Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: MMOWTF: Flair Follows Function
Stradden
Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
Weekly MMORPG.com columnist Dan Fortier tackles the subject of complexity in MMORPGs and how flashy new features can sometimes be a hindrance to a smooth game.
Sometimes when watching game play videos or reading some design documents for an upcoming MMO that we are interested in, it is easy to forget that some of the most important elements that let us enjoy a game are the things we don't experience while playing. These are the things we take for granted while immersed in an online game like being able to play without constant crashes or stuttering graphics that move like a mailman in a coma. When a game is buggy or unstable it doesn't matter how great the graphics, quests or storyline are because we can't enjoy it properly without a stable game. The old adage that "Form follows function" applies in this case and I'm going to take a quick look at some of the reasons that stability is one of the most overlooked and elusive elements in game design.
Read the whole column here.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Comments
Not to nitpick, but it's Magnum Opus (Or Opus Magnum)
I agree with the setiment of the argument (as I usually do with Dan's work). It seems more and more companies are trying to steal away the World of Warcraft audience, often times they just make their game a clone of WoW, and expect it to be as sucessful. It's just plain stupid to have this mindset. It will only make things worse for your players.
As for big IPs, I think we've seen time and again that if anything, working with a big IP only makes things harder. As the larger the IP, the more people expect from the game. Often times, it pushes Developers to make drastic moves, which ultimatly hurt the game, because they are shooting not only for more people, but to make people feel as if they are a part of their IP's universe (Star Wars, LoTR, etc)
I know, we'll change this to a typical WoW vs anti-WoW thread, but i just couldn't help noticing that this is just plain wrong. Warcraft may not be as major as say LOTR, but it is one of the best known IPs in the industry.
Also... not stealing people from other games... I'm not sure what you mean by stealing, but having the largest marketing campaign in the industry, one that extends to other media (the famous chinese gold farmers article while not designed as such is in fact a very good advert) just has to draw players from other games.
I admit, I have never played WoW, and never will (getting money off gamers for the box, subscription AND expansions is just plain wrong, that's why), so i will not try to say the game is bad or anything like that. But please, don't tell me it has so many players just because it's the best game ever.
To get back on topic,
The world we live in now will never again let a developer publish a game that is nice and shiny and with no bugs at all. To illustrate it: I'm just making a mobile game, and have a deadline tomorrow. I know there is plenty of bugs/issues that really need to be addressed, but publishers will not wait, because they have to meet their own deadlines. In the end what we do is quickly patch most of the bugs and waive the rest in hope QA guys will let them pass.
While on a mobile game this "strategy" will work because with some luck really noone will notice the bugs, it looks completely different when it comes to MMOs.
But the only thing we as MMO players can do is bite our teeth, send a report to devs and patiently wait for it to be fixed.
No point in ranting about it - it will not make things any faster, but will only push other players away from the game, and that's not what we want when playing any game, right?
I think the notion of the statement was that, in order for a MMO to be sucessful, they dont have to make stealing players from other games their goal. This has been a common theme, so many games are adopting a WoW ui/play style in order to attempt to steal away players from WoW. Just look at SWG... do you think their TWO combat revamps were not aimed at making the game more wow-style?
I dont think it was the intent for WoW to drag people away from their previous games. Blizzard knew that their SC/WC3 zombies would gladly flock to WoW, especially their Zerg Rushers. kekekekekeke ^___________________________^
As I read this i was hoping he didn't just get done looking at Age of Conan. Everybody always reads things differently but I felt like dan was saying that if your going to have al this new inovative stuff, it needs to work properly. No point have new stuff that is broken. Anyway ,I agree with him.
Nail hit squarely on the head, but not driven entirely into the board, on account of it's one tough board.
The quality-versus-features argument is not unique to the MMO gaming industry. I would say it applies to all product development.
I think the article applies indirectly to extreme ranters, haters, and fanbois all at once. Perhaps that is the hidden intent. Personally, I'm willing to trade off some quality for great features, but basic reliability and smoothness are things that I would like to take for granted. Reliability failures, hitching, and audio glitches unconsciously (or consciously) grate on players. They reduce enjoyability in an insidious manner and correspondingly increase the likelihood of not logging in, not renewing that subscription, and not buying that expansion.
A good article Dan. I could not agree more.
It is the old KISS principle. Blizzard followed that logic perfectly with Wow. The game is easy to play and fun. Woe to the developer that ignores this. Vanguard is a good example of a developer ignoring this.
Most of these MMO developers should sending thank you letters to Blizzard, they opened up the genre to a lot of new players, many who are not playing Wow now. So there is a large audience out there waiting for a new game. The only game that has come close to following the Wow model is Lotro and it only represents a small segment compared to Wow.
I think there are some good games coming up in the 2nd half of this year and the first part of next year that will challenge Wow. That is good for us players when we have more options available to us. Let us hope they hold the KISS principle dear to their heart.
Good article and one of the games that came to mind was Shadowbane. I recall this game getting some hype with my friends about the PvP perspective however, the game had many bugs, server issues and kept crashing to desktop constantly. In the end it was because of these reasons my guildmates and I left the game. This was at release, and I can't speak for the game as to what it has become cause I simply don't know if it has improved. One game that I never had these issues with was Final Fantasy XI. I still come back to play this game even after all these years. Apart from being a fan of the game, it has been very stable.
Nothing can kill a game quicker than bugs and/or crashes. Doesn't matter if it is the prettiest, deepest, whatever MMOG in gaming history if I keep getting booted to desktop every 10 mins I'm not gonna play it.
I also don't think that devs should design games with the "steal players from Game X" mentality. Some people will actually play 2 different ones. Myself, I got really burned out on the mass of fantasy-themed games out there and that is what drew me to try out CIty of Heroes back in '04. I doubt Cryptic or NCSoft made CoH with the intention of stealing players away from EQ1 or DAoC. It was different from hack & slash fantasy, that was enough for me.
Well I am going to burst your bubble! Some if us SC fans did not flock to WoW like you say we did. Some if us SC players are not interested in WoW.
Actually there is a term that we use when describing new and upcomming games that does very strongly factor in the "stability" question that the author talks about.
The term is "polish" or "polished". When used to describe a MMO it typically means that the game is A. Stable, B. has a fairly low or smooth learning curve, C. has an effective and intuitive interface, D. has an attractive and immersive environment that feels complete.
The stability is a key component of a game being described as "polished". And while it may not attract much attention from the casual browser of the shelves at Walmart, within the existing comunity of MMO fans it can mean alot. And seeing it will prompt alot of the folks around here to take a serious look at the game. WoW released as a polished game (love the game or hate the game, it was a polished stable finished product), LoTRO gained a ton of players at release because of beta reports on how polished it was. Eve Online and EQ2 have both increased their playerbases in large part because of reports of their polish on sites like this.
Whereas the oposite reports have contributed greatly to the lack of financial success of games such as Horizons, Vanguard, AC2 etc.
So consumers do look for stability in the game, they just bundle it in with other things and call it by a diferent name.
I agree FFXI was my first MMO when it released in the US and had a huge time sink compared to WoW.
I have gone back to that game several times now as I have never had a single bug occur in that game, it's graphic-ly a beautiful game, sure not life like more cartoonish but none the less it's very easy on the eyes.
I've often wondered when they will release a FFXI-2 so to speak. From what I hear it's currenttly in the works but will be quite some time before it's ready to be officially announced. (or so I was told)
Anyway I know a ton of people who are going to warhammer if it lives up to the developers hype. In fact every single person I know that plays MMO's in my area are going to buy warhammer when it comes out. Hopefully there will be a downloadable version lol.
I don't know anything about the design process of games but it just seems game companies might also should be picky about who they choose as beta testers because I wonder if maybe beta testers might be part of the problem. Isn't it possible to have lots of impatient beta testers who are ready for the game to release or beta testers who don't know what beta truly means and consequently may not report known bugs they come across. Perhaps improved screening with tougher requirements for beta testers would be a good start.
It is a beautiful game. When it is not ctd'ing. Having Desynch issues in pvp. Memory leaks. Oh, and you can't play the game with the sound on!
They had to make the game so beautiful and show off its physics(it is one of the Ageia games).
Ultimately, it was the bugs and bad mouthing due to them that killed the game.
Two words: Quality Assurance. This is the reason EQ2 improved so dramatically. They fired the teams that made initial mistakes in design and recruited a large group of QA testers. Beta testers are alright for stress testing, but most of them are interested only in playing the game early. Pay someone and monitor their actions in house, and you get better results.
How many QA testers did Sigil have on hand for Vanguard? One?? We all know how that turned out.
Honestly, thats not really true. You can take every statement like yours and replace every "WoW" with "EQ" and it will look exactly the same as every rant everyone has written since mmo's started being made. No one is really trying to remake Wow..its just the simple fact that any MMO of that type is going to have similar features.
And as long as people keep paying for the craptastic games that have been coming out..companies like Sony will keep putting them out. Unfortunately, the trend is for small innovative companies to get bought out by the giants, (NC soft, Sony, etc..) then all the origionality gets beat out in an effort to only put in what they know will work for a fact.
What I don't get is how they STILL manage to F*&% it up when going by that model...
D.
p.s. WoW honestly had the Godfather of IP's for this type of game. WC was a very, very well known and popular game IP...the perfect candidate for an MMO. They did well with it..I just don't understand how they messed the pvp up so bad though..when their strategy games had it right for years.....
Condisering that sigil opted for Sony to distribute the game, then sold it so quickly to sony after release, I think they had always planned to sell it, make their cash quick and get the hell out. They did it with EQ, why not with other games.
So..honestly, I think they just pulled the wool over the communities eyes, cashed Sony's check hella quick and laughed all the way to the bank.
Just my 2 cents on that one.
D.
I think Ozmodan is right on about KISS -- Keep It Simple Stupid. Playability + Fun + Stability = Success. You don't have to imitate WoW, just understand the principles, and learn from the mistakes. There is an MMO coming soon that has stated up front that they will add crafting and pvp after release, in order to get it right. They are taking the time and effort and expense to polish and stabilize the core game. Time will tell for sure, but I'll bet you they won't fail like Vanguard. Even LoTRO, with noticeable shortcomings, got the above formula right, well enough that it is quite successful.
For the most part, I highly agree with this article.
It is in fact a shame that when it comes to the gaming industry that so few companies and developers pay attention to one of the most critical aspects to making a good video game, the ability to play the game. While it is very important to have something new and innovative that will make people get the interest to try your game OVER others (notice: not steal other players), its also important to make sure that beyond the fact that its there and produce the fact that it works and works well...
Programming and development is and has came a long way, and I think a stable MMO is something you will see before you think you will. As a developer currently trying to work my way into the industry and currently starting talks and such with some pretty big developers, I will not lie to you and put on that happy face that says "don't worry, everything is going to be ok." (Like Blizzard does whenever something goes wrong.... if they feel like it, half the time they don't even acknowledge problems for a few days... took them 1 year to fix a relatively simple bug) but I do aim and believe that the stability of the product is just as if not more important than the features it provides.
I am a long time player of WoW and I will say, though I am addicted, I am very disappointed and disgruntal with Blizzard on their upkeep of WoW past its original release. So the game grew really fast, thats no reason why 14 months have gone by and servers still crash like its week number 3 and if more than 45 players get in an area a relatively low graphic and static game world lag to pieces, and even more so when they do things like implement "Public Test Servers" where they load down and test new features that when it hits the live servers it all of the sudden goes boom (Patch 1.9 anyone?)
This article could be summed up with 'Make a good, stable game (preferably with some fun involved) and people will play it.
Diem Carpe!
Dan is pretty right there.
I try to be forgiving as a player, but even with these, I recognize that I am not that forigiving for these bugs...and most players are even less then me. Yet, I won't play the smoothest PING in the world.
But...In hardly see what this has to do with the designers...99% of this area of expertise is never see, address or experienced by the designers, it is solved by the front line programmers. Getting a designer on these problematics is often the first step to disaster, the designer won't solve stability issue...he may screw up the design however.
These problems are to be solved by programmers...and if they need to work 80 hours in 4 days and get the extra bonus rate, then be it...if they want to...ahhh...who said programming was easy? If a programmer "can't" solve it, then you either need to make him work harder...or find a better programmer...or accept to make compromises...but each compromise is heavy of consquences.
This is why designers who once where programmers have a huge benefit...other designers need to get some programmers to read their doc and understand what have to be done...and then, you must also make sure the programmer isn't trying to please the designer, but telling the truth, and willing to say it is possible with heavily insane amount of work, if this is the case, rather then just say: "can't".
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
With the complexity of modern MMORPGs, I think it's only reasonable to release initailly both less-than-stable code, and code without all the planned features in it. Until the way programs are written drastically change, than this is the way it is. Simple economics and technology. Fom now, games will be released in a 'beta' version. Vanguard comes to mind, right now it is buggy and not nearly fully featured, but will be given enough time.