complexity
Latest
Stick and Rudder: How complex is too complex for Star Citizen?
I've taken a little while to let Chris Roberts' recent flight model manifesto marinate. In that time, my opinion has run the gamut from "funk yeah, simulation!" to "hmm, I hope I'm able to enjoy this title" and back again. I waffled because as much as I'm salivating over Star Citizen and everything it represents, it's still one game out of dozens that I'm following. And as much as I'd like to, I can't realistically devote all of my free time to a single title!
The complexity of Heroes of the Storm
Ten years ago, players told Blizzard that WoW was too simple compared to past MMOs like Ultima Online, EverQuest, and Asheron's Call. More recently, many (including me at one point) said the same about Hearthstone -- that too much complexity had been removed from the genre compared to games like Magic: The Gathering. Today, Polygon posted an interview with Heroes of the Storm game director Dustin Browder. His message: HOTS isn't "DOTA for babies." "If you come looking for complexity in exactly the same places," Browder said, "you will be disappointed. If you come looking for complexity wherever it may be, I think you're going to be surprised and have a great time." Blizzard has stripped away many MOBA hallmarks, such as the item store. Browder says that other features make up for this loss of complexity. Talent selection is crucial. Map-specific objectives also play a huge role in determining the course of the battle and require careful strategy to accomplish. In a video included with the story, Polygon's "MOBA expert" Emily Gera had some further comments on the game: "The masses don't want to play big, scary MOBA games... Blizzard is trying to create a game that has less of a barrier to entry and bypass the classic issue of MOBA games -- that MOBA games are full of jerks... There's a lot of infighting. In HOTS, everyone on the team is in it together." What do you think? Is HOTS dumbing down the genre too much, or are these the changes the genre needs?
Bashiok on choice and complexity
It's not a secret that a lot of change is coming to Warlords of Draenor and WoW, and not all of us are sanguine about all of it. Enter Bashiok, the man, the demonic evil tree avatar, with a forum post about the nature of choice and how it informs complexity in our gaming. Bashiok's point about interesting choices vs. choices for the sake of having more choices is one that is worth discussing. There's complexity that comes from the interaction of options, and complexity that descends from an overwhelming variety of options. In the past, Blizzard has always tried to err on the side of lesser, more interesting choices as opposed to more choices that aren't necessarily choices at all. One need look no further than the change in Mists of Pandaria to our talent system. We lost talents that added things like 1/2/3% crit and gained decisions. Not everyone liked that change, but it's worthwhile to keep in mind when looking at future changes that happen. There's a lot of complexity in modern WoW that evolved over time as new systems were introduced, but not all of this complexity is based on meaningful options and gameplay. As we get closer to Warlords of Draenor, we're going to lose some of this evolved complexity, in order to clear out some room for more choices that matter. For the full text of Bashiok's post, click on through to the other side.
World of Warcraft, complexity, and design vs. sprawl
One of those trends that comes out of reading a lot about World of Warcraft is you start to see patterns in the responses. One trend I (and others, to be fair) have noticed coming out of BlizzCon, and then from discussions with people that I think needs to be understood and explored by players is the notion of vastness in World of Warcraft - this is a game that has recently celebrated its ninth anniversary. In that time it's seen four expansions, with a fifth on the way. Each of these expansions has added something to the game - reforging, transmogrification, arenas, new raid content, new dungeon content, new classes, new spells and abilities, new levels, new stats - and in many cases, this all increases the overall complexity of the game. It goes far beyond simple to understand symptoms of this growth, like the upcoming item squish, and into a realm of interconnected complexity that causes dominos to fall in directions we may not have even seen before it happens. We started the game with three classes capable of tanking. We're up to five. Along the way, tanking has changed and changed again, until its modern implementation barely even resembles what we were doing back in the days of ten or fifteen person UBRS groups - tanking today has a host of mob control abilities in order to allow them to more effectively control groups of adds, tools for mobility and is based around actively reducing incoming damage in a way it simply wasn't years before. Now, consider this - how does the game itself change in order to challenge the modern tank? What does it do to demand they play to their best? Encounters of the past wouldn't even make a modern tank blink - what challenge would Garr pose to today's tank, for example? A bunch of adds? Bring it. So design has to take these new tanking modes and abilities into account and provide new ways to give them difficult encounters... and these encounters thus create, in their turn, the new tank of the future.
The Daily Grind: How stat-heavy do you like your game mechanics?
Playing Allods Online, you will not find yourself simply raising one stat even if all you do is swing a weapon at something. See, there's one stat that increases your overall damage, another stat that improves the range of that damage (so you're more likely to hit for a higher number rather than a lower one), and a few other stats that also affect something as simple as "how hard do I hit." It's not simple by any means, but it does provide an interesting dynamic wherein your primary stat isn't all that high, and you hit for astonishingly consistent amounts. Is that a good thing? Well, some players will be quick to point out that the game is doing with four stats what could really be done with one. Others like to have that amount of fine control over a character. So today we ask: How stat-heavy do you like your game mechanics? Do you want even the simplest character to be looking at seven or eight different numbers at all times, or are you happiest when you've got a choice between three stats at most? Every morning, the Massively bloggers probe the minds of their readers with deep, thought-provoking questions about that most serious of topics: massively online gaming. We crave your opinions, so grab your caffeinated beverage of choice and chime in on today's Daily Grind!
The Daily Grind: How complex is too complex for MMOs?
I'm a huge fan of isometric clickers like Diablo, Torchlight, and Titan Quest, so I admit to being secretly pleased when pseudo-MMOs like Path of Exile were approved for coverage on Massively. In fact, I jumped into Path of Exile this past weekend to give it another spin. And as soon as my new character got her first skill point, I gleefully clicked over to the skill panel, only to be confronted with the game's notorious and glorious SKILL TREE TO END ALL SKILL TREES. It's not even a skill tree. It's a skill maze. A skill constellation. A skill galaxy. The screenshot above isn't even half of what's available. It's overwhelming at level 2 to say the least. I like complexity in character development, but I had forgotten how over-the-top Path of Exile really was, and I had to wonder whether this sort of complexity-dump scares off newcomers to the genre, or indeed, whether it's intended to scare them off, convince them the game is harder-core than they are, or possibly just entrap them with poor early game decisions. Doesn't the skill avalanche just drive gamers to tab out and look up guides, and is that really the best idea for retaining brand-new players? How complex is too complex for MMOs and pseudo-MMOs? Every morning, the Massively bloggers probe the minds of their readers with deep, thought-provoking questions about that most serious of topics: massively online gaming. We crave your opinions, so grab your caffeinated beverage of choice and chime in on today's Daily Grind!
Riot rules on League of Legends Elo-Boosting, alleged DDoS attacks
Riot recently celebrated the five-million-concurrent-players milestone, but it seems that not all of those players are on the level. League of Legends' competition committee has dropped the smack down on a number of pro players due to Elo-Boosting. The company defines Elo-Boosting as "the repetitive and intentional act of an individual playing on someone else's account (a "client") for the purpose of artificially improving the client's Elo rating." Seven players and one coach, representing pro clubs that include Curse and compLexity, have had their accounts suspended for 14 days. Additionally, the cheaters have had their Season Two rewards revoked. Riot also issued a "first and final" warning to Good Game University general manager Sam "Hexo" Bouchard for allegedly using a DDoS (distributed denial-of-service) attack to disrupt an opponent's internet connectivity. The LoL competition committee provides an example of Bouchard's antics and it also notes that he currently boasts the worst harrassment rating among all LCS North American players. [Thanks Officer Jenny!]
Leaderboard: Complexity vs. simplicity
A wise man once said to me, "Now, the world of MMOs don't move to the beat of just one drum, what might be right for you, may not be right for some." That may have also been '80s TV talking, but the point is still valid. When it comes to the wide range of our gaming buffet, we have everything from incredibly complex games that require a Masters-level course to Fisher-Price games with condescending colors and icons just in case we can't read. I appreciate both and everything in between on that spectrum. Complexity certainly does drive people away and present a real obstacle to growing a playerbase, but it also asks folks to step up and learn something instead of be handed welfare epics. Simplicity is relaxing as well because life is complicated enough. Sometimes you just want to see big numbers and things going poof. So take out your imaginary crayons today and draw a line. To the left are complex MMOs and to the right is simplicity in its finest. Don't levy judgment on which is better overall; just tell us where your preferences lie -- to the complex or to the simple? Vote after the jump!
The Soapbox: The perils of passive gaming
Disclaimer: The Soapbox column is entirely the opinion of this week's writer and does not necessarily reflect the views of Massively as a whole. If you're afraid of opinions other than your own, you might want to skip this column. My folks don't really understand my infatuation with video games (and MMORPGs in particular). "How can you sit there and play a game for two or three hours at a time?" my mom is fond of asking. Ironically, this usually happens on a visit that ends where most of our visits do: on the couch in front of the television. Don't get me wrong; she's no couch potato, and in fact she has the meanest green thumb you'll ever see. When the sun goes down, though, my parents (like most of their generation, I'll wager) park their butts in front of the TV. That I should park my own posterior in front of the computer is exceedingly strange to them even though online gaming is to the 21st century what television was to the 20th. I wonder, though, if games are starting to become more passive forms of TV-like entertainment.
The Daily Grind: Have you ever facerolled MMO content?
I've recently returned to World of Warcraft and was surprised to find a much more complex game than when I left (contrary to popular lore in our comments). Several of the classes have been revamped mechanically to be far more interesting and layered, and new dungeon encounters are frequently among the best in the industry. At endgame, anyway. I realize that outside of heroics and raids and PvP, WoW (like many MMOs) aims for accessible simplicity, which is nice when you're just happily grinding away or teaming up with weekend warriors not looking for a stressful challenge. One of my mates even bragged about facerolling his way through the dungeon finder, and I had to wonder, do people really do that? Even if content is easy, I still try to play it "right." I'll still make sure I know how to play my character, probably because I'm terrified of being that person in a PUG -- you know, the one who makes people hate PUGs. But I have to admit that the idea of honestly just punching whatever buttons just to see if we'll still win has its own amusing charm (and a strange level of challenge too). Have you ever facerolled MMO content, literally or figuratively? Every morning, the Massively bloggers probe the minds of their readers with deep, thought-provoking questions about that most serious of topics: massively online gaming. We crave your opinions, so grab your caffeinated beverage of choice and chime in on today's Daily Grind!
Complexity of systems and player retention
If you don't read Cynwise's Warcraft Journal, you probably should. Cyn's been doing an excellent series of posts about warlocks in Cataclysm that are interesting and thought-provoking -- even if, like me, you're not a warlock and don't really know much about the class. For me, one of the most striking tidbits was that rogues are the second-to-least-played class overall, but the second-most-played class in high-end PvP, implying that people only play rogues to PvP. There's a lot of interesting data in there about class representation, role representation, and who is playing what and at what levels. The post that really grabbed my attention was this one about warlock complexity in Cataclysm because it highlights an extreme form of something we've talked about before, the design philosophy that argues for increased complexity in a character's suite of abilities. In its simplest form, it can be summed up as the hitting buttons is fun argument, although at the extreme Cyn describes for warlocks, it becomes a game of if X, then Y that resembles programming your first computer in Basic. If you remember making a chain of dirty words scroll on a loop up the screen, congratulations on being old with me. Cyn's comparison of the destruction rotation in Wrath and Cataclysm shows a rotation with seven elements mushroom out to one with 14 elements to remember and consider. That if X, then Y flowchart just got as complex as a subway map. In my experience, all DPS rotations in general have a little bit of this kind of gameplay nowadays. The difficulty is in hitting the sweet spot where the rotation is designed so that random elements or procs serve to liven up an otherwise predictable set of abilities (providing the fun in the hitting buttons scenario) without making a rotation so complex you need six to seven addons to help you plot it out.
Why I Play: EVE Online
I can't for the life of me convince my friends to sign up for EVE Online. In their defense, the game can feel like a job at first. There are no skinner box particle effects or angelic choirs signifying your latest achievement, nor does anyone shower you with virtual confetti as you graduate from the newbie island. For these reasons and others like them, CCP seems to have topped out somewhere around half a million active subs at the game's high point. EVE is seen as unfriendly in some ways, but in actuality it's the friendliest MMO around if you're an imaginative sort with the desire to direct your own in-game destiny. Could the tutorials be better? Sure. Could PvE missions be more engaging? Absolutely. Does either of these failings, or numerous others, detract from what is the genre's premier emergent experience? Nope.
Why I Play: Final Fantasy XIV
From the moment I set foot in the beta to Final Fantasy XIV, I was hooked. This, if you somehow managed to miss everything going on around the game's launch, was the exact opposite of most players' reactions. Most people found the interface clunky and counterintuitive, the main form of content repetitive, and the combat system awkward and frequently frustrating. Here's the thing: None of those statements is wrong. The game has made enormous progress over the past year toward fixing those issues, but the players like yours truly who do enjoy the game don't love these elements. They love the game that lies underneath all of that, the design elements that shine through despite a lot of hoops you have to jump through first. I enjoyed the game at launch. I enjoy the game now, and based on what I've seen so far, I'm going to enjoy the game in the future. There's something very special about the game amidst all of the downsides, something that made me decide back in beta that even if this game is going to take extra work to play, it's going to reward the effort.
The Light and How to Swing It: What happened to encounters that were interesting to tank?
Every week, WoW Insider brings you The Light and How to Swing It for holy, protection and retribution paladins. Protection specialist Matt Walsh spends most of his time receiving concussions for the benefit of 24 other people, obsessing over his hair (a blood elf racial!), and maintaining the tankadin-focused blog Righteous Defense. Cataclysm has been a fairly, er, cataclysmic expansion when it comes to the status quo of tanking. For starters, threat was decimated with the introduction of Vengeance and nigh removed from the game with the recent buffs to threat generation. Likewise, variability in the number of tanks a fight required seemingly died along with Halfus Wyrmbreaker. And, perhaps most troubling of all, the profession of tanking has generally been made less and less interesting as far as encounter design is concerned. What makes a fight "interesting"? If you think back to some of the fights in previous tiers, the most interesting ones were always the most demanding ones -- the ones that required you to juggle multiple balls over the course of the encounter. These balls could be one of many mechanics. To name just a few: Picking up adds that are dynamically joining the fight Shepherding adds to a specific location Hitting cooldowns to counter a near-death attack Moving out of hazards constantly Taunt swapping boss on a debuff Combating the threat output of buffed DPS And countless other tropes that I've neglected to list. Reading any of these, you can think of a number of mechanics that Blizzard has constantly repeated that encompass them. It's a fairly limited bag of tricks, and Blizzard has done a bang-up job mixing and matching a handful of them and compiling the resulting smorgasbord into some of the fights we have known and loved.
The Daily Grind: Which MMO has the hardest learning curve?
MMOs come in all shapes and sizes, and with new titles launching every other day, there's bound to be one out there that caters to just about every skill level imaginable. While many of these games boast similar mechanics, occasionally a dev team will stray from the norm and create a head-scratchingly complex title (or in some cases, a title that is deliberately user-unfriendly). Games like EVE Online and Second Life are renowned for their learning curve and the amount of research necessary to play at a high level, and we're curious to hear about others you may have experienced. For this edition of The Daily Grind, share your thoughts on MMO complexity, and whether the term entails mechanics, the UI, gameplay options, or some combination of all three. While you've got your thinking cap on, which MMO has the hardest learning curve? Every morning, the Massively bloggers probe the minds of their readers with deep, thought-provoking questions about that most serious of topics: massively online gaming. We crave your opinions, so grab your caffeinated beverage of choice and chime in on today's Daily Grind!
The Soapbox: Decent challenge
Disclaimer: The Soapbox column is entirely the opinion of this week's writer and does not necessarily reflect the views of Massively as a whole. If you're afraid of opinions other than your own, you might want to skip this column. The ancestors of modern humans had a lot to contend with, but I'm willing to bet that the seeds of MMO gamers existed even in those days. There had to have been at least one person who looked at a wooly mammoth, a titantic mass of tree-trunk limbs and tusks and fur, and announced "I bet you get great loot for killing that thing!" And as it turned out, he was right, assuming "great loot" means "meat for food and fur for clothing." I'm exaggerating, naturally; everyone knows that ancient humanity spoke Norwegian, not English, and it's a well-known fact that the term "loot" was first coined in the Canterbury Tales along with "spawn camper." But that need for a challenge is still there, the central idea that in order to get something really awesome you have to overcome a big obstacle. Which is why challenge is such a thorny issue for MMOs and always has been, because one person's challenge is another person's irritation.
The Soapbox: Sandparks
Disclaimer: The Soapbox column is entirely the opinion of this week's writer and does not necessarily reflect the views of Massively as a whole. If you're afraid of opinions other than your own, you might want to skip this column. The war between sandbox and themepark MMOs is being fought now, not just in the hearts and minds of players but in the simple matter of which project is getting funding for development. It's a war in which adherents to one design philosophy loudly decry the other, where both sides sling insults at one another and mourn how the other side has damaged the promise of MMOs or has no idea how to make a compelling gameplay experience. It's a battle of words and of subscription fees. It's also really, really stupid. Setting up the MMO sphere as a battle between two opposing design philosophies probably feels like a great chance to explore a two-faction system in real life, but it's also shortchanging not just MMOs but games on both sides of the nonexistent fence. It sells a number of games short, and it adds nothing useful to the genre as a whole. It's time to stop seeing the onling gaming sphere as a match of opposing forces and start seeing it as a varied and frequently awe-inspiring spectrum.
Breakfast Topic: Is WoW too complex?
As I said the other day, we've talked about the dumbed-down argument quite a few times before, but I think this is the first time I've ever heard the opposite argument put forth so succinctly: Tadaa asks, over on the forums, "Is WoW getting too complex?" Longtime players will probably say no at first glance -- the game has been streamlined a lot since it first game out, and things that took up much of your time previously (tracking quests, looking up quest targets, dealing with respecs, and finding groups) now have systems built into the game that let you get past them easily. But think of what it would be like to step into Azeroth nowadays -- instead of just a chat channel where you can find groups, there's a whole system with terms like "damage" and "tank" in there. On first glance, it might be tough to figure out. And then there's things like resilience and Replenishment (which some experienced players don't even fully understand), and even things we think of as helpful features (getting pets and currency out of our inventory) can be super confusing for new players: where did that pet go that I just clicked on, or that badge that I just saw looted to me in the combat window?
EVE Online's Tech III ships hit Singularity test server
When CCP Games first announced the new line of ships coming to EVE Online with the Apocrypha expansion, a modular design called Tech III, player opinions were rather divided. Some view the flexibility to create thousands of potential ship configurations as a positive thing for EVE. Still, others remain standoffish, citing either the potential for over-complexity or "Lego in space."Well now it's time for speculation to fizzle out, and for the players to see what Tech III is all about firsthand. An announcement today from EVE dev CCP Nozh let the players know that Tech III can be experimented with on the Singularity test server.
Players skeptical about EVE Online's introduction of Tech III
Everyone loves Lego, right? That childhood pastime of snapping together pieces to create new and often bizarre creations is coming to the spaceships of EVE Online, but not all players are happy to hear about this. The next EVE Online expansion, Apocrypha, is going to introduce some new aspects to gameplay. Some of these new features, like wormhole exploration, seem to be received positively by the player base. But others -- like the modular "Tech III" ship designs -- have drawn no small amount of criticism from EVE's subscribers. Tech III is an aspect of the game that has players pretty well divided, much like the upcoming Walking in Stations (aka Ambulation) expansion. The sentiment a number of players have been vocal about is 'Do we really need this?' Whines and tears are a daily occurrence on the game's official forums and perhaps the opinions voiced there aren't necessarily indicative of the sentiments of the larger player base. But concerns about Tech III are also beginning to show up on player blogs, far from the bandwagoning of the EVE Online forums, and in some cases from players who know the game very well.
