Recent Comments:
Developer communication as it affects games {Massively}
Nov 16th 2009 2:47AM Communication is a hard one. To have really open communication, there should be dialog about the core goals of the developer and the strategies on how to get there. Often developers are not willing to share their goal, but rather ignore or defend their design.
For instance, if the goal is to have a player driven economy, one method to that is to have an auction house. Often developers dump the auction house on us players and defend or ignore it's shortcomings (if, say, there are some). Instead, they might communicate that they really want us players to have an economy and ask something like, "What do you need first of all in an auction house?"
MMOs are rather special in that you actually have a large base of players to solicit ideas from. And you can even have a huge ego doing it. If anything, we players want developers who have a clear goal and the drive to achieve it, which takes ego. However it appears to me that most developers get too invested in their methods to achieve the goals instead of constantly evaluating them and adjusting accordingly.
Another example. If someone says an ability is over powered, the developer might ask the community for their suggestions on how it can be balanced next to a similar or opposite ability. Let the community suggest ideas. Maybe some the developer actually implements, and maybe even gives credit for the help. Moderate the discussion without defending their system, but keeping the goal in sight. Basically - lead the masses.
That, to me, would be very cool communication.
MMOrigins: The play's the thing, too {Massively}
Nov 13th 2009 11:07PM Shame you missed the UO experience. I joined the "net" (before it was called the internet and was still a government run system with connections between collages - at least that is how I got my entry) back before MSDOS was really solid yet. I was running CPM (you have to be really old school to know that). I was only 7 and programming from BASIC BASIC. By the time I was 9 to 10, the C-64 was making early rounds and I was cracking software protection to hack games.
MMOs have always been a pull for me. Colleges had access to the early MUDs that were student programming projects for the most part, with only handful really known about and played. They started as projects to create very immersive worlds with a "Zork" like interface... all text for those of you who don't know that.
Even the first graphical MMOs, Ultima Online probably being the first "hit" in the MMO space, were aimed at creating worlds in which your avatar lived rather than gamed. Everquest still had quite a bit of that.
Yet over the last, what, 14 years or so since UO. MMOs have become more and more like games and less and less like simulated worlds. There are a few exceptions, like EVE. EVE does feel like a huge universe to be sure.
Yet most games, take Champions as a new one on the block, just lack substance. Log in and kill things. Don't need friends - solo it all. It is just about doing damage and avoiding damage. Perhaps collecting gear to do that better. Very little about socializing, teamwork, or "living" in a persistent world.
I'd like to see some of that old spirit from the BBS days (anyone remember BBS based table top games? Post your turn each day, heh) and the RP from LARPing and SCA and wrap that into an MMO world. I think in order for MMOs to become deep worlds where players can, once again, feel like they live there requires actual tools and gameplay elements for community. Like, rob the SIMS of some good ideas regarding non-combat gameplay for instance.
I guess I am saying that your article really reminds me how shallow MMOs have become after I read your rich background.
Subscribe to Age of Conan and receive The Secret World beta access {Massively}
Nov 13th 2009 12:49PM I know enough to know that beta is for development of a game. I know that selling spots to beta turns something that was, traditionally, a job of playtesters to a service that people are paying for.
No prophet, but I would be willing to bet you a solid $100 that when their beta launches, there will be plenty of complaining by people who bought into it who don't have the access they feel they deserve being a paid customer and all.
Cryptic is currently in that stage with Star Trek Online. They sold beta access to get people into Champions. Their beta thread with people wondering why they don't have access after 3 weeks is over 3700 posts long. Plus another few thousand other bitching in more threads. Clearly, it is a heated topic.
Personally, I think there are some better ways to spin special access to the game without trying to pimp beta spots. Leave the beta to people who really want to test and to the people who fit the demographics the developers need. At some point, similar to an open beta, let the special access people in.
Ask Engadget: Best multitouch monitor? {Engadget}
Nov 12th 2009 11:35PM I think I have to limit my touchscreen experiences to smaller portable devices I can quickly wipe on my pants legs to clean or maybe large cool displays like Microsoft Surface for the fun of it.
Otherwise, it is touch - clean - touch - clean - touch - clean... ugh. Might as well ask what the best monitor cleaner is to get greasy fingerprints off your multitouch monitor.
Will Star Trek Online be ready for its launch? {Massively}
Nov 12th 2009 1:30PM I don't think that the engine is the biggest hurdle in MMO development. In fact, there are plenty of software packages one can license to handle client/server code in an MMO. Look at the new Star Wars, Bioware even licensed HeroEngine for their game to give it a big jump start.
What I think STO lacks is solid testing. Cryptic isn't horrible about listening to their playerbase, but they are not that great either. The Champion Developer's egos and lack of solid play-testing time lead to a product that needed major fixes after launch. They actually said they didn't know because they needed the data from having all the players going - yet why did they make their beta 3-4 hours twice a week for months? They could have gotten that data ages before launch.
My confidence in Cryptic is 4/10 now. I think that STO will look nice and I feel, like Champions, it will start off pretty fun and cool. I am worried, like CO, it will lack depth beyond blowing things up in a very repetitive fashion. I worry it will be instance happy like Chapions (maybe even more so) creating more and more of a feeling that you are playing a single player game.
The big problem with massive single player games isn't that the game won't be fun, but the development time to make it a MMO could have been spent making a much better single player game. Take Dragon Age. Awesome game. The reason I love MMOs is because I love interacting with thousands of players. I love team-based play. Same reason I am so excited for Left for Dead 2 - fun team play!
STO = Rocky start with initally fun gameplay. A month later people will be reporting that the end game lacks and the game feels like it lacks depth. It will end up a fizzle with near-death blows given by the WoW expansion and Star Wars (BioWare, so far, looks to be doing it right).
Subscribe to Age of Conan and receive The Secret World beta access {Massively}
Nov 11th 2009 2:04PM Have people learned nothing from Cryptic?!?! Don't resub in hopes for beta access. That is a sad road to take.
Beta is always a limited volume and limited time event. By use beta access to help sell their game, they are selling you something that says "guaranteed" but really means: "At some point in the beta process, perhaps even the last day of open beta, you will get in. But you may not even get in then, because our servers might not handle you or you might in a login queue that is too long for you to wait. We might even run our beta servers for 3 hours from 8am to 11am that happens to be when you are working/sleeping/schooling or whatever"
Just head on over to the Star Trek Online forums and you can find thousands and thousands of posts from people who are still upset that they don't have their beta access they paid into.
@Funcom - you just signed up for a major PR mess. Way to go. You could have just blocked off a special month and called it something magical "supporter month" where you use a perk and let everyone in all at once then. Maybe even let the people keep their characters to the live servers.
Spouse Aggro explores Darkfall's self-imposed limitations {Massively}
Nov 10th 2009 2:50PM I like the basics of Darkfall (hate the interface). The thing it is missing for me is a system to enforce moral behavior.
The truth of a fully open world is that if you don't offer some mechanic for policing the world, it ends up lord of the flies. And that is fun for some, but does not build a strong world.
I don't mean a murder flag either. Ugh. I mean some sort of revenge system. The more you are ganked by someone, the more revenge points you get. These points can cause nasty revenges if they are built up. Like cursing a character for a set length of time to make them very week. Setting up trap spells that will 1-shot a huge offender if they come into an area they are banned from (say by players pooling their revenge points into the local town which then bans that player).
In the real world, we are afraid of death and often afraid of being locked up for months/years/life so we follow social rules. There is something about cause-effect that helps keep our moral compasses in line. So, MMO developers with open PvP really need to design systems to help keep those moral compasses in line!
Imagine if a hardcore greifer was cursed so that his next death was for good. Yup, perma-death. Sure, maybe he had to really piss off a lot of people to pool their revenge to cause such a powerful curse, but it would send that character off hiding. They might even loose a subscription - but one major ass gone will keep a dozen other players paying.
The Daily Grind: Is Warhammer Online doomed? {Massively}
Nov 10th 2009 2:38PM @Mark - You nailed it. There IS room for exceptional products. Also, to be clear, this does not mean exceptional budgets! Well executed games will sell very well.
The next big MMO will simply be one that is really fun. It won't matter if it is fantasy or sci-fi. But it will be fun enough that friends will tell their other friends and reviewers will give it a 9/10 or better. It will sell well, hit best sellers. Because so many people play it, it will suck in more non-gamers (just like WoW does) because people want to check out the hype.
Once you get the snowball rolling, it keeps going.
What do MMOs lack these days? Mostly - a sense of wonder. They are becoming too gamy in my opinion. I picked up Dragon Age thinking I would be bored in no time (I prefer online experiences) and I am totally hooked. And I realize it is because I keep wanting to see what is going to happen next. That is the same feeling I had from UO, EQ, DAoC, and WoW. I just wanted to see where the game went.
In the case of WAR, the areas seemed too much of the same. Not only graphically, but empty of players. I didn't feel a sense of wonder and adventure, I felt the need to rush through levels so I could raid the city. Then, when i finally could reach it, I found myself locked out because of a cap. Yuck.
The Daily Grind: Is Warhammer Online doomed? {Massively}
Nov 10th 2009 1:59PM Economy is not an excuse at all! Actually, entertainment actually goes UP in a poor economy. Depressed people are looking for entertainment more than when they are not. Although sad, during the great depression it was a great time to be an entertainer with lots of audiences.
Box office sales have been a bit rocky, but that is more due to the huge increase in DVD rentals - and video games. Gaming has become the nations #1 entertainment past-time. But, WAR has to compete not only to other MMOs, but good games on consoles. Things like Rock Band are going to pull people away from WAR.
The Daily Grind: Is Warhammer Online doomed? {Massively}
Nov 10th 2009 1:52PM The "gaming market" is alive and well. As an industry, it is the #1 grossing in the entertainment sector - far more than movies.
But PC games always have their tough times. Right now the money is still in console, which is why MMO guys keep trying to figure out how to move their MMOs to the console. Blizzard might be an exception - a game with the right style at the right time. Even if WoW came out today, I don't think it would do as well as it has.
