Richard Garriot Argues Against Stagnant MMOG Design 175
The creator of Ultima Online and Tabula Rasa and well-known designer Richard Garriot spoke at the Develop Conference in Brighton, England on the subjects of stagnating MMOG design and the NCSoft deal with Sony. His commentary on Massive game design is fairly direct: "If you look at the vast majority of MMOs that has come out since Ultima Online and Everquest, you can look at the features and they are almost exactly the same. Even though the graphics have got better and the interface is much slicker, fundamentally the gameplay is unchanged. Worse yet, there are many things that have become standard that I look at and even though they are powerful enough to encourage the behavior of people obsessed with playing these games, I don't think they are the right way of building the future."
Re:Very perceptive Richard (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, I get it... this is the obligatory Richard-Garriot-Sucks thread. I would think it would be further down. My bad.
Re:Very perceptive Richard (Score:4, Insightful)
More elements of simulation needed (Score:5, Insightful)
well.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Some are differant (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:UO=innovative and no one has gotten it right si (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:UO=innovative and no one has gotten it right si (Score:5, Insightful)
Can you say the same in WoW? Is there any reason for a high level player to go to a low level crafter? Or how about low level players helping on high level quests?
This is grind. Players feel the need to do monotonous dull tasks to level up because doing the riskier task will kill them and halt their progression, or slow it down(exp penalty). In UO the only reason to grind was if your impatient, or a powergamer. There was never a need for it. In WoW, it's gameplay design. This is what Garriot is angry about. Grind is now considered to be a gameplay aspect that players "expect", and grind isn't fun.
Re:Very perceptive Richard (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't think the FPS MMO market is ever going to be a smashing success, because you can only shoot so many bad guys and have so many weapons before it gets old.
Anarcy Online in its current form is a better game than TR. It was a better game back when it was first released. The biggest problem with AO is the fact that so many losers think it is cool to create a female toon, strip down to nothing, and gyrate their ass in your character's face if you ever sit down.
TR's UI sucks, the quests are fairly lame, and unless Garriot listens to those beta testers that aren't still frothing over UO and think he is god (see, Brad McQuaid and the disaster that was Vanguard), this game is going to be a pile of bullhockeypucks.
I'll hope for improvement, but most games don't get radically better from their beta state.
Re:Very perceptive Richard (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh, wait, Meridian 59... I mean, The Realm Online. I mean, Neverwinter Nights...
Yes, grinding is bad (Score:3, Insightful)
Obviously, to SOME extent grinding is necessary (not counting PvP which Guild Wars has down damned near perfectly) but when you start talking about hundreds of hours just to REACH the end game (let alone take part in end game activities), you've got massive barrier against casual gamers.
Re:Very perceptive Richard (Score:4, Insightful)
No-one said they weren't fun, just that the design is stagnant.
In general, you do have a great point: Why should anyway care that some crotchety bastards think the genre is stagnant, when more people than ever are paying $15/mo to play a Diku?
It's similar to the old:
If five hundred thousand people are happily playing EQ, why would you think anything's wrong with the design?
The answer to that, of course, is nine million people happily playing WoW.
When design stagnates, it doesn't mean no-one's having fun. It just means that if the next game is the same, it can't grow the market.