Monthly Archives: June 2006

Gabe Newell talks about Mmorpgs

by | Leave a comment

Not really talking about mmorpgs, but rather pertinent with what I’m writing these days. From an interesting interview about the design of Ep1 (part one here):

Gabe Newell: What we try to do is get people through as much entertainment as possible. This is an argument I have with Warren Spector; he builds a game that you can play through six different times. So that means that people pay for the game, but don’t get to play five sixths of the game, which I feel is a mistake. You spend all of this time to build stuff that most players will never ever ever see, and I feel we try to maximise… I mean, I understand the exploration impulse and we try to make people happy doing that because it’s an important part. Exposition, exploration, combat and so on are things that we need to make sure are present, but if only one per cent of your customers see this cool thing that takes five per cent of your development budget, that’s not a good use of resources.

This other part also fits quite well with the discussion about accessibility barriers and “noise”:

Gabe Newell: It’s one of the critical things that playtesting shows. If there’s a capability and 80 per cent of people aren’t figuring it out then that’s probably a defect in the design. Not to be heavy handed, but the most ridiculous example is to have a hole with a Zombine hand sticking through with a grenade. You’d catch on pretty quick! “You know, I’ll do something to that thing!” I mean, you’d never do that, but that’s a kind of approach you use to get people to understand that there’s now a new choice available to them at that point in the game.

Erik Johnson: That’s why playing catch with Dog with the gravity gun was so important to the whole game.

Robin Walker: If you look back at Half-Life 2, many of our training things were doing multiple stuff where you might be learning a new gameplay element, but at the same time you’re learning about a character that you’re interacting with who might be telling you something about the world, and the relationship between you and the character you’re dealing with. For example, the cop who tells you to pick up the can, which we want you to press use, but at the same time you’re learning about the relationship between the Metro Cops and the players, and the way they use civilians. But at the same time you’re building this animosity between you and this character that eventually you’ll be able to deal with when you get a weapon, and so on. Our training is all there throughout the game, but it’s fairly well disguised with you doing multiple things at the same time.

Posted in: Uncategorized |

More accurate graphical combat representation, maybe

by | Leave a comment

From Eve-Online’s dev blog:

While we’re in the technical design stages, I get to write crazy things about wanting to completely rewrite the turret system and do stuff like make turret animations miss.

While you are at it, what about scaling the “shake” effect on a missle hit with a % calculation on the damage done to the ship?

Crazy things, indeed.

P.S.
And physical missle launchers. So that missles come out of the launchers instead of spawning in the air. Maybe with pwetty missle-shooting animation/effect?

And better graphic representation of the damage states.

Gated content + Permeable barriers

by | Leave a comment

Again on the concepts of “gated content” and “permeable barriers”.

In the second part I tried to explain that the idea of “gated content” didn’t negate the possibility to have stories, but instead enhanced it. But that’s just one inherited application of the model. Originally the idea wasn’t about “parallel worlds”, each with its own rules, progression and story, but about general patterns. Like “solo” play, PvP, groups and raids.

So not only the different parallel worlds are accessible because “contemporary” (with the player “gated” from one to the other), but the general patterns on which they are based are also “contemporary”. The player has a choice about which *type* of content he wants to experience. The rule is: experience the type of content you prefer without your character being penalized.

This is why I started to describe this model by analyzing the “endgame”. There’s no need for an “endgame” when finally all the different gameplay patterns that the game has to offer are always open. There’s no “before” and “after”. There are no obligatory passages. There are no barriers between the players that prevent them to group and enjoy the game together.

This possibility not only offers an open choice to the players without penalizing the characters they play, but it also leads to a game where the players will be much more inclined to take advantage of the different types of content the game offers. When you can easily “switch” between the different gameplay models, then you are also much more inclined to experiement with all the game has to offer.

Which is the real original goal behind those ideas: start with a familiar single player style of experience that a vast public can grasp and recognize with, and then “branch up” the game, progressively, slowly opening and disclosing all the different patterns and possibilities the game has to offer. Like the PvP sandbox. One part is used to “gate” the players to another without scaring them. Without crippling these possibilities with huge accessibility barriers or high prices of admittance.

Mass market, to me, means the possibility to absorb that public by making the game as accessible as possible. Without slapping them in the face with an insane amount of “noise”. The idea of “gated content” and parallel worlds is about the possibility to layer different complexity levels, one on top of the other, so that you can slowly convince the player to experiment and learn with all the various possibilities offered.

Which is why “gated content” and “permeable barriers” are strictly tied together and have similar purposes. Educate, “lead” the players through the complexity of a virtual world.

From another perspective: you cannot hope to have a commercially successful PvP game without a PvE side that slowly convinces the players to look over to the other part. The goal is to make that transition as smooth as possible, still without forcing the players, but instead *encouraging* them to switch freely between the parts. Following their own preference.

My idea is: if switching between the gameplay patterns is simple and without penalizations, then the players will be naturally inclined to “cross the lines” (the permeable barriers) and see what’s on the other side. And then consider where they want to be, making their own choice.

World traveler: “gated content”

by | 9 Comments

I return again on the fancy term “gated content” to focus more on some concepts that were misunderstood.

It’s already frustrating not being able to convince the few who care to read what I write. Even more frustrating when I discover that not only I didn’t convince anyone, but that what I wrote was also completely misunderstood and that I’m being criticized for things that I didn’t even thought. In particular because I put a lot of effort trying to explain what I mean in the most clear and direct way. Receiving critics is always good, it’s less good when what I write is misrepresented. There’s no worse failure for me than that.

In these two articles I associated the definition of “gated content” to the “endgame” and the “world traveler” concepts. To understand things better you could also use this reference (tripartite model).

1- There is no “endgame” in this model because the idea of “gated content” erases a “before” and “after” in the flow of the game. What your character does and the different gameplay patterns he can have access to are defined by a personal choice. Your own preference. Not impositions. Not obligatory passages.

One of the steps to reach that goal is about removing “level mechanics” in favor of a skill system. The purpose here, as it is widely known, is to reduce the power differential, but, in particular, to remove the bad habit of using levels to decide the content that you can access and the content that is out of reach. With a skill based system there may be still a significant power differential between a newbie and a veteran, but it is at least possible for people to group together without the game mechanics getting in the way, crippling the experience you gain, limiting the loot you can use and not allowing you to be in certain places. The gap is narrower and more natural. The game doesn’t put artificial barriers between you and your friends. This is the part that should be more familiar of the idea.

The other part involves the content in the game. “Gated content” means that there are “contemporary” realities. The “world traveler”, aka the player, can switch between these realities following his own preference. While in other games you move from solo to groups and to raids, in my idea I separate the direct ties and make all those “contemporary”. As your character is created you can decide, for example, to solo, to group, to PvP or to raid. Do only one of them, do only those you care about or all together. It’s your choice. The game doesn’t force on you a pattern, nor it cripples your character because you didn’t do a specific thing.

2- I’ve been accused of being willingly to remove the story component from mmorpgs and since this cannot be more FAR from the reality, here some precisations in that direction.
Quoting myself again:

I NEVER wrote that the stories should be removed. This cannot be more false since it’s NOT what I think.

The point is that a mmorpg shouldn’t be about just ONE story with a start and an end, because simply that’s not what a mmorpg should do.

Story elements CAN and SHOULD be integrated in that “world traveler” model, aka the “gated content“.

EACH WORLD, or sub-world can have its story. The character IS YOU. You don’t need other characters to experience more stories, and those stories in those worlds CAN and SHOULD “end”. But not the game and not your character.

Each “gated” world, each reality, correspond to a different story that you can live. A different character that you can become.

The “game”, as the overall structure that supports and contains all these worlds/realities, never ends. The NeverEnding Story. The real ideal behind these games. It’s over only when there aren’t anymore ideas, when there aren’t anymore players who want to hear and be part of fantastic stories.

Instead the stories you can experience within each of these worlds WILL and SHOULD end. They can be linear and represent finite story lines. Maybe where to return one day when something new happens that destabilizes the temporary calm you achieved in a previous mission. When the designers of the game decide to move that particular story onward. You step in the gate and become once again that hero in that world. Like when you went back to Britannia with each new chapter of Ultima.

In WoW you cannot go in the Deadmines or Gnomeragon with a level 10 character. When the flying isle of Naxxaraxxwhatthefuck will be released with the next patch you won’t be able to see it and play there if you aren’t already part of a selected group.

Imho it make sense when your devs puts months of work to release a new zone to let it being experienced by as many players as possible. Instead of cockblocking it behind severe accessibility barriers.

With the model I’m describing you can. There are no barriers separating you from your friends. Everything in the game is offered. And it’s you to determine your experience by making your choice. You could just PvP, just soloing, just raid if it’s what appeals you. But it’s your own choice and all the other possibilities would be always open to you in the case you decide to try something else.

The “gated content” is a model used to actualize the possibility of contemporary realities.

The player “travels between worlds”. A world traveler.

You can travel to a world and become a knight, travel to another and become an adventurer, and then a merchant, an hunter, a member of a revolutionary movement that is trying to overthrow a regime, a partisan, a diplomat, a crusader, a paladin, a jester, a doctor, an exiled, a “stranger in a strange land”, a demon from another world, a spy, a noble, a soldier taking part on a large siege, a thief, a treasure hunter, an explorer, an archeologist, a wayfarer, a beggar, a mage in search of knowledge, a sailor, a pirate, a revered king, a fugitive, an outcast. A predator or the prey.

A level 50 character or a level 1. All these things at once.

No, you don’t “shapeshifts”. But the dwellers of these worlds can see and treat you in many different ways. They can have many different points of view and offer many different perspectives. In some worlds your powers don’t work, and in others they are much stronger.

These realities preserve their linearity if it’s needed. In the case of the world where you are part of the revolutionary movement maybe you cannot just start the revolution as you put your foot in that world. You’ll have to first organize things and all the rest that the story is setting for you. They can then be independent from each other or intertwined. For example you could need a special key to reach some place that can only be obtained from another dimension.

Such is the multiverse.

But the most important element is that there are no “you need to be this tall to enter” accessibility barriers.

If you want an even simpler definition think about a game as an aggregator of multiple, possible stories. That is my sandbox ideal. The early Ultima RPGs had already a beginning and an end, but in between they aggregated many different stories, characters and situations that you could discover, learn about and interact.

Prey incoming

by | 1 Comment

The release of “Prey” (the FPS) is approaching.

In about twenty days 3D Realms will release a free demo that will show both the multiplayer and the single player portion. From the rumors it seems to be a very good demo with a lot of content in it (I miss the shareware days). The actual game is going to be released for the beginning of July.

The reason why I write about this is because this game is not “just another shooter”, but one that is adding some quite innovative features that will add some new patterns and break some conventional ones. I’m interested to see how all this will work out. I think the demo is a perfect opportunity to have a peek at how those new features will impact the “flow” of the game and see if they’ll really add to the fun.

I wrote already in the past about the game because I believe in those ideas and, if the technology is solid as it was publicized, it could really open so many new possibilities.

Previous articles – here and here. I think the only part I haven’t commented is that the game will also have an option to dynamically adjust the difficulty while you play. Just another interesting (and optional) feature to throw in the mix.

A summarized feature list taken from my old post on a forum:

– Portal tecnology opening at every angle breaking the euclidean space
– Different gravity/physics systems active at the same time (ceilings, walls, planetoids etc..)
– Environmental hazards and mobile rooms (the environment moves and can hurt you. No static or fixed)
– Gravity flipping (entire environments flipping upside down with you inside)
– Wall walk (switching orientation, no ladders)
– Spirit walk (switching to a spirit world where you just can use a bow but you can move through impassable barriers in the physical world)
– Death walk (instead of “game over” you enter the spirit world killing flying demons with a bow to quickly regain a decent amount of health before being thrown back into the action)
– Adaptable difficulty system (as you play the game monitors your performance and tries to dynamically adapt the difficulty, this can be turned off)

And I would even add a good HUD design and all sort of imaginative “alien” weapons to that list.

From the latest weekly update, about the innovative approach:

Back in the old days with Doom, ROTT, and the like you had just left and right to contend with. Quake introduced up and down to the mix, and it’s pretty much stayed that way until now. While Quake allows for incoming fire to come from almost every direction, the base play remained the same, as you had to be “on” something – up and down were constants for the most part, despite the Z axis now being brought into play. Prey changes that with gravity flipping and wall walking.

And some interesting updates about the delivery system (that I think and hope will be also used for the demo):

One other section that has been tested a lot is the Triton delivery system. Sure, you can go to the store and buy a box, but you will also be able to buy the full game over Triton, and this needs testing. The last few beta builds we got at 3DR have come through Triton, which is kind of cool. What’s nice about the Triton system is that you don’t have to wait for the entire title to come down to play. After a certain percentage of the game has been downloaded, you are asked if you want to start playing right away. You can choose to start playing (depending on your download speed) after a short while, and the remainder of the game will be streamed to your computer in the background while you play.

My hope is that they don’t screw this. First worry is whether this is supported worldwide or just NA, because it would suck if it’s limited. Then I hope the final game, and maybe even the demo, will be preloaded at least a few days before, as Valve does with Steam. It’s a convenience both for them (spread the server load on more days) and the users (have time to download even on slower connections).

In the meantime I got Half-Life 2 Ep1. It took me almost two days to finish the download on my slow connection, but I was oddly able to play when it was still at 87%. While I was waiting I also got the Darwina demo that was only 20Mb or so (and what is fun is that those are 20Mb of sound files, since all the graphic is generated, and sooo pretty) and five minutes later I was already buying the full version. Right now I’m more hooked up in Darwinia than HL2.

That said, the new chapter to HL2 is really good, with an even stronger cinematic feel. As they defined it, it’s a great “rollercoaster”. Everything is still on rail, heavily scripted. Plenty of “whoa” moments, cool stuff, wonderful ideas and decent plot. The starting sequence (when you have already the control) is simply amazing and I watched it with a grin on my face. The commentary system is also interesting for those who love the dig the design, even if they seem to end exactly when you would like to hear more details.

The new technical bits aren’t so noticeable. The HDR is pretty but it’s also heavy on the framerate. After the magnificence of Oblivion and Quake 4 the textures seem less impressive, but the overall level design is still good. The animation system was also reworked but I didn’t notice the difference to be honest. In fact I think the animations still aren’t on par with the cinematic feel and still look rather faked and awkward.

I think the main innovation about the episode is the presence of Alyx and the “single-player co-op”, as they defined it. The interesting part is that she isn’t just a bot following around, but a fully scripted character that has possibilities different than yours, so enhancing the interaction and possible variations in the game. As other people have wrote the annoying part is that Alyx sometimes pushes you around as she tries to run past you.

There was a lot of discussion also about the price, which I consider a bit too high. As written on Q23.

With much lower production costs I think Valve’s first goal should have been about reaching a much larger audience by making the price more convenient and accessible. But that’s just me striving for ideals as always.

Posted in: Uncategorized |

Why WoW won.

by | 4 Comments

There was a discussion about EQ2’s UI on the FoH’s forums and it made me think that too often people tend to completely ignore the most obvious things. While they tend to consider what is instead absolutely irrelevant.

So here why WoW racked up millions of subscribers worldwide and why it dwarfed every other mmorpg:

First Postulate on Mmorpgs Subscriptions: If you suddenly double the minimum hardware requirements, then even your potential subscribers base is HALVED (if not worst, considering the scaling).

There, I said it. WoW’s success is for the biggest part contained in that line. No need for thousands and thousands of pages and design researches. Just one fucking line.

Hello? Accessibility barriers. The GREAT MAJORITY of people on the internet have computers that SUCK. This is why browser-based games are popular. Not because they are “casual” games, but because they embrace a MUCH BIGGER potential subscribers base.

Crappy internet connection, instable, badly configured system, old drivers, conflicts, incompatibilities. All these are the NORM for PCs. Not everyone is a geek who assembles his computer, runs benchmarks, reads hardware reviews and figures out obscure quirks in the Bios of the motherboard. This is also why the consoles are much more popular. Not everyone has the patience and dedication to swallow that. In particular after having spent considerable amounts of money for that hardware and STILL managing to see games running like crap.

WoW broke the market in three moves:
1- Low hardware requirements, wider compatibility (here)
2- It launched EVERYWHERE, localized and with a good support (here)
3- Game design all focused to simplify a genre and make it accessible/usable (here)

WoW became so popular because it lowered the accessibility barriers. BOTH from the hardware requirements perspective AND the game design. It’s accessible. Its engine is the best out there. It runs more smoothly and without incompatibilities compared to any other mmorpg, old or new. And in nearly all the cases IT EVEN LOOKS SO MUCH BETTER.

Seamless world, smooth framerates with tenths of players on screen each with particle effects and perfect animations, no jerky LOD, impressive environments and clip plane, beautifully painted textures, consistent art direction throughout the game.

Not only it is a charming experience because it runs great and doesn’t stutters or crashes all the time, but it even looks great.

And here we come to that discussion about EQ2’s interface:

—
I don’t know if it’s a Nvidia vs Ati issue but the UI simply eats a lot of resources. I use the standard EQ2 UI + maps here and I can be in a zone with 30+ FPS or another with 15 or so, the UI still eats up significantly processing power.

Arguably WoW has the most powerful and flexible UI out there, but where it really shinies is in the fact that it takes nearly zero resources. I can have the barely needed on display or I can open hundreds of buttons, windows, features and energy bars and the game maintains roughly the same amount of frames per second.

It’s obvious that it’s a matter of how the UI in EQ2 and WoW are engineered at a basic level and rendered on screen. It’s surely not a matter of “optimizations”.

The point is that in other games the UI really does not impact the framerate. In EQ2 it does sensibly. Now it could even get optimized but the fact that it takes resources will hardly change if it’s not recoded at a very basic level, I suspect.

And don’t bring up the “focus to support hardware for the years ahead”. Slowing down the game just because people have more powerful hardware is not an argument. If I’m buying new hardware it’s because I want new possibilities supported, not so that I can swallow horrible engines.

If your hardware requirements are high, then the game better demonstrate that the slowdown is worth it (and it usually never is). Instead of just an excuse for a crappy engine.

—
EQ2’s engine is already heavy enough without the UI slowing it down even further. One thing is about supporting better graphic possibilities and advanced engines, another is having high hardware requirements because the engine is not so great. Here the competition is stronger because these things CAN be easily compared.

The same applies to Vanguard. If it looks like crap, then better run *very smoothly*. Because noone swallows extremely demanding engines AND overall deluding graphic quality.

Which is also why I have that terrible nightmare.