PDA

View Full Version : Players vs. Devs


Eburk
02-01-2007, 05:36 PM
An interesting Community Spotlight popped up over on MMORPG.com. It examines the aspects of current MMO's and discusses how difficult it must be to please gamers such as ourselves.

MMO players are always complaining that devs aren’t giving us what we want. “You’re releasing too early!”; “You said the game would be out a month ago!”; “Too difficult!”; “Too easy!”; “It’s overwhelming!”; “There isn’t enough to do!”

The article isn't too long, and is a pretty interesting read. It may be found in full here (http://www.mmorpg.com/showFeature.cfm/loadFeature/1098).

Spirit
02-03-2007, 10:20 AM
But what about casual players, who can only put in 2 hours a night vs. some players’ average 6 hours a day? When I get done eating a long, relaxing meal at the all night diner, do I drive by a fast food place and ridicule customers for eating “nub food”?

Heh. The ever popular McDonalds~MMO analogy, with a slight twist. I never thought the cut and thrust of persistent online world debates would leave me so hungry all the time.

Suraknar
02-25-2007, 08:40 PM
Very interesting article...

made me laugh to read this:


And let’s face it, the perfect MMO, from the publishing and production side, is one that everyone pays for and no one plays.

But as far as players go, I am guessing what most everyone wants is simply, FUN, and a fun game does not come around often. Is WOW fun? I played it, and I think that it was fun, and is fun, simply that, all other considerations apart (Easy hard Simple complex etc).

And that I think is the first and foremost factor that makes a good game, good.

After that we can start talking about customer retention customer devellopment and all those financial & marketing thingies that relate to the money making portion of an MMO.

I think we would all agree that the FUN factor is the first most important criteria to all of us as players when we start playing a new MMO, on an individual basis.

After that comes in future considerations, such as Groops, Raids, in-game Communities through Housing, In game Politics and Role Play.

So while I agree with the article that competition amongst Devs is a good thing because it offers more choices to us, on the other hand, I also think that DEVS compete amongst eachother in the wrong areas. One is trying for Ultimate Graphics, another for Simplicity, yet another for Complexity...they all may miss the core of any game in the process, which is the FUN factor.

I know some will debate "Complexity is what makes it fun for me" or some will retorq with "Simplicity is what makes it fun for me". The key here is to strive for a balanced and scallable gameplay, as to be able to offer both complexity and simplicity in the same engine for both types of players.

The biggest problem is between players that play games for fun and players whose fun comes from the satisfaction of successfull competition.

I once asked a friend of mine, "have you ever played ROME:Total War? Did you like that Game? Myself I love it." his answer is what made me stand back and think about this, his answer was, "Oh I played and beat that game".

I was left speachless...I mean, what if I had asked, "Have you ever played Baseball? Did you like hat game?"...would he have answered "i beat that game?"...

i think games are meant to be played, not beaten. Because if your only satisfaction is to beat agame, then you will never be interested in replaying that game.

And MMO's are all about replaying that same game, hence fun, is a crucial factor in them, and the tools they offer so that the players can expand their individual fun to new leves such as sharing that fun with others, is what insures customer retention aswell as a healthy expansion of new players, when they want to invite their friends in sharing that fun.

We play MMO's to share the fun with others, we dont play MMO's to "beat" the engine or the AI. There is other genre of games out there that are far more suitable for that individual goal to beat the engine. And if Devs of MMO's start understanding this as werll as their players, maybe we would have lot less of the apparent "complaints". It wont happen by itself, it also requires a different approach on how MMO's are marketed.

Most are marketed like Solo games! "A world where You can become a Champion, a King or a Knight", "Immortality is yours! Take it!"...emphasising individual achievement, when in reality MMO's are about Groop achievements and interaction.

Maybe because even to the Devs this is a new kind of game, even to DEVS it hasnt completelly sank in what this kind of genre of games is, and many are striving to improve on the formulae and make it successfull.

WOW, was successfull on the first part, FUN factor, who will be able to offer same fun and add to it long term shared fun now?As well as market it as such, Is the real question.

ammie
03-23-2007, 08:25 AM
Quote:
For players, the perfect video game would be one where we could invest as much time as we would like and keep current with content, yet still be competitive. It would have no subscription fee, the best graphics, frequent updates, free expansions, character customization, no lag, lots of space but it wouldn’t feel empty (i.e. population would be spread out). You could progress via large-scale wars, raid content, group content, solo content, crafting, and all this with a perfectly crafted weather and season system, and NPC AI.


Something tells me even a game such as this would have its fair share of flamers. Flaming has become almost a game itself, in the "my pen is mightier than your pen" kind of way. Of course anonymity and potent androgenic hormones help this along greatly.

I fear no matter what it will be hard for devs to win, after all flaming is a game you can play for free! :D

Interesting article though, thanks for posting :p