www.Tobold.com
Tobold@GMail.com
A blog with my thoughts regarding games I am playing and other stuff in life. Please read my Terms of Service
RSS Feed
Friday, June 15, 2007
Time for a divorce?
Yesterday we were discussing the problem of class balance in games that have both PvE and PvP. The root of the problem is that the PvE and PvP gameplay are so different that the same ability can have different power in the different modes. Similar problems exist between solo gameplay, group gameplay, or raid gameplay. The much discussed warrior taunt ability is a good example. It is obviously great in group and raid gameplay, wasn't implemented for PvP because of being potentially too powerful, but is obviously damn useless in solo PvE. It seems impossible to design a game in which all classes are different, but where they are equally strong in all different modes of gameplay.
While you can PvP at any level, the most PvP is going on between characters having reached the level cap, whether in World of Warcraft or in other games. Also raiding is an activity that typically takes place at the level cap, there are no level 30 raid dungeons in WoW. Technically you can raid a low-level dungeon, but you're punished by getting minimal xp and aren't able to do any quests. That gives us a hint on why games like WoW are designed as they are: They have two distinctive phases, one with solo / small group PvE to level up, and a second phase where the leveling has stopped. PvP and raids are additional content for the second phase, because PvE is less fun when you don't level up any more.
That makes sense insofar as it can be argued that PvP and raids are *more* fun when there aren't huge differences in power between the players involved. A level 20 and a level 70 on the same battleground or in the same raid wouldn't make any sense. In both PvP and raids you still can make your character stronger by earning better items, but the power of the avatars is much more homogeneous. With the characters being more equal, the differences in player skill become more prominent, which is an advantage.
The only problem with having a game in two phases, one with a rapid rise in power over time, the second with a much slower power evolution and more focus on player skill, is that not everybody enjoys both parts equally. Some people are mostly interested in the first phase of PvE leveling up, others mostly in the second phase of raiding and/or PvP. For some unknown reason the people who enjoy the first phase more are being labeled "casual", and the people who enjoy the second phase more are being labeled "hardcore". But that are just semantics. The eternal "casual vs. hardcore" conflict isn't so much about how casual or hardcore you are, but about which phase of gameplay you enjoy more, and thus would like the developers to concentrate on. Nobody is fooled by the game developers trying to sell you a game like WoW as one whole package. The phase 1 players clearly don't like the current end game. The phase 2 players experience the necessity to level up to the level cap as a chore, as seen when the top teams in the arena tournament got banned for account sharing.
So why not split MMORPGs in two? Make one game that is exclusively about PvE leveling up, with no raids or PvP "end game", but raising the level cap in every expansion. And make another game without levels at all, where people effectively start with stats and equipment equivalent to what somebody in blue gear at level 70 has, and which only has raids and PvP in which you can slightly improve your powers by earning gear. For the phase 1 players that has the advantage that once they reach the level cap, they really feel they have "won" the game, and don't find themselves in front of an end-game they don't like. For the phase 2 players, they don't need to bother leveling up any more, they jump right into the part they actually want to play. Now some people claim that leveling is necessary so you learn how to play your class. But frankly, I leveled two priests, to 60 and to 70, in World of Warcraft, and soloing them in PvE with bubble and wand taught me absolutely nothing about how to be a good healer in a raid. If anything solo PvE teaches you bad habits, like doing maximum possible damage for a mage, not taunting for a warrior, and so on.
With the MMO market having grown considerably, there is now enough volume to have more specialized games. There is no real advantage of having both phases in the same game, but there would be a lot of interest in the separated games. What do you think?
- posted by Tobold @ 2:06 PM Permanent Link
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
This is essentially what Guild Wars has done. It's a very nice balance of allowing players to choose whether they choose to advance (by unlocking skills and item enhancements) through the PvE game or purchasing them through PvP points. With the way things seem to be going, as each expansion comes out, it will be more and more difficult for players to level up a new character. A system that allows players to create a max level character but only allows entrance into the battlegrounds would be a fantastic thing in my opinion.
Well it's also what LOTRo did basically. I love PVE and PVP separate tbh, because I like PVE and don't like PKing, ganking, grieving etc and I don't actually like overly competitive environments either. But I do know a lot of people who enjoy the particular PVE/PVP blend that WoW offers.
But I think WoW raiding would be much more sane if PVE was decoupled. Mana longevity wouldn't be a balance issue, because you won't outmana anyone in PVP, so long PVE encounters are less painful or become pot-fests.
But PVP is still the market staple it seems, especially if one looks at WAR. Seems like the prevailing believe in the industry is that PVP (warcraft3, starcraft, diablo II) is what keeps people playing because PVE content becomes repetitive much more easily and doesn't have the competitive achievement lure... I'm curious if we'll get some learning from non-competitive environmnents like Hobbo or SL and see game designers realize that there are more ways to create longevity than PVP.
But a choice/divorce would be good and even the WoW game design would support it, simply by itemization (i.e. have raid and PVP-only gear could remove gear balancing issues between both).
Don't think it's ever gonna happen. Blizz has a long history of liking the PVE/PVP blend in their games.
But I think WoW raiding would be much more sane if PVE was decoupled. Mana longevity wouldn't be a balance issue, because you won't outmana anyone in PVP, so long PVE encounters are less painful or become pot-fests.
But PVP is still the market staple it seems, especially if one looks at WAR. Seems like the prevailing believe in the industry is that PVP (warcraft3, starcraft, diablo II) is what keeps people playing because PVE content becomes repetitive much more easily and doesn't have the competitive achievement lure... I'm curious if we'll get some learning from non-competitive environmnents like Hobbo or SL and see game designers realize that there are more ways to create longevity than PVP.
But a choice/divorce would be good and even the WoW game design would support it, simply by itemization (i.e. have raid and PVP-only gear could remove gear balancing issues between both).
Don't think it's ever gonna happen. Blizz has a long history of liking the PVE/PVP blend in their games.
# posted by 
: 15/6/07 15:36
: 15/6/07 15:36
There is no real advantage of having both phases in the same game, but there would be a lot of interest in the separated games. What do you think?
First i will say that PvP in an item-based environment will never ever work. If you want balanced PvP this genre will never be your friend.
As for MMOs catering to one specific player type... it's a double edged sword actually. Why is Blizzard able to put out endgame dungeon after endgame dungeon for the Nihilums? Only cause there are millions of other customers paying for the content they can not experience. I seriously doubt that you will ever be able to financially sustain a game for hardcores only. Those times are done, content is consumed too fast to serve it to a small but skilled audience. You need masses of paying customers to produce high quality content, that's why i doubt to see any high quality content MMOs without monthly subscription payments. You simply can not build new zones, cause your customers pay 10 cents for a red dress for their avatar.
On the other hand you have EQ1, right now doing exactly this. Serving hardcore endgame content to a very small audience, but there is a reason they slowed down the release windows for expansions. Even EQ1 propably has to carefully plan its investments now, content quality is declining from what i heard recently. It is a niche game, a financially struggling one.
Actual content still is very expensive for the studios. The production tools are still not effective enough. You just can not click a mouse button and let the cpu generate a quest, or an encounter. We may all slap WoW in the last couple of weeks and month but this games still defines a quality standard for content, that no niche game will be able to deliver soon.
First i will say that PvP in an item-based environment will never ever work. If you want balanced PvP this genre will never be your friend.
As for MMOs catering to one specific player type... it's a double edged sword actually. Why is Blizzard able to put out endgame dungeon after endgame dungeon for the Nihilums? Only cause there are millions of other customers paying for the content they can not experience. I seriously doubt that you will ever be able to financially sustain a game for hardcores only. Those times are done, content is consumed too fast to serve it to a small but skilled audience. You need masses of paying customers to produce high quality content, that's why i doubt to see any high quality content MMOs without monthly subscription payments. You simply can not build new zones, cause your customers pay 10 cents for a red dress for their avatar.
On the other hand you have EQ1, right now doing exactly this. Serving hardcore endgame content to a very small audience, but there is a reason they slowed down the release windows for expansions. Even EQ1 propably has to carefully plan its investments now, content quality is declining from what i heard recently. It is a niche game, a financially struggling one.
Actual content still is very expensive for the studios. The production tools are still not effective enough. You just can not click a mouse button and let the cpu generate a quest, or an encounter. We may all slap WoW in the last couple of weeks and month but this games still defines a quality standard for content, that no niche game will be able to deliver soon.
# posted by : 15/6/07 16:07
: 15/6/07 16:07
They aren't even playing fields for developers. The "phase 1 players" require vastly more content to please than the "phase 2 players". I'm guessing it takes vastly less development time to create a Karazhan than it does a Stranglethorn Vale with associated quests. The incentive is to create for phase 2 because it creates the appearance of more with the effort of less.
Then there's the fact that no one has done a successful specialized game such as you suggest. (A Tale in the Desert, maybe?) Game bean counters aren't known for being risk takers.
Then there's the fact that no one has done a successful specialized game such as you suggest. (A Tale in the Desert, maybe?) Game bean counters aren't known for being risk takers.
# posted by : 15/6/07 16:41
: 15/6/07 16:41
I wholeheartedly concur; my MMO of choice is EQ2, and luckily there's so much content that even after hitting the cap I'm not relegated to just raiding. However, the dichotomy between the two play styles make the 'community' aspect less than desirable -- i.e., raiders* tend too often to resort to scorn and derision to those of us who (strongly) dislike raiding. This also affects the quality of the solo/small group content available in terms of equipment rewards (for the later, this is pure vendor fodder.) I would love to see a no raiding, no pvp game, limited grouping MMO published someday.
*Raiders often seem to have the same mindset as pvpers in many cases -- competitive and insulting towards others who choose other play styles.
*Raiders often seem to have the same mindset as pvpers in many cases -- competitive and insulting towards others who choose other play styles.
# posted by : 15/6/07 16:53
: 15/6/07 16:53
I think it's a mistake to assume that players are seperated into two camps. Yes there certainly are extreme ends to the scale: People who hate Raiding/PvP and those who suffer through PvE merely long enough to reach maximum level. But there is also a middle-ground where I feel most people, like myself, can and do enjoy both aspects of the game. If anything, I have always wanted more intermediate levels to raiding so I don't feel required to put on those last 5 levels and max out my effectiveness. Basically I'm saying that people burn out on raiding and grinding. Having alternative choices is always nice.
Also, I believe you have ignored the popularity of PvP servers, where people have to contend with an amalgamation of PvE/PvP. Why is this style of play so popular with many MMO games? Is it the added tension of being attacked at any moment? That unlike a "care-bear" server, there's really no point in which you are 'safe'? People seem to flock to this style of play and many MMO's who launch without it, are often pushed by the players to implement a PvP-rules server (or 4).
I also think the PvE-only server idea would fail miserably. I mean, once people 'beat' the PvE game, would they not just start an alt or quit? Without decent customer retention a game is bound to go under, regardless of how attractive it may be. This seems concept seems very close to a multi-player RPG concept game like Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights.
The PvP-only server concept does work, we have seen that much at least in Guild Wars. Though, equipment would create gaps between player skill and player-equipment.
Also, I believe you have ignored the popularity of PvP servers, where people have to contend with an amalgamation of PvE/PvP. Why is this style of play so popular with many MMO games? Is it the added tension of being attacked at any moment? That unlike a "care-bear" server, there's really no point in which you are 'safe'? People seem to flock to this style of play and many MMO's who launch without it, are often pushed by the players to implement a PvP-rules server (or 4).
I also think the PvE-only server idea would fail miserably. I mean, once people 'beat' the PvE game, would they not just start an alt or quit? Without decent customer retention a game is bound to go under, regardless of how attractive it may be. This seems concept seems very close to a multi-player RPG concept game like Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights.
The PvP-only server concept does work, we have seen that much at least in Guild Wars. Though, equipment would create gaps between player skill and player-equipment.
As I pondered the questioning terms of WoW, I think a basic problem is the concept of "threat".
IMO, "threat" and "damage/healing output / special attacks*" should not be separate.
(*special attacks = fear, sheep, and even taunt)
A prime example of that dichotomy is talent points in threat generation / reduction. Another is the "sunder" attack, which is a warrior PvE staple, but never used in PvP.
Bottom line: Damage output would have to be equalized to a great degree so that a warrior in plate could still hold "aggro" in PvE. Life/health totals would probably need to be re-tuned for PvP.
And while we're fixing things: As pointed out before, collision detection implementation in PvP and PvE would help this to work, too. And all abilities and talents would need to have both a PvE and PvP function (no "warrior taunt" arbitrary inconsistencies).
The concept of a "DPS class" would disappear. CC attacks and abilities would keep former DPS classes useful, though retuning would be needed in that area as well. Classes that gain DPS output would logically have to be nerfed in other abilities to keep the balance, while classes that lost DPS output would be given additional abilities & talents.
A major issue that this would not fix is equipment imbalance (the "PvE raiding into PvP ubergear problem").
Simple diligence could solve that: Ensure that PvP reward gear is upgraded as raid gear is added, and that extra non-raid content is added with gear that at least keeps the gear gap fixed -- so that the gear gap is not allowed to widen unchecked as it did in pre-BC WoW.
IMO, "threat" and "damage/healing output / special attacks*" should not be separate.
(*special attacks = fear, sheep, and even taunt)
A prime example of that dichotomy is talent points in threat generation / reduction. Another is the "sunder" attack, which is a warrior PvE staple, but never used in PvP.
Bottom line: Damage output would have to be equalized to a great degree so that a warrior in plate could still hold "aggro" in PvE. Life/health totals would probably need to be re-tuned for PvP.
And while we're fixing things: As pointed out before, collision detection implementation in PvP and PvE would help this to work, too. And all abilities and talents would need to have both a PvE and PvP function (no "warrior taunt" arbitrary inconsistencies).
The concept of a "DPS class" would disappear. CC attacks and abilities would keep former DPS classes useful, though retuning would be needed in that area as well. Classes that gain DPS output would logically have to be nerfed in other abilities to keep the balance, while classes that lost DPS output would be given additional abilities & talents.
A major issue that this would not fix is equipment imbalance (the "PvE raiding into PvP ubergear problem").
Simple diligence could solve that: Ensure that PvP reward gear is upgraded as raid gear is added, and that extra non-raid content is added with gear that at least keeps the gear gap fixed -- so that the gear gap is not allowed to widen unchecked as it did in pre-BC WoW.
# posted by : 15/6/07 17:57
: 15/6/07 17:57
Quite frankly its about player retention. Forcing raiders to go through a long period of leveling makes them invest more in their characters. Developers of subscription based games see this as necessary to keep people deeply involved and stay with their product. The only games that could offer instant max level characters would be those not depenedent on subscriptions like Guild Wars.
So why not split MMORPGs in two? Make one game that is exclusively about PvE leveling up, with no raids or PvP "end game", but raising the level cap in every expansion.
I've mentioned this before.
Developers need to convince their publishers to let them create a final and heroic quest, so your character can go out in a blaze of glory.
Give PVE players a sense of accomplishment. Let us retire our character on a high note and maybe we'll come back and level up a new character.
I've mentioned this before.
Developers need to convince their publishers to let them create a final and heroic quest, so your character can go out in a blaze of glory.
Give PVE players a sense of accomplishment. Let us retire our character on a high note and maybe we'll come back and level up a new character.
# posted by : 15/6/07 19:17
: 15/6/07 19:17
In the original version of SWG, you could max out the XP/skills for your character pretty fast. (approx 1month for a casual player). So leveling was a small part of the game. Thus, almost all of the new content could then be geared toward the 'Master level' players.
I used to be quite bitter that in WoW all the new content was mostly for raiding. But to be honest, for the 'phase 1' player there is a huge amount of content in WoW. With horde/alliance, and different starting zones for races there is a lot of replayability there to keep most players busy for a couple years. It just sucks to see all that flashy raiding content waved in your face all the time and not being able to experience it. Maybe have separate servers (raiding/non-raiding) that you can transfer your character to?
I used to be quite bitter that in WoW all the new content was mostly for raiding. But to be honest, for the 'phase 1' player there is a huge amount of content in WoW. With horde/alliance, and different starting zones for races there is a lot of replayability there to keep most players busy for a couple years. It just sucks to see all that flashy raiding content waved in your face all the time and not being able to experience it. Maybe have separate servers (raiding/non-raiding) that you can transfer your character to?
I think casuals enjoy leveling up. Nothing replaces that feeling of watching the xp bar move forward. Gear is nice, but it's not enough.
People trashed AA in EQ, but I like the idea - in principle.
Once the exp ends - so does my interest. I'm just astounded that so many players will replay the same zone dozens of times just to get a complete set of armor.
People trashed AA in EQ, but I like the idea - in principle.
Once the exp ends - so does my interest. I'm just astounded that so many players will replay the same zone dozens of times just to get a complete set of armor.
# posted by : 15/6/07 21:12
: 15/6/07 21:12
"As I pondered the questioning terms of WoW..."
So much for careful re-reading and editing!
Should have been:
"As I pondered the question in terms of WoW..."
Now back to your regularly-scheduled programming... :)
So much for careful re-reading and editing!
Should have been:
"As I pondered the question in terms of WoW..."
Now back to your regularly-scheduled programming... :)
# posted by : 15/6/07 21:13
: 15/6/07 21:13
WoW lacks class balance to make a pvp mode with prebuilt/pregeared type of lvl 70's chars. Also, unless WoW drastically changed the que system to lower the time needed to actually get into a match it would be a terrible and collossal failure.
Guildwars has created a great pvp mode that requires players to use tactics, strategic skill placement and there really is no dps/tank/healer scheme needed to make groups work. (lets face it, this is what burdons WoW pvp). You can actually build a char that has all those traits and that has specific advanatages to bring to a match.
What WoW could do to make a successful pvp-mode, is to bring the battlegrounds to a console system like xbox 360/ps3/wii with access to every playable char and pre-defined gear choices (arena gear + teir 1-2 raid gear type of selections available imo). This would bring que times drastically shorter (good thing) and also bring a option to the casual players of WoW that doesnt require losing social aspects of real life. Win-Win scenario is what casual gamers are looking for in the big picture.
I also have a suggestion for the raiding community of WoW as well. In that you can do a pre-built char to help flesh out more raid parties and to drop the attunement process altogether (its lame). Some limits for these chars is that they cannot do regular WoW and they are only for instance'd raids. (lets be honest... the wow 2.0 takes you away from your friends if u wanna play).
Post a Comment
Guildwars has created a great pvp mode that requires players to use tactics, strategic skill placement and there really is no dps/tank/healer scheme needed to make groups work. (lets face it, this is what burdons WoW pvp). You can actually build a char that has all those traits and that has specific advanatages to bring to a match.
What WoW could do to make a successful pvp-mode, is to bring the battlegrounds to a console system like xbox 360/ps3/wii with access to every playable char and pre-defined gear choices (arena gear + teir 1-2 raid gear type of selections available imo). This would bring que times drastically shorter (good thing) and also bring a option to the casual players of WoW that doesnt require losing social aspects of real life. Win-Win scenario is what casual gamers are looking for in the big picture.
I also have a suggestion for the raiding community of WoW as well. In that you can do a pre-built char to help flesh out more raid parties and to drop the attunement process altogether (its lame). Some limits for these chars is that they cannot do regular WoW and they are only for instance'd raids. (lets be honest... the wow 2.0 takes you away from your friends if u wanna play).
<< Home
