Dr. Bartle's speech.  So there's that!

[Yegolev]

I'm really getting an old-timey sensation from this thread, and I like it.

Bartle's excuse for not making a game is a cop-out.  Translation: I don't want to ask for money because it's hard.  I'd add that if he did shit or get off the pot, he'd risk that he'd be off his throne or we'd all smell shit.

[tkinnun0]

Yes copying functioning UI is bad, if you don't have the same functions behind it.

Copying it is bad period if the UI is obsolete or becoming one. Taking WoW health bars as an example and breaking it down by style of play:

• Questing 1-80: Health will be 70%-100% if not taking unnecessary risks. Mana may drop to below 50% in which case a simple "Drink soon!" reminder after combat will suffice.
• Raiding: Your own health is out of your hands. Managing mana/rage/power/points is of utmost importance to how well you do so they should be displayed prominently.
• Socializing: Neither bar will drop below 90%.
• PVP: Both bars are of utmost importance and should be displayed prominently.

In none of the cases do health bars tucked away in the top left corner provide useful information in an easy to use manner.

I might even go as far as say top left corner health bars are obsoleted as soon as you get a big widescreen monitor.

[Fordel]

I might even go as far as say top left corner health bars are obsoleted as soon as you get a big widescreen monitor.

Which is probably why the most popular total UI revamp mods deal with wide screen and insane resolution scaling.


Me? My monitor sucks and I play in a 1024 window, the default works just great for me.