Author Archives: Abalieno

Bauchelain and Korbal Broach – The Collected Stories – Steven Erikson

by | Leave a comment

This book collects at a (relatively) accessible price the three novellas that PS Publishing published separately. I didn’t know what to expect, how much they were connected to the bigger series, how relevant. If a significant effort with its own purpose or just a diversion intended for the most passionate readers who won’t miss even the minor works. Well, I don’t even know where to start with the praises because this isn’t simply a “worthy” read compared to the rest of the books, but may be as well the finest writing Erikson ever achieved. And by a good margin.

The most impressive achievement is how the writing style changes and adapts to the different form. It is the same Erikson, with the multitude of characters and crazy ideas and inventions at every page, but at the same time it feels as if the constraints to the short form fueled the already wild creativity. The stories and characters seem explode out of the pages, unrestrained. The more they are squeezed tight, the more they come alive and claiming their space. Single sentences that read like poetry and filled with meaning on multiple levels.

Not only Erikson is at ease with the short form, he excels, shines in it. He understands it fully and carves out all the potential there is. It’s not the wild creativity, the crazy characters, the usual convergences that accelerate to a mad rush toward the end. It’s not in the content itself (that has always been seen as THE strong point), it’s in the execution. Here Erikson shows sheer talent. It oozes out of the page. From the first page. From a writer who’s used to publish once a year books with more than a thousand of pages you expect a writing style that is merely functional. Something quick and cheap that gets the job done. Well, here the real protagonist is the writing itself. It’s Erikson at his very best (or worst for some detractors), talking right at the reader in this meta-narrative game:

“But what do we know? We’re no brush-stroked arched brow over cold, avid eye, oh no. We’re just the listeners, wading through some ponce’s psychological trauma as the idiot stares into a mirror all love/hate all masturbatory up’n’down and it’s us who when the time comes -comes, hah- who are meant to gasp and twist pelvic in linguistic ecstasy.”

He’s “loose” and highly pretentious. Condensed, focused awesome. Everything that makes the readers love or hate him with a passion.

I used to say that from my point of view he is among “traditional” fantasy writers the one with the most “literary” intent. For these novellas this intent is shown prominently, but not limited to this show-off I’m celebrating. There are a number of memorable characters, plot twists and plenty of humor. Even if the writing has the predominant role, it doesn’t overshadow or gets in the way of the fun of the more traditional elements. “Over the top”, excessive and raving indeed. But still a masterful execution from every point of view.

It was a pleasure. Not just about what is written, but how it is written. I developed a familiarity with it, absorbed some of it as if it were mine. I really couldn’t ask more.

Blood Follows

The novels are put in the book in the chronological order of the plot, but the second was actually written and published last. This is interesting to consider because it proves again Erikson’s growth as a writer. There’s a steady, definite improvement between the three novellas in the order they were written, so with the second representing the real peak.

With the first one Erikson seems to take confidence with the new format. He shows sparks of genius but it’s still the beginning of a journey. He sets the foundation, starts to present the characters and develop the style (along some recurring habits and quibbles of the characters) that he will fully exploit later. Here he shows an economy of writing compared to the other novels, starts to play with the words to look for an intended effect, using them more for what they evocate than their explicit meaning. Showing a contagious love for the language that shares the similar beauty and lure of poetry.

There are a few memorable scenes, like the very first encounter between Bauchelain and Emancipor Reese and a myriad of details are presented that will only make sense later, following a similar trend of the main series. The first novel is also the one more connected to the Malazan world. The relatively familiar setting isn’t a weight. There are a number of interesting informations and perspectives, but they are used as “flavor”, not as key points.

The tone is far from the realistic one used in the main series. There is still a bleak and dark atmosphere but no restraints for the humorous and excessive side of things. Characters are caricatures, exaggerated in their traits, clever and naive at the same time. In some ways he reminded me more of Abercrombie here, with scenes intended both to to give personality to the characters and to be fun in their own way. Circumscribed situations with their own (often comic) purpose, while also driving the plot.

Maybe it’s the reason why I thought the end was not completely satisfying. With so much focus on the “performance” itself, what was being performed didn’t have the best denouement possible. This worried me since also for book 1 and 2 in the main series I was partially deluded by the ending. Maybe I really had a problem with the way Erikson ended his stories. The reasons of the disappointment were due mainly to the fact that some plot threads and characters seemed to pass by without a definite aim. Or better, the novella was so rich that it built a number of expectations that lead nowhere by the end of it. There were characters and plot threads that ultimately revealed to be dead ends, or still not used fully or significant enough for the potential I saw in them. As if I saw more in what was hinted than what revealed to be the real intent.

Still, the journey was fun and I developed a lasting sympathy and fondness for the characters that is only comparable, again, to what I felt for Abercrombie’s characters.

The Lees of Laughter’s End

It represents the high peak and the one case where I can say: there are no flaws.

100 pages of condensed AWESOME. Everything and then more happens, including the assault of a god. The ending is a mad dash in typical “convergence” style, only this time the convergence all starts and ends in the limited space of a ship. You’ll be amazed at how many stories tangle there, without even an ounce of the confusion that sometimes can be found in the main series. It’s all sleek, cleverly assembled. It’s a celebration of all things Erikson.

This time all the expectations built along the way were fully realized and even surpassed. The ending is great and fitting, without leaving that feel of incompleteness. In those 100 pages he sets up the scene and wraps it up perfectly.

He even conjures an external narrator in the form of a child and her old mother, who live completely alone in the crows’ nest of the ship and observe from far away everything below. They become at times the narrators of the story, some kind of abstract, symbolic figures, playing with different tones and registers, only to have their own patterns broken in some incredible way. Nothing is safe, not even an omniscient narrator.

This sent chills down my spine and one case where Erikson surpasses Gene Wolfe at his own game. It happens in a few pages and yet is extremely powerful and not at all vague. It plays with your expectations and breaks them, turn them on their head. Whatever you take a granted, breaks apart. And then again and again.

The Healthy Dead

Erikson meets Pratchett. This novella reads like satire, with plenty of wit and paradoxical situations.

It is the least “Malazan” of the three and also the one more “over the top”. It even uses some fantastic elements that do not seem to fit or belong perfectly to the world. Its explicit intent is also more driven and specific. It isn’t “loose” like the others, it doesn’t follow its own pattern and consistence. To understand it you need to draw parallels with our “modernity”. It’s fantasy fiction but working only in direct contact with what we live every day, which is what the satire is supposed to do with its metaphorical value. This purpose is already manifest in the disclaimer in the first page (and in those quotes I extrapolated):

Warning to lifestyle fascist everywhere. Don’t read this or you’ll go blind.

The novella brings to the front a different style. How to convey the most disparate thoughts through a story made as a vehicle. The plot and characters, including our protagonists, aren’t here the ultimate destination, they are means to an end.

It also marks a structural difference compared to the more usual worldbuilding. The majority of fantasy writers shape a world around the story, so that the world is functional to the story, or the intent behind it. Erikson instead shapes his world as a frame that can contain all possible stories. It’s a “world” in the true sense because it’s not one-directional.

The world is the frame, the characters are his “voices” and the stories his meaning.

But even if in this case he has a definite purpose and thesis he wants to prove, despite the whole novella pivots around “expedients”, it’s still a gorgeous, utterly fun read. The usual trio feels almost out of place at the beginning, as if those Malazan characters finished into a different, impossible world. But that’s also what fuels it all and makes those characters even more appropriate. Both Bauchelain and Emancipor become perfect vehicles for the message as if they were created and meant just for it. And, more, they came out even richer.

—
If you expect these novellas to integrate the main series and say something vital you’ll be disappointed. If you expect them to be throwaway little-efforts, forgettable digressions, you are also absolutely, terribly wrong. This book swiped away all the reservations and doubts I had of Erikson as a writer. He may show up and lows throughout the whole main series, but I am now sure he has an indubitable talent. As James Barclay put it in the introduction to the second novella:

The Lees of Laughter’s End is a splendidly outrageous offering. It is utterly fearless and compelling. Most of all, it is hugely entertaining. Erikson in this mood is a joy to read.

The big problem I have now is that while reading the novellas I couldn’t wait to move onto Memories of Ice, considered Erikson’s masterpiece. Now that I’m 200 pages into Memories of Ice I feel… nostalgic. I’m developing a serious case of withdrawal from the novellas and the 1100 pages of this new book aren’t helping much. I’m addicted to those novellas, to the wit, the superb writing style, the memorable characters. So every time I sit down to read the new book I actually take in my hands the novellas and read some random pages. It’s like being in deeply love with someone of whom you’ve left just a photo.

The Healthy Dead quotes

by | Leave a comment

A few fantastic quotes from “The Healthy Dead”, the last of Erikson’s novellas. Next is the review of all three.

‘Ah, Mister Reese, I gather you still do not understand the threat this king poses to such creatures as you and I.’
‘Well, frankly, no, I don’t, Master. As you say.’
‘I must perforce make the linkage plain, of sufficient simplicity to permit your uneducated mind to grasp all manners of significance. Desire for goodness, Mister Reese, leads to earnestness. Earnestness in turn leads to sanctimonious selfrighteousness, which breeds intolerance, upon which harsh judgment quickly follows, yielding dire punishment, inflicting general terror and paranoia, eventually culminating in revolt, leading to chaos, then dissolution, and thus, the end of civilisation.’ He slowly turned, looked down upon Emancipor. ‘And we are creatures dependent upon civilisation. It is the only environment in which we can thrive.’
Emancipor frowned. ‘The desire for goodness leads to the end of civilisation?’
‘Precisely, Mister Reese.’
‘But if the principal aim is to achieve good living and health among the populace, what is the harm in that?’
Bauchelain sighed. ‘Very well, I shall try again. Good living and health, as you say, yielding well being. But well being is a contextual notion, a relative notion. Perceived benefits are measured by way of contrast. In any case, the result is smugness, and from that an overwhelming desire to deliver conformity among those perceived as less pure, less fortunate–the unenlightened, if you will. But conformity leads to ennui, and then indifference. From indifference, Mister Reese, dissolution follows as a natural course, and with it, once again, the end of civilisation.’
‘All right all right, Master, we are faced with the noble task of confounding the end of civilisation.’
‘Well said, Mister Reese. I admit I find the ethical aspects of our mission surprisingly… refreshing.’

The man’s voice came closer. ‘Situation? Situations are frowned upon, Storkul Purge. Even a low-ranking Well Knight such as you must know this.’
‘I endeavour to promulgate conformity at every turn, Oh Purest of the Paladins.’
‘And well you should, lest by your actions you prove singular or, Lady forgive us, unique. You do not deem yourself unique, do you, Storkul Purge?’
Her voice was suddenly small. ‘Of course not. The purity of my innate mediocrity is absolute, Purest. Of that I can assure you.’

Emancipor winced, overwhelmed by a flood of guilt. ‘Can there be no second chance, Paladin?’
‘Ah, you are a saint indeed, to voice such sentiment. The answer is no, there cannot. The very notion of fallibility was invented to absolve mortals of responsibility. We can be perfect, and you can see true perfection walking here at your side.’
‘You have achieved perfection?’
‘I have. I am. And to dispute that truth is to reveal your own imperfection.’

‘It would seem,’ Bauchelain said as he led the others through the gateway, ‘that much of the present fabric of comportment has frayed in your city, King Necrotus, nay, torn asunder, and none of it through my doing. I am pleased to discover said evidence of my own cherished beliefs.’
‘What?’ Storkul Purge demanded drunkenly, ‘are you talking ’bout?’
‘Why to transform the metaphor, that piety is but the thinnest patina, fashioned sufficiently opaque to disguise the true nature of our kin, yet brittle thin nonetheless.’

The subsequent explosion was heard and felt by every citizen of Quaint, and those crews out in the bay, throwing four-finned fish from their nets, looked up in time to see the skyward pitching fireball and at least three oxen cart-wheeling above the city, before the monument of Singe dropped from sight and flames lit the dust clouds a gaudy orange.

A glance at the future

by | Leave a comment

Let’s assume for a moment that the discussion at F13 was useful and that Mark Jacobs is really determined to make Open RvR a substantial part of the game to the point that a majority of players move from Scenarios to the open world as their overall preference.

The second this happens players will start to heavily complain on two fronts:
1- The clients lags too much and zerg battles are unfun.
2- Factions unbalance makes battles pointless and frustrating in certain cases.

This is a kind of overall trend: as you fix a problem, there’s another that takes its place next on the chain. You made some progress, but still far from having solved the whole situation.

The consequences of those problems are kind of obvious:
1- Work on the client should never stop because it’s still far from having an optimal performance.
2- Faction unbalances need to be eased through a number of solutions, but in any case there should be incentives so that the underdog faction is still encouraged to participate even in the most critical situation.

For example counting the number of players in a RvR Lake for each faction and scaling appropriately the rewards.

Asymmetric objectives and rewards that adapt to the real possibilities of one realm against the other.

EDIT:
Just noticed. Doing it this way is NOT GOOD.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

If we believe in the Utopia…

by | Leave a comment

I’m currently banned from F13 as well but don’t feel any outrage since the intent was to “maximize” the effect of Mark Jacobs short attention span. With Shild incessantly trying to engrave in Mark Jacobs mind how the bonuses for Open RvR and faster leveling CAN’T be enough.

In that whole thread I wasn’t able to reply but they voiced my own thoughts, gripes and hopes for the game rather well. So I’m happy the descussion took place even if I wasn’t allowed to contribute.

There is one poster to whom I look with some affection. He has the candor and hope that I had long time ago, and explains things rather well:

I think the thing I’m looking for, which I’ve written about, is a lead developer for a MMOG who recognizes the peculiar character of their job in relationship to the customer base. I don’t think there is an easily comparable service industry. You’re the public representative of a team of people who combine the roles of political rulers, gods, authors, customer service, and seller of goods in relationship to their players/customers/citizens. I don’t really think any developer has understood how that melange of roles and responsibilities ought to impact how and when they talk about their gameworld. Raph probably gets closest to understanding what this means and crafting a public voice to go with it.

Blizzard solves this problem largely by hiding the decision-making layer of their live management away entirely, and leaving it almost entirely to an intermediary layer of customer service representatives to speak on behalf of the gameworld sovereigns to the playerbase. I don’t think that’s the right way to go, but they stick to it with some consistency and it functions fairly well as a result. If you think in terms of political sovereignty, it’s rather like a mysterious kind of royalty who appears only in glimpses in public, with decisions being shrouded behind layers of pomp and circumstance in the royal court. They do ok with this approach largely because they deliver a very polished, reliable product.

I don’t think you have that luxury if you want to hold steady at 500k subs, not the least because Blizzard also is pretty damn smart about undercutting competition in all sorts of ways, including public jabs designed to put competitors off their feed. But the public voice you’ve built up over the years isn’t a consistent alternative that will create loyalty in players through rough patches in the development of a game. I think a couple of other people have used this analogy, but I hear too much Smedley in some of what you say–too much promotion, too much all-is-well, too much Oval Office press secretary.

I think a consistent alternative to Blizzard’s remote, chilly inaccessibility is to take people inside the structure of your decision-making, to create a transparent kind of affect, to go for sustained honesty. I don’t think a single MMOG has helped its retention rates by saying, “All is basically well! We hear your concerns, and believe me, we take them seriously! Great things are coming, and great things have already come!” It just doesn’t work with your audience. They’ve usually played a lot of these things, they’re often pretty savvy about design issues.

This isn’t just about saying, “Players are right! I am sorry! We suck!”, either. Taking people inside the process of decision-making is about laying out the issues clearly, and not ceding to players your judgment about the right way to go on some of the tougher issues. On the RvR lakes, for example, you could say, “Ok, here’s what we’re thinking. We can tweak this and that in the short-term and see what works better. Our *design goal* is XYZ for those lakes. But we can’t do some of the things you’re suggesting, either because they are impossible given our resource limitations or our code base, or because we think they’re honestly not good ideas.” Etc. Really, almost no one has taken this approach, in part because they don’t want to demoralize their own team by appearing to criticize them in public. Or, if I can be brutal, because at least some MMOG designers don’t understand the problems and issues in MMOGs half as well as some of their most experienced players. I think you understand well enough, so why not work your way towards transparency, inclusion, straight-talking honesty?

What have you got to lose? The current approach to communication is really not going to get you over the problems I see you having *very soon*. I know I’m fairly close to unsubbing myself now that I feel I’ve seen most of the interesting issues that Warhammer poses for the MMOG form and its future. I generally find that in terms of whether I’m having fun or not in a MMOG, I’m right about where the consensus judgment falls–when I’ve unsubbed, I’m usually in the middle of a wave of unsubbing.

Indeed. If only I didn’t learn that what makes sense doesn’t usually get realized. Life would be too easy.

One impression I get is as if Mark Jacobs is the only one making the game. As if it’s him and then just slaves that execute what he wants done. He’s the president, comments the game design and even looks around the boards to find out bugs and then instructs the team so they get fixed.

As if no game can exist outside of him. As if nothing works if he’s not there poking at the cogs.

What happened to the rest of the team? It’s as if they don’t exist and Mark Jacobs did everything on his own. As if nothing in the game can happen without Mark’s seal of approval.

No one in the team has any opinions? No one of them plays the game, is aware of bugs, has plans on how to improve things? Is it a team of zombies? BRAAAAINS?

On the Vault, in the occasion of that ridiculously underestimated bonus to conquering keeps in ORVR, I wrote:

If it’s true that you are “working on it” in a substantial way, then TALK WITH THE PLAYERS. Don’t just push these ridiculous fixes that fix nothing at all and just (legitimately) sour the players. Giving 2000 xp for taking a keep isn’t an “improvement”, it’s a joke. If you are REALLY doing something more radical that needs coding then YOU HAVE to talk to the players, explain what you are doing and opening a discussion so that players can actually see where you are going and even anticipate the shortcomings (since it seems you alone can’t figure them out).

Bring those goddamned designers out. Make them explain what they are doing and why. Make them explain what they AREN’T doing, and why.

It is entirely a matter of being in touch with the game and then communicating honestly with the players.

No one asks the impossible, but it’s crucial that we agree on some basic points. Shild insisted in every way possible: there ain’t no risk of “enough”. You can’t overshoot.

What is needed is only the commitment and a more direct dialogue with the community. Not for a few hours or a couple of weeks. But in the longer term. What happened in that F13 thread should become the NORM.

Mark Jacobs is doing this alone now. As if he has the burden of the whole game on his shoulders. My esteem for him goes up when he shows he cares and seems interested in a serious, not superficial confrontation. The problem is that this dialogue shouldn’t stop here but should be instead intensified and improved in the longer term.

It should involve members of the team outside Mark Jacobs himself. This needs to be a significant part of the process in the everyday life of the project and not a sporadic, rare event happening just because Mark Jacobs decided to grant us some of his precious time.

And, to conclude, from the same F13 poster an insightful commentary on the reasons why PvE in Warhammer sucks.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

A friendly reminder

by | Leave a comment

The things I post on this blog are supposed to stay in the blog.

Whoever posts links to here or pasting excerpts is doing it without my consensus or approvation.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Mark, you are out of your fucking mind, go sit down and relax

by | 2 Comments

GODDAMNIT.

DO NOT FUCKING LOCK THREADS ON THE VAULT. Why Mark Jacobs is allowed to bash me freely and I’m not allowed to defend myself?

This is what I was trying to post before the thread was locked.

—
Haha, what amuses me is that no matter if I post under HRose or Abalieno, people still misspell my name ;)

he spent years attacking me personally whenever he could.

Oh please, you know it is false and my “attacks” have always been motivated. I’ve criticized your work, often harshly and inappropriately, sure, but not to bash the man outside his public role. I don’t know you personally and I don’t judge you personally.

He also had a tendency to create new accounts and post where I posted (like WHA in the beginning).

This is UTTERLY false. There isn’t one case you can name.

I post on three forums in total if you include this one (the Valut). F13 and Quarter To Three are the other two, and in both cases I was there before you (on F13 you registered first because developers were invited before the forums opened to everyone else, and I was there all along since Waterthread).

You
Me

If with WHA you intend Warhammer Alliance then either you’re lying or mistaking me for someone else as I never had an account over there.

Really, I don’t know whether you’re trolling me (only to then accuse me of trolling you) or truly believe what you said. I have absolutely nothing personal against you nor I care on which forums you post. Recently I’ve bashed in a much harsher way Kalgan from Blizzard. Not because once again I have personal issues with him but solely because of game design. You don’t get special treatment, I only happen to play your game and so have something to write about it. In my usual style.

If I was fanatically egocentric then I’d think that *YOU* chase and stalk me around. But instead I’m not and simply think that you misunderstand what I write, as it often happens.

Think again if you think I’m obsessed with your persona. I’m just a passionate player who once had game design aspirations.

Nothing else.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

This is not 2001

by | Leave a comment

I noticed this comment from Mark Jacobs:

No successful MMORPG hit its peak within the first year, let alone the first month and that’s the approach we’re taking with WAR.

Age of Conan hit its peak within the first month.

This is not 2001, the market radically changed and the same for the players’ trends. Subscription numbers are much more fluid now and “loyal” fans much rarer. Things happen more quickly. You need to be ready of losing substantial numbers as to see them coming back.

I’ll point to this 2007 quote for something more up-to-date:

In online games beyond the boutique scale, you are #1 or you are Everyone Else.

“#1” obeys certain rules that I won’t get into, but stability-to-growth becomes easier and you’re far more protected from loss, barring extreme triggers.

For “Everyone Else,” the converse is true: You are generally in a net state of subtraction over time. It’s just a matter of the rate. It takes extreme triggers to cause stability or gain.

For an MMO in the Everyone Else category, overall stability is actually a significant victory.

With WotLK coming next month stability for Warhammer would be already an impressive achievement. If they expect a growth between now and December then I believe they are set for a harsh surprise.

The real match starts with the next year. Who will succeed is the one who reacts more promptly and effectively. Blizzard has a history of being really slow. Mythic has the resources and skills to become a serious competitor but it is crucial that they arrive at that point with a game that is in the best shape as possible. And this implies not being scared of addressing problems at the root. It is going to be like a fencing duel with plenty of back and forth. The steady and slow growth or decline? Is a thing of the past.

WotLK is a storm that will happen soon but that will also pass. The same “window” that opened in September for the potential success of Warhammer, will likely open again with the next year, when the players will start to lose some interest in the other game.

It remains to be seen in what state Warhammer will be at that point.

—
EDIT: This one explains it better:

so far, they’re showing that they have no idea how to apply the right kinds of bandaid fixes. They’re undershooting everything with the understanding that some time in the future they can add another fix, whereas they really need to be overshooting their solutions because WotLK is almost here and they really need to cement their player base. The fact of the matter is, with a MMO a large part of it is getting the start right. If your grindy, imbalanced, life-sucking game gets a bad rep (ala Vanguard) no one will want anything to do with it. The key for WAR is to be clearly better than WoW at some stuff (which it is, RvR) and not much worse than WoW at other stuff (everything else, which sadly it isn’t). Otherwise your game gets a clownshoes rep, a la AoC. Who of us is playing that one atm? Hmm?

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

My trust in Mythic just went down by a lot

by | 1 Comment

For Mark Jacobs I’ll likely be in the trolls group but at least I’ll motivate my reaction.

I’m unimpressed and a bit deluded by his state of the game. It’s purely marketing and not even good at it.

I’m a cynic and expected very little, but this doesn’t mean that I don’t always hope to be disproved.

What I hoped from Mythic: an honest overall look at the game, admitting all the main problems and issues the game is presenting and explain, along with an approximate time table, what they are doing to address them. I wanted this and nothing else.

What I got: a bleached proclaim of success and self-praise that gave me the impression that they are again out of touch with the game. And the announce of more content.

Why this is wrong: you can’t announce new content when the majority of content you ALREADY have is either broken or ignored.

That’s it. That’s what originates all that is wrong in that letter.

Did you see any mention of Public Quests not working as intended and them doing something at the root? Did you see a mention of tweaks and changes to the Scenarios to make them more playable and equally rewarding? Did you see anything concrete and convincing about what they want to do with Open RvR? Did you see mention of a gentler leveling curve? Did you see mention of adding the required NPCs the all the hubs and improving the horrid travel time sinks?

Nope, but we got the announce of new classes, dungeons, quests. Adding a myriad of new problems on top of those we have already. The only positive point is that they are working on performance, that, I agree, should be their very top priority effort as they are way behind.

My opinion is that all the main problems that Warhammer has at the moment are structural and systemic. All the changes MJ announced are just layers added on top of a weak foundation. This is how you build another castle of cards.

We need mention of what they concretely want to do about Open RvR. I don’t know what’s the point of adding an “influence” system for gear as renown gear already has that function in the game. Things in RvR needs unification, not being duplicated and dispersed. Between city-raids, keeps, keeps lords, PvE raids, renown gear and armor sets unlocks there are PLENTY of ways to get gear. Adding more systems that overlap each other only makes the game more confusing.

So I wait. A month passed and Open RvR, admittedly the core of the game, is dead, Public Quests are only good for grinding influence, the level curve is painfully slow and nothing is being done to improve the gameplay in the Scenarios.

This 1.1 patch will take two months to make.

GODDAMNIT. If you wanted to announce new content at least you could have announced some decent textures for those white cloaks, or more visual variety for the gear in the first tiers.

Or a better wharf mount in place of that good-on-paper but horridly executed helicopter that glides unrealistically one inch above the ground.

Please stop working on new shit and fix what you already have. There’s PLENTY to keep everyone busy. Programmers, artists, designers, sound engineers, server programmers and whatever else fits in.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Warhammer: post-launch state of the game

by | 1 Comment

I don’t need to wait Friday to read Mark Jacobs’ own.

Putting aside client performance and stability for once, even if it should remain the very first-priority effort, I’ll focus on the gameplay. Class balance is also an argument on its own that I won’t comment here.

I said before, and repeat again, that Warhammer’s biggest strength is in the variety of gameplay it offers. This variety comes in four different flavours: straight PvE quests, Public Quests, Scenarios and Open RvR.

The game is in the best shape when these four systems are always accessible and equally rewarding (or comparably rewarding). All four of them.

Removing Scenarios doesn’t make a better game, it’s the wrong solution to a problem. Reducing the number of scenarios also doesn’t make a better game since it reduces once again the variety. The main reason why everyone says the game is an awful grind is because the game entered a dead end where there’s scenarios and just scenarios. It’s repetitive, and repetitive is “grind”. And grind means that you worship your exp bar. And worshiping your exp bar means that you aren’t having fun and just hope to reach the “promise of a different end-game”.

This is the state of the four gameplay paths coming from my personal experience in the game and what I read in other players’ feedback:

– PvE Quests yield crap experience, especially in Tier 3 and 4 (or so I read)
– PQs don’t have enough players and bag loot should be improved
– Scenarios outbalance everything else, but should be balanced between each other to be more equal in rewards
– Open PvP is non existent and with piss poor rewards

PvE Quests
I don’t have the data, but I think that the experience curve throughout all the levels should be improved. Things should scale more uniformly and quests, scenarios, PQs, direct kills, these all should scale with the levels following a smooth, predictable curve. Instead I read reports that quests yield less and less experience and something similar happens for scenarios too. The escalation of level requirements isn’t perceived as smooth, and I’m willingly to trust the feedback I read on this.

I don’t have any experience in Tier 3 so I can’t comment the details. For sure the solution is NOT to add repeatable quests to fill the gaps. If the are gaps they need to be removed entirely, not just bridged with fluff. In any case it’s a problem of boosting or decreasing the xp rewards so that even the normal quests make your experience bar move perceptibly.

Public Quests
Big issue. Problems coming from different aspects that aren’t easily fixable without significant coding efforts. Difficulty scaling, to begin with.

The real reason why Mythic is scared about making leveling faster is because the faster the players move to the cap, the quicker the tiers will depopulate. The quicker the tiers depopulate, the less fun the experience for new players. The less fun the experience of new players, the smaller the influx of new subscriptions to the game. With less players sticking, the game has no future.

Right now for Mythic is crucial that the first tiers are vibrant with activity. The band-aid they have for this is to keep the leveling so slow that people “pool” in the tiers for longer, maybe even encouraging them to create alts more than pushing to the cap.

The real problem is that no matter how slow the leveling speed, these problems will arise anyway. The depopulation of the tiers is the big thorn in the game’s side. It WILL happen. Ignoring it now will just make things worse later. It starts affecting mostly the PQs, but later will even affect Scenarios. It’s a game-breaking problem.

There’s only one effective solution, and I’ll point where I discussed it.

Scenarios
I believe that the Scenarios should be reworked even in level design, but I won’t go in the details. For sure they need to add lightmaps and avoid fights in the dark. Not fun, especially when it’s so easy to get stuck everywhere. For this kind of gameplay the zone design shouldn’t get in the way, it should ease the fight. Less stupid obstacles and more visibility, thanks.

Secondly, all the Scenarios in a tier need to be equally rewarding. Make an average of time each required, then compensate the differences through bigger or smaller rewards for completing one.

Open RvR
To begin with: travel sucks. Travel time-sinks have to go completely. Every hub, big or small, should have all the necessary NPCs. Then I’d add at least two flight masters for each zone, one closer to a PvE hub, the other to the RvR Lake warcamp.

Once travel between PvE and RvR Lakes is simpler, I’d go with the following plan:

– Players take a Battlefield Objective (or keep) and cap it (worth nothing for now). Guilds can put a banner on the BO and stack benefits.
– For the time the BO is being actively defended (meaning there are real players in its proximity) it “blinks” on the map for all the players in the zone, for both factions. So that all players know that there’s activity there.
– All the kills (both defenders and attackers) that happen within a decently wide radius from the BO starts to be worth more points (XP, renown). A bonus that should be slightly higher for defenders, to encourage defense.
– For all the kills that defenders manage, some points go into a “bounty pool” in the BO. The more kills, the more this pool increases. I’d also make the BO generate some of these points even if no one is around, so that if left untouched for a lot of hours it actually start to be worth something anyway.
– This means that the longer it takes to conquer the BO, the biggest is going to be the reward, as it increases with the time and makes the prize progressively juicier.
– In order to “collect” these points the attackers need to conquer the objective themselves and “cash” the reward.

This has mainly three effects:
1- The BO works like a magnet, like a natural convergence since the direct kills are worth a lot more when they are closer to the objective. This makes the players know where to go and the action is focused on a smaller area (those who played Planetside know what I mean). This reduces the problem of RvR lakes being too dispersive.
2- The bounty points increase over time, so growing to a level that will likely motivate the other faction to take action. It will also move the “hot” RvR area around instead of repeating what happened with “Emain” in DAoC. It puts variety in the system.
3- It avoids exploits and disruptive behaviors. Points in this system come from direct kills. Handing out a lot of points for just conquering a keep, instead, encourages the factions to just trade the objective instead of fighting for it. It teaches them to AVOID the fight to maximize the reward (we saw some of this in WoW). My system instead focuses on the fight itself. It motivates it and makes sure it is rewarding since it promotes and rewards the activity.

This is how I would fix Open RvR. Some of those mechanics existed in some form in DAoC, but were never implemented in a way they mattered.

Mark Jacobs says:

Look, it’s really very simple and I’ve said this more than once. This is not 2001 and we are not going to blithely make changes to our game just because some people think that we are wrong before they even get a chance to see the changes in action or worse, just because we are getting yelled at by a very vocal minority. We’ll gather the data, look at all the feedback and then make a decision. If we’re wrong, we’ll correct the decision but at least this time we have all the data we need to make the right call and we are not getting swayed either by just the loud voices or a few wrong-headed individuals. So, if you feel the need to talk about canceling in these threads, of course you have that right. Just don’t think that we are going to react to it the same way we might have at times back in 2001, we need to be smarter and react more carefully than that.

Mark Jacobs apparently believes that these complaints about Open RvR are due to “loud voices or a few wrong-headed individuals”.

To what did they overreact in 2001 that made them so scared today? Class issues, maybe. Doing nothing in regards to huge unbalances for a long time, keeping specs completely broken. And then suddenly turning things on their heads. This happened. Right now there are no signs of change. Class issues are still unaddressed and no one knows if when the changes will come they will be searing.

Class issues aside, what I remember from Mythic is not overreacting, but doing very little, too late and never at the root of the problem. How is this different today? As with ToA, they risk to fix things when it’s too late, or never in a radical way. Even at that time Mythic believed that the complaints against ToA came from a “vocal minority” and it take them a long time to acknowledge that this “vocal minority” spoke in regards of the majority. When they did, it was too late.

History repeats, no matter how hard they try to persuade players of the contrary. No matter how much I hope something really changed.

DAoC with the time became more and more a game just about specialized 8vs8 or arranged matches between guilds. The keep battles and sieges became a rarity. For a very long time I was part of the “vocal minority” who pleaded Mythic to bring the “real” RvR back to when the realm was fighting together and the battles pivoted around keeps instead of away from them to avoid interferences.

They did nothing for a long time and when they started adding some rewards to conquering a keep, these rewards were ridiculously low. Does it sound familiar? This is way too similar to what is happening now in regards to Scenarios and Open RvR.

The same happened again with the “Catacombs” expansion. They added private instances that were merely a corridor populated with a row of skeletons. It was STUPID. Ridiculously pointless and dull.

But everyone continued to do them and just them. Over and over and over. Why? Because they gave by far the most experience points.

Mythic had other instanced dungeons that provided a lot more variety and depth of gameplay, also more linked to the various zones. They were completely deserted. No players at all. Why? Because they couldn’t even compare to the fast rewards of the private instances. For a long time I tried to persuade Mythic to make these other dungeons comparably attractive. They never did.

History repeats.

I know I sound like the stereotypical soured player, but I’ve seen these things happening. Over and over. And now I don’t see any sign that they actually learned from mistakes. They say they did, but this isn’t reflected by their actions. I continue to see the same mistakes repeated. The exact same mistakes.

I remember reading an old post from Ubiq who described similar patterns:

In Star Wars Galaxies, I remember, the rewards for killing the flying bat things were better than for everything else (probably had something to do with me being a Master Armorsmith). So because I could choose my own randomly generated quests, I chose the flying bat thing quests every time. Man, I got so sick of killing those, but all of the other content may as well not have existed.

It bears pointing out that most MMOs, rather inadvertently, end up shrinking their own content down in some way. Players are incredibly efficient at finding the fastest way to advance, and designers sometimes accidentally make design and balance decisions that help this along.

What Ubiq describes here is what it happens with Warhammer today. Players do scenarios and just scenarios, everything else may as well not exist at all. They shrunk their game to just repetitive deathmatches. This is what originated the “grind” the players are feeling. The repetition. The dullness.

Bringing back the variety I talked at the beginning would already help to substantially reduce the “grind” even without touching the levelling curve. But Mythic is scared even to touch the smallest thing, because their “metrics” tell them how much fun players are having in Scenarios. The same metrics that told them how fun were the 8vs8 matches or those stupid task dungeons in DAoC.

Mark Jacobs continues to repeat that they’ll only listen their metrics and not those “loud voices and few wrong-headed individuals” I’m sure he would put me in.

The metrics on my account will tell Mythic that when I log in I sit in a warcamp and do exclusively Scenarios. But those metrics don’t know that I’m PISSED, DEAD BORED about them. Mythic instead will take those metrics and see the evidence of how much I obviously love Scenarios since all my play time goes there.

How much I love Mourkain Temple, especially, since I do mostly that one. But those metrics don’t know that I think that whoever designed the Scenario terrain should better move on another job. Plenty of time I get stuck somewhere while moving, the textures are so dark that I see jack shit, and there’s a total absence of lightmaps that makes all this even worse. It’s terrible, but I continue to do it because it’s the most rewarding.

Metrics are dumb. Their “evidence” is a lie.

So I really don’t know what message I should send Mythic instead. Because if I play Scenarios they’ll think I love Scenarios. If I do Open RvR they’ll think it’s ok that Open RvR yields no rewards. Next time they’ll write that they see some more activity in the RvR Lakes because some idiots are trying desperately even if the system is so punishing. Do I boycott them? Do I cancel my account? Canceling my account would tell them that I don’t believe in Mythic, the potential of the game, or that a PvP MMO could be successful. Whatever I do sends the wrong message.

Whatever I do sends the wrong message because on the other side there should be a game designer that UNDERSTANDS players. That is in touch with them. That plays the game himself and sees where the problems are. That plans and fix things for the long term, and not through band-aids. At the root of the problems, and not inadequately.

Instead we rely on “metrics” and whatever twisted, biased use is made of them. To prove “evidence” where there’s only wronged partiality.