| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (67)

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 10:43AM ElfLove said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"Hardcore players aren't always helpful in reaching out to casuals, he said. Sometimes they grow too cliquish and elitist, pushing away the players whom developers are hoping to rope in. Instead, Schubert wants to see more incentives given to hardcore players to help casuals, inviting them in and strengthening the bonds that serve to form a stronger investment all around."

Now that...that is the absolute truth of the matter. Right there. That man hit the nail directly on the head.

This is what it all boils down to right now, in modern MMOs.

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 3:48PM jslim419 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ElfLove

it is absolutely the truth. however it will never change. someone that becomes a hardcore player automatically thinks themselves superior, and more important to everyone below him/her.

in the same way that a rich person that was once poor will automatically feel superior, and more important to anyone immediately below his/her station.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 4:00PM Neiloch said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@ElfLove I'm all for helping out new people, unfortunately you get people, new or old, who simply aren't good at the game or games in general. There is literally no incentive that could get me to reach out to a poor player.
Reply

Posted: Oct 19th 2011 7:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Neiloch "Sometimes they grow too cliquish and elitist, pushing away the players whom developers are hoping to rope in. "

I'd point out that you just proved his comment.
Everyone sucks on day one. Then again, what's day 85 to you might be day one to someone else. And sure, different people will pick up the skills necessary to playing well at different rates. Finally, some people, whether it's because of a lack of physical reflexes or simply a lack of focus/commitment to being a better player, may never be better than average.

Your question: 'why should I help someone who sucks?' might be its own answer.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 10:45AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Some pretty solid points he makes. I hope developers actually listen to it.

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 10:47AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"Endgame presents a whole new batch of potential pain points, such as a player hitting a progression wall or a feeling of extreme repetition. It's here, Schubert argues, that devs need to give players as much variety as possible so that choice can relieve these instances of pain instead of forcing a confrontation between the pain and that player's investment."

In the days of MUDS, it was at this point (atop the level curve) that the player would be given wizard status and the ability to create some content. There is no current equivalent in any game MMO that I know of, but the first game to give the hardcore player that option, will make some serious money.

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 12:51PM StClair said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Unfortunately, my experience indicates that when given the ability to generate their own content, most MMO players simply use it to farm characters to the level cap as quickly and efficiently as possible, skipping over the rest of the game.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 12:53PM StClair said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
(for clarity, that should be "create farms and power-level characters")
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 1:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@StClair

What is the difference between that though and going out in company made content and farming the same dungeon or three for leveling up? Would you rather have that player sitting in the same spot in a public area farming or would you rather they have an instance that they can poach? In the end the same results, but it keeps that farmer out of the way of folks who may just want to go through the public content without having to deal with 'Farmer X' being in the way.

I used to be very much against instancing, that is until I figured out that it gets the turds out of the way and lets me get to the content I want to play with folks I want to play it with.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 1:58PM StClair said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Frankly, I'd rather they NOT ****ING DO IT (in the games I play), but that's probably a forlorn hope.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 10:55AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I've been both casual and hardcore by these definitions, and I'd agree also that the upfront box cost does play a large point in 'commiting' to a game, and at least giving it a chance. I've played f2p games where I've literally loaded into the world, taken one look at the graphics or the UI and simple logged out and uninstalled. Fickle perhaps, but I'm a consumer and people need to attract/interest me on a superficial basis in order to get me to invest time.

So - by whatever hook they're using, devs do need to keep us intrigued or amused long enough to develop a connection to our character, and the world we're spending time in. WoW did this exceptionally well, with other games still trying to find that elusive formula that leaves them just a little way behind. I've quit and gone back to a few games, like Aion, STO, Conan etc, and WoW is still an on-off relationship after a few years of hardcore.

Star Wars will have a huge expectation to meet, and many hurdles to overcome for an increasingly jaded player base to stay and play. From what I hear of the beta, they may well succeed - and frankly I hope they do, I'm looking forward to some indepth wookie on wookie action.

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 2:37PM DarkWalker said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)
For me, at least, the availability of F2P games do have another effect: it makes me less willing to try games that require an upfront payment.

If I want to try something new, and there are two options - one with upfront payments, one without - I will start downloading the free one and try it, while looking at more info about both on the Internet. If the free option actually satisfies me, I won't even try the one with an upfront cost.

It's why I never recommend WoW to new players. I consider WoW without both WotLK and Cataclysm as just a very expensive trial that, besides an upfront cost, also asks for a subscription. WoW without all expansions, sincerely, feels to me like something inferior to playing most of the hybrid F2P games on the lowest payment tier.

And, if you get all expansions upfront, WoW costs $100 - the only MMO more expensive to start playing would be TOR, and even then only if the player purchases the collector's edition. I can't recommend a game with a $100 upfront cost when other good games in the same genre don't have any kind of upfront payment.

(BTW, it's not that I want to play for free. I have three lifetime subs for MMOs, and I'm currently subscribed to two more - though the sub is already canceled on one of those.)
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 10:56AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Unfortunately, players who think they're hardcore already want to bypass the hand-holding early stages of the game to get to the deeper content immediately."

Why not allow players who wish to bypass the early stage the opportunity to purchase a max level character (With weak gear for that level)?

Blizz did something similar when they introduced the Death knights. You had to have a max toon, then get to start at level 60. The mistake they made was they should have let all classes start at 60 if you already had a max level toon, because Death knights glutted up the 60-80 level instances.

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 12:57PM StClair said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)
The implication of that statement, which I think you're missing, is that some of those players are NOT actually hardcore and NOT really ready for the later steps of the game. And not because they don't have a leveled and geared character, but because they haven't mastered the basic skills, don't understand their class abilities and how they work together with others, etc etc. Give such a player a maxed-out character and you might as well sit him down in the pilot's seat of a 747: "what do all these buttons do?"
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 12:57PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

Because it completely invalidates the entire point of their MMO, which is based on emotionally-driven storytelling. Their model is to get you emotionally invested in the game so that you care what happens. It's why TOR is totally different than any other MMO.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 2:24PM DarkWalker said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

At the same time, one of the big reasons I won't get TOR at launch is due to the combination of choices we can't go back on (mainly AC, which is set to be locked before reaching max level) and a too long leveling process (it's stated that the main questline should take 200 hours to finish).

I'm not sure how many players are like me, but I would rather play a game that lets me explore all options freely than one that asks me to make a new character - and go through the whole story again, something that is bound to bore me to death - just so I can try other facets of the game.

This does not need to be done by letting players create a new character already at max level. GW2 is doing it by making roles flexible (any character can do any role with a respec, and respecs are freely available outside of combat) and by putting a zone-based cap on character power (so a max level character can go to a newbie zone and experience the content at the correct challenge level, instead of basically playing in god mod while there); TSW is doing so by ditching levels and classes altogether (players spend experience to learn skills, so if you raised your character as a sorcerer and wants to play a gunslinger, you just go back and start learning gun skills; plus, lack of levels should make more of the world actually enjoyable to progressed characters).
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 10:59AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Endgame presents a whole new batch of potential pain points, such as a player hitting a progression wall or a feeling of extreme repetition. It's here, Schubert argues, that devs need to give players as much variety as possible so that choice can relieve these instances of pain instead of forcing a confrontation between the pain and that player's investment."

Devs really should start putting as much effort as possible into this. As players, we've grown to figure out leveling, and even if there are twenty zones to level through, we will eventually hit that cap and then be stuck going, "Now what?" Not everybody wants to do daily quests or the same dungeon every night. Repeatable, different content would be amazing.

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 1:23PM Mikx said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

there's an easy solution to this, and its a horizontal endgame. games like Lotro and WoW grow smaller with every expansion. They both have/had a lot of vanilla cap content, but that gets invalidated and trivialized with each expansion and raise in the cap level. the game is all about an endless gear grind. The Horizontal cap is something like gw1, where the level and stats cap never changed with each update. this left you with many more places to play and things to do at level cap/endgame.

If swtor does have a horizontal endgame, that would solve bioware's potential problem in creating post vanilla content for each class story because there would be less reason to create such content in the first place.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 1:55PM Seldra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Mikx
I've heard this a few times before and I agree with it. That's one of the reasons why I either like Leveless or low level cap and stay that way MMO games. I don't want to sound like an Anet fangirl but damnit they just get it.

If the post 2 month dust settles on Swtor looks good I'll be trying it out for a while till GW2 drops. Maybe I'll even stay but if the level cap increases for their first expansion I'll probably be done, I did that on WoW and I only stomached that because I was obsessive compulsive in wanting to keep playing till Arthas showed up.

This goes for GW2 though, if they increase the level cap every expac, I'll be leaving that too. I'm done with treadmills devs.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2011 2:43PM DarkWalker said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Seldra

GW2, while sporting a way higher level cap than GW1, does have an advantage over MMOs with the traditional vertical end-game: each zone and instance will have it's own level/stat cap. Characters will, if needed, be reduced to the power cap for the zone, so they can actually experience all it's content at roughly the expected challenge level.

It's a very nice idea. Should open the whole game as actually fun options to spend some play time.
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW