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
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Feeling comfortable
I was reading a story about the hostile takeover bid from EA for Take 2. In a gross oversimplification EA was depicted as the company making nothing but sequels with only minimal improvements over last year's version of the same game, while Take 2 was described as the small innovative company launching lots of original games. Now apart from the obvious holes in that version (EA's next big game is the original Spore, while Take 2's next big game is a sequel, GTA4), I can't help but notice the fact that EA's less original sequels are selling a whole lot better than the original games of Take 2. It is as if the customers don't want original games. And I think that has a lot to do with what people are comfortable with.
Video games, and especially MMORPGs, have become rather complicated. Apart from the "casual" games like Peggle, which anyone can understand in under a minute, most video games now need quite some time to "get into". Just look at whatever MMORPG you are playing right now and count how many different on-screen hotkeys, keyboard shortcuts, and other control elements you are using. And for games like WoW that is just the bare minimum, most players enlarge the number of controls with addons and macros. This creates a barrier to entry: Very few people play several MMORPGs in parallel. Not only because each MMORPG takes too much time, but also because in game A you press "I" to open your inventory, and in game B you press "B" to open your bags, and if you switch back and forth a lot you'll quickly get confused and mix up the controls. Other types of games try to counter that problem by working with de facto industry standards, most first person shooters use very similar controls. And since Diablo it is hard to find a game in which the health potions aren't red and the mana potions aren't blue, with health / mana bars in corresponding colors.
But because it remains difficult to learn a new game from scratch, some people prefer their new games to be nearly identical to their old games. And that is why the umpteenth version of Madden is still selling so very well, and why there are sequels everywhere. It is also why World of Warcraft is hugely successful, while not being terribly innovative. That of course poses a problem for games like Age of Conan, who try to introduce a completely new system of controls and combat. MMORPG combat hasn't changed much since Everquest, and I'd really love a new system to succeed, but there will always be a lot of people unwilling or unable to learn a new system of controls.
- posted by Tobold @ 8:10 AM Permanent Link
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
now that reminds me, in my current favorite in the midst of MMO fatigue, NWN2, the health potions and the health bar are blue :) But then, there are no mana potions and no mana bars. Reminds me, I should try D&D online. They say the system is different from your next door MMORPG.
Ibrul
Ibrul
# posted by 
: 22/4/08 09:31
: 22/4/08 09:31
Genre Evolution is what this is called by designery people. EA are generally into selling a refined version of last years game to the players of last years game. Add some marketing and viral pull and you have a viable bussiness as long as you invest your talent and twice the budget from last year.
This works to make money but its only a viable model for the publisher with the most muscle. Everyone else will lose in that marketplace. It also tends to develop the complexity of the genre to where the game really needs to be several games, one for new players, another for devloping players and a third for master players. - Expensive!
The problem with innovative game designs is the lack of a pre-defined target audience. People are notorious for labeling games into already existing genres, you will fail if you try to make a new genre so you have to move with the flow and accept that a game with "green monsters" is a fantasy rpg of some sort, if the control scheme is the FPS controls then it will be a hybrid kindof like BioShock is some "Adventure/RPG/FPS" which feels muddy in the mind of the player.
Almost none of the new innovative game designs succeed where it is important (well, except for the Nintendo products) and that is to remove obstacles that prevent "non-gamers" to enjoy the game. WoW did some of this way better than good ol EQ. But you can use the same technique to open the play experience to a wider audience in pretty much any genre, at the cost of pissing off the hardcore fans of that particular genre unless your budget is incredibly large.
The error in the strategy behind Conan is that they make changes where changes not are desired by the potentially wider audience, they rather narrow the audience by removing some of the primary "hook" of the genre and replacing it with something few will find engaging on the reptile-brain level.
There is a huge difference between innovative and different. It seems like the game industry is traumatized by failures to innovate which cripples the studios ambitions to actually make positive differences. The publishers want to contain the innovation into a little sub-system within the whole design and that is nothing but a recepie for failure.
If the "new EA" has learned anything about this problem they might actually be able to crank up the innovative aspects of Take 2 into the mainstream level. But I doubt it, politics, money and strategcal limitations will be popping up left and right in search for the easy money recepie.
This works to make money but its only a viable model for the publisher with the most muscle. Everyone else will lose in that marketplace. It also tends to develop the complexity of the genre to where the game really needs to be several games, one for new players, another for devloping players and a third for master players. - Expensive!
The problem with innovative game designs is the lack of a pre-defined target audience. People are notorious for labeling games into already existing genres, you will fail if you try to make a new genre so you have to move with the flow and accept that a game with "green monsters" is a fantasy rpg of some sort, if the control scheme is the FPS controls then it will be a hybrid kindof like BioShock is some "Adventure/RPG/FPS" which feels muddy in the mind of the player.
Almost none of the new innovative game designs succeed where it is important (well, except for the Nintendo products) and that is to remove obstacles that prevent "non-gamers" to enjoy the game. WoW did some of this way better than good ol EQ. But you can use the same technique to open the play experience to a wider audience in pretty much any genre, at the cost of pissing off the hardcore fans of that particular genre unless your budget is incredibly large.
The error in the strategy behind Conan is that they make changes where changes not are desired by the potentially wider audience, they rather narrow the audience by removing some of the primary "hook" of the genre and replacing it with something few will find engaging on the reptile-brain level.
There is a huge difference between innovative and different. It seems like the game industry is traumatized by failures to innovate which cripples the studios ambitions to actually make positive differences. The publishers want to contain the innovation into a little sub-system within the whole design and that is nothing but a recepie for failure.
If the "new EA" has learned anything about this problem they might actually be able to crank up the innovative aspects of Take 2 into the mainstream level. But I doubt it, politics, money and strategcal limitations will be popping up left and right in search for the easy money recepie.
# posted by : 22/4/08 11:02
: 22/4/08 11:02
I have quite a few console, as well as PC games, languishing in a drawer somwhere, unplayed.
I'm sure I would enjoy playing all those games, but I really really do not enjoy learning how to play a new game.
Besides, with my WoW commitment, I don't have time.
I'm sure I would enjoy playing all those games, but I really really do not enjoy learning how to play a new game.
Besides, with my WoW commitment, I don't have time.
# posted by : 22/4/08 14:16
: 22/4/08 14:16
Back when I was in college there were Street Fighter people and there were Mortal Combat people. It was very rare for someone to play both games since the special moves required totally different button combinations and you either excelled at one or the other.
Years later a nephew of mine had a new game called Street Figher 3D or something along those lines. The character graphics were light years ahead of what I used to play and, as the title suggested, it was in 3D. You could now move around your opponent and not just forward and back. My nephew was quite surprised when I knew all the special moves to this game even though it was new. He was even more surprised when he couldn't beat me at his own game.
Years later a nephew of mine had a new game called Street Figher 3D or something along those lines. The character graphics were light years ahead of what I used to play and, as the title suggested, it was in 3D. You could now move around your opponent and not just forward and back. My nephew was quite surprised when I knew all the special moves to this game even though it was new. He was even more surprised when he couldn't beat me at his own game.
All entertainment venues have this issue. Television and film are the same way. When you report to a board, and a series of investors for your money (and they ALL do) you have to be able to pitch it in a way that will make them feel comfortable with where their money is going.
If you say, "No one has ever seen anything like this before!" they will smile and might even say that sounds good, but it doesn't make them feel secure. If you say, "This is the next Cosby show! We even have Bill Cosby!" they will not hesitate to sign away approval.
It is not just about the comfort of the audience, but of the money men.
Games, I imagine, are not very different.
If you say, "No one has ever seen anything like this before!" they will smile and might even say that sounds good, but it doesn't make them feel secure. If you say, "This is the next Cosby show! We even have Bill Cosby!" they will not hesitate to sign away approval.
It is not just about the comfort of the audience, but of the money men.
Games, I imagine, are not very different.
# posted by : 22/4/08 14:59
: 22/4/08 14:59
One thing to look forward to is that Age of Conan has a very simple UI which should be easier for new players to pick up. Of course the game play will be a bit more twitch based then the average MMO but that will be a good thing especially for healers I think.
People are worried that the playstyle will allow hyper caffeinated 12 years olds to be immortal but I don't think it will be that bad. Probably guitar hero on medium at the worst. In World of Warcraft nothing sucks more then raid healing as a paladin. In Age of Conan you aren't going to have the problem of just pressing one or two keys every 7 seconds.
People are worried that the playstyle will allow hyper caffeinated 12 years olds to be immortal but I don't think it will be that bad. Probably guitar hero on medium at the worst. In World of Warcraft nothing sucks more then raid healing as a paladin. In Age of Conan you aren't going to have the problem of just pressing one or two keys every 7 seconds.
I don't know relmstien but I do know the worries over twitch kiddies have me holding off till its out of beta and I see the reviews of the final game. I want something new but I do want something PVE wise similar to wow. Especially pre BC. Its funny I love scifi but the scifi feel to BC really turned me off in my fantasy game.
I don't think it's too difficult to go back & forth between MMOs. It might require a minute or two of adjustment, but it's not really any different from playing your Warrior, then jumping on your Rogue for a bit, then logging on to your Priest. Different play-styles, different skills & hotkeys, but you adjust. Sure, occasionally when you see your opponent Dodge you might hit 2 before remembering your Rogue doesn't have Overpower, or press 1 to interrupt a caster's spell then realize your Warrior can't Kick, but you quickly get back into the groove of how that particular Toon plays. Switching between MMOs is exactly the same, it just requires you to press buttons in a different sequence.
I think most people don't play multiple MMOs not because of a different interface, but because of some other difference. Now it might be the interface, but if it is, it's most likely because their favorite MMO's interface is more intuitive, or more readable, or less intrusive, or more easily modified. But it could be something in the graphics, or the character models, or the animations that makes one MMO more visually appealing than the other. It could be the community or the friends you made that pulls you back to one particular MMO time after time.
I chose WoW over LOTRO because of the friends I had still playing WoW, and because I couldn't get over the robotic running animation of my Hobbit. I liked the way he swam, I liked the LOTRO interface, I liked the Minimap with the quest markers and waypoints, it was a good game, but the running animation was too stiff and unnatural and was like having a glass of water thrown in the face of my immersion. It broke the game for me.
I think most people don't play multiple MMOs not because of a different interface, but because of some other difference. Now it might be the interface, but if it is, it's most likely because their favorite MMO's interface is more intuitive, or more readable, or less intrusive, or more easily modified. But it could be something in the graphics, or the character models, or the animations that makes one MMO more visually appealing than the other. It could be the community or the friends you made that pulls you back to one particular MMO time after time.
I chose WoW over LOTRO because of the friends I had still playing WoW, and because I couldn't get over the robotic running animation of my Hobbit. I liked the way he swam, I liked the LOTRO interface, I liked the Minimap with the quest markers and waypoints, it was a good game, but the running animation was too stiff and unnatural and was like having a glass of water thrown in the face of my immersion. It broke the game for me.
Just like warcraft one didnt sell as well as warcraft two and warcraft two didn't sell as well as three, you have to build up brand recognition among people and keep it positive. Blizzard does this well. Total Annihilation didn't. They made a much better RTS game than Blizzard (has ever made) the first time and then with Kingdoms destroyed their ip with an awful game using the same brand name. (Just an example) Blizzard has done this consistently with Diablo being a decent game and then Diablo 2 being a much better one (for another example) You can't buy brand loyalty with money but you can with hard work and not changing things too much.
I think most people don't play multiple mmo's because its counterproductive. MMO's are all about rewarding you for the time played. Or the difficulty of the encounter if you split your time between multiple games you just fall behind in both.
"but there will always be a lot of people unwilling or unable to learn a new system of controls."
A sad, but true, fact of our society. Depressing, actually. I feel like our culture has become so enamored with its own accomplishments, people just want to sit on what we have so far and coast for the rest of eternity. Hard work, creativity, innovation, learning be damned.
A sad, but true, fact of our society. Depressing, actually. I feel like our culture has become so enamored with its own accomplishments, people just want to sit on what we have so far and coast for the rest of eternity. Hard work, creativity, innovation, learning be damned.
i think you have to assume that blizzard isn't oblivious to this either. As thallian pointed out, their sequals are generally superior to the original games, but they also follow the same basic formula. Although WSC/WOW2/WD may be in the making, I do not forsee it being radically different from WoW. In fact, i expect it to simply be WoW as we know it in a new skin. Why wait around for that when I can play WoW: Middle Earth (aka LOTRO) which is a genre that pwns aliens/hell any day
# posted by : 23/4/08 07:27
: 23/4/08 07:27
A sad, but true, fact of our society. Depressing, actually. I feel like our culture has become so enamored with its own accomplishments, people just want to sit on what we have so far and coast for the rest of eternity. Hard work, creativity, innovation, learning be damned
This is the funniest post I've seen in awhile.
Creativity is never rewarded till its accepted. People who push for change upset the status quo. The status quo then pushes back. The agent of change usually loses the battle. This hasn't changed for all of human history. The moments of change and creativity are usually sparked by war, hunger or those few times when the right leaders come to power and create a good environment for the promotion of creativity.
If you honestly thing our society is worse than the rest of the world or even most of history. Go travel go read. For all its faults Western history is at a higher level for accepting change than ever in history.
But the fact that people want comfortable known things will never change. It's hardwired into our DNA. Change is dangerous and can kill you.
Post a Comment
This is the funniest post I've seen in awhile.
Creativity is never rewarded till its accepted. People who push for change upset the status quo. The status quo then pushes back. The agent of change usually loses the battle. This hasn't changed for all of human history. The moments of change and creativity are usually sparked by war, hunger or those few times when the right leaders come to power and create a good environment for the promotion of creativity.
If you honestly thing our society is worse than the rest of the world or even most of history. Go travel go read. For all its faults Western history is at a higher level for accepting change than ever in history.
But the fact that people want comfortable known things will never change. It's hardwired into our DNA. Change is dangerous and can kill you.
<< Home
