Bad interview with Jeff Hickman.

Where he says how they “talked about all this stuff” for two years without coming out with anything at all. Pretty clever.

Everyone with a minimal experience with MMOs knows how the concept of PQs is flawed without an adaptable system. Everyone knows that low level zones WILL have serious population issues. Moreover just everyone can experience those problems simply by logging in and playing: things are working correctly on a MINORITY of the cases. That is on high/full populated servers during prime time. If you’re lucky.

That’s NOT how you design a game. You don’t design it so it’s fun only “sometimes”, or only if picked the right server, or only if you play at a set hour.

Two years that you work on the concept of Public Quests and open RvR. Outside the idea itself, the implementation is deeply flawed. And it required two years of talking and figuring out.

“What we found,” he continued, “in Dark Age of Camelot and Ultima Online (these are games that are old, old, old games) there are still people in the low level areas. New people, people re-rolling, people coming through the game, so for months and years to come, we will have a constant stream of players rolling and going up through the ranks. What you’ll find is that you go into an area and there’ll be some people there… multiple people generally, doing PQs. Yes, some of the time you’re going to run into a PQ and there won’t be anyone there. Run to another one.”

That goes without commenting as it’s pure bullshit.

Outside the comments about DAoC that right now has a bazillion of clustered servers that together don’t make 1/5 of what is required to make a single server playable, it’s false that “some of the time” you run into a PQ and find it empty (and let’s not even talk about open RvR). It’s true that MOST OF THE TIMES it happens. If you’re lucky you find a couple of players to farm the first two phases and then get slaughtered at the last. Or that you find a decent group somewhere deep in the zone through Open Parties. But sometimes to rarely. And we are two weeks from launch and things can ONLY get worse.

In the meantime Mark Jacobs talks about open RvR being essential for the success of the game, as well as population balance. And that they’ll approach this with baby steps, because they don’t want to overreact.

Nothing really wrong with being careful, but I’m not sure if the players will be still there when you’re done with the talking and considering. Especially when it took two years to come out with… no solution.

The rest of the interview isn’t better, especially when he says that players aren’t participating in open RvR because they don’t know the best loot is there. Huh? Maybe that’s why Blizzard put raids only at the level cap? When you are leveling up you do not care where the best shiny piece of loot is. You care about moving up as faster as possible, and gear isn’t a problem there. That’s why it’s becoming “Scenarios Online” and not Warhammer.

Jeff told me that in the end, this really comes down to players not yet having discovered en masse that these things exist (in fact, knowing this, it actually somewhat addresses the issue of fewer people participating in open world RvR thinking that the rewards aren’t great enough).

If the players have not yet discovered “en masse that these things exist”, it’s because you’ve done a crappy work directing them.

Don’t put the blame on your players if you are bad at game design.

P.S.
Who the fuck wrote that interview? By way of answering this question, Jeff told me… What the fuck?

Today I logged in after the patch to see if the stuttering problem was at least getting better.

Well, it was! Even in a scenario it was more playable. The stutter was still there, but much reduced to where it used to be, and definitely not a matter of perception. It really seemed better.

In fact Mythic confirmed this:

We have been listening to the Warhammer Community about performance issues players are having while they were in scenarios. While we had the servers down today, we applied a number of fixes designed to improve play in scenarios and make the experience better overall. Our goal is to make scenarios the best possible experience for our players.

Great.

But I had a few suspects. I noticed that the texture usage was noticeably lower, so I was wondering if those fixes were about reduced detail or something like that. Or maybe a better caching. It was odd because the stutter seems reduced even outside the scenarios.

Then a few minutes ago I noticed something: specular lights aren’t being shown anymore.

Specular lights are those shiny effects/glow on the terrain, or the red glimmer on metal items. Well, gone for me.

You know, that explains both the reduced texture usage and stuttering. I just wish Mythic was more honest about this and explained that the increased performance wasn’t due to “fixes”, but removed client features. And at least give us updates about their progress on what is really being done…

Mythic’s engineers should be able to do something more than go in the settings and turn off an option (while also causing the side effect of hardlocking all the graphic settings, which is kind of hilarious).

UPDATE: It seems hardware-based. On my other PC everything is turned on and working properly, while on the first PC I have BOTH lightmaps and specular lights disabled even if they are active in the options.

UPDATE 2: The patch fixed the previous problem, but the stuttering is back as it was.

Something like a reblogging since Eurogamer put it in the most hilarious way.

The entire process, beginning with the capture of the contested zones, began in the early evening and was over by the small hours of the morning. This despite the fact that Mythic boss Mark Jacobs told Eurogamer in a recent interview that completing a city siege in one night would be impossible:

“We’ve laid everything out in a manner that your side has to accomplish a lot, so it’s going to take time. We’ve seen the other games out there where people can do things late at night while nobody else is on, but it doesn’t work that way in WAR. It’s impossible,” he said.

“It should be weeks unless we really messed up.”

So thrice wrong.
– It happened in less than two weeks from launch when they said it would take much longer
– It took just a few hours when they said it would take days
– It happened deep in the night when it wasn’t supposed to be the case

Tobold says it’s a matter of exploits and I’m not surprised since I got the impression that the endgame wasn’t tested thoroughly.

But for me that’s not the problem.

These points could be eventually fixed if one really wants to fix them. These are just transitions to a mature game. The REAL problem is that I do not think they are encouraging defense.

So let me state this bluntly: the game, in particular endgame big objectives, risks to become “hide and seek” events where Destruction and Order take turns at the bag of loot. Without any incentive for defense the game risks to be more rewarding for avoiding each other than to fight.

Shortcut to victory.

Or like in DAoC, where the “endgame rewards” were so trivial that the whole keep and relic warfare was forgotten and the game became just 8vs8 specialized ganking groups.

Edit: This is an example of a long thread, there are many of those on the forums, many players with the exact same problem (hard disk thrashing). If you look at the specs you can notice there isn’t a pattern (nVidia, ATI, doesn’t matter). So it’s really a generalized behavior that more or less affects everyone (depending on drive speed and video memory bandwidth). I had a slight improvement after I lifted the Windows page file from 2Gb to 3. Slight.

Another.

—
When I wrote my impressions on the game I was running the client on a brand new, near-top the line machine, and said the performance wasn’t that amazing, with some FPS slowdown in crowded RvR.

Today I mirrored the client to my old PC and I was surprised to see that the framerate is about the same (!) while the PC is four years old. I have about 30 fps, 20 in the quest hubs with lots of NPCs around. Obviously the more characters, the lower the framerate, but it’s playable.

What instead makes it *completely* unplayable is the constant hard disk thrashing. If I stand still I have smooth FPS, as soon I start to move in a direction the hard disk begins loading heavily.

Since the problem is weird (I expected lower fps, but not this caching problem) I started to research it a bit. I have 1.6GB free on this XP install, and the client uses between 1 and 1.2Gb of memory. My videocard has 512Mb. On standard settings the client only uses 256Mb, in all cases. This is also related to a bug (known by Mythic) as it seems that the client doesn’t detect the correct amount of video memory.

In any case they added that slider on the options. Moving the slider basically “overrides” the amount of video memory the client is going to use. From my experiments I noticed that at the higher setting it was using up to 400-430Mb of video memory.

The problem is that this does very little to reduce the heavy stuttering as you move around. That slider does NOT load an higher number of textures (so reducing the need of constant loading), it simply loads higher res ones (so you don’t see anymore blurry textures around you). So it doesn’t increase the number of textures, it increases their quality. This means that, no matter the slider position or other settings on that window, the hard disk thrashing is still there, almost unaffected.

On the new PC I also noticed this thrashing, but it was noticeable in heavy populated zones. And that PC had 4Gb of memory and a very fast HD too, so the problem was minimized. This just to say that I don’t think it’s hardware related, but a problem in the architecture of the client and the way the memory is managed. I remember when I was in Mourning’s beta (yeah, the vaporware game) and they didn’t have implemented yet some kind of threading system that would have prevented the loading from the HD to freeze the client. The result was that every time you changed direction the client would freeze for one second to load a different animation.

This thrashing problem feels somewhat similar. It’s like the loading from the hard disk thrashed the whole system and makes the game unplayable, while the *constant* need to free/load video memory makes it all worse.

As I said even at the highest setting the client doesn’t use all the video memory available. Usually you have that texture thrashing when the video memory is filled and so loading new textures requires to free some space. Warhammer client does this CONTINUOUSLY. Every step you move in a direction it starts swapping old textures out and loading new ones, even if you have free memory. Sometimes you don’t even need to move, turn south and it loads those textures, turn north and it is already swapping things out and back in. It’s insane.

This to say that I doubt you can find a “magic fix”. This seems entirely a client issue that only Mythic can investigate and figure out. On a very fast computer the problem is much reduced and so not ruining the gameplay, while on older machines it becomes really annoying. But it was there in both cases for me.

One thing I noticed is how much the client performance affects my “bias” to the game. When I was having these problems I logged out with a sour taste and the experience soured me even toward completely different elements. So, beware, sometimes the overall opinion and positiveness toward a game can be heavily influenced by a couple of things that do not work well. Like a chain effect.

This has become the most diffused internet meme associated with the HRose name. “I predicted it on my blog”. An expression that I never really used all that often but that I started using for laughs. There is really anything more irritating and arrogant than saying “I was right, I told you so”.

But sometimes it’s true. We can see at things superficially for shit and giggles, stay at the form. Or instead look at the merit of things.

Yesterday, during prime time, the Warhammer server where I created my character had a queue of 500 and a wait time up to an hour. Totally expected on my side, in fact I let the client sat there for the time and when I was finally in I had a very good time. With plenty of players participating in RvR and almost no lag. Ideal experience to me.

If it wasn’t for what I discovered later.

What I discovered later is that the “bloggers” guild I’d like to join hit the panic button, decided that Volkmar wasn’t anymore a playable server and moved to another one. I’m talking about this because it affects me. IT SUCKS to invest seven hours in a character and then be told to start over again. Especially because it’s the third time in less than a month and I’d rather punch my balls than going through the same content again. And AGAIN.

More so because I’m a kind of completist player and so I go and try to finish all public quests. Even if I’m restless there, doing the grind and hoping it’s quick. I don’t have ALTITIS. I like to grow my main character and stick to it. I like to invest the time so that I know it doesn’t get wasted because I switch a class or server. I look at the longer term and for me the choice of a well populated server, with lots of RvR activity comes before any other transitory problem. Because in six months the server may end up deserted, and I’m sure I’m going to regret having moved if it happens.

I’m not completely selfish. There are players in that guild that joined with the CE headstart and had characters up to rank 14, and still agreed to move. It sucks. And not just for me.

So lets look at it from a broader perspective. Server population balance and factional balance.

It’s years that I rant on this because I see it as a fundamental problem that severely affects *everyone*. It’s in the interest of everyone to find a radical solution. It’s not acceptable that every single time a mmorpg launches the servers are unstable, or the PvP sucks because of faction unbalance, or that guilds can’t organize well because they end up on a server with long queues, or that you can’t join friends because half go in a server and half in another. Or that you have to start over again a bunch of times because there is always some problem. One server is crammed, the other is empty.

I have a working solution for this and, while technically not simple, it is based on a simple concept: the player characters being an abstraction external and independent from the server.

First you create your character, then you move the character into a server. The server is no eternal bound, your character is.

A concrete example on the today’s situation:
My idea is once again to allow server travel regulated by strict rules. For example now Volkmar has long queues during prime time. In my idea there would be a portal/beacon in the game that lights up under specific cases. What kills these servers and creates all the problems is not that there are too many players and not enough servers. But that players tend to overpopulate certain servers while others are nearly empty.

This because it’s desirable to play, you know, with people. Especially for PvP. But it isn’t desirable if the server crashes and burns or if you have to sit in a queue for an hour when you have an hour and half to play in total.

But now think if that portal existed. My (hopefully it will be) guild now is asking me to toss away the seven hours I put in my character to create a brand new one in another server. It sucks. But if there was a way to use server travel and move my existing character to a lower populated one, I WOULD DO IT. And with me a MAJORITY of players who prefer moving than sitting in a queue.

If you allow players to police themselves they will. Because it’s in their interest to keep factions balanced and the servers queues-free. If they DO NOT do it, it’s because, like me, they don’t want to toss the investment they made in a character. And then move ONCE AGAIN because even the second-choice server is gone wrong and it becomes overcrowded or deserted.

But if you allow players to move, following some capacity rules, then they spread out if the server is full, and they converge again if it happens that the population decreases.

It’s the rule of communicating vessels they teach in school. Every vessel is a server, they communicate with each other under set rules:

Most persons would call this a system. If we add water to any vessel, there is a movement of water (a flow of matter) until the water has levelled out. There is also a flow of potential energy until each milligram of water on the surface has the same potential energy as any milligram on the surface of another tube. An increase or decrease of water in any tube affects the water in all other tubes according to well-known laws of physics.

This happens BOTH for population balance AND faction balance. Spread out among all servers.

Yes, having rules means that the portal/beacon is closed sometimes and so you can’t always move where you want. But this is preferable to not being able to move AT ALL.

Technically it isn’t simple, but I think this is a problem so significant to deserve the work it requires. Obviously it can’t be easily done now, but it was (and it’s years I’m repeating this) doable if this was set as an original goal.

We saw it’s possible. My idea sits between WoW’s “manual” transfers and Guild Wars immediate ones.

Warhammer would have been a MUCH better and more successful game if it was developed with that goal. Because players activity and factional balance are indispensable to have fun in this game.

Since IainC is a nice guy and helped me behind the scenes on a couple of occasions, I’ll spend some words on what is going on.

Lum has a piece on the specifics (Warhammer Euro open beta not starting exactly well), I agree wholeheartedly with that, so won’t repeat.

It seems instead that Mark Jacobs found his scapegoat:

3) I have read IanC’s post on the situation and I have just communicated to GOA my thoughts on it. I’ll simply say this, I do not agree with what he said, I do not support what he said and his comments were, in my opinion, way out of line.

Now I hope that “communicated to GOA my thoughts” doesn’t correspond to “FIRE HIM, FIRE HIM NOW!”, because I really don’t see how a community manager is responsible of a database server not working well. Especially a community manager that wasn’t there that day.

In particular he’s probably the most dedicated CM they have, as he posts frequently all over the internet (including f13.net, quite a feat) and seems overall a nice guy that does the job well (frequent updates, clarity, helpful).

But what is even more incredible is that MJ is blaming him for saying THE EXACT THING he just posted on the blog. But he is Mark Jacobs, and obviously does not fear that someone steps in his office and fires him.

This is the blamed passage written by IainC:

I wasn’t at work yesterday, Magnus was the man on the scene covering the situation, but I did keep a close eye on forums and was in contact with the guys in the office. A lot of what was said yesterday here and on other forums was entirely out of line. Of course you were disappointed and criticism is certainly warranted but frankly many of the posts made about the situation were borderline sociopathic. If having delayed access to a beta test really drives you to such depths of anger and fury that you felt compelled to make the death threats, racial slurs and other deeply unpleasant posts then – and there is no polite way to put this – there is something wrong with you.

And this is what MJ wrote himself:

Why do some people feel it is okay to threaten, curse, abuse and be downright hostile to other people over a game, especially in this case when it is only over access to a game that is still in testing (Open Beta Test = Not Yet Ready For Prime Time Players)? While I’ve become quite cynical over the decades, I still find myself amazed at times at certain people’s reactions to stuff like this. I don’t mind when people get upset but to treat other people in such a callous, mean and immature manner is really a bit much.

Now I know that there’s this stupid, but motivated, rule that wants Community Mangers not being able to say WHAT PASSES ON EVERYONE ELSE’S MIND, but I really don’t see what’s the sense in MJ’s remark. He SURELY agrees and supports what IainC said, since he wrote exactly the same on his blog.

A matter of form:

However, as a Community Manager telling the players that were disappointed about not getting into a game because of the errors of your company were “borderline sociopathic” is as over the line as some of the comments that were posted here and other places. Saying that some of the players were “way out of line” is one thing but the “borderling sociopathic” bit is quite another.

Ghislaine (CEO of GOA) did something that she has never done before for GOA and we are in constant touch with them about what happened yesterday, today and what we need to do to straighten things out before launch. I would hate to see those efforts be tarnished in any way by an ill-conceived and ill-considered post by any member of that team.

It’s not the first time we see a CM blowing up because of the pressure, it surely isn’t justifiable as it’s part of the job, but let’s not be *completely hypocrite*. That part of IainC post could have been spared, as you really can’t be surprised at some reactions if you aren’t an internet noob. But I also do understand the intent that drove those words (bring back the discussion within civil bounds).

It was a misstep of form, not of merit, and putting the blame on that is about being simply hypocrite and just find a scapegoat to burn only because you need one handy.

What went wrong was responsibility of the engineers who are supposed to make the thing work and anticipate stress issues. JUST THEM. But of course you can’t blame or fire them, because in a 3rd party company they are the only ones who really are indispensable. So let’s blame the Community Managers, because they are disposable. Easily replaced. And you can burn them publicly so that the players can cheer up, so that you can demonstrate how seriously we are taking things.

The truth is that the real errors were made days ago.

Those errors were about the overconfidence and lack of humility in the way things were presented. And these were errors of BOTH the engineers for being caught off-guard, and the Community Managers for passing over that overconfidence without blinking.

It’s indispensable for every business that the REAL problems are recognized and acknowledged. Not the wrong, but handy for public display, ones.

What I said about the game’s future development being hard to foresee still applies. Mythic went with a smart strategy by previewing the game in small chunks. They show some little bits of the game just to entice, then wipe the characters and take down the servers again. They show just enough to test the stability and make you want more, but without spoiling it all.

It’s very hard to understand how the game will do in the longer term. There are issues of factional balance and overall RvR flow, there are issues of character growth. Most of these remain completely hidden at the moment and this situation would encourage a prudent approach to the game.

What I suggest, though, is contradictory. If you want to play this game, do not wait. Play at release. Despite the bugs, servers going down and all sort of problems, the most fun in a MMOs, especially a “social” one like Warhammer, comes from being there with everyone else and enjoy the rush. Get over the bugs, have some patience, but do not wait.

The best tip is to start when everyone else does and try to keep up. Don’t level too fast, don’t level too slow. Find a server that is well populated because waiting in a queue can be preferable of getting stuck in Public Quests or RvR due to the lack of players.

I don’t expect Warhammer will do a big splash. Despite the feedback is much, much better than the one preceding Age of Conan’s release, the amount of “noise” and interest doesn’t seem as high. For the kind of game it is, the potential is in a slower growth, over time. A better retention overall. Piercing through the release of WotLK is the biggest challenge for this game.

The problem, again, is that this potential slow growth is crippled by the game design itself. Because if from a side the game promotes the socialization and collaborative gameplay like no other MMO in the market (and so that slow growth in subscriptions I expect), from the other it cripples it because as the playerbase moves through the content and levels the new players will find a game that is a lot less welcoming and vibrant.

Warhammer’s biggest strength and biggest weakness in one.