Vanguard Round 2 - Post Mortem

[Venkman]

If your game is solid state (ala Monopoly), you don't need to leverage your community. But MMOs rules change all the time because of your players. Consider the players the game pawns, sometimes controlling themselves. If you dictate to them everything, you end up with a contrived experience that allows for no user creativity, like EQ2 at launch, and you drive them away.

You can't just talk to them in one way though. You need a talented staff to know what information should be elevated to development and what should simply be "managed" :)

[Sky]

I admit I did consider EQ2 while I was writing that, but I left it off because it's the only example I can think of where a game improved over time due to community feedback, and I'd lay more credit to the excellent team working on it.

And totally wtfpwned by Cal. Ok, running official forums is a waste, and having an ingame forum (GM paging) for bitching, RTFM moments, and calling mom on people is On Notice.

[ajax34i]

Game designers design games. Players play games.

If the developers want to establish that attitude, then fine, I'll play the game, but I won't feel the least bit enticed to improve the game in any way (for example, reporting bugs, reporting exploits, reporting macro players).  After all, I'm completely disconnected from the "development" process and they've made it clear that they want me to only pay and play.

Make a bug report. Then shut the fuck up and play the game.

I've just quit EVE over a couple bugs.  I just had enough of that piece of shit game, and quit.  The bugs were minor, and I guess CCP (correctly) decided to indefinitely postpone fixing them, because there was always a more important bug requiring their attention.  For 3 years.

The whining on the forums provides (a little) feedback about which "minor" features are more important to the players than one would think.  Without some sort of feedback like that, the option is "shut the fuck up, and play the game or quit."  Smaller playerbase.  Actually, it's probably a business question:  what percentage of your profit is eaten by maintaining boards and community relations people, vs. what percentage of your playerbase you'll theoretically lose if you don't have said features.

[Rodivar]

I admit I did consider EQ2 while I was writing that, but I left it off because it's the only example I can think of where a game improved over time due to community feedback, and I'd lay more credit to the excellent team working on it.

And totally wtfpwned by Cal. Ok, running official forums is a waste, and having an ingame forum (GM paging) for bitching, RTFM moments, and calling mom on people is On Notice.

EQ1 was the same thing.  Players provided feedback that the developers used to help figure things out.  A post was made over at FOH yesterday it was a discussion from a EQ1 dev who outlined how valuable the players insight into the game really was.  Much of the balancing in EQ1 was done by "feel" for many reasons.  One being the teams work schedule, players soon played more and knew how things felt and worked better than the designers.

[Calandryll]

I admit I did consider EQ2 while I was writing that, but I left it off because it's the only example I can think of where a game improved over time due to community feedback, and I'd lay more credit to the excellent team working on it.

At the risk of invoking a bunch of Trammel hate, I can name a ton of stuff that was improved or added to UO because of player feedback. Runebooks, Potion Kegs, House lockdown system, most of the veteran rewards and holiday gifts, etc. And that's just off the top of my head.

At the end of the day it's the development team's job to improve the game as a whole. But the players can certainly play a vital role in helping to improve the aspects of the game they care about if the team does a good job sifting through the feedback. The trick is to have people who know how to push through the noise to get to the signal - because the signal, once you find it, is invaluable. The problem occurs when teams don't do that and start listening to the noise or ignore everything all together. Niether one of those things is good for the community or the game.

Edit: oh and Sky, I'm with you on the in-game help button. It's like giving people a button on their remote control that summons someone from the cable company so they can tell them they don't like the show they are watching. I don't have the answer, and I am a huge proponent of providing quality support for players, but I've never liked the in-game support model.

[Rodivar]

BTW, Even Monopoly changed, the original game didn't include pieces for players to use, they were instructed to use common household objects. 

After little jimmy's  mom complained how difficult it was to play using marbles they decided to include pieces.

[Nyght]

After little jimmy's  mom complained how difficult it was to play using marbles they decided to include game peices.

Oh well, that explains it. Fucking Trammlite Carebear Monopoly Moms.

 :-D

[Kageru]

The most amusing part is that brad seems to believe the "viral marketing" effects of him pontificating, and getting shot down, on message boards will work in the games favor. I'm not sure a skilled CM could really do much more, other than damage control and confirm that the game really doesn't have any idea of what it wants to grow up to be. The really scary thing is that even if the game were up to launch spec, lands fully populated, bugs removed and performance decent, it would still be a pretty boring game. A random collection of gameplay mechanics with the fun to be patched in later.

[Margalis]

The bottom line is they are incompetent. Incompetent programmers, incompetent designers, incompetent communicators, incompetent artists.

It's like people with the proficiency of the SWG team tried to make a really boring game - VG is the result. A bad idea done badly.

[Slayerik]

After little jimmy's  mom complained how difficult it was to play using marbles they decided to include game peices.

Oh well, that explains it. Fucking Trammlite Carebear Monopoly Moms.

 :-D

Thanks for the sig :)

[Cheddar]

I thought it was spelled Callandryl.  as in 1 l.  Hrmph.

Also, my desire to try out VG ran out this morning; I estimate it was sometime between when I took a shit and when I shaved.  Maybe around the time I wiped my ass?

[Sky]

EQ1 was the same thing.  Players provided feedback that the developers used to help figure things out.  A post was made over at FOH yesterday it was a discussion from a EQ1 dev who outlined how valuable the players insight into the game really was.  Much of the balancing in EQ1 was done by "feel" for many reasons.  One being the teams work schedule, players soon played more and knew how things felt and worked better than the designers.

I said /improved/. I feel EQ1 got shittier as time went on and they developed for the hardcore. EQ2 has developed for the hardcore /and/ casuals.

At the risk of invoking a bunch of Trammel hate, I can name a ton of stuff that was improved or added to UO because of player feedback. Runebooks, Potion Kegs, House lockdown system, most of the veteran rewards and holiday gifts, etc. And that's just off the top of my head.

Trammel! Seriously, can't be discussed without saying it. It began the downward slide that led to ninjas, itemization and all the garbage UO devolved into. While some improvements were made, the overall game suffered.

If the developers want to establish that attitude, then fine, I'll play the game, but I won't feel the least bit enticed to improve the game in any way (for example, reporting bugs, reporting exploits, reporting macro players).  After all, I'm completely disconnected from the "development" process and they've made it clear that they want me to only pay and play.

So if you don't get a little pat on the head, it's not worth your time? Your bug reports are still valid and improve your own gaming experience. Your face will sure be spited once you lop off your nose.

I'm not sure where you get the idea developers would be 'establishing' that attitude. That's been the dominant attitude in game development going back to chess. Maybe in your playground games where you make up rules on the fly, but in professional game development, the amount of player feedback engendered by mmo is unprecedented.

[shiznitz]

Back to VG, recall to house plot was patched in yesterday. If you buy a plot, the ability appears in your General Abilities tab. You do not need ot have a house built to use it. It is on a separate 1 hour timer from the recall to bind ability (1 hour timer) which is on a separate timer from the evac spells Arcane casters get.

On the adventuring front, last night my 9 psionicist (damage+CC) grouped with a 11 pally and a 11 ranger. We fought level 9-11 mobs in Riftseeker's Torrent. We took down a few 11**** mobs. I was impressed how well we did without a healer although we could not have beaten the 4-dots without the pally who kept himself healed in battle which generated enough aggro for me to mana dump with impunity. Each 4-dot fight was close (pally and ranger down to 25% or less health) but fun. The group broke up when the pally died 10 seconds after the fight from a DoT since only the healer archetype can rezz. I don't know if the pally got careless (likeliest scenario since he had mana) or was timed out on his heals.

So, the holy trinity - while still optimal in VG - is not mandated. I won a yellow drop!

[WayAbvPar]

Back to VG, recall to house plot was patched in yesterday. If you buy a plot, the ability appears in your General Abilities tab. You do not need ot have a house built to use it. It is on a separate 1 hour timer from the recall to bind ability (1 hour timer) which is on a separate timer from the evac spells Arcane casters get.

That is remarkably non-cockblock-ish. Although the fact that it wasn't introduced at the same time as housing is equally remarkable.

[Falconeer]

Back to VG, recall to house plot was patched in yesterday.

That's good news.

[Hutch]

Also getting back to the original topic, here is an official housing video.

I wonder if actual players can ride around on winged mounts yet.

The houses in that video looked a little more expensive than the ones in this thread. They had windows, for one thing.

[Engels]

I wonder if actual players can ride around on winged mounts yet.

Well if you mean wether the mechanics are there, then the answer is yes, since everyone in Beta got a chance to do so. As to anyone high enough level to do what's needed for it, I've no clue.

[Rithrin]

I seem to recall some people in my guild at lvl 30 or so telling me that they were about to get their gryphon mounts. This was before I quit, so about a month ago. And since this was on the FFA PVP server, I'd bet there were dozens more on the PVE servers who got them. If I recall, it was something like +600% movement speed in flight, and ~+200% ground speed on the gryphons.

[Engels]

Don't believe the hype. I play every day and I have yet to see a single solitary one.

[Hutch]

Vanguard Team Discovers the Secret of Fighting RMT!

The secret? Have a small subscription base. Easier to police a smaller group.

I kid, I kid. My favorite quote though:

With your help we have already banned more than 7 00 gold selling, powerleveling and solicitation accounts used by various organizations.

It's hard to tell whether 7 00 is supposed to represent 700, 7000, or $7.00.

[shiznitz]

On Test: no more corpse recovery. Instead, EQ2's initial essence system. You leave a ghost corpse with some exp on it but you keep all your items when you respawn.

Next month (just speculating): item attunement.

Looks like the EQ2 team is already bandaging VG, either in spirit or in person.

[HaemishM]

With your help we have already banned more than 7 00 gold selling, powerleveling and solicitation accounts used by various organizations.

It's hard to tell whether 7 00 is supposed to represent 700, 7000, or $7.00.

Any one of those numbers would be a major blow to Vanguard.

[Jayce]

Speaking from a position of total ignorance, all this looks like an NGE-like thing to me.  Sacrifice the core values of your game (no easy mode travel, corpse recovery included, etc) to make it more like everyone else in the hopes that it draws in more people from everywhere else.

What ends up happening is people who never liked your game still don't like it, and the ones that did like it at one point no longer like it because it's too much like that other game that they never liked.

[Sky]

That's the new metrics, I think. Are you going to NGE it or EQ2 it? One way lies heartache, the other lies a sustainable and improved game. I think they are good moves, once they finally give up on the stupid essence half-assed measure. Remove some of the group dependencies and I'll start warming up to VG.

Of course, no game designer wanting to make BIG MONEY should ever listen to me. I'm a dirty soloer.

[Azazel]

It's sounding more and more EQ2-like all the time.

But why would you play VG as it becomes more and more EQ2-like, when you could just play EQ2 instead?

[Trippy]

That's the new metrics, I think. Are you going to NGE it or EQ2 it? One way lies heartache, the other lies a sustainable and improved game. I think they are good moves, once they finally give up on the stupid essence half-assed measure. Remove some of the group dependencies and I'll start warming up to VG.

Neither strategy has worked for SOE so I wouldn't say that the EQ2 method is any better. If you look at the server list for EQ2 in the US you can see that they have not added *any* new PvE servers since launch and in fact had to merge some servers a while back and the number of PvP servers that they've added is fewer than the number of PvE server that they shut down, so the game is treading water at best. In other words all the good work they've put into the game since launch still has not overcome the incredibly crappy first impression people got with the game. Vanguard has exactly the same problem.

[Lear]

Then shut the fuck up and play the game.

Despite the overly wise things said in response to this, an MMO where I clicked on the "customer service" tab and got a flashing message to Shut the Fuck up and play the game would have a strangely warm place in my heart.

Guess that is why I am waiting for Conan.

[Sky]

Neither strategy has worked for SOE so I wouldn't say that the EQ2 method is any better. If you look at the server list for EQ2 in the US you can see that they have not added *any* new PvE servers since launch and in fact had to merge some servers a while back and the number of PvP servers that they've added is fewer than the number of PvE server that they shut down, so the game is treading water at best. In other words all the good work they've put into the game since launch still has not overcome the incredibly crappy first impression people got with the game. Vanguard has exactly the same problem.

I'm not so sure. If only we had a SOE poster ;) Seems to me EQ2 is stable, rather than treading water. I wonder how much the Station Pass helps their portfolio, and conversely, how much the price hike is going to destroy their base. Using PvP servers as a metric for ANYTHING in a game designed for PvE is kinda ridiculous. I wish companies would stop wasting their time and lots of resources (not to mention fucking with the PvE balancing to 'fix' PvP balancing) catering PvP, but at least I can ignore it because it's on an entirely seperate server. Hey...maybe we need SOLO SERVERS with NO elite/^^^x2/whatever mobs. That would rock my world, and you'd get at least as much response as PvP servers get...

Remember, I really couldn't stand EQ2 at launch, and I gave it another shot because I knew there was a good game in there somewhere. It's still not what I would call my ideal game (^^^x2), but I think it's the best mmo out there right now. Seriously (and yeah, I like WoW ok, too (except that Elite nonsense).

I think VG misunderestimated how many 'hardcore' players are out there, or maybe just how sticky they are with their guilds in a game where they can have the support of a massive cadre of casuals.

[shiznitz]

Well, I have been sucked back into Vanguard and actually re-subbed to Station Pass. I am probablyt kidding myself that I will play Planetside but I intend to.

What changed with VG? I moved my character from the empty land of eastern Thestra to central Thestra. There are actually people around and while it is hard to get a full group, it isn't hard to find one or two people. That is enough to do 90% of quests so far. The spell/skill trainers are also never more than 5-10 minutes of travel away, either.

I also must admit that my guildmates with multiple characters in the 30s are being generous with gear so I haven't had equipment upgrade issues.

[Slayerik]

Neither strategy has worked for SOE so I wouldn't say that the EQ2 method is any better. If you look at the server list for EQ2 in the US you can see that they have not added *any* new PvE servers since launch and in fact had to merge some servers a while back and the number of PvP servers that they've added is fewer than the number of PvE server that they shut down, so the game is treading water at best. In other words all the good work they've put into the game since launch still has not overcome the incredibly crappy first impression people got with the game. Vanguard has exactly the same problem.

I'm not so sure. If only we had a SOE poster ;) Seems to me EQ2 is stable, rather than treading water. I wonder how much the Station Pass helps their portfolio, and conversely, how much the price hike is going to destroy their base. Using PvP servers as a metric for ANYTHING in a game designed for PvE is kinda ridiculous. I wish companies would stop wasting their time and lots of resources (not to mention fucking with the PvE balancing to 'fix' PvP balancing) catering PvP, but at least I can ignore it because it's on an entirely seperate server. Hey...maybe we need SOLO SERVERS with NO elite/^^^x2/whatever mobs. That would rock my world, and you'd get at least as much response as PvP servers get...

Remember, I really couldn't stand EQ2 at launch, and I gave it another shot because I knew there was a good game in there somewhere. It's still not what I would call my ideal game (^^^x2), but I think it's the best mmo out there right now. Seriously (and yeah, I like WoW ok, too (except that Elite nonsense).

I think VG misunderestimated how many 'hardcore' players are out there, or maybe just how sticky they are with their guilds in a game where they can have the support of a massive cadre of casuals.

Yeah because PvE doesn't get enough catering to.  If you are going to 'tack on' PVP should you not try to balance the game accordingly? Mobs dont bitch when classes are overpowered in PvE. Poor schmuck with underpowered class #1 does in PvP.

Elite nonsense? You claim to be a PvEr and you cant get one friend to help you kill elites? Or would you like to be able to solo everything, get equal XP and items as those that have to coordinate and beat encounters?

[Hartsman]

Neither strategy has worked for SOE so I wouldn't say that the EQ2 method is any better. If you look at the server list for EQ2 in the US you can see that they have not added *any* new PvE servers since launch and in fact had to merge some servers a while back and the number of PvP servers that they've added is fewer than the number of PvE server that they shut down, so the game is treading water at best. In other words all the good work they've put into the game since launch still has not overcome the incredibly crappy first impression people got with the game. Vanguard has exactly the same problem.

I'm not so sure. If only we had a SOE poster ;) Seems to me EQ2 is stable, rather than treading water. I wonder how much the Station Pass helps their portfolio, and conversely, how much the price hike is going to destroy their base. Using PvP servers as a metric for ANYTHING in a game designed for PvE is kinda ridiculous. I wish companies would stop wasting their time and lots of resources (not to mention fucking with the PvE balancing to 'fix' PvP balancing) catering PvP, but at least I can ignore it because it's on an entirely seperate server. Hey...maybe we need SOLO SERVERS with NO elite/^^^x2/whatever mobs. That would rock my world, and you'd get at least as much response as PvP servers get...

Remember, I really couldn't stand EQ2 at launch, and I gave it another shot because I knew there was a good game in there somewhere. It's still not what I would call my ideal game (^^^x2), but I think it's the best mmo out there right now. Seriously (and yeah, I like WoW ok, too (except that Elite nonsense).

If only, indeed!

EQ2 definitely averages around stability, with the standard live MMO caveats: As other games launch stuff, or as showstopper single player games come out, some of your people stop playing to check it out.  Lots of them come back.  Occasionally they bring more friends with them when they do. (We like when people do that.)

We have two growth triggers:  A) new expansions and B) adding new live content.  The first one is the bigger impact, though PvP was a great growth trigger as well.  EoF (exp3) was a good one in that it caused a lot of returns to the game and also had the added advantage of putting an all-in-one box (base + expansions) on the shelves for a reasonable price for the first time.  This is something the team fought hard to convince people was a good idea, and will continue to fight to keep on doing with future releases.  It's too good an idea to not do, and it cleans up the retail presence nicely. (No scatterings of 10 different SKUs in the stores, and no confusion what people need to buy to play.  Buy "The Box" and you're set.)

The PvE merges that we did in the one pass happened for reasons I've posted about in the past:  Yes, there were absolutely some losses of people whose expectations of an "EQ" game weren't met.  (Hello, archetypes, rigidly structured gameplay with a single success path, full groups required before leaving town, et al.) 

However, the bigger one was that with the accelerated release schedule (2 expansions + 2 adventure packs in approximately 1 year), the growth of the world's playspace significantly outpaced the growth of the audience.  The audience size was "mostly stable," after the falloff of disappointed initial adopters, but the world kept getting bigger.  The merges were as much about correcting population density as they were about anything else.  That period of EQ2 may have been the most rapid world-size expansion for any MMO for a given 14 months on a calendar.  Definitely the largest I've been involved with.


Re: ^ ^^ ^^^ x2 x3 x4 HEROIC EPIC WTF

If there was one thing that a lot of us wish we could change, it would be that.  There's really no reason that any game system needs twelve gradiations of anything inside each level, all having different meanings.  Unfortunately, that one's always been too deep in the system and too involved to address reasonably.  Whenever you launch a game, you have some things that will most likely be around forever because the cost of fixing them is so high.  (e.g. invent new system, repopulate and replaytest whole world, which keeps growing while you're doing it.) 

Yes, a number of us who joined the team late in the dev cycle knew the issues this would cause, but we had a fixed release date to meet.  If you do get extra time on games, you tend to get it in chunks measured in weeks/months, which means that retooling of the type that really needs to get done, tends not to based on the consecutive time commitment required to even take the first step.  (e.g. 6 more months is harder to get than 8 weeks, 3 times).   When you're faced with that, you make your choices.  This would have had to change, ideally, before population began. 

Given that, we at least started using it a bit more smartly in that not all 12 distinctions are used.  You tend to see 4 or 5 used commonly, which is more in line with what we felt at the time people might be familiar with given that there were other games using similar mechanic (only using word descriptions) that had a similar number of strengths-per-level-of-NPC in the world.

All that said, the upside with this system is that it let us do more interesting things with varying #'s of NPCs in single encounters.  Sometimes one enemy is tuned to be a challenge for a soloist, but we can very easily make packs of 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc NPCs that are also solo content, so solo combat isn't just "single creature after single creature" ad infinitum, which is still a valuable tool to have available, it just needs to be used carefully to avoid causing more confusion than it's worth.

- Scott

[shiznitz]

Nothing is more fun than those encounters of 6 or 8 double down arrow mobs. One thing dikus really need to work on is larger encounters. It just feels more heroic to beat 10 weak mobs instead of 1 strong one.

[Hartsman]

Nothing is more fun than those encounters of 6 or 8 double down arrow mobs. One thing dikus really need to work on is larger encounters. It just feels more heroic to beat 10 weak mobs instead of 1 strong one.

I'm glad you said that -- That's really what a lot of the population changes came down to.   There were lots of cries of "Wowification" early on, but it's funny in that WoW in particular wasn't the drive.  It was us asking the question "How can we make people feel more heroic?"   

Killing 10 skeletons charging at you in a solo-content instance (of which WoW doesn't even have an analogue, still) just feels a hell of a lot cooler than walking outside Freeport and getting wtfpwned by a 6-man-required beetle.

[Sky]

Yeah because PvE doesn't get enough catering to.  If you are going to 'tack on' PVP should you not try to balance the game accordingly? Mobs dont bitch when classes are overpowered in PvE. Poor schmuck with underpowered class #1 does in PvP.

Elite nonsense? You claim to be a PvEr and you cant get one friend to help you kill elites? Or would you like to be able to solo everything, get equal XP and items as those that have to coordinate and beat encounters?

Hey man, I love pvp. While I was in a guild way back in EQ 2000, the last clan I was with was for BF1942, and I totally loved it. PvP rocks. PvP in MMO tends to suck outside Planetside. Because diku is good for PvE. I just don't think it should be tacked on, thus necessitating the balancing issues get addressed. Of course if they tack it on, balance needs to be addressed. But there was a decent discussion about this somewhere else around here, with a split between the pve and pvp code so you wouldn't need to put pvp changes into the pve game and vice-versa.

There were lots of cries of "Wowification" early on, but it's funny in that WoW in particular wasn't the drive.  

It's not a Wowification, it's a Cohification :) CoH is hands-down the most heroic feeling game, still. And I think you meant 'wtfpwned by that (*&^#@ orc outside Freeport'. I hate that goddamned orc, finally killed him with my lvl 27 SK when he was -very- grey to me. Bah.

Backing up a bit, I wasn't really referring to the convoluted system of ^^^x2 (my shorthand for it), I just dislike the Elite mob idea in general. It's the reason I have teflon levels of stickiness for WoW, they shut my playstyle out of dungeons almost completely. I can see having Epic mobs like Vox or Innoruuk that require groups to raids. I can live without the tippy-top gear they drop (and the hellish game experience to get it). But being restricted to a few mobs in Blackburrow's front yard because I prefer to solo (for valid reasons)...that sucks. Same thing in WoW, I did one dungeon once (the newbie dungeon), because I had time and grouped. And it totally sucked (PUG hell). Just because a mob has a name and drops cool gear doesn't mean he should also get the ^^^x2WTF treatment.

[Signe]

Especially when melee is your preference.  Now and then, fighting some big old boss like baddie can make you feel great.  But too much of the I smack you, you smack me stuff just makes the game feel slow and grindy.  Battling 10 skellies and winning gives the game a quick and action-y feel, as long as the downtime after is minimal.  The one on one fights are good when you come to a bit in the story where it makes sense.  I enjoy when something leads up to that sort of confrontation.

I didn't like EQ2 a bit in beta.  It dragged.  Some time later, after the tidy up, I gave it another go and, to be honest, I couldn't believe the changes.  I had good fun in that game for quite a while and even went back for a bit after the last expansion and had some more fun.  I'll probably even play it again now and then.  I have nothing but good feelings towards the EQ2 crew.  (not pervy feelings!)  Vanguard, on the other hand....