Could MMOs Benefit from Less Scope? a Column at MMORPG.com

SBFord

Could MMOs Benefit from Less Scope? a Column at MMORPG.com

“All I want is a focused experience”, said one of my friends. We were chatting about massively multiplayer games and the scope of the genre. Seemingly and in recent years that scope of has grown to the point where developers want to include everything. Take Guild Wars 2 as a prime example, it has dungeons, raids, fractals, structured PvP, World versus World, open world events, living world and seasonal events.

Read the full story here

RPGMASTERGAMER

TLDR for this articles : how that okay give more crappy players experience because it become less expensive to create these games and dev make more money

how about ''no'' ??

let me quote some funny part : ''It’s entirely unrealistic for MMO players to believe that such a variety of content can be maintained equally and in some respects'' guild war 2 did that and also all the old school mmorpg..... you know that ?? even ff14 did that. if players stop accept these cash grab we would get decent games... they make alot of money with mmorpg curently... more that before and we got only crap now.

SEANMCAD

no


that is my answer to the articles op

zanfire

I wouldn't mind if they came out and said outright that this is a PVE or PVP focused, that I have no qualms with, but the devs need to realize they will never hit like WoW numbers and to budget and build with a realistic expectations.

It has worked in the past, look at games like EQ/FFXI which are primarily pve or DAOC which is focused on pvp. All of those games focused on one side of it and to this day they are still going and 2 of them with subs no less.

If you do decide "hey this is a pve game" just know certain standards and minimums are going to be expected out of it these days.

Of course if you can do it all, go for it. Your risk vs reward will come from how much you want to cover.

Kyleran

Have to disagree as I'm not looking to play games, but rather inhabit virtual worlds so the broader the number and variety of activities the better, at least in my view.

Shana77

Yes and no. Theres something to say that if you have little money you might as well focus all of it on one area. Everyone sees Guild Wars, WoW and FF14 as great virtual worlds with a lot to do, but those have all been created by big budgets and supported by big publishers.

A small indie company can never make a complete experience as rich and with the same level of quality as Blizzard can. On the other hand, they might be able to compete in one specific area, for example PvP or WvW, by focusing all their attention on that.

The sad thing is we haven't yet really seen examples of that. Destiny is doing well which is a lot more focused but that game too has a huge developer and publisher behind it. Other games like Darkfall for example don't seem to be doing as well.

SEANMCAD

Shana77 said:

...

A small indie company can never make a complete experience as rich and with the same level of quality as Blizzard can. On the other hand, they might be able to compete in one specific area, for example PvP or WvW, by focusing all their attention on that.

...

I have found this actually to not be true.

I agree its not logical and doesnt make sense and as a result I believed as you did for years. but then I started to play these games, its amazing how much a small team can put together if they are dedicated

kitarad

Could you give me an example of such a game so I might check it out ?

SEANMCAD

kitarad said:

Could you give me an example of such a game so I might check it out ?

MMOS
Wurm Online
Xyson
Darkfall (sadly I think its no longer open)

now in the single/MP game space the list is huge but not sure you want a sample. if you do I can provide but I assume you want MMO

kitarad

Thank you but I thought Xyson wasn't very good when I tried it but perhaps it has improved. Wurm Online is simply not a game I would play.

SEANMCAD

kitarad said:

Thank you but I thought Xyson wasn't very good when I tried it but perhaps it has improved. Wurm Online is simply not a game I would play.

Wurm is better, more complete and has a lot more depth then Xyson does so I guess your out.

However, dont confuse you not being interested in playing with lacking content. The depth and feature set of a game like Wurm puts WoW to shame despite it not being of interest to you.

Sevala

Try Project Gorgon maybe?

SpottyGekko

I have always been a fan of "virtual worlds", so my ideal MMORPG would NOT benefit from a reduction in scope.

It sounds like a great idea for "quick match" and "instant action" games. Those types of games are often excellent at what they set out to do. I have over 2000 hours in War Thunder...

kitarad

Wurm Online has full loot PvP that is the reason I never tried so I will take your word for its content.

Loke666

For games mainly focused on PvP skipping the "mandatory" PvE content like raids and dungeons are a good idea. You might considering skip PvE altogether. And there is no need for a PvE focused MMO to have PvP because it will be bad and the balancing annoy the PvEers.

Now, GW2 is equally (or at least close to) on both and that type of games have it harder and needs a huge team to maintain.
So for a smaller team focusing on the type of gameplay your game will do best make sense.

If your choices is to make some parts good while skipping others or doing everything mediocre the good wins every day. I think a lot of PvP focused games got hurt by putting effort into PvE, WAR is a great example. With the budget they had (which wasn't enough to make all 6 cities) putting work into dungeons was a huge waste of very precious resources they should have used somewhere else.

SEANMCAD

Loke666 said:

For games mainly focused on PvP skipping the "mandatory" PvE content like raids and dungeons are a good idea. You might considering skip PvE altogether. And there is no need for a PvE focused MMO to have PvP because it will be bad and the balancing annoy the PvEers.

Now, GW2 is equally (or at least close to) on both and that type of games have it harder and needs a huge team to maintain.
So for a smaller team focusing on the type of gameplay your game will do best make sense.

If your choices is to make some parts good while skipping others or doing everything mediocre the good wins every day. I think a lot of PvP focused games got hurt by putting effort into PvE, WAR is a great example. With the budget they had (which wasn't enough to make all 6 cities) putting work into dungeons was a huge waste of very precious resources they should have used somewhere else.

yes...
I agree PvP and PvE should be kept apart with different rule sets completely and not co-existing together.

PvE 'arena style meaningingless PvP' however could remain in pve.

Alomar

I've been saying for years one of the main reasons for the sharp dip in the quality of mmo's has been the attempt to appeal to more than one style of players. In the end we often get games that mildly appeal to hardcore and casual pve'ers, pvp'ers, and rp'ers yet don't excel in any specific area. I'd much rather have an amazing pve mmo and an amazing pvp mmo and just play both, than the typical everything mmo's that max profit corporations try to create.

Nanfoodle

Back in the day I used to play EQ1 for PvE and DAoC for PvP. I dont have time to play 2 MMOs any more. So the game that gives me most or all of my checkboxes, even at a lower quality. Will win my sub. I am willing to pay for a B+ game over a A+ game, if the A+ game does not hit enough of my checkboxes.

So for me, less is less.

kitarad

I would love a game with systems like Black Desert and have some Everquest 2 questing thrown in with absolutely no PvP. So for me a PvE focussed game would be narrowing the focus and making a game I might love to play.

FrodoFragins

For PVP? absolutely. WvWvW - cut out the leveling and get right to it imo. Build the best WvWvW game ever. Put in sieges and castles and advancement systems galore

From what I've seen GW2 is mediocre in all areas it tries to deliver on, except for the leveling story.

Scorchien

No ...

And ill add , one thing City State has managed to do is Slice away a huge portion of the community at the same time with no PVE .. So be careful what you wish for you just might get it .. Which in there case will be (after the first 6 months )is a very very small community

waynejr2

Kyleran said:

Have to disagree as I'm not looking to play games, but rather inhabit virtual worlds so the broader the number and variety of activities the better, at least in my view.

I play games but I have lots of games of the non-computer game variety that I still play.  But when it comes to mmoRPG I want a world as I can get my other gaming needs from other games which I more likely to fill other specific gaming needs.

mmoguy43

I often choose a game with limited scope that provides new, unique, quality gameplay over one that's generic, lacking in quality, and tries to be everything (PvP, PvE, PVEVP, Battlegrounds, Open world FFA, crafting simulator, farming simulator, etc). However, it will still get to a point where if a game is lacking in depth then it will need to be at least improved with an update/expansion post-launch.

Yes/Maybe

jmcdermottuk

The only reduction in focus I'd want to see is choosing PvE or PvP, as many have already said. Pick one and excel at it, leave the balance headaches behind. Otherwise, no, we need a broad focus to give players options.

Sevala

I agree with most. Trying to mix PVE and PVP is pretty bad usually. Its mechanically boring due to "balance" in most games. Generally you end up with some cookie cutter builds and not much creative play when balance for PVP, but if they don't balance the PVE classes then you end up with usually only a few viable PVP builds everyone makes or complain are OP. Then it just cycles around with the nerf bats and FotM builds. But other than that seperation, I'd say games can usually a broader margin now adays, with engines and assets becoming easier to acquire and manage.

GladDog

In my mind, the best games are the ones that have a focused vision and then expand on their vision with every expansion.  City of Heroes was a good example.  It released as a PvE game with one raid, and it did it well IMO.  As time went on the game expanded in scope and added PvP (arenas first, and then zone PvP), then added more quests, then added alternate leveling with more quests, and so on.  

The game released a little (OK, a LOT) buggy, but had solid fundamentals such as a clear view of right and wrong (with a good system to let the player know), a good questing system that played well to its audience, a solid combat system, and the right feel for the genre, to develop a hardcore fan base.  There were 10's of thousands of players that played from beginning to end, like me.

They released a top notch expansion, City of Villains, and continued to add quests and interesting things to do that were within the scope of its targeted players.

But the one thing they did properly was to keep the players informed as they were making changes and adding content.  They messed this up at first, but after seeing fan reaction they did it properly for most of the run of the game.