Lum is a pussy and too scared to admit he agrees with everything I write! (with Colin Powell as guest star)

I was going to just archive the reply I wrote over there as I usually do. But then, on a second read, I gave this passage some more weight and started to think about it:

Developers fear change too. They can be beaten down just as hard; the hammers are just called different names. Message board posts. Emails. Subscription numbers. Publisher pressure. Going home and getting yelled at because your significant other can’t understand why you people just don’t fix X, Y, and Z. After a certain amount of time, inertia kicks in out of self defense. If you don’t change anything, you don’t make any mistakes, after all.

I think I can understand what he is trying to say here. That position is understandable and it’s normal that, given those conditions, the reaction is a defensive one. I wouldn’t blame or accuse anyone. I wouldn’t point my finger. It’s simply legitimate and normal. But still… It isn’t a type of value you can share or build things upon. It’s not something you can expect people agree with. Understand, probably. But not agree with.

The current situation is understandable, but this isn’t a justification on its own. It doesn’t mean that things cannot change. Or that shouldn’t change. It doesn’t mean that nothing can be done to make things better. It doesn’t mean that we have to suffer this (I shouldn’t use “we” here since it’s way too easy to preach without being directly involved, but I wouldn’t know how to phrase it). So I don’t think that this position is defendable. There is no fault in the position itself, but at the same time not enough to make a valid point. The fact that this is what currently happens is the very first reason why we should desire it to change. Work better, offer better products, and not suffocating the potential on our own.

“Shit happens”. So we do nothing and feel jaded or even sage. This isn’t enough of a justification. I’m simplifying, but that’s the tone. It sounds like a type of anxiety-inducing reaction that I actually know rather well. But I’m not so stupid to justify this position as valid. Even if I choose it. I know it’s short-legged. If there’s too much pressure (and I’m sure of this) there’s the need to transform it in a positive drive, or things just won’t work. It’s just frustrating. We need to get educated and educate so things can change. Not work *despite* the negative conditions or the pressure. But transform the situation so that it becomes a positive one. Lead the context instead of suffer it.

But then I write this because Lum brought it up. He says he reads me because he has different opinions. What a liar :) I know perfectly that he agrees with everything I write. He is too intelligent to disagree with me. And I’m a genius. Besides, if he wrote about this it’s because there’s a controversy where he felt involved, somehow. It is evident. He tries to defend a position but it’s obvious that he is siding the other… He wishes he could disagree.

See, it’s like a little kid crying “…my mom spanked me!” Of course he doesn’t want to hear his mum is a bad mum because he loves his mum after all, but at the same time he doesn’t want to keep getting spanked, either.

And this is where Colin Powell arrives (stolen from Eve-Online dev blog):

“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” is the slogan of the complacent, the arrogant or the scared. It’s an excuse for inaction. It’s a mindset that assumes (or hopes) that today’s realities will continue tomorrow in a tidy, linear and predictable fashion. Pure fantasy. In this sort of culture, you won’t find people who proactively take steps to solve problems as they emerge.”

Here’s the rest:


I’ll just say this.

Why the hell new games are allowed to get marketed over the mistakes of previous ones?

http://www.corpnews.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2674

“- The combat itself is much longer than what I experienced in DAOC or SB where fights were over inn 1, 2, 3, gone….spend 30 mins regrouping.

– Each character seems to have a decent amount of surviability so you have time to react

– there is NO /target, /group target, or /sticky command.”

This is a very simple example. The *whole* World of Warcraft was built on top of the mistakes, failures and bad habits of previous games. In general I could safely state that these successful games are more the result of the observation than the rabid creativity. Which is also what drives this whole industry, not just the mmorpgs: reiterations over previous models. Who “gets it” is successful. In the mmorpgs this is even more emphasized because who gets it *first* is successful. So what is fundamental is the aptitude to anticipate trends and possible developments. The market itself requires this availability to evolve and rewards it.

My belief is simply that this is what this genre could do at best considering the “ongoing development” and the nature of “game worlds”. The ideal world and inspiration remain, the implementation can improve and grow, along with the possibilities and the technology. You can express new ideas and open new potential from here. Working on top of what you already built. The game can become richer and you can finally explore those ideas that just weren’t possible till that moment. It’s a journey and you are required to learn from what happens along the way so you can continue on that path.

The point is, the games who decide to fear change are consequently predated by other projects. The competition is going to use your weaknesses and by being conservative you just hand them on a silver plate the opportunity to eat your slice of the pie:

“this game is broken and I’m gonna see you in Dark City of Shadowquest 3: Electric Boogaloo.”

That said, I specifically wrote that I don’t fully support what is going on to SWG (as LoH also writes here above). I like change and I like when a company dares, but this should be the result of reiterations, even radical but never to discard months and years of work to steer the game in a completely different way. As I said the ideal should be about working on top of what you built. Sometimes this means to step back and rebuild something following the new rules you learnt, but it shouldn’t mean that the game should restart in a brand new direction that requires to replan and repackage everything from the ground up every six months. Choices, even here, must be made. Once you choose a path you have to stick to it. To commit to it. This is alse why I often criticized devs jumping from project to project. And, if you notice, SWG had a strong churn rate of developers that obviously affected negatively the game. I want authorship and commitment instead.

I don’t support “change” just for the sake of it, in the same way I do not support fancy ideas with no foundation. What I’d like to see is working actively to deliver what was planned and adjust what you are creating with what you learnt along the way.

Then the final point is even more simple. “Change” is good only when well executed. SWG will get many, many more subscribers and will get revitalized for the years to come if it will deliver on the premises. But this is a risk. It could go well as it could just not work. I’m the first to feel sceptical. Six months down the road we will remember this as a huge success, or as a big, predictable (like we are doing here) failure, or something gone so so. The truth is far from *all* these three possbilities. The truth simply depends on how “change” is executed and not “whether change or not”. I hate this generalization about “change”. If *this* change is well executed the players will finally reward it, if it sucks the game will pay an harsh price. The same would apply if we were talking about a brand new product.

And to really conclude, the very first quality of a designer is about learning. In the same way “learning” is what these games are about. As Raph says: “the best personal qualification is intellectual curiosity and a dedication to self-education”. Learning is about change. If a designer “fears change” he is just done. He hasn’t anymore anything to say.

Maybe a more interesting point could be about how we could educate ourselves to not fear change and use it as a positive motivation instead of a negative, stressful pressure. I know that “we aren’t there yet” in the same way I know that SWG’s changes “aren’t there yet”. In fact most of what I saw sucks and is the result of awful compromises. The point is to move in a direction when you decided that the direction is worth the effort.

I want these games to be vital and not just drown in stagnation to finally get predated by better products. I know “we aren’t there yet” but I also know that this is the right direction where to go. And enjoy the ride.

Posted in: Uncategorized |

Eve-Online – Dev blogs

Eve-I, the major news and information site about Eve-Online, died at the beginning of September for a rumored server move but it’s still not back and it seems it won’t be anytime soon.

I used it mostly to read the dev blogs which are rather interesting but posted on a hidden section of the official website that you can access only if you are an active subscriber (which I’m not, currently). So I started to search for another fansite with the backups of those blogs, but without much luck. Till I found what I needed in the most obvious place: their feeds page.

I was trying to build a group on this site but it seems that it isn’t able to digest the feeds, so I moved the thing here. The archives are lost and volatile but at least I can read what’s new. In particular a detailed post about their server infrastructure and lag problems (dated 3 November).

Interesting stuff.

The fault doesn’t lie with the SQL software or hardware, it lies in our server software. I’m sure you’re all used to people blaming the SQL but usually it’s our own stuff which kills it the most :D

Posted in: Uncategorized |

Yet another general view on the NGE

I was reading an italian forum about the latest changes in SWG, mostly because it’s a type of community usually less conditioned, and I found a considerable number of “I quit!” posts. I consider these more important and I say that they are less conditioned because it’s unlikely that someone working on the game reads their opinions. There’s nothing to demonstrate, noone to convince. Still, the tone of the comments is the same I can find on the usual boards. Most of them are definitely pissed off, almost enraged. I tend to believe this because they really write only to confrontate with each other and vent their honest disappointment. So I tried to delve a bit deeper on the reasons, trying to put a line between the emotive reactions and the actual valid points.

Now this doesn’t pretend to be a deep analysis of this phenomenon. It’s just a vaporous glance to some of the reactions just out of the curiosity. It would require too much time to do this better. In general what I notice, more than the critiques to the gameplay or the changes to the classes, is the rage against SOE. The players are really pissed off, they feel cheated. This comes before everything else, even before the game itself, and it depends on a number of reasons, some of which I already commented. This radical change is happening all at the sudden and way too quickly. The previous Combat Upgrade was already traumatic but it was carried along, the players were part of its progress, they saw it coming, they saw it pushed back to after the release of JtL. So, good or not (and I’m between those who didn’t like it at all), the players were aware and part of what was happening. They had time to “digest” it. Now the situation is completely different and I wouldn’t be surprised if this was an experiment also about the community. Like a social test to see how the masses react to the most traumatic thing possible. Instead of endless announces and delays, long test periods and rebalances, everything is pushed out without notice and without giving the players enough time to even understand what is going on. But maybe I’m seeing too much into this and the reasons are not so elaborate as I think…

Jeff Freeman hints that the team is under hard crunch. I’m sure noone would feel surprised but, well, *I am*. Why the hell you would have the need to rush out something huge and so absolutely fundamental like this new transition? It doesn’t make ANY SENSE. This is probably the most delicate moment ever for the game at the exclusion of launch. And they are rushing out, they are on a hard crunch and they announced the whole thing when it was already all decided and with just a two-weeks notice. No communication, no significant explanations. Just a fact: “All your base are belong to us”.

I could go on forever wondering about the reasons behind all this inconceivable absurdity but, again, I wouldn’t be surprised if the real one would be really simple and linear:

This year, the release of Episode III has fueled significant growth for the title and indeed it’s the release of the final Star Wars that has prompted the timing on these changes. “It’s great to have a movie like Episode III that gets people excited. We tried to time these changes with the release of the DVD,” says Smedley. “There will also be a big marketing push that follows as well.

Have you noticed this? Have you noticed how extemporary is it? Without the usual months of preorders? I think that what is going on could be only the result of a marketing manoeuvre. From various posts on the boards we know that the “proof of concept” about the new twitch combat has been worked since forever. Basically since the players themselves started to claim a merge between Planetside and SWG after the obvious failure in the practice of the concepts of the HAM system. But then from Jeff we know that the steering point that concluded into the announce of the NGE goes back to just “a few” months ago. Maybe I’m too naive but I believe that the whole “the changes were deliberately released after the cash-cow of the new expansion had been milked” (this one “fished” from a comment) may not be so deliberate and preplanned. Maybe it’s all the consequence of a number of coincidences and different teams working on different parts of the game as autonomous units (which is already a glaring issue). Maybe the devs tried to push for the idea for a long time, working on two or more fronts. The live game, the Combat Upgrade, the new expansion all while the proof of concept of the twitch crazy idea was being developed. And then they all did a huge effort trying to “pitch” this idea to the “Managment” and this took more and more time. Till the point where the Mangment saw this “Planetary Alignment” between the problematic status of the game (and its not so stellar performance), the crazy idea that the devs were trying to pitch and the release of the DVD version of the very last episode of the series. The game, at this point, was probably in stagnation and without many other hopes since no new movies are expected to give another external sale-boost. The release of the DVD was probably seen as a last occasion to readily pick up or just leave behind. I’m sure that it’s at this point that the managment went “Hoooooooooph” and finally said, “What the hell. Let’s just do it.”

Something I’ve learnt is that the reality is the result of awful compromises. But or you accept them, or you do nothing. This is one. As I commented elsewhere what matters from now onward is solely the quality of the changes. And this remains a risk because the quality doesn’t come with guarantees. It is never safe. This while the whole discussion was derailed through various fancy transitions to “whether change or not”. Which is a moot point. Empty, redundant. These are the discussions that risk to trigger polemics that do not go anywhere.

I’ve already derailed enough but my point was to isolate the very first problem perceived by the players, the fact that they feel cheated, and figure out the reasons. Because I’m still naive and I always think that there are always some justifications, somewhere. And so I try to convince myself that all that is going on isn’t driven by an evil mind but just the result of a bunch of coincidences and compromises that, while do not fit with our ideals, are still necessary for the reality. And someone, at some point, has to choose. And I don’t think that choosing with some courage is to blame. *Even* if the result won’t be satisfying.

The players feel cheated and I totally understand and justify them. SOE recently launched an expansion that not only will be half broken and unbalanced as the NGE will be pushed live in just a few days, but that was also marketed to hand out rewards like the special necklace and the exclusive pets for the Creature Handler that are being removed just a few weeks after they were introduced (and bought). SOE deliberately (in this case) decided to not say anything about what would have happened just a few days later. The same for all those players that were able to endure the grind to become a Jedi and unblock the second character slot. The same slot will be now open for every player and in the same way everyone will be able to start as Jedi. The JtL expansion is now free. Some classes were grounded, others were stripped out of their identity and others were simply erased. The combat mechnics changed genre.

OF COURSE the players feel pissed off. No surprise here. They got ganked.

But again this is part of the risk that SOE decided to take. I wrote down some of the reasons why I think these compromises have been so particularly awful and what is left is simply a daring choice. What matters is now about how the game will move from this point. The current designers have inherited an overambitious mmorpg and the “fathers’ guilt”. Some things were broken, some others not. Choices have been made and the designers decided to accompany the conversion of the combat with a replan and consolidation of the classes that could trigger an endless discussion alone. It’s not really easy to discern some decent patterns to organize all that is going on to figure out the actual real, unbiased status of the game and potential development from now on. One thing is sure, though, the current players are sick to play a game still in beta that keeps shapeshifting. And from now on you can be sure enough that they will remain unreasonable and won’t provide unbiased and reliable feedback on the status of the game.

This is why I tried to start digging (only very superficially) to find some patterns. I think I’ve already covered how the players feel, the reasons why they feel so and the whole problem about the communication, timing and execution of these changes. So what about the actual game on its own? This is a short, uncomplete and superficial list:

  • Many players are worried about the increasing dependence of the game on ping and framerate which could become an insurmountable barrier, in particular in a game that wasn’t planned accordingly.
  • Quickbar combat+First Person Shooter style = clunky and lame. Very lame. The controls are felt problematic and using many types of attacks and effects through hotkeys is appropriate for an RPG style of combat instead of a FPS. The current mix is frustrating and alienating many players.
  • Inconsistences in the combat mechanics, too much abstraction. Ex. In the tutorial the players is instructed to hide behind some boxes while the laser beams of the stormtroopers go right through them. Lack of appropriate AI and mechanics.
  • Doubts about the scaling possibilities of the FPS combat at the higher levels (both PvP and PvE). FPS combat + levels = problematic. (Tess has a comment about Diablo, though. Which was also referenced by SOE more than the FPS combat)
  • The combat is faster but still not wrapped up around the new style and polished. All the characters and NPCs move awkwardly, the animations are mostly broken or not consistent and targeting becomes frustrating under these conditions. Forcing the players to just fire approximately with the autoattack for the best result.
  • The freedom and flexibility in how the profession system worked, while maybe mostly only apparent (due to standarized templates and such), was a major feature of the game that is going to be completely discarded.
  • Complete lack of customization within the same class.
  • Crafters roles at risk due to the complete removal of item decay and customization/personalization.
  • Direct unbalance between the classes: it is expected that most players will now become jedis to fill a world of jedis. Which kills both an healthy diversification (the “world” aspect as the unique trait of this game) and the entire perceived setting.
  • Heavy bias in the classes and general outlook toward the rebels. No distinction between typologies of classes (again “rebels vs imperials”). Even the tutorial is rebel-biased. If Smed is expecting to make PvP viable in this game and focus again on the Galactic Civil War, this seems a glaring overlook that will seriously undermine the future of the game and its possibilities.
  • Many problems still in the perception of the classes. Some of them have been stripped of their identity and main role (instead of consolidating and adding versatility). Ex. Bounty Hunters not being able to hunt players anymore, Jedis losing some key features, Smugglers not smuggling (slicing and production of spices being cut), Officiers not being able to lead groups (removal of “rally point”) and more.
  • Inconsistence and excessive simplification (and abstraction) of the level-based system. Ex. Using a pistol will “level” even your skill with a sword.
  • The specific, independent quests for each class are shaping the game as a single player, minimizing the strong social aspect that was both a strength and weakness of this game.
  • The quest rewards that the new characters acquire along the way and that seem to have an important role, aren’t accessible to respecced ones.
  • The UI is really ugly and looks more like a gross proof of concept that something finalized. (apologies to the artist/designer but I’m being honest. Some players have referenced Pit Fighter)

These are some of the points I’ve isolated even if I’m sure I missed many more. Each of these would require a deeper analysis on its own which would go beyond the scope of what I’m doing here. This was an attempt to narrow what isn’t working and what is probably more problematic but still urgent to solve. If SOE decided to go radical they definitely cannot stop now and must remain committed to go through each of those points and provide effective solutions. If they stop here they’ll just produce another half-assed system that will need another major redesign in less than a year. It already happened and noone needs more of these predictable fuckups. And the consequent negative admission that “change is bad”.

To conclude I just wonder what would have happened if SOE already ebayzed all its games as it will eventually happen. Maybe you remember someone menacing the “creative corner”. Some players speak already of fraud. What could have happened if the players had actually directly paid for those characters, skills and items that are now being scrapped or emptied of their main value? I believe this question is threatening enough without further comments…

P.S.
A direct fix I would suggest:
I don’t care if this breaks the current balance. This MUST be in and the rest of the game tweaked accordingly. If a player is engaged in melee he shouldn’t be able to use his ranged weapon. The very first thing the opponent would do is to block the weapon. Receiving laser bolts in your eyes for two minutes straight isn’t conceivable. So give every character defensive melee skills and knockback attacks, but ranged combat should remain ranged. The melee combat should be fleshed out as an independent system with its own “twitch” type of gameplay (give a look that what Bethesda is trying to do with Oblivion for decent twitch-y melee combat). Or removed entirely.

And for the comedy value give a look to this thread (and notice the date). This one also.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Reality check

This is one standard comment on FoH’s boards. Nothing too deep and elaborate but there’s some truth in it.

Dyscord:
Sounds like what I was afraid of. They implemented a interface and combat set like a FPS. The problem is this FPS is Wolfenstein 3D instead of Half-Life 2. Actually, I’m sorry, Wolfenstein had an enemy AI at least and it didn’t take 5 minutes to kill a nazi soldier. The SWG world isn’t made for this psedo FPS combat. Even the most uncreative FPS have shit everywhere to hide behind, etc. SWG is barren, really barren. Hell, the engine sucks so much shit you couldn’t display that much junk anyway. Its a good start of a good system jammed into the worst possible game.

It’s a god damn shame. It sounds like they have the beginings of something interesting. But thats just it. THE BEGINING. Not THE WE’RE PATCHING IT LIVE THE 15TH! If they were to work from this base and leave it in development for another year and a half to make a new game, maybe they’d actually have made something fun.

I don’t even think adding chaingun wielding robotic Hitler would help.

It brings up some of my scepticism about the implementation. To not even consider the basic, fundamental problems like the netcode and the engine and all the mechanics that would need to be completely rewritten (PvE AI? Environments? PvP?).

It’s like being a child and trying to push a square form piece into the triangle-shaped hole.

I wouldn’t be surprised if in a week SOE discards the project as a bad (or too good) dream.

(Some more harsh feedback and summary here. Again about the -lack- of jumping, inappropriate NPC AI, ugly UI, animations and much more.)

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Custom Autojoin BattleGrounds Addon for CTMod

Fancy title for the same thing.

I spent some time to work on one of my tiny UI addons to add more functions and keep it polished. Now it’s perfectly integrated with CTMod and by pressing on its button (on the Misc tab of CTMod panel) you can toggle between various modes that let you select the delay in seconds before it automatically joins the BattleGround.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Hardcore is as hardcore does

I just spotted a comment from Darniaq on Heartless blog which simplifies in a wonderful way another core problem:

It is dominated by Hardcore because the very system requires hardcore levels of investment. If a system is designed to require such dedication, then regardless of who you say it’s for, it will be dominated by hardcore. Because it’s easier for them to do it than casuals.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Fundamental problems in SWG’s wannabe twitch combat

I’m not sure if I wrote it clearly enough here but what is fundamental in the choice to go twitch is to incorporate progressively gameplay elements that aren’t too abstract and that MAKE SENSE. Like adding elements that can give the perception of the space a decent value. And this only because we are human beings who like games that simulate experiences that we can understand and relate to. This isn’t about fancy design hypothesis, this is a nature we cannot negate.

Twitch is good not because you have to break your mouse to play effectively:

Ethic:
I aim and left-click on a trooper and my laser pistol fires and hits. Click, click, click as fast as I can.

It feels like it will be a click-fest during combat.

But because it integrates a pattern (you have a pistol, you have to aim at target, and shoot) that people can relate to. That is somewhat visceral. Not made up, constructed or abstracted.

Now there’s a video that has been linked and that shows what I fear about this last change. But this “danger” goes beyond the problem pointed in that video.

In fact a decent (and fun) simulation of ranged combat isn’t just about the one element of aiming. That’s probably the less important one. The combat in “Jagged Alliance” (a tactical game) was great and realistic, but it didn’t include aiming, or at least not directly. But it included many, many other fundamental gameplay elements that are totally missing from SWG. Like arcs of fire, rates of fire, positioning and range. In particular the environments become a strong part of the gameplay and don’t just sit there as empty boxes with walls. The place sets the strategy, the situation. You can use walls and objects to take cover, hide, barrage fire. And then camping a zone, sending out other people while you cover them and so on.

ALL these elements are what make a game fun. Often just a different environment and layout is enough to present a whole new situation that you’ll have to study and solve. But this can happen only because there are *many* elements that come into play and that you have to consider. The good FPS aren’t those game that limit the action to a dull but frenetic clickfest, but are those that integrate all those elements right into the gameplay. The “first person” becomes then an optimal way to remove the abstractions and feel and understand directly the scope of the gameplay. These types of games are more successful because of the lack of abstraction and the presence of gameplay elements that are felt more natural.

Now the core point is about trying to integrate all those basic elements that the players expect from a situation like the ranged combat. It’s totally irrelevant if we build a system that is twitch, or one that is turn based or something else. We still need to integrate those elements that make sense, that the players can understand and use easily.

So it’s a terrible, superficial mistake to consider “twitch” as just “aim and click”. The player who made the video is complaining about the blaster bolts following the target, but he is not complaining because it’s simply ugly to see. But because this implies that the movement, positioning and range are elements completely irrelevant in the game.

This is why I believe that the very first priority should be about readding some of the elements I listed above to the gameplay. And it’s also the reason why the current games try to incorporate more and more of those visceral elements of the reality, like the physical consistence and all the new physics engines that are now trivialized as nothing more than a trend. And this is also why I believe that Prey is an extremely interesting game that will introduce some truly new and interesting patterns into the genre.

Which also brings back to my: “The graphic is the game”

These games need to renounce progressively to interfaces and abstraction to incorporate those elements (that cannot be lost or discarded) as a direct feedback and type of gameplay.

“Twitch” doesn’t mean that the game will be dumbed down. But a superficial implementation of twitch could do that.

Please do not rush it

There’s an article on IGN delving on some interesting points even if it’s obviously siding SOE. These are my highlights:

The official line on these changes is that both SOE and LucasArts think that the new Galaxies is how the original game should have been released. Sony Online producer Dallas Dickinson was in town to show the game off and told us that they’d gotten tons of feedback from all kinds of sources “telling us essentially that Star Wars Galaxies did not deliver on the Star Wars fantasy. It didn’t make you feel like you were part of the Star Wars universe.”

Well, this is a rather common point of view and it’s sort of predictable that those points would have been recovered to justify this huge change. Ubiq writes about a compact with the players, while I wrote about the communicative pact. The main difference here is that from Ubiq’s point of view the developers are breaking the compact because they are fundamentally changing the original concept of the game with another one. While what I wrote is that the “communicative pact” between the devs and players was already broken as the game came out and provided a type of game with mechanics *already* too alienated and abstracted from the established archetypes and cultural values and myths of Star Wars.

From this point of view this last “turn over” could be considered as a way to actually restore that pact that was broken long ago. Hence deserving the risk.

“The existing game is in a bad place and it has been. We try to give it as much attention as we can, but we’re allowing entire systems and professions to atrophy and that’s just going to continue going down in that direction

This is outright. The comment doesn’t try to justify the previous work and instead digs it without remorse. I agree in particular with the concept of atrophy that can be easily extended to many other situations and mmorpgs. Atrophy and stagnation are two widespread flaws that are already deep-rooted in the mind set of the developers. While this is mostly rhetoric once again used to justify the sweeping changes, the intention to dare and not just let the game follow its course is precious.

Yeah, it’s a big problem with the game when developers don’t know where you’ll be or if you’ll be having fun 30 minutes into your gaming experience. “That was a huge turn off to people that tried the game and quit or people that got told not to play the game. The only people left were hardcore MMO players that understood the genre and were willing to accept its failings.”

In one word: accessibility. This says that one of the fundamental flaws of the original system was in its lack of accessibility. I totally agree. So why and how the new one is suppposed to be better?

An over the shoulder 3rd person view like you’ve seen in Resident Evil 4 on the consoles that at first glance acts like any skill based action game. It means instant understanding of how the system works, which to SOE and Lucas mean more people likely to stay and pay… er, play.

See the pattern?

To begin with this can be interesting and better than a straight shooter in First Person, if the controls and the interface are well adapted and polished. The over the shoulder 3rd person view appeals me and could be an optimal blend between the “twitch” gameplay and group-oriented action.

But what is actually important is again the focus on the accessibility. I’ve already commented that decision to go “twitch” isn’t a guarantee of a better system. A whole lot will depend on the implementation and polish of all parts (it’s really not trivial, we go from the graphic engine to the controls, UI and gameplay interactions), but it’s true that “twitch” will bring the game one step closer to its goal and will help to solve the problems explained in the paragraph above: the accessibility.

Complex and abstract games aren’t easy to understand and relate to. I wrote a whole lot about this. While the “type” of game isn’t determinant for its quality, the decision to go twitch will basically force the designers to integrate and develop a type of gameplay that is more direct and natural. Which is what truly matters, whether twitch or not. In the past I ranted strongly against the trend in SWG to add classic rpg elements like class roles, sparkling “spell” effects and other immersion-breaking features that just clashed with this genre. The twitch combat, while nowhere mandatory to translate the Star Wars univers in a good game, is already a guarantee that the gameplay will be more understandable, more easy to parse and to get, more appropriate for this game.

What I wrote above about the “communicative pact” still applies here. It will be probably easier for the players to adapt themselves to these new radical changes than how it was for new players understand and accept the first combat system (grammar fails me here, but the sense should be clear).

We don’t need to just invent mathematically ideal formal systems, but we need formal systems that are also appropriate for the simulation we want to render. The myths and expectations are stronger and have an higher priority than the abstraction and perfection of a formal system. The idea of a “twitch” combat will remove the weight of the previous HUD-heavy gameplay that used a very high level of abstraction that was nowhere direct and intuitive (I wrote something similar while “reviewing” what we know about Vanguard). What is sure is that, if the implementation is good, the players will surely reward this choice.

Apparently it was difficult creating special content for 34 different classes, which I’m guessing anyone can see is a ridiculous balancing and content creation task that never should have come about in the first place. “We looked at the professions and said we have 34 widely disparate professions in the game. None of which get all of the attention that a profession deserves in a game this type and many of which don’t resonate to the Star Wars universe. I mean, what is a pikeman and why is it something in the game?” So with that thought in mind, they’ve folded all of the 34 professions down into nine professions including Jedi, bounty hunters, spies, officers, smugglers, commandos, entertainers, traders, and medics. “We ended up with these nine very iconic character types.

The necessity of a reasoned consolidation is obvious here and it’s another of those comments that are nowhere new. On the other side I remember Raph being sad because he wasn’t able to fit even more roles into the game, like the “mechanic” and even the “writer”.

As everyone else I’m perplex about using Jedis as a starting class. If anything I would have unblocked it just for those players subscribed for more than two years. It could have been a “cheap” but effective way to reward those players that had to suffer all these painful transitions. But then I would also have tried something different to try to retain their “rarity”. Maybe one day I’ll collect my ideas and write down how I would have implemented them.

The idea to use iconic character types is both good and bad. Good because it provides an answer to the question above: “what is a pikeman and why is it something in the game?” Using iconic types will help to understand and relate to the game in a more direct way but it’s also important that the gameplay is fleshed out so that each class will “feel” and play differently. Then it’s bad because it could easily bring to dull stereotypes. The same could be said about the will to make the player feel like an hero. I don’t think that’s a direct necessity. Star Wars is more subtle than how it appears and its strength isn’t that superficial like a simple hero’s journey. I think people here underestimate the efficacy of this setting.

And finally a note about the two professions getting discarded, rangers and creature handlers:

The only other profession we didn’t absorb into one of these iconic templates is the creature handler and only 1% of our players play that character type.

So, while it seems that elements of the rangers will be absorbed by the other nine archetypes, the creature handler profession will be dropped just because of a lack of popularity. And you cannot blame the devs for this choice.

In general I approve this new plan more than how I did with the previous Combat Upgrade. Changes are always good even if I would have appreciated more the will to build on top of what was there already instead of directly tear down big parts of the game. I don’t see this process as easy. As I said this need some serious work not only on the design, but also on the controls, the client and the interface. Adapting the whole PvE content to the new system and so that it is fun to play will be another huge and hard accomplishment that could easily fail.

But at least I think they are finally moving in the right direction. Let’s hope that the initial result will be acceptable and that the game can finally settle down and start to evolve on more solid premises.

Please do not rush it. It’s too important to go wrong.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Design as a practice of reality

With the whole discussion about SWG, a few recurring comments were resurrected. Which gives me an occasion to nail down the heart of the issue from my point of view and link it with both the critique to OOC-design and the problems of the interfaces and people’s expectations. Starting from my critique to Richard Bartle and concluding with the medium and its future possibilities.

Megyn:
No man, lack of jumping is a serious problem. To this day whenever I get asked about guildwars or SWG: “You can’t jump” is the only answer I can come up with. A 3d game that you can’t jump in. Fuck dude, you could jump in side scrollers.

But the problem is beyond that. The lack of jumping isn’t the problem, it’s the symptom.

The observation about the side scroller is perfect, a comparison with a MUD would fit even better. The perception of the space is one of those unique strength of this medium (as 3D game environment). People NEED this because the perception of the space is strongly deep-rooted in the expectations we have about games. And these games must provide patterns we can racognize and feel at ease with (and not just formal system abstractions) or we would just underutilize the potential of the genre, as Raph would say.

Now the problem of the jump doesn’t exist on it’s own, but it’s the sign that the game is “nerfing” a fundamental element. If this was math we would deal with a postulate. Something we cannot argue about and that we cannot disrespect.

Just notice this: both in GW and SWG the players don’t complain just about the jump, but about the jump as “symptom” of the perception of the space.

In fact: in SWG what is annoying is the impossibility to move through even a minimal barrier, while in GW is the impossibility to move where you want and always feeling “trapped” in a labyrinth that continuously tries to stop you from going where you’d like to.

So the problem isn’t because “people like to jump”. But because people expect to use this action as a “creative” pattern to solve a situation. While the game itsef *forces* another solution that isn’t felt as direct, intuitive and natural.

It’s not so different from how people get pissed off at the “monster closet” in FPS. The designers force patterns that the players refuses to accept.

Merusk:
The lack of any kind of functional jumping in a 3-d world is stupid beyond all measure. It reduces the world to nothing more than a side-scroller. “OOps.. twig in the way, have to go around.”