What makes a "good" MMO? Beating WoW at it's own game

[Kag]

I think the rewards in MMOs need to be far less permanent
...
Think TF2.

I think you're right about the TF2 model. Getting a bunch of sidegrades lets you have distinct playstyles within the same class, tailor made to player preferences, which is fun for everybody. But that's really more permanent.

[Gelsamel]

I would never play an MMO that didn't have permanent progression. It's part of the reason I quit WoW... once a new expansion comes out you have to start from scratch at a newer but not any more "progressed" max level.

[Ixtellor]

Which is irrelevant, because gear isn't a very fun way to reward players.

Also, give players lots and lots of options, let them find ways to make them work together. If people are still discovering new and powerful ways to play well into the life of a game, it does wonders for the community.

Totally wrong, its about the Gear. Thats why City of Heros sucked at max level. Non gear to go for..

You could accumulate TONS of titles(badges) but who cares.... Your level 50 scrapper was exactly like my level 50 scrapper except the costume which any one could get at level 1 (aside from a few special pieces - that generally just looked comical)

There are only like 4 rewards that make MMO's worth it.
1) Levels
2) Gear
3) Skills
4) Prestige (badges, titles, guilds)etc.

[Kag]

Your level 50 scrapper was exactly like my level 50 scrapper except the costume which any one could get at level 1 (aside from a few special pieces - that generally just looked comical)

Yeah, I know, which is why this:

Also, give players lots and lots of options, let them find ways to make them work together. If people are still discovering new and powerful ways to play well into the life of a game, it does wonders for the community.

What's the difference between this helmet and that helmet? When I put that one on, some of my attacks do ~3% more damage. Does that in any meaningful way affect gameplay? No.

There are at least a trillion ways of building any class in Guild Wars. Do any of them play the same? Also no.

[Gelsamel]

Which is irrelevant, because gear isn't a very fun way to reward players.

Also, give players lots and lots of options, let them find ways to make them work together. If people are still discovering new and powerful ways to play well into the life of a game, it does wonders for the community.

Totally wrong, its about the Gear. Thats why City of Heros sucked at max level. Non gear to go for..

You could accumulate TONS of titles(badges) but who cares.... Your level 50 scrapper was exactly like my level 50 scrapper except the costume which any one could get at level 1 (aside from a few special pieces - that generally just looked comical)

There are only like 4 rewards that make MMO's worth it.
1) Levels
2) Gear
3) Skills
4) Prestige (badges, titles, guilds)etc.

I'm gunna say levels are only worth it in games where levels give logarithmic benefits with a ridiculously high level cap. Of course in a game like that you have to start End Game early and the level is mostly just for the extra numbers and to be really cool and famous and stuff.

If it's like levels in WoW then it's only slightly worth it, much less than the worth of effort to get gear is. I think if an MMO is going to make you grind for levels either make the levels essentially a really long tutorial so you don't have newbs in end game content and then thats it no more leveling. Or you make the levels essentially infinite (like, make max level 999 but you don't expect people to get past like 300 due to exp/time requirements) and do some log scaling.

The best part about the gear is when it makes you look different to everyone else, it also is just fun because of theorying up min/max and gettin' shiney rares. But I think it's mostly the pride of having that rare item, and the fact that everyone knows it because you're glowing.

[Izawwlgood]

Well, you can go in either direction; you can let individuals become incredibly powerful, or, you can limit the capacity of an individual and make it about numbers.

To far in either direction is bad. In WoW, once I hit 525, I mine just like any other miner. In Eve, it's easy to get to the 525 equivalent, but you aren't going to get much done unless a dozen miners are cracking at it with you.

I think WoW needs more 'big' crafting projects, and guild perks was a decent forey into that, except it's largely non-directed. Just get 500 people generating coin, grinding xp, etc.

[nowfocus]

Totally wrong, its about the Gear. Thats why City of Heros sucked at max level. Non gear to go for..

You could accumulate TONS of titles(badges) but who cares.... Your level 50 scrapper was exactly like my level 50 scrapper except the costume which any one could get at level 1 (aside from a few special pieces - that generally just looked comical)

There are only like 4 rewards that make MMO's worth it.
1) Levels
2) Gear
3) Skills
4) Prestige (badges, titles, guilds)etc.

This is kind of my point: the next MMO should be 'worth it' without the need for additional levels, gear, or skills. There are plenty of multiplayer games with massive followings that don't have these elements. Why exactly does adding extra players on screen require this?

Lets imagine a hypothetical TF2 MMO. The PvP is the same, in that its instanced. There is already an in game economy and crafting. There are already classes.

The plot? Two sides, are fighting for control of Australia. You are a mercenary who can sign up for either side. By doing this, you gain in-game currency that can be used to buy hats and badges that are designed by the community, as they are now. For each of your weapon slots there are several classes of weapons, each of which has a bit of a different flavour (like the demomans sword and axe) but play in a similar manner. Since both sides of the war are being controlled by the same woman, she gives larger rewards to the team with fewer players, maintaining population balance. Each side has a large base where you can meet with others before scurrying of to various battlefields. PvE is done with Valve Bots, who are coming along fairly nicely.

I think this is all quite feasible. Hell, it seems like Valve is slowly incorporating these elements into the game.

People already pour dozens of hours into TF2 because the gameplay is excellent. Any game that relies on increasing power to keep you playing is doing it poorly.

[CombustibleLemons]

If they can pull this off this http://undeadlabs.com/. i love the idea of no missions just survive

[Chen]

Personally, I think a good MMO is one that favors WARs system over WoWs.

A "good" MMO maybe in terms of what you enjoy but it certainly won't be a popular one. WoW is popular because they cater to the casual player. Much as the hardcore raiders get annoyed by it, it works. And Cataclysm seems to so far be doing a good job of allowing everyone to get gear but giving the best gear to the best players in form of heroics. The fact you can grind out badges to get gear that is just below what raiders get was a brilliant move on Blizzards part. It keeps people coming back into the game during the entire content cycle instead of those who come in late being stuck WAY behind, barring joining a guild to have you carried through content.

Which is irrelevant, because gear isn't a very fun way to reward players.

I'm going to beg to differ here. Games like Diablo 2 or Titan quest which are really nothing more than "go find new shiny gear" are still quite popular. Giving people even marginal upgrades that make their character "better" seems to be an excellent carrot to dangle in front of people to keep them playing. Clearly not everyone likes this, but a very large portion of those who play MMOs (or RPGs in general) do seem to like this.

[Kag]

I'm going to beg to differ here. Games like Diablo 2 or Titan quest which are really nothing more than "go find new shiny gear" are still quite popular. Giving people even marginal upgrades that make their character "better" seems to be an excellent carrot to dangle in front of people to keep them playing. Clearly not everyone likes this, but a very large portion of those who play MMOs (or RPGs in general) do seem to like this.

That's the idea. Notably: Not synonymous with fun.

In a related matter, a good way to produce a better MMO would be to have Jonathan Blow make it.

[pepsi]

A good MMO should still be fun if it was a single player game.

I'd say take a roguelike, make it real time, then add some trees, rocks, and such for players who enjoy grinding. Then you have options: you can click a rock for 9999 hours (some people actually enjoy this), run a dungeon and hope for nice loot, or do some PVP. PVP should be global and allow you to just attack anyone anywhere with no penalty on death... it's more fun that way. Small areas can be designated for ranked fights. PVP would probably have some FPS elements in it but still rely a lot on designing a good build for those who love to min max.

There shouldn't be any 1/10000 drops from bosses that only spawn once per hour. That's just silly Korean stuff and causes items prices to unrealistically high. Players hate saving up their cash and always feeling poor... the best gear shouldn't be tradable if that's the case.

[Izawwlgood]

A good MMO should still be fun if it was a single player game.

Er, you mean if there was complete human emulating AIs?

If not, the exact opposite is what should be true.

[Jesse]

PVP should be global and allow you to just attack anyone anywhere with no penalty on death

Yes, because there is nothing more fun than being ganked constantly while I'm trying to level my crafting.

[Menacing Spike]

PVP should be global and allow you to just attack anyone anywhere with no penalty on death

Yes, because there is nothing more fun than being ganked constantly while I'm trying to level my crafting.

Or your guild group getting stomped by a korean centaur zerg. Shadowbane I miss you so.

[Spambot5546]

Pepsi, I feel like what you're describing is really similar to Ultima Online.

[pepsi]

Possibly. I've never played that game.

I'm just saying like... an activity shouldn't be fun only because you're doing it with other people. The activity should be fun on its own and more fun with other people involved. If it's only fun with other people then it's a boring activity and the people you're with are just making up for it; you might as well just hang with those people and ignore the activity altogether.

The bare bones of an MMO is an open world with player interaction. You can't just take that and toss in some monsters and an experience curve (the Korean formula it seems). Instead why not add activities that are already fun and add them to this virtual environment? Like... take your favorite single player game and turn it into an MMO. You'll probably then have your favorite MMO instead of just some repetitive grind for levels and gear.

I think the main problem with this is that most games run their course in less than 20 hours and an MMO needs to eat up 1000+ hours. This is were roguelikes come in with randomly generated areas and a steep difficulty curve. It keeps players on their toes and interested instead of the same content over and over.

[Izawwlgood]

I disagree entirely man. You're describing a game that has a multiplayer option, which is a far cry from an MMO. Eve Online would be a horrible single player game, because there'd be no dynamic market. WoW would be a horrible single player game, because raid level content would be impossible without a really advanced AI.

[Gelsamel]

.hack exists for people who want a single player MMO.

[Kag]

I disagree entirely man. You're describing a game that has a multiplayer option, which is a far cry from an MMO. Eve Online would be a horrible single player game, because there'd be no dynamic market. WoW would be a horrible single player game, because raid level content would be impossible without a really advanced AI.

It's impossible to play those games without other people.

That's not the same as saying the people are what makes the gameplay fun.

[Izawwlgood]

I agree with you pertaining to Eve but only because I recently quit the game. You could make the entirety of the game, game generated, and allowing hiring of NPCs to accomplish everything you do. FF12 had a fairly robust system for giving instruction to the other people in your party, and EVE has even less complexity in terms of combat outside the fitting window.

As for a game like WoW, I always think it's neat seeing the difference between a good tank and a bad tank, and I'm not sure how easy it would be to code some of that behavior into an AI.

But those two aside, in both of those games, I found single player questing to be a HORRIFIC bore, and multiplayer anything to be a lot more fun. You could easily make single player versions of 'fun' activities in Eve, but I think it'd be a lot harder to do it well, and even more so in WoW.

[BlackSails]

I disagree entirely man. You're describing a game that has a multiplayer option, which is a far cry from an MMO. Eve Online would be a horrible single player game, because there'd be no dynamic market. WoW would be a horrible single player game, because raid level content would be impossible without a really advanced AI.

They made a single player EVE, and while it wasnt Gee Willikers AMAZING, freelancer was a decent enough game.


Edit: So, its that time of year again, eh?

[TheBanana]

I don't know if it's been mentioned but I believe that Star Wars: The old Republic stands a chance at beating WoW in the MMO world. For starters, the game will have huge name recognition because it's star wars for god's sake. And it's also be developed by Bioware who generally put out damn good products. Also, the budget for this game is reputed to be ridiculously huge. Obviously the game hasn't been released but from what I understand the game is supposed to have a massive amount of story which will keep players interested in the world for a long time, which assuming they get the basics of a good MMO down (class balance, good PvE AND PvP, equipment, leveling etc.) then the story focus might give them the edge over WoW. Supposedly players' decisions during quests are supposed to actually impact the world too.

[SecondTalon]

Star Wars video games (and Star Wars MMOs) don't exactly have a stellar track record.

I mean, yeah.. you can name five awesome Star Wars games fairly easily. You can also name 30 that sucked even easier.

[Shivahn]

Star Wars video games (and Star Wars MMOs) don't exactly have a stellar track record.

I mean, yeah.. you can name five awesome Star Wars games fairly easily. You can also name 30 that sucked even easier.

Right, but this one's developed by Bioware*, among other things. It isn't the case of the license being given to the first person with a billion dollars.

* The same Bioware who was bought by EA so we'll see how this actually goes.

[Ixtellor]

My and all my MMO friends are going to buy it (starwars) I hope its good and better than galaxies.

[thc]

I currently play Dungeons and Dragons Online (DDO for short).

Things I like about it:
1) Familiar game mechanics to just about practically everyone that makes it easy to get into, yet there's also new mechanics and depth in character building.
2) Class balance - every class is viable and welcome in groups.
3) F2P option. You do need to buy adventure packs and unlocks for premium races/classes, but I like the feeling that I "own" the game and I'm not just renting it.

Things I dislike:
1) Too heavily instanced. Zones are too small, and there is actually only one major city, so the world feels small.
2) Grind substituted for new content. Lots of grind introduced since becoming F2P... not surprising, but I still hate it.
3) Too many servers - there are maybe ~1000 players on a server at any given time, and it's hard to find groups for less popular content.
4) grind

[SecondTalon]

thc,

Given the known definitions, this is going to seem like a completely idiotic question, but.....

What is grind? You mention it several times : what do you mean by it?


Spoiler fer Reasonin!

Spoiler:

The reason I'm asking is that there are many definitions of grind, and yes they do all basically boil down to "Doing the same repetitive thing over and over", but I'm curious to know if you're meaning there's low/boring quest content so it's just as efficient (if not more efficient) to just kill the same enemies over and over and over, OR if you mean that item drop rates are so low as to require that you kill the same things over and over and over for halfway interesting items.

[Deva]

Thinks there are two important things to a good MMO:
- Constant improvement
- A feeling of change in gameplay

Constant improvement. Fictional example: starts playing at noon. Stops at midnight. Would want to be able to say “Can do X better now”, “Knows about Y now”, or "Got cool tentacle thingy". Rotation improvement? Gear improvement? Strategy knowledge? Cosmetic greatness? Doesn’t matter which. Wasted all that time, if not. Hates wasting time. Accepts that there will be obstacles, but not a brick wall.

Fun analogy time: Stuck in traffic. Backed up for miles. Has an annoying child moaning in your ear. Would you rather be inching forward (negligible amount) or completely still? Chooses the first for a feeling of progress. Will wear off after an undetermined time. Still, was less miserable for a while.

Actual example: Ozruk in Heroic Stonecore (WoW). Is/was completely upon the tank dodging two moves: a straight line attack, and a point blank area effect. Can’t dodge? Death. Over and over and over. Was frustrating, because I was helpless (see: not the tank). Did not want to leave. Had already spent 40 minutes to get in and another 30 to get to where I was. Took two hours (and several tanks/healers/damage dealers) to kill just that boss. Felt more relief than accomplishment. Logged off for the rest of the day after that dungeon. Still twitches at “Break yourselves upon my body!”

Feeling of change: Will do a fictional example. Starts at level 1. Has a move called Fireball. Will use that almost exclusively at first, since there is nothing better. No problem. Will get a new move at level 2 called “Wrath of the Poultry Queen”. Does the same damage as Fireball, but a slightly longer cast time. Will never use (unless the graphic is awesome). Gets a new spell at level 4 called “Dance of Windy Doom”. Has the same damage and cast time, but a horrible mana cost. Will probably never use. Continues likes this. Only uses Fireball the whole way. Low on mana? Fireball. Extra monster? Fireball. Friend about to die? Fireball. Has a cat jumping on the keyboard? New strategy (frantic spamming of Fireball to try to kill the monster, or coaxing the cat into your lap). Thanks cat for excitement, assuming victory.

Sounds silly, but it happens. Two other MMO examples:
Rappelz. Had other problems with it, but spells were the worst. Had Fire Arrow and Lightning Bolt bound to F1 and F2, respectively. Was the beginning spell for each tree. 1.5 second cast time, 1 second cooldown on both (or something like that). Had to alternate. Poor keys. Squeaked upon pressing after a while. Had one other spell worth using (a stun) on a 30 second cooldown, even when I was over halfway down the spell trees.

Lord of the Rings Online. Has more things going for it. Is a healer for this. Has five heals (for now, but the 6th is weak and a ways away). Uses one heal 90% of the time. Will run out of power if I don’t. Does the most healing too (not including the 10 minute cooldown heal), unless 4+ party members are wounded.

Compared against WoW:
Must keep an eye on Earth Shield (or Renew). Has a slow efficient small heal, a quick inefficient large-ish heal, and a slow semi-inefficient large heal. Must use AoE heals every so often. Needs to watch debuffs. Makes decisions, in short. Is unlikely that someone will die if I make a wrong choice or two (assuming no death wishes, like swan dives into lava). Will die if I make several. Could probably categorize this a little under challenge rating too.

Same for overarching gameplay. May really like the PvE, but sometimes, a break is required. Can be a separate game or another task in the current game. Crafting? PvP? New character? Roleplay? Is all about options.

Is my *looks up* 2 cents that I kept pulling out of the machine with a string and placing back in. With a heavy dose of bias, probably.

[psion]

I think a MMO should be fun and engrossing on it's own merits rather than churning out yet another game over the same formula. How about not having fireball at level 1? How about not having levels? I think that as long as a game designer is willing to bind their mind to the typical features of the genre they won't be able to intentionally design something to overthrow WoW.

[Izawwlgood]

Lord of the Rings Online. Has more things going for it. Is a healer for this. Has five heals

Deva, for what it's worth, you should start using subjects in your posts.

How about not having fireball at level 1? How about not having levels? I think that as long as a game designer is willing to bind their mind to the typical features of the genre they won't be able to intentionally design something to overthrow WoW.

I think it begs the question as to why the Korean grind fests are so successful.

But agreed; I'd like to see more novel concepts in MMOs. I've enjoyed the different mechanics in place for the games that I play, and would like to see more neat things incorporated, across the board, in terms of leveling/advancement, economies/crafting, and combat itself.

[psion]

How about not having fireball at level 1? How about not having levels? I think that as long as a game designer is willing to bind their mind to the typical features of the genre they won't be able to intentionally design something to overthrow WoW.

I think it begs the question as to why the Korean grind fests are so successful.

I don't remember saying that the formula isn't successful. It's possible that regurgitating the formula over dozens of different games that one of them could get lucky and surpass WoW, but I think this thread is about intentional design decisions that would make for a wholly superior game. In which case I feel that the whole formula should be destroyed, reanalyzed and rebuilt rather than copying WoW with slightly different emphasises.

[Kag]

I think it begs the question as to why the Korean grind fests are so successful.

Notably: Not synonymous with fun.

Maybe a bit of a time investment, but worth it. Jonathan Blow knows his shit.

[Gelsamel]

That link isn't working for me, what does it say?

I think the reason grindfests are popular is because... character progression. There was talk in the D&D thread about why people who had fun playing the game wouldn't come back for more of the campaign, and the answer is because they weren't running a game where the players were invested in their characters.

[Kag]

That link isn't working for me, what does it say?

Basically: Reward Scheduling.

[thc]

thc,

Given the known definitions, this is going to seem like a completely idiotic question, but.....

What is grind? You mention it several times : what do you mean by it?


Spoiler fer Reasonin!

Spoiler:

The reason I'm asking is that there are many definitions of grind, and yes they do all basically boil down to "Doing the same repetitive thing over and over", but I'm curious to know if you're meaning there's low/boring quest content so it's just as efficient (if not more efficient) to just kill the same enemies over and over and over, OR if you mean that item drop rates are so low as to require that you kill the same things over and over and over for halfway interesting items.

Both. The item grind in DDO can get ridiculous if you let it. For the most part, you can have fun without uber gear, but the difference between a moderately geared toon and an "epic" geared toon is huge - like an order of magnitude huge, and its a little disheartening when you realize that you're being carried through a quest. For example, there's a ring that doubles a caster's mana pool which is highly sought after. You need three parts of the ring to get it. The problem is, people have literally farmed for over a year, non-stop, hours on end, and have not even seen one part.

There's also a ton of grinding for experience points. It isn't so much that there's a lack of quests, it's more so that some quests are just so much more efficient in terms of exp/time. Getting to level 20 isn't so bad, but there's a reincarnation system that takes you back to level 1, and makes you marginally more powerful for each past life. And also, as a fun side effect, makes it so that getting to level 20 requires twice as much EXP.

[Izawwlgood]

but there's a reincarnation system that takes you back to level 1, and makes you marginally more powerful for each past life. And also, as a fun side effect, makes it so that getting to level 20 requires twice as much EXP.

This strikes me as a brilliant method for keeping all level content relevant.

[mike-l]

That link isn't working for me, what does it say?

Basically: Reward Scheduling.

More specifically, he talks about how game makers are intentionally manipulative to the harm of the individual.

What he DOES NOT say is that this makes games not fun. In fact, at one point he says in trying to make games less manipulative it's usually at the cost of fun. (FYI, this is the guy who made Braid)

Edit: On a related note, Braid is an amazingly fun game. But only for about 3 hours. You can't make an MMO around that, an MMO NEEDS to keep pleople playing a lot, because if you log on and you're the only one on the server, you're really just playing a single player game.