Fuck quest driven content.

[WindupAtheist]

They've done a lot of interesting stuff that gets overlooked because it's bolted onto a hundred-year-old game. But it's the only MMO I can think of by a major company that has been trying to do interesting PVE in a non-diku system.

[UnSub]

This is why WUA is right in respects to Ultima Online.

The lesson of UO was that the trade-off for giving players freedom is not worth the number of subs you lose from players abusing that freedom. And that a controlled, directed experience - EQ - will attract a bigger audience anyway.

It's all quest-driven content. It just depends who sets the quest objectives (game vs player) and how they are delivered (where single player RPGs tend to have the same kinds of quests but they are better delivered).

[Sheepherder]

The lesson of UO was that the trade-off for giving players freedom is not worth the number of subs you lose from players abusing that freedom. And that a controlled, directed experience - EQ - will attract a bigger audience anyway.

It's all quest-driven content. It just depends who sets the quest objectives (game vs player) and how they are delivered (where single player RPGs tend to have the same kinds of quests but they are better delivered).

I have a feeling that The Sims (1/2/3, not online) attracts more players than World of Warcraft, but am too lazy to research boxes sold.  Granted, they're not directly comparable, and TSO was a flop.  However I'd imagine that the market is there if a developer can deliver the right game with the right payment model.

[Merusk]

The Sims is a dress-up/ house simulator whose primary attraction is customizing a Sim family, furnishing their house and either fucking up their lives or pushing them to the pinnacle of a career path.  While using cheat codes for tons of money to do so.   Also, player-supplied content is huge.   

Neither of the last two were available in TSO, and other players were able to fuck up the first one far too easily.   Plus, you were limited to one Sim where the SP attraction is controlling not just the family but the whole damn neighborhood.

If you want to even remotely come close to the SP numbers you'd have to keep people from fucking with your players and provide the instant gratification of cheat codes.  So, RMT, with some method of ignore causing other players to not be able to affect you at all, ever.

[Sheepherder]

If you want to even remotely come close to the SP numbers you'd have to keep people from fucking with your players and provide the instant gratification of cheat codes.  So, RMT, with some method of ignore causing other players to not be able to affect you at all, ever.

Part of the problem you seem to be having is the MMO tradition of making player owned/controlled stuff akin to staking out a sign that reads "Fuck me here!" with an arrow pointed to the appropriate orifice.  The obvious solution for a Sims-type game is some form of karma (a list of shit destroyed / messes made in dollar value to fix) with a "call cops / sue for damages" option that redresses the imbalance where appropriate (note: aggregate shit like messes and broken appliances, make the subsequent repair/cleaning call a flat fee).

Cheat codes aren't needed if the gameplay required to get nice things is trivial.  Instancing the housing areas would solve a number of the apparent problems of handing out low-cost housing to players, after which point it's pretty much a matter of finding what kind of gameplay you want to reward with the ability to build or rebuild bigger and grander houses, and to what extent you want to encourage communal/guild type living quarters.

For example: you could tie housing to Achievement/Tome of Knowledge unlocks, with the unlocked items being free.  Similarly, you could use an aggregate point value from Achievements to determine how big a player can build, with no additional costs (free housing OMGWTF?).  Same thing for guilds, with guild achievements/levels determining the available resources.

[Merusk]

Part of the problem you seem to be having is the MMO tradition of making player owned/controlled stuff akin to staking out a sign that reads "Fuck me here!" with an arrow pointed to the appropriate orifice.  The obvious solution for a Sims-type game is some form of karma (a list of shit destroyed / messes made in dollar value to fix) with a "call cops / sue for damages" option that redresses the imbalance where appropriate (note: aggregate shit like messes and broken appliances, make the subsequent repair/cleaning call a flat fee).

Cheat codes aren't needed if the gameplay required to get nice things is trivial.  Instancing the housing areas would solve a number of the apparent problems of handing out low-cost housing to players, after which point it's pretty much a matter of finding what kind of gameplay you want to reward with the ability to build or rebuild bigger and grander houses, and to what extent you want to encourage communal/guild type living quarters.

For example: you could tie housing to Achievement/Tome of Knowledge unlocks, with the unlocked items being free.  Similarly, you could use an aggregate point value from Achievements to determine how big a player can build, with no additional costs (free housing OMGWTF?).  Same thing for guilds, with guild achievements/levels determining the available resources.

1) Sims had a karma system and it backfired. Problem players formed groups to shake-down other players for Simoleons. If you didn't pay up they and their affiliated groups would downrank your karma/ plot, ruining gameplay for many.

2) People want the easy way out, regardless of how easy anything is to attain short of handing it out.  You can earn 200g a day per character in WOW in less than an hour, but folks still buy gold.  So unless you're going to simply remove all gameplay, plenty of folks will still go around and RMT what they want.  May as well let the company make that money via RMT.   In your example, gold farming becomes character farming, selling pre-ranked characters to players who simply want to .

[Sjofn]

Sims Online missed the entire goddamn point of the Sims. If I'm playing the Sims, the last thing I want to do is have someone else playing with me!

[Sheepherder]

Sims had a karma system and it backfired. Problem players formed groups to shake-down other players for Simoleons. If you didn't pay up they and their affiliated groups would downrank your karma/ plot, ruining gameplay for many.

Which proves that player-controlled karma is a bad idea, not that tracking who dumps shit on the floor and penalizing them §15 divided by the number of people who dumped shit so that the owner can phone a maid is a bad idea.

The other point is inconsequential, because I really don't have an axe to grind against authorized RMT for fluff items, particularly if the results can be reproduced without RMT in the hypothetical game.

[Stormwaltz]

If I'm playing the Sims, the last thing I want to do is have someone else playing with me!

The joke makes itself!

[Malakili]

Sims Online missed the entire goddamn point of the Sims. If I'm playing the Sims, the last thing I want to do is have someone else playing with me!

I think this is a problem with a lot of MMOs actually.  The genre is "hot" since blizzard has made a bazillion dollars on WoW, but frankly, not every game idea is best made into an MMO, and especially not a WoW Clone MMO.

There are a lot of MMOs right now that have perfectly good gameplay, decent stories, and even a decent game world, but they would be totally more enjoyable as an out of box single player game, or maybe even as a co-op game.   But put the MMO title on it, charge me a monthly fee, and I start wanting something more worthy of a virtual world, and the games don't deliver in that respect.

If Borderlands were an MMO I'd be screaming bloody murder about the fact that it railroads me through the content, and that the classes aren't balanced.   As a co-op game, I'm having fun finding outrageous loot and blowing the crap out of bad guys.

[Sjofn]

Yeah, I definitely agree that some games would be better as just co-op or even single player instead of as an MMO. I'm sort of WTF at Torchlight apparently being an MMO one day, for example.

[ghost]

Regardless, I'm done with MMOs other than LOTRO (lifetime sub) for a very good while.  I don't mind quest driven content, but they are all exactly the fucking same.  To a tee. 

[Aez]

Good video on the silliness of sidequests

[Malakili]

Good video on the silliness of sidequests

The problem with sidequests is that they are "side" quests.  I think the main story arcs that end up driving a lot of RPGs aren't that good, are cliche, or just don't add that much to the experience to be honest.  They aren't always terrible, but I can't help myself but think "what if the developers let me live in this world they created on MY terms instead of theirs?"

[Nebu]

They aren't always terrible, but I can't help myself but think "what if the developers let me live in this world they created on MY terms instead of theirs?"

Most people don't appear creative enough to make their own fun.  This seems to be the reason why MMO's have mutated from worlds to amusement park rides.  That and it's a hell of a lot easier to keep the douchebags under check when they don't have tools at their disposal to ruin the gameplay experience of others. 

[Venkman]

People have the creativity. It's that their passion gets shot to hell when they realize the amount of actual investment it takes to make a fully playable end-to-end game, much less an MMO. The epiphany people get is when they realize most of game development is the grindy development part, not the shiny design part.

So.. basically the argument against raiding is, "I might find a guild full of assholes, and I can't be bothered to quit them and find another guild.  So instead I'll denigrate those who have bothered to find folks they like playing with, because it makes me feel better."

Because hey, if you're avoiding stuff because you might meet assholes, make sure you don't go out in public.

No. Draegen nailed it in his response, but I meant what I said. I did my time and my life has changed so I no longer can. It's not the people. That part is easy if you're not an asshat nor have high expectations of suddenly falling in with a well-coordinated group of altruists. The hard part is the time against the reward, balanced against having to care enough. I don't anymore. This is not an indictment against Raiding. It's more an insight of why raiding doesn't cast a wide net no matter how its tweaked.

[Nebu]

People have the creativity. It's that their passion gets shot to hell when they realize the amount of actual investment it takes to make a fully playable end-to-end game, much less an MMO. The epiphany people get is when they realize most of game development is the grindy development part, not the shiny design part.

I really want to believe you.  You're usually pretty spot on about these things.  With the popularity of WoW it almost seems like ding-gratz and loot are more of an incentive than enjoyable gameplay.  It's very much a lottery mentality in these games. 

I think what I'm observing is a change in core gameplay as you attempt to target a broader audience.  It's like going from a story-driven indie film to a mass market action flick.  They're both good for different reasons.  The McDonald's analogy also applies.  I guess I'm wanting to go back to more niche market games.  Sadly, I think those days are over. 

[Venkman]

I'm sorta at that point myself. I think the big problem is that we want a niche game but one done with a big mass market budget because we don't have the patience for whatever kludginess usually comes along with "niche"

[Nyght]

I really want to believe you.  You're usually pretty spot on about these things.  With the popularity of WoW it almost seems like ding-gratz and loot are more of an incentive than enjoyable gameplay.  It's very much a lottery mentality in these games. 

You know an awful lot of people are willing to sit in front of slot machines and just pull the handle for hours on end. Even virtual ones that don't pay real coin.

[tazelbain]

SB and WAR basically fall in the same category in my head.  Some genuinely interesting ideas but a complete lack of foresight to understand how these ideas would play out.  One common trait between the two is that both games are designed to function under ideal populations.  Which is hopelessly naive for PvP games where it is very unlikely populations will ever be ideal.   Even on the off-chance the population where ideal, the nature flow of battle would push them off kilter.

So the design of these games needs stop pretending these imbalanced situations don't happen, instead assume that they are normal. The game should be 100% playable in lopsided scenarios:  Uberguild owns 100% landscape.  One team outnumbers the other team by 100 to 10. One team is more hardcore players than everyone else.  These scenarios needed to be beta tested.   Deliberately and severely imbalance teams on your beta servers.  Force entire teams to be PvP- to see happens when carebears play your game.  

This stuff will happen.  Wishful thinking isn't going keep your game from tanking and your staff from being slashed.

[DLRiley]

SB and WAR basically fall in the same category in my head.  Some genuinely insetting ideas but complete lack of foresight to understand how these ideas would play out.  One particular interesting common trait between the two is that both games are designed to function under ideal populations.  Which seems hopelessly naive for PvP game where are unlikely populations would be ideal.   Even on the off-chance the population where ideal, the nature flow of battle would push them off kilter.

So the design of these games needs stop pretending these imbalanced situations don't happen, instead assume that they are normal. The game should be 100% playable in lopsided scenarios:  Uberguild owns 100% landscape.  One team outnumbers the other team by 100 to 10. One team is more hardcore players than everyone else.  Thees scenarios needed to be beta tested.   Deliberately and severely imbalance teams on your beta servers.  Force entire teams to be PvP- to see happens when carebears play your game.  

This stuff will happen.  Wishful thinking isn't going keep your game from tanking and your staff from being slashed.

And we all said amen. Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Slyfeind]

Sometimes I wonder if developers know how to make good solid games, but they purposefully go down the fail trail for some weird reason. Bite-sized chunks, simple yet entertaining graphics, soloability, gamey versus worldy, spoon-feeding content...those were all things players have been asking for before WoW. Developers seemed to invent reasons not to do those things, as though they were afraid of unleashing some juggernaut. But someone did.

[ghost]

Sometimes I wonder if developers know how to make good solid games, but they purposefully go down the fail trail for some weird reason.

It all has to do with money.  The people with the money think you have to have grind to make it work.  If you can never achieve end-game then you don't need an end-game.

[Nebu]

It all has to do with money.  The people with the money think you have to have grind to make it work.  If you can never achieve end-game then you don't need an end-game.

They should know that even a horse knows the difference between a real carrot and a fake one. 

[ghost]

Speaking of carrots, I'm convinced that Blizzard utilzed or utilizes psychological principles in its design.  I wouldn't be surprised if they actually had behavioral psychologists on staff.  If I was going to blow $100 mil to develop a game I can guarantee you that I would.

[Montague]

Speaking of carrots, I'm convinced that Blizzard utilzed or utilizes psychological principles in its design.  I wouldn't be surprised if they actually had behavioral psychologists on staff.  If I was going to blow $100 mil to develop a game I can guarantee you that I would.

I think the only thing that Blizzard does differently from most other companies is that if several months and millions of dollars of work is done on a milestone and the internal testers say "This sucks and isn't fun" they actually listen to them, and have the balls to shitcan or heavily modify work with sunk costs. This isn't to say that Blizz doesn't make mistakes (original honor system, vehicles, etc) but they've avoided the truly game-killing mistakes that other MMO's have done. We'll probably never know but I would love to find out how many iterations the WoW combat engine went through before beta.

[Numtini]

I think the only thing that Blizzard does differently from most other companies is that if several months and millions of dollars of work is done on a milestone and the internal testers say "This sucks and isn't fun" they actually listen to them, and have the balls to shitcan or heavily modify work with sunk costs.

Yeah. That's it.

It has cascading benefits as well. People know this and they know if something comes out, it won't be warhammer or conan.

[Ingmar]

Yeah. What other company would have just blown up the Starcraft: Ghost project entirely when it was clear the game just wasn't fun?

[Ratman_tf]

Yeah. What other company would have just blown up the Starcraft: Ghost project entirely when it was clear the game just wasn't fun?

How many other companies can afford to abandon a project that they've sunk millions into?

[Fordel]

We'll probably never know but I would love to find out how many iterations the WoW combat engine went through before beta.

Too many to count is my guess. Someone spent a LOT of fucking time making sure player input and character output were virtually in perfect sync. I have yet to play another MMO that had that smoothness.

[Khaldun]

Yeah. What other company would have just blown up the Starcraft: Ghost project entirely when it was clear the game just wasn't fun?

How many other companies can afford to abandon a project that they've sunk millions into?

That's the point of understanding sunk costs: the money is already spent whatever it is that you do next. If you've blown $1 billion making new fighter jets and they don't work right, blowing another $1 billion because you already spent a billion is more painful than letting it go when you should have. Same for a lot of MMOs: what producers need to realize is that you can't afford to continue a project you've sunk millions into if it's unsalvageably bad, not the other way around. That's why Blizzard is money hats and Mythic is about to go bye-bye.

[Venkman]

This is the difference between design and development. Lots of companies think they're being clever by combining both. And the reason they do that is because they've convinced themselves their fundamental design concept is solid, so all they really need to do is build against it. This is a problem in lots of industries which have as much need for R&D as they do for marketing.

Blizzard leaves a lot of time for iteration. Most others don't. But then, most others don't show up to a new project with a warchest full of prior successes. Their methodology is in part permissable because they're right, they're right at a scale of success almost nobody else can touch at that time.

So this is something else one really can't compare with Blizzard.

[Ratman_tf]

Yeah. What other company would have just blown up the Starcraft: Ghost project entirely when it was clear the game just wasn't fun?

How many other companies can afford to abandon a project that they've sunk millions into?

That's the point of understanding sunk costs: the money is already spent whatever it is that you do next. If you've blown $1 billion making new fighter jets and they don't work right, blowing another $1 billion because you already spent a billion is more painful than letting it go when you should have. Same for a lot of MMOs: what producers need to realize is that you can't afford to continue a project you've sunk millions into if it's unsalvageably bad, not the other way around. That's why Blizzard is money hats and Mythic is about to go bye-bye.

What if you're a startup and only have one game? What if the development money runs out? Nobody wants to be the company that just gave up.

[Venkman]

And that's exactly the reason most stuff launches, good or bad. Because it needs to. Once you're in the hole that deep, you might as well see it through to at least have the sense of accomplishment.

[Endie]

As a counter-argument, SOE in particular have shown several times that, once you have sunk those costs into a project, you can sometimes at least give yourself a moderate cash cow since MMOs aren't all that expensive to run (badly) in maintenance mode for even very moderate subscriber bases.