Innovation

[Evangolis]

Briefly, I won't recapitulate my various thoughts on story, beyond saying that I agree with much of what has been said here on the subject.  I will say that story is one of many things that can be improved to improve games in general, and MMOs in particular.  I'd also point to another Raph post and the linked talk about what he calls Moore's Wall.  I commend the transcript too you, for all that it is a bit dry, and Sturgeon's Law gets mangled in the transcription.

I will recount what I said in the discussion thread on Raph's site.  A couple years back I was harping on the need for better project management in MMOs.  I'll add to that the need for the creation of better methodologies of game building and better business design toward the end of reducing the production costs of games in general and MMOs in particular.  I'm talking more about actual business practices and working methods here than I am about things like player generated content.  As long as these games remain big-budget large team affairs, it will be difficult to improve the level of artistry, and increase the frequency of innovation in the game design proper, including innovations like player content.

I'll also add that new innovations in game design aren't really the problem for MMOs.  I know from playing M59 that this medium, to use Haemish's jargon, isn't using the innovations it began with, never mind the innovations that the MUD world before it created.

[HRose]

I have a new principle.

Not only I want the story back. But I also want all the related content soloable *from the beginning to end*. And absolutely free from time constraints. The game should be enjoyable whether I have ten minutes, an hour or five hours. Duoing should be the norm.

I'm writing lots about it, but it's my new conclusion.

[Akkori]

It seems to me that, while a lot more work, branching quests would win hearts and minds. Thanks for the education in the terms. Chain quests are boring, and have been done to death. THey are the lazy Devs tool. IMO. So what if its more work! Heloo!! Thats what they get paid to do! Seriously, how is it that people can complain and say its too much work, when games are making 10's of million s of dollars a month?! I KNOW the Dev tools they use to assemble Quests isnt so pathetic that they cant bang out a nice 10-ending Quests in a couple weeks. The story would be easy enough compared to the rest. Toss 2 people at it. The re-playability of it could be enormous if done right.

[Venkman]

I have a new principle.

Not only I want the story back. But I also want all the related content soloable *from the beginning to end*. And absolutely free from time constraints. The game should be enjoyable whether I have ten minutes, an hour or five hours. Duoing should be the norm.

I'm writing lots about it, but it's my new conclusion.

Then you don't want this genre anymore. That's basically we're you're headed, right back to old school RPG, which still has story and content relevant to it far more advanced than MMORPGs have.

That's not a bad thing of course. I just have long wished that people who don't like the large-scale realtime multiplayer aspects of this genre would find a genre more conducive to their preferences. Otherwise, we'll continue getting what we're seeing: smaller and smaller "massive" until there's no massive left.

That this is what a lot of people seem to want (given the success of some titles over another) just means that it's going to happen. But it'll also mean that, at some point, there's going to be a clear dilineation between real "massive" and just "online". GW and WoW are still massive after a fashion, but less so. DDO is almost not massive at all. Meanwhile, ATITD and Eve are truly massive, though for much narrower crowds.

MMORPGs have always been niche. They're getting more popular because the popular titles are getting less massive.

Oh, how I define "massive": real economies with thousands of concurrent inputs and many different playable positions within a value chain. How I define "online": being able to play a combat role with a few or a few dozen other people in activities containing some objectives and an eventual single big one.

[Nyght]

That's not a bad thing of course. I just have long wished that people who don't like the large-scale realtime multiplayer aspects of this genre would find a genre more conducive to their preferences. Otherwise, we'll continue getting what we're seeing: smaller and smaller "massive" until there's no massive left.

Yeah WoW is pretty small.

Adjacent play is what casual players have been saying for years would break the genre open. Someone actually does it and now its boo hoo hoo the massive is leaving?

There are two things online can bring to gaming beyond just getting together in a room and playing with networked computers.

The first is the you don't need to be physically proximate. Fine, they all do this.

The second is you can design a game where you still have a shared experience and goals but don't have to be time proximate.

Yes it probably won't throw out as many social hooks as forced time proximity, but it also opens the available playstyles, ergo.. a more massive and less homogeneous world.

I'd write more, but my available time is up.

[HRose]

Then you don't want this genre anymore. That's basically we're you're headed, right back to old school RPG, which still has story and content relevant to it far more advanced than MMORPGs have.

But that's not what I want :)

I'm one of those who want these games truly massive. And the freedom of the sandbox. Simulating different aspects instead of just combat.

But I also "want" each part to be placed where it belongs. Imho, a good story REQUIRES soloability or to be played at max by four players. Not more, or the story goes to hell. This isn't a mmorpg, by itself. But, in fact, this would happen within a larger structure that gives the dimension of the mmorpg.

So what's the whole project? It's simple. Make the advancement through the story and part of your character as the best experience as possible (very small groups, duos or solo. focus on the immersiveness). Then, beside the mandatory advancement through the story, you attack two different "branches" (the real game). One is the PvP persistent world. With its complexity and economy. The Sandbox in all its undisclosed potential. And another is the larger-scale, mandatory grouping PvE. This latter one is connected with the PvP but, as a fundamental trait, it won't allow your character to gain directly more power.

The long version is here. And when I say long, I mean it.

[Venkman]

Yeah WoW is pretty small.

Adjacent play is what casual players have been saying for years would break the genre open

The second line defines the first.

And you of all people know I don't think this is the wrong course for one part of the genre to go. I'm all about options, either within a game or within the genre. There's enough entertainment to go around. I don't believe every player who's ever launched anything with "MMO*" in its description has to be compelled to play every one. Someone who loves SL may feel imprisoned in WoW. Someone who loves WoW may wonder just what the heck to do in SL. I do not believe in One Game to Bind Them All.

But obviously more people will go to one game than others. It's the nature of competition. WoW is only not "time-proximate" from 1-59. After that it's only not time-proximate for folks not continuing to advance their characters in Raid or Rank gear. That the 1-59 could take a long time for some to finish, and that their enjoyment will run out before then, bespeaks mostly of what "casual" really is in MMORPGs. And WoW is successful, like GW, because it got casual right.

WoW-style diku is the way things will go for people who just want diversionary entertainment. The other split-off from the genre will be based on those seeking more immersion. The former is probably going to make more money than the latter, but it's already been proven there's enough room for both.

[Nyght]

Someone who loves SL may feel imprisoned in WoW. Someone who loves WoW may wonder just what the heck to do in SL. I do not believe in One Game to Bind Them All.

Nor one term apparently, since  you don't feel that massive applies to them all in equal measure. I am only objecting to defining one as massive and the other not based upon playstyle because to do so has a pejorative feel to it.

[sarius]

Didn't someone already define "massive" as the largest collection of elf boobs in one spot possible? 

[Venkman]

Nor one term apparently, since you don't feel that massive applies to them all in equal measure. I am only objecting to defining one as massive and the other not based upon playstyle because to do so has a pejorative feel to it.

I never said either game wasn't massive. It's just a question of degree. And that depends on what metric's being used to measure it. I tried to do so in this table, to knowlingly subjective results.

But please don't misunderstand and think I'm making a value judgement. I don't walk around saying "nya nya, my game is more massive than your's!" Shit. How could I?! I, like many here, average at best four or five months in one game, and that not necessarily exclusive. It's why I continually say there's enough fun for everyone based on the options. It's why I always say there's no one game to bind us all.

I find WoW less massive than SL, by orders of magnitude, but much more massive than Starcraft or Battlefront 2. That's all.

[sarius]

The only Quests I bothered reading was the Warren (in SWG).

Why did you read that one? I plotted it, though I did not write the actual dialogue, just the outline of the conversation.

It's actually just about the only content of mine in SWG, I think (as opposed to systems).

Okay, I'll bite.  Lemme ask the question most ex-SWG players I know still wonder:

Why not build more content into the game instead of changing the rules literally every single publish, if not every hot fix during the first year? 

My perspective: You changed the rules constantly and created the little bitch mongers (aka the jedi forums) where all this whining begat even more drastic changes, convincing someone upstairs that the only way to "fix" it is to change the game again to the point where there is no SWG game left, it's something else.

[Triforcer]

Raph-

Great article.  My small group in law school is doing an online worlds presentation and I assigned this as reading for the entire class    I'll tell you if I get any good comments.

[Raph]

Would this be the same as the Harvard reference I mentioned on the blog?

[Piperfan]

The only Quests I bothered reading was the Warren (in SWG).

Why did you read that one? I plotted it, though I did not write the actual dialogue, just the outline of the conversation.

It's actually just about the only content of mine in SWG, I think (as opposed to systems).

Okay, I'll bite.  Lemme ask the question most ex-SWG players I know still wonder:

Why not build more content into the game instead of changing the rules literally every single publish, if not every hot fix during the first year? 

My perspective: You changed the rules constantly and created the little bitch mongers (aka the jedi forums) where all this whining begat even more drastic changes, convincing someone upstairs that the only way to "fix" it is to change the game again to the point where there is no SWG game left, it's something else.

I stand by for correction but I understand that Raph left well before the game went live. No part of the question is answerable by him since he was not there.

You need to have more facts at your fingertips or you embarrass your self on these boards with questions like that. That is why I mostly lurk.

[Triforcer]

Would this be the same as the Harvard reference I mentioned on the blog?

Yeah...but like the comment said, it was me assigning it, but the whole class was still supposed to read it (it was "the students set the curriculum" day).  A lot of people here (admittedly, this Cyberlaw class is full of the techiest of the techies) have said they are already love your work    You should meet some of the Berkman Center people here sometime, you would really like them.

[sarius]

The only Quests I bothered reading was the Warren (in SWG).

Why did you read that one? I plotted it, though I did not write the actual dialogue, just the outline of the conversation.

It's actually just about the only content of mine in SWG, I think (as opposed to systems).

Okay, I'll bite.  Lemme ask the question most ex-SWG players I know still wonder:

Why not build more content into the game instead of changing the rules literally every single publish, if not every hot fix during the first year? 

My perspective: You changed the rules constantly and created the little bitch mongers (aka the jedi forums) where all this whining begat even more drastic changes, convincing someone upstairs that the only way to "fix" it is to change the game again to the point where there is no SWG game left, it's something else.

I stand by for correction but I understand that Raph left well before the game went live. No part of the question is answerable by him since he was not there.

You need to have more facts at your fingertips or you embarrass your self on these boards with questions like that. That is why I mostly lurk.

More than willing to make mistakes, but lurkers never accomplish anything, nor find out those answers in my experience.  He posted a comment relevant to the genre, so I asked.  I'm sure if he has a desire to post a response it would be forthcoming.  As late as Sept 2005 Raph posted on SWG forums that he was the Creative Director for SOE.  In addition, he has probably a good scale of insight into the culture of SOE, if not the SWG teams that have cycled through the various quarters.  The question is relevant to me.

A more accurate response is what are you trying to accomplish.  Not much I see.

[Piperfan]

Perhaps I was intentionally ignoring the hostile tone of your question to a Red Name, and giving you one possible, easy, non-insulting reason (among many) as to why I think you will not receive an answer.

[Raph]

I officially moved out of the Creative Director role in July of that year (which was literally a couple of days after launch; some think that I got the job post-SWG, but in fact, I was offered it months before and chose not to take it until SWG had launched). I was still involved, to a gradually lessening degree, until Sept or so. So I was involved in planning mounts, vehicles, and cities, and I was involved in the Warren. By the time Holocron drops for Jedi came out, I was not actively on the team. What's more, I have been at arm's length to the title ever since, because to do otherwise would be very disruptive to the guys who have charge of it now.

As far as your question, I of course have to be politic about answering it, but I'd answer with "we did add content" -- cf the aforementioned Warren -- and "content depends on systems being solid underneath" -- such as better content tools, which we now have, and such as fixing the bugs you cited.

It's not really a complicated answer...

[sarius]

Thanks for the answer.  My tone was never intended to be hostile, FTR.  Thanks again.