A Theory of Fun

[Jeff Kelly]

Please explain. Not having a dig at you, I just want to know where you think it failed. Personally the only things I didn't like about the games were with gaming communities in general, and the cost.

The balance is shit. If you play the newest editions of Warhammer playing Empire equals teh win.

Every time they release an revised edition they kill nearly every model released for the previous edition and replace it by something even more sub-par and forcing everybody to stick with the old edition or buy most of their armys new.

In the newest edition for example they have split chaos into three different armies, thereby forcing every chaos player to completely buy new models if they want to be current.

They take too long to release supplements and army books. The last army book (usually skaven or wood elves) for edition x will be released  only three months before edition y comes out (And they are working on a two year cycle between major revisions)

The ruleset is lacking essential rules and is too dumbed down to be of any worth whatsoever. They have for example air units but no real ruleset regarding air combat.

The best edition of Warhammer has been the second edition. The rules were a bit complicated but worked really good. Troop balance was all right and you didn't have to pimp your sister in order to afford an army to play.

But nowadays models cost a fortune. The dragon I bought in 1996 has cost 40 Marks (20 Euro or 26 Dollars at the current exchange rate) and it was made out of metal. The very same model now costs 60 Euro (79 Dollars) and is no longer made from metal but plastic.

I liked warhammer very much but the game has become a caricature of itself over the years by people who wanted to make everything better in the next release but only fucked up even more.

Plus them ditching necromunda and everyone dropping it as a result. Damn that game was fun (and the new EPIC, the old one was complicated sure, but it was a great way to piss away an entire day with massive battles).

Standard Citadel/Games Workshop release cycle. Release a new system, wait till its popular then can it. I play GW games since 1990. Between then and now they have released and killed Bloodbowl three times, Epic two times, Epic 40K, Necromunda, War Dogs (Ship battles), that Ork Game with Cars (I cannot recallthe name) and several other games. Some of these games were so popular that third party game companies have picked up the licence to the game and the miniatures.

On the other hand GW is completely overworked with Lord of the Rings, Warhammer and Warhammer 40K already. It already takes them to long to release announced material e.g. during third ed. they released the last Warhammer army book one month before release of the fourth edition making it obsolete on release.

GW have nice ideas but the implementation sucks.

Jeff

[HaemishM]

I  was focusing on the guy's book, which many seem fully qualified to comment on without ever having read. It was a view on the quality of the commentary lately, and NOTHING more.

If you return from your one-day timeout, you might read back through this thread and notice that just like every other thread involving Raph which he may or may not read, a lot of this thread wasn't even discussing the book, it was discussing his previously-released games. Since everyone has personal agendas when discussing games, especially those they left bitterly, a lot of rhetoric bled in.

And again, if you find the quality of commentary on this site lacking, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND GO ELSEWHERE. No one is forcing you to read us. If you want to stay, you can be a dick, just vary the subject of your dickishness. So far, 90% of your post have been either about that game or about SirBruce. You sound like Blair.

Sorry to piss in a thread about your book, Raph. I will comment on it when I've read it, which should hopefully be in a few weeks.

[Signe]

I hope that Haemish or someone here does do a good write up.   I enjoy reading the reviews quite a bit and how often do we get to review a book written by someone in our own little community?

[plummerx]

I  was focusing on the guy's book, which many seem fully qualified to comment on without ever having read. It was a view on the quality of the commentary lately, and NOTHING more.

If you return from your one-day timeout, you might read back through this thread and notice that just like every other thread involving Raph which he may or may not read, a lot of this thread wasn't even discussing the book, it was discussing his previously-released games. Since everyone has personal agendas when discussing games, especially those they left bitterly, a lot of rhetoric bled in.

And again, if you find the quality of commentary on this site lacking, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND GO ELSEWHERE. No one is forcing you to read us. If you want to stay, you can be a dick, just vary the subject of your dickishness. So far, 90% of your post have been either about that game or about SirBruce. You sound like Blair.

Sorry to piss in a thread about your book, Raph. I will comment on it when I've read it, which should hopefully be in a few weeks.

You really amaze me. If there was a more bitter and vociferous post it would have to compete with yours.

I posted on the foolishness of commenting on the guys book when the posters haven't read it. Your total paranoia that command you to think anything I post MUST in some remote way we realted to SirBruce or his steaming pile of shit of a game is your very own pathology.

 As commentary, that IS pure shit. For dickeheadedness YOU are right up there. I doubt you even know who the hell Blair is, in your reactionary knee jerk fuge state, you use the name as a verb and not a noun, or worse yet, as a punctuation mark.

I didn't piss in this thread, you did, remember that. And I highly doubt you are sorry for it either.

[Miasma]

If your avatar is Michael Douglas from the movie falling down it is very apt.

[plummerx]

If your avatar is Michael Douglas from the movie falling down it is very apt.

Main Entry: mi·as·ma
Pronunciation: mI-'az-m&, mE-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -mas also mi·as·ma·ta  /-m&-t&/
Etymology: New Latin, from Greek, defilement, from miainein to pollute
1 : a vaporous exhalation formerly believed to cause disease; also : a heavy vaporous emanation or atmosphere
2 : an influence or atmosphere that tends to deplete or corrupt <freed from the miasma of poverty -- Sir Arthur Bryant>; also : an atmosphere that obscures : FOG <retreated into an asexual mental miasma -- Times Literary Supplement>

[Rasix]

So, do you want to post here or not? You're not making a good case for us keeping you around.

[stray]

plummerx, even if some of us haven't read Raph's book (which I'm sure most of us eventually will), you need to understand that it's still possible for us to be acquainted with Raph's ideas, if not the book itself.

How can we not? It's not like it's the first time he's spoken about the "theory of fun" or that none of us have read the articles on his website...Hell, some people here have been discussing it with him for years.

Before you butt in and start bitching at people, how about finding out a bit more about the circumstances? Raph was sorta joking when he pointed all that out.

[plummerx]

So, do you want to post here or not? You're not making a good case for us keeping you around.

Well, That begs the question.

Can I post here without some sort of stupid, irrelevant,  one line cheapshot from another poster after every post I put up?

I posted ON TOPIC. With no mention of what apparantly nobody wants mentioned. And I've been having crap tossed at me even then.
Thas ok by me, I can defend myself.

The real question is, will anybody allow me to post about any subject without having a hissy fit?

Apologies to the author.
we now return to the thread topic, and the next guy to take it off topic is a total buttwinkle.

[Miasma]

I like the name miasma entirely because of that definition.

Back on topic: I'm going to buy this book today and look forward to reading it.

[Shockeye]

I'll be receiving the book within the next couple days and will start looking it over this weekend. I hear there's illustrations which is nice because words don't really do it for me.

[Calantus]

Bad stuff about GW

Ah, I got out when I could no longer justify the cost. That was around episode 210 of White Dwarf I think. The last WHFB we played is the one that introducted the french knight guys and the lizard men. I guess I was at the beginning of the end then since they had already dumbed down WH40k and EPIC when I left, and the magic system of WHFB had its guts ripped out at that point. So I still have fairly good memories of GW and their games.

(Not a derail, just an aside :P)

[HaemishM]

I posted on the foolishness of commenting on the guys book when the posters haven't read it. Your total paranoia that command you to think anything I post MUST in some remote way we realted to SirBruce or his steaming pile of shit of a game is your very own pathology.

Actually, I didn't think your original stupidity was about WWIIOnline or SirBruce, but more saying that this site was full of rhetoric and people talking out of their asses. You connected dots that I didn't. You have also made yourself out to be a complete tool in a short time here. If you'd like to continue on, do so, but don't be surprised when and if you get banned.  

As commentary, that IS pure shit. For dickeheadedness YOU are right up there. I doubt you even know who the hell Blair is, in your reactionary knee jerk fuge state, you use the name as a verb and not a noun, or worse yet, as a punctuation mark.

FYI, I'm the guy who banned Blair from Waterthread, which probably just freed him up to spew his insane love for CRS elsewhere on the Internet. If you're going to spout, please be informed of who and what you are spouting about. Which is exactly what you were bitching about this site and this thread doing when I responded to you.

As for my dickishness, I try. Really hard, as I'm sure most of the site's readers could attest.

[Righ]

Well, That begs the question.

Can I post here without some sort of stupid, irrelevant,  one line cheapshot from another poster after every post I put up?

I posted ON TOPIC.

Let me quote in full your first response under this topic, which is "A Theory of Fun" and presumed by original context to be about Raph's book of the same name.

Actual first hand experience with anything seem of little value here.
I suggest stop asking for silly things like reason and logic, and simply heat up your rhetoric.
"You R teh suck" will be placed upon you any time now.

Three snide comments, demeaning the site and its other respondants. What the motherfuck are the drugs that you're on? Can you not see the fucking disconnect between your original post and your latest defense?

Well bugger me. Monkeys can use typewriters.

[Pineapple]

The real question is, will anybody allow me to post about any subject without having a hissy fit?

Plummer, when you first posted here I replied with a welcome. I know debating can be tough, so I mentioned sticking to your guns.

I wasnt meaning you should turn your fingers into 50 caliber chainguns and open fire at everyone. You are in fact the one having the hissy fit, by bringing all attention onto yourself and generally being abrasive.

You are not dumb, as I can tell by your posts. You are good at debating. But perhaps you are upset at your life or something, because you seem to vent when you post here.

Word to the wise: dont be so abrasive. Once you have said your say, let it go. Stick to the topics. That is, if you havent been banned by now.

[plummerx]

I note with good humor some of the comments directed at me, and some points are well taken.
Others i find dubous at best, but I think you guys can handle that.

That comments on sombody's writing, without actually having read it, seems to me prima facie evidence of the the inability to comment with authority. I think that is pretty much a recognized standard just about anywhere else

Note this is yet again another good faith attempt to steer the thread back on topic. I suggest some start a rip plummerx a new one thread is thats what the desire really is.

As for my dickishness, I try. Really hard, as I'm sure most of the site's readers could attest.

Actually, I respect that.

[SirBruce]

Well, I think a lot of us have read it -- I know I have -- and I think it's perfectly okay for others to comment on our reviews/retransmissions of the material and on Raph's previous game history.

I think there is some frustration among gamers with the fact that Raph, as much as he has become a face of the industry, has been unable to make a better game.  Now, I am not saying his work on UO and SWG was not great, but I think if had then gone on to make, say, WoW, which is currently seen as one of the best, some people would value his opinions more highly.  Again, I'm not one of those people, but I can certainly see that such people exist.  I'm sure this fact frustrates Raph a bit, too. :)

Bruce

[Raph]

Well, I think a lot of us have read it -- I know I have -- and I think it's perfectly okay for others to comment on our reviews/retransmissions of the material and on Raph's previous game history.

I think there is some frustration among gamers with the fact that Raph, as much as he has become a face of the industry, has been unable to make a better game.  Now, I am not saying his work on UO and SWG was not great, but I think if had then gone on to make, say, WoW, which is currently seen as one of the best, some people would value his opinions more highly.  Again, I'm not one of those people, but I can certainly see that such people exist.  I'm sure this fact frustrates Raph a bit, too. :)

Bruce

Of course it does. On the other hand:

1997: UO
2003: SWG

Bit of a gap there. One dead title in between, of course, which resulted in ~1 year of wasted effort. Still, you have to assume that following SWG with WoW or indeed ANYTHING would be an unlikely event just given the amount of time elapsed.

Of course, at the current rate, you'll see my next game in 2009. Given that I don't actually have a game of my own that I am working on (MMO at any rate), you may wait longer. :)

I take comfort in the fact that I see plenty of things in WoW that are derived in one way or another from stuff that I worked on. *shrug*

It may also be that I am better at talking about how the games can be than actually pulling it off myself. When I'm feeling down (which some forum threads are guaranteed to accomplish!) I certainly often feel that way, and I know many gamers have said so.  ;)

[plummerx]

Well, I think a lot of us have read it -- I know I have -- and I think it's perfectly okay for others to comment on our reviews/retransmissions of the material and on Raph's previous game history.

I think there is some frustration among gamers with the fact that Raph, as much as he has become a face of the industry, has been unable to make a better game.  Now, I am not saying his work on UO and SWG was not great, but I think if had then gone on to make, say, WoW, which is currently seen as one of the best, some people would value his opinions more highly.  Again, I'm not one of those people, but I can certainly see that such people exist.  I'm sure this fact frustrates Raph a bit, too. :)

Bruce

That's akin to you explaining how much you hated a movie and for me to dispute the view without having seen it myself. That makes no sense.

Didn't make WoW? So what. He's on the fray and had some sucesses.
WoW's time will come and go, then it will be "but what have you done lately".

[SirBruce]

Of course it does. On the other hand:

1997: UO
2003: SWG

Bit of a gap there. One dead title in between, of course, which resulted in ~1 year of wasted effort. Still, you have to assume that following SWG with WoW or indeed ANYTHING would be an unlikely event just given the amount of time elapsed.

An excellent point.  Pity about Privateer Online, though.

Of course, at the current rate, you'll see my next game in 2009. Given that I don't actually have a game of my own that I am working on (MMO at any rate), you may wait longer. :)

This thought makes me sad.  Hopefully people won't forget how big UO really was by then.

Anyway, thanks for taking my post in the spirit in which it was given.

Bruce

[SirBruce]

That's akin to you explaining how much you hated a movie and for me to dispute the view without having seen it myself. That makes no sense.

I think it's more like M. Night Shyamalan writing a book about making movies, and people discussing people posting about what he said in the book, even though they've only seen some of his movies.

Bruce

[schmoo]

It may also be that I am better at talking about how the games can be than actually pulling it off myself. When I'm feeling down (which some forum threads are guaranteed to accomplish!) I certainly often feel that way, and I know many gamers have said so.  ;)

It may be that your written work on games may inspire some future game designer(s) to create something better than has been done up to now, which seems to me to be of more value in the long run than making Yet Another Game.

In any case, one doesn't design and create something like a modern computer game by oneself; any failures can always be blamed on someone else. ;)

[Jain Zar]

It may also be that I am better at talking about how the games can be than actually pulling it off myself. When I'm feeling down (which some forum threads are guaranteed to accomplish!) I certainly often feel that way, and I know many gamers have said so.  ;)

Nothing wrong with that sir.  Everyone learns as they go and makes mistakes along the way.  Learning from them is something not everyone does quite so much.  Its clear you kinda have, and actually are willing to admit so, and with a sense of humor about it all.

I can respect that.  It actually makes me more interested in your book actually.

Its just at least for me its been like the previously mentioned GW stuff which on its own I would be happy to chat about in a more appropriate thread, you came up with all these interesting ideas and stuff packed with... STUFF, yet didn't fully think about how it would work in an actual game.  Like open PvP.  Not only did it turn most of us into sheep for Bobby the Catass who gets a swirly at high school every day, dying while trying to do anything, your bounty system just encouraged ganking guilds to kill each other for lots of cash!  Or your no NPC economy in SWG.  It just caused items that with NPCs would have sold for around 10K to sell for 100K or more.  And the training system?  Sure I think the CONCEPT was for it to save younger players money by having veterans train newbies for free, making new pals in the process, but it ended up having people begging to train other people so they could master their class to the point of paying to train people!  

The road to hell was paved with good intentions.  And yeah, WoW has concepts from your games.  Its got concepts from almost the entire genre in it.  Blizzard is much like Squaresoft in their rabid.. ahh...  "borrowing" of other gameplay and world elements in making their software.  About the same level of rabid fanbase too..  To fans of innovation its a little bit disappointing, but there you go..

[Margalis]

It may also be that I am better at talking about how the games can be than actually pulling it off myself. When I'm feeling down (which some forum threads are guaranteed to accomplish!) I certainly often feel that way, and I know many gamers have said so.  ;)

You just need to team up with the right person. A very pragmatic, minimalist, aim-low asshole type.

When you work by yourself on something like a painting, it's very different from working on something with is a complex collaboration like software. You may have the "vision guy" and they may be great, but that's not enough. For a painter or a composer the "vision guy" can also be the nuts and bolts guy, and that works fine. But for something like a MMORPG I don't think that's possible.

With any large-scale software project you need someone is very realistic and honest about what can be delivered and when. The kind of person who, when you describe a new feature, will say "your last two new features didn't pan out, how is this one any different?" Someone who can honestly judge the talent everyone has and figure out if they are biting off more than they can chew.

This is true in any software development effort, but I think it's more true in games because there is a more creative aspect. People are thinking about cool features and new systems and backstory and what-have-you, rather than the real nuts and bolts.

I don't mean a suit, or someone that makes a MS Project list of milestones. I mean someone who understands the engineering and the product but errs on the side of caution. It's like good cop/bad cop.

Edit: SquareSoft is far more innovative than Blizzard. They produced, let's see: the Final Fantasy job system, the FF active time battle system, the entire Romancing Saga series (that has a lot of wacky stuff in it, including being able to start as a lot of different characters), Secret of Mana (3 player simultaneous adventure/RPG), etc etc. The Romancing Saga series in particular gets pretty out there. Blizzard hasn't really ever done anything other than provide a minor evolution in gameplay or simply better deliver something that has already been done. The delivery is clearly their strength.

[HRose]

It may also be that I am better at talking about how the games can be than actually pulling it off myself. When I'm feeling down (which some forum threads are guaranteed to accomplish!) I certainly often feel that way, and I know many gamers have said so.  ;)

Oh come on, where's the challenge so?

[Pineapple]

That comments on sombody's writing, without actually having read it, seems to me prima facie evidence of the the inability to comment with authority.

I wasnt commenting on what is within Raph's book. As someone else said, my attitudes come from past experience. Actions speak louder than words, and so I will await to see of SOE produces another grind-fest or a fun game. So I wont buy the book. Sorry Raph, I wont give you more money until I see the theories in action.

And as I noted on the upside, Raph says he wants to get back to certain basics and examine what worked and what didnt. Bravo to that and bravo to him. Let's see it in action, and then I will respond with my wallet. Until then, words are just words. I think Raph can greatly impact online gaming, either positively or negatively. If what he says is true, I think he will probably find the fun. Great, fun games are possible. Somehow someone is doing it. Maybe a back to the basics approach is the way to go next.

I wont keep rehashing this, because it has already been said. There is no point in continuing to go on about it. But if you say that I have been commenting on a book I never read, I say that I am not commenting on the book itself. I am commenting on past game experiences that relate to the author, due to his creative direction influence on those games.

Ok?

I dont want to keep bashing Raph, so stop making me re-explain my posts. What he said lately has given me optimism for Sony's future games. But I'm not ready to pay yet.

[Riggswolfe]

What I would love to see Raph, would be to take some of your more interesting ideas (economy and social aspects of games mostly) paired with somebody who has a good handle on engaging content.

I believe if you also threw in somebody with a bit more understanding of the gamer mentality you could make an amazing game. This isn't a dig. What I mean by this is I've noticed both UO and SWG seem to have a lack of understanding of common gamer mentalities, at least in their original states.

UO was an amazing game totally destroyed by a naive belief that players could and would police themselves. Couple this with the fact that most players don't WANT to have to police each other and you have a huge problem. It was heaven for griefers and huge PvP fans. Hell for everyone else.

SWG has been discussed enough here. Way too much grinding. Way to much afk macroing. Awesome social aspects. The city stuff was cool. Horrible combat mechanics.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the ideas look awesome on paper, and some aspect so of them are, but they seem to fail to take into account the way gamers behave in the real world.

[Pineapple]

Edited: many words removed.

[Pineapple]

It may also be that I am better at talking about how the games can be than actually pulling it off myself.

I do not believe this. I think you CAN do it. I just think it is as you said, a getting back to certain basics is needed.

Perhaps it is easy to get caught up in the process of it all. Perhaps more focus groups are needed, and early on not just in beta. We have been bitching about grind for years, but these games arent produced very rapidly so maybe the next one will reflect the changing attitudes.

Just avoid agonizing grinds in the next one. Avoid tools that have very little actual use once the game gets going. Avoid overcomplication. You have more knowledge than the rest of us on the subject of online gaming. This book is a start down a new direction, so I think you can do it. I'll pay cash money when I see it materialize.

[Raph]

We go into every game with the goal of avoiding grinds. :) Really, it surprises me how many people think developers are willfully ignoring everyone--it's really not that so much as how easy it is to lose sight of what you're trying to do.

[HRose]

We go into every game with the goal of avoiding grinds. :) Really, it surprises me how many people think developers are willfully ignoring everyone--it's really not that so much as how easy it is to lose sight of what you're trying to do.

So what exactly was the concept of 'jedi' if not the purest form of grind EVER created?

[Samwise]

I think the original concept of the Jedi system was spot on - make it a secret set of criteria that people will "naturally" stumble into after they've explored a large amount of the game world.

The implementation problems were threefold:

1) They weren't able to track as many variables as they wanted to, so they made profession mastery the sole determiner.
2) The professions themselves were for the most part huge grinds, so natural exploration never entered into it - nobody wanted to master a bunch of professions because mastering one was tedious enough.
3) Once the holocrons leaked the secret, the system was beaten - anyone willing to catass through all the profs at high speed could get his Jedi, and everyone knew it.

If more than profession mastery entered into it and/or the professions weren't just grinds and/or it had stayed a secret, getting a Jedi wouldn't have been a grind.

Unfortunately, the otherwise fairly decent Jedi system was built upon other systems that had some pretty deep flaws.

[Riggswolfe]

I used to read the Jedi forums and people had all these crackpot theories.

"Go talk to the hermit who spanws once every 6 hours on Tatooine. Do this quest series on Naboo. Go into the temple on Yavin. Seek the towers."

God I wish they'd been right.

[Samwise]

The beauty of keeping it a secret was that nobody would have ever known the difference.  The actual criteria could be completely braindead, but as long as the players couldn't figure out the criteria, they'd keep doing wacky shit, and some of them would be utterly convinced that the wacky shit was what did it.

Once the secret was leaked, it was all over.

[Margalis]

UO was an amazing game totally destroyed by a naive belief that players could and would police themselves. Couple this with the fact that most players don't WANT to have to police each other and you have a huge problem.

The funny thing is, lots of people STILL believe this! How many times have you heard people talk about "player justice."

Player justice and player-created content are both pervasive myths. There's never been a game where either was worth a darn. I think people cling to them because they represent less effort and less cost. Hey, why create content when players can do it for free!

(I'm not saying players creating content is bad, I'm saying it's no substitute for developer content. It's icing, you need the cake first)