The less time I have to play Mmo's, the more I realize that leveling system's are often a hinderance to gamers who dont have alot of time.
Some may argue that mmo's already cater to the casual gamer too much. That the hardcore playstyle has to be rewarded, and that levels are one representation of the amount time put into a game. If there are no levels, then what do you grind for. What new shiny reward to you get when you accomplish something in the game.
The inherent problem with levels, is that in most games you have to play with someone at or near your level. Unless the game has some type of apprentice system. Even so, most apprentice systems arent as appealing to the character with the higher level.
Thousands of players online, but i can only select from the small percentage of folks who happen to be at my level and online at the same time as me. Think how much fun the game would be if you could team up with anyone, anytime and the group be enjoyable for both parties.
Who hasnt found themselves in this situation plenty of times. You meet someone from a good group outing, add them to your friends list, get busy with work, life, etc... log back on and they are 20 levels higher than you!!! Or Vice Versa! Doesnt really seem like a great way to build community, does it?
While many mmo games like to have a thriving community, I feel that levels actually prohibit community development, since you can only group with people at your same skill level. It's extremely rare to meet someone who stays at your level, unless you decide to only use that character when both people are on, and if im paying a monthly fee, im definatley not waiting to play!
Levels are an outdated system used to show advancment. Levels also obsolete alot of the game world as the game matures. There are many ways to show character advancement, repution systems, ala wow, trophy systems, ala warhammer online, badge system, ala cox.
I always thought that levels were purely psychological mumbo jumbo to keep the player base appeased. Sure players feel more powerful when you go to an area as a level 22 and smash level 10 mobs. But, an alternative way to simulate this would be to have players skill against mobs increase over time.
Not with any type of trackable level or skill advancement. For example, if player x kill troll's everyday for a week, in the beginning they will be harder to kill, but by the end of the week player x will be mowing them down. Simply put, the more u do something the better you get at it. Similarly as my adventures take me to other lands, my skill against trolls would diminish, however it would take less time to become proficient at dispatching them if I chose to take them on again.
Grouping when exploring new area's in encouraged, as players will have less experience fighting the mobs. As the groups skill increases fighting certain types of monsters, they can aid other groups/guildmates new to the area.
Of course, their are some real roadblocks when designing a game with no levels. How do you handle itemization, Gear, and skill advancement....
But that, is another tale....
Showing posts with label game design. Show all posts
Showing posts with label game design. Show all posts
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Friday, June 6, 2008
Whatever happened to Star Trek Online?
For some strange reason, wondering what happened to this game has been on my mind.
While I was excited with the original announcement of the game going into development back in September of 2004. I always wondered how they could pull it off. Finding details on the game was extremely difficult back then. I believe even a couple of fan sites launched and eventually closed as it became obvious that the game would not see the light of day.
I cant say that im surprised. Ever since the game announcement, I always felt MMo's lacked the innovation to develop a game from the Star Trek IP. The game details that eventually surfaced were miniscule, simple screenshots of a ship interior, or the concept design of the avatar's in the game. However, Eventually some core game design info came out. None of which I thought were positive.
The core reason, or rather the fatal design flaw which doomed the game in my view, is making it a 1st/3rd person game.
The game would revolve around players Players who would start at Starfleet Academy, where they would have learn basic game skills. After graduating they would get assignments on ships, planets and star bases.
But how much can you really do on a federation starship? Run quests? Simulations on the holodeck perhaps? The fact of the matter is, life on a federation starship is quite boring most of the time. Especially for a lowly ensign. At least thats how it seems to me. Besides, the Star Trek Universe is based more on political and moral dilemmas, with combat as a last resort.
Large Ship to ship combat was going to use a teamwork system. Where players assigned to your ship would help you in combat situations. I didnt like this design decision as well. How do you make the science officer's role fun and endgaging. How do you stop mr chekov from firing at will? It is a game after all, kids will do what they do. Forced grouping is always bad in my eyes, and this appeared to be another game killing design flaw.
As of right now, I dont think the technology exists to make a MMo game that is true to the Star Trek universe.
If I were to play a star trek mmo, I would prefer a game designed around running a starship crew, not an indivual person. The core gameplay would evolve around leveling up and assembling a crew. I would start the game in starfleet acadamey, you have control over a small group of cadets, whom you train to fill the core ship needs. Captain, engineer, helm, science officer etc...
Your level in the game is represented by two factors, your crew size, and your ship class. Since there is no cash in star trek, as you complete missions you gain prestige or rep. You would use this to increase the stats of your crew, or to garner more favor with starfleet to gain a promotion or new ship.
Every player has a ship and crew and players can work together for combat missions, space exploration, saving the universe type stuff. Of course players can join non federation factions as well, klingons, romulans, and engage in pvp combat. In fact a star trek mmo based on the klingon empire would probrably way more engaging than a federation effort.
Graphics would need to by simple and stylized, when a pary beams down to a planet you would need to be able to see multiple crews at the same time. Similar to an rts. I would have slightly better ship graphics for ship to ship combat and damage modeling.
Instead of crafting in the game I would have planet building. Once players reach a certain level of prestige they would be allowed to create an explorable planet, generate quests, policitical intrigue and problems. Based on a certain rules the developers have designed within the planet generator tool. Once you create your planet it would enter the game world in unexplored space. Similar to the concepts behind the unreleased "spore" game.
Players can visit your planet, solve quests and explore. There should be some way to reward players for good planet design as well.
just my ramblings on STO. While I still dont think its possible to make star trek online in the current environment. Who knows, maybe the new developers can pull it off.
Monday, June 2, 2008
No AOC for me
Since my pc lacks the power to play AOC in all its glory I am forced to put it on the backburner. Its not that I dont think aoc is a fun game or would look great on a new machine. Its just that in order for me to justify a $1000 dollar upgrade, the game has to do more than be just a pretty face.
It has to be a keeper.
Granted, not knowing first hand is a handicap. But having read countless forum post's, video reviews and blogs. I have come to the conclusion that while AOC may not be perfect, it is definately a fun game that many will enjoy.
While the general opinion seems to be that itemization and end game content are not finished. For a casual gamer like myself this is a non issue. Basically, what it comes down to is economics. Cold - hard - cash.
How do you define a games fun level, is it worth $1000 dollars? Is the amount of fun I can gain from AOC worth that much of an upgrade? For me, the answer is "NO".
For me to upgrade to that extreme 1 of 2 things has to happen.
1. The game has to be considered the "second coming" a "must buy" a "10" ala GTA4. (which I will prolly be getting a ps3 and this instead of my new rig)
Thats not the feeling I get from Aoc posts and forums... the feeling I get is its a good game with the potential to be great. That the game is still fun, even though it has not yet delivered on all its promises. It's not even shipping with DX10(I always thought those aoc dx10 screenshots looked a little iffy!)
Or the second thing is
2. My system can no longer play any and all new and upcoming games.
Those are the conditions I look for, and unfortunately AOC just doesnt fit the bill right now. I still play cod4 on a regular basis and enjoy it.
Before I heard about AOC, I new my pc was aging, but I never really thought about upgrading yet...(maybe next year, after taxes...)
Who knows, maybe in 3 months if it hits that "great" tag, perhaps I'll reconsider.
Looks like the streets of liberty city may be my next home for now.
It has to be a keeper.
Granted, not knowing first hand is a handicap. But having read countless forum post's, video reviews and blogs. I have come to the conclusion that while AOC may not be perfect, it is definately a fun game that many will enjoy.
While the general opinion seems to be that itemization and end game content are not finished. For a casual gamer like myself this is a non issue. Basically, what it comes down to is economics. Cold - hard - cash.
How do you define a games fun level, is it worth $1000 dollars? Is the amount of fun I can gain from AOC worth that much of an upgrade? For me, the answer is "NO".
For me to upgrade to that extreme 1 of 2 things has to happen.
1. The game has to be considered the "second coming" a "must buy" a "10" ala GTA4. (which I will prolly be getting a ps3 and this instead of my new rig)
Thats not the feeling I get from Aoc posts and forums... the feeling I get is its a good game with the potential to be great. That the game is still fun, even though it has not yet delivered on all its promises. It's not even shipping with DX10(I always thought those aoc dx10 screenshots looked a little iffy!)
Or the second thing is
2. My system can no longer play any and all new and upcoming games.
Those are the conditions I look for, and unfortunately AOC just doesnt fit the bill right now. I still play cod4 on a regular basis and enjoy it.
Before I heard about AOC, I new my pc was aging, but I never really thought about upgrading yet...(maybe next year, after taxes...)
Who knows, maybe in 3 months if it hits that "great" tag, perhaps I'll reconsider.
Looks like the streets of liberty city may be my next home for now.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Killing the MMO Instance
After reading this post over at /random. I started to think about how you could get around the problems instancing solves in mmo's.
Having played many of the early Mmo's like Ultima Online and EQ I remember the early days of gaming without instances. Dungeons were overcrowded and camped for items. Players often argued over loot ninja's. Many times I would log on at odd hours of the night just to be able to garnish a valuable item.
The open world was always very immersive, However, the lack of instances doesnt suit itself to a mainstream audience with the current designs we see in mmo's today. While I may have enjoyed farming a dungeon for hours on end, or waiting for a respawn in the middle of the night, that type of gameplay no longer fits into my current lifestyle.
I want to be able to get in, run a quest, and do a dungeon without having to wait for other's who beat me there to wrap up with their fun.
Instancing has provided this type of gameplay to now. But sometimes the instances take away from the feeling of an open world for many gamers.
So the question arises? How can we build a world where both gamers are satisfied. Group A wants a completely open world with alot of social interaction. While
Group B wants social interaction and a world that can be explored at their leisure.
So in order to come to a solution, we have to understand the problem. I have always felt that instancing is a solution to a game design flaw - lack of content. Lack of content for a certain area that does not coincide with the number of players in an area at any given time. This allows for overcrowding and unfulfilling dungeon gameplay.
I dont think that the lack of content is due to the size of any given mmo. I believe its due to the levels. I would recommend 20 levels max for an mmo. For example of wow was reduced to 20 levels instead of 70, you immediately open the number of quest areas in the game. With the level range being reduced the amount of content that players have immediate access to triples. Instead of having 1 or 2 zones for a certain level you now have 6 or 7. Instead of selecting one starting town per race, you would have access to 4 or 5 starting towns. This would have the trickle down affect of reducing camping of dungeons in certain non-instanced zones.
In order to keep dungeons static more explorable dungeon areas should be added to a game world. Reducing the level gap should help with making more dungeons available for each player level. However, I do believe double or triple the amount would be needed to keep overcrowding minimized.
Dungeon design should also be enhanced to be less linear. Different groups may need to explore or quest in different sections of a multi-branch dungeon. Perhaps even making the lower levels only accessible to higher level players, or a large well organized group of lower levels.
Another gameplay element that I would try to implement would be something I like to call a "wild dungeon". These would be random dungeons that spawn periodically at a random location in the game world. While I would use instancing technology to create these dungeons, there would not be a player limit to the number of groups that could enter. These "wild dungeons" would encourage open world exploration. Players would be encouraged to only share the location with their friends or guild in order to avoid overcrowding. These dungeons could be spawned from a day to a week, or until the dungeon boss is defeated.
Well, im gonna cut my thoughts a little short, due to the length of this post, But,In summary, I think mmo design will have to drastically change if an open world is ever going to be preferred over instancing. In order for an open world to appeal to a mainstream audience mmo games need to implement
Fewer Levels
More content per level
More Dungeons
Random Dungeons spawns
All are steps that could be taken to re-make the open worlds that mmo's are supposed to be. What do you think?
Having played many of the early Mmo's like Ultima Online and EQ I remember the early days of gaming without instances. Dungeons were overcrowded and camped for items. Players often argued over loot ninja's. Many times I would log on at odd hours of the night just to be able to garnish a valuable item.
The open world was always very immersive, However, the lack of instances doesnt suit itself to a mainstream audience with the current designs we see in mmo's today. While I may have enjoyed farming a dungeon for hours on end, or waiting for a respawn in the middle of the night, that type of gameplay no longer fits into my current lifestyle.
I want to be able to get in, run a quest, and do a dungeon without having to wait for other's who beat me there to wrap up with their fun.
Instancing has provided this type of gameplay to now. But sometimes the instances take away from the feeling of an open world for many gamers.
So the question arises? How can we build a world where both gamers are satisfied. Group A wants a completely open world with alot of social interaction. While
Group B wants social interaction and a world that can be explored at their leisure.
So in order to come to a solution, we have to understand the problem. I have always felt that instancing is a solution to a game design flaw - lack of content. Lack of content for a certain area that does not coincide with the number of players in an area at any given time. This allows for overcrowding and unfulfilling dungeon gameplay.
I dont think that the lack of content is due to the size of any given mmo. I believe its due to the levels. I would recommend 20 levels max for an mmo. For example of wow was reduced to 20 levels instead of 70, you immediately open the number of quest areas in the game. With the level range being reduced the amount of content that players have immediate access to triples. Instead of having 1 or 2 zones for a certain level you now have 6 or 7. Instead of selecting one starting town per race, you would have access to 4 or 5 starting towns. This would have the trickle down affect of reducing camping of dungeons in certain non-instanced zones.
In order to keep dungeons static more explorable dungeon areas should be added to a game world. Reducing the level gap should help with making more dungeons available for each player level. However, I do believe double or triple the amount would be needed to keep overcrowding minimized.
Dungeon design should also be enhanced to be less linear. Different groups may need to explore or quest in different sections of a multi-branch dungeon. Perhaps even making the lower levels only accessible to higher level players, or a large well organized group of lower levels.
Another gameplay element that I would try to implement would be something I like to call a "wild dungeon". These would be random dungeons that spawn periodically at a random location in the game world. While I would use instancing technology to create these dungeons, there would not be a player limit to the number of groups that could enter. These "wild dungeons" would encourage open world exploration. Players would be encouraged to only share the location with their friends or guild in order to avoid overcrowding. These dungeons could be spawned from a day to a week, or until the dungeon boss is defeated.
Well, im gonna cut my thoughts a little short, due to the length of this post, But,In summary, I think mmo design will have to drastically change if an open world is ever going to be preferred over instancing. In order for an open world to appeal to a mainstream audience mmo games need to implement
Fewer Levels
More content per level
More Dungeons
Random Dungeons spawns
All are steps that could be taken to re-make the open worlds that mmo's are supposed to be. What do you think?
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Max Level Crisis - when will endgames matter?
Reaching max level in any mmo has always been a badge of honor. Many of the old school mmo's made it very difficult to do this. But as game designers cater to the more main stream casual player. The difficulty in reaching max level has decreased.
This has had the effect of diminishing the value of reaching max level for many gamers. Not only did you have to reach the max, but you always needed the best equipment and the best gear. It is a constant competition to be number one.
But some players like myself look for more meaning in the endgame activities besides upgrading my own character. Upgrades have their place, but I prefer the feeling of impacting the world or contributing to a greater cause.
What I would like to see is more player driven content for endgame. However, I would like to see the content shaped in context with the game world. Instead of acquiring player owned cities or keeps through gathering resources. I would like to see players garner favor with the king or lord of that region. This favor would then be used as currency to purchase lands.
These king or lord of the region would deed the land to the guild for them to shape as they see fit. It would start as a small village with npc's, shops, perhaps a small militia. The village would grow based on the resources gathered from the guild, as well as quests given by the local lord of the area.
Guild resource gather should be seemless and tie into the proffessions of the guild members. Those who chose to collect resources of their own could do so as well. As the city grows, trade routes are established, alliances are formed and enemies made.
As the village grows and generates money for the kingdom, the village will level up 2 different stages. Similar to guild cities in age of conan. Eventually increasing the might and land of your kingdom. The kingdom would start at the outskirts of the lords land, so keeping it safe from predators, npc's and enemy guilds would be a challenge.
The city growth has to be somewhat seemless and not too much of a grind. Having played shadowbane for some time, one of the main game killing gameplay elements was that a large city took so much to acquire and maintain. Once it was destroyed, usually the guild responsible would quit.
City financial decisions will be made by all max level guild members. I would apply a weight to certain guild officiers. Similar to shareholders, the guild leader may have 10 shares to use for their vote, while a new max level char would only have 1. That way all players are involved, and the most dedicated players are rewarded with more influence on political or financial city issues.
Hopefully having the player cities tied to a local king or lord will alleviate some of the pain of having your village or city burned to the ground. Multiple guilds can offer their allegiance to the same king and compete for favor. As well as opposing factions.
Once max level is reached in an mmorpg, apart from gaining gear and money. The only way to keep the game from ending is to transform it into more of an mmoRTS. The gameplay focus has to go from being player-centric to world-centric
Politics, betrayel, war, famine, disease, peace, prosperity all these aspects of rts gameplay should somehow be implemented. I havent quite figured out a way to do that, but if someone ever does, it will be a great step forward in the mmo space.
who knows, maybe after I think about it for a while I can ramble on about mmorts gameplay elements.
This has had the effect of diminishing the value of reaching max level for many gamers. Not only did you have to reach the max, but you always needed the best equipment and the best gear. It is a constant competition to be number one.
But some players like myself look for more meaning in the endgame activities besides upgrading my own character. Upgrades have their place, but I prefer the feeling of impacting the world or contributing to a greater cause.
What I would like to see is more player driven content for endgame. However, I would like to see the content shaped in context with the game world. Instead of acquiring player owned cities or keeps through gathering resources. I would like to see players garner favor with the king or lord of that region. This favor would then be used as currency to purchase lands.
These king or lord of the region would deed the land to the guild for them to shape as they see fit. It would start as a small village with npc's, shops, perhaps a small militia. The village would grow based on the resources gathered from the guild, as well as quests given by the local lord of the area.
Guild resource gather should be seemless and tie into the proffessions of the guild members. Those who chose to collect resources of their own could do so as well. As the city grows, trade routes are established, alliances are formed and enemies made.
As the village grows and generates money for the kingdom, the village will level up 2 different stages. Similar to guild cities in age of conan. Eventually increasing the might and land of your kingdom. The kingdom would start at the outskirts of the lords land, so keeping it safe from predators, npc's and enemy guilds would be a challenge.
The city growth has to be somewhat seemless and not too much of a grind. Having played shadowbane for some time, one of the main game killing gameplay elements was that a large city took so much to acquire and maintain. Once it was destroyed, usually the guild responsible would quit.
City financial decisions will be made by all max level guild members. I would apply a weight to certain guild officiers. Similar to shareholders, the guild leader may have 10 shares to use for their vote, while a new max level char would only have 1. That way all players are involved, and the most dedicated players are rewarded with more influence on political or financial city issues.
Hopefully having the player cities tied to a local king or lord will alleviate some of the pain of having your village or city burned to the ground. Multiple guilds can offer their allegiance to the same king and compete for favor. As well as opposing factions.
Once max level is reached in an mmorpg, apart from gaining gear and money. The only way to keep the game from ending is to transform it into more of an mmoRTS. The gameplay focus has to go from being player-centric to world-centric
Politics, betrayel, war, famine, disease, peace, prosperity all these aspects of rts gameplay should somehow be implemented. I havent quite figured out a way to do that, but if someone ever does, it will be a great step forward in the mmo space.
who knows, maybe after I think about it for a while I can ramble on about mmorts gameplay elements.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Stylized and Mature Mmo Graphics
If I could have the Pve of Wow, the fatalities of Age of Conan, and the RvR PvP of the upcoming Warhammer. That would be an mmo I could sink my teeth into.
And why not? Many companies struggle to find their niche in the mmo industry. Wow has captured the fantasy realm and the so called kiddies. Cox has the superhero genre on lock. Even the subpar SWG at some point in time had the sci fi genre in the bag.
With alot of people digging the mature settings and gritty graphics of age of conan, its a shame that alot of hardcore fans will be locked out.
I dont think having a mature theme has to equal realistic graphics. Graphics have always been a passing fettish, it is what draws many people to a game, but its not what keeps them there.
I know warhammer online toyed with the idea of having a more mature, bloody world, but eventually nixed the idea.
I believe the niche for a playable game of that type exists now. If BLIZZARD were to add fatalities to wow, i may actually start playing again, just for something different.
And why not? Many companies struggle to find their niche in the mmo industry. Wow has captured the fantasy realm and the so called kiddies. Cox has the superhero genre on lock. Even the subpar SWG at some point in time had the sci fi genre in the bag.
With alot of people digging the mature settings and gritty graphics of age of conan, its a shame that alot of hardcore fans will be locked out.
I dont think having a mature theme has to equal realistic graphics. Graphics have always been a passing fettish, it is what draws many people to a game, but its not what keeps them there.
I know warhammer online toyed with the idea of having a more mature, bloody world, but eventually nixed the idea.
I believe the niche for a playable game of that type exists now. If BLIZZARD were to add fatalities to wow, i may actually start playing again, just for something different.
Monday, May 12, 2008
NO TANK YOU!!
With the upcoming release of AOC and the highly anticipated Warhammer Online. I wanted to touch base on one of the two classes I always felt were prohibitive to the casual gamer.
The Tank.
The tank class is historically known to be a “meat shield”, soaking up all the damage and enemy blows. Leaving the other members of the group in a better position to deal damage while the attacking mobs are focused or taunted onto the tank class.
Tanks are known for their high survivability and low damage.
But here’s the rub.
While I always enjoy the company of a good tank. When I quickly want to jump into a group to do some dungeon running. There seems to be 1 of 2 holdups.
1. No Tanks available.
2 No healers available.
While I am focusing on the tank class in particular. As a casual gamer, whem im running short on time, being forced to look for 1 or 2 classes to have a successful group has always been a problem for me.
I’m not sure what out-dated model mmo developers have been using, but it would seem making any combination of classes viable in a group, would increase the mainstream appeal of the game, to both hardcore and casual alike.
Many mmo’s often boast about how great and innovative their A.I is. But how great can it be when mobs just run up and stick to whatever tank taunts it?
Even though Im against the idea of a tank class for gameplay. There are so many viable alternatives. All classes should be able to tank effectively. Perhaps a tanking switch where the character would sacrifice dps in order to tank better for the group.
There are many ways to make classes tank.
• Rogues – Increase dodge ability greatly when in tanking mode
• Mages - Perhaps a mirror image spell or stoneskin spell that will allow the mage to tank, at the expense of spell casting or dps.
• Pet classes – should be able to buff their pet animal or undead to a tanking mode.
• Warriors - Should always have high dps, but sacrifice it when in tanking mode
• Rangers – if no pet involved a mix between dodging and using a shield buff.
The overall idea that im trying to get across is that once developers stop following obsolete grouping requirements and make grouping more open and viable for different types of classes, I believe the playerbase and game community will really thrive.
Instead of making tanks a class type, I would rather It be a stance, skill or option usable by any and all classes. With each class having its own variation of a tanking ability.
This would be a start to having less grouping guidelines and more immersive and casual friendly gameplay.
Any thoughts?
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
AOC Beta Issues updates
I came across this article
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/191/feature/1927 at mmorpg.com.
It has an interview with some interesting insight on some of the issues many people on the forums and blogosphere have been having with the Age of Conan Open beta.
Explanation of what caused alot of the load issues is explained to be due to an "update" to the code prior to the open beta. Apparently, in an effort to bow to consumer demands and "peer pressure" Funcom wanted to squeeze in a couple of new fixes to enhance the beta.
If you believe this I've got some swampland in Florida I'd like to sell you!
I find it hard to believe that an experienced mmo developer would find the need to insert code that was not properly quality tested, prior to a major release. In fact according to the article I can only assume it was done mere hours before the beta began!
This article didnt really alleviate my concerns, if anything it made me more skeptical that funcom has it's ducks in a row this close to release.
But who knows, maybe its just me?
Monday, May 5, 2008
What are you looking forward to in Age of Conan?
Having been a long time fan of conan comics and movies. Finally having a mmo come along, set in the conan universe has been extremely exciting.
Having played wow since release, I started to wonder, what exactly was it about aoc that I was so excited about? Was it the graphics? The new combat mechanics? The fatality system? Or was it just the fact that it was something new?
I think it was a little bit of all those things. With the mmo genre finally maturing, the upside of many of the next gen mmo's is really impressive.
Not only do I find the lore and mature setting of conan to be appealing. The graphical representation of the world, by all accounts is amazing.
I look forward to playing a game where my skill has more of an impact on the battlefield than what im wearing. A game where my guild, my clan, my tribe, can have an actual impact on the game world by destroying and claiming a keep.
I look forward to a world where the grind of pvp combat is non-existant due to the fun gameplay.
I look forward to AOC.
Friday, May 2, 2008
INSTANCING IS THE FUTURE OF MMO'S
An instance is defined as an occurrence of something.
With Age of Conans upcoming release and open beta. A lot of gaming details have come forth. Including the fact that some cities and environments in the game will be instanced or copied to avoid issues with lag.
The topic has stirred up alot of heated debate about how instancing ruins immersion and gameplay.
However, instancing in itself is not the problem. There are many factors that can cause a player to lose immersion.
It is these factors that ruin the moment not the instancing itself.
For example, when entering a new city or area, most instances require you to view a load screen. These load screen's are reminders that you are playing a game, and definately ruin your sense of being in the moment.
Secondly, Groups, Guilds and Friends.
When entering an instanced zone if any of the above are in the same zone as you but not the same instance, you immediately become aware of what instance you are in. This also takes you "out of the game".
While instancing provides a more lag free gaming experience, I believe developers have taken the ez road as far as instancing is concerned. Development needs to take into consideration the social aspects of the game and put in place filters of some sort that better determine what instance to spawn a player or group in.
I would place a priority on a persons Group, then friends, then Guild as far as determine the best instance for each character. While this may not always be possible to have all of your guild or friends in the same instance, it would help to know you would see a friendly face most of the time.
Instancing allows for alot of the design issues with mmo's to be alleviated, spawn camping, overrun dungeons, item collecting, lag issues, can all be avoided with a seemless instancing system.
As technology evolves and become better, the ability to create virtual seemless graphically intense worlds will exist. However, I believe it will not be used as it exists now.
The upgradeability and reusability of instanced areas offers too many advantages over current open world systems to be ignored. The ability to re-use older instances as the game population ages. Controlling alot of the lag issues associated with overpopulating zones as well as easier content upgrades.
I believe the future of mmo's is to have instanced worlds that are seemless and transparent to the user.
Dynamic instance generators that create the next closest instance in flash memory to avoid loading screens.
Instances smart enough to know what friends/guildmates should be prioritized in sharing the instance with you based on level, skills etc.
Hopefully, soon we will have the technology that can make instancing seemless and behind the scenes.
Perception is reality.
If it feels like an open world, it will be an open world, whether its instanced or not.
But thats just my 2 cents. What do you think?
With Age of Conans upcoming release and open beta. A lot of gaming details have come forth. Including the fact that some cities and environments in the game will be instanced or copied to avoid issues with lag.
The topic has stirred up alot of heated debate about how instancing ruins immersion and gameplay.
However, instancing in itself is not the problem. There are many factors that can cause a player to lose immersion.
It is these factors that ruin the moment not the instancing itself.
For example, when entering a new city or area, most instances require you to view a load screen. These load screen's are reminders that you are playing a game, and definately ruin your sense of being in the moment.
Secondly, Groups, Guilds and Friends.
When entering an instanced zone if any of the above are in the same zone as you but not the same instance, you immediately become aware of what instance you are in. This also takes you "out of the game".
While instancing provides a more lag free gaming experience, I believe developers have taken the ez road as far as instancing is concerned. Development needs to take into consideration the social aspects of the game and put in place filters of some sort that better determine what instance to spawn a player or group in.
I would place a priority on a persons Group, then friends, then Guild as far as determine the best instance for each character. While this may not always be possible to have all of your guild or friends in the same instance, it would help to know you would see a friendly face most of the time.
Instancing allows for alot of the design issues with mmo's to be alleviated, spawn camping, overrun dungeons, item collecting, lag issues, can all be avoided with a seemless instancing system.
As technology evolves and become better, the ability to create virtual seemless graphically intense worlds will exist. However, I believe it will not be used as it exists now.
The upgradeability and reusability of instanced areas offers too many advantages over current open world systems to be ignored. The ability to re-use older instances as the game population ages. Controlling alot of the lag issues associated with overpopulating zones as well as easier content upgrades.
I believe the future of mmo's is to have instanced worlds that are seemless and transparent to the user.
Dynamic instance generators that create the next closest instance in flash memory to avoid loading screens.
Instances smart enough to know what friends/guildmates should be prioritized in sharing the instance with you based on level, skills etc.
Hopefully, soon we will have the technology that can make instancing seemless and behind the scenes.
Perception is reality.
If it feels like an open world, it will be an open world, whether its instanced or not.
But thats just my 2 cents. What do you think?
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
5 thoughts on how dev's can make mmo's more casual friendly
1. Apprentice Systems
Every great student has a great master….
Why this isn’t a mandatory addition to any mmo I have no idea. How many times as a casual player do you log in, have a great questing day with a new friend and find them again and their 5 levels above you? A good apprentice system will allow for friends of different levels to group up and enjoy the game together. Going down in level should have more “perks” than having the lower level boost up to the higher content. I don’t necessarily think that the xp gain should match the level of your current level, but is shouldn’t be too shabby. Also perhaps you can get a temporary buff to damage/healing when you return to your normal level.
2. Friendstones
Every player should get one of these, you should be able to bind to a friend to reach them during the day. Perhaps a 2 hour recharge. I cant count the number of times I’ve logged into a game, had a friend online and was discouraged from grouping with them because it would take me 10 mins just to get to where they are. 10 mins doesn’t seem like a lot butt if you’ve only got time for a few quests it can be a deal breaker. I would make it so one stone could bind up to 3 friends. The Recharge timer would apply for each use. It would be a useful tool for those nights when you just want to catch up to your friends and do a few quests before you take off for the night.
3. Find a friend Tags
With all the social networking sites available online today. It seems like it would be very easy to add a similar type of functionality to the mmo genre. I would base it on a few questions that you could answer under a “profile” section for your avatar. All the info would be optional. Items such as age, time zone, type of player, time of day playing, play style. You can use a system where you define your likes and dislikes, as well as what you are searching for.
For example, if I wanted to look for players over 30, eastern time, casual play style, playtimes of 10-11 on weekdays mostly. I could actively or passively search.
I would like to have it set as passive by default, then if you group with someone who fits your category likes, you would get a message or perhaps a smiley face appears over them, some visual indicator that lets you know they would be a good candidate for a friend. I think it would make it easier for casuals to find and keep friends when you have a general idea of their gaming schedule.
4. Auto Quest group toggle
One thing that always irks me about mmo’s is when I’ve been searching for that mobile named mob to complete my quest and someone runs up and kills them right in front of me! And then looks at me and says “oops”. Right now a lot of mmo’s let you search for a group depending on what quest you are doing. I would just alter this slightly. You would basically select the quest you are on, start working on your and if your in visual range of a player who has also selected their quest you will auto join their group. Hopefully it would stop all the questions about are you looking for so and so mob? Or trying to jump in before someone kills the named? If they want to share they will have their quest toggled. I have to think about this one some more, and how it can be implemented passively. Perhaps if you and another player are in range of a quest objective….
5. Raid Checkpoints
Last but not least the Raids! More often than not the primary complaint most casuals have are the length of raids. I do think that this is an issue that can be easily solved and be satisfactory to the hardcore and the casual. First all Raids should be broken down into 45 mins to an hour chunks. But, I would also implement a “heroic mode” for lack of a better term, where you could run the whole 5-6 hour dungeon at once. The benefit of the heroic mode would be guaranteed or more item drops for certain bosses. Those who attempt the raid in chunks would still have access to the same items, however the drop chance would be random. That way time invested is rewarded with Guaranteed loot. I would even go so far as to have the raid instances for PUG’s scheduled. You could set it up as an interface, or mandate from the king that he needs your special skills to destroy capture blah blah blah and bring it back. Raid chunks would be scheduled every hour or 30 minutes and you could see the classes who have scheduled for a certain time/instance run. Similar to entering a wow battleground you would receive a message that the kings wizards wishes to summon you, you would accept and appear in the instance. I think developers would get a lot more use out of their raid instances if they implemented something like this.
These were just some thoughts I had about some simple measures that developers have the tech for that would make things a lot more user friendly for both hardcore and casuals alike, I’d like to hear other’s thoughts on it.
Thanks to Keen over at http://www.keenandgraev.com/?p=1000 for stimulating my mind :-)
Every great student has a great master….
Why this isn’t a mandatory addition to any mmo I have no idea. How many times as a casual player do you log in, have a great questing day with a new friend and find them again and their 5 levels above you? A good apprentice system will allow for friends of different levels to group up and enjoy the game together. Going down in level should have more “perks” than having the lower level boost up to the higher content. I don’t necessarily think that the xp gain should match the level of your current level, but is shouldn’t be too shabby. Also perhaps you can get a temporary buff to damage/healing when you return to your normal level.
2. Friendstones
Every player should get one of these, you should be able to bind to a friend to reach them during the day. Perhaps a 2 hour recharge. I cant count the number of times I’ve logged into a game, had a friend online and was discouraged from grouping with them because it would take me 10 mins just to get to where they are. 10 mins doesn’t seem like a lot butt if you’ve only got time for a few quests it can be a deal breaker. I would make it so one stone could bind up to 3 friends. The Recharge timer would apply for each use. It would be a useful tool for those nights when you just want to catch up to your friends and do a few quests before you take off for the night.
3. Find a friend Tags
With all the social networking sites available online today. It seems like it would be very easy to add a similar type of functionality to the mmo genre. I would base it on a few questions that you could answer under a “profile” section for your avatar. All the info would be optional. Items such as age, time zone, type of player, time of day playing, play style. You can use a system where you define your likes and dislikes, as well as what you are searching for.
For example, if I wanted to look for players over 30, eastern time, casual play style, playtimes of 10-11 on weekdays mostly. I could actively or passively search.
I would like to have it set as passive by default, then if you group with someone who fits your category likes, you would get a message or perhaps a smiley face appears over them, some visual indicator that lets you know they would be a good candidate for a friend. I think it would make it easier for casuals to find and keep friends when you have a general idea of their gaming schedule.
4. Auto Quest group toggle
One thing that always irks me about mmo’s is when I’ve been searching for that mobile named mob to complete my quest and someone runs up and kills them right in front of me! And then looks at me and says “oops”. Right now a lot of mmo’s let you search for a group depending on what quest you are doing. I would just alter this slightly. You would basically select the quest you are on, start working on your and if your in visual range of a player who has also selected their quest you will auto join their group. Hopefully it would stop all the questions about are you looking for so and so mob? Or trying to jump in before someone kills the named? If they want to share they will have their quest toggled. I have to think about this one some more, and how it can be implemented passively. Perhaps if you and another player are in range of a quest objective….
5. Raid Checkpoints
Last but not least the Raids! More often than not the primary complaint most casuals have are the length of raids. I do think that this is an issue that can be easily solved and be satisfactory to the hardcore and the casual. First all Raids should be broken down into 45 mins to an hour chunks. But, I would also implement a “heroic mode” for lack of a better term, where you could run the whole 5-6 hour dungeon at once. The benefit of the heroic mode would be guaranteed or more item drops for certain bosses. Those who attempt the raid in chunks would still have access to the same items, however the drop chance would be random. That way time invested is rewarded with Guaranteed loot. I would even go so far as to have the raid instances for PUG’s scheduled. You could set it up as an interface, or mandate from the king that he needs your special skills to destroy capture blah blah blah and bring it back. Raid chunks would be scheduled every hour or 30 minutes and you could see the classes who have scheduled for a certain time/instance run. Similar to entering a wow battleground you would receive a message that the kings wizards wishes to summon you, you would accept and appear in the instance. I think developers would get a lot more use out of their raid instances if they implemented something like this.
These were just some thoughts I had about some simple measures that developers have the tech for that would make things a lot more user friendly for both hardcore and casuals alike, I’d like to hear other’s thoughts on it.
Thanks to Keen over at http://www.keenandgraev.com/?p=1000 for stimulating my mind :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
