Did WoW push the bounds of the MMOG genre?
by Stephen Zepp · in General Discussion · 01/10/2005 (8:16 am) · 86 replies
(Note: In some ways this thread was written to try to channel discussion out of some threads where it didn't really apply, as well as open up a discussion on how Indy MMOG's may--or may not--push the genre bounds of the current definition of a Massively Multiplayer Game).
It is my opinion that even with the massive (pun intended) success of WoW as a PC game (fastest selling PC game ever according to some market surveys, as well as arguably the best MMOG launch known to date), it doesn't actually expand the boundaries of the genre nearly as much as some of the less successful titles such as Tale in the Desert, Puzzle Pirates as David Blake so kindly pointed out, or even PlanetSide (arguably the first MMFPS).
When I say "push the bounds", my meaning here is introducing fundamentally new gameplay styles, game mechanics, or design theory. I do not mean "better implementation of", or "more enhanced implementation of", or any other "it did XXX better than game YYY did"--for the purposes of this discussion, I'll concede (happily! I think they did myself) that WoW implemented standard genre expectations better than pretty much any game released to date.
For example, WoW certainly did quests better than EQ...I don't think anyone would seriously argue that. However, they are still "instanced" quests, and no matter how many times you, or anyone else, performs a quest, that exact same quest is available for someone else to walk up and perform. In my opinion, they simply provided a better implementation of a genre standard, but did not push the boundaries of quests within a MMOG in any way (obviously open to debate, which is the purpose of this thread!).
Another example is their implementation of "PvP". Surely, their "temporary PvP" flags that appear for a player in various circumstances is semi-unique, but does it fundamentally change the nature of standard genre PvP in a MMOG?
So, my question to the community is two-fold:
1) Did WoW actually push any genre boundaries, or is it simply "better than XXX, YYY, and ZZZ, and therefore the best around".
2) How exactly (or loosely) can Indy MMOG developers push the boundaries of what we know as "MMOG"...and why is this A Good Thing(tm)?
It is my opinion that even with the massive (pun intended) success of WoW as a PC game (fastest selling PC game ever according to some market surveys, as well as arguably the best MMOG launch known to date), it doesn't actually expand the boundaries of the genre nearly as much as some of the less successful titles such as Tale in the Desert, Puzzle Pirates as David Blake so kindly pointed out, or even PlanetSide (arguably the first MMFPS).
When I say "push the bounds", my meaning here is introducing fundamentally new gameplay styles, game mechanics, or design theory. I do not mean "better implementation of", or "more enhanced implementation of", or any other "it did XXX better than game YYY did"--for the purposes of this discussion, I'll concede (happily! I think they did myself) that WoW implemented standard genre expectations better than pretty much any game released to date.
For example, WoW certainly did quests better than EQ...I don't think anyone would seriously argue that. However, they are still "instanced" quests, and no matter how many times you, or anyone else, performs a quest, that exact same quest is available for someone else to walk up and perform. In my opinion, they simply provided a better implementation of a genre standard, but did not push the boundaries of quests within a MMOG in any way (obviously open to debate, which is the purpose of this thread!).
Another example is their implementation of "PvP". Surely, their "temporary PvP" flags that appear for a player in various circumstances is semi-unique, but does it fundamentally change the nature of standard genre PvP in a MMOG?
So, my question to the community is two-fold:
1) Did WoW actually push any genre boundaries, or is it simply "better than XXX, YYY, and ZZZ, and therefore the best around".
2) How exactly (or loosely) can Indy MMOG developers push the boundaries of what we know as "MMOG"...and why is this A Good Thing(tm)?
#82
03/01/2005 (12:00 am)
I agree with jorge. I played EQ for 2 years and have watched friends play WoW.. Too me it looks like an even bigger waste of my time than everquest was. Its also much less social than any other MMO I have played.
#83
1) I can say I have never had more fun playing an MMOG and all my friends that play agree with me. That is pushing boundaries in a genre!
2) Perhaps indies need to stop obsessing over technology and focus more on gameplay and content. I had friends who were still playing Diablo 2 before WoW came out, a game that was dated before it was even released! Will innovation make your game a success if it is not accessible and fun?
03/01/2005 (2:17 am)
Yes, Blizzard has once again pushed the boundaries of a genre. Developers and hardcore gamers are so intent at looking at technology and features that they have lost sight of what makes a game great, Fun Factor. Jorge says, "there is nothing great about WOW, just that its simple and fun". The fact that it is simple and fun is what makes it so great! Sure, the art is polished and the music is good, but it is the accessibility, content, and challenge that makes the game so enticing. I feel that anyone who says the game is easy has not played it very long because there is real challenge in the instanced dungeons created by Blizzard, as well as in character building and PvP. 1) I can say I have never had more fun playing an MMOG and all my friends that play agree with me. That is pushing boundaries in a genre!
2) Perhaps indies need to stop obsessing over technology and focus more on gameplay and content. I had friends who were still playing Diablo 2 before WoW came out, a game that was dated before it was even released! Will innovation make your game a success if it is not accessible and fun?
#84
As said above, true persistence means that new contents need to be created by the developers again and again to fill the "gaps". This is (almost) impossible. So the only way a true persistent world could work nowadays is an evolution system in the world. This means the world creates itself new contents. What does this mean ? The world here means the players and the "npcs". The players need mechanisms in the game to create new "contents" and as for the NPCs you need a "strong" AI (evolution, genetic algorithms, ...) to let world advance. I think there are lot of (doable) potentials for giving players mechanisms to change the world.
03/01/2005 (3:01 am)
To implement "true" persistence you need "true" evolution in the game.As said above, true persistence means that new contents need to be created by the developers again and again to fill the "gaps". This is (almost) impossible. So the only way a true persistent world could work nowadays is an evolution system in the world. This means the world creates itself new contents. What does this mean ? The world here means the players and the "npcs". The players need mechanisms in the game to create new "contents" and as for the NPCs you need a "strong" AI (evolution, genetic algorithms, ...) to let world advance. I think there are lot of (doable) potentials for giving players mechanisms to change the world.
#85
03/01/2005 (3:53 am)
Once I complete my first project, I'm most likely going to work on the MMOG I've been planning. I'm planning on addressing most of the issues above, and then some, with many simple implements I devised when I began working on it back in 1996. I'm not entirely sure all of them will significantly, or otherwise, effect gameplay in either way, nor am I certain if they will achieve their desired effectiveness, but I know this, I'm going to go all the way I can to make sure the game is what it's supposed to be, fun! 
#86
1) the less /commands, the better.
2) instant gratification - the idea of tradeskills needing a 'time cost' is rubbish. If a 'time cost' is needed, it should be offline time, not online. Sitting and watching a time bar is the most useless online activity I can think of.
3) Self-modifying environments - in DAoC, one of the big problems is that about 1/2 of the content is now ignored. I think MMOGs should upgrade unused zones automatically to make them more attractive to players, be that in XP or loot.
03/01/2005 (9:37 pm)
I never got into WoW, but I've played both City of Heroes and Dark Age of Camelot, and theres more than a few things I'd like to see in MMORPGS1) the less /commands, the better.
2) instant gratification - the idea of tradeskills needing a 'time cost' is rubbish. If a 'time cost' is needed, it should be offline time, not online. Sitting and watching a time bar is the most useless online activity I can think of.
3) Self-modifying environments - in DAoC, one of the big problems is that about 1/2 of the content is now ignored. I think MMOGs should upgrade unused zones automatically to make them more attractive to players, be that in XP or loot.
Torque 3D Owner Matthew Langley
Torque