General: Blog Spotlight: I Have A Dream

Stradden

Community Manager Laura Genender takes a look at a blog from MMORPG.com user Vajuras, discussing "Appealing to the Hardcore PvP Crowd" and "Player Run Universes".

Blogger Vajuras, like many users on our website and forums, is part of the "vocal minority" movement of gamers. The mass appeal today is with games like World of Warcraft and Lord of the Ring Online: games that take what has been done and polish it to perfection. Players like Vajuras, though, are speaking up for innovation and new ideas: appealing to niche markets instead of the mass one, and evolving gameplay as an art.

Vajuras' blog starts off with an article titled, "Appealing to the Hardcore PvP Crowd". The entry starts off by comparing our MMO characters to our favorite book and movie characters: in books and movies, we watch as our favorite characters progress and grow, from the village farmer to the center of world-saving efforts. "This is the great thing about RPGs: they take this transition and take gamers through this process." We start off as level 1 fighters and mages, embark on epic quests, class transfers, and so forth, and end up as a max-level badass who can do just about anything.

Read the whole article here.

vajuras

Wow, thanks a lot for the polite words. This is one of the reasons I love this site because it gives us gamers a great place to discuss our ideas, etc.

Techleo

  Due to my extreme bias against pvp I have to say: Let them eat cake!

The irony is I love games with side to side wars over territories and resources like AO. I simply dislike the mentality of

most of the Pvpers I've met. I dislike people who want to go out and kill for sport. I dislike people who gloat. Moan when they loose.

What I don't mind is when war needs to occur. Such as if a game was made such that there are two sides and one resources both sides need. Competing for resources is fun!

Overall though I really enjoy Vajuras's posts and thank him for him time

 

Alienovrlord

MMORPGs have finally broken away from the game mechanics that drove away gamers from them for a decade.  And yet there are continuous suggestions that we go crawling back to those same mechanics.   The genre is evolving for a reason. 

MMORPGs are NOT art.    They are GAMES.   Gameplay is not meant to be art.   It is meant to be FUN.  

Forget these things, even for a second, and you will have a failure. 

elvenangel

I've always been on a seesaw about these particular subjects.  I speak out strongly alot of the times against overly niche pvp gank fiesta titles for the main fact I'd like to be able to play the ones that dont look like 2d peices of crap without dealing with that percentage of players that actually ruin niche games for other players(griefers / gankers).   If you look at a few of the games on the list for pvp like starport their frigging ugly 2d games that to me don't resemble an MMO at all.  Just an online game that has no publisher backing it.

I experienced such griefing game ruining players in UO during its birth up until the splitting of the servers came along.    It actually became fairly enjoyable after that, if i wanted the cool experiences of certain dungeons i'd have to risk life and limb for it by going back to the other 'darker' shard but atleast i had a choice and a chance.    If niche titles really want the better chance of being appealing to real publishers & developers to make the game  they should be smart enough to atleast release alternative versions of their servers rule sets, but like its been said alot are now turning to the mass market appeal.  

As for sandbox games I'm kinda tied...I mean...look at Second Life (its not a game) but it is sandbox and its frigging weird and buggy, not to mention they want me to put up RL cash for currency which I think is bogus.  UO was sandbox and it worked but I admittedly like the ability of being able to take on a quest or a job from an npc if I want to(its the pnp D&D player in me).  A true sandbox should have both.   Horizons had this..you didn't have to quest...you could build your own communities, repair broken in game bridges and buildings and walls to beef up npc cities.  Course horizons met is death with its multitude of operational problems from the companies that have owned it.

Atleast the 'niche' genre isn't completely dead its just not been utilized correctly or effectively.   Hopefully AoC and WAR would hug that bit niche and bit of mainstream into a happy medium.

tysonj25

Shadowbane is still probably the best PVP niche game.

With the right guild it was also one of the most fun games I played sure at times it was a gank fest but mostly if you grouped with your team and watched each others backs it was a great time. Wars were madebetween guilds and it fit the mechanics. Great Fun.

vajuras

Originally posted by Alienovrlord


MMORPGs have finally broken away from the game mechanics that drove away gamers from them for a decade.  And yet there are continuous suggestions that we go crawling back to those same mechanics.   The genre is evolving for a reason. 
MMORPGs are NOT art.    They are GAMES.   Gameplay is not meant to be art.   It is meant to be FUN.  
Forget these things, even for a second, and you will have a failure. 

yet Ultima Online has more subscribers then all PVE games like D&D Online which eventually realized this and added PVP. And Lineage 2 makes these PVE based games look like dirt if we compare dollar for dollar

vajuras

Originally posted by elvenangel


I've always been on a seesaw about these particular subjects.  I speak out strongly alot of the times against overly niche pvp gank fiesta titles for the main fact I'd like to be able to play the ones that dont look like 2d peices of crap without dealing with that percentage of players that actually ruin niche games for other players(griefers / gankers).   If you look at a few of the games on the list for pvp like starport their frigging ugly 2d games that to me don't resemble an MMO at all.  Just an online game that has no publisher backing it.
I experienced such griefing game ruining players in UO during its birth up until the splitting of the servers came along.    It actually became fairly enjoyable after that, if i wanted the cool experiences of certain dungeons i'd have to risk life and limb for it by going back to the other 'darker' shard but atleast i had a choice and a chance.    If niche titles really want the better chance of being appealing to real publishers & developers to make the game  they should be smart enough to atleast release alternative versions of their servers rule sets, but like its been said alot are now turning to the mass market appeal.  
As for sandbox games I'm kinda tied...I mean...look at Second Life (its not a game) but it is sandbox and its frigging weird and buggy, not to mention they want me to put up RL cash for currency which I think is bogus.  UO was sandbox and it worked but I admittedly like the ability of being able to take on a quest or a job from an npc if I want to(its the pnp D&D player in me).  A true sandbox should have both.   Horizons had this..you didn't have to quest...you could build your own communities, repair broken in game bridges and buildings and walls to beef up npc cities.  Course horizons met is death with its multitude of operational problems from the companies that have owned it.
Atleast the 'niche' genre isn't completely dead its just not been utilized correctly or effectively.   Hopefully AoC and WAR would hug that bit niche and bit of mainstream into a happy medium.

I am not so sure if 'niche' is a proper term. EVE enjoys much more subs then many of its competitiors and will do even better once they bring it to the Asian market. Hardcore PVP is not really niche at all I would say 100% PVE games are niche

Yeah full out looting can be brutal to the casual players that do not want to group up. When you go full looting your game becomes a Community based game whereas our gear is expendable.

PVPers want huge, massive wars- the more the merrier. Only way we can let these guys make an impact is include risk vs reward. Pirates, Darkfall, EVE, and even Age of Conan all realize this

vajuras

just realized many of the posters here did not read my article. I propose many risk versus reward variants. You do not have to lose gear for a risk versus reward system. There just needs to be an exchange of real resources to allow PVPers to make an impact

 

Like a guild losing a struture in a prearranged guild vs guild battle. You do not have to lose gear for risk versus reward. Even WAR will have risk vs reward for instance to some extent I am sure just on a huge RvR scale

SonofSeth

With the right ideas enything can be acomplished. It's painful to see how all those against more visceral PVP expirience cringe their teeth at the meere mention of it only because they want to avoid some bad expiriences in the past. I'm not trying to belitle their PTSD but what I am trying is to appeal to reason and some remaining shred of creative thinking when talking about games.

Ofcourse it can't work if done the same way like in the past, but in virtual time, there has been a constant evolution of techology and ideas, examples and proofs that many things can be acomplished thought impossible in the past. I know it sometimes looks like there is nothing more to be added to crative process of making a MMORPG come to life, but that must never be the reason to categoricly deny even a posibility of making something new with this existing genre.

If anything, it looks like PVE games are coming to a wall where there can be only so much done with the current AI and scripting technology. What else is left if not PVP and sandbox content? Don't get me wrong, I don't wish to remove NPCs and PVE completly out of the game, I'm leaning more toward giving players the option of choosing their own path. Make it so that those who wish to do PVE have some PVE content to do, make it so that there is a present game universe with it's own set of rules and NPCs to guide us at start, but what I would like to see the most is that those NPC positions are available to be taken up by PCs, but only by those who truly find their bigest enjoyment in the social and sandbox aspects of games.

And in that line of thinking, progresion is also something worth discussing. Vertical progresion can get you only so far before you hit the cieling, and you hit it again and again after each expansion... With horizontal progresion there is much more choices to be had and truly deep and socialy and politicaly enganging end game to be expected. I always liked the fighting aspect of games, but in games that represent virtual worlds to some extent, the final end game has to be of some social sort, because that is the only true way of keeping the game evolvoing and engaging, giving everyone a reason to come back and change the world, or die trying.

vajuras

All the time I see someone post, "Well Ultima Online failed" or "Why dont we see more hardcore open PVP games then?"

 

 

 

 

The genre is evolving simply because they can reliably predict how long PVE'ers will stick around. What do you do with your retirement money? Do you reduce your risks and try to make safe, profitable investments or do you risk it all on a whim? Publishers are like us they want safe investments.

I've been to the meetings whereas the first thing out of our producers mouth was levels and timesinks. Levels and Classes are control. Developer control. Hence they go hand in hand. They can do charts and predict how long you guys will stick around. And then plan to get that expansion out just in time to extend the vertical progression

 

Game Developers have no way to predict 'magic'. They are BAFFLED why Warcraft 3 still gets playtime. They think its magic, seriously. But they can predict how long gamers will stay if they stretch out character progression.

 

Player Looting = Player control. So does casting away levels / classes. They all equal player run universe and that is a risk. Game Publishers don't take risks they take 'calculated risks'.

 

Ultima Online (made in austin,tx) was a success period. Still makes more money then some MMOs. Austin, Texas is a hotbed of MMO technology- Bioware, Sony, NCSoft, Destination Games, Midway Austin, etc the list just goes on and on. We know hardcore PVP is a success however we cannot guarantee publishers how profitable sandbox titles are. Sandbox = risk

So in my article I predict less risky ways to appeal to Western mainstream audiences. We will most certainly see more hardcore PVP games come down the pipe. It's inevitable. EVE has exposed a big market. Game Developers are realizing if they want to appeal to hardcore pvpers they will need risk vs reward. even Age of Conan is investigating this. Pirates of the Burning sea will have it and they're getting distributed by Sony. There will be a big push towards hardcore PVP alternatives in the future.

Grind will still be here for the forseen future- they still must reduce their risks. But hardcore PVP will be mainstream

Lindorn

I'm sorry but the concepts described in Vajuras's blog are not "niche" concepts.  I am so tired of people claiming these concepts are "niche"  There are 170 thousand people playing Eve online that beg to differ with the person who ultimately posted this blog on the front page.  While I am glad it did get front page attention (and deservedly so) I absolutely despise that among the first words out of the community managers mouth were labeling it as a niche article.  Immediately followed I might add by a guy stating up front his immediate bias toward PvP because he "doesn't like the mentality" of most PvPers.  That is like giving up eating cake for the rest of your life because a fat guy stole your wallet.  If people just approached this with logic they would understand that what he has stated is entirely accurate.  The games we play are riddled in a methodology of developer control.  You are just a statistic to most of the "higher ups".  These people are pen pushers and business men and that is how the entertainment business will always be.

But if we can just unlock this little gem here.  This idea that the players can not only run their worlds in a sphere of perfect harmony and chaos free of developer control is a new one and it must be nurtured.  What the developers will also realize is that this angle toward MMORPG's WILL make money.  I think people are starting to get tired with this spoon fed content they are being delivered every day and waking up to the fact that what is so fun about these RPG's is what we discovered about them so long ago with pen and paper.  It is about YOUR imagination and YOUR adventure.  Sure some guy may have written a book and a few rules so that you had some guidance....but ultimately it was you and your friends that told the story every day.  Folks you are paying these people your hard earned money and they are milking you for every dollar.  That is their primary concern.  Time to stand up and show them we aren't alone.  And most of all it is time we stopped using stereotypes and labels to describe an emerging phenomenon that I believe is the future of online gaming.

This wasn't meant to chastize MMORPG.com or Laura so please do not take it that way.  I am simply easily frustrated by this bandwagon approach that leads to "smacking down" a genre that is already spit on unecessarily by the mainstream.

Taera

I don't think "niche" means it has to have a small playerbase; as I said in the article, if a "general", catch all MMO has 15% of the MMOer population, and a game that focuses on PVP has 90% of the PVPer population, I do believe those would balance out by niche I meant that it wasn't trying to appeal to everyone: EVE is not an "everyone" game and I don't think it's trying to be.

Eridanix

First of all thanks to Vajuras for his blog's article. I think he is right and that there he ressembles what a lot of us try to express but are not able to put it up the right way; he is filling the gap between the hardcore PvP crowd and the mainstream gamers, these last one be the big population of all MMORPG's out there.

The day the bussinessmen discover that a player run world is a HUGE hit in numbers, as it would be as these kind of worlds are much more social by PC's interdependency and that such a game REALLY has a fidel population due to the freedom, that is all about, the real freedom to be what you want, not what the too-selfprotecting devs wants you to be, then hardcore PvP will come to mainstream and it will not be blamed anymore, as everyone will be able to engage on it, or well be the richest man of the city, or the most skilled thief of the world or the unseen and silent scout that only the fortunate meet in some depth in the woods... or whatever else the player wish to be.

Call it Freedom. When gamers discover their own freedom it will be a extensive and intensive blast in the market. And no one can stop Freedom.

vajuras

Originally posted by Taera


I don't think "niche" means it has to have a small playerbase; as I said in the article, if a "general", catch all MMO has 15% of the MMOer population, and a game that focuses on PVP has 90% of the PVPer population, I do believe those would balance out by niche I meant that it wasn't trying to appeal to everyone: EVE is not an "everyone" game and I don't think it's trying to be.

I thank you for writing that article and also taking the time to make this post I fully agree with you.

Lindorn

[quote]I don't think "niche" means it has to have a small playerbase; as I said in the article, if a "general", catch all MMO has 15% of the MMOer population, and a game that focuses on PVP has 90% of the PVPer population, I do believe those would balance out by niche I meant that it wasn't trying to appeal to everyone: EVE is not an "everyone" game and I don't think it's trying to be.[/quote]

Don't get me wrong I am not arguing the numbers here.  My point was that to put labels on these things is really hurtful in this particular scenario and I believe it is crippling the development of gameplaying in general.  When we label things and stereotype things we are indirectly creating a "stigma" for things that don't really need to be categorized to begin with.  How many articles, blogs, or posts have been made on this site or other major gaming publications in the last 6 months regarding "casual players".  The phrase "casual player" has been thrown around so much it could make a person sick with the gross misuse.

Now I am reading things like this article that tells a totally different story about who is purchasing and how large of an "impact" a casual gamer really has on the industry.  My point is simply that we are entering a new era here.  I don't think any of us can deny that we have been playing games for a long time now and we are set in our ways in a lot of respects.  Unfortunately on a community wide scale, and especially when influenced by the mainstream gaming media, these collectivized ideas we have can stunt progress.

Consider that World of Warcraft is such a popular game because of the genre, smooth game mechanics, addictive item based progression, well known company, well known title, already huge market saturation, etc etc.  Obviously one or all of these reasons may not be the ones that come to mind immediately for you but that isn't my point.  I am saying also consider that the MMORPG playerbase world wide has in the last few years increased by a factor of one third or more per year.  If a statistic like this is true (or even half true) then there is a significant portion of the gaming community that is new to the MMORPG concept or is currently playing their first MMORPG. (WoW in a lot of cases).  Now what is more likely.....that every single person who plays WoW has found the game that appeals to their needs as a gamer 100%? Or is it more likely that a significant portion of the MMORPG population playing mainstream titles has literally no idea what is available out there and if they do may not even feel comfortable moving elsewhere because it is unknown territory.

I am a firm believer that if you do not have a developed idea of how game mechanics impact a virtual world then you more than likely cannot fully appreciate what a "sandbox" title would actually entail.  It is my belief that the MMORPG community is growing and evolving in its knowledge and expectation.  Also add the fact that there is an influx of FPS and strategy gamers that are infiltrating what was up until a few years ago an "old boys club" of people who had played the MMO genre since back in the EQ/UO/MUD days.

Overall I am again simply stating that to use the traditional titles and labels we have over the past 10 years is to stunt growth and close our minds to the possibilities in gaming today.  It is exactly this sort of mentality that leads to the same type of games being produced over and over and over and over again.  The mold is set in the public eye and we need to break it.....

I highly doubt CCP games designed Eve Online to appeal to a "special interest" crowd.  On the contrary I think what they did was designed what they felt was the ultimate game and something that had really never been done before and if it so happened to draw a good amount of players in the process they'd be satisfied.  I think they were way ahead of their time and the evidence in their rapidly rising subscriptions and multiple awards over the last 6 months represents this fact clearly.

The Associate Producer of Darkfall has stated that there won't be much of a need for widescale media/market saturation akin to mainstream titles for their game because the developers believe firmly that "the game will sell itself".  That takes a hefty set of stones to make a comment like that as far as I'm concerned.  Either they are insane and have no idea what they are doing....or they might just have the right idea about the future of gaming and have full confidence in its fruition.

Just some things to tickle your noggin.  Thanks for the response Laura and again it is not my intention to call a stand off here.  I just have very defined opinions about this kind of thing.

Taera

Originally posted by vajuras


 
Originally posted by Taera


I don't think "niche" means it has to have a small playerbase; as I said in the article, if a "general", catch all MMO has 15% of the MMOer population, and a game that focuses on PVP has 90% of the PVPer population, I do believe those would balance out by niche I meant that it wasn't trying to appeal to everyone: EVE is not an "everyone" game and I don't think it's trying to be.

I thank you for writing that article and also taking the time to make this post I fully agree with you.

 

My pleasure, thanks for the blog!

CharslesT

EVE is the only game I have hated, and possibly LotR.

vajuras

Lindorn you write a good post but the MMO market is a little different then the console market which is driven by hardcore players that burn games in a few days and are constantly purchasing new ones. I guess I might fit that bill since I am sort of a hardcore buyer I always average at least 1 new console game a month

Console titles make money based on the features and other content they contain. They are more pressured to innovate to attract a hardcore gamer's attention

MMO Titles, according to Richard Bartle, usually get brought by newbies if they have features familiar to them from their last MMO.

 

He explains much better then I could in his article 'MMOs are for Newbies'.

 

you have good ideas and write well written posts I look forward to reading more posts (or blogs, etc) from you

Lindorn

Well that was precisely my point.  A majority portion of MMORPG gamers have now played World of Wacraft as their first MMORPG.  World of Warcraft was built upon the concepts that had embodied mainstream games like Everquest before it.  So now we have set the mold and expectation for the gamer.  In my opinion if a lot of people even had a clue what was possible with games they'd be enticed for something so much greater.  The truth of the matter though is that they don't know and they can't know until somebody LETS them know.

Klav

"The truth of the matter though is that they don't know and they can't know until somebody LETS them know."

It seems only NC Soft is interested in breaking the rules.

SoE wont do it.

I have my doubts with Blizzard.

Blizzard looks to be an up and coming MMO company. 

When I think of WoW i only think of PvP Tier Ranking. That is it.

When I think of SoE, I think of Scripted Events.

When I think of Play NC, I think of Guildwars.

Where do players want to go?

a)Play the zerg cuz everyone does?

b)Play liscenced movie with crappy content?

c) Play with hardcore PvP boundaries.

Like Vajuras had mentioned- MMOs feared that if everyone had to pvp, people would quit. But when it came to Guildwars, it took a focused community of players and cashed out. Kapow.

If MMO companies want to cash out on the PvP community they need to spend time developing tactics and strategies to win back their subscriptions, instead of trying to water down their games and giving people red names.

I believe in Vajuras' ideas (from the article on the first post of this thread)

If you can't/won't pvp, youre not digesting your games' community and foundation. If an npc killed you and COULD say "I JUST PWNED YOU LOADING PLEASE WAIT," would you still play it? Probably. and then you would continue and turn off npc chat or whatever communication channel because smart people can flip switches.

It's not just PvP. Its psychological. They do it in other games too. Dominoes? Boxing? Its all head games to whittle your opponent down. Its about second guessing and attacking a player beyond digital commands. If you cant hack it  then stick to single player console games.

Anyways. small rant but whatever. Im new to the community. I found this forum by mistake and well a rather pleasant mistake.

Ive been playing PvP MMOs since Aug 1999 (EQ1)

Keep fighting the fight Vajuras.