mendax.org

Prelude to the Awakening

There was a time when massively multiplayer online games (MMORPGs) were the genre reserved for the nerds of the nerds; even among fellow gamers, MMORPGers were ridiculed for their obsession with “EverCrack”, their hack’n slash diversion from real life. This was to remain the case until early 2005, when Blizzard’s World of Warcraft (WoW) began turning heads, and world-of-mouth convinced gamers previously uninterested in the MMORPG genre to take WoW for a spin. Since then, WoW has become a global phenomenon, spreading the Warcraft namesake so far, that Blizzard has already licensed the name for a Hollywood movie deal. With over six-million players, WoW has been accused of killing revenue for other gaming developers, while at the same time becoming the shining example of how polishing an old formula can turn a relatively small company into the top developer in the industry.

The gamescape we look at today is one where MMORPGs are flooding the market, all vying for a piece of the pie that Blizzard has drawn into the sky. Many fail quickly, while others claim to circumvent the flaws that many seasoned WoW gamers complain about; titles such as Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning (WAR) are already gathering an audience despite a release date a full year away. Not to be outdone, WoW’s first expansion is only weeks away, with intentions to keep a growing player base.

It’s an interesting time for what we might consider the third generation of MMORPG titles, and while battles for market share will rage on, the war may only temporarily be in WoW’s favor. For sure, the innovation behind the current MMORPG lineup has grown, but it is far from complete in order for a decisive winner to emerge from the clash.

Over three years ago, I commented on the evolution of MMORPGs, and where the industry needed to go in order to revolutionize the genre. Since that time, much of what I predicted has come to see the light, either in existing games, or in those planned for the future. Other suggestions I made have gone ignored, and in this oversight, the MMORPG genre has remained a mostly hack’n slash enterprise, where even blockbuster games like WoW have shown little innovation.

As in my previous piece on the subject, this article will key in on elements that need refining in the MMORPG genre, or elements that simply need to exist in order to keep the genre fresh and exciting. By taking a strong look at MMORPG trends, and considering the genre as a canvas for improvement, rather than a vehicle just for earning pocket change, we could encounter great things in the future, where virtual worlds are even more engrossing and captivating than they are today. In short, consumers and developers alike are now well aware of future MMORPG dreams, but both need a little jostling to wake up and see what changes need to be made.

Where Failure Struck Twice

Three years ago, developing a MMORPG was a different affair. Nowadays, while a good deal of financial backing may still be required to market and polish a game, the opportunities for independent development studios to get into the MMORPG buffet are pretty good. MMORPG engines are finally on the free market, and various endeavors to publish engines specifically for licensing purposes are already successful. While seven-digit budgets for future MMORPGs are nothing to take lightly, such enormous financial undertakings are quick becoming the exception at the get-go, as companies can show a workable product before having to solicit venture capitalists for the funding to make the MMMORPG equivalent of Hello World.

The state of graphics in games today is also slowly starting to plateau. Computer hardware is at a point where upgrading every six months is no longer necessary to run the latest games, thanks to yesterday’s processing power able to adequately render the games of today. In part, this is why video game consoles no longer sport revolutionary changes from generation to generation, and this trend of graphics not being leaps and bounds better from one generation to the next means developers don’t need to focus as heavily on making use of new and complex eye-candy. Instead, they can finally spend more time on gameplay and immersion.

While the gaming industry as a whole carried us from one hack’n slash journey to the next, the gameplay and graphical improvements changed over the years. From the tabletop versions of Dungeons & Dragons, to Diablo, to Dungeons & Dragons Online, we have the same formula used by vastly different products. Yet, the repetition and play is effectively the same, with roleplaying elements lost somewhere along the transition. After awhile, no matter how addictive killing and looting can be, the experience grows old. It’s that grind that ultimately turns players away from a game, not because it wasn’t fun for awhile, but because that’s all there is. For MMORPGs to make it long-term, players need to feel that their games offer more experiences than running the same old dungeons, capturing the same old flag, and killing the same old creature just for a minor increase in some NPC’s recognition.

Even WoW, who has managed to grow the MMORPG market considerably, hasn’t done much in the way of innovation for the genre. Its growth is rather misleading because of this, as the mainstream media, and many gamers, believe that Blizzard’s formula was somehow very different from its predecessors. The reality is that while Blizzard had many great ideas, it failed to successfully implement a good lot of them, and by the time WoW went live, it did not have a product on its hands that redefined the MMORPG experience.

If WoW was simply a small step in the greater evolution of MMORPGs, then why did it succeed so marvelously in a financial context? In the original “The Second Big Bang,” I proposed that MMORPGs won’t leave the niche market until they break free from the simple hack’n slash formula, “Kill or acquire”. Yet WoW managed to draw in a record high number of players, and bring MMORPGs into the mainstream, despite modifying this formula only slightly. The question is, “how?”

To start answering this question, one needs to look at Blizzard’s track record. With early console titles, Blizzard showed themselves adept at making fun games. With the Warcraft series of real-time strategy (RTS) titles, Blizzard showed how adept they were at taking an existing formula that worked, and polishing it until it shined. The first Warcraft title was hardly different than Dune 2 or Command & Conquer. Arguably, it wasn’t even better than the latter, but it was clean. Warcraft II, unlike Red Alert, was little more than a graphically superior version of Warcraft, and yet it did well because Blizzard knew how to cater to the audience, using humour and very simple yet effective graphics to compliment an easy-to-use interface. More importantly, Warcraft II’s sales could rely on the success of the original to hype expectations. In the end, however, as far as gameplay was concerned, Warcraft II did little to add to the RTS genre. In fact, at no point in their RTS history did Blizzard revolutionize the genre. Rather, Blizzard tacked on extras like hero units in Warcraft III, and interesting racial concepts (i.e. Starcraft’s Zerg) to compliment what would otherwise have been stale gameplay compared to other RTS titles of the era.

While one needs to credit Blizzard with their DIablo series, there wasn’t much competition to speak of. Yet, when a similar title did crop up, Darkstone, Blizzard’s efforts looked meager in comparison. Nonetheless, Diablo 2 pressed on to be a huge success, thanks again to the legacy of the original. While interesting changes to the series took place in terms of socketed items and minions, Blizzard’s innovation was no greater than that seen in titles such as Dungeon Siege and Neverwinter Nights.

By the time WoW was ready for release, the game had the same type of hype behind it that Diablo 2 or the PS2 had, thanks to their respective predecessors. Everyone knew that Blizzard’s first effort at building a MMORPG would end up a solid product, and with Blizzard’s promises of catering to casual gamers, fostering a solid player-versus-player (PvP) community, no one questioned whether or not WoW would be successful. Once again, Blizzard could rely on its past performers to push hype prematurely, and because the MMORPG market only had a couple titles to compete with, Blizzard didn’t have to fight hard to get people to try WoW.

As stated earlier, Blizzard’s talent is in making polished titles, in much the way companies like Apple are able to polish their own products. When the iPod came out, it wasn’t any more feature-rich than other mp3 players, nor is it to this day. However, the iPod’s look and interface is very refined and easy-to-use, which other companies have since tried to emulate. Blizzard is like Apple in this regard, and have shown their skill numerous times at producing products that feel finished.

One of the first things new players to WoW take to is the graphics. WoW doesn’t strive for photo-realism the way Everquest 2 did. While in no way ugly, WoW nonetheless has simpler graphics compared to many MMORPGs, and uses vibrant colours that aren’t washed out like its competitors. The interface is easy to learn and use, and compliments the learning curve in the game very well. That is to say, the interface doesn’t become bothersome until a character is at later levels, where a much broader set of abilities are required to battle effectively. By this time, however, most players have already installed fan-made user-interface (UI) modifications. Before that time, however, players do not find it difficult to juggle the abilities given to them, and even though character advancement in WoW is much quicker than in other MMORPGs, the rate at which one gains new abilities is slowly paced, such that players can adapt to gameplay changes.

Even the exploration in WoW lends itself to players who might otherwise be scared away by the scale of the world. The quests are fairly easy to follow until end-game, when soloing for items finally becomes impossible. All of these attributes drew early adapters in, and before WoW’s flaws were noticeable, word-of-mouth had already spread quickly enough to make WoW a masterful success.

It ought be noted that the aforementioned merits are not excuses for why WoW became popular. WoW is, in fact, a solid game, but as with most other MMORPGs, is rather lacking in the end. Blizzard took what made other MMORPGs popular, used their talents appropriately, and carved a statue that will forever stand in the MMORPG hall of fame. The industry can’t expect the same kind of shoe-shining to work on every MMORPG project, however, because players now expect more, and not more of the same. It’s what Blizzard did right that drew in the massive audience WoW gathered, but it’s what they did wrong that’s echoed on Blizzard’s forums every day, and why many players who explored WoW’s end-game finally threw in the hat. The hack’n slash formula Blizzard and other companies rely on is great for the short-term, but doesn’t satiate the needs of players who want more than a repetitive experience. This oversight is exactly what Blizzard’s competition will capitalize on when the next generation of MMORPG titles step up to bat.

Through the Eyes of a Character

Virtual worlds are places inhabited by characters, not players. Why developers are incapable of grasping this simple concept is befuddling. From the days of Ultima Online onward, character abilities fail to be masked in most every MMORPG. If it’s not a class label inconveniently located above a character’s head, it’s their physical appearance that gives away what the character can do. By way of a character’s actions and displayed gear should it be obvious enough what foe a player comes across.

Certainly, allied players should have some indication as to what classes are present in their party, but the rest of the virtual world does not need such information. In fact, the world at large need not quickly be able to spot a character by way of the character’s name, in giant letters, heralding their arrival. Characters should move through the world subtly, with the opportunity to hide from an enemy’s approach. We are not talking invisibility, or stealth, but the mere obfuscation of a character by hiding behind an object, or inside shrubbery or shadows. This is easy enough to do by moving a character model into a poorly lit or well-camouflaged area, but is impossible if the character’s name tag gives them away.

The name tag being visible to the world at large is only part of the problem. Lest we get into a detailed discussion about roleplaying versus rollplaying as per the first “Second Big Bang” article, it ought still be noted that names should not be universally known until a character is “tagged” to know it. In other words, until a character “introduces” themselves to a second character, their name should remain hidden. And, when a name is indeed known, there ought be Gamemaster (GM) intervention if the name is inappropriate. Even in WoW’s RP servers, the lack of GM action to spot, monitor, and enforce name infractions was despicable. This whole ordeal would be easier to tackle if GMs had a method for reviewing names on a long list, and could review all names who were “revealed” to other characters; until names were known by others, no review or enforcement would be necessary. Furthermore, the fact that names could be hidden vastly increases the roleplaying potential for players, and minor problems, like how characters ought be recognized in groups if their names were not revealed, could easily be solved by giving them temporary name tags in these situations (i.e. Thief 01). Similarly, the class label is unnecessary, and can be dealt with accordingly.

For a genre that boasts “roleplaying” as one-third of its acronym, MMORPGs are woefully lacking in this element, and while adding a descriptive text-box for players to fill out for their characters may be overkill in a graphical game, the lack of customization in most MMORPGs is inexcusable. It is not a difficult operation, after all, to allow players to adjust the widths and heights of their character models, nor modify facial features more drastically. If the Wii can do it, so can WoW.

The social aspect of MMORPGs, or more specifically, the ramifications of such, is an area poorly simulated when it comes to non-player-character (NPC) factions. In WoW, for example, a character’s relationship with factions is associated to a reputation meter that determines how allied the character is to the faction in question. Unfortunately, the primary method of increasing this reputation number is to kill a particular enemy, rather than being based on conversations and decisions made that are not directly related to what kind of enemy was killed. While some NPC factions are linked to one another, there is generally no real connection between them. In Wing Commander: Privateer, reputation was something that carefully needed to be balanced, as killing enemies of a particular race/faction had direct ramifications on how the character could relate to another race/faction. While this may be similar to “grinding” reputation by targeting one enemy in particular, the ramifications of reducing reputation with the targeted faction is practically non-existent in most MMMORPGs.

For example, in WoW, a game whose backstory is not based on open warfare between two factions, there is no ability to gain reputation with particular enemy races. Yet, the backstory itself hints at reputation differences among races, in that not all enemy races are treated the same by allied races. Sadly, there is no parallel between this backstory and anything in-game. If that’s to be the case, then why feign a detailed backstory in the first place?

There is also the issue of language barriers; while WoW includes the occasional friendly NPC who belongs to the opposing faction’s army, who is magically able to communicate with the player’s character, the capacity to learn an enemy’s language is missing from the game’s functionality. While the limitation here is understandable given the potential abuses, the problem is that in games like WoW, there is no motivation behind staying allied with one’s own faction. Outside of Battlegrounds, there is no need to protect allied characters, or otherwise aid one’s side. Fortunately, games like Warhammer intend to address this with an emphasis on Realm vs Realm (RvR) gameplay, which is really just a synonym for World PvP. One of the ultimate motivational factors is in this very concept.

Killing thy Neighbor

World PvP is a fun variation on typical PvP, and one that offers a number of possibilities. For example, players are able to finally affect the world overall, because their actions will change the course of not just a battle, but an overall war, and the associated benefits thereof.

When it comes to the world at large, there is also the question of dynamism. Games like Diablo included dynamically generated dungeons that varied whenever the game was loaded. Why this couldn’t be done in MMORPGs, wherein dungeons and such are created and “mapped” by the server when it first goes online, is a function of developer’s laziness. Certainly, such variations in servers would increase the replayability of the game, and give players a reason to play on more than one server.

Similarly, property is an aspect of MMORPGs that is grossly neglected. Guild houses, personal stashes, stores, etc. should all be player-driven, and alter or expand the layout of a town/city. Such structures should be available to players not only in major cities, but also throughout the world, with possible restrictions based on what faction controls a particular territory. Structures in a territory could, for example, increase the defensive abilities of a faction in a particular zone, but if that zone is controlled by the enemy, the defensive bonus would be applied to the new occupying force, and a character would “forfeit” their structure until their faction regains control of the territory.

With a large number of NPC forces on the “front lines”, or borders of controlled territories, their strength can be affected by which zones are ultimately taken by player characters. This establishes more motivation for players to stick with known objectives, rather than go around “ganking” lower level players, whose deaths are otherwise meaningless. More importantly, such ganking can be further prevented by keeping the World PvP areas in specific areas of a zone, akin to what WAR intends to do. Let the PvE players quest, and the PvP players player-kill to their heart’s content. There’s no reason both goals cannot be accomplished together.

World PvP is also less gimmicky than WoW’s Battlegrounds, which can have unusually unrealistic goals (i.e. Capture the Flag). While there is certainly a place for Battlegrounds (instanced PvP zones with objectives), the objectives need to be more realistic and complex. Take for example the Assault levels in Unreal Tournament, wherein players needed to reach various objectives on a map by having one team make the attack, and the other defend, before switching sides. The team who completed the offensive portion successfully, in the least amount of time, was declared winner. The opportunities to make instanced PvP areas more engrossing and objective-packed will increase their replayability, and keep the “grind” factor down. WoW attempted this idea with their third Battleground, but many of the objectives and side quests were easily ignored for a quick victory.

MMORPGs need to differentiate battlefields from the generic world; as World PvP shifts borders, NPC troops should move alongside them, and there should be constant struggle between opposing NPC factions. Player actions should adjust the ferocity and numbers of their own NPC characters, while a lack of player action from either side results in a balance between opposing NPCs; if no players are contributing to the battle, then there should simply be constant NPC battle with spawn rates and deaths happening appropriately. In effect, NPC characters can establish the illusion of a crowded area, but not be a major factor in resolving border placement. In fact, to keep lag down, NPC characters can be removed as battlefields fill up with players, such that NPCs merely maintain a minimum number of combatants for atmosphere purposes.

World PvP should also allow characters to make use of abilities unique to the experience. For example, characters should be able to utilize mounts in combat scenarios (mounted combat), as well as leverage siege weapons; the more players use battlefield items, and the more damage they deal with them, the higher the character’s respective skill becomes. If only some characters have skills in a particular type of siege weapon, then these characters become more valuable on the battlefield, especially if a character can only maximize their skill in one of many siege weapon types.

This concept can also be utilized in respect to environment types; where a character fights most often can increase the skill in defending, or attacking, that terrain type. For example, a player who regularly defends an objective atop a tall hill can gain a skill for hilltop defense, making his attacks slightly more effective than elsewhere. Such terrain proficiency skills can be on a sliding scale rather than a linear one, such that characters can never maximize all terrain proficiency types. Rather, after achieving a base score across terrain types, increasing one specific terrain proficiency means that one’s least-used terrain proficiency is reduced accordingly. Thus, to maximize one proficiency, all other proficiencies are reduced to much lower levels. This type of skill can be adjusted using a typical skill interface, or can change based on where a character fights most and least.

As Mythic undoubtedly projects, World PvP is where end-game will inevitably lead to. After large-scale raiding becomes boring, World PvP is where new, dynamic experiences will come from. While raiding environments will generally stay the same for a given instance, World PvP areas can change over the course of a game’s development; new defensive structures can be constructed, or razed, depending on how long a faction controls an area. With this in mind, the next time a faction pushes into previously conquered territory, the landscape may have changed, with new enemy siege weapons and defenses at the ready.

While many MMORPGs have complex character abilities that compliment the abilities of other characters, making for strategic combat, there is still the problem of the “twitch” factor that is usually considered foreign to RPGs. For example, combat in most current-generation MMORPGs is rather fast-paced, with a two-minute round of one-on-one combat considered “long”. This is a weakness in current games, because it fosters the idea that death is common and expected. If most battlefield characters are to be considered heroic in nature, then their feats against other heroes should take longer to achieve, and combat ought be more drawn-out, leveraging more situation-dependant skills.

Battlefield placement is also an element missing from most current-gen PvP. WAR’s implementation of “solid” character models that can’t be walked through is a step in the right direction, as it will allow lines of tanks (infantry) to be formed to keep enemies away from ranged attackers. This will increase the use of tactics such as flanking, assuming that World PvP areas are large enough to warrant such maneuvers.

Most importantly, World PvP needs to be purposeful, to the extent that it negates, or at least severely reduces, ganking. By rewarding characters with more than just gear and PvP titles, but by allowing them to break the cookie-cutter PvP mold with specific battlefield abilities, MMORPG developers can leverage the type of gameplay that FPS’ have enjoyed for years. When the strategic aspects of such World PvP reaches the point of games like Counterstrike, or some RTS titles, then even players previously resigned to questing may find an addiction that will keep MMORPGs from stagnating when the characters hit their level cap.

Stay tuned for the rest of this article…

Interested readers should check out the predecessor to this article.

Popularity: 3% [?]