Posts
I was playing Warhammer Online (WAR) and I stumble upon the lack of economic aspect in the game. There is AH, there is pricing and it seems to be assumed that it satisfy players' appetite for economic fun. (Well some people do like to play AH. and they login everyday just to play AH and earn gold in other MMO).
Gold in WAR seems useless for individual. Many people are been offended when my guild suddenly decide to make the tax 25%. This cause a lot of problems to the management level in the guild. There is no real requirement for gold in WAR. There isn't any super armor / weapon to be crafted. There isn't any real need to get super potions. In WAR, the real aim is to have RvR. Hence the guild decide to strive for an end game keep (claiming a keep cost 240 gold per day). If gold is useless in game, it is this concept that conflicts with real life. We need money in real life. Is this a design problem to make something that is so important in real life to be so insignificant in game? Or is it not? The real problem is that if such decision is made in design level, how should this difference be educated to the player so that it will not give them much mental impact?
Now for the real topic. I see so many problems in guild management in all games. I see management level giving reasons, giving brief answers to the people and just take it that the decision is final. This cause people to join other guilds or form their own guilds. I do understand that as no one is actually responsible in game. Everyone pay money to play. We all are equal hence there is no need to demand for people to spend effort to manage. This is a portion that can be looked into for design changes. Most MMO now concentrate on having the system that we have in companies. The problem is, do the players desire such structure?
Is it also correct in real company? Recently, I had a discussion with some of the colleagues left behind to fix certain stuff like policy in the company, evaluation and work flow. Till now, people in the discussion reflected (indirectly) that the discussion is actually useless. The person in charged is actually not concern and does not show effort/progress at all. The future looks bleak and it seems that the next project will be the same as the current one.
I notice that in game, the management level could be a base level. Everyone contributes in some sense and decision is made by majority. And in real life, it's different. The top has to be active to motivate the people below and the below has to reflect to know that the top's decision is effective or not.
The only similarity I have found so far (as the major experience for me in real life and in game has always proven to me that the major failure of any management level (both in game and real life) ) is that the people at the top expects the below just to accept and work. So far, most of the management that I have encountered (in both real life and game) behaves quite similarly in this aspect. Even when anyone says that the interaction is to be both ways is just another way of saying, "I am not going to do anything. The below is just supposed to listen and work quietly". They just want the bottom to feel that he is listening but he is wrong. When time passes, people lose faith in his/her words and the impact will be even bigger.
I will say till now, action speaks louder than words. And so far, I only hear excuses and no actions at all.
(Pending rephrase when I am free. Too much of "last minute" typing)
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
All Good for the Game
I have an incident in which I am expected to create a feature for a game. I asked for the design specification. In the end, the designer gave me this answer. "This discussion was made by XXX and YYY. And hence they decided this. However, if there are better solutions. Feel free to try. All good for the game."
It is very "noble" for the designer to give such answer. It gives programmer free play. WOW. It will means something else if the above discussion mentioned was not a good discussion, ending up with a solution that in theory is not going to work at all.
However let's look at it this way, the programmer will end up doing all the work and in the end during INDIVIDUAL evaluation, the designer gets all the credit. It is a sad fact for any company that evaluates based on the feature you are in charged and also based on the hours you stay in the company. It ends up that the capable programmers who can finish their work fast end up doing more work but reward is the same with others. Or they finish their work fast, get out of the company and end up having less reward because they do not stay in the company as long as others. Such company policy will kill any capable programmers' passion for the company.
What is wrong with this designer is that he tries to push responsibility. Such actions cause resentment and will the programmer really make a good feature out of it? Or is it because the designer is not capable to create the design and hence need other people to do it? I do not know but it also means that he has abused the programmer's passion for gaming.
We can always say "All good for the game". However the basis is that treatment to all is equal. Evaluation means the most to employees. When evaluation is not equal, any "noble" action like the above mentioned, will most likely cause negative reaction. The designer will seem to be leeching instead of doing his job.
I will not say that it's anyone's fault. Does the problem lie in the company then? Evaluation is done such that the designer thought he is doing the right thing. He is not educated enough to be a real designer to produce good designing specifications or documents. He is not educated enough to think of design. So it makes the programmer wanders what the designer is doing. Designing is his main job but why isn't he doing it?
We need to establish this basis in work that no matter how good any person feels about his job, and how well his relationship with other colleagues is. He needs to be satisfied with the rewards the company is giving him.
For those people who are in management, satisfy your employees first. Evaluation must be equal.
PS: Now I finally understand why job application for designers in gaming requires sample level design / documentation
It is very "noble" for the designer to give such answer. It gives programmer free play. WOW. It will means something else if the above discussion mentioned was not a good discussion, ending up with a solution that in theory is not going to work at all.
However let's look at it this way, the programmer will end up doing all the work and in the end during INDIVIDUAL evaluation, the designer gets all the credit. It is a sad fact for any company that evaluates based on the feature you are in charged and also based on the hours you stay in the company. It ends up that the capable programmers who can finish their work fast end up doing more work but reward is the same with others. Or they finish their work fast, get out of the company and end up having less reward because they do not stay in the company as long as others. Such company policy will kill any capable programmers' passion for the company.
What is wrong with this designer is that he tries to push responsibility. Such actions cause resentment and will the programmer really make a good feature out of it? Or is it because the designer is not capable to create the design and hence need other people to do it? I do not know but it also means that he has abused the programmer's passion for gaming.
We can always say "All good for the game". However the basis is that treatment to all is equal. Evaluation means the most to employees. When evaluation is not equal, any "noble" action like the above mentioned, will most likely cause negative reaction. The designer will seem to be leeching instead of doing his job.
I will not say that it's anyone's fault. Does the problem lie in the company then? Evaluation is done such that the designer thought he is doing the right thing. He is not educated enough to be a real designer to produce good designing specifications or documents. He is not educated enough to think of design. So it makes the programmer wanders what the designer is doing. Designing is his main job but why isn't he doing it?
We need to establish this basis in work that no matter how good any person feels about his job, and how well his relationship with other colleagues is. He needs to be satisfied with the rewards the company is giving him.
For those people who are in management, satisfy your employees first. Evaluation must be equal.
PS: Now I finally understand why job application for designers in gaming requires sample level design / documentation
Do design PROPERLY! and satisfy the players' desire
During my first job as a designer, the direction of the game for a "war oriented" MMO (We all know what the game is) is to have war as a tournament system which is the selling point of the game. This is the aim to make the game friendly. So that it "suits" the market the company is targeting.
The direction is kept throughout the entire development process which is correct. In the end, we have a major feature that player cannot see everyday and the setting of the game is so peaceful that there is not enough other content for players. The game although is having a war theme is so friendly that it ends up too friendly, so friendly that it becomes boring. Players are not used to it. Players are not able to accept it. This is not what they want.
Is it wrong to stay with this direction? In this case, yes. But what is the problem? The direction for any major game development should always be adhere to throughout the process. The problem in this case is that the designers want to be different without any proper market research. Been different is good. However being different does not mean surprising people with something they do not desire. But to surprise people with something that they do not think of, ENHANCING what they desire.
This is the importance of market research. A game will not sell unless it satisfies it's targeted audience.
Another problem will be that all design decisions are made to cater for system limitations. Talk to any designer and they can chunk out all the system limitations that lead to his final decision and in the end, that is the basis of the design. Such design will means smooth process because the design will always work and literally means less cost. It's just a matter of fact that the design might not be desirable or fun. I feel that is wrong. A designer will not be necessary in the above case, we can just let the programmer design then. So in this case, why do we need designers?
I feel that designing is not like this. We need to know what we want, and then use the system limitation to modify that idea.
I am guessing that it is the stress of designing. A wrong design can literally cause players to quit the game, or do not buy the game. And any wrong design in the middle of the process literally cost thousands of dollars to rectify it. However, that is the challenge of been a designer. A designer needs to recognize this fact as a challenge and not a excuse or problem.
The direction is kept throughout the entire development process which is correct. In the end, we have a major feature that player cannot see everyday and the setting of the game is so peaceful that there is not enough other content for players. The game although is having a war theme is so friendly that it ends up too friendly, so friendly that it becomes boring. Players are not used to it. Players are not able to accept it. This is not what they want.
Is it wrong to stay with this direction? In this case, yes. But what is the problem? The direction for any major game development should always be adhere to throughout the process. The problem in this case is that the designers want to be different without any proper market research. Been different is good. However being different does not mean surprising people with something they do not desire. But to surprise people with something that they do not think of, ENHANCING what they desire.
This is the importance of market research. A game will not sell unless it satisfies it's targeted audience.
Another problem will be that all design decisions are made to cater for system limitations. Talk to any designer and they can chunk out all the system limitations that lead to his final decision and in the end, that is the basis of the design. Such design will means smooth process because the design will always work and literally means less cost. It's just a matter of fact that the design might not be desirable or fun. I feel that is wrong. A designer will not be necessary in the above case, we can just let the programmer design then. So in this case, why do we need designers?
I feel that designing is not like this. We need to know what we want, and then use the system limitation to modify that idea.
I am guessing that it is the stress of designing. A wrong design can literally cause players to quit the game, or do not buy the game. And any wrong design in the middle of the process literally cost thousands of dollars to rectify it. However, that is the challenge of been a designer. A designer needs to recognize this fact as a challenge and not a excuse or problem.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Role of a designer
I was reading a book on game design. Well struggling to find proper guidance and also knowledge in the company. I have to search elsewhere for self improvement.
Most books break the game design into 4 basic steps.
Imagining a game is easy to me. A basic idea which is not refined can be done and should be done early. However, a designer not only knows how players will react, they need to learn how to make it. Maybe that's why a game designer requirement involves scripting and it's always stated as a bonus to have programming knowledge.
Are we able to find such people in Singapore?
It's sad that many times, no one realize that they are not doing their job. I do not believe that I need to prove myself hardworking by working from 9am to 11:30pm. In fact, I always believe that those are the people who cannot make it.
I believe that if I work from 9am to 11:30pm, and I cannot get things done properly, I need help instead. Not help from others, but help to improve myself, to make myself more knowledgeable in my domain, to make myself learn, to make myself efficient.
It typically seems that in every company we have this type of people who just keep talking about ideas but when it comes to implementation, it's so hard to get things done. And in the end it's always saying "please fix it." to others and not to themselves.
Any one, even a 16 year old who has start playing games heavily can easily think of imagining a game by just mimicking others. But only a true game designer will think of how to implement a game system or feature and how to make use of the system for further things or to improve it.
Do we actually have such talent in Singapore?
There are so many problems with designing and the below has to be prevented.
Most books break the game design into 4 basic steps.
- Imagining a game.
- Defining the mechanics of the game.
- Describing the elements that make up the game (conceptual, functional, artistic, and others).
- Information passing to the team that is in charge of the game.
Imagining a game is easy to me. A basic idea which is not refined can be done and should be done early. However, a designer not only knows how players will react, they need to learn how to make it. Maybe that's why a game designer requirement involves scripting and it's always stated as a bonus to have programming knowledge.
Are we able to find such people in Singapore?
It's sad that many times, no one realize that they are not doing their job. I do not believe that I need to prove myself hardworking by working from 9am to 11:30pm. In fact, I always believe that those are the people who cannot make it.
I believe that if I work from 9am to 11:30pm, and I cannot get things done properly, I need help instead. Not help from others, but help to improve myself, to make myself more knowledgeable in my domain, to make myself learn, to make myself efficient.
It typically seems that in every company we have this type of people who just keep talking about ideas but when it comes to implementation, it's so hard to get things done. And in the end it's always saying "please fix it." to others and not to themselves.
Any one, even a 16 year old who has start playing games heavily can easily think of imagining a game by just mimicking others. But only a true game designer will think of how to implement a game system or feature and how to make use of the system for further things or to improve it.
Do we actually have such talent in Singapore?
There are so many problems with designing and the below has to be prevented.
- Think of an idea and only say to programmer, "please do it" without any other details
- Found a database bug and run around finding everyone saying, "There is a bug!" and he/she has no idea why the bug occurs.
- Running around saying how tough it is to think of ideas when it's their primary job
- Finding everyone for any idea and spend hours in meeting without any valid conclusion or any results.
- Spending hours/days/weeks making a schedule so that the bosses can see it. They never fail to realize that isn't it even better if those hours are spent on making/improving a feature? Scheduling is not the main job!
Warhammer Surprise
Most MMORPG do not change much from close beta to open beta when it's only 1 week. Usually it's just changing balance.
Warhammer surprised us with LOTs of UI changes. The Character creation looks decent finally. Tome of knowledge looks good now.
This is certainly amazing.
Who say that schedule is always the most important? I guess it's the motivation of the people in the company. Accompanying Warhammer throughout the whole beta period, I see sincerity of the developer. Not few bunch of people who just pushing blame around and say that we need months to change. Not the people who only desire to be praised by their superiors and not thinking for the players.
I seriously think that they are able to create missions easily and not spending 1 month for only a couple.
I think that they can change UI in days and not FEW weeks / months and they proven it.
Warhammer developer can certainly be proud of their work and reach out to the rest of the world, declaring "THIS IS MY WORK". Hope that Warhammer Online is a success!
Warhammer surprised us with LOTs of UI changes. The Character creation looks decent finally. Tome of knowledge looks good now.
This is certainly amazing.
Who say that schedule is always the most important? I guess it's the motivation of the people in the company. Accompanying Warhammer throughout the whole beta period, I see sincerity of the developer. Not few bunch of people who just pushing blame around and say that we need months to change. Not the people who only desire to be praised by their superiors and not thinking for the players.
I seriously think that they are able to create missions easily and not spending 1 month for only a couple.
I think that they can change UI in days and not FEW weeks / months and they proven it.
Warhammer developer can certainly be proud of their work and reach out to the rest of the world, declaring "THIS IS MY WORK". Hope that Warhammer Online is a success!
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Balancing in Games (Crazy Thoughts & Complaints)
What is the definition of perfect balance for game? Does it exist in MMO?
Offline game is always balanced due to the fact that it exists for a single player to be able to experience the "feel" that the developers’ desire and that should already be catered as balance. Is it really as simple as that? I believe so.
What is a perfect balance for games? Are there any MMOs that are balanced?
Does balance actually exists in MMO?
I start reviewing all the old games that I played. There's not really a real balance point. All MMOs have players ranting in the forums on how the balance is really screwed up for specific classes.
Imagine a tanker who should not really experience high damage will feel unbalance as he is not able to kill. However other people cannot kill him too. But people will complain. It's impossible for him to win. But it is possible for him to lose. Is it true?
A healer cannot damage but able to heal. Are they able to kill? Is it really true they are at a disadvantage?
I believe that balance should not be look at how fight is like 1-1 but on how players will play the character class and also if the game system supports that play style. A healer/tanker can never do short fight. However, are they able to survive for long period of time? Will the system allow them to?
A classic problem will be the warlock versus mage in WOW. A warlock can make enormous damage and fear a mage. However, a mage can polymorph. Such scenario will generally turn out to be whoever "crowd control" first and damage enough to kill fast wins (There are exceptional cases). Is it good? Future increase in damage will generally lead it to "who hits first wins" scenario. Is it nice? An important factor in MMO is latency. Should we penalize players with such scenarios when latency varies from place to place and is not really within players' control? WOW might not be a good example as it is generally more towards PVE and not PVP. However such scenarios happen too in PVP oriented games like AOC/Guild wars. Are there ways to change it?
Another type of balance problem is economy.
We see inflation in game which does not happen in offline game. New items, new equipment, new skill to learn, new attributes to change, new stuff all make players need to "farm" in MMO. They will cost more as generally players become "rich" in game. How to solve this inflation? Will it affect the lifespan of a game? I am looking at a recent problem in real life in one country (which I forget). A man actually brings millions of dollars (literally) to buy grocery. A sweet itself cost more than 500k.
Aren’t we creating banana notes in the game too by generating the new content? We have depreciated the value of the currency in game. Is such game economic suitable? Is it avoidable? How can it be changed?
Some people blame it for the lack of money sink in game. I beg to differ. It is obviously short sighted and the developers do not understand MMORPG in many countries. Players like to farm. I have seen players who spend hours in front of the computer because they want to have thousands of gold / or whatever currency in game. This is because in nature, we like to keep "reserve" so that next time new items will cost more and they can afford it. Lack of money sink IS a problem but it will never exist as the only problem to economic balancing.
One way of coz, create new currency. For example, we call the currency in a game now KDOllars. So literally each expansion/or large content patch will lead to a change in the world in game and new ruling. Hence the currencies become "LDollar" and so forth. (Literally x (say 10) KDollars will have the value of 1 LDollar) Will this work? Will players complain? Or is banana notes really a problem in MMO?
Economic balance should not consider how the system limitation. In a game if a players' limit is 10000 gold. Should a developers' limitation be 10000? Players like to farm. Some players came in game to just spend time. There are cases whereby players like to keep farming till their gold reserve reaches max.
Offline game is always balanced due to the fact that it exists for a single player to be able to experience the "feel" that the developers’ desire and that should already be catered as balance. Is it really as simple as that? I believe so.
What is a perfect balance for games? Are there any MMOs that are balanced?
Does balance actually exists in MMO?
I start reviewing all the old games that I played. There's not really a real balance point. All MMOs have players ranting in the forums on how the balance is really screwed up for specific classes.
Imagine a tanker who should not really experience high damage will feel unbalance as he is not able to kill. However other people cannot kill him too. But people will complain. It's impossible for him to win. But it is possible for him to lose. Is it true?
A healer cannot damage but able to heal. Are they able to kill? Is it really true they are at a disadvantage?
I believe that balance should not be look at how fight is like 1-1 but on how players will play the character class and also if the game system supports that play style. A healer/tanker can never do short fight. However, are they able to survive for long period of time? Will the system allow them to?
A classic problem will be the warlock versus mage in WOW. A warlock can make enormous damage and fear a mage. However, a mage can polymorph. Such scenario will generally turn out to be whoever "crowd control" first and damage enough to kill fast wins (There are exceptional cases). Is it good? Future increase in damage will generally lead it to "who hits first wins" scenario. Is it nice? An important factor in MMO is latency. Should we penalize players with such scenarios when latency varies from place to place and is not really within players' control? WOW might not be a good example as it is generally more towards PVE and not PVP. However such scenarios happen too in PVP oriented games like AOC/Guild wars. Are there ways to change it?
Another type of balance problem is economy.
We see inflation in game which does not happen in offline game. New items, new equipment, new skill to learn, new attributes to change, new stuff all make players need to "farm" in MMO. They will cost more as generally players become "rich" in game. How to solve this inflation? Will it affect the lifespan of a game? I am looking at a recent problem in real life in one country (which I forget). A man actually brings millions of dollars (literally) to buy grocery. A sweet itself cost more than 500k.
Aren’t we creating banana notes in the game too by generating the new content? We have depreciated the value of the currency in game. Is such game economic suitable? Is it avoidable? How can it be changed?
Some people blame it for the lack of money sink in game. I beg to differ. It is obviously short sighted and the developers do not understand MMORPG in many countries. Players like to farm. I have seen players who spend hours in front of the computer because they want to have thousands of gold / or whatever currency in game. This is because in nature, we like to keep "reserve" so that next time new items will cost more and they can afford it. Lack of money sink IS a problem but it will never exist as the only problem to economic balancing.
One way of coz, create new currency. For example, we call the currency in a game now KDOllars. So literally each expansion/or large content patch will lead to a change in the world in game and new ruling. Hence the currencies become "LDollar" and so forth. (Literally x (say 10) KDollars will have the value of 1 LDollar) Will this work? Will players complain? Or is banana notes really a problem in MMO?
Economic balance should not consider how the system limitation. In a game if a players' limit is 10000 gold. Should a developers' limitation be 10000? Players like to farm. Some players came in game to just spend time. There are cases whereby players like to keep farming till their gold reserve reaches max.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Blogging in MMO Part 2 Crazy Idea
I am trying this new method all day long. Having Windows Live Writer to write blogs here.
It's fantastic. Imagine writing like a Microsoft Word. You do not have to bother about HTML tags. Although it is allowed in most blog editor online. Come on we do not need to login through web in this case. It's a bonus I guess.
However looking at this. A MMO is made up of communities.
I am looking at the fantastic stuff made by others. Although the basic functions of guilds/clan/whatever are basically adding people in common chat channel and also do stuff like adding people, giving ranks, settle access rights.
Is it enough?
Most guilds have voice chat (Ventrilo, Teamspeak etc). Should game provide?
Most guilds have homepage. Should game provide? Let's go deeper here. People usually have to buy domain names. (etc www.guildname.com). It gives them recognition of the guild when people search. Imagine this now. guildname.gamename.com. How does this feel? Will it gives them a better sense of belonging to the game?
Blogging is a major factor also in MMO besides content. Looking at the guild/clan websites found online. Most guilds are just listing their achievements in the homepage. Why? To make it visible to people and declaring their achievements. In one way to make people interested in applying to join the community. But I do feel that one major reason is for themselves, their pride. And also, maybe that's the only major thing for them to post as homepage.
Now imagine the financial factor. The cost of making the domain name, getting someone to maintain it, getting the webspace (although most is free now). Now, imagine it making it as a SERVICE to the community in your game. In fact, it might be worth adding a price to it, like even 1 USD per month?
However the important note is the social factor. Providing a complete community service actually provides them reasons to stay in the game. Of coz, content is always the major factor to keep customers, but it is widely recognize that people are less liable to leave a game when they have already formed a community. It is also recognize that even when a player leaves the game, he/she does visit his/her guild/clan website often to interact with the people. if we categorize access rights to login to forums using their game ID if they are still subscribing. Will we actually manage to retain some subscriptions? ^^
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)