Questions about Order & Chaos (O&C) are still making the rounds, because the game’s features aren’t documented well, and finding out more about the game is either a practice in raising your Googling skills, else based on in-game experience. For some, neither of these options is desirable. Since we’ve wasted time on both endeavors, we’ll happily regurgitate our findings, and correct some of our misunderstandings from our post two weeks ago.

The classes.

We pointed out earlier that we actually wanted O&C to invest in the Diku-genre, as it’s a solid starting point for a robust MMO scene on iOS. It turns out, however, that the holy triad concept is watered down in O&C, which in a way makes sense, since O&C is just watered-down WoW to begin with. What we mean here is that in games like WoW, aggo is a function of threat, which can be generated in a variety of ways. In O&C, threat is based purely on damage, which means that healers can freely spam spells, and DPS classes need to be aware that they will likely be expected to kill anything that runs towards them, or at minimum, tie it up until someone else does. This makes the defensive Warrior spec rather questionable, because while it helps keep a Warrior alive, it doesn’t really aid in herding mobs, and decreases the Warrior’s damage output.

We suppose that at end-game, and/or when Gameloft places further emphasis on team dynamics, that Warriors will be expected to hold adds, while the DPS classes help burn down main targets, but the lack of taunting, or threat mitigation via skills for DPS classes, means that Mage AoE abilities are basically too dangerous to use against difficult mobs. Since so much of the game is solo-friendly, like WoW, most Warriors are speccing offensively, and the rage-like generation that Warriors are capable of keeps them fighting with little downtime. Gear is pretty self-evident here, with a focus on strength and stamina. With the exception of maybe fighting over one-handed weapons with Rangers and military Monks, Warrior itemization should be easy, since Warriors are the only class that wear plate.

The same can be said for Rangers, whose specs basically determine whether they are ranged or melee capable¹. Ranged Rangers² specialize in slow, high-damage attacks, with crowd-control abilities keeping enemies distant so they hopefully die before getting in our face. Melee Rangers, on the other hand, mimic World of Warcraft’s Rogue class, which emphasizes stealth, fast dagger attacks, and some crowd-control to keep adds at bay until a primary target can be neutralized. The obvious downside to the Ranger is that it’s a pure DPS class, which means if more Diku-style encounters are to be added in the future, these classes will likely be a dime-a-dozen. Gear is all about agility, with melee Rangers likely looking for some stamina items as well. Since this is the only class that exclusively wears leather, itemization shouldn’t be a problem for the most part.

The Mage is pretty straightforward, with one tree focused on pure damage output (fire), and one with slightly less damage output (ice) but with arguably more utility. Both versions of the class are for ranged DPS play, so if played correctly, Mages, like non-melee Rangers, shouldn’t be getting hit much. Mages may fight over some cloth gear and weapons with healing Monks, but most leveling Monks should be military-specced anyway, so gearing up in a team shouldn’t cause too much heartache.

Monks are different than the aforementioned classes because the specs differ so much; healing Monks rely on Wisdom, while militant Monks require Strength and Stamina gear. The former is also ranged, while the latter is melee. The former is a great support class in teams, while the latter is more of a utility DPS class. Geared up correctly, a healing Monk should have adequate mana regeneration, such that downtime is minimal, but in our own experience pre-level 20, there’s a lot of eating food between fights to regenerate health and mana. Long-term, this is supposedly more of a problem with militant Monks, who blow through mana a lot quicker than their healing-focused counterparts. Still, the potential nice thing about the Monk is that you can spec for melee DPS, and as long as you have healing gear stashed away somewhere, you can probably get away with healing in a team without re-speccing³. Healing Monks are also incredibly boring to play, because they don’t have many combat abilities, and quickly get beaten in the face.

The world.

Travel is painfully slow, especially if you need to run back to a major city in order to upgrade skills. There’s a teleport system in place, but it’s arguably expensive, and doesn’t go everywhere you’d want it to. There are no mounts in the game yet, which is curious considering this would be a perfect use of RMT⁴. The main city starting out is not easily traversed, and it’s somewhat of a pain to run from one side to another; the main city needs to be redesigned to be less linear, and have vendors more easily accessible.

The auction house remains the most viable method for acquiring gold, especially considering that your character is docked money whenever she dies. At least one of the minor towns has a convenient-placed auction “vendor” near a chest, so you have a decent way to bid on and post items. It seems that raising the cash at early levels to afford skills, deaths, inventory upgrades, and the occasional purchase relies on the auction house or RMT. We hear that at later levels, there’s enough gold coming in from quests and mobs that this is less of an issue, but at earlier levels, expect to price gathered crafting materials competitively at auction in order to have reasonable spending money.

While Gameloft is known for being slow or simply unresponsive in getting game updates out, they seem to be committed to rolling out updates to O&C; some form of team-based Diku-style encounters for end-game seem planned, though it’s unclear if these will be instanced, or simply be world objectives. Currently, PvP is based on dueling or World-PvP at later levels, but a WoW-like arena system is also planned. The World-based PvP is complainant-prone, thanks to loss of gold after each death. This may be mitigated somewhat by better cash inflow at later levels, but we can see this being very annoying if it happens often.

The rest.

Crafting is actually useful, but an extremely long grind. Only smithing relies on items gathered from ore nodes around the world, as leather-working and tailoring are based on items collected from mobs. This means that ore is generally priced a bit cheaper on the auction house, while leather and cloth are less bountiful and more expensive. Expect to spend cash at the auction house for these items, unless you’re okay with farming low-level mobs for crafting supplies. We’re told that high-level crafting relies on RMT-derived items, which we’re not a fan of, but we don’t expect to get to that point anytime soon considering how much of a grind professions are.

O&C is a great way to get a WoW-like fix in a less complex package, and Gameloft has a lot of potential here to make huge waves with the game. However, updates will need to be iterative, and the business model needs to be tweaked to keep a dedicated player-base that won’t cry foul if RMT is required for success in-game; RMT should be a crutch at best, but not mandatory, especially on top of a subscription fee and up-front purchase.

We’re looking forward to how the game evolves, but with reports that the grind becomes unbearable at the later levels, we question whether Gameloft can get end-game updates out in time for more casual players to hit the level cap. Unless Gameloft gives level-60 characters something to do, World-PvP ganking will likely become more commonplace before people get bored of the game and move on. A proper end-game PvE and PvP experience will keep players around for longer, however, and with the iOS distribution model, expansions can be funded quickly and easily as time progresses. Gameloft had better lock this down now before another big player makes their entry into the iOS MMO arena.

Similar Posts:

• Upcoming Order & Chaos patch. – Naysayers be damned: [Gameloft has posted](http://onlinegames-forum.gameloft.com/index.php?topic=106…


• Order & Chaos, initial impressions. – As a former World of Warcraft (WoW) gamer, we found ourselves intrigued when Order & Chaos (O&C) was…


• RMT, and Order & Chaos. – The business model of Order & Chaos (O&C) is irking us a bit more now, and it might help us to have …

The business model of Order & Chaos (O&C) is irking us a bit more now, and it might help us to have a better understanding of Gameloft’s expenses for this title. Freemium titles are typically free, with profit derived from real money transactions (RMT), where players purchase in-game items for actual cash. Overall, freemium titles are considered profitable, so why is O&C not being distributed under this model? In other words, what makes O&C less profitable than other successful freemium titles, necessitating the monthly subscription¹ and up-front cost?

Because of the RMT model, players paying the monthly subscription alone are at a disadvantage; buying gold becomes advantageous when min-maxing, because more gold means more vendor and auction house purchases, which means players who dabble with RMT can level faster than regular subscribers. Plus, since characters lose money whenever they get killed, players who take too many risks, or are simply not very good, could find themselves without adequate funds to purchase skill upgrades. Again, a clear advantage for those who spend on RMT.

That said, Gameloft’s done a good job of relying on craft funds to limit gold expenditures on crafting skills. This means that crafters can potentially see decent profits on the auction house, assuming their better items don’t bind on pickup. The auction house really becomes the only way for regular subscribers to stand any chance of making decent profit for their characters, but there are a couple problems with this, too. For one, the primary auction house location doesn’t have a chest nearby, which means players can’t easily post a lot of items to the auction house at once (because of inventory issues). A good solution would be to combine the auction house and chest system at auction house locations, such that there’s no need to courier items between the chest and auction house. Two, the auction house should be more readily accessible. As it is, running to the auction house takes too much time, especially since there’s no cheap transportation system in the game, unlike World of Warcraft’s hearthstone which quickly transports a character to a major city. Here again, RMT provides players a way to get around faster, because those who buy gold can afford to make use of portals, while regular subscribers cannot.

Finally, while O&C doesn’t run on 3G, a nice feature Gameloft could add is an auction-house/chest/mail interface that’s still accessible over 3G, letting players check in on auctions, post new ones, etc. This would allow players to remain engaged with the O&C world, even though they couldn’t actually “play” because of a lack of wifi.

Similar Posts:

• A bit more on Order & Chaos. – Questions about Order & Chaos (O&C) are still making the rounds, because the game’s features aren’t …


• Upcoming Order & Chaos patch. – Naysayers be damned: [Gameloft has posted](http://onlinegames-forum.gameloft.com/index.php?topic=106…


• Creating a player-based vendor system. – While wrong about Aion’s lack of an auction house, Tobold raised an interesting point concerning pla…

As a former World of Warcraft (WoW) gamer, we found ourselves intrigued when Order & Chaos (O&C) was announced for iOS. Gameloft titles are known for cloning gameplay, art, and themes from blockbuster titles, and O&C is no different. The title offers to do one thing that no one else hasn’t, however, and that’s delivering a solid MMO experience to mobile devices¹. And in this respect, Gameloft delivered.

WoW lite.

Let’s get this out of the way immediately: Order & Chaos isn’t going to replace WoW. At least not for most people. That’s because WoW has a rich, established setting that’s interesting the moment you enter the game. O&C may share an aesthetic style, but it’s WoW watered down. The quests are just as simple as vanilla WoW, and while the world appears to have a decent scope to it, the atmosphere isn’t reflective of racial or cultural differences. New characters are basically dropped right into the game, and while WoW eases new players into game mechanics in way that’s mind-numbingly slow your second or third time around, O&C throws you into the mix a bit quicker, expecting you to get the hang of things before you’ve even explored the full interface. So maybe the tutorial could use some buffing up for people new to the genre, but maybe Gameloft expects most people downloading O&C to already be MMO veterans.

Let’s back up a bit and talk about character creation. The game limits players to four races (two per “side”), and players can choose either male or female gender. Model customization is limited to skin and hair color, hairstyle, and face style. There are about four options in each category here, so the customization isn’t horribly robust, but it’s plenty for a first attempt. What surprised us is that there are no racial bonuses, so other than appearance, there’s no benefit to which race you decide to go with.

There are also four classes to choose from, each being available to every race: Warrior, Mage, Monk, and Ranger. We’ve only played around with the Monk thus far, which looks like it can be specced to do extra healing, or be combat-proficient. It’s unclear to us as yet whether O&C is a true Diku-style MMO, but at first glance we didn’t see any threat-reducing spells available at our class trainer. By level nine, we had a one go-to healing spell, and we grouped up twice to take on some named monsters, where we were more useful healing than fighting.

There’s a talent tree for specializing, and it looks pretty deep, so the customization here may be interesting. There are some talent dependencies, and other talents that require a certain amount of pre-spent points in a given tree in order to buy them. Unlike WoW there are two trees per class, with the Monk being the sole healing class. The Ranger looks to be a cross between a WoW Hunter and Rogue, while the Warrior and Mage are more obvious. Again, without any indication of a threat meter, we don’t know whether the Warrior has a taunt-like effect, but we imagine this must exist, if only because his armour is clearly more robust.

Like WoW, each class has a trainer, but unlike WoW, you buy books that contain skills. So rather than buying the skill, you buy the book and then use the book to learn the skill, which is really just a pain in the ass considering the extra step. There are a lot of extra steps like this littered throughout the game, like when you click an item in your inventory, and you have to click another little icon in order to bring up a smaller window comparing it to the item already occupying the respective item slot. These things just go to show how polished WoW was when it came out in 2004, and how even after all this time, a clone isn’t getting everything right.

O&C includes crafting, which seems limited to tailoring, leather-working, and smithing. There’s a quest you can complete which lets you choose one of those three, and we don’t know why you wouldn’t choose the one that lets you craft your own gear. The only gathered we’ve yet seen is mining, and it doesn’t require special gear – you just click on a resource node on the map, and your character pulls a pick-axe out of her ass and starts hammering away.

Yet, decent gameplay.

It’s pretty remarkable that Gameloft got O&C to run well, particularly given the low resolution. The game does feel a tad cramped compared to playing WoW on your big-screen monitor, and we can’t help but think that reducing text sizes and some icons wouldn’t alleviate our virtual claustrophobia a bit. But the gameplay is pretty smooth, with a virtual control-stick appearing on the left side of the screen, wherever you decide to drop your thumb. This only gets in the way when you want to loot a mob whose corpse is on that side of the screen, but it’s not too annoying to move the camera to the left so you can loot easily. Yes, your right thumb controls camera movement, as well as jumping and using your hotkeys on the bottom-right of the screen. There are three hotspots near the jump button where you can place spells and items, but if you need more (and you will), you can place less-used abilities on a shelf that you can pull up or hide on the right side of the screen. This is where we stashed our potions and food, and definitely beats bringing up the player inventory just to use a potion mid-combat.

The lack of addons is actually nice. We don’t know how many hours we spent working on an ideal addon configuration, and compiling it for others to use. Needless to say, it’s somewhat refreshing knowing that every player is on equal footing, and that when you want to play, you don’t have to first update all your addons or mess with your screen layout. Since there’s no O&C version of wowhead, you have help with quests thanks to a blue arrow that points in the direction of a selected quest objective. Presumably, this won’t be as helpful when you have to travel half-way across the world, so paying attention to quest descriptions will be necessary, but in the initial levels of the game, it’s a foolproof guide.

WoW-like “groups” are called “teams” in O&C, and they work decent enough. The chat system includes a global channel, which, as in every game, can be a royal annoyance. This is perhaps even more true in O&C, if only because players come from various countries, using various languages. There are regional servers, but this hasn’t stopped Korean players from creating characters on the American servers, complete with names that we don’t have the proper keyboard set up for, even if we did want to type them.

About the only major gripe we have with the game is the business model. The game costs $7 to download, and after a free, three-month subscription, costs $1/month. That’s not bad, but there’s also a “freemium” model here, where players can buy gold and other items for real money. How this will affect balance is still up-in-the-air, but it seems as though many of the for-pay items are temporary buffs and aesthetic enhancements (like pets)².

Moving forward.

O&C is certainly deep, in the sense that player progression isn’t super-quick. It doesn’t seem to be super-slow, either, but we’ll have to play more to see what kind of curve the game offers. Right now, the game feels like more complex Gauntlet. That is to say, it’s a hack’n slash emporium with various MMO elements, but not offering enough to foster a complex community³. That’s not to say that Gameloft couldn’t expand on O&C as time goes on, offering new abilities, races, classes, emotes, customization, et al. If anything, O&C blows games like Dungeon Hunter out of the water, because of the MMO complexity.

What we hope to see in the next 10 levels or so is more Diku styling, with areas that require grouping and the holy triad of classes (tank, healer, DPS)⁴. We also hope to see varied class builds, and a world with considerable atmospheric changes. The background “lore” has been weak thus far, and we hope this will change; right now, we don’t see a reason to separate races into Order and Chaos factions, because both races are seen pretty close to the get-go near starter areas. With no clear faction contest, Order and Chaos offer even less context than Alliance and Horde in WoW does.

O&C is an awesome next step in the future of mobile MMOs. While the inability to play over 3G is a hit against the game, the fact that you can take an MMO along on an iPhone, iPod, or iPad, is still remarkable. Even better is the proof-of-concept that Gameloft managed here, showing developers that an MMO on these devices is not only possible, but that the control scheme can be good, and needn’t be hampered by the lack of a physical keyboard. So even if O&C fails to deliver an experience even marginally as robust as beta WoW, it’s already challenged other MMO developers to create something better. For that alone, O&C should win a prize.

Similar Posts:

• Upcoming Order & Chaos patch. – Naysayers be damned: [Gameloft has posted](http://onlinegames-forum.gameloft.com/index.php?topic=106…


• RMT, and Order & Chaos. – The business model of Order & Chaos (O&C) is irking us a bit more now, and it might help us to have …


• A bit more on Order & Chaos. – Questions about Order & Chaos (O&C) are still making the rounds, because the game’s features aren’t …

We’ve long held that the problem with most MMOGs is that they don’t offer up enough of a developed sandbox to capture the imaginations of a broader gaming audience who may not want a mere hack’n slash adventure. In other words, casual pursuits like thorough, in-depth crafting systems in lieu of adventuring were not concepts that most developers considered. So too, the idea of a robust roleplaying system for those who did not want to simply go out and kill things.

As it turns out, Blizzard managed to simplify even hack’n slash, by pushing the high of a constant item reward system, combined with a simplified skill-rotation algorithm, making World of Warcraft (WoW) appeal to the largest possible audience. To many, this is interpreted as WoW catering to the lowest-common-denominator. In this respect, focusing on more complex non-crafting pursuits was hardly necessary.

Syncaine suggests that MMOGs different from WoW (e.g. EVE, Darkfall) will never be able to attract the large player-base that WoW boasts, simply because the elements that would foster that attraction are the very same elements that would detract from these games being “true” virtual worlds. (For the purpose of this post, we think it’s a fair assessment to suggest that games with more sandbox-like qualities are a “truer” representation of an ideal virtual world, and so we’ll follow Syncaine’s lead here, even though WoW is a “virtual world” in a more abstract sense, too.)

Gamers at large want their avatars on a fairly level treadmill; too much of an incline for progression, and players will get frustrated and quit. But games like Darkfall and EVE are all about frustration because a big factor in their success is player-driven events. Only by avoiding the things about these games that make them popular among the niche audience can you avoid as much frustration as possible.

So maybe the issue is PvP, here: maybe sandbox MMOGs reliant on PvP cannot attract the type of audience WoW has, because progression is in great part limited by what other players let you do, and what they let you get away with. We can look at a game like Minecraft, for example, and say that yes, a robust, non-combat MMOG has the potential to obtain a pretty large audience, even one rivaling that of WoW.

But this presents another challenge: balancing combat vs non-combat professions. If we try to capture the elements that make games like Minecraft and, say, Farmville popular, then how do we balance that against the combat elements that other MMO gamers desire? In effect, developers will be building two games in one, and adding a strong degree of synchronicity such that interactions between the two remain meaningful for all involved, and no “true path” exists for the average player (i.e. investing one’s time exclusively in either path will not provide the majority of game benefits).

We can look at one aspect of this argument by analyzing MMOG crafting, which in most games is a part-time endeavor to be done alongside the chief objective, combat. Yet to capture a larger audience, say, including people who desire to chiefly craft, then perhaps there needs to be a cut-off point in which part-time crafting ceases to make sense, and to become a great crafter, a large skill and/or time investment becomes mandatory. In other words, if you want to “max-out” a crafting profession, then you can’t max-out a combat profession, and artisan crafters will require players who spend most of their game-time on crafting, rather than on combat (like traditional MMO gamers).

But what we now have is a deeper game with more paths for players to take, but it doesn’t alleviate the issue of combat itself, in which “hardcore” players want combat more akin to EVE and Darkfall, but more casual gamers want something like WoW. In a sense, we’re back at the PvE vs PvP argument.

Games like Warhammer Online have attempted a PvE/PvP experiment to surpass that in WoW, to questionable success. Mythic had the idea right, but perhaps the implementation is where the problem is. Returning to our initial issue, rather than offering a PvE game game like WoW and focusing on simplifying and expediting progress, nor focusing purely on the niche sandbox PvPers, what if we had a game with multiple paths for players to take, some dependent on PvE, and others on PvP, each with different “max” outcomes? Some characters would be PvP soldiers aiding their kingdom in Darkfall-esque battles, while others would focus primarily on collecting resources in PvE scenarios, which they could then provide crafters who made the majority of goods that all characters needed for their respective professions.

In this example, players could choose which role they fulfill in the game, but no role would ultimately be more important than any other, and while those who enjoy combat would be in it for the glory, other players may be in it for the cold, hard cash. Either way, end-game items would be obtainable by everyone, as their acquisition would primarily be a cash affair, as they’d be crafted items.

Syncaine may be half-right in his assertion. Developers should be creating the best-possible niche MMOGs, but if they have the resources and come upon a formula for developing true professional tiers in an MMOG that offer more than just combat, then by all means, go with it and see if you can capture an audience that may one day rival that of WoW.

But in the meantime, we’d be happy with a more accessible niche title, too.

Similar Posts:

• Most self-described “hardcore” PvP gamers are likely full of shit. – Scott Jennings makes a great point about why Darkfall won’t make it in the end: …people enjoy har…


• Artisan fishing. – I intended on posting a shoutout to my Twitter status about achieving Artisan-level fishing in World…


• World of Warcraft’s success is greatly because of luck. – One of the primary reasons that World of Warcraft (WoW) managed to make MMOGs mainstream is because…

If it’s one thing nerds love, it’s pirates ninjas Warcraft zombies. There are zombie movies, board games, games where zombies fight plants, and naturally, an upcoming massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) made for the console crowd.

After scavenging resources, you’ll need to pool some ideas and blueprints together to retrofit the settlement with defenses. The game’s dynamic and malleable physics engine lets you design obstacles, cattle paths and all manner of cruel and ingenious traps to stem the flow of sudden zombie strikes… Banish the memories you have of the PC MMO paradigm for combat, and start thinking AAA console action game.

The post-Apocalyptic, yet-unnamed zombie title, sounds like a hybrid between a first-person shooter and a tower defense game, with maybe a helping of Minecraft thrown in for good measure. And while that may sound strange, our second thought is, simply, “Awesome.”

Or at least, “Potentially awesome.” This is the type of project that sounds fantastic on paper, but ultimately, it will all be about the implementation. And there are already things that sound questionable, like whether this really will be an MMOG, rather than merely servers with procedurally-generated worlds that host 64 or 128 players. But let’s say that there really will be just one big server, and players begin scattered across the landscape almost at random, with perhaps some method to control a spawn point nearby friends (perhaps with a temporary “spawn code” limited to, say, six people.

The idea of running around solo without anyone immediately by your side, with zombies approaching in the distance, requiring you to find some method to defend yourself, is zombie-cliche at its finest. But once you do manage to meet up with your friends, knowing that larger zombie hordes are on the horizon, certainly makes for a good cooperative team-play. This is especially true when you’re fending off waves of zombies with the ability to manipulate in-game obstacles in order to channel approaching zombies into a kill-space, or enforce the walls of a make-shift shelter. But with resources limited (food and water to keep health up, ammunition for ranged weapons, perhaps even fuel for long-distance transportation), your zombie-killing crew can’t stay in one place for too long, and that’s where things could get interesting. Not only will you have to stray from your shelter to find resources, but you’ll ultimately have to return to defend yourself (think night-time mode in Minecraft), where simply being out-and-about isn’t enough defense to evade the zombie army.

Ultimately, you’d see makeshift settlements popping up across the landscape, all player-run, with some defenders staying behind, and other players running “missions” to acquire resources to keep the settlement running. That could be bringing back jugs of water, cans of fuel, gathered food, or found livestock. And bringing those things back could allow you to empower yourself and friends with “research.”

In quieter moments you’ll be able to build out the settlements, even plant and grow gardens within.

Undead Labs seem to be talking growing food, not flowers. Established settlements could provide bonuses to food grown over a longer period of time, just as other player-built structures could provide similar benefits, such as meat grown from livestock, sanitized water, refined oil, et al. Ultimately, we have a reason maintain settlements instead of just using them as short-term defensive hold-outs. And there’d be a reason to defend these settlements not just from the zombies, but from other human survivors.

Think Mad Max and typical post-Apocalyptic fighting, with different in-game guilds vying for raw resources out and about in the world, and raids happening on other human settlements to steal weapons and refined resources. Maybe even outright destroying rival settlements under the the right circumstances.

Okay, so we’re excited at the prospect of this untitled game, and it being more of an action title as far as combat goes means we really wouldn’t need to rely on a keyboard to make this work. Indeed, forcing players to rely on a headset to communicate would be a fun limitation, and a game like this running on OnLive would simply be a dream-come-true.

Of course, we may be jumping ahead of ourselves here, but we can easily see Undead Labs spinning gold thread here, surpassing the Left 4 Dead series as far as zombie games go, and truly pushing the envelope when it comes to MMO player cooperation. It may not be a carebear title, but nothing about zombies should be.

Similar Posts:

• On Battleground strategy. – As I’m now in a prolonged struggle against the forces of The Alliance evil on multiple fronts, it’s …


• Review: Settlers of Catan. – Additional Commentary (in yellow) by DrMantis. Introduction I don’t care how many geeks out there sw…


• Level design trumps PUG elitism. – When Keen complained about public five-man groups in World of Warcraft (WoW) being ultra-selective a…

Classic World of Warcraft (WoW) defender Tobold discusses player skill versus character skill in the context of “twitch” versus “strategy,” effectively accusing anyone who complains about WoW’s lack of skill requirement as downplaying the strategic elements required. This follows a number of complaints people have with “twitch” games in general (i.e. those games requiring quick reflexes and hand-eye coordinating like most first-person shooters). It’s an argument that’s heavily drawn a line between the players of games like WoW and, say, Darkfall.

Now some people believe that a MMORPG should be an action arcade game, a kind of Super Mario, in which your twitch skills (hand-eye coordination, spatial awareness) should determine your success. And these people often are using a dirty trick in the discussion: They claim that only twitch skills are “skill”, while other video game skills like strategy skills or puzzle skills are “not skill”.

But that’s not really what people are saying when they dismiss WoW as a game requiring little skill. Rather, it’s that WoW has successively become a game in which less and less strategy is required by a player, since the game has, instead, provided the opportunity for players to obtain high-powered gear rather easily, which makes up for a lack of strategy. In other words, had Blizzard reduced the potency of gear in WoW, it would require players to use more strategy (e.g. better spell rotations and timing), but that would mean not as many players would be able to accomplish certain in-game achievements. Blizzard’s decision was to make the game’s content more accessible to the vast majority of players, and thus more powerful gear was made accessible to people as a sort if crutch.

In this regard, most WoW-haters who rely on the “no skill” argument are likely to place “old school” WoW on a higher pedestal, since there was less wiggle-room when it came to player skill back in 2004. But since, Blizzard has reduced the need for strategic excellence.

Darkfall, and games like it, do rely more on “twitch”-based skill. Darkfall’s developers decided that strategy elements in traditional MMORPGs like WoW were themselves too simple, even if gear bonuses were drastically reduced. While Tobold is correct in saying that the developers could have made the strategic elements of the game more complex in lieu of relying on “twitch” mechanics, the developers decided that the latter allows for an easier learning curve. Either way, Darkfall is less accessible to the same number of players as WoW, since it does not offer the same gear-based crutch that WoW does.

So while Tobold and his supporters dislike the “twitch” play-style and believe that games should be more strategic to be considered “skill-based,” the ultimate blame here still falls on Blizzard. At this point, few people disagree with the notion that WoW has become dumbed down in great part because of gear inflation. It’s simply that some people want gear to be reduced in power, others want more “twitch,” and others yet want more strategy. Blizzard, however, is the one doing neither of these things.

Yet, Tobold blames the players:

It is simply not true that there is no challenge at all available in World of Warcraft. Instead what happens is that players DELIBERATELY are constantly working on LOWERING the skill requirements, through maximizing their “efficiency” of gear / talent builds / everything else, and even through the use of third-party programs (addons) which make encounters much easier.

How is it that the players should be to blame for min/maxing what the game provides them? Sure, people can play the game with bad gear in order to artificially increase the game’s challenge, but doing so only affects the players participating. If Blizzard offered “hardcore” servers with bad gear, so everyone was in a similar situation, then this option might be attractive to many, but if we’re given a certain number of tools at our disposal, why shouldn’t we use them, and why should we deny ourselves these tools just so someone who does use them can easily pass us by in terms of content progress?

The reason I personally dislike the “WoW needs no skill” crowd is that I always suspect them of elitism. Their main interest isn’t in playing through something hard, because they already could do that. Their main interest is in excluding a broader audience from the game, or from certain types of content.

Ultimately, success at a challenge is sweeter when only a sub-set of the whole has achieved it. Otherwise, is it truly success, or is it just a matter of putting in the time? Tobold’s position comes down to one of selfishness: he believes that just by paying his monthly fee and putting in a certain amount of time, that he should be rewarded the same as everyone else, even if he’s not as good of a player. The “elitists” he points at, on the other hand, believe that better players should be better rewarded. In a sense, it really is an argument for or against welfare, and whether simply contributing by logging on warrants a full game experience. But it’s certainly not an argument of “twitch” versus strategy – those are just fancy labels improperly used to discuss WoW’s gear inflation.

Similar Posts:

• World of Warcraft is not sustainable. – Tobold recently mused about the sustainability of World of Warcraft (WoW), inasmuch as its continued…


• Level design trumps PUG elitism. – When Keen complained about public five-man groups in World of Warcraft (WoW) being ultra-selective a…


• How Blizzard can fund a longer leveling game. – Earlier this month, syncaine at Hardcore Casual suggested that because World of Warcraft (WoW) is a…

We got rid of our World of Darkness (WoD) books a couple years ago; we stopped playing games in the WoD setting years before, and while we held onto our WoD library for sentimental reasons, the success of the revised (new) WoD pretty much made our library deprecated anyway. So when more and more rumours of a WoD-based massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) hit the blogosphere, we assumed (though hoped otherwise) that the game would be based on the new WoD setting. It wasn’t until we read developer Justin Achilli’s notes about what players wanted to see in the game that we were surprised; the WoD MMOG will be based on Vampire: the Masquerade (V:tM), which is a component of the old WoD (oWoD), rather on the new WoD’s Vampire: the Requiem setting.

At first thought, we’re disappointed that other WoD campaigns won’t be featured as player characters, but the scope of implementing that kind of game is extreme: just getting the scope for V:tM is more than enough for a developer to deal with. And it’s not like the game can’t feature werewolves, mages, wraiths, and changelings later.

Let’s focus a moment on what some players want, and that’s to capture the setting accurately. The one thing that would utterly ruin a V:tM-based game is if the server population were made up entirely of Kindred (vampires). In the oWoD, Kindred hide from humans for obvious reasons, despite manipulating them from behind the shadows. And there’s no reason this can’t be emulated online.

Visiting cities, and fealty to the Prince.

Let’s assume that every server represents a city and its surroundings. Going beyond that, you’d enter a different city, and thus connect to a different server. But straying away from your city should be risky, or at least not be obstacle-free. However the game decides it, be it via a particular system, developer-run characters, or simply sorted out by the players themselves, each city has a Prince, who rules the city and keeps tabs on all its supernatural denizens. When a player leaves their home city, they should feel like they’re in foreign territory; in the oWoD, Kindred laws require visitors to check in with their destination’s Prince, else are trespassing. An easy mechanic to handle this would be to require every Kindred character to check in with the Prince or his counsel. Only then will he be flagged as a guest (safe), and able to go about his business normally, whether that’s meeting with other characters or simply grinding through quests. If the visiting Kindred fails to check in, however, or his request to visit is denied, he is flagged as a trespasser, and everyone in the city is free to hunt him.

This does two things: one, it keeps Kindred populations down in most cities, and two, it introduces a controlled PvP atmosphere to the game, especially when you have to consider the masquerade.

Using minions, and not getting caught.

In the oWoD, Kindred don’t walk around in the sun because they’d burn. And they don’t walk around using their powers around regular people because they’d eventually get caught and… burn. The masquerade is basically the Kindred’s philosophy of fitting in: acting like a human around most people. If they don’t, they’re not only likely to be noticed by Hunters (humans who seek out and destroy the supernatural), but by other supernaturals as well.

So, we have a pretty contained system here: if the WoD MMOG has a day/night cycle, it means that free movement outside is impossible. Yes, Kindred can move around freely indoors, and maybe even get around the city via a subway, tunnels, et al. But either way, they’re limited in what they can do by day. So, limit players by how many Vampire characters they can play, but let them play several humans over time, maybe by letting them unlock human character slots as they progress through the game. These human characters would serve several purposes: ghouls, blood dolls, retainers, etc. Basically, characters that serve some purpose to the Kindred character, by supplying them with sustenance, or running daytime errands. And during the day, this can be useful; there’s no reason that these minions can’t grind quests on behalf of the Kindred character during the day, or, really, be the only ones who can do most daytime quests.

At night, when Kindred characters can roam city streets freely, there’s still the issue of the masquerade, and CCP merely needs to populate the streets, bars, clubs, et al with human non-player-characters (NPCs). Most such NPCs don’t need to be sophisticated: they’d walk around, dance, and do other banal activities. And if a Kindred character does something clearly supernatural around them, be it throwing a small car or turning into mist, then there should be repercussions. One, from other player characters in the vicinity (by immediately flagging the offending character), else by other NPCs in a Grand Theft Auto-style chase. This doesn’t have to be by lowly police officers who are called on scene, but by more supernatural peace-keepers: werewolves and mages, who themselves don’t want people stumbling upon the supernatural, and especially hate vampires.

These measures, too, will keep Kindred characters from becoming too comfortable out and about, making the WoD MMORPG a more elegant affair than the traditional hack’n slash MMORPG; Kindred characters need to be subtle around human characters, utilizing their minions effectively, and utilizing their powers only when desperately needed.

More EVE and less Warcraft.

Will CCP push elements of the irregular MMOG play-style associated with EVE, rather than focusing on “traditional” MMORPG elements embraced by games like World of Warcraft? We hope so, but in the end, it will likely be a blend of the two. Yet, a WoD MMOG has a lot of potential to break the mold, assuming it’s development team is willing to take the time to truly study the source material and understand what makes it different from typical hack’n slash roleplaying games. The end result probably won’t be a game that caters to the World of Warcraft crowd, but then again, neither is EVE, and only a fool would consider that to be unsuccessful.

Similar Posts:

• Firefly MMOG mimics the TV show: cancelled. – We’re not sure why people love Buffy so much, but it’s somehow made Josh Whedon a cult superstar. Wh…


• Increased XP shitty for legacy players. – Cameron Sorden at Random Battle pointed out how Blizzard’s decision to drastically alter the amount…


• Player attachment to characters a potential feature? – Much commentary has been made on the addictive components of MMOGs, particularly regarding the item …

In a reply to SynCaine over at Hardcore Casual, commenter Mig borrows from Palahniuk’s Fight Club by acutely noting how World of Warcraft’s (WoW’s) glorified new looking-for-group (LFG) system does little more than create “single-serving friends.” The lack of difficulty in most instance encounters, combined with the ease of being able to quickly enter such content with strangers, means that in many ways, WoW’s guild system is deprecated. Whereas in the past, guilds served primarily as a way for like-minded gamers to approach content together, guilds are now left to serious raiders and socializing.

Interestingly, the gear creep isn’t even a staple of just end-game characters anymore. Old content is now routinely attempted by under-leveled characters who happen to have comparatively awesome gear. Combined with class changes like dual-specs, more crowd-control, and other evolutions that have occurred during WoW’s lifetime, there’s definitely little argument left for WoW being anything more than a casual game. A time-sink, still, but not a gaming pursuit appropriate for someone who wants a real, concerted challenge.

As we’ve said before, this is rather discouraging as a former player who looks back on the early days of WoW with adoration. Sure, there were class balance issues and other areas that needed fixing, but being able to form a group and reach the end of an instance was gratifying. Now, it’s just part of the perpetual grind. It’s a design evolution that has done Blizzard well financially, but one that has also alienated former players, who might have returned to the game if it offered anything more than a casual, Farmville-esque experience.

Similar Posts:

• Damage buff to healing classes unfair? – When I first heard about it some weeks ago, I was a bit confused as to why Blizzard would buff spell…


• Level design trumps PUG elitism. – When Keen complained about public five-man groups in World of Warcraft (WoW) being ultra-selective a…


• World of Warcraft is not sustainable. – Tobold recently mused about the sustainability of World of Warcraft (WoW), inasmuch as its continued…

Lots of folk are annoyed at Bioware’s revelation of “companion characters” in the upcoming Star Wars MMORPG, whereby “companion characters” are NPC group-members that can stand-in when groups can’t find other players to fill certain roles, such as healers and tanks. Keen was one of the first to vocalize his aggression:

Why don’t you just make it a single player game? I do not understand this mentality of making a MMO and then taking all these steps and putting in all these systems to make it anything but a multiplayer experience. What is the point? Make it another Bioware RPG and stop jerking us around by jumping onto the “We’re a MMO!” bandwagon.

Looks like Keen, like many others, doesn’t get that not every MMOG player wants to group and raid, which has become a common sentiment among MMOG bloggers, lately. Whereas before World of Warcraft (WoW), lots of people wanted a more solo-able experience, the exact opposite is true now among “real” gamers. But these folks need to realize that MMOGs are going to cater to both camps, whether everyone likes it or not. The fact is, MMOGs are a pretty cheap form of entertainment compared to blowing through multiple 20-hour single-player games every month, so for “hardcore” gamers who want single-player experiences, the MMOG is a valid outlet. This is particularly true when one considers factors that support the single-player experience yet is based on the player populace at large, such as player-made goods, auction houses, et al.

If anything, NPC party members will be a good thing because it will somewhat allow more casual gamers to participate in group contact that they might otherwise be shut out of. No more stalling public groups because the baby is crying, or because mom and dad called your tank to the dinner table. The more pertinent issue at hand is the effectiveness of NPC party members, and this is where careful play balancing needs to take place. In other words, assuming that NPC party members could be written to be as intelligent as players as far as respective group roles are concerned, they shouldn’t. A good player tank should always be better than an NPC tank, whereas the NPC tank should probably be better than a poor tank. This will force poor players to up their game or get out, and as long as certain encounters are written to require good players, then mostly NPC parties won’t be able to succeed in top-rate instances anyway, so the “hardcore” can still have their cake.

Another bonus to this is that even at low levels, Bioware can require players to participate in groups. This way, from the get-go, players will learn how to play their class in a group environment, rather than having to learn end-game mechanics such as threat, aggro, healing, et al upon reaching end-game. It’s a good idea that more MMOG developers should explore, rather than shy away from because of a thousand angry Keens.

Similar Posts:

• Established IP = successful MMOG. – Let’s clarify that: in order for the next big massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) to become a r…


• Most self-described “hardcore” PvP gamers are likely full of shit. – Scott Jennings makes a great point about why Darkfall won’t make it in the end: …people enjoy har…


• Learn to DPS, please. – I’m not sure why the title of his blog is not consistent with his subdomain, but pelides runs a blog…

Electronic Arts (EA) is already preparing the Command & Conquer (C&C) franchise for the future vehicle for software proliferation: digital distribution. Kotaku, meanwhile, says that some fans are skeptical:

News of the transition was sending fears of a Facebook-ized, watered-down C&C among some series fans.

And yet C&C always was watered down, offering little more than eye-candy to recent sequels. The good news is that EA CEO John Riccitiello hopes to change that, and bring more innovation to the real-time strategy (RTS) genre.

“…I have a shared vision that the RTS category is due for fundamental innovation and not just cooler graphics,” Riccitiello said. “We’ve gotten to the point where you can see the particles around individual grenade explosions inside rooms where windows fall apart. That was never what made RTS good. That was just sort of eye candy on top of a very traditional game mechanic. From when Red Alert and Starcraft sort of defined the genre, it hasn’t moved.”

While Riccitiello’s take on RTS games mirrors our own, his seniority is at question when he uses Red Alert and Starcraft as examples of genre-defining games. In reality, predecessors Command & Conquer (yes, the original), Warcraft, and Warcraft II, solidified the genre that Dune II built. And really, nothing fundamental has changed since then, either. And that portends danger for developers not willing to let go of the tried-and-true method of simple throwing a new unit or two at a player each level, while making them rebuild from scratch on a new map. The repetitive play is what kills the genre in one game alone, let alone when looking at new RTS games.

“Some of what Facebook does, in terms of letting you collectively experience things, have not been stitched together by the game industry in terms of lessons learned there. You start applying that thinking to a C&C franchise you get something pretty special.”

This is where Riccitiello’s price as CEO may be worth it, because at least Riccitiello is looking at some aspects of what make Facebook games, and MMOGs, so alluring. If RTS games are meant to illustrate a greater struggle, then the thousands of players participating in battlefield combat should be able to assist one another, participate in local battles, and change the tide of war one small step at a time. In many ways, this mirrors the idea of Warhammer Online’s Realm vs. Realm PvP scenario, but at a less granular level.

If there’s a clear disadvantage for one player to effectively handle a large army, compared to many players handling less units at a more focused level, then new aspects in RTS titles emerge: buildings alliances, strategies, and resource flows become important. And ultimately, the complexity of individual units can grow, because with less units, players have the ability to use more unit abilities in order to create battlefield synergy, whereas in purely single-player games, players must first be concerned with amassing large armies and rushing the enemy head-on.

Adopting certain key aspects of social and multiplayer games can be a good thing for the RTS genre, as long as it’s done right and with the intent to grow the genre “up,” rather than “out.” That is to say, adopting the wrong aspects of social games will result in a watered-down RTS experience that may be more accessible to non-gamers, but at the expense of the RTS faithful. Maintaining the complexity of strategy and risk-taking, however, and adding on top of this formula a perpetual battlefront that all players share, will only satiate RTS gamers more.

Similar Posts:

• I spent my weekend killing Nazis. – Strategy games based on World War II are a dime a dozen, which says something about the purchasing p…


• Free Realms like Harry Potter – attracting adults? – We raise an eyebrow as commentary on Free Realms continues. Not because Free Realms is a poor idea, …


• On Battleground strategy. – As I’m now in a prolonged struggle against the forces of The Alliance evil on multiple fronts, it’s …