Vague Patch Notes: Don’t alter MMO systems for people who never liked them to begin with

    
28
M'qote

Here’s a concept that just would not leave my mind thanks to World of Warcraft, but it’s not a bad thing. But in order to talk about that, first I have to talk about horror movies.

Some of my friends do not like horror movies. Sometimes, this is more about mistaken assumptions, like thinking that “horror movie” means “film in which teenagers get stabbed by a dude for an hour until the last remaining cast kills that dude.” But many times, it’s simply a matter of someone who doesn’t particularly care for horror movies. And that’s perfectly valid.

The problem, however, comes when these same friends advertise a particular horror film to me as “a horror movie that even I can enjoy!” This usually means that it’s not actually a horror film in the first place, because… well, that’s kind of the point. And that’s a perfect place to jump into the way that MMOs can have a bad habit of trying to market things as features for people who generally don’t like a given feature.

Case in point: PvP. A lot of games – particularly ones that have mandatory open PvP – often try very hard to convince people who don’t like PvP that they should totally try this game, that the PvP really isn’t as cutthroat as you might think, that there are really ways to not worry about it…

None of these messages work, of course, because most of the people who are being sold these messages have already heard them before. But a game actually changing its open PvP model to accommodate the people who really don’t like open PvP is, by definition, changing away from the model that its actual playerbase wants to see. There is no “open PvP for people who don’t like open PvP” because it’s a contradiction in terms.

There are lots of people who dislike open PvP for a lot of different reasons, of course, but the whole selling point of open PvP is that it’s open. You cannot opt out. While the people who wish to opt out may have different reasons for doing so, the endpoint of that is still being able to opt out. And once you can opt out of PvP, you no longer have open PvP, no matter how many reasons you might give people to opt in. This is also a viable PvP system, but it’s not open PvP – it’s something else.

And you know what? It’s good that there are games out there with open PvP that try to be exactly that and nothing else. And it’s also good not everyone likes that.

Ohhh snap.

No single game is to everyone’s taste. Some games do one or two things well and more or less nothing else, and sometimes even the things it does well are debatable. (Star Wars: The Old Republic feels like it kind of stalled out on everything other than its initial class story.) Other games do lots of things very well, making a game with something for many player types to enjoy. (Final Fantasy XIV has excellent dungeons, story, crafting, housing, minigames, and so forth.) Every game has some things it does worse and some things it does better, and that’s fine.

But there’s a trap that designers and players can both fall into when there’s an urge to make the parts of the game someone doesn’t like into something for the people who very definitely don’t like it. Not just to tempt people who might like it but people who are telling you confidently that they don’t. And that is almost always a bad look.

Consider crafting in FFXIV. Crafting in the game is involved, and it’s in the midst of a series of overhauls to make it easier to level one crafting job instead of forcing you to level all of them, giving you ways to level up that are less expensive, and making it clearer how you’re meant to craft. All of these are good things. What the overhauls are not meant to do are make crafting an activity that is mandatory, or an activity for people who don’t like crafting. Instead, it’s targeted toward people who like crafting but are unclear on how to progress or simply need a helping step along the path.

The thing is, crafting is an activity people already like in the game. Crafting has dedicated fans, happy to craft away and discover new recipes. It doesn’t need to find an audience. It’s an activity that could use an expansion of that audience, but the people who just really dislike crafting are just… really going to dislike crafting, and that’s fine.

The reason this is in my head about WoW is the latest expansion changing the game’s follower missions again. Supposedly, the goal here is to make them more interactive and more interesting, and the whole thing made me sigh a little, not because it sounds awful but because the fact of the matter was that I never had a problem with them to begin with. The iteration in Legion was a bit simple, but you know what? It was fine. It was absolutely fine and worked for what it wanted to be.

Whatever changes are made to it are not going to make it fine to the people who don’t like it and can never be talked around into liking it.

As intended.

For some people, having low-impact set-and-go gameplay in WoW is something they don’t want to engage with, and that’s fine. Some of them would prefer it wasn’t in the game at all, just like some people would prefer that lots of parts of the game weren’t in there. That’s also fine, even if it’s wrong; it’s fine for this to exist, fine for it to be a thing, and fine for players to have a reason to engage but not necessarily have to if they don’t care.

But what you’re not going to do is convince the people who wish it wasn’t in the game at all that it’s super neat and fun and they should try it out now. The only way to do that is change the very fundamental nature of what these missions are to not be low-impact fire-and-forget bits of management you do early in your play session. It would destroy what people who do like them like about them.

Don’t get me wrong, the changes being shown off at this point don’t look bad or anything. They’re frankly neutral. It’s just something where the redesign seems like extra effort to no real end, because there was already a very functional version of this system in place and it doesn’t need changing. You can literally just roll that out again. No one would complain about it. Heck, it’d save development time.

From a player side, the best we can do to influence this is learn whether we’re asking for something to not be itself or to broaden its appeal. It’s perfectly valid to say that you’d prefer mission table gameplay if, say, it weren’t gated behind the randomness of Battle for Azeroth; that’s asking for a refinement and not a wholesale replacement. It’s fine for some systems to not be for you, even if they have rewards or benefits you otherwise want.

And from a developer standpoint… well, it’s all right for not every player to like every system. The goal shouldn’t be that 100% of the playerbase has 100% engagement with everything; rather, it should be that the majority of players are engaged with whatever takes the majority of development resources.

Trying to make a horror movie for people who don’t like horror movies is trying to not make a horror movie. And not everything needs to be a horror movie, but making a horror movie that some people won’t enjoy based on genre is a valid exercise.

Sometimes you know exactly what’s going on with the MMO genre, and sometimes all you have are Vague Patch Notes informing you that something, somewhere, has probably been changed. Senior Reporter Eliot Lefebvre enjoys analyzing these sorts of notes and also vague elements of the genre as a whole. The potency of this analysis may be adjusted under certain circumstances.

28
LEAVE A COMMENT

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
strangesands

This is true for so many games. In TSW, they literally tried relaunching the game to cater to people who hated the combat, forgetting the people that actually liked TSW combat and only wanted more content. In the end, neither group liked the combat. Do what you do best, and double down on that. Don’t worry about the whining ninny in the corner, who probably will never be happy (and probably spends zero dollars on games besides).

Reader
Jeremy Barnes

“It should be that the majority of players are engaged with whatever takes the majority of development resources.”

It shocks me how much developers don’t seem to understand this.

Reader
Mat Bars

I thought the main reason people hated the follower system because it was mandatory to complete the WoD main story? You couldn’t progress until you got the shipyard and you couldn’t get the shipyard in a timely manner without sending followers to gather resources.

Also perish the thought of fine-tuning stuff people already like. The follower system is objectively mediocre. I won’t judge you for liking it though. After all, it’s just something you can do on the side without putting much thought into it. Perfect for casuals and us avids but there is no appeal for the hardcore crowd and I fully agree that it never will have any.

Of course by your logic they should have never changed the game to appeal more to casuals and us avids, which is probably true considering it’s been bleeding subscribers for years.

Reader
Wrecktangle

While I agree with that World of Warcraft constantly makes iterations to systems including classes and rhing things that aren’t broke the mission tables isn’t one of them.

People have been complaining and calling it a “fscebook game” since it’s inception in WoD. In legion it got a lot more simple albeit worse and yes felt mandatory.

BFA same kind of thing.

It’s been a constant source of complaints until the expansion is at the tail end where people have completed the content the table provides bonuses too.

Trying to make it more interactive is not a bad thing.

kjempff
Reader
kjempff

About the pvp thing..
Are there actually many players who like pve game with occasional pvp ? I am not sure what is the case, only that for me pvp in a pve game is just resources wasted, that could have been used for better pve gameplay.

I would be inclined to say the first fork choice to take when designing a mmorpg is to choose between pvp and pve. I just seem that history supports that those who try to sit between those two chairs, end up failing or becomming half assed versions of both.

Reader
Ald

The quest for “more” will always alienate your core fans. The real question is if it’s worth it in the long run?

Then again i’ve of the mindset that studios need to stop making games for their shareholders and start making games for the fans that help build their studio to begin with.

Reader
Adam Russell

deleted

Reader
Robert Mann

It is true, that trying to improve… say crafting, by listening to people who’s focus is on dungeons, will most likely be a net negative and destroy a lot of the interest in crafting from some others.

At the same time, there’s a step to this that is missing in this article. There’s various degrees of interest in these systems. That is, some people want to do everything themselves, some want to be casual and hit maximum ranks quickly, some want something more involved, some want to require interaction with others, some want a system to be tied to other systems, or not to be so tied, etc.

You cannot please everyone. The status quo is “Hey, let’s do X because that’s what all the other MMOs are doing.” Which merely leaves people who are not interested without an MMO that appeals to that part of their interests. It’s the same thing, just in a different form.

We can and should embrace the idea that there are different interests, on different scales. Instead, we get forum warriors making salt about how new game X doesn’t fit them to mold Y -or- Z that is already done to death. Then people wonder why the genre is called dead or stagnant…

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Dobablo

Summary of above article.
Don’t try to make things better. You won’t win new converts and current players don’t hate it so any improvements are a waste of effort.

Reader
Zero_1_Zerum

Speaking of people who don’t like Horror movies, I’m one of them. I don’t watch them. But, Alien is one of my favorite movies. I always thought of it as a sci-fi movie, but apparently it’s also horror.

More on topic, I don’t like PVP for the very specific reason that it’s player versus player, some of which have been playing the game for years, they’re more skilled and also faster than I’ll ever be. Not to mention griefers, gankers, and the down right rude PVP players. There’s no system of PVP video game that I’d enjoy, because to do that it couldn’t be PVP at all.

That’s fine, I just won’t play PVP games, and they can make games that don’t cater to my tastes.

But, I don’t like it when devs change things around that effect both PVP and PVE. There’s been a few times they’ve nerfed perfectly fine skills for PVE because they didn’t work well for PVP. They broke the skill for PVE to fix it for PVP. I don’t PVP, so why should PVP effect how I play the game? I think PVP and PVE should be separate systems and balanced differently. But, I don’t know of any games which do that. So, by making the PVP system and PVE system the same, they end up diluting both. By trying to please one type of players, they often piss off the other type. They try to please everyone and often do the opposite.

All of that said, I think the one of the first things any creative, be they a game dev, an artist, a singer, will have to accept is that it’s impossible to please everyone. They shouldn’t even try. I’ve heard many times that the key to being successful in entertainment is finding your niche market, your audience. That audience isn’t, and can’t be, everyone.

Reader
EmberStar

There’s a lot of genre cross-over in some movies. My mom hates “horror movies,” but she watched Lake Placid and Shawn of the Dead and mostly enjoyed them. Are they true horror movies? Probably not, I’m not sure. But they’re also comedies. They just happen to be comedies where between the humor, peoples’ heads come off.

I don’t have anything useful to say about the article, except that I don’t like PVP. There is no iteration or variation a dev can come up with where I would like PVP, or be willing to try it. Devs *don’t* cater game design to me (which is good, because I’m arbitrary and fickle and so far off the curve of “average” that I don’t even show up on the chart.) But a dev team trying to “create PVP that even Emberstar can enjoy” can just stop. Because what’s left by the time I’d be willing to even log in would be NOT PVP in every possible way.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
Tobasco da Gama

There’s been a few times they’ve nerfed perfectly fine skills for PVE because they didn’t work well for PVP. They broke the skill for PVE to fix it for PVP.

I played Mesmer in GW2, so I know this feeling big time.

Reader
Robert Mann

I am of the opinion that, since it NEVER ends with PvE being untouched in such cases, there simply needs to not be any crossover of PvE classes into PvP stuff.

Which instantly upsets other people, of course, who want to do both on one character.

This is merely another case of the same altering of systems for people who don’t enjoy them… but one where the clash involves people enjoying what other people don’t in the systems. AKA, it’s a “Can’t please everyone” thing. So my best solution is that some games should mix the two, and some shouldn’t.