mechanics
Latest
Under The Hood: Choices and Consequences
Despite the persistence of most MMOs, there's one thing that the majority of them lack. I am, of course, speaking about consequences for your actions. Sure, you can kill some NPCs for experience and you yourself level up, but what about the world? The NPC just respawns and continues on his merry way, ready to become fodder for another adventurers weapons and skills. You gain some money and items. There's no real tangible effect on the world as a whole. What about exploring the truly excellent part of MMOs, the persistence? What about making a player's choice actually affect the game world?
Under The Hood: New Beginnings
Part of any MMO is starting from scratch. Whether you just started a new MMO, or a new character, the first few hours playing can determine whether or not you want to keep playing that game or character. So why is it that most MMOs have a lack of early game content? Countless times I have heard players complaining how hard it is to get into a game because the early content is all about grinding. In a sense, though, this ties into last week's article, and the desire of developers to have you keep giving them all your wonderful green money.
How a quirk in the game can steal your loot
There is a mechanic in game that we are all aware of, and one that exists for a good reason: when we attack a mob, we get the mob's loot. That's the mechanic. If you're solo grinding mobs out in Shadowmoon Valley for some Primal Fire, you want to be sure you're the only one that can get the loot. The same goes for groups – if you're grouping and killing Murmur in Shadow Labs, you want to be sure that everyone is going to get his pretty blues.But what if the mechanics of the boss fight dictate that you won't hit the boss? In fact, what if successfully killing the boss means that you have to stand on the opposite end of the playing field the whole time? You don't hit the boss, you don't get the loot – but you've done everything right. In this, the game mechanic does not represent fair play, nor does it encourage success. In fact, the mechanics are a complete contradiction of each other.I've recently encountered this problem, and it's a real pain. Read on after the break for what happened, and what can be done to solve it. It's rather long, but this is a serious problem that Blizzard needs to fix, and all the facts need to be laid out completely and in a way that is full of thruthiness.
Under The Hood: The Depths of Space
Riding on the coattails of my last article, I realized that it would be a good idea to explore that new frontier. No, not cowboys and Indians. Outer space in MMOs is rapidly becoming the new "generic fantasy continent(s)" that almost every other MMO takes part in. It's also pushing the envelope, in one case letting players practically run your game, and in another cases exploring new and varied game mechanics.
Under The Hood: Strategy on a Massive Scale
Ask any MMORPG player out there how much time it takes to play their game of choice, and the answers will range from the incredibly long to the delightfully short. And they will almost always be measured in how long it takes for you to level (one hour, one day, one year, etc). But real-time strategy games don't have any dependable way of measuring player level, and still need to keep the player playing for a long time.
Under The Hood: Player Economics 101
One of the more contentious points of an MMO is how it treats its economy. The average MMO runs the gamut of no real economy to speak of (besides vendors and drops), to a fully player-run economy such as the one in EVE Online, and everywhere in between (the middle point seems to be crafting and auction houses). So which is best. Well, if the EVE players and, by association, elite-like players in general are to be believed. It's the player-run economy.
Behind the Curtain: A new take on quests?
I'm not happy with my experiences with quests in MMOs. Very rarely do the quests I undertake online feel as epic as I had hoped they would back when I was installing World of Warcraft for the first time, back when I was still naïve enough to think each quest would leave me feeling like I'd undertaken an epic journey in the vein of Shea Ohmsford or Frodo Baggins – you'll note I never saw myself as Flick or Samwise. It seems that the word 'quest' has been watered down so that it means little more than performing FedEx duties, or traipsing off in a random direction to bring back the vital organs of whatever monster has incurred your quest-giver's wrath that day, but I've accepted that fact. I understand that not every action we take in-game has to rock society to its foundations, but it might be nice if we were left feeling that our questing through the game was more like a journey, instead of just a check list of objectives.
Under The Hood: Free For Now
There is a veritable glut of free-to-play MMOs, both in development and on the market. This much is certain. It especially originates around the Asian countries such as South Korea, Japan, and China. And some of the smart designs of these free-to-play games are gradually working their way into more mainstream, American and European MMOs. But how do these games stay in business? And how do they relate to the traditional design of monthly fees?
Under The Hood: Running Out Of Time
It's very debatable, but the biggest investment into any MMO is time. It's one thing to just pay to play the game, as there are several per-month services you can pay for, such as cable television, or car insurance, or sometimes simple things like a book club. But no normal service, however, require both the time and monetary investment like an MMO does. They are designed from the ground up to be full of grinding, time-wasting, and slow experience gain. But why is that?
Damion Schubert (sort of) defends the raid mechanic
Allow me to state the obvious; raiding is an integral part of WoW's design. A lot of people think that's a bad thing. They'll say raiding is only for the elite hardcore, and that it alienates everyone else. Here's a shocker; Damion Schubert -- a renown MMO designer whose games have historically been pretty much the opposite of raider-friendly -- is not one of those naysayers.He recently updated his blog with a strong defense of Blizzard's decision to emphasize raiding. You should read it for yourself, but the gist of it is that there are more raiders than you think, that players of a PvE game want a PvE endgame (as opposed to a PvP one like the Battlegrounds), and that because raids are re-playable content, Blizzard gets more bang for its development buck.His ultimate point, though, is that Blizzard focuses on raiding content because that's what players want. But I wonder if a lot of those players, especially the more casual types, would want something different if they were aware of other options. And Schubert suggested that there are alternatives. What are they, and do you want them, or are you perfectly happy with working your way up to Black Temple?
Under The Hood: Going Live
Live events. Where developer interacts with players. Traditionally, this has been a pretty contested battlefield, ranging from forums, to chat rooms, to game masters. Where it really comes together, however, is in the classic legacy of live events, where developers and game masters interact with the players in-game. But not only that, they assist in furthering the story, or fleshing out the game world. But where did live events come from?
Scott Jennings on how to make PvP not suck
Just in case any of us design a PvP ruleset for a massively multiplayer online game, Scott Jennings has helpfully posted a 13-step guide to "PvP done right" on his personal blog, BrokenToys.org.It's a potent mixture of common sense, personal opinion, and thousands upon thousands disagreeing that classes are needed. It's a great primer, aphorisms or not, and written wonderfully. Put simply, PvP in a game needs to work -- if it's an impossible concept or impossible to implement, nothing else matters. Personally, I'd go as far as to say the simpler the concept, the better the execution -- of course, that's a huge sweeping statement, but be it Team Fortress 2 or World of Warcraft or Chess, the depth doesn't come from the rules, it comes from the implementation. Except Cricket.All decisions will upset someone. It's just about having a realistic, well-defined goal for PvP in your game and going from there -- and accepting that there will always be an awful lot of criticism, rage, and Fury.
Under The Hood: The Ouroboros System
In most MMOs, once you hit a certain level, quests from before you hit that level turn useless and defunct. This sort of mechanic keeps players from going back and experiencing old stories because they leveled too fast, and really detracts from the overall feel of a game. What if I wanted to go back and play old quests (World of Warcraft, I'm looking right at you) and get some reward for them? Well, thankfully, City of Heroes/Villains has just implemented the Ouroboros System to allow you to go back and play previous missions you couldn't. But how is this going to affect the industry?
All the World's a Stage: Turning stumbling blocks into stepping stones
All the World's a Stage is brought to you by David Bowers every Sunday evening, investigating the mysterious art of roleplaying in the World of Warcraft.It is an art to turn any negative situation to your advantage, and no less so when roleplaying in WoW. In the fine tradition of "turning stumbling blocks into stepping stones," it pays for a roleplayer to reconsider a number of in-game situations which seem to get in the way of roleplaying, yet which actually offer a special opportunity to showcase your creativity.The biggest stumbling block WoW roleplayers trip over is often some aspect of the game mechanics themselves. Your roleplaying may lead your character into a deadly conflict with another player, for instance, and yet even if you kill the other in a free-for-all PvP arena, he or she can just resurrect and be back to normal in a few minutes. Alternately, you may find an epic BoE drop off a Skettis Kaliri and be hard pressed to explain how a rainbow-colored owl was flying around with a huge sword inside its body. You may even ponder why every single ogre you've ever seen is male.Naturally, of course, there are ways around all these problems -- it's just a matter of finding plausible reasons for things. You may say to your bitter rival, in the event of a deadly conflict: "I do not kill fellow members of the Horde! We shall duel for honor and be done with this!" Likewise, when recounting your discovery of your BoE epic sword, you might explain: "As I killed the strange owl, I suddenly noticed something gleaming in the grass just next to its corpse! This [Blinkstrike] was lying there, sticking out of a stone in the ground!" Your character might even make an effort to explain away in-game oddities: "I have deduced that the entire race of ogres must be hermaphrodites -- both male and female at the same time! They are so ashamed of this that they all hide the fact, pretending that ogre females are hidden away somewhere!"
Damion Schubert seeks a different kind of grind
MMO developers and publishers try to provide game-play that keeps you coming back again and again so you won't stop their money flow by canceling your subscription. The easiest way for them to do this is to make their games an addictive grind. You feel compelled to level up. You can't help yourself.Just because something's addictive, though, doesn't mean it's fun. But is there another way? Damion Schubert (of Meridian 59 and Ultima Online fame, and one of a certain blogger's personal heroes) posed that question on his Zen of Design blog. MMOs must be centered around highly repeatable activities, Schubert said. Combat, for example, works well because developers can put in a lot of changeable variables to make the experience different every time. On the other hand, he uses puzzle/mystery games like Myst as examples of games not based on a repeatable activity. Once a puzzle is solved, it's solved, and that's the end of it. So, if not that, then what? What other games have mechanics that can be used as a model for MMO game-play that sticks?That discussion is going on right now at Zen of Design.
Dofus embraces permadeath with new hardcore servers
Richard Bartle once said, "Do you want permadeath or pedophilia? Both seem equally attractive to most players." In other words, permanent death in MMORPGs is pretty much unheard of, and most people who hear the idea are horrified that it should even be suggested. A few MUDs have it, but in the graphical world, there's almost no such thing. The original Lord of the Rings MMO that was developed by Sierra and eventually canceled was going to have it. That's the closest we've gotten to mainstream MMO permadeath.The developers of Dofus, then, are either completely insane or just very daring. They've announced plans to open up "hardcore" servers in December. On hardcore servers, player characters will receive significantly more experience and gain new items and abilities much faster than on normal servers. But when they die, that's it. They've passed on. They are no more. They have ceased to be. Bereft of life, they rest in peace. They've joined the bleeding choir invisible. They are, in their entireties, ex-Dofus toons.At various stages in an age-old debate, proponents have suggested that if executed in the right way in a certain kind of game, permadeath could enrich the online gaming experience. Battles would be more intense and PvP would be more meaningful, for example. Will you play on Dofus' hardcore servers, or is permadeath an affront to everything you believe in?
Under The Hood: Pseudo-MMOs, Part One
The world of MMO-making is more and more competitive by the hour, with many big-name developers throwing their hats into the MMO development ring as time goes on. But where does this leave us? Are all of these games requiring subscription fees? Will I be left out in the street playing Star Trek Online because I'm paying hundreds a month in fees? Not if the "pseudo-MMO" has anything to do with it.The pseudo-MMO is a game which is similar to an MMO, but lacks things that an MMO often has, such as subscription fees, a truly massive environment (as opposed to a very large environment), a centralized server, or non-instanced zones. They aren't "real" MMOs, but they come very, very close. By offering persistent worlds, large amounts of players on a server at any one time, and sometimes even single-player, these doppelgangers can capture the "feel" of an MMO without (or with, in some cases!) a subscription fee. So let's walk down the list.
Collision mechanics -- yay or nay?
The plight of the prot warrior and other tanks in PvP has been lamented for ages on the forums. DPSers can, of course, kill their opponents in PvP, and healers can help out their team, but the effectiveness of tanks depends entirely on a non-sentient opponent. Illidan and Archimonde apparently can't see beyond attacking the shiny person in the nice thick armor, but even the dumbest player knows not to go for the guy in plate with 15k health. Making taunt work on players is a commonly-mentioned idea, but it would take away a lot of the fun and strategy from PvP. Prius of Blade's Edge has a new idea for helping out our protection buddies in PvP. He would like WoW to implement collision mechanics in PvP. That way, a prot warrior could "tank" by physically preventing enemy players from getting to his squishies. Warhammer Online is already implementing such a system, whenever it finally comes out (probably bundled with Duke Nukem Forever.) There are a lot of problems with body collision in general, most of which are aptly summed up in this thread. Total body collision would allow WoW's infinite supply of jerks to block off access to banks, inns, dungeons and whatnot. PvE collision would turn raids into a group of tauren warriors standing around a boss while ranged DPS nukes it down. And, like everything, collision would add lag to the servers. But a pure PvP collision, done only in battlegrounds or if two players are PvP-enabled or dueling, sounds like it could be a neat mechanic. Of course, I'd feel sorry for the gnomes, but maybe they could get some ankle-biting collision abilities. Do you think PvP collision could be a viable new mechanic for WoW PVP? What problems would you forsee?
Under The Hood: Of Titles, Badges, and Achievements
Say what you will about achievement points on the Xbox 360. They may cheapen the experience, or reduce elements of skill down to raw numbers, but anyone who has ever played a 360 knows how addictive the little "Achievement unlocked!" message is. So what happens when you toss that into an MMO? Titles. It seems that a recent trend in MMOs is "titles". When they first debuted in the mainstream with City of Heroes, they didn't do much. All they did was add bragging rights for the person who has them, and a displayable title above the person's head. They were worthless (Well, mostly worthless). And most of the titles in CoX are still worthless. "Oh, I killed 200 Circle of Thorn members. I've got that sweet new title." Some MMOs are actually starting to change things up now, though, including the pioneers of the "Titles" system. Getting the exploration titles in City of Heroes/Villains will enable your Supergroup to teleport to that map from your Supergroup base. Getting certain titles in Guild Wars will allow you to increase your holding cap on faction. Getting all titles in an area in Tabula Rasa gets you a huge experience bonus (noticing a trend here? NCsoft developers seem to love the use of titles).
Fear and how to fix it
Draele just started a blog about being a Warlock called Rantings of the Afflicted, and today he's got a post up about that most heinous of Warlock abilites: yes, none other than fear. A touchy subject (to say the least), but he offers three different suggestions on how to make fear fun for everyone.At its base, fear is actually Blizzard's way of trying to come up with another game mechanic. If you're a veteran MMORPG player, you know there are three archetype classes-- healer, DPS, and tank. All three of them are centered around damage-- either getting rid of it, doing it, or tanking it. Fear, however, plays with none of those rules-- it's a complete damage negator. The reason Warlocks have fear is so they can wear cloth and yet stay alive for a long time against one target-- long enough for their DoTs to come in.The problem with fear, however, as even the developers have admitted, is that it's not fun for the person being feared-- getting feared leaves you with almost no option but to sit there and do nothing. It removes control from your character, and that's never fun.So how can we fix it?
