Learning the right things from people who are afraid we learned the wrong things when they learned other wrong things.
Raph Koster has a pointer to a rant on Gamasutra about how World of Warcraft sucks.\par
\par
\par
Nothing new there… (checks watch) Yep, it’s been a little over a year, time for the backlash to hit the mainstream. Still, this article is pretty interesting, especially from the point of view of its author. He happens to be a competitive Street Fighter player, so you can probably guess where he comes down on the player skill vs time investment discussion. And again:\par
…playing a fair game is what it’s all about. It would never occur to us to play a game where one player gets to do 50% more damage because he has a level 60 Chun Li.
\par
The problem, of course, is that not everyone is going to be a wizard at playing Chun Li. The barrier of entry to knowing exactly how to blow away people with arcane 8-step combo moves is far higher than a “level 60 Chun Li”… and learning how to do them - how to be a competitive, truly skilled player, I would argue, would take more time than grinding your Chun Li to 60. It would feel fairer to some to be able to leverage their hand-eye coordination or whatever to “pwn” people more effectively - but would people resent being “pwned” any less because someone was able to game the system instead of grinding out levels? This is, of course, an old discussion, and Raph’s hit on it more than once.\par
\par
There’s some other surprising takes in the article as well, that challenge a bit our preconcieved notions of “WoW as the casual MMO”. To wit:\par
Group > Solo. You can forget self-reliance, because you won’t get far in World of Warcraft without a big guild. By design, playing alone (even if you are the best player in the world) will get you worse loot than if you always play in 5-man dungeons. If you always play in 5-man dungeons, you’ll always get worse loot than if you play in 40-man raids. The player base has been hit over the head for so long with this notion of 40-man raids, that players are taking that as given. I see so many people who have been fooled into thinking this is justified, that it actually scares me. They think that you shouldn’t be allowed to get good loot unless you do something with 39 other people, because that’s harder. Coordinating 40 people is hard, but so is winning a Street Fighte tournament, which you have to do by yourself.
\par
This is interesting to me on a couple of different levels.\par
\par
World of Warcraft actually discourages grouping, at least during the 1-60 character building stage, for the majority of gameplay. To be precise, the experience doled out in groups makes for a far less efficient character growth rate than if the players were solving quests solo. Not only that, with the exception of elite quests and instances, the entire game can actually be played solo; in that it’s one of the most forgiving MMOs in that regard.\par
\par
That this player took away “World of Warcraft enforces grouping” from this tells me that the groups he felt he had to be in were SO jarring, and SO resented, that they shaded the rest of the experience. (The references to “40 man groups”, which only occur in the vastly different post-60 elder game, tend to bear this out.) To quote again:\par
Unfortunately, the game offers no difficult solo content leading to good loot. (Note to picky readers: there is some, but it’s soooo far out of whack with raid rewards that we can safely ignore it, the same way Blizzard does.) The designers must be so extraverted, that they can’t fathom the introvert point of view.
\par
Again, within the same paragraph: “There’s no content for my playstyle. Well, there is, but the other stuff is better. You know it, I know it, Blizzard knows it, so it just doesn’t exist for me.” This is a far more important lesson to learn than what he is actually saying. As long as there is content percieved as “better”, players won’t settle for what they can easily achieve through their own devices. They will resent not being able to get The Best.\par
\par
And again:\par
Warcraft\’e2\’80\rdblquote maybe accidentally\’e2\’80\rdblquote hit upon this concept, and now seems spit on it and all those who appreciate it. If a Blizzard developer read this, his PR department would say they are not spitting on this play-style, but unfortunately the game design speaks louder than words. “Spit on” is exactly how I feel. But far worse is the idea that millions of children are learning that doing things on your own is bad. Albert Einstein accomplished far more in the field of physics by himself during off-time as a patent clerk than a 40-man raid of so-so physicists ever would. I want little Johnny in Idaho to learn that lesson, but he sure won’t find it in World of Warcraft. 40 mundane people with a lot of time would put Albert Einstein to shame any day of the week in this game.
\par
Little Johnny in Idaho may be learning bad lessons, but the lesson Little Scott in Virginia is learning is that as long as 40 man raids exist, there will be people who wish they didn’t have to do them - but still want the rewards that were crafted to reward the combined efforts of 40 people. This is important: rewards for the effort of 1 person isn’t good enough. As long as better exists, that will be the baseline. “Why can’t I get the same stuff as the 40 people working together. I’m smart! I should be able to get the same stuff! Or stuff just as good. It had better be just as good, too, or else it may as well not exist.”\par
\par
The author also dislikes one of the primary pillars of community in an MMO:\par
You’re either with a guild, or you’re nobody to them. I can’t imagine being in only one IRC (chat) channel at a time, or choosing only one gaming community, yet I can only join one guild at a time. It’s a very weird social environment with the same dangers as nationalism and flag-waving.
\par
I wonder if the author has settled on one family yet.\par
\par
Seriously, this part kind of strikes at the core of community building. Like attracts like. We join guilds that have people that we get along with. If we don’t, we don’t last particularly long. If we do, we form bonds of friendship that persist beyond the game itself. This is a pretty key part of what makes the community behind MMOs tick, and the author’s rejection of these out of hand makes me wonder what sort of enforced guild grouping he felt he had to endure to get Those Shiny Things Only 40 Man Raids Give You. If you’re detecting a theme, congratulations!\par
\par
And finally, the author decides that rules are bad.\par
The very idea of using the terms of service as the de facto way to enforce a certain player-behavior goes against everything I’ve learned. A game should be a system of rules that allow the player to explore. If the player finds loopholes, then the game developer should fix them. It’s never, ever the player’s fault: it’s the game developer’s fault. People who currently make deals with enemy faction (Horde or Alliance ) to trade wins in battleground games are not really at fault. They are playing in a system that forces anyone who wants to be rank 14 to do exactly that. A line in the Terms of Service saying that you shouldn’t behave this way changes nothing, and teaches nothing.
\par
Cheating is fine, because the players learned how to cheat. The game developers should wave a magic wand and fix it! Failing that, they should just let players evolve new forms of gameplay. I believe the terminology used for this in Ultima Online was “creative uses of magic”. Needless to say, most people that found this term used during an interaction with customer service found it an insulting, patronizing copout.\par
\par
Players expect an even field of play. Developers absolutely have to fix bugs as they are discovered, but that does not give players carte blanche to discover and exploit interesting ways to break the game. The author seems to resent the fact that terms of service exist, but I suspect if he played a game where they were honored only in the breach his opinion would change dramatically.\par
These examples go on and on, but the basic idea here is that Blizzard treats the players like little children who need a babysitter. There are mountains of rules in the terms of service that tell you that you shouldn’t do things that you totally can do in the game if you want. Why they don’t just alter their design and code so you can’t do these things is beyond me. But this mentality is drilled into the players to the point that they start believing that it’s ok. They start believing that it’s not ok to experiment, to try out anything the game allows in a non-threatening environment. Well\’e2\’80\rdblquote that’s a dangerous thing. That’s the point at which the game stops being “fun” by Raph Koster’s definition, and it’s also the point at which the game can no longer teach. The power of games is that they empower a player to try all the possibilities that he can think of that the game rules allow, not that they have pages of “rules of conduct” that prevent you from creative thinking.
\par
Which is all well and good. I want to explore new frontiers in cyberspace and new ways that men pretend to be women to get other men to give them shinies too. But in most worlds, including the one we happen to live in, running afoul of the community standards (our world calls them “laws”) isn’t excused by the complaint that the offender was “exploring the boundaries of society”. Amazingly, there are folks who aren’t joyous explorers of the human psyche, but just want to be irritating weasels. Thus why rules exist. Thus why “babysitters” exist (in our world, we call them police officers). I totally can rob money from stores and punch random passers by in the face. Why shouldn’t I be allowed to do this? Those damn terms of service, getting in the way of my fun!\par
\par
Back to seriousland, what this tells me is that there isn’t enough education about why rules enforcement exist. Grizzled veterans of gameplay ‘experiences’ past know that people online are, nine times out of ten, raving assholes. I’ll grant the author a blissful ignorance on this one, and give Blizzard bonus points for making a world with such a well-enforced rule set that the author can’t understand why it exists in the first place.\par
\par
Sometimes, you learn things you didn’t expect in places that didn’t expect you to learn them.
February 23, 2006 at 2:27 am
> I wonder if the author has settled on one family yet.\par
\par
This strikes to the heart of why he’s right on this one point at least, and all the major MMOs are wrong.\par
\par
I haven’t settled on one family, and I’ll bet you haven’t either. I’ve got the family I was born into, the friends I made in my backwoods Connecticut hometown as a child, the friends I made in college, the friends I made in college, the friends I made in my new home in Silicon Valley, the people I work with, and numerous other “families”. These groups overlap. I spend more time hanging out with my coworkers and SV friends than I do with my birth family…and yet, I go home to be with that family most every Christmas. I feel no less close to them despite that fact.\par
\par
The standard MMO guild structure is utterly antithetical to way people associate in life. It encourages–and sometimes forces–people to pick one association and stick to it in preference to all others.\par
\par
If real life worked the way MMO guilds do, I’d have been forced to give up my family when I went off to college–and again, when I got a job. Sorry kid, isn’t uber enough to raid SysProg…come on, it’s only got a dozen members and half of them haven’t even hit level 17 and gotten their mounts yet. Time for you to drop that tag and join .\par
\par
I started playing WoW with various real life friends. We founded a guild so we could hang out and chat together. Over time, however, half of those people have left the guild for others. Some wanted to raid, some wanted more roleplaying, and so on. It wasn’t that they wanted to stop associating with the rest of us–just that the game mechanics forced them to make a choice.\par
\par
I’ve played one game that didn’t limit guild membership: A Tale in the Desert. The average player in that game belongs to a dozen guilds or more. There are the family guilds, which keep friends close to each other. There are the corporations, where people coordinate large group activities. There are the regional guilds, where all the inhabitants of a given region gather to chat. There are the affinity guilds, collecting people who share a common interest. THIS is how people form associations in real life: Not artificially bound to a single circle of people, but caught up in a gloriously complex web of relationships.
February 23, 2006 at 2:28 am
lol, I just read that right before i checked your site and was thinking some of the exact same things. What a noob.\par
I hate how there are so many articles popping up written by these WOW newbs. At least let someone who knows what they are talking about write their articles (I have come to expect more from gamasutra anyways). Then the flood of new players coming to the genre sees these things and takes them as biblical scripture.\par
Is old school completely dead?\par
\par
~Dunadurium
February 23, 2006 at 3:07 am
pot\par
kettle\par
black\par
\par
\par
that is all
February 23, 2006 at 3:16 am
I actually read that whole article! While waiting in a WoW BG queue. :)\par
\par
That guy is a jerk. WoW is one of the most solo friendlt games out there. I am solo (or duo with my wife) most of the time while leveling to 60. Even after 60 I’m solo or duo EXCEPT for BGs or high level dungeon raids.\par
\par
And about the rules, there are lots of things that the game designers COULD prohibit, like killing Civilians for example, but dont prohibit. They impose penelties but allow it. There are lots of other things that the game designers cant or wont code in but are still against the rules and it seems perfectly sensible to have some written “Thou shall NOTs”.\par
\par
After all, God (our designer) COULD have designed us to not kill our fellow man, but instead She gave us freedom of choice between right and wrong AND 10 written rules.
February 23, 2006 at 3:27 am
Damien, I agree with you to an extent and i think this is especially if not exclusively a wow/”casual game” thing.\par
I mean the first time I tried WoW i flew to lev 10-15 with no need of any player interaction at all. The first time i grouped for a quest, we went through and did good 2-hour series of quests, the whole time this pally spoke to me maybe 5 sentences. When we were done he thanked me for grp and was off. It was almost like a mutually beneficial deal that went down. Both parties benefiting at the moment but neither needing to keep in touch. This went on through the levels. There were relatively few people that actually would sit and talk in the minimal downtime. The fact being that the game absolutely does encourage solo play. Grouping is just a means to get things done as apposed to a community building fundamental element. Grouping in WOW almost seems like your just being used. After you disband and wander off never to meet each other again, it feels like the community aspect of WOW is non-existent. So yeah, when you get in a guild in this game it feels like you are cut off from every other group of people.\par
What ever happened to having a friends list? When I quit I had maybe 15 people on my list, of those maybe 5 I ever saw on a half regular basis.\par
In EQ when I quit I had countless numbers of names (going back a few years of course) but of those I had different groups of good friends. Like the guys I grouped with a year ago that maybe don\’e2\’80\’99t play as much any more, or some people from my early noobish guild, as well as a few of the friends from when I was a noob that went different ways or joined a different group.\par
What I\’e2\’80\’99m saying is that an MMO community can be EXACTLY like what you describe, and in fact that\’e2\’80\’99s what makes it interesting. In WOW this is not that case and the game is actually almost the opposite-where community means nothing more than a way to advance your own personal game, instead of being part of something larger. This may also stem from the relatively fast progression rate in that a player may max a character in a month or two and move on to another, never to touch his first one(or just rarely log it on).\par
Overall my personal thinking is that a \’e2\’80\’9ccasual game\’e2\’80\’9d of the WOW fashion cannot truly foster meaningful communities of the style that a more \’e2\’80\’9chardcore\’e2\’80\’9d or long-term game can.\par
Just my two copper of course so feel free to expand on it,\par
~Dunadurium
February 23, 2006 at 3:32 am
Hmm this article prolly is more interesting for the way the mentality that he describes in http://www.sirlin.net/Features/feature_PlayToWinPart1.htm , reacts to a game like WoW.\par
I agree with him that rules should be fixed though, relying on a human arbiter will produce arbitary results, hard and fast rules will avoid this problem.
February 23, 2006 at 4:04 am
Dunadurium, I think you’re missing my point and replacing it with another.\par
\par
Calling WoW a “casual game” is pointless. Yes, it has a faster level grind to $MAXLEVEL than some of the competition, and it’s generally easier to level without grouping. It also has just as many catasses as any other game out there. There are the people who grind honor points for twelve hours a day, every day, in order to max out their PvP rank. There are the people who spend 4-5 hours a day in raids, and just as much grinding faction or the like.\par
\par
WoW supports much the same communities as other games of its ilk. Yes, the lack of downtime and increased soloability means that the social structure while leveling is different from the old EQ. I very much doubt, however, that the nature of a family, RP, or raid guild is substantially different between WoW and EQ–and what differences exist will be largely a matter of how much history the games have accumulated.\par
\par
No, the problem is that EQ and all of its heirs that I am familiar with discourage membership in multiple communities. Being a member of a family guild, an RP guild, and a raid guild is generally mutually exclusive. The attitude that people must “settle on one family” is utterly absurd, and corrosive to the social fabric of the game.
February 23, 2006 at 4:05 am
the part where he compared wow players to eistein made me laugh.\par
\par
to console myself over the rest of the article i simply replaced phrases like “terms of service” with “no rules” and phrases like “self reliance” with “co-operation”
February 23, 2006 at 4:40 am
Shouldn’t that be %MAXLEVEL?\par
\par
I agree on the Time > Skill point, personally.\par
\par
MMOs reward the stupid and the obsessed. There must be a better way, unless every development studio believes that “stupid and obsessed” is an ideal market.\par
\par
I suppose that for a long-lasting subscription, it is.
February 23, 2006 at 4:41 am
Damien I agree with you on this, i did actually jump the gun and just skim over your post.\par
Overall what I was getting at is that MMOGs provide an environment where it is very possible to form these different groups and circles within a game community, and while a game may provide limited infrastructure to accommodate these things naturally happening (guilds, families, fellowships etc), you need not solely rely on them as there is the freedom to achieve them in alternate ways. The thing that does hamper though is if the game is already designed to fail in the social aspect, which is why I cited WOW.\par
\par
So I fully agree that a virtual world supporting more or alternate social structures, especially in a game that is designed for community, is a great idea and definitely something that games in the future can take to another level.\par
~Dunadurium
February 23, 2006 at 6:54 am
That article starts up interesting but in the second part, you just feel that the guy is simply ranting, trying to use his “what do they teach” argument to back him up.\par
\par
UO still remains the only true MMORPG to date I think. The whole character development concept and the freedom you had in the game are things I really miss. Hopefully, some day, some game company will come back to simple things, where items don’t really matter, where you don’t have bunch of levels just to keep you busy, where you can focus on the character itself and have it simply living in a world…
February 23, 2006 at 7:39 am
>As long as there is content percieved as \’e2\’80\’9cbetter\’e2\’80\’9d, players won\’e2\’80\’99t settle for what they can easily achieve through their own devices. They will resent not being able to get The Best.
February 23, 2006 at 7:42 am
Nice of it to eat the rest of my post.
February 23, 2006 at 7:45 am
The author of the article overlooked another big flaw in WoW and video games in general, the lesson that ‘cheating is ok’. It seems cheating in many forms is rampant in all video games, from cheat guides, cheat codes, eBayed resources, game ‘add-ons’, to blatant hacks. What is startling is the growing acceptance of this as being normal and ‘ok’.
February 23, 2006 at 7:46 am
The complaint about “one family” is prefectly valid in the vast majority of MMO’s, where the text system is highly restrictive. Eve, with the ability to have user-created chat channels, multiple chat windows open, resizeable, and tabs which flash when people speak should be the VERY minimum.\par
\par
And in Eve Online you CAN stab a passerby in the face, or loot your corp’s bank and run away with it.
February 23, 2006 at 7:57 am
Allow players to cheat the system? Toss out the ToS? Oh God… I feel an Ultima Online rollback flashback coming on!
February 23, 2006 at 8:17 am
I see the problem as a lack of PvP focus on the world as a whole.\par
Forty man raids are fine. The problem with the design of every MMORPG’s 40 man raids is the lack of actual political design of reward and punishment in the game’s PvP. Your enemies should be able to hurt you in more ways that just standing over you and chanting “azzrape”. How about a system of get enough black marks and you *can’t* do the 40 person raids because too many members of the community think you’re a jerk? Complicated? Not really. Unfair? Not really. I can’t think of a single time in the last 15 years in any online game where 5 let alone 10 people would have marked my avatar as a jerk in game.\par
\par
I don’t have the time for a multipage discussion on this, I honestly wish I did have the time. The problem is not one of rewards but of punishment.\par
\par
The problem is that a jerk can gain more, more quickly (just by being available for action) in all of these games than an honestly nice person (who isn’t available 24/7). The community has no way to punish, penalize or drive out anyone.\par
The problem isn’t mechanically how rewards are being distributed but to whom they are distributed. Just my nut job opinion.
February 23, 2006 at 8:25 am
“We join guilds that have people that we get along with. If we don\’e2\’80\’99t, we don\’e2\’80\’99t last particularly long. “\par
\par
You’re using the royal ‘we’ here. No “WE” (I) do not join a guild for those reasons. I join a guild that antagonizes me the least while providing me a means to an ends. People suck. I don’t group with them, guild with them or otherwise interact with them willingly. I do so only as much as I need to working towards a given set of goals.\par
\par
In DAOC it was to RvR so I had to join a guild that ran a near perfect 8 man group or it didn’t even go into the frontier (I sidestepped guilding there and stayed with my one man guild name thankfully so I least didn’t have to interact with them outside of combat).\par
\par
In WoW it’d be a raiding force who can farm or near farm BWL. They get a healer that is out for perfection within his class, I get my gear. Everyone gets something. I don’t have to like them, I just have to do my job and do it well enough that nobody really cares if I laugh at their jokes.\par
\par
Depending on how you define ‘long’ you could argue that since I don’t stay with the same group every single MMO I’m meeting your criteria of not ‘lasting long’ but within the confines of a single game I tend to last for some time.\par
\par
“If we do, we form bonds of friendship that persist beyond the game itself.”\par
\par
I don’t want those bonds. I want a god damned game that I can pick up and put down when I have time. When I want to form ‘bonds of friendship’ I’ll take up golf with the admirals.\par
\par
“Grizzled veterans of gameplay \’e2\’80\’98experiences\’e2\’80\’99 past know that people online are, nine times out of ten, raving assholes”\par
\par
And you want me to be friends with them or not progress. Yeah great idea there.
February 23, 2006 at 9:02 am
Two ways to combat the “stupid and obsessed”…\par
\par
1. Make them pay for the content they consume. For a WoW example… make a player pay a micro-transaction to enter Molten Core. So if the catass consumes faster they pay more. It makes sense because they ARE using the games resources MORE. Casual gamers pay less.\par
\par
The problem will still exist in this model and more likely it would create a seperate debate about who has more money. However, the people paying for more content have every right to defend that they are paying for it and that if someone not paying for more content can just quit.\par
\par
The problem with WoW and monthly sub MMORPGs is that they create a falsehood of “everyone is created equal” because they are all paying the same. I pay $15 and deserve the same as the catass paying $15 a month.\par
\par
But like I stated changing the business model doesn’t get rid of the problem, but it does make it easier to defend. The people paying more support the game more and therefore deserve more than those unwilling to pay less or unskilled enough to progress far enough to purchase more content.\par
\par
NOTE: I don’t really support this model, but I understand it’s appeal. My hunch is SOE has a game featuring this business model hidden away.\par
\par
2. Fast progression with player created content as the end game focus. This is a much more appealing solution to the problem. Think Ultima Online and the skill system. The general “skilling up” was a short period. The acquisition of “uber loot” was null and void because you really spent most of your time in the regular crafted gear.\par
\par
Magical items were used, but really didn’t turn your character into a super power house ala WoW or EQ “uber loots”. Yes the items were more powerful, but with the high turnover of weapons and item decay they were in and out of the system (aside from the Blessed weapons).\par
\par
With UO’s fast progression everyone was soon on the same playing field. Most content at this point was player driven (talking pre-Trammel days). The catass may be online for 12 hours and own a castle, but there was probably a guild of casuals a click away that had already built an entire town.\par
\par
Then there was the PvP aspect which had a somewhat “player skill” driven concept. Better PvPers would kill lesser PvPers. Player Killers (PKs) ran rampant and soon there was Anti-PK springing up all over.\par
\par
Player drive content combats catass because the majority of gamers are not cat asses.
February 23, 2006 at 9:06 am
Raph Koster is a nutcase. Plain and simple. I’ve had this viewpoint for years now. He’s never seem completely ‘right’ to me, no matter how many times I’ve read his work, hear his talks or meet him in person. He’s always seem a little off kilter. But back to the topic at hand.\par
\par
Raph has a few points, I think. Although he then streaches them far beyond reasonable. For one thing, if you focus his discussion on end game content, which most people feel is the real meat of a game, then his points make sence. Building up to end game, typicaly is seen as just a hurdle that needs to be passed and serves no purpose other then to delay people from the end game.\par
\par
That being the case, while many do enjoy the large population of many MMOG’s. The difficulty they have tends to be an issue of time and patience. Many, with limited time, or limited patience, tend not to do well in raid based settings. This is because, Raids are slow, long, but I argue, typicaly unchallenging. Why unchallenging? Because you as the player typicaly are an insignificant aspect of the whole situation. You’re just one of fourty. a small fry that, while part of the whole becomes a strong force, you’re not really all that spectacular in what you do individually. It doesn’t seem challenging, and typicaly you’re just repeating the same function your class was primarly designed to do. Heal, swing a sword, or cast a spell. Their is no creativity in Raiding. Their can’t be because trying to orchestrate 40 people to do anything complexe usually is a Herculean trial of frustration and futility.\par
\par
That being said, Smaller raids, with just as good rewards but increased difficulty, can offer players more personal stories, more telling adventures and more interesting content to explore then yet another tale of defeating Ugh`sloghoth the Sloth Giant Lord for the 50th time to get the Ring of Slothyness but then, you lost the roll so you’ll need to go on another 50 raids and hope it pops again.\par
\par
THAT sounds like fun?
February 23, 2006 at 9:50 am
PvP game fan discovers WoW was not designed for his playstyle. News at 11:00!\par
\par
I hope that designers are now passed the point where they think they can hit all or even most playstyles in a single world and do a decent job for any of them. Unless of coarse you have mulitples of WoW’s budget.\par
\par
The guild issues have some broader appeals. I think it should be remembered that real communities are largely meta-game. In game systems should take that into account and enable that instead of working against it.
February 23, 2006 at 9:55 am
The exclusivuty of guilds has many problems. It also prevents the creation of narrow groups - say, a group of clerics that want to talk about cleric stuff - because said group is combat ineffective.\par
\par
Guild like tools must exist for forming “weak” groups of like minded players. You are right I want to hang out with like minded people, the trouble is I have a bunch of different like minded people and “like minded” isn’t transitive so we can’t put them in one giant uber guild.
February 23, 2006 at 10:02 am
Neglecting one play style for another works both ways. If solo items are just as good as group items, there won’t be any reason to do a group activity except for the hell of it (or more like the “fun” of it, which as we know, isn’t really fun).\par
\par
In that sense, I think Guild Wars got it right. The second best equipment is easy to get with minimal grinding. The best equipment is only slightly better, but requires tons of grinding. It isn’t considered efficient and the edge it gives is not noticable, but they do look much better than the second best. It gives catasses a sense of accomplishment, but it doesn’t really help them better to overcome someone in second-best gear who is much more skilled in pvp.\par
\par
I figure as long as pvp remains mostly inaffected by item benefits, people can settle for at least second or even third best, because skill differences will actually show.\par
\par
The point about communities, I think you hit it right on the money as usual. I dislike most people, and the people I happen to like aren’t on my server or I have to level up to 60 again to play with them on their server (or vice versa) and also have to deal with their 18 friends who I don’t like. In order to get to them, we need to both sacrifice something huge to our gaming experience for a while. The only way around it would be as if we bought the game brand new and we leveled together, and that’s not really possible for most people who already have a 60 grinding the dungeons.
February 23, 2006 at 10:49 am
“I can\’e2\’80\’99t think of a single time in the last 15 years in any online game where 5 let alone 10 people would have marked my avatar as a jerk in game.”\par
\par
That’s because marking you as a jerk wouldn’t tick you off.\par
\par
There are going to be 5, let alone 10, people who under any black-mark system will be sitting on a ledge in the city and spamming /target-next-player /blackmark-target.\par
\par
–GF
February 23, 2006 at 11:03 am
>>Damien Neil says on February 23rd, 2006 at 2:27 am:\par
\par
>> I wonder if the author has settled on one family yet.\par
\par
> This strikes to the heart of why he\’e2\’80\’99s right on this one point at least, and all the major MMOs are wrong.\par
\par
> I haven\’e2\’80\’99t settled on one family, and I\’e2\’80\’99ll bet you haven\’e2\’80\’99t either.\par
\par
He’s married. Chances are high that he meant the family you might found some day instead of the one you’re born into. And yes, that’s actually, at least to me, more tight-knit than my much wider circle of friends.\par
\par
> # Andrew Crystall says on February 23rd, 2006 at 7:46 am:\par
\par
> Eve, with the ability to have user-created chat channels, multiple chat windows open, resizeable, and tabs which flash when people speak should be the VERY minimum.\par
\par
You know you can do that in WoW too, right?
February 23, 2006 at 11:32 am
Thank jebus Scott saw this whackadoo for what it is - I read the article before I read his commentary and was starting to fear the worst…\par
\par
The argument that someone should be able to “solo for epics” is nothing more than e-peen envy. I’d be willing to bet that half (or more) of those people wouldn’t say a word if the colors weren’t universally known to be the “tiers” of loot valuation. How long before they’re bitching about not having solo-friendly Legendaries? Wit the new ultra-ultra-uber zone hitting in the next-ish patch I’m sure there will be a new half-dozen of them entering the loot tables for also-rans to be pissed about. I say that in a rather derogatory way, but my point is simply this - harder content == better rewards. While some look at that and say “it just requires time” or “lols grinding” - that shit ain’t easy. Access to those ultimo items is my reward for conquering difficult content.\par
\par
Within the paradigm of WoW’s “normal” gameplay there is simply no reasonable way to make something as challenging as Hakkar (or Ragnaros, Magmadar, Nefarion, Azuregos, et al) that would then be worth an equivalent loot table. With 20 and 40-player groups you can craft scenarios that require 3 different kinds of crowd-control, 3 off-tanks and 5 pooled healers or any of a hojillion other “strategies”. You can’t do that when your 5-player encounter, by definition, excludes 3 classes from attending.
February 23, 2006 at 11:39 am
Note: I have a great guild and a great group of friends that allowed me to catass 1..60 very, very quickly. After that I have raided at what could only be described as a languid pace. I raid 1-2 end-game zones a week at most and enjoy the lovely hues of my various accoutrements.\par
\par
I have cake. I eat cake, too. It’s not impossible.
February 23, 2006 at 12:06 pm
You do deserve just as much reward for playing solo as for playing in a 40 man group. You confirm the guys theory “people who group are more important than people who don’t”, but then say he’s wrong because 40 people should get better loot? How does that make any sense?\par
\par
40 people should get 40 times the loot, not better loot. If you want the best gear, you must group with a huge group. That is stupid. You should be able to get the best loot solo, or as a group. Most people don’t want to be in huge groups, they just have to because its the only way to get the best gear.
February 23, 2006 at 12:18 pm
Hank, then there’s no point grouping, since organising those 40 people is a challenge in itself. If grouping is pointless..why is it a MMO?\par
\par
\par
Gwaendar, WoW is by FAR the best MMO on the market for UI. It is perhaps the one thing from WoW which I hope other MMO makers will learn. (Did I mention I know Lua? :P)\par
\par
I mentioned Eve becase I really do thing it does the reasonable minimum. But other MMO’s in the pipeline like DDO and Auto Assualt…do not :/\par
\par
\par
As for rolling for loot…I like DDO’s system. Everyone can pull something out the chest. If it’s not what they want…they can trade.
February 23, 2006 at 12:19 pm
Oh, and Hellfire?\par
\par
Thanks for illustrating the weakness of a class-based MMO
February 23, 2006 at 1:08 pm
Raph Koster is a nutcase. Plain and simple. I\’e2\’80\’99ve had this viewpoint for years now. He\’e2\’80\’99s never seem completely \’e2\’80\’98right\’e2\’80\’99 to me, no matter how many times I\’e2\’80\’99ve read his work, hear his talks or meet him in person. He\’e2\’80\’99s always seem a little off kilter. But back to the topic at hand.\par
\par
I’m stalking you, too.\par
\par
But FWIW, I didn’t write the article.
February 23, 2006 at 1:28 pm
Sirlin’s entire argument is based off a flawed assumption. He believes that the only way for a MMORPG to be “fun” is to “win” and that “winning” requires the “phatest leewt”. The best loot is (currently) in high level PvP and 40-man raids. Everything else is time-investment grinding.\par
\par
I saw a lot of similar sentiments in DAoC. RvR was all. Leveling to 50 (or whichever battleground was popular) was the dues you had to pay to play the “real” game.\par
\par
Frankly, I have never seen the appeal of high level content. For me, the “fun” is the leveling. The developement of the character. I have never in my 8+ years of MMORPG playing ever maxed out a character. Not even in UO (where in the stack-of-pennies-macro days was laughably easy). When the character starts to stagnate, I loose interest and move on to something else.\par
\par
The run-all-over-creation missions in AO killed the game for me. Skill grinding in SW:G killed the game for me (I am most bitter about this one. LUM FIX PLZ K THX). The lack of noticeable improvement lvl45+ killed DAoC for me.
February 23, 2006 at 1:29 pm
(awwww, Raph has a best buddy!)\par
\par
“weakness of a class…” - Out of context quoting, but I play a paladin so I have to capture funny where I can. :(\par
\par
In all seriousness: Everything I was talking about is withing the existing WoW paradigm. If you look at Eve or DDO or make fundamental changes to the “normal” way WoW works? Totally different ballgame.\par
\par
WoW follows in the EQ mold of “randomizing” loot tables based on the mobs you’re killing. It doesn’t bother me per se, but I’d love to see more attention paid to the people who participate vs the RNG. Baby steps, I guess. I’m just glad shaman BP’s no longer drop during Alliance raids.\par
\par
ZG/AQ do solve *some* of that within the existing game mechanics. The quests are the quests, the components/faction to fulfill them are your rewards. You know exactly what you’re getting and approximately how much effort it will take from day-1. This is then supplimented by the “standard” loot drops that MMO players expect from whacking a giant foozle.
February 23, 2006 at 3:02 pm
I will say it once more: “How many wildly succesful MMORPGs will it takes before developper consider soloing a valid playstyle ?”. The solo-friendliness is no stranger to it’s mass appeal success.\par
\par
Grouping is not the end-all be-all of player retention and there is many soloer playing your games for YEARS that it’s not even funny.\par
\par
You Scott; you Raph; may keep playing games because of the social ties made within it; but me, and scores of others, end our subscription the day a guild or a large group is required to play…
February 23, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Hellfire you’re as bad as the original author. Catass finds out he doesn’t like casual gamers at 12!!!!?!?!?!?!?!111one!!#@$
February 23, 2006 at 3:47 pm
The general idea that other people suck and we all have to live with that is a major, major flaw in MMORPGs today.\par
\par
Politics and chaos and PvP effecting the world are ignored in todays MMORPGs and that’s a bad thing. These things would solve a lot of the “issues” currently under debate.\par
\par
Heros in Fantasy never had the best gear. They had the best souls.
February 23, 2006 at 4:27 pm
I agree with some points in the article (namely that raids shouldn’t give the absolute best gear, but that’s mostly because I think from a pvp standpoint such a huge gear discrepancy screws everything up), but mostly reading this last night annoyed me to no end.\par
\par
Yeah, I think raph’s a loon. A smart, well spoken loon. Basically my idea of fun and his don’t jive, so I’ll just disagree a lot. But this whole article wasn’t really raph’s thing.\par
\par
The one point that stuck me was “If you invest more time than someone else, you “deserve” rewards. People who invest less time “do not deserve” rewards. This is an absurd lesson that has no connection to anything I do in the real world. The user interface artist we have at work can create 10 times more value than an artist of average skill, even if the lesser artist works way, way more hours. The same is true of our star programmer. The very idea that time > skill is alien.”\par
\par
That is obviously written by someone who has never beaten their heads against the brick wall of a College Degree. Simply getting to the point of an interview in most jobs (at least on the east coast) is a quick pass over with “time in college” being more important than finding out if the person is skilled. Once you get past that, you can try and prove you’re good, but there are plenty of things in the world that assume time spent doing something (even say, 7 years of experience sucking at something versus a genious with 1 year of experience writing ground breaking code) is more important than actually evaluating skill. Or for something very basic, no matter how good a cook you are, if someone else starts to simmer for 30 minutes before you do, you’re not going to finish the 30 minutes of simmering before them.\par
\par
Anyways, the whole thing pretty much comes down to gear, and WoW’s suprising lack of stat caps (for the pvp game at least). Without stat caps, gear gets more and more out of hand, and leaves the non raiders more and more outclassed even if they decide to simply play the pvp game. I raided, I enjoyed it, but it wasn’t very fair when my character was placed in direct competition with someone who didn’t, no matter how well they played their character.\par
\par
But I like my guilds, be they small or large. I don’t feel that I have to only be friends with my guild, either. I guild with people I like who have similar goals. I chatgroup with people I like but don’t see as often (be they more casual or more hardcore than I am).
February 23, 2006 at 4:40 pm
Andrew:\par
“Hank, then there\’e2\’80\’99s no point grouping, since organising those 40 people is a challenge in itself. If grouping is pointless..why is it a MMO?”\par
\par
Its not a MMO. Its a MMOG. Speak the words, stop using a retarded partial acronym.\par
\par
Second, its a MMOG because there’s lots of people. Why do you think that its only a MMOG if people are forced into large unweildy groups? If people want to play that way, they can. If people don’t, they shouldn’t have to. If doing hard single player quest X gave me the same loot as doing hard 40 player quest X, only it gives it to all 40 people in the 40 player one, then everyone could play how they want, all be rewarded equally, and life would be good.\par
\par
But no, instead people have to insist that there is some inherent value in forcing people into large groups. And thus developers make the best loot only available to such groups, to reward them for putting up with being forced into a huge group in the first place. Its retarded.
February 23, 2006 at 4:50 pm
Ideally, an MMO would provide something for everyone to do that would eventually wind up with an equivalent reward for each path. Sadly, nobody does that because it’s Hard.\par
\par
The thing is, WoW’s raid pve is iffy in it’s difficulty. While BWL is worthy of good lewts, MC really isn’t. They’re bad epics, but still massively better than most blues.\par
\par
That said, large group coordination is only difficult if the reason they’re all together is phat lewt. If they enjoy being together, keeping a raid moving and being effective is a breeze. The key failures people make trying to form a leet raid guild is picking up people with conflicting personalities, and downtime between kills (boredom breeds lazy and pissy players, feed them mobs and they’ll stay busy).\par
\par
I’d like to see a game do a decent overall plotline/automated kingdom thing where you could join a “raid” simply by zoning into a battlefield, or go into one that was capped at fewer players, or do small solo stealthy missions.. but until that time comes, I figure solo play should be acceptable, but at the minimum a group isn’t asking all that much. 40 people is asking a lot, but I wouldn’t mind it if the loot wasn’t all that much better, it was simply there for people who wanted to raid for the sake of raiding, not winding up with gear that’s 20-30% more effective than anything else you can get.
February 23, 2006 at 5:13 pm
I play less than 10 hours a week. Usually what amounts to 2 or 3 raids worth or a night of questing, depending on where I can find a spot. I guess that doesn’t fit into the whole persecution complex “the casuals” try and build up when people who play for the same length time are able to do all the things they scream about NOT being able to do. I get to play whatever content I have a hankering for and collect my share of the phat lewts all without devoting 6 hours a night 5 nights a week to a game.\par
\par
Participating in 20 or 40-person content has no correlation to being a casual or hardc0re player. Some of the people in my guild have been playing since launch and have just started doing ZG runs as newly minted 60’s. They’re lucky to be able to play for more than an hour or two at a stretch. The guild makes the difference for that type of player. They are accepted in our guild and we welcome the limited time they have to adventure with us. Raids of any importance are posted and if they can make it they sign up.\par
\par
I enjoy the ability to solo while “grinding” out the early game. It’s nice to be able to jump into the game, achieve something meaningful and then jump right back out again. Spending more than 10 minutes LFG is NOT fun - I’m just as likely to log off and go play TrackMania or something else than I am to continue waiting. We’re also talking about MMO’s here, not Knights of the Old Republic. I don’t get why people are surprised or angered that a game with the words “massively multiplayer” in the description is unwilling/unable to provide a better single-player experience than Planescape.\par
\par
lern2casual, nub?
February 23, 2006 at 5:35 pm
Also… Even if you exclude the managerial issues from wrangling 40 people onto a raid target the fact still remains that no solo (or even 5-man) content can scale in difficulty enough to justify equivalent itemization. I already said as much earlier on - the depth of an expected raid force frees the encounter designers to put in very challenging stuff that they can then reward the player for appropriately. For what it’s worth there are a few hundred epic world-drops that anyone just out killing random_mob_001 can take solo or grouped. It’s just the luck of the draw.\par
\par
A solo player running a 20-step quest for 6 hours but never killing a mob higher than 56 isn’t deserving of a brand new Sulfuras. Furthermore wouldn’t that be the very epitome of a catass?\par
\par
WoW isn’t DDO. In the context of what WoW actually is there is simply nothing a single player can do that has an equivalent “difficulty” to what is required to kill Nefarian or Hakkar or Ragnaros or any of the big game. Could WoW be made to use more puzzle/crafty/thinky stuff to reward the solo player? Absolutely - and that would actually BE epic.
February 23, 2006 at 6:10 pm
from D-0ne:\par
Politics and chaos and PvP effecting the world are ignored in todays MMORPGs and that\’e2\’80\’99s a bad thing. These things would solve a lot of the \’e2\’80\’9cissues\’e2\’80\’9d currently under debate.\par
\par
They are ignored for a reason. I will never again play a game where I can be randomly killed, corpse-raped, and have all my personal effects (house included) stolen. I am not alone. Sheep is not a viable class. It never will be.\par
\par
The [good|bad] old days of UO are gone. Get over it.
February 23, 2006 at 7:27 pm
Harder content should NOT necessarily equal better rewards. This whole “raids should give better rewards because they’re hard” argument is silly and bogus.\par
\par
It’s predicated around the idea that the Game Devs should be some arbiters of fairness, dispensing content and loot as they see fit.\par
\par
To have a decent game, the Devs have to (As AC1 devs wisely did with Darktide) put themselves more into the *background* of determining winners and losers. Player-created forms of content, such as PvP or social structures, should be the fluid systems through which outcomes such as “better” and “worse” come.\par
\par
A great chat system, like EVE’s, is essential for this. So, too, is worldwide unrestricted PvP.\par
\par
From there, you give players *tools*, not restrictions, and let them work their magic.\par
\par
In games like AC1, your sword was a tool - your selected means by which you whacked whomever or whatever you chose to whack. Everybody’s sword was about as good as everybody else’s, and people coalesced into a relatively small number of player templates such that there wasn’t any big issue of “OMG he has that item/skill and I don’t” during the game’s golden era.\par
\par
In WoW, your sword is not a tool - it’s a restriction. One sword can be a hell of a lot better than the next, such that your gear is a ‘gatekeeper’ to post-60 content. You do one dungeon to get the gear that effectively lets you into the next dungeon, etcetera.\par
\par
\par
Also, Lum, you’re critically wrong when it comes to time invested in learning a skill being in any way equivalent to time invested in your character. The former is a fluid process, and one where you literally learn by doing; there is no mandated rate (or direction) to your learning. It’s a player-directed, player-centric process. As a result, it’s something people take to with gusto. I’ve never met anyone who’s felt put off by a fighting game just because other people knew a ton more combos than they did.\par
\par
Raising your character’s skills via XP earned by foozle-bashing or whatever is not a fluid system. It’s arbitrated by the game developers.\par
\par
The result is a feeling of relative powerlessness and pointlessness, and one of the major reasons WoW is a terrible game.\par
\par
It’s the difference between growing wings and learning to fly, and riding a rollercoaster on a track from beginning to end.\par
\par
Rollercoasters aren’t bad, per se, but I’d rather have the wings.
February 23, 2006 at 8:04 pm
The problem was Sirlin thought if he road the rollercoaster it would give him wings. He got stuck trying to explain why the rollercoaster should have wings to people who like the rollercoaster just fine. Instead, he needs to go play Planetside and EVE where you can at least deceive yourself into thinking you have wings for a little while.
February 23, 2006 at 11:12 pm
Hellfire: “I already said as much earlier on - the depth of an expected raid force frees the encounter designers to put in very challenging stuff that they can then reward the player for appropriately.”\par
\par
Plus, you mention sulfuras, which isn’t epic, it’s Legendary.\par
\par
Now, I will argue that Lucifron is as difficult an encounter as the DM king. Both are relative jokes with extremely minor technical aspects. Heck, Mar’li is easily 5x harder than anything pre rag in MC. But that’s the rub: Molten Core is too Easy to deserve epics off anything except Rag and maybe Domo if we’re going by “must be harder than 5 man content”. The fights simply aren’t difficult, half the raid can be afk, and if you really know what you’re doing you don’t even need 30 people for the first half of MC. Yet it drops gear that’s massively better than anything in an equivalent personal difficulty (meaning the amount of effort each player must put forth) encounters in the game.\par
\par
Heck, Mar’li and Jin’do don’t even always drop epics entirely because they’re only 20 man raid mobs, yet skill wise they require FAR more effort to kill than anything in MC (domo and rag come close). MC guilds were wiping like mad to ZG until they started to wake up and not afk through the fights like they did in MC.\par
\par
Blackwing Lair? AQ40? Epic worthy if you want to talk skill based fights, and needing to put forth more effort and a larger depth of encounter. But Molten Core alone blows a giant gaping hole in the idea that raiders put any more effort into getting the encounters that drop their tier 1 sets than 5 man players put into DM North and West. Or even ZG players who only get a garunteed epic off of Hakkar, versus the multiple epics off the easy bosses in MC, and random epics (about the same chance as getting a halberd of smiting..) off the TRASH.\par
\par
I was a raider. I liked Raiding with my guild, they were great people. But implying that clearing MC requires the players to be at the top of their game is blatantly false. You need to pay far more attention to successfully run DM north than you do to clear up to and including Golemagg. But if you run both of those activities for 4 hours (average guild time to clear up to and including golemagg), I wonder which group pulled out 14-20 epics, and which didn’t.\par
\par
Now, I’d totally agree with you if blues dropped off every MC mob, and Rag dropped a single epic per kill. But as is, they’re handed out like freaking candy for encounters that are not in any way shape or form difficult. And they’re not even minor epics, they’re full on badass compared to anything a 5 man can pull off. At least some of the ZG blues (emphasis on SOME) are as good as a low end epic. But those ZG runners put a heck of a lot more effort into getting that item than the sunday afternoon MC flatten.
February 23, 2006 at 11:44 pm
“The problem was Sirlin thought if he road the rollercoaster it would give him wings. He got stuck trying to explain why the rollercoaster should have wings to people who like the rollercoaster just fine.”\par
\par
Heh, fair enough.\par
\par
The problem with this, though?\par
\par
If there weren’t so many simpletons willing to just ride the rollercoaster, the devs probably would have built us wings by now. The two best ‘wings’ examples, early AC1 Darktide and pre-Trammel UO, are both long gone now. We’re moving in the wrong direction rather consistently, it seems, and the EQ crowd - people who will apparently be happy with any old crap - has led that trend with their dollars.\par
\par
A lot of us who railed against EQ and its ilk weren’t like Lum - we didn’t Rant Because We Care, like EQ was some flawed but enjoyable game. We saw it as the embodiment of everything wrong with this Diku-ified direction of MMOs, wrong down to the core.\par
\par
Sure, one might counter “You’re telling people what they should want!”, but libertarian as I am, telling people what they want *works*, whether in politics or in culture, if you’re persistent enough and you can get the necessary volume (opinion-makers) and style (persuasiveness) on your side.\par
\par
Ranting against WoW, just like EQ, is not to get the game “fixed”. It’s unfixable, rotten to the core. The point is, operating on the logic that human beings are social and persuadable creatures (and there’s a whole mountain of evidence to this effect), to drill in the “No, you don’t *really* like WoW, even if you think you do” message until it finally sticks.\par
\par
Unless the barriers to entry for MMO-making go down significantly (Despite some interesting efforts like Multiverse, I doubt it), those of us who want non-Diku gameplay (AKA a ‘world’), a minority, aren’t going to be much of a draw for game development dollars. Our options are either sit around bored with nothing to play, play games like WoW that are fundamentally contrary to the nature of our enjoyment, or convince other people that they’re wrong to enjoy what they do.\par
\par
Option 3 is certainly a longshot, but the opportunity costs are low (everyone loves hearing themselves talk on the internet!) and Options 1 and 2 aren’t any good.\par
\par
The same is true not only for changing what people play, but changing what people talk about. Anyone who writes about how they wish they could have their WoW with a bit more ‘world’ tossed in needs it beaten into their head repeatedly what it takes to have a real ‘world’ in a MMO (And I use the phrase ‘world’ in the fun sense, not in the Hay Guys Let’s Get Fat and Go To A RenFaire For LARP sense… in other words, not in a way that would exclude casual gamers), and how WoW (and EQ, and DAoC, and EQ2) are fundamentally incompatible with that.
February 24, 2006 at 12:08 am
So, let me get this straight:\par
\par
People don’t actually like what they a) say they like, b) pay for, and c) give every evidence of enjoying ? And you reach this conclusion because you don’t like what they like?\par
\par
Dude. No offense, but do you also think all positions besides missionary should be prosecutable offenses, or are you more of the philosophy that if you TELL people they don’t enjoy the more interesting variations, then eventually they’ll… stop? Or something?\par
\par
I’m perfectly comfortable believing that some people like WoW, some people like DAOC, and some people like Kama’s Wheel. Mainly because all the evidence available to me on this here internet as well as in my experience would seem to support my thesis. But hey, thanks for tonight’s demonstration of solipsism in action.
February 24, 2006 at 12:17 am
Dave Sirlin stepped in it…\par
\par
\tab Since I’m neither an executive at a large corporation with nothing better to do than post in my blog (http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/02/22/dave-sirlin-rips-wow/), nor have I just left my job and have nothing better to do than post in my blog (http://…
February 24, 2006 at 1:05 am
I would love to get people’s thoughts on the second life concept in comparison to WOW. I can’t get my head around whether SL has a chance (in the l-o-n-g term, not today for sure) of creating something as rich and rewarding and popular as a strict game-driven MMO?
February 24, 2006 at 2:31 am
“People don\’e2\’80\’99t actually like what they a) say they like, b) pay for, and c) give every evidence of enjoying ? And you reach this conclusion because you don\’e2\’80\’99t like what they like?”\par
\par
No, you misunderstood. I fully accept that people like what they say they like. I’m just saying that with a concerted effort, you can convince people of pretty much anything - in this case, that they don’t really like WoW/EQ. I’m also arguing that the genre would be better for it.\par
\par
The alternative would be to say that whatever the most people like is best; i.e., Myst and Deer Hunter. Of course, to go that route is to generally reject the idea that there’s such a thing as ‘high’ and ‘low’ culture.\par
\par
“Dude. No offense, but do you also think all positions besides missionary should be prosecutable offenses, or are you more of the philosophy that if you TELL people they don\’e2\’80\’99t enjoy the more interesting variations, then eventually they\’e2\’80\’99ll\’e2\’80\’a6 stop? Or something?”\par
\par
You can convince people of pretty much anything, given enough effort - to use your example, sex can be pretty hard to enjoy if you drill a kid enough with guilt and shame via abstinence-only education and church.\par
\par
Of course, you’re picking pretty much the world’s most hard-wired response to stimuli around. It’d be a lot easier to convince people to drop EQ than it would be to get them to stop enjoying blowies.\par
\par
“I\’e2\’80\’99m perfectly comfortable believing that some people like WoW, some people like DAOC, and some people like Kama\’e2\’80\’99s Wheel. Mainly because all the evidence available to me on this here internet as well as in my experience would seem to support my thesis. But hey, thanks for tonight\’e2\’80\’99s demonstration of solipsism in action.”\par
\par
Oh, of course plenty of people do - you misunderstood my point. WoW is the most popular MMO in existence right now, I’m not disputing that, and it’s because people like it.\par
\par
That said, from the perspective of someone who likes MMOs, MMO development is more of a zero-sum game than single player games; if the devs are making something that WoW players want, it means they’re not making something you want. The much higher barriers to entry for making MMOs, as opposed to single player games, means that your options of where to play are much more limited, and devs are going to go where the cash is.\par
\par
Thus, if I want something fun to play, preaching to the players is more likely to reap positive rewards than preaching to devs or just sitting quiet and hoping someone will make the kind of MMO I’m interested in again.\par
\par
Of course, to be most effective, you’ve usually got to make like the LaRouche kids; go about it indirectly, exploit pre-existing fault lines in the community (casuals vs raiders in WoW, for instance), that sort of thing.\par
\par
MMOs also have a special frustration to them that single-player games don’t; the games you’d love to play have already been made (for me, pre-Trammel UO, and golden era AC1 Darktide), but were then un-made by time and external forces.\par
\par
It’s like playing Sonic the Hedgehog, and while you’re still in love with playing it, the game devs fly to your house and take back the cartridge. You’re left with a bitter pill to swallow.
February 24, 2006 at 7:44 am
I don’t know if they fixed it in the time between when I left and now (approx a year? longer?) but when instead of fixing the problem of people sniping from rooftops where the guards couldn’t get them by either allowing the guards to climb or equipping them with bows, they decided to simply say “don’t go up there anymore or you will get in trouble” I quit and never looked back. That is just pure lazy, and worse, its a horrible way to admin a game. You should never tell your players to quit exploiting a game engine fault, unless in a temporary way until you can fix it, which should be as quickly as possible. Was it annoying getting killed from bastards on rooftop while the guards for the city clustered around the base of the building trying to get at him? yes. But I would rather go through that a thousand times than have the devs simply say “stop it” without actually fixing anything. thats just rediculous.\par
\par
Additionally, I agree with the original author about the soloing bit, though I am apparently in the minority. I question the truthfulness of anyone who says they soloed all the way to 60. Or rather, I question your memory since you are probably forgetting pickup groups and random raids you were invited to. its possible to get through the game without a guild (though extremely difficult, and becoming more so as time passes) but it is not possible to get through the game solo. It simply cannot be done.\par
\par
Several of my friends still play WoW, though I have no idea why, and as I understand it currently, if you are not in a guild, you do not expect to go on any large raids… ever. There are no pickup groups, because everyone is in a guild, and their guild has scheduled the dungeon raid for thursday, and non guild members arent invited, and they’re not going without their guild because nobody else is inviting non-guild members to raids either, and the cycle continues.\par
\par
The biggest problem I have with WoW is that its extremely unforgiving if you don’t want to farm molton core (or whatever it is now) 50 times for the boots your character is required to have or be gimped when compared to characters who HAVE those boots. In the end, you ultimately end up with a character who is identical to the same race/class standing next to you, because you both got the same items, and you both “specced” the same way, and thats just the way it is. The end game of WoW is a battle between cookie cutter-esk players all fighting each other for the title of most generic. There just are not enough item options at higher levels. You pick from one of four “suits” of armor, and that means that one out of every four of your class/race looks just like you. You have several ways to spec your skills, but if you don’t pick the one or two specific ways that are known to be superior to the to the others based on years of testing, then congratulations, you may be different, but now you’re gimped. Good luck in pvp.\par
\par
I think the idea that WoW is wide open with possibilities is deceptive.\par
\par
my two cents.
February 24, 2006 at 8:26 am
J,\par
You must know by now that I believe the implimentation of PvP in UO was a mess. To much focus on killing each other and the resulting punishemnt for being killed effecting the victim.\par
\par
No. What I’m trying to communicate is that communities in current MMORPGs lack an effective political structure within the game mechanics that actually effect the gaming environment. DAoC comes close but is still miles away.\par
\par
The successful assasination of the top guilds leader should effect the guild and the guilds surrounding community far more than the guild leader. If you’re a pawn in the guild the effect of killing you is meaningless to everyone. If you’re the second in command the effect of assasinating you should be real to everone on your side.
February 24, 2006 at 8:44 am
Quote -\par
I\’e2\’80\’99m stalking you, too.\par
\par
But FWIW, I didn\’e2\’80\’99t write the article.\par
—\par
\par
Well Raph, You’ll have to excuse us then if you got pinned for this but, It sure as hell reads like something you might have wrote to me. I’ll stand by my view that anytime I’ve seen you talk or read any articles of yours. That in the past few years, especialy, you’ve gone further and further away from what I think the base is, and moved into space that I call madness. Maybe we’re miss-reading into your statements. Perhaps we’re missing something. Something inside of you that helps make sence of all this but, lately what I’ve been hearing is to me, a lot of nonsence.\par
\par
Hey, I call em how I see em.
February 24, 2006 at 9:40 am
“Or rather, I question your memory since you are probably forgetting pickup groups and random raids you were invited to. its possible to get through the game without a guild (though extremely difficult, and becoming more so as time passes) but it is not possible to get through the game solo. It simply cannot be done.”\par
\par
Not only can it be done, it can be done easily and very quickly. I personally have leveled two toons to 60 (hunter and rogue) and never grouped with them at all, ever. On top of that, the only time I ever grouped with my main (paladin) prior to hitting 60 was to run through Zul Farak to finish a bunch of quests. And honestly, it wasn’t worth it. I’d have been better off grinding solo. And right now I’m soloing up my 4th, 5th, and 6th toons (priest, druid, warrior) by alternating so they’re always getting rest XP. I doubt I’ll group with any of them either. Grouping prior to 60 in WoW is a complete and utter waste of time aside from the socializing.
February 24, 2006 at 10:05 am
Raph Koster makes some of the worst games on the planet. His opinion on the time of day, let alone gaming, has no value.
February 24, 2006 at 10:29 am
D-one wrote:\par
\par
How about a system of get enough black marks and you *can\’e2\’80\’99t* do the 40 person raids because too many members of the community think you\’e2\’80\’99re a jerk? Complicated? Not really. Unfair? Not really.\par
\par
Yeah I hate getting ganked. How about…every time you gank a newbie with any character, none of the characters on your account can enter an instance until they get at least one more day on /played. Then double it for each subsequent infraction. I don’t know if it’s possible to make rules in here that would work since you have situations of newbies attacking and groups of newbies attacking. Maybe if you attack someone who considers you gray, you can be ganked for 10 mins? But it would make people think, and I’ll bet highlevel players could avoid ganking if they tried. It would also stop the stupid “highlevels protecting their friends lowlevel alts” routine that screws up otherwise legit pvp. If it could stop that last situation, it would be worth it.
February 24, 2006 at 10:55 am
Joe - ah, I see what you’re saying. I did misunderstand.\par
\par
(Side note - sex is the most hardwired thing, true, but I chose it as the basis for my analogy because the same parts of the brain are stimulated during any intense pleasurable activity. Some of us in our wilder, unfettered days may have accused the uberguilds of whacking the monkey during raids, but the scientific truth is that they didn’t NEED to - because it would have been redundant from a brain chemistry point of view.)\par
\par
I still think you’re crazy, but in a Don Quixote sort of way as opposed to a dangerous egotistical fascist kind of way ;)\par
\par
And Joe? FWIW, there are plenty of devs right now growing disenchanted with the dominant idea that if you don’t have 40 million bucks and a whole lot of rats pounding the pellet bar, you’re screwed. I truly believe that the “next big thing” is going to be smaller, niche world games. I don’t think what you want is ever going to attract forty million investment dollars, but someone’s eventually going to pony up two. Are you willing to accept less than stellar graphics and web-based CS, though?
February 24, 2006 at 11:11 am
Quoting Angry Bob:\par
\’e2\’80\’9cGrouping prior to 60 in WoW is a complete and utter waste of time aside from the socializing. \’e2\’80\’9c\par
\par
And maybe, just maybe, that is an integral part to WoW tremendous success.
February 24, 2006 at 11:43 am
“This is important: rewards for the effort of 1 person isn\’e2\’80\’99t good enough. As long as better exists, that will be the baseline. \’e2\’80\’9cWhy can\’e2\’80\’99t I get the same stuff as the 40 people working together. I\’e2\’80\’99m smart! I should be able to get the same stuff! Or stuff just as good. It had better be just as good, too, or else it may as well not exist.\’e2\’80\’9d”\par
\par
I’m hoping developers DON’T learn this lesson. I agree it’s probably true for the general gaming population, but I like solo content, and I don’t give a damn if the rewards don’t match the rewards for raid content. If the rewards match, the raiders will be out farming the solo content instead of off somwhere where they’re not in my way.
February 24, 2006 at 1:15 pm
[...] Gamasutra’s piece ‘World of Warcraft Teaches the Wrong Things‘, which I posted to Slashdot the other day, has generated a lot of talk amongst the usual suspects. Tobold’s reaction was that he got some things right and some things wrong. Scott Jennings points out the many ways in which the author was pretty clueless. My reaction? [...]
February 24, 2006 at 1:26 pm
Sanya said: “And Joe? FWIW, there are plenty of devs right now growing disenchanted with the dominant idea that if you don\’e2\’80\’99t have 40 million bucks and a whole lot of rats pounding the pellet bar, you\’e2\’80\’99re screwed. I truly believe that the \’e2\’80\’9cnext big thing\’e2\’80\’9d is going to be smaller, niche world games.”\par
\par
/nods\par
\par
Garage Games’ Marble Blast Ultra is a great example of what Indie developers can do on a small budget in the console space, a traditionally difficult space for indies to break into at all. There’s no reason it can’t work for MMOs.\par
\par
WRT the main topic, I think it’s interesting that people (including myself) keep coming up with ways that WoW sucks, and yet whatever-million-they’re-up-to-now people don’t seem to agree. Blizzard must be doing something right, even if it doesn’t jive with our own concepts of good game design.\par
\par
Amber
February 24, 2006 at 1:27 pm
\par
from my last game’s guild who I still keep in touch with despite the fact that they don’t play WoW, period. The implied thought that the only way you can maintain the bonds you have in game is if you’re always doing the same thing at the same time is absurd. If you translated that dynamic into real life, the behavior would be egregiously unhealthy. I’m sure there’s a psychiatric term for it. In a cross-gender relationship it sounds like codependence.\par
This strikes to the heart of why he\’e2\’80\’99s right on this one point at least, and all the major MMOs are wrong.\par
\par
I haven\’e2\’80\’99t settled on one family, and I\’e2\’80\’99ll bet you haven\’e2\’80\’99t either. I\’e2\’80\’99ve got the family I was born into, the friends I made in my backwoods Connecticut hometown as a child, the friends I made in college, the friends I made in college, the friends I made in my new home in Silicon Valley, the people I work with, and numerous other \’e2\’80\’9cfamilies\’e2\’80\’9d. These groups overlap. I spend more time hanging out with my coworkers and SV friends than I do with my birth family\’e2\’80\’a6and yet, I go home to be with that family most every Christmas. I feel no less close to them despite that fact.\par
\par
…\par
\par
I started playing WoW with various real life friends. We founded a guild so we could hang out and chat together. Over time, however, half of those people have left the guild for others. Some wanted to raid, some wanted more roleplaying, and so on. It wasn\’e2\’80\’99t that they wanted to stop associating with the rest of us\’e2\’80\ldblquote just that the game mechanics forced them to make a choice.\par
\par
Wait.. so you can’t play with those friends ever again because they’re in another guild? You can’t type, say, /join DamienClub in game and keep in touch with them? You can’t shoot them whispers in game to see how they’re doing or if they want to join up with you?\par
\par
What you’re saying, from my perspective, seems to be akin to the following:\par
\par
Me and my buddies used to enjoy playing soccer together, but it was an informal thing. Then some of my buddies really got into sports, and they signed up for soccer teams. Now I can’t talk to them ever, or do anything with them, because they don’t like to play in the county soccer league any longer.\par
\par
Huh?\par
\par
My family in my game is my guild. But I have friends aside from that. I even have friends (and some “family”
\par
A guild is a way to organize people who have the most things in common. If your friends leave to go to a raiding guild and you stay behind because you’re not into that, then within the context of the game, you don’t have as much in common with your friends as the raiding guild does. This says nothinga bout your friendship and whether or not you can still regard these guys as your “family” though.
February 24, 2006 at 1:35 pm
Aufero as it has been alluded to in other posts solo content doesn’t mean easy content. Raid content does not mean hard content.\par
\par
Thats the false belief that developers push on the players and as Joe has gone in depth to talk about it is something that is relatively easy to make people believe en masse.\par
\par
The raid content of WoW could be debated all day whether it’s rewards are worth the challenge. Same could be said about 5 man dungeons. Same could be said about solo content.\par
\par
It’s driven into MMOGers heads that raid = harder = better loot. When in fact the difficulty of the content is exactly in the developers hands. Developers just cop out knowing that increasing group size artificially increases the difficulty for the average player. Organizing people is hard unless you all know each other and have played togehter for years.\par
\par
Its a sad and common occurence in the Diku based MMOG.\par
\par
\par
And on a final note. Hellfire you may play 10 hours a week now, but your catass logged thousands of hours to get to that point… unless you have a very forgiving guild that lets you afk through raids and still roll on loot. If that is the case you are in the 0.01% of WoW raiders that plays 10 hours a week and still gets the same chance on rolls as everyone else.\par
\par
If I was in that 0.01% I would say the same exact thing you do… oh come on it isn’t that hard… look at me I play 10 hours a week and I am purple from head to toe.
February 24, 2006 at 1:37 pm
I will say it once more: \’e2\’80\’9cHow many wildly succesful MMORPGs will it takes before developper consider soloing a valid playstyle ?\’e2\’80\’9d. The solo-friendliness is no stranger to it\’e2\’80\’99s mass appeal success.\par
\par
Do you at least see a little bit of the irony in making semi-petulant demands that Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games really ought to do a better job of entertaining players who want to play by themselves and minimize multiplayer interactions?
February 24, 2006 at 2:20 pm
“Do you at least see a little bit of the irony in making semi-petulant demands that Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games really ought to do a better job of entertaining players who want to play by themselves and minimize multiplayer interactions?”\par
\par
No. Massively multiplayer means there’s lots of other people, that you CAN interact with, AS YOU SEE FIT. It does not have to mean that you are forced to interact with those people in ways you don’t like, all the time. The real world is massively multiplayer too, but I don’t have to spend a half hour trying to find a group before I can go to the mall.
February 24, 2006 at 2:56 pm
mouselock says:\par
>Wait.. so you can\’e2\’80\’99t play with those friends ever again because\par
>they\’e2\’80\’99re in another guild? You can\’e2\’80\’99t type, say, /join DamienClub\par
>in game and keep in touch with them? You can\’e2\’80\’99t shoot them\par
>whispers in game to see how they\’e2\’80\’99re doing or if they want to\par
>join up with you?\par
\par
Of course I can, and do. You miss the point.\par
\par
WoW, like other games of its ilk, has a concept of a “guild”. This is a concept that’s supported by the game mechanics–guilds get a private chat channel, you can easily see who is online in a guild, guild affiliations are visible, and so forth. You can only be in one guild.\par
\par
You can mimic many of these concepts without using the game-supported guild interface: You can create a chat channel, add all the people in it to your friends list, and so forth.\par
\par
However, consider this scenario: You’re a member of a guild–an actual guild, supported by the game UI. This guild is casual, though, and you want to get into raiding. A raid guild approaches you and offers you a position. The game UI now forces you to choose which guild you want to be in.\par
\par
Yes, you can create a MyFriends channel and invite all your old guildmates to it. (Oops, you can only be in ten channels at once–tough luck if too many of your friends do this.) What you can’t replace, however, is the association with the guild as a whole: The new members that join after you leave, the people you never got to know all that well, and so on.\par
\par
And so when people quit a guild, they drift apart from it. They retain ties to specific friends, but they don’t retain a tie to the community of the guild.\par
\par
And, as I said, this is entirely unlike the way people form communities in real life. For example…\par
\par
Gwaendar says:\par
> He\’e2\’80\’99s married. Chances are high that he meant the\par
> family you might found some day instead of the one\par
> you\’e2\’80\’99re born into. And yes, that\’e2\’80\’99s actually, at least to\par
> me, more tight-knit than my much wider circle of friends.\par
\par
He’s married, and he has a job. If life worked the way most MMOGs do, he’d have had to /gquit his marriage to get a job–after all, his wife and kids just aren’t enough people to field a decent raid group. You need to hook up with an uber guild like if you want to raid the retail market.\par
\par
This is the complaint that David Sirlin had: Restricting membership to one guild prioritizes one community that you belong to over the others. It makes certain communities mutually exclusive. And it generally prioritizes the WRONG community–your “business associations” rather than your “family”.
February 24, 2006 at 3:32 pm
Quoting mouselock:\par
“Do you at least see a little bit of the irony in making semi-petulant demands that Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games really ought to do a better job of entertaining players who want to play by themselves and minimize multiplayer interactions?”\par
\par
I find it ironic that after so many years of people soloing in MMORPGs, even when it’s usually the least rewarded path, you and so many others still have the guts to tell us: You should not enjoy this game, go play a single player game…\par
\par
Do any of your non-MMORPGs hobby require you to group with 40 semi-unknown peoples ?
February 24, 2006 at 5:30 pm
Well Raph, You\’e2\’80\’99ll have to excuse us then if you got pinned for this but, It sure as hell reads like something you might have wrote to me. I\’e2\’80\’99ll stand by my view that anytime I\’e2\’80\’99ve seen you talk or read any articles of yours. That in the past few years, especialy, you\’e2\’80\’99ve gone further and further away from what I think the base is, and moved into space that I call madness. Maybe we\’e2\’80\’99re miss-reading into your statements. Perhaps we\’e2\’80\’99re missing something. Something inside of you that helps make sence of all this but, lately what I\’e2\’80\’99ve been hearing is to me, a lot of nonsence.\par
\par
Hey, I call em how I see em. \par
\par
That’s fine, you’re entitled to your opinion. Blaming me because it sounds like something you think I could have written, that’s just careless reading though. :)\par
\par
I’d love to discuss the aspects of my madness with whoever. Self-knowledge like that can only bring me closer to union with the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It’s probably not apropos for this comment thread, however.
February 24, 2006 at 5:34 pm
“And Joe? FWIW, there are plenty of devs right now growing disenchanted with the dominant idea that if you don\’e2\’80\’99t have 40 million bucks and a whole lot of rats pounding the pellet bar, you\’e2\’80\’99re screwed. I truly believe that the \’e2\’80\’9cnext big thing\’e2\’80\’9d is going to be smaller, niche world games. I don\’e2\’80\’99t think what you want is ever going to attract forty million investment dollars, but someone\’e2\’80\’99s eventually going to pony up two. Are you willing to accept less than stellar graphics and web-based CS, though? “\par
\par
Heh, I’d gladly take those tradeoffs. Hell, AC1 and UO were both huge duds in the graphics department (Though AC1 did have interesting art direction to compensate for the outdated technical specs).\par
\par
I just have a hard time seeing those niche worlds coming to pass - particularly in terms of unrestricted PvP.\par
\par
Good, unrestricted PvP requires a lot of things to go right:\par
\par
-A large world, enough that you can spread out and hide out in the boonies from the bigger fish in the sea if you want to.\par
\par
-Some sort of physics/twitch involvement so that player skill is a major determinant. For instance, in AC1, if an arrow or spell is shot at you, and you physically step out of the way, it misses. No dice roll or anything like that. This became a major issue to me when I was trying out DAoC’s all-PvP server; there just wasn’t enough twitch involved.\par
\par
-A lack of grind to be PVP-competitive. AC1 had, back in the day, a complex system of unintended “features” and exploits that, while not intended by the devs, essentially meant that you gained XP rapidly based on your membership in a guild and the territory your guild controlled.\par
\par
-A way to hurt other players. This works better if it involves taking their stuff as opposed to taking their XP.\par
\par
-A world that’s big, but not *too* big relative to the size of players. This becomes a problem as game subscription numbers change; AC1 has nearly doubled in size since its release (dungeons and world locations included), yet its population is between 1/5th and 1/10th of what it once was. The balance of world size to population is no longer there.\par
\par
\par
So, yeah - I’d love it if smaller indie games could pull off a good ‘world-y’ MMO, but I’m not sure it’s in the cards, at least for another few years.\par
\par
Frankly, the only semi-decent hope I see right now is a WoW unlimited-PvP server (no factions) with a heavily modified ruleset.\par
\par
Why WoW hasn’t tried one of those already is beyond me.\par
\par
But again, that’s settling for a lot lower than what once existed - so it’s bound to be a bitter pill. When I hear some of the awful noise that passes for ‘rap’ music today on the radio, I can pop in a Tribe Called Quest CD and return to the good old days. Not so when you depend on people for the fun.
February 24, 2006 at 8:11 pm
“Aufero as it has been alluded to in other posts solo content doesn\’e2\’80\’99t mean easy content. Raid content does not mean hard content.”\par
\par
Not the point. If there’s solo content with similar rewards to raid content, it will be perceived as easier, and there will be ten times as many people getting in my way trying to do it. (And if it’s actually difficult, all of them will whine until it’s made easier. After all, solo content is supp