An interesting approach can be discovered in Cryptic's Champions Online, an upcoming MMO based on the similarly titled superhero tabletop game. While the closed beta has been progressing in a very secretive manner, the game's selling features are displayed prominently on the website's FAQ and interview pages. Some of these systems are very appealing to me as a player.
One of the primary appeals to this gamer is the idea of action-oriented combat in an MMO. The term might be confusing to some, and it's certainly not the formal phrase for it (after all, all MMORPGs have 'action' of some sort), but what I mean is that the combat in Champions is apparently closer to an action-adventure game than a traditional RPG. Instead of relying solely on level and character skills to overcome an opponent, players may be expected to actively aim attacks, dodge those of opponents, use cover as a means to protect themselves, and otherwise rely on hand-eye coordination over statistics and timing strategy.
I have been waiting for this for a very long time! Age of Conan attempted it with some success, and Darkfall Online promises the same, but Cryptic has a potential advantage in releasing their game. It is widely expected that Champions will be cross-platform on the Xbox 360, and may utilize the Xbox 360 controller for Windows, as well as a more traditional mouse-and-keyboard setup on PC.
A different style of play brings opportunity to attract a new demographic. Much of the appeal I find in Turbine's Lord of The Rings Online is in its untraditional community. While the action-oriented gamers of the Xbox Live community are not the same people of my virtual Middle-Earth, the prospect of a more competitive control style makes me think that PvE, PvP and simply getting around the world (who hasn't wanted to fly around as a superhero?) will be more interesting for a longer period of time. I have hope, at least!
And now, to direct that hope toward my email inbox, where I am attempting to will a beta key into existence...
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Darkfall Online: Early Review
Take a look-see at this review of the beta for Darkfall - it describes the systems I'm excited about with a perspective I don't yet have :)
MMO Crunch Review: Darkfall Online Beta
MMO Crunch Review: Darkfall Online Beta
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Upstarts: Microtransactions in MMOGs
The pricing for video games is an interesting thing to me. When I was eleven, and I was first exposed to online multiplayer games, I was amazed that they could charge a person 99 cents an hour to play! Even at such a young and impressionable age, the dollars added up in my head as I considered how often I played my favorite games - and that was before I had discovered the addictive nature of the MMO/MUD.
Subscription pricing is still a racket in the fickle-accountant part of my brain: if you've played World of Warcraft since launch on their basic subscription, heaven knows you've spent well over $800. While there are debates as to the value such subscriptions really offer, I see a pricing trend in smaller projects that works very well.
When content is free or ad-supported, a game is more likely to attract a population based on interest. After all, the less risk there is, the more people will feel comfortable signing up. The companies that want to really make money on their "free" games will then offer bonus services for a small fee. These fees are known as "microtransactions," and they allow players who find value in things like additional storage space, exclusive items and exclusive content to pay for them on a need-to-own basis.
I'll not mince words: I like this system. It allows players who genuinely enjoy a game to pay for the better parts of it, thereby supporting the developers. At the same time, it encourages developers to create content that players will feel willing to pay for, thus encouraging a standard of quality on projects with a limited budget. Everybody wins.
The biggest pitfall of such a system is a scenario in which developers don't release enough free content, or implement too many nudges toward purchasing extra content. If players feel pressured, they won't want to buy. That said, microtransactions are a viable option for many games, particularly when the developers might not be able to compete with standard subscription titles in the mainstream.
Subscription pricing is still a racket in the fickle-accountant part of my brain: if you've played World of Warcraft since launch on their basic subscription, heaven knows you've spent well over $800. While there are debates as to the value such subscriptions really offer, I see a pricing trend in smaller projects that works very well.
When content is free or ad-supported, a game is more likely to attract a population based on interest. After all, the less risk there is, the more people will feel comfortable signing up. The companies that want to really make money on their "free" games will then offer bonus services for a small fee. These fees are known as "microtransactions," and they allow players who find value in things like additional storage space, exclusive items and exclusive content to pay for them on a need-to-own basis.
I'll not mince words: I like this system. It allows players who genuinely enjoy a game to pay for the better parts of it, thereby supporting the developers. At the same time, it encourages developers to create content that players will feel willing to pay for, thus encouraging a standard of quality on projects with a limited budget. Everybody wins.
The biggest pitfall of such a system is a scenario in which developers don't release enough free content, or implement too many nudges toward purchasing extra content. If players feel pressured, they won't want to buy. That said, microtransactions are a viable option for many games, particularly when the developers might not be able to compete with standard subscription titles in the mainstream.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Darkfall Online: Skill Based Experience
I have to say, I'm pretty excited about Aventurine's Darkfall Online. While I've never heard of the company up until recently, it looks as if their game is going to be pretty edgy. Currently, Darkfall is promising unrestricted PvP, full empire and town construction, and most importantly, a skill based experience system.
I love skill based experience. The idea of leveling up with a generic EXP meter never really appealed to me at all. This may have to do with my first MMO love, a MUD by Simutronics known as Dragonrealms. This MUD used a skill based system to great effect, and I always wanted the system to work in a graphical game.
With skill based EXP, a player doesn't necessarily level up by killing monsters or completing collection quests. Rather, he or she possesses a set of distinct skills, and each skill corresponds to a certain activity.
For example, in Dragonrealms, my character might know how to swim, climb, use a bow, hide, stalk, and wear leather armor. Each of these things has a corresponding skill. When my character undertakes an acton that might train a skill, such as climbing a steep incline, he would learn a little bit of climbing skill. When he learns enough, the level of climbing skill increases, allowing my character to tackle more difficult climbs.
It sounds very simple, and it is (or at least, it can be). What grips me about the system is the way it realistically rewards the player. I've never liked gaining a level by running errands for goblins in World of Warcraft, or by killing umpteen boars when my character is a druid and wouldn't normally do that. There is no insight in killing boars, unless your chracter is striving to be a world-renown pork butcher.
Now, when you want to be a master of stealth, and you learn how by skulking in shadows all day - or when you want to be a champion swimmer, and you work from streams and brooks to swimming lakes and channels - you feel a more genuine sense of mastery. I think this is the sort of feeling players actually want when they create a finely tailored character.
I'll be keeping an eye on Darkfall. If you find their systems exciting, you should too.
I love skill based experience. The idea of leveling up with a generic EXP meter never really appealed to me at all. This may have to do with my first MMO love, a MUD by Simutronics known as Dragonrealms. This MUD used a skill based system to great effect, and I always wanted the system to work in a graphical game.
With skill based EXP, a player doesn't necessarily level up by killing monsters or completing collection quests. Rather, he or she possesses a set of distinct skills, and each skill corresponds to a certain activity.
For example, in Dragonrealms, my character might know how to swim, climb, use a bow, hide, stalk, and wear leather armor. Each of these things has a corresponding skill. When my character undertakes an acton that might train a skill, such as climbing a steep incline, he would learn a little bit of climbing skill. When he learns enough, the level of climbing skill increases, allowing my character to tackle more difficult climbs.
It sounds very simple, and it is (or at least, it can be). What grips me about the system is the way it realistically rewards the player. I've never liked gaining a level by running errands for goblins in World of Warcraft, or by killing umpteen boars when my character is a druid and wouldn't normally do that. There is no insight in killing boars, unless your chracter is striving to be a world-renown pork butcher.
Now, when you want to be a master of stealth, and you learn how by skulking in shadows all day - or when you want to be a champion swimmer, and you work from streams and brooks to swimming lakes and channels - you feel a more genuine sense of mastery. I think this is the sort of feeling players actually want when they create a finely tailored character.
I'll be keeping an eye on Darkfall. If you find their systems exciting, you should too.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Where Did My Grammar Go...?
It's terrible. There are so many free projects on the web today that have a ton of potential. In truth, there are probably more good games being built than I care to count, and many of them are being designed by young, smart companies (or in some cases, just a few people). The systems and websites look good, the advertisers are in place, the mechanics, graphics and technical issues have all been ironed out; what's keeping these games from really taking off?
In my opinion, it's a lack of writing skill. The grammar and usage issues I see in many of these titles is positively horrid. It's far more important than many people think - especially in any (good) MMORPG, where the development of both a character and a larger story can be narrative driven.
I've said it in the past - I'm a role-player and a story nut, and so maybe this perception of mine is skew. However, as a consumer, I feel that a little proofreading goes a long way in maintaining my enjoyment of a title. I don't think any native English speaker wants to rescue the proverbial princess, only to have her give her thanks in a broken, mis-spelled wall of vomitext (that's a technical term, you know).
I don't really have specific title in mind, but there are some games that could have gripped me for just a little longer had the writing been good - or even adequate - when I played them. Sure, some of it in lost in translation - RF Online had terrible text-wrap and proofreading errors well after its translation from Korean - but that should just make the issue more clear to developers. If you want to grip a target audience, WRITE for them. Make them feel like they're reading a good book, and maybe they'll keep reading after the shine of your innovative combat system has worn down a little.
The funny thing is, while so many games are carbon-copies of other (often better) games, few try to differentiate themselves with a powerful story. Again, as a consumer: hook me with words, and I'll stick around longer.
In my opinion, it's a lack of writing skill. The grammar and usage issues I see in many of these titles is positively horrid. It's far more important than many people think - especially in any (good) MMORPG, where the development of both a character and a larger story can be narrative driven.
I've said it in the past - I'm a role-player and a story nut, and so maybe this perception of mine is skew. However, as a consumer, I feel that a little proofreading goes a long way in maintaining my enjoyment of a title. I don't think any native English speaker wants to rescue the proverbial princess, only to have her give her thanks in a broken, mis-spelled wall of vomitext (that's a technical term, you know).
I don't really have specific title in mind, but there are some games that could have gripped me for just a little longer had the writing been good - or even adequate - when I played them. Sure, some of it in lost in translation - RF Online had terrible text-wrap and proofreading errors well after its translation from Korean - but that should just make the issue more clear to developers. If you want to grip a target audience, WRITE for them. Make them feel like they're reading a good book, and maybe they'll keep reading after the shine of your innovative combat system has worn down a little.
The funny thing is, while so many games are carbon-copies of other (often better) games, few try to differentiate themselves with a powerful story. Again, as a consumer: hook me with words, and I'll stick around longer.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Warhammer Online: Public Quest Quandry
When Warhammer Online (known as WAR) came out last year, I was very excited. The game was supposedly pumping life into an dying generation of MMORPG, introducing several mechanics with the intention of bringing players together (and also against one another). An element of these mechanics is known as the Public Quest, or PQ.
In a traditional MMORPG, a "quest" is a mission that the player must accomplish. The player talks to an NPC, who then grants them a quest that they can complete. Players keep their own quest logs, and each player can complete each quest for him or herself. The process is very localized. For quests that involve multiple people as a requirement for completion, this internal nature can cause problems in getting a group together. Moreover, rewards in traditional quests are not always fairly allotted to a group.
WAR sought to end these problems with the concept of the public quest. In a PQ, an area of the world is reserved for a specific quest. Unlike a traditional quest, the PQ is a scripted series of events that begin periodically, running their course and resetting upon success or failure. Any players in the area can participate, simply by walking into the area where the PQ takes place. One doesn't need to be a member of a group to benefit from the quest. Depending on his or her contribution, a player has a better chance of earning a good reward. On paper, this is a fantastic idea.
In practice, I find that the system needs work. The PQ does streamline the questing process (and to be fair, WAR is not about questing), but instead of communicating with other players to achieve a goal, I found that players in PQs simply contribute to mindless blob-play. There is no communication - indeed, if you're not in a group but still trying to participate, there is no easy way to contact other players in the middle of an event. If you're being hammered on by five enemies, then you're at the mercy of any random healer who happens to notice you dying in the corner. This is, of course, not ideal for new players.
Players who run these quests repeatedly end up re-creating an atmosphere of expectation common in the endgame of an MMO: "if you are here, you should know what you are doing and you should do it well." The PQ system breeds a crowd of hardcore players who are out for rewards, and when the system encourages play without communication, it marginalizes players who are still learning. I don't think that this is what Mythic intended at all.
In a traditional MMORPG, a "quest" is a mission that the player must accomplish. The player talks to an NPC, who then grants them a quest that they can complete. Players keep their own quest logs, and each player can complete each quest for him or herself. The process is very localized. For quests that involve multiple people as a requirement for completion, this internal nature can cause problems in getting a group together. Moreover, rewards in traditional quests are not always fairly allotted to a group.
WAR sought to end these problems with the concept of the public quest. In a PQ, an area of the world is reserved for a specific quest. Unlike a traditional quest, the PQ is a scripted series of events that begin periodically, running their course and resetting upon success or failure. Any players in the area can participate, simply by walking into the area where the PQ takes place. One doesn't need to be a member of a group to benefit from the quest. Depending on his or her contribution, a player has a better chance of earning a good reward. On paper, this is a fantastic idea.
In practice, I find that the system needs work. The PQ does streamline the questing process (and to be fair, WAR is not about questing), but instead of communicating with other players to achieve a goal, I found that players in PQs simply contribute to mindless blob-play. There is no communication - indeed, if you're not in a group but still trying to participate, there is no easy way to contact other players in the middle of an event. If you're being hammered on by five enemies, then you're at the mercy of any random healer who happens to notice you dying in the corner. This is, of course, not ideal for new players.
Players who run these quests repeatedly end up re-creating an atmosphere of expectation common in the endgame of an MMO: "if you are here, you should know what you are doing and you should do it well." The PQ system breeds a crowd of hardcore players who are out for rewards, and when the system encourages play without communication, it marginalizes players who are still learning. I don't think that this is what Mythic intended at all.
Free-to-Play: No Download Required! Web-Based MMOGs
Before there were big and flashy, graphical internet games, there were web games. While your average DVD-ROM based MMORPG will devour several gigabytes of space and demand high amounts of memory, a web-game will humbly exist within your web browser, asking only for what the application can spare. These are not MMORPGS in the contemporary sense of the term, but they remain popular even now, when techonology makes games with incredible visuals popular. It is a different genre of game altogether, but occasionally, these browser-based games, such as Anime Cubed's Billy vs. SNAKEMAN, can compete with bigger names for several unique reasons.
Browser games are often asynchronous; a world is persistent, but "ticks" on an hourly or daily system - that is, reources (and therefore playtime) can be managed simply by setting the pace of the tick. This pacing makes it logical for players to log in for 10-20 minutes, once or twice a day, play to their hearts' content, and set down the game until tomorrow. A browser-game is not an EVE online, Everquest, or World of Warcraft, games that can demand large blocks of leisure time to accomplish anything within. Players can play because they feel like they have the time to. In addition, asynchronous playing often comes with a hieghtened sense of anonymity, for those players who absolutely hate being social with others ;)
Browser games are (often) easy to pick up. Most tick-based games make their money on advertising, so players are usually encouraged to refer other players for in-game benefits. This is certainly no new concept in the world of marketing, but the simplicity and convenience of a web game can often lead to people outside a demographic to pick up the habit.
Browser games are (often) free! As mentioned above, advertising makes most of a browser game's revenue, and the implications of click-through and page impressions are obvious. Doing nearly anything in a browser-based game will refresh or change the page you are visiting, which loads new ads and (possibly) convinces a user just a little bit more to click on one. If a player doesn't care for advertisements, perhaps a flat fee can be assessed to remove them - a deal that the host of the game will enjoy, no doubt. Barring this, there is usually no cost for a player when registering for a browser-based game, making them risk-free for the consumer.
If you haven't played a web-based game before, consider giving one a try. You could discover a new sort of video game that tickles your fancy.
Browser games are often asynchronous; a world is persistent, but "ticks" on an hourly or daily system - that is, reources (and therefore playtime) can be managed simply by setting the pace of the tick. This pacing makes it logical for players to log in for 10-20 minutes, once or twice a day, play to their hearts' content, and set down the game until tomorrow. A browser-game is not an EVE online, Everquest, or World of Warcraft, games that can demand large blocks of leisure time to accomplish anything within. Players can play because they feel like they have the time to. In addition, asynchronous playing often comes with a hieghtened sense of anonymity, for those players who absolutely hate being social with others ;)
Browser games are (often) easy to pick up. Most tick-based games make their money on advertising, so players are usually encouraged to refer other players for in-game benefits. This is certainly no new concept in the world of marketing, but the simplicity and convenience of a web game can often lead to people outside a demographic to pick up the habit.
Browser games are (often) free! As mentioned above, advertising makes most of a browser game's revenue, and the implications of click-through and page impressions are obvious. Doing nearly anything in a browser-based game will refresh or change the page you are visiting, which loads new ads and (possibly) convinces a user just a little bit more to click on one. If a player doesn't care for advertisements, perhaps a flat fee can be assessed to remove them - a deal that the host of the game will enjoy, no doubt. Barring this, there is usually no cost for a player when registering for a browser-based game, making them risk-free for the consumer.
If you haven't played a web-based game before, consider giving one a try. You could discover a new sort of video game that tickles your fancy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
