Raids and the games before them...

[Koyasha]

The thread in the WoW forum got me thinking, but the topic turned out to be more general than WoW-related.  Most MMOG's seem to have some form of raiding or another, although there are exceptions to this.  It's not so much the merits of raiding vs. not raiding or whether it's personally fun that I'm interested in at this point, though.  The question is more along the lines of whether the game before the raiding properly coincides with the raiding.  As has often been observed, upon hitting max level and beginning to raid, the game changes a lot.  Some games prepare their players better for this change, and others seem to do rather poorly.

Since WoW was what prompted this line of thought for me, I'll take it as a first example.  WoW up to level 60 is extremely casual-friendly and very easy.  There are almost no consequences to death, repair costs are barely worth noting, running away when you get in trouble usually works very well, and if you fail to kill an elite or named, you can try as often as you like, or you can just bypass it.  Inside instances, running away doesn't work and you can't bypass some things, but most of the other rules stay in place.  Instances are completely optional though, since you can progress your character without them - until you hit level 60.

WoW raids are among the easiest of all MMOG raids, and the consequences for failure are low.  Pretty much like the rest of WoW.  But repair costs start to climb at these levels, and you're *not* gaining money on a raid.  In a lower instance, you typically gain money from the things you kill, at least enough to cover repairs unless you are very very foolish and die very very often.  On a raid, the money intake is rarely equal to the money output.  Even if you happen to only die once or twice on a given raid, the amount of cash you take in is unlikely to cover it.  You also don't get to bypass the mobs, but nor do you get to advance your character in much of any other way.  And finally, the mobs are harder.  Not equal to some raids in other games, but they still require coordination and intelligence among 20-40 people.  You can't run from raid bosses either, and each wipe takes usually 15-30 minutes to recover from, depending on the organizational skills of your raid (and sometimes, the reset time on the event).  Raids are therefore unforgiving and tend to plant your face into the ground over and over until you learn to not be an idiot and not screw up, and overall execute flawlessly.  There seems to be a very wide gap between the easy pre-raid game and the relatively unforgiving (in comparison) post-raid game.

To contrast, we look to the granddaddy of raiding games, and still probably the best on the block if your interest is in raiding: EverQuest.  Modern day EQ has taken on a LOT of softening up to make it more attractive to the WoW crowd and people who like things easy, but its roots are still there.  From the moment one first set foot in Norrath in the early age, the game made it brutally clear that this is an unforgiving world and you're gonna get the everlovin' shit beat out of you on every mistake you make.  From the very moment the newbie died in Greater Faydark and popped back, naked at her bind point with no clue where her body and even her newbie weapon was - without which she could not even kill a spider - the game started beating the idea that this is going to be HARD into her skull.  Throughout all of EQ, you learn that a mistake means death, death means lost experience, it means a corpse run across gods only know how many zones brimming with hostile enemies that can now crush your naked pasty ass into the dirt.  The game taught you from day 1 that mistakes and stupidity and screwups are not tolerated and that you will be paying the price for making them.

By the time you were ready to face Vox and Nagafen you knew this was going to be hard, you knew that you were going to be dying over and over to kill these dragons and that you were going to have to learn to execute flawlessly in order to do it.  By the time you stood in front of the portal to the Plane of Fear, you had been well educated that if you made mistakes once you stepped through that mighty gateway, you and your whole raid would be dead in there, and there would be no way in hell you could fight back to your corpses after that wipe other than relying on the benevolence of another guild.  The raids were brutal and unforgiving, but so was every inch of the game from the start to the end.  Many things changed between EQ grouping and raiding to be sure, but unlike WoW, the punishment for failure was beaten into you from day 1.

WoW seems to have a disproportionately large population of idiots among its raiding base.  That's what I've seen, and that's what a lot of people who have raided in WoW have seen and told me about.  Things that no EQ raider would even think of using voice comm for have the community considering teamspeak or vent a 'requirement' in order to be successful at raids of such complexity.  The people need to be yelled at - quite literally - to perform simple tasks that EQ raiders tend to accomplish by memorization.  The same people, significant percentages of the raid, not reacting to situations they've experienced dozens of times in the past until yelled at by a raid leader.  I wonder if much of this isn't simply because the game has taught them they don't need to give any effort.  They're not expected to perform, mistakes are forgiven, and so on.  Then raids are tougher, they're more unforgiving, they plant faces into the ground over and over and they're not quite sure why, because they're doing everything right just like they always did.

It seems to me that if a game is going to have difficult raids that require you to execute flawlessly, not make mistakes, learn your place and your role and not screw around, then the rest of the game should also teach you the same lessons, and if the rest of the game is easy, forgiving of mistakes, and generally doesn't punish you for failure, then raids should be equally easy and forgiving.  There's already enough of a difference going from leveling to equipment grind, going from small groups to huge raids, and all the other vast shifts in focus that comes when the game switches to raiding without suddenly expecting people to perform to the best of their ability when 'meh' used to be good enough.

Should the games really be bringing us up with expectations of one level of difficulty, then dumping 'hard mode' in our laps along with a whole bunch of other changes we were only slightly prepared for?

[stray]

It seems to me that if a game is going to have difficult raids that require you to execute flawlessly, not make mistakes, learn your place and your role and not screw around, then the rest of the game should also teach you the same lessons, and if the rest of the game is easy, forgiving of mistakes, and generally doesn't punish you for failure, then raids should be equally easy and forgiving.

Raiding and 'the rest of the game' should be completely different things, imo. Having it so intertwined with how the rest of the game works, be it easy or hard, assumes that everyone should want to move on to raiding later on. It assumes that raiding is necessary, and what everyone is ultimately playing these games for.

[Trippy]

To contrast, we look to the granddaddy of raiding games, and still probably the best on the block if your interest is in raiding: EverQuest.  Modern day EQ has taken on a LOT of softening up to make it more attractive to the WoW crowd and people who like things easy, but its roots are still there.  From the moment one first set foot in Norrath in the early age, the game made it brutally clear that this is an unforgiving world and you're gonna get the everlovin' shit beat out of you on every mistake you make.  From the very moment the newbie died in Greater Faydark and popped back, naked at her bind point with no clue where her body and even her newbie weapon was - without which she could not even kill a spider - the game started beating the idea that this is going to be HARD into her skull.  Throughout all of EQ, you learn that a mistake means death, death means lost experience, it means a corpse run across gods only know how many zones brimming with hostile enemies that can now crush your naked pasty ass into the dirt.  The game taught you from day 1 that mistakes and stupidity and screwups are not tolerated and that you will be paying the price for making them.

By the time you were ready to face Vox and Nagafen you knew this was going to be hard, you knew that you were going to be dying over and over to kill these dragons and that you were going to have to learn to execute flawlessly in order to do it.  By the time you stood in front of the portal to the Plane of Fear, you had been well educated that if you made mistakes once you stepped through that mighty gateway, you and your whole raid would be dead in there, and there would be no way in hell you could fight back to your corpses after that wipe other than relying on the benevolence of another guild.  The raids were brutal and unforgiving, but so was every inch of the game from the start to the end.  Many things changed between EQ grouping and raiding to be sure, but unlike WoW, the punishment for failure was beaten into you from day 1.

Your memory of EQ is different than mine, though I never raided in WoW so my perspective isn't the same as yours. Yes EQ was much harder compared to WoW but there were plenty of idiots in EQ. Remember KC? For many people in their mid to late 40s to early 50s that was their first real "dungeon" group experience (though technically KC was considered outdoors) and it showed. In other words lots of people managed to get to their 40s and beyond without learning proper grouping skills.

For Fear raids there was a seemingly never ending stream of idiots, at least on my server, who would jump through the portal before the word was given, train the break group causing a wipe and then kept going through to try and recover their stuff (not that they could get out even if they did manage to loot their corpse). At least PoH was better in that you could control who went up there. However, for some fricking reason, there were always people who did not understand simple instructions like "DO NOT STAND NEAR THE WALLS" -- that was seemingly beyond their reading comprehension or something. So while I agree the EQ taught people to fear death early and often it really didn't force people to learn raiding skills until you actually started raiding -- same as with WoW.

[Koyasha]

Raiding and 'the rest of the game' should be completely different things, imo. Having it so intertwined with how the rest of the game works, be it easy or hard, assumes that everyone should want to move on to raiding later on. It assumes that raiding is necessary, and what everyone is ultimately playing these games for.

Hmm, that's an interesting line of thought, but it seems to me that's pretty much what these games expect anyway.  If you don't raid, you have almost no path for further advancement.  If you want to continue playing (and advancing) then you raid.

Your memory of EQ is different than mine, though I never raided in WoW so my perspective isn't the same as yours. Yes EQ was much harder compared to WoW but there were plenty of idiots in EQ.

Oh, I completely agree that both games have always had a decent proportion of idiots, but it has seemed to me that the percentage of idiots is much higher in WoW than in EQ.  All raids have always been about cat-herding.  I've heard many other people who've played both games say the same thing, so it seems like it's not just a personal difference in views.

So while I agree the EQ taught people to fear death early and often it really didn't force people to learn raiding skills until you actually started raiding -- same as with WoW.

It's not so much raid skills I'm saying you have to learn in EQ, but simply doing things right and generally not making many mistakes.  Just a general attitude of 'pay attention and don't screw up, or else' that you saw in EQ from the start, but don't see much in WoW.  The 'or else' in WoW is only the most tiny of inconveniences, until you get to raids.  And you're allowed more mistakes before the 'or else' even presents itself.

[Venkman]

In the early days of EQ, Raiding also had its share of idiots. The playerbase has not gotten collectively dumber nor younger. There's just a hell of a lot more people raiding in WoW now than there ever was in EQ.

The big difference is that you're looking through a lens of years of EQ and its well established incrementally-growing playerbase versus the just-under-two-years WoW where new people still have been entering all the time. Some of those who skyrocket to the endgame for Raiding realize they're not really supposed to be there because they lack the discipline, focus or interest. Others get there and it takes them time to realize these things. Still others get there and do have all of these, so get picked up by raiding guilds.

It's not about the players. It's about the recruiting and pruning policies of large and/or raiding guilds. Pickup raids are always going to have their share of uncontrollable freakshows. But "pickup" and "raid" should never be in the same sentence. Raiding is like Major League Baseball as Pickup Raids are to Little League. You don't take a Little League team and expect them to compete competitively against something an MLB team is competing. You've got to know your teamates well, and it takes time and consistency to achieve that.

The rest is just frustration. EQ or WoW or DAoC or CoH or AO or AC or DDO or FFXI or GW.

Raiding and 'the rest of the game' should be completely different things, imo

They already are. Lots don't survive that transition. For every account WoW has I'd say they've lost one as well. This is why I think they'll hit 10 million box sales with Burning Crusade. There's a lot of people that don't want to raid at all, whether in a 5, 10, 25 or 40 person group. It's not just about the time nor focus requirements. It's just boring.

[sinij]

I think designing PvE games to be punishing is an absurd concept. Do you think corpse runs in EQ made game more fun for anyone?

[El Gallo]

WoW raids are among the easiest of all MMOG raids,
. . .

By the time you were ready to face Vox and Nagafen you knew this was going to be hard,

Gotta disagree..  Vox and naggy are mind-numbingly simplistic.  The simplest raid in WoW -- hell, most single-group dungeon bosses starting with Wailing Caverns  -- are vastly harder and more complex than any raid that existed in EverQuest from the day its servers opened through the end of PoP.  GoD+ I have heard go somewhere beyond "mindlessly trivial" but I never experienced them firsthand.  The only thing hard about vox or naggy was getting everyone to log off to preserve their buffs and all relog at roughly the same time.   There's not a single strategy you need to learn other than "have your clerics count to x and hit CH" to get you through everything Velious, Luclin, and most of PoP had to offer.  Late PoP had a little strategy, but compared to Twin Emps of C'thun, they are a complete joke.

[Telemediocrity]

EQ is the worst of both worlds.  If a game is easy, it's alright to be unforgiving because it takes a lot to fail.  If a game is hard, the game should be that much more forgiving if you fail, since so much of the fun in a hard game is trying random crazy shit that's likely to fail. (Darktide falls into the latter category, IMHO)

A game that's hard and unforgiving is just annoying pissant bullshit.  I wouldn't pay for it, anyway.

[Righ]

I think designing PvE games to be punishing is an absurd concept. Do you think corpse runs in EQ made game more fun for anyone?

Why just PvE? Oh, because the killer gets fun out of killing in PvP. Well, turns out people got fun from your PvE misfortune too, not least the developers, and those that then took your spawns.

[Telemediocrity]

There are a lot of "punishing" mechanics that make sense in PvP but absolutely none in PvE.  Long travel times, for instance.

[geldonyetich]

PvE with or without meaningful consequences for death?  Tough call.  Make death matter and it lends a feeling of accountability to the immesion, but at the burden of frustrating players.  Make death harmless and the players check their brains at the door before logging in.

Tell you what: Gimme a game with a 100x accelerated grind and permadeath.

[stray]

Raiding and 'the rest of the game' should be completely different things, imo. Having it so intertwined with how the rest of the game works, be it easy or hard, assumes that everyone should want to move on to raiding later on. It assumes that raiding is necessary, and what everyone is ultimately playing these games for.

Hmm, that's an interesting line of thought, but it seems to me that's pretty much what these games expect anyway.  If you don't raid, you have almost no path for further advancement.  If you want to continue playing (and advancing) then you raid.

At one time, I thought about that with WoW, but then realized that raiding is just for the purpose of being able to raid more. It's almost a totally self contained advancement scheme -- it need not apply to everyone. It doesn't need to apply to pvp at least. You don't need to raid in order to stay competitive in the battlegrounds. Some of that gear would help, but you don't need it. Some of that gear isn't even that good for pvp at all.

You can still win matches with normal gear and a good team. You could also just do some 20 man (and less) raiding and bail out once you get Tier 0.5 (at least for some classes, that'll function as good gear for pvp). And if you play long enough, you can also remain competitve with a blue pvp set. That's still kind of practical, unlike getting the purple stuff.

Unfortunately, battlegrounds and raiding are the only real endgame options in WoW. Crafting doesn't make much of a difference -- Which would be a nice third addition. Also, I'll be the first to admit that the idea of battlegrounds suck compared to meaningful, 'endgame' world pvp.

I'm sure there are some people who get their rocks off hanging around Goldshire too.

And last, but not least, like someone else mentioned, there's always expansions.

[Telemediocrity]

PvE with or without meaningful consequences for death?  Tough call.  Make death matter and it lends a feeling of accountability to the immesion, but at the burden of frustrating players.  Make death harmless and the players check their brains at the door before logging in.

Tell you what: Gimme a game with a 100x accelerated grind and permadeath.

The problem with that feeling of accountability is that players will keep their brains, but they'll bring their egos along as well - and I'd rather play with brain-dead goof-offs than people who think "what you do in the game actually matters" any day of the week.

The solution, IMHO, is to make death harmless and allow the players to be brainless - but then make it so that you're not typically relying on other players for your survival.

[geldonyetich]

There we've a difference of niche.  Lucky for you that your model is a pretty common one to find in MMORPGs, where mine doesn't seem to survive beta.

[Venkman]

*deleted for lack of relevance yet*

[Koyasha]

El Gallo, I meant hard on a 'what happens when you screw up and lose' basis, not so much of a complexity basis.  Although yes, GoD and beyond got a lot more complicated - and difficult to execute.  They're still improving a lot in the latest expansions, though I think the Trials of Mata Muram have been the most complex and involved so far.

Sinij, no, not really, but I do think they educated the player on the death consequences.  And yeah, as much as I like challenge in my games, I agree sometimes EQ was just too tough, but what I'm looking at in this line of thought is whether or not the toughness of the game before the raids was equivalent to the toughness of the raiding game.  I think part of the thing with EQ is they didn't really look at the raids as a separate thing or something that would develop and expand the way it did.

Geldon, interesting idea.  I like the general thought of a game that has the most drastic consequences for death, but advancement is fast enough so you can hit max level in a week or two.  And Tele, I don't really see the point of removing all reliance on other players - why have an MMO then?  I'm not sure I agree with forced grouping - I even soloed through most of my EQ levels by playing a Druid and a Bard, but removing all reliance on other players for all aspects of the game just seems like...playing a single player game.  What's the use of the other players, it's like, Oblivion.

In general I still think that the percentage of players who are idiots in raiding is proportionately higher in any game where raiding is generally harder than the rest of the game.  To bring in another example, FFXI is in some ways even more punishing than EQ was when you die.  I never made it as far as raiding in FFXI, but I've talked to those who have and the answers are similar, less idiots there than in WoW.  I don't think I've played any other games with raiding, at least not up to any noticeable level.  Anyone else seen any correlation between the ease of the pre-raid game and the idiots in raiding?

[edlavallee]

I think designing PvE games to be punishing is an absurd concept. Do you think corpse runs in EQ made game more fun for anyone?

Corpse runs sucked and sucked hard. But, it did give you a feeling of danger because you wanted to avoid that if at all possible. The result was that sweaty palm feeling of anticipation that I have missed since.

PvE with or without meaningful consequences for death?  Tough call.  Make death matter and it lends a feeling of accountability to the immesion, but at the burden of frustrating players.  Make death harmless and the players check their brains at the door before logging in.

Tell you what: Gimme a game with a 100x accelerated grind and permadeath.

The problem with that feeling of accountability is that players will keep their brains, but they'll bring their egos along as well - and I'd rather play with brain-dead goof-offs than people who think "what you do in the game actually matters" any day of the week.

The solution, IMHO, is to make death harmless and allow the players to be brainless - but then make it so that you're not typically relying on other players for your survival.

If you make death harmless, there is no fear. I need a sense of accomplishment to feel good about the time I have spent and no matter what level I have in a game, it is those times I have cheated death that I remember than the last "ding". I don't think it is a matter of "what I do in the game matters to you", I think it is "what I do in the game has consequences to me".

Shit, firedrill.

[Riggswolfe]

If you make death harmless, there is no fear. I need a sense of accomplishment to feel good about the time I have spent and no matter what level I have in a game, it is those times I have cheated death that I remember than the last "ding". I don't think it is a matter of "what I do in the game matters to you", I think it is "what I do in the game has consequences to me".

Shit, firedrill.

I'll be honest, this kind of player mentality pisses me off because it leads to corpse runs and other timesinks that I don't have time for. I don't find spending 15 minutes after I die getting back to where I started to be fun or to add to my sense of accomplishment. Fuck, I don't play these games for a sense of accomplishment, I play them for fun and the mechanics you EQ-vets like drive me up the wall. (I'm assumnig you're an EQ-vet simply because I see this in alot of people whose first major MMO was EQ.)

[Venkman]

That's exactly the point. These games already have significant barriers for players. Beyond time and subscription fee, what else do you need to reduce the number of players in this genre even more?

Screw death penalties. There's too many ways to die. Even if you've got perfect code, a pure internet connection, the servers are wonderful and the client PC is more babied than a 57 Chevy, characters will still die for reasons beyond the player's control. Because in any game including other players, every element connected to that player connects to everyone else.

CRs and potential item loss worked for us nuts who loved this genre more than logic should have let us, but there's better ways to facilitate social interaction than force people to be even more scared to log in at all (because logging in could lead to death and CRs and item loss).

It's not bad to want this stuff of course. Just don't expect this in games striving for some measure of popularity :)

[Jayce]

I don't play these games for a sense of accomplishment, I play them for fun and the mechanics you EQ-vets like drive me up the wall. (I'm assumnig you're an EQ-vet simply because I see this in alot of people whose first major MMO was EQ.)

I don't think it's endemic to EQ players or playstyles.  Ironically, this is a way in which EQ is more like UO than anything else.

In UO it was the PKs who would cause lost equipment/CR OR the sense of satisfaction from having successfully survived an encounter.  In EQ it was similarly difficult but it was "only" the environment causing it.

Just this thread alone shows a definite divide between those who welcome a steep failure slope for the accomplishment, and those who think they are nuts and can't imagine how that could be considered fun.  I don't really think it's casuals vs ubers either, because I'm casual in time commitment but I fall into the first camp.

I think that the two will never agree on one game, just because even if most of the game is easy but to get the best rewards you have to go through the difficult stuff, "easy-mode" players will complain because they aren't allowed the coolest stuff on account of their playstyle.

edit: Someone please come up with a good name for these two camps.  "easy-mode player" is pretty charged, I admit...

[Telemediocrity]

And Tele, I don't really see the point of removing all reliance on other players - why have an MMO then?

Because if you feel like it, you can interact with other players in a persistent-world setting?  It seems almost like you're starting with the implicit assumption that other players are shitstains and you'd only interact with them if the game "forced" you to.

I need a sense of accomplishment to feel good about the time I have spent

We completely disagree on this fundamental level.  If you don't have guilt about the time you spend ingame, why is a sense of accomplishment in any way necessary?  You play all sorts of other games without a "sense of accomplishment" at the end - why not MMOs?

I think that the two will never agree on one game, just because even if most of the game is easy but to get the best rewards you have to go through the difficult stuff, "easy-mode" players will complain because they aren't allowed the coolest stuff on account of their playstyle.

Why not just give the best rewards to easier players as well - offer them the proverbial soloable or duo-able version of Blackwing Lair?

Because if you do that, and the only reason to do the 40 man raid is because you really want to do a 40 man raid rather than making people feel compelled/coerced to, almost nobody will do the 40 man raids.  I'd argue that the vast majority of people who do 40 man raids don't find them fun; they just want the best stuff (And on a less generous note, some of them only want the best stuff if the best stuff will stay rare, so that they can wave their e-peen around).  If you made those raids truly optional, the numbers would drop off dramatically.

I'm sorry if I come off sounding strident about this, but I truly believe that this whole idea that "harder difficulty should mean better reward" is a frame cooked up by the catasses.  There's no reason that a MMO has to operate that way.


Oh, and I also agree.  Camp names, please.

"Climb the Mountain" players vs "Enjoy the Ride" players?

"Mountain-climbers" vs "Vacationers"?

[Jayce]

I'm sorry if I come off sounding strident about this, but I truly believe that this whole idea that "harder difficulty should mean better reward" is a frame cooked up by the catasses.  There's no reason that a MMO has to operate that way.

Accomplishment is what some people consider fun, no matter how grueling the game.  For an RL example, you said it - mountain climbers.  Do you really think climbing Everest is an enjoyable experience?  Yet, people do it.  It's not that these people feel guilty unless they have some sort of accomplishment, they feel like they didn't have any fun.  Disneyland is just not appealing to them.

The idea behind the sense of accomplishment is that you take something inherently difficult and conquer it, because it's there.  If there is a junior version of content with the same rewards, it's no longer inherently difficult.  You just turned from someone who likes a challenge into a masochist, which I admit is a fine distinction, but an important one.

[Telemediocrity]

The idea behind the sense of accomplishment is that you take something inherently difficult and conquer it, because it's there.  If there is a junior version of content with the same rewards, it's no longer inherently difficult.  You just turned from someone who likes a challenge into a masochist, which I admit is a fine distinction, but an important one.

This, I think, is an interesting line to go down.  Climbing Everest vs Climbing Everquest.

I'm not sure your "if there's a junior version with the same rewards" analogy holds up, though.

Climbing Everest nets you nothing except... the sense of having succeeded at something difficult.

Climbing a smaller mountain nets you nothing.

Doing the 40 man raid nets you UberGear, and the sense of having succeeded at something difficult.

Doing the hypothetical 2 man raid nets you UberGear.

In the Everest example, the only difference between Everest and the smaller mountain is the sense of accomplishment.  And yet, people still climb Everest.

If people would stop doing the 40 man raid if the rewards could be obtained in an easier fashion, there are then 2 possible explanations for why people stop:

1.  They weren't really having fun in the first place, and just felt like they "needed" the gear.  They won't be disappointed if you can get the gear in an easier fashion.

2.  They were doing it for the sense of accomplishment, but their sense of accomplishment is directly tied to the rarity of the gear, and so even if it was a hard battle they lack the sense of accomplishment because they could have gotten the gear elsewhere easier.  They don't want the gear to be easier to obtain.

Via Occam's Razor, I'm willing to bet that the majority of 40-man raiders are group 1, not group 2, and would appreciate an easier way to get the gear.



On a side note - I'm doing an "accomplishment for the sense of accomplishment" feat right now in Asheron's Call - levelling up a character entirely via quests, using no spoiler-sites or buffbots and no magic skills, and only using quest gear/weapons/armor.  I've spent the last two months playing my guy.  I don't feel that my accomplishment is lessened simply because someone could have used loot gear and buffbots and uber hunting grounds and had a character that's more powerful in a single day.  I do it because it's fun regardless of what other people get or don't get.

[Morat20]

In the Everest example, the only difference between Everest and the smaller mountain is the sense of accomplishment.  And yet, people still climb Everest.

Far more people -- a thousand times more --  climb smaller mountains every year than climb Everest. Some people obviously feel it's a waste of time to climb anything but Everest, but I note that the people who feel that way tend not to climb mountains at all.

[tazelbain]

"Brock... you're fired..."

[Venkman]

And Tele, I don't really see the point of removing all reliance on other players - why have an MMO then?

Think beyond the directed-play experience. There's other ways for players to feel "together". They could be off playing their own games and only come together for community and economy. The dynamics of these alone are "massive" in their own way. It's only the diku-inspired games of the last eight years that drive this impression that the only way people come to together is if they're forced to play the exact same game, in a hive-mind sort of way.

That's the reason why MMORPGs mostly appeal to a specific type of player within the total gaming community.

[Morat20]

And Tele, I don't really see the point of removing all reliance on other players - why have an MMO then?

Think beyond the directed-play experience. There's other ways for players to feel "together". They could be off playing their own games and only come together for community and economy. The dynamics of these alone are "massive" in their own way. It's only the diku-inspired games of the last eight years that drive this impression that the only way people come to together is if they're forced to play the exact same game, in a hive-mind sort of way.

That's the reason why MMORPGs mostly appeal to a specific type of player within the total gaming community.

There are players in EVE who rarely interact with anyone outside of the market -- or who spend all their time 'troid fucking, or on hour-long treks across the universe with trade goods. There were players in SWG who NEVER interacted with anyone other than their vendors and harvestors (save for posting hunting contracts). A friend of mine spends more time day-trading the AH in WoW than he does doing instances or quests.

Games have more players, and happier players, the more playstyles they allow. Stuff like the WoW fishing tournament draw in suprising number of players who otherwise might not have logged on that day.

"Massively Multiplayer" merely means inhabiting the same online reality -- it doesn't necessarily require interaction. I find WoW one-dimensional (if a well-done one dimension) because it lacks a lot those 'mini-games'. No high-end gear to craft, no homes to decorate, no real tools for trading (and not enough markets to do so -- crafting once again), no poker or gambling -- the new Arenas in TBC might flesh that out a bit, though.

The more "Games" you pack into an MMORPG, the bigger your potential world (and audience) can be. Of course, you can go too far -- too much scope, not enough polish. You either get crap, or something so confusing or muddled only the dedicated will search out the nuggets of fun. 

[edlavallee]

Crap... I have started this reply at least 3 times only to have fire drills and sstaff meetings interrupt me...

I need a sense of accomplishment to feel good about the time I have spent

We completely disagree on this fundamental level.  If you don't have guilt about the time you spend ingame, why is a sense of accomplishment in any way necessary?  You play all sorts of other games without a "sense of accomplishment" at the end - why not MMOs?

Name a few, because I am not sure I agree at all. I play all kinds of games and each one of them has a sense of accomplishment, no matter if it is self imposed or part of the game dynamic.

If you make death harmless, there is no fear. I need a sense of accomplishment to feel good about the time I have spent and no matter what level I have in a game, it is those times I have cheated death that I remember than the last "ding". I don't think it is a matter of "what I do in the game matters to you", I think it is "what I do in the game has consequences to me".

Shit, firedrill.

I'll be honest, this kind of player mentality pisses me off because it leads to corpse runs and other timesinks that I don't have time for. I don't find spending 15 minutes after I die getting back to where I started to be fun or to add to my sense of accomplishment. Fuck, I don't play these games for a sense of accomplishment, I play them for fun and the mechanics you EQ-vets like drive me up the wall. (I'm assumnig you're an EQ-vet simply because I see this in alot of people whose first major MMO was EQ.)

Don't assume I meant that I wanted corpse runs or that I am an EQ catass type. Pretty far from the truth actually. I meant there should be some penalty for dying because without one there is no cost for failure. Without a meaningful failure, there is no meaningful success. If I win everytime no matter what I do, where is the fun in that? Sounds like a recipe for immediate boredom.

Maybe its just that we don't have a common definition for the word "accomplishment", because I cannot see how you can have fun in a game if you have no way of measuring or tracking accomplishment (and I still mean by my own mechanism or by some game imposed mechanic).

[Venkman]

I've long been fine with the penalty of death being nothing more than needing to do something over, after first traveling back to that location. Why can't we integrate some of what the Consoles have done for ages with their save points? That's effectively what we've got with games like WoW and GW anyway. Death is having lost, having to repair stuff, having to maybe run back and rez, or to rez your entire party. The penalty is already there, in the form of Time lost. What else is needed? How is adding yet another penalty beyond this anything more than arbitrary and punitive?

Games have more players, and happier players, the more playstyles they allow. Stuff like the WoW fishing tournament draw in suprising number of players who otherwise might not have logged on that day.

A good point; however, once you get past that momentary exception, the core single-focus experience that WoW comes back. SWG and Eve are better examples, as you note, because the games within them are truly different from each other. Crafting is not mining is not ratting is not bounty hunting. However, because of the types of total experiences they are, the barrier is still pretty high, because all of those activities require a semi-fierce dedication if you wish to have some sort of relevant sense of place in comparison to other people doing the same activities.

I'm talking about environments that don't have games where success is measured by time, something more open ended. It's why I go back to Neopets. There's very little that connects players to each other beyond the trade-based economy and the sharing e-peen waving of trophies. But for them, it's more than enough.

[sinij]

One fun bit out of social psychology - different groups of college students were asked to do repetitive and mindless tasks for $20 payoff.

First group was asked to do it for 15 minutes before they were paid, when questioned most replied that it was boring but was worth it for $20.

Second group did the same task but for 3 hours, when questioned most replied that they found competing task 'challenging' and that they ‘earned’ their reward.

Third group was asked to do the average number of repetitions with the same task as Second group did, most of them replied that task was ‘extremely boring’ and $20 was too little pay for their time.

Moral of the story – internal motivation can make you do stupid shit for prolonged time and feel good about it.

[Morat20]

A good point; however, once you get past that momentary exception, the core single-focus experience that WoW comes back. SWG and Eve are better examples, as you note, because the games within them are truly different from each other. Crafting is not mining is not ratting is not bounty hunting. However, because of the types of total experiences they are, the barrier is still pretty high, because all of those activities require a semi-fierce dedication if you wish to have some sort of relevant sense of place in comparison to other people doing the same activities.

Well, I was more making the case for expanding the game past the basic Diku kill-loot-heal-repeat process. Not getting rid of it, but adding either totally seperate or complimentary "games".

Kill-loot-repeat is a "mini-game". So is "gather-craft-sell". The two are generally bundled together -- generally with the crafting to make the killing easier/quicker and get you better loot or make you a better killer. But that neglects the notion that crafting -- to the folks that like it -- is more of a compelling game than "kill-loot-repeat". So is "trading" and other market manipulations. So is PvP. So is socializing. So is making money, decorating homes -- all that crap. Gambling, games-within-a-game -- it's too often neglected.

MMORPGs don't have to be just an MMO version of a RPG with the kill-loot-repeat concept. Why not add in some of the Sims (building of homes)? Throw in some of Railroad Tycoon (making money/crafting/building). Don't make any of it necessary -- don't force someone there to PvE to grind crafting to get his kills on. But don't make the crafter do the same.

You've got people in WoW who organize naked elf footraces, or daytrade on the AH, or create mods to allow them to play poker. Why the hell not put some of that directly in the game?

I think WoW has polished the Diku model so thoroughly that I think it's time to branch out. Integrate that polished combat component into something bigger. More varied. Nothing you have to do, but with choices to take all sorts of paths. What harm is there in having some fierce craftards working their ass off on a crafting mini-game you find mind-numbling boring? Best case, their fierce competition means high-quality crafted goods (at a low price) to supplement your killing. Or gambling? Heck, I'd love to supplement my gold supply by teaching idiots not to try to fill inside straights. :)

[stray]

I think WoW has polished the Diku model so thoroughly that I think it's time to branch out.

high-quality crafted goods

WoW is so fubar'ed in this respect, there's no point in even talking about it. I mean, you pretty much have to be a raiding-oriented player to get the best recipes (and there aren't that many good ones to begin with). Crafting will never branch out into something on it's own.

[Morat20]

I think WoW has polished the Diku model so thoroughly that I think it's time to branch out.

high-quality crafted goods

WoW is so fubar'ed in this respect, there's no point in even talking about it. I mean, you pretty much have to be a raiding-oriented player to get the best recipes (and there aren't that many good ones to begin with). Crafting will never branch out into something on it's own.

I didn't mean to imply WoW had high-quality crafted goods -- I was thinking more of the SWG model in that respect. WoW's crafting is an afterthought -- my only goal with crafting is to accumulate all the recipes for a given profession. Mostly, however, I simply make something to supplement my gear until I find something better.

Well, my alchemist is a bit different -- but that's a consumable. WoW's crafting does suck -- about the only real fun is the Gnomish engineering line, because you can get some fun trinkets. :)

[stray]

I think WoW has polished the Diku model so thoroughly that I think it's time to branch out.

high-quality crafted goods

WoW is so fubar'ed in this respect, there's no point in even talking about it. I mean, you pretty much have to be a raiding-oriented player to get the best recipes (and there aren't that many good ones to begin with). Crafting will never branch out into something on it's own.

I didn't mean to imply WoW had high-quality crafted goods

I didn't mean to imply to that you implied that :).  My point was more about your comment about WoW "branching out". I don't think Blizzard could do that even if they wanted to. A lot of things are integrated with and serve the needs of one gameplay type and playerbase. If you alter it, you'll either break something or piss all of these other shitheads off. Or both.

Would be nice if they learned their lesson when designing another, future, MMO however. But then again, what lesson do they really have to learn? The formula they've used has worked out extremely well for them.

[Hellinar]

"Mountain-climbers" vs "Vacationers"?

Maybe “Travelers” vs “Vacationers”? One big divide is between people who come to MMOGs to play in the moment, and those who play with the past/future in mind. For the former, they are just looking for fun “now”, and to walk away from it unchanged. A vacation. Something that doesn’t leave much mark on your past, or any consequence in your future.

But the online worlds that MMOGs create can provide adventures that change something about how you see the world. Which is what I think of the purpose of ‘traveling’, as opposed to just vacationing, is. Really adventurous travel has its tough moments, but that is a big part of expanding what you know about yourself. In a real adventure, you end up somewhere else than where you started, and someone else from who you started.

I can only assume that people who are looking for pure non-stop fun have never experienced that in MMORPG world, and don’t know what they are missing. Some people on this board seem to get it, and some don’t. And as for the people looking for a bigger sword to expand their e-peen, well that’s another dimension entirely.