Liore is on vacation and so Dahakha kindly agreed to fill in for the day. You can find his blog, Star-Fired Beef, right here.
Anyone who follows MMO news, particularly the major MMOs, knows that the various companies competing for our time and money do some things, make some decisions, that are not highly regarded by the playerbase. The resulting explosion is inevitably, yet tiresomely acted out in two major steps. Ground Zero is the forums of the “villain” company of the moment and the accompanying social media (mostly Twitter, in my experience). This is where the direct, and often the most vicious, feedback occurs. The secondary fallout occurs on blogs and MMO news sites, where at least a little restraint is shown by the howling masses and where you are more likely to find the thoughtful, constructive critiques. Not that those don’t exist at Ground Zero as well, but they are regularly buried under the ravings of those who feel that politeness and respect are a sign of weakness.
The latest brouhaha is on over at ArenaNet, thanks to their announcement of the pricetag on the upcoming expansion. Ravious pointed out some of the ways that the developers – i.e. the actual artists, not the company as a whole – are being affected by the backlash. It is a sad indictment of our hobby’s community that this behaviour exists, of course, but is it made worse by the easy public access to individual employees? Or rather, is it beneficial for anyone except the haters for a company to encourage or require non-PR staff to have work-related social media accounts?
Why do it?
It seems like Twitter has prompted a massive increase in the number of developers who have a public face. I know that there was a sense of “greater engagement with our fans will give us good PR” at some point, and so there was a push by the suits to have the developers discuss their (as yet unreleased) work with the public a lot more than had previously been the case. Blizzard did it – I think Ghostcrawler becoming *the* name for WoW was a direct result of this policy. The ArenaNet team were way more open about their vision and what they were doing in the buildup to GW2’s release, and have continued to remain accessible to the public. SOE/Daybreak made whole Blueprints to emphasize just how much they were interacting with the community with EQN and Landmark. And most of the eagerly-awaited crowdfunded MMOs – Star Citizen, Camelot Unchained, Crowfall, etc – go out of their way to keep up a constant stream of communication with their fans.
The main benefit – I would argue the only benefit – of such direct public engagement is the creation of a more personal relationship with the player. The players get to feel like they are respected as people, and their thoughts and feelings are being taken into consideration when games are designed or changed. This presumably strengthens the bond of loyalty to the company and/or the product. But is it worth it?
Drop it like it’s hot
This all looks great on paper. And it probably works a treat as long as the players are mostly content or happy with what you are doing. But as soon as something controversial or unpalatable crops up, WELL. It instantly becomes clear (at least to me) that this policy of more communication, more interaction, more personal and instantaneous feedback is nothing but a way for players to elevate themselves. Instead of treating the developers as people, and having a civilised discussion, a negotiation regarding the design direction being taken, the players see this policy of availability as an invitation to dictate. To demand satisfactory service, as if the developers are their employees, not the studio’s.
It is easy to point to Community Managers and PR reps and press releases and say, “this is just the wall of corporate-speak, do the developers ever get to actually hear what we, the players, want?” But on the other hand, if the results of breaking down that corporate wall is having the developers treated like personal servants who can never get anything right, is it not better for that wall to stay up? At least for the time being, until we can find other, less overwhelming ways to facilitate more direct interaction between players and developers.
I would personally prefer to have less direct interaction with developers if it means they don’t have to put up with the bullshit that comes from the community via social media. A developer who is less stressed from having to deal with direct backlash from the public – and who is not driven to despise the people they are making a game for as a result – is bound to do better work, in my opinion. Leave the community interaction to the people hired for that purpose, and let them get on with their jobs.
Liore is on vacation, but blogging never sleeps! Or, um, something like that. Today’s post is by Murf from the blog Murf Versus.
For the first five minutes of my MMORPG career, I was stuck in the new player tutorial that Origin had added in their Renaissance expansion for Ultima Online. Once I had arrived amongst the adventurers of the realm, I knew one thing immediately: I needed new clothes.
Looking good matters in MMOs. Like theories of evolution guided by sexuality, there are certain rewards that draw players to flames (the kind you aren’t supposed to stand in) as if they were moths. Progression is driven by the need to look better, to be more attractive to your mates, or to show off to others. Whether you are a powergamer or a roleplayer, a ganker or a crafter, a collector or a flavor-of-the month, having an avatar that looks good unites us all.
I felt the urge to look better immediately upon seeing how good others looked, sitting around Britain’s bank in their finest gold plate or dyed black robes. I felt it even more when I journeyed over to EverQuest. It will sound strange to some, but EQ didn’t have level requirements on gear. As long as it fit your race (yes, gear had a size, so no Ogres running around in tiny breastplates or Gnomes hiding inside their Ogre-sized leggings), you could wear almost anything. For me and my low teens self, my greatest aspiration was to own a full set of Bronze Armor on my Dwarven Cleric.
I had a few pieces, but I could never find anyone with the few I needed. When I did, they wanted too much money. Bronze lent itself more to the orange-side of the color spectrum, but that made it even cooler. While everyone else was equipped with drab leathers or dreary chain mails, I had bits of bright metallic orange all over my person.
Sadly, I never completed that set.
City of Heroes made looking good an art form (and easier). Instead of assembling your costume from bits and pieces you had pulled off the corpses of fallen enemies, the game started you off with an incredible character creator. I loved it. Not only could I assemble a guild of number-themed ninjas alongside a few school buddies, but I could do so before even entering the game. Better yet, wealthy benefactors regularly held costume contests to reward those amongst the rabble who had exquisite taste. I even won one once.
While it looked fine at the time, EverQuest II’s gear was rarely attractive outside of owning a completed set. Like many MMOs, a patchwork accumulation of gear made you look like a three year old who just dressed itself for the first time. To solve this problem, the game had display slots, and to do this day I consider them the gold standard of how a MMO should be designed.
Essentially, you had two sets of slots: one for gear with stats that counted and the other with gear you wanted to display on your avatar. This was particularly important as my bard, Album Platinumbound, had assembled his first tier of class-based armor, but it had worn out its use. Rather than look like a plebeian, I got to keep my shiny blue armor which matched perfectly with my charismatic personality.
Other MMOs have added things like transmogrification where you can make one item look like another or they have added in micro-transactions for purely cosmetic pieces of armor. While both are okay systems, neither is my preference. Still, it is so, so important to remember how powerful looking good can be. Both go a long way toward making that possible.
How one looks says a lot about what you’ve been doing with your time, and I personally enjoy the status symbols that come with the right gear. At the height of my raiding career, I was a foppish troll with a giant sword, but others knew me as such and thought that because I had the gear I also was an amazing player. It just so happened I could back up the armor I wore, but that’s a different story.
At the same time, while status is important – especially as a reward for something challenging – we all want to look good. Not just in MMOs, but in RPGs as well, people expect to progress from tin cans strapped together to a shining suit of ekphrasistic armor crafted by Hephaestus himself. That should be something afforded to all players, no matter the time they invest in the game, as long as a suitable amount of time and effort have been spent as payment for the desired look.
I say give it to those at the top a little quicker, maybe added a few lights or extra spikes, but otherwise have it available to all. Better year, make sets that anyone can access, but only a select few can customize or outfit with trophies earned by challenging accolades. Or, you know, just let everyone look good and stop giving a damn about having a reward at the end of the rainbow, when we all know people will journey to rainbow’s end with or without the pot of gold.
All I know is looking good matters – I don’t much care how anyone gets there.
Yesterday this blog post “about the liberating and energizing effects of complete commercial failure” made the rounds on Twitter. The very indie studio behind critical successes Tale of Tales, Sunset, and more are shutting their doors and getting out of the game industry. The post outlines some of the ways that the developers didn’t succeed, but at the end of the day it simply seems that in the current market players didn’t want to pay $20 or even $10 for their game.
It’s a problem that I can sympathize with, although I too am part of the plague of deal-seeking buyers. The Steam Summer Sale just ended, and I spent less than I have in years. In past sales I’ve felt frustrated by a lack of fresh, new games to buy, but that wasn’t the problem this time. This year, I just can’t make myself pay more than $9.99 for a game.
Witcher 3 is getting great reviews, and I’ve already sorted it into the “maybe in the Christmas sale” bucket. I actually really want Shadows of Mordor, both because the game is apparently great and because I really like this blog post by Tzufit on playing the game as a lady character. The game is maybe a year old and dropped to $25 during the Summer Sale… and it’s still too rich for my blood. I mean, I could buy it now, or I could wait until the Fall or Winter sale and get it for $15. That’s a pretty clear choice for me, and I already have a thousand literal hours of games that I own and have never played.
The Guild Wars 2 expansion kicked off pre-orders during a rather flashy segment on the PC showcase at E3. Heart of Thorns costs $50, and includes the base game. This is the first paid expansion that Arenanet has introduced since the game launched over three years ago. The response to this news has been mixed at best, and includes a rather popular Reddit campaign encouraging people to boycott. To be fair there are a number of concerns about what is included in Heart of Thorns, but the message from a vocal segment of players is that they are just not getting $50 of value from this piece of software.
I wrote just a couple of paragraphs ago that I refuse to pay more than $9.99 for a game, and sharp-eyed readers may have caught that I was totally lying. Of course I’ll pay more than that for a game! I just spent $40 on the FFXIV expansion, Heavensward! I’ve bought every single World of Warcraft expansion for $60 a piece. I bought WildStar for $50.
For the last few years, stores like Steam and Humble Bundle have been driving down the prices of PC games and the corresponding expectations of buyers, and yet the price of MMOs has remained relatively the same since the days of Everquest. There are of course extended costs associated with MMOs that help maintain those prices — servers don’t manage themselves — but even in the era of the omnipresent online multiplayer, MMO prices have remained fairly stable.
The backlash against Heart of Thorns is interesting, though. If I can buy a AAA title like Watchdogs for $15 when it’s only a year old, I can see why some people would feel skittish about spending three times that amount on an MMO.
I am not at all saying that MMOs and their expansions aren’t worth their cost. If anything, the games we buy on Steam are worth much more than we’re willing to pay, and honestly $50 every three years for Guild Wars 2 players is still a pretty great deal. But are MMO prices finally feeling the effect of Steam-ified devaluation?
Blizzard can’t make up their mind. Likely sinking under a tsunami of angry tweets and forum posts, the publisher announced that flying is totally back, you guys! You just have to do a long “meta-achievement” that could take weeks. Elly and Aro feel this is a fair compromise, while Liore wonders about the excellent timing.
The Steam Summer Sale is on right now and the gang have mixed reviews. Aro bought more games than ever before in a summer sale. Elly is eyeing up a Steam stream box and .. more Borderlands? Meanwhile Liore has Steam malaise and has just.. played the Sale Game for badges? Ugh, she’s the worst.
Also, Aro is a Rock Band rock star! Elly devises virtual parenting! Liore must build a boat!
Like to watch? This podcast has a livestreamed video version:
If you enjoyed this podcast, please “Like” or “Favorite” it in your media consumption method of choice! It makes us feel nice.
I haven’t written much here about WoW’s flying drama, although we did talk about it on the podcast. You probably already know all about it but here’s a very short summary:
A few weeks ago Watcher mentioned in an interview that flying would not be coming to Warlords of Draenor or any future content. WoW players flipped out. This week Blizzard announced in a blog post that flying will be coming back, but it’s locked behind an achievement that involves grinding reputations and doing quests. WoW players were pacified.
I mean, what Blizzard has proposed is basically an attunement for flying, right? Looking at the requirements, they are fairly hefty. You need to get to Revered with multiple reputations, explore the world, gather a lot of treasure, complete almost all of the Draenor quests, and do a long series of Garrison dailies. Now I’m a fan of attunement chains in MMOs so this all sounds pretty okay to me, but I’m surprised that a community that has had such strong negative reactions to attunements in the past is so happy and accepting of this one.
On the podcast I said that Blizzard needed a better PR team, but after this week I feel like I could be totally wrong on that front.
1) Calling this an “achievement” rather than “attunement” is clever marketing.
2) Threatening to remove something completely and then coming back a week later to say that okay, you can have your toy but only if you do this otherwise totally unpalatable (by the usual player standards) process first is a very good way to get people to accept your terms.
I don’t actually believe that Blizzard announced that they were removing flying with the intention of softening up the community for an attunement chain, but it would have been diabolically clever if they had.
Anyway, the next time a group of MMO players gets all cranky about attunement chains I am going to look back on the relatively positive response to this announcement and make a smirky face.