Interview here with Jack Emmert on MMO design. A couple of interesting article quotes:
What might surprise new entrants of the game development industry is that these failures and successes rely in some part on trial and error. “Research, to be honest— we don’t use it in the commercial industry. I wouldn’t even know where to look for it,” says Emmert. But he does know that “ownership is key. Make players own stuff. That way, they’re not going to own you.”
Another way to improve the chances of creating a successful massively multiplayer titles is to use groups. “Grouping is absolutely vital in an MMP,” Emmert says. “If people are playing online and they meet friends, then they are going to play. I have no other evidence of this other than the exit surveys in City of Heroes. “We want to keep people playing. What are the mechanisms MMPs have used to keep people playing?” Some of these mechanisms, from Emmert’s point of view, are not only grouping, but also
classifying player types, such as fighter, mage, thief, and cleric. The designers then need to find a purpose for those player types, which gives them reason to rely on other player types for other purposes.“You cannot play Everquest alone,” says Emmert of one example. “You have to find other people online. The [enemies] are so tough that no one person can do it. And in fact, you have to get just the right players” to move forward. And while some may questions the true strength of player grouping in games, enough MMOs have succeeded due to the very nature of their grouping that the trend cannot be ignored.
Lots of other good stuff on grouping, too.
Emmert realized, in developing City of Heroes that there is a deeply rooted fear in most people of, essentially, grouping with strangers. He asks by example do you know your neighbors well enough to have them over to dinner? Do you know and trust your neighbors well enough to let them take care of your children. These rhetorical questions beg yet another question about irrational fears, namely, if the odds are absurdly low that we should be wary of our neighbors, why do many people still not know
or trust them?“We need to develop mechanisms that circumvent this fear that we have. In City of Heroes, we used a few classic mechanisms,” the primary one being “sidekicks,” Emmert says. Using sidekicks, partners in the game play alongside each other and advance to new levels together, so friends playing together can stay together. Emmert notes how the use of sidekicks helped Cryptic Studios maintain a 90 percent conversion rate when their players’ free trials expired. This design choice, he says, was intentional, and
is one that serious game makers can learn from.“The other thing we did was create super groups,” says Emmert, “large amounts of people willing to cooperate,” otherwise known as guilds in other MMO games. “Super groups are purely a social mechanism that allow people to have a chat chain and that’s about it.”
But the grouping can’t be forced. And a lot of the individual stuff is even more important.
Emmert highlights other facets of the game that players appreciate, such as costume creation and player creation. He also notes that groups often used their costumes to show group identity rather than individuality, illustrating that some of the best team-building, again, originates from the players themselves.
But not all the game design put in place in City of Heroes and City of Villains worked out for the best. For example, “Players don’t ever want to be in a situation when they’re forced to group,” Emmert says. Another example is a facet created by the game designers, that, according to Emmert, were “probably the best designed game element ever.
“We spent more time developing [bases] than any other feature in City of Heroes or City of Villains,” he says. Although bases are built by a team, Emmert and his team viewed them as being “incredibly, incredibly individual” because each piece of the base is designed and added by individuals.
“What happened was players hated it. It’s the most underused facet of the game. It received almost no coverage in the press. And there’s nothing like it in any other MMP.” Emmert’s hypothesis is that “people don’t like contributing money to a group to express individuality. … At its heart, these MMPs are individual game experiences in front of a computer terminal.”
That led to a bunch of discussion on the boards, prompting States to actually comment on it.
Let’s take a look at costume creation. It’s been embraced beyond belief by players…we have in game costume contests and events organized by you the players…Some say it’s the best part of the game. The single most requested item in CoH is to make the costume creator standalone…
Intestingly, costumes have no gameplay value. They don’t boost damage. They don’t boost resistance. They don’t boost defense. They’re only for show.
Now, let’s take a look at bases. Take away the teleporters, take away anything game related.
As just a resource for expressing something unique, base creation is on par tech wise with costume creation. Admittedly, there’s not quite the same amount of textures, colors, etc., but there’s still a lot of versatility. And the layout possibilities are endless.
But what’s clear from this thread – and from many, many posts – is that bases are “too expensive”. To me, that’s interesting (as it is to the Serious Games crowd). Costume changes come with a minimal cost that no one really complains about, but we complain about the costs of bases. Evidently, the costs exceed the perceived value of creating one’s own HQ (btw, I confess that many other games have the notion of personal property, but aside from Second Life, I don’t think they offer as much customizability as our
bases).Let’s turn to the idea of an architect. We foresaw that some people would feel alienated if they weren’t the architect. That’s why some things (Personal Items) can be “crafted” by individuals and placed in the base. But even if there’s an architect: many super groups have a member who designed a single costume which all then use. In other words, they’re more than willing to accept someone else’s opinion in the group identity for their avatar appearance. Again, the primary difference is cost (I think).
That’s what the point of the talk was. I completely agree with many of the suggestions raised in the Base Construction forum, as well as one’s mentioned here, would improve Bases to some degree or another. Posi and I go through them at length; really, it’s just a question of time & resources. Some things would take astronomically long to do – or perhaps there’s something else even more requested or popular.
Interesting stuff. Honestly, the whole base thing has never been nearly as interesting to me as I suspect the devs intended — if base entry simply changed into a “where do you want to teleport to?” I would have very few regrets.
But costumes? Yeah, they rock.
This was my complaint– and reason for cancelling– my Dungeons & Dragons Online subscription. Solo play was nigh-impossible without building the perfect min-max character.
For an MMO to hold my interest, I look for the ability to play either solo or in groups.
As a Stone/Sonics controller, solo play is slower than a (insert your favourite image to convey the Ideal of slowness).
However, soloing in is possible as any AT. Speed and safety may vary, but I can take on anything not bright purple or rated as a Giant Monster or Arch Villian and have some expectations of surivival or even victory.
See Mal.
See Mal Ramble.
Ramble, Mal, Ramble!
The ability to large team, small team, or solo (or all of the above) is a great strength of CoX, no doubt.
EQII you have several types of houses you can buy depending on cost (money and Status (prestige basically)), you can customize the interior look, and add all of the trophy’s of your success’. And some of those grant temp powers to boot, so, I would say that the bases are “close” to being the best, but not the best and they are over priced on rent.
Bull. Just like CoX you can solo much of it until you face “Named” or “Heroics” (Elite boss’, Elite Boss Mobs, and Monsters). Is it easier to have folks along? Just as easy as CoX.
Can you do a mission without a type of AT? Yep, in both EQII and CoX you can do things without an AT, the strategy just changes.
Yep, that is one thing that CoX has over EQII, and it allows for far more socializing in the SG/Guild. EQII has Mentoring, which works better in EQII than it does in CoH (you have all of your abilities, just that thet are reduced to the level that you are mentoring at).
*laughs*
Okay…yeah.
Every SG/VG I have seen in game has one or two people (like me) that enjoys the base building and design aspect of the game, and they are the ones that do it, as opposed to EQII where everyone CAN have a house, and everyone that has a house decorates and adds to that as they wish, so it is far more individule than the bases.
In Dark Age of Camelot, the player housing is in a seperate zone. The zone is broken up into neighborhoods, and you have the option of either running or taking a horse to the desired area. You can also choose to teleport directly to your own house.
Plots become free as neighborhoods are added, or when someone fails to keep up with their rent. Imagine not paying the SG base rent, then coming to check on something only to determine that your base has been sold out from under you. All of your things are in storage, and your key no longer works.
The player housing is where all crafting is done, and is customizeable as it is in EQ.
You can have battle trophies, banners, beds, trees, flower beds, and so on. You can also put a merchant on your porch to sell crafted– and found– items. Honey? Why does our tower have a front porch?
In addition, the center of each suberb has public areas with crafting tools, and a listing of who is selling items.
I agree. Sidekicks make CoX a great thing. You don’t need to keep a seperate set of alts to be able to play with the lower level alts, and you can take them with you on the bigger fights and expect them to have fun. (Fun does not come from the frustration of facing +10 monsters.YMMV)
Yep, EQII you can build/buy items that allow you to craft in house, but each section of town has a crafting basement with a broker.
In your hose you have “vaults” where you sell the crafted items, found items or raw items to people visiting the Brokers.
Yeesh…losing your house. Gah! Yeah….so glad that CoX and EQII does not have that “feature”.
Yes…fighting +10 mobs does not equal fun.
The DAoC Housing has vaults for Guild and/or personal storage. Another neat feature is the ability to make non-functional clones of your weapons to use as wall decorations.
The consignment brokers have a different vault to draw from, and you can set the rent to make an automatic withdrawl from them before charging the owners. This also allows guild members to make rent payments– just put up a bunch of toy swords for varying large amounts of gold.
When I left DAoC, our Guild had nearly all the houses in one corner of the neighborhood.
What I hated were the artifacts. I got an alt to 50, but then had to get XP for my STUFF so that it would become stronger and gain additional powers.
Back to DDO for a moment:
The dungeons always had traps in the same place. Rather annoying for the Fighter or the Wizard to tell the Rogue that there was a trap 45′ ahead on the left.
The other problem was content. Some modules were less popular, as the rewards were less impressive. Even for the popular modules, people only thought of loot to be gained. Some of the maps were enormous, but we would take the quickest route to either the objective or the special chest. We would bypass the rest of the dungeon– anything else would interfere the maximum loot returned for time spent.
More follow-up from States on this thread. Excerpts:
For myself (and I won’t globalize here), it’s the function that’s most important. The aesthetics is the icing on the cake — it’s cool to pop into the CoJ base and see the logo spinning there, or go in as Psi-clone and hang out in my office. But if I just clicked on the base portals and was presented with a menu of TP locations, healing, or storage bins, I wouldn’t feel all that cheated.
It is nice having a place (other than an untravelled piece of parkland) to meet folks in. Not essential, but nice.
States talks a lot about SG costumes, but my (limited) perception is that these are a rarity. Most of the SGs I’ve associated with never even do that much with SG colors, let alone standard costume styles. It’s neat that the capability is there, but it’s not nearly as universal as I think Statesman thinks it is.