There’s an interesting article up over on Massive.com:
The assertion is that leveling content is more important than the endgame, both from a business perspective and from the player’s perspective. As a content nut, disgusted with subscription treadmills, I am sympathetic to this view.
Yet, what if your MMO design is all about the endgame sort of play? Specifically, what if you do not have leveling, and are counting on an interesting economy and a series of minigames to keep people playing? Something like a Puzzle Pirates, or the theoretical Harvest Moon Online? Why do MMOs have to be about the leveling content at all?
Single player RPGs tend to have better pacing and leveling systems. MMOs are about massive amounts of players interacting in interesting ways. Why maintain that bizarre tendency to make MMOs all about what is ultimately a solo experience? (Or, more pointedly, why make an MMO force people to group to do soloish content rather than incentivize sociality by making the whole game about the natural interactions with other people?)
Saylah and Capn’ John have written before about Harvest Moon Online, and their inclination to play such a game. I think such would be a great idea, but it would almost certainly be a very different animal. There would be no “leveling” in the classic sense. Trade skills might have levels, but the character wouldn’t need them to make progress in or contribute to the world. Combat wouldn’t be the dominant minigame, and may not even be present at all. What would be the draw in such a game?
Could what we currently call the “endgame” experience actually be the bedrock of a complete game design? Almost definitely not using the “raid/loot” mentality. A hypothetical HMO (an auspicious acronym) certainly wouldn’t be about the loot treadmill/slot machine. It would of necessity need a robust player-driven economy, modeled roughly along supply/demand lines. Atlantica Online has a great economy, Puzzle Pirates does as well, and EVE Online apparently has an economist on staff for their in-game opus of an economy. Minigames for crafting, harvesting and manufacturing would have to carry the weight that combat unceremoniously left at the door. Freestyle crafting would introduce a level of craftsmanship that WoW and its ilk are sorely lacking, even introducing “secret recipes” and brands established by players. Offline labor might be a great tool for keeping the economy chugging along in the offpeak hours or when players have to tend to “real life” concerns.
The sense of a “world” would have to be fostered, rather than a focus on the “game” mechanics of killing and looting. Guild dynamics would be interesting, and might even need to be much more flexible. We would have to incorporate geographical location, resource allocation, scarcity and abundance, sinks and fountains, supply routes, seasons, auction houses, and lots and lots of fluff. Cosmetic enhancements to the in-game avatars (and their property, like housing) would almost definitely be a major currency sink, and could sustain entire in-game industries. (See Puzzle Pirates again.)
After all, what do you do when you don’t have levels to grind, or raids to repeat? What of those players out there that don’t want to do either, but enjoy the worldcrafting, economies, art and lore of MMOs? Can this be a niche with enough money in it to support a game or three?
What would you like to see in a game that completely drops combat (or relegates it to a trade minigame, like security for supply lines and caravans), levels and gear treadmills? It’s certainly a game design that I’d love to suss out, but I’m still a relative neophyte to the MMO landscape. What about you with more playing experience than I? What do you want out of a non-DIKU MMO?
You just described UO and SWG.
Ultima Online was already the most “non-DIKU” (everyone who did not read the link under DIKU, leading to Raph Koster’s webpage and an explanation what a DIKU is, do it now!) and is still one of the most “worldy” MMOs out there and people still play it. The private “free shards” are centers of roleplaying of all kinds of fantasy worlds. I played on a german one for quite some time, and it was probably the best MMORPG experience I ever had.
“Fighting is exciting” – the mentioned first 10 minutes to interest people. This is what modern MMOs focus on, they are almost exclusively combat simulators. Ultima Online offers combat + a world. More world and more interaction than combat simulators with pretty wallpaper backgrounds like EverQuest-derivates.
But: Newsflash, MMORPG is today almost synonymous with World of Warcraft / EverQuest levelling, progression & addiction style combat gameplay. Ultima Online did not make it, the clear loser. But it still exists… and I no longer play it either.
Sometimes I think I should give it a shot again or they have to make ULTIMA ONLINE 2.0. But joining UO today… it has grown for ages, it was released in 1997!!! It is very hard to join into this world of veterans nowadays. And the graphics and comfort of the older clients used by freeshards are going to scare away players, too.
I suppose I glorify Ultima Online as my first true MMO love, but if we want a living and breathing world for MMOs, Ultima Online is the prime example for designers.
We need alternative actions and less focus on combat, more on item and world interaction. Muckbeast will probably talk about housing, another important aspect. UO shows how housing can go wrong, every spot in Britannia’s wilderness was filled with houses till they introduced housing zones and housing free zones for later continents/worlds/areas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_Online
Oh, is the poster “rkoster” really Raph Koster? Awesome! Every Ultima Online designer is my personal hero! Thanks for countless hours of fun.
What really bugs me is why WoW/EQ style made it, and not UO/SWG style of gameplay. Because I really prefer the latter… :(
It looks like the real Raph Koster. I linked to his “what is a DIKU” article, and it left a Trackback link over there, so he probably just followed that.
More the pity me for not having played UO or SWG. I’m a latecomer to the MMO market, digging into what I think makes it tick and what could make it better. It’s interesting to me that I came by a “definition” of UO and SWG independently. I’ve not studied those games… yet. It does make me wonder, though… if what I’ve described is the “old guard” of MMO design, does that mean that I’m describing something that has been tried and just isn’t enough to sustain a big market, or is there merit to a “back to basics” design ethos when determining the next MMO generation… and would such an approach be profitable?
It is heartening that there are still UO servers live and running. There’s an audience for this sort of thing.
I just sent you a PM that was going to end up chatting about this sort of thing, actually.
Random semi-related points:
Puzzle Pirates may not have “levels” in the integer-on-your-character-sheet sense, but it does have notable social strata. Typically people with interpersonal skills and moderate time investments are going to be better at it, as they will become captains, monarchs, and perhaps governors. Typical RPG design unfortunately floats around “time=levels=power” mentality, which is understandably not attractive to people who don’t want to spend hours hunting for experience, loot, and so forth.
Why *does* WoW have a level cap?
I do not mind levels…just, I do not need so many.
Guild Wars really ruined it for me by offering a straight 20, that was either easily attainable, instant, or could turn into a journey.
It also fits in with my new theology, which I plan to post about soon…
Rails are good.
Why is it that most “Open World” games sell well, but the Gears of War, Halo’s, etc…sell better?
Anyways…
When I play a game like Resident Evil 4 with no levels, I have a ton of fun. But, I can also play the level game, just stop with the mindless need to get there based on boring rote mechanics that dull my senses.
What do I want? A sense of progression in my games without arbitrary numbers to tell me I am getting there.
Cheers for another great post by the way!
I think what makes PP progression click for me is that it’s based on player skill, whether it’s social or puzzle rank. It’s not about time investment or grinding levels. More time does usually generate better skills, but it’s the player gaining skills, not the avatar.
An avatar-based skill system is a sort of middle ground that allows for greater playstyle customization without the arbitrary discrete leveling mechanics that put an emphasis on time investment over player skill. Freeform crafting would be another way to let player skill be relevant, which is why it’s appealing to me.
That’s what it all comes back to in my mind. If I’m playing PvP, which is essentially what an MMO is about, I want to be testing my skill, not my time investment. I’m happy testing my skill against PvE content, but again, I want it to be my skill, not my avatar’s grinding prowess.
Hehe, you just preached the old Guild Wars Mantra “Skill > Time” and “No Grind” meaning no Lineage II style longish levelling.
Unfortunately, they jumped a bit on the achievement bandwagon. The titles are a bit on the silly side, you know, I just say Legendary Defender of Ascalon. But the Hall of Monuments is a very interesting idea, I hope they manage to polish it more till GW2. They also promised some work on it in their latest newsletter of the “GW1 Live Team” which works on GW1 content and fixes while the rest focuses on GW2.
Farming in Guild Wars was always dumbest repetition. Get a smart build was the fun part, the execution to get the money actually… not always.
I really appreciate builds that leave the mobs a chance, if you screw up, you will die. But the best builds are of course those that are easy and reliable. And then you have people farming a special area over and over instead of playing the game. You have people raiding their favorite instance the moment the reset timer resets in WoW, too, but it is nothing compared to the repetitiveness of GW farming.
I think this is rather odd, as GW is supposedly grind free. People usually argue it is optional, after all. I did it myself, I killed Corsairs till I got my Colossal Scimitar. Only to realize that they look really ugly. And then poor Warrior Longasc was replaced with the vile Necro Akivasha as my fave char anyways…^^
To put it bluntly: Ultima Online + Guild Wars + Medieval Mount & Blade Setting (less magic+fantasy) = Longasc buys lifetime subscription.
Wait, you are asking for alternative payment methods, Tesh? You are evil! ;)
Well, in Guild Wars, having the title doesn’t make your character “better” than another. The main problem with levels is it segregates the playerbase. I join in two months late as a level one when the other 1999 people on the server are level 80 and I can’t play with them. First I have to go through a two month long tutorial to “learn to play” my character. That’s when its a grind.
Leveling when there’s other people around who are your level isn’t so much a grind. That’s why I find leveling games the most fun when the game first comes out.
A sandbox type of game has the potential to be more interesting after its grown, which is why I think Eve Online is one of the few MMOs that is actually growing in subscribers so long after it came out, while the level and loot based games generally grow real quick and then start losing people slowly over time (going up occasionally only for major expansions, etc.).
I am really fed up with the whole “end game” obsession. This is definitely something that started with Everquest, and World of Warcraft “perfected.”
There used to be a time where reaching max level, if one even existed, would take YEARS in a game. As a result, there was no such thing as an end game. You were always making progress and developing your character – albeit slowly. As a result, you focused more on the fun things to do on a day to day basis, because pure grinding out levels was basically impossible.
We are working on a game right now where the ultimate level cap is 100, but in the first year the cap will be 50. We then plan to raise the cap every year or so, no more than 20 levels per year. We also plan to make levels gained very slowly after 50. The focus of the game will be on the role play, the development of your own towns, cities, fortresses, business (especially for crafters), religion, or whatever else you choose to focus on. This is something you can work on from level 1, not something you can only really work on once you hit “cap.”
-Michael
Muckbeast – Game Design and Online Worlds
http://www.muckbeast.com
I’ve asked and asked but have never gotten a response: back in UO was there a such thing as “end game?”
I started with SWG back when it was a skills-based sandbox and cannot recall ever hearing the phrase “end game” even hunting Rancor or doing the first instance in the game, the Corellian Corvette.
I don’t recall ever heaing “end game” until I started playing WoW, which was my first levels-based game but it derived directly from EQ so, I blame EQ for being the genesis of end game obsession.
Hard levels (ie. the type used in EQ, WoW, etc.) are so tiresome. Stop limiting what I can do and who I can do it with by sticking these arbitrary numbers over my head already.
I am really fed up with the whole “end game” obsession.
Then play (or make) a game without levels. If you have levels, there will be an endgame.
Getting rid of levels would also mean getting rid of zones and content getting old and useless, as you levelled out of it.
Guild Wars has 20 levels, and the first “chapter” (stand-alone game/expansion) had a slow progression to 20. The other chapters allowed people to level up to almost 20 in the small starter area, and then the whole game was still ahead of you.
In retrospect, there would have been nothing wrong with people starting out without a level number at max ability.
But… there are issues: Quickly levelling up in Factions (first expansion) put new players against VERY tough enemy mobs that required quite some skill. I found it very enjoyable as experienced GW player, but new players had little chance to learn the basics as I did in the original Guild Wars.
GW never found a way to show new players the depth of the “8-skill-selection+party system” and making them grow with the challenge as level based games usually do. Chapter 3 was very easy, till people came to the Desolation/Realm of Torment and got their butt handed to them on a platter.
I am still a follower of Ultima Online’s system: You get a fixed limit how high a skill can be, a fixed number of skillpoints that you can have at max. The same for stats. So you get 700 Skillpoints and 100 Statpoints. You can distribute them as you want, but to get the max of 100 or 50 in a Skill/Stat, you will have to do related tasks to get stronger or better at fencing. Working with an axe increased strength, fighting with a fencing/sword/axe weapon increased the corresponding fighting skill. Basically, your char became what he did. If you did a lot of casting, you became a mage, if you crafted a lot of items a crafter.
You could help “Grandmaster” Swordsmen and Mages, even if your sword skill was not maximum 100, but significantly lower. There were no levels between you that prevented playing together. Try to bridge a +/- 5 level gap in WoW, almost impossible!
EVE also has a very interesting system: You learn the basics in real-time very quickly, but then it takes days to weeks to improve. So players that played from day one have quite an advantage, but as the power curve becomes VERY flat in the end, you can still participate in fighting/trading whatever and be competitive.
Being some levels higher is enough to trivialize all dungeons of the previous expansion. This plagues WoW, it is a flaw of the EverQuest system in general.
The idea of an endgame is intrinsic to this system that is all about levelling +1, getting items +1,+2,+3… – what to do if you reached the cap?
You should get the idea to play a game that is about MMO-RPG, even if you do not like RPG at all, playing together not for the sake of getting items can be very entertaining. Today’s MMOs are online singleplayer games. Ultima Online offered a world.
People rejected it and picked EverQuest-style. This is another subject of debate. I do not really understand it and I am quite sad that this happened. :(
Aye, that’s why I wonder if the “market has spoken” and relegated the more “pure” MMO designs to the niches, and embraced the DIKU feel-good level/loot treadmill. The DIKU line does offer a fairly consistent sense of progress in discrete happy numbers, but it’s also a relatively mindless experience. Maybe that’s what most players want. My question is more along the lines of “what can we do better” when looking at new projects. Would a modern UO/SWG style skill-heavy game be profitable? I mentioned Harvest Moon because it’s the sort of sandbox that could easily support a detailed economy with interesting crafting and plenty of player niches to explore.
Of course, the next conceptual step is to look at monetization. I see the DIKU lineage as a series of treadmills, a natural fit for the sub model. In a game where the gameplay itself is more tailorable by the players, why not expand the concept of “choices in gaming” and give alternate monetization models? Say, offer subs and microtransactions and/or a dual currency economy; let players get the most out of the game because they pay for it the way they want to.
I don’t think we can say that “the market has spoken” yet (of course, this does not stop a lot of people from saying it).
In my opinion, WoW’s success came down to:
– Blizzard label
– Not being a buggy piece of crap
– Running well on low specs
– The “You mean it’s a big world with heaps of people all running around together? Cool!” factor
– Timing – stuff like EQ and UO existed at a time when much, much fewer people even had the internet. Nowadays with widespread internet and cable TV, playing online, and paying a monthly subscription for it, feel much more natural.
Note that nowhere in there is any reference to the item or leveling system – it’s not as if new players are drawn to WoW by the promise of “Hey play this game, you get to level up and get items and then level up and get more items!” People are instead drawn in by the “Cool!” factor mentioned above – if you actually sat down and explained the gameplay to each new player, I think they would be much less likely to sign up.
I maintain that WoW could have featured any one of a broad range of implementations of such a system and had the same success. It is unfortunate for us that they chose the model that they did, and now publishers/investors feel iffy about backing anything different.
——————–
Then play (or make) a game without levels. If you have levels, there will be an endgame.
——————–
Level based games existed long before the end game obsession. So I really do not think that is the key. WoW and later MMOs don’t have an end game obsession because of levels. They have an end game obsession because the game dramatically changes at level cap, and in some ways the game becomes better (or at a minimum, most of the continued content development happens there).
Levels serve a useful purpose for gating content and providing a framework for character development. You don’t have to throw the baby out with the bathwater. What you need to do, as a developer (and this is something I do in my own games, so I’m putting my money where my mouth is here), is design your major gameplay elements such that they begin early and continue endlessly. You do not design your game so all the game elements people enjoyed STOP at level cap, and all new elements they may or may not enjoy become the new focus (e.g. raiding).
True enough, Melf. WoW is the beneficiary of some great timing and stellar marketing. The lemming devs that come along and try to make their own WoW aren’t helping the industry at large.
One of the biggest plusses that I can imagine from a non-lvl based MMO would be being able to group with anyone, regardless of time played. One of the problems with games like WoW & WAR was that you can’t find people to go into dungeon X or Public Quest Y. Removing levels, could, in theory, give you more people to play with, provided that the incentives are properly laid out. (i.e. you don’t want everyone just farming the same spot).
However, in some ways, your typical player is a bit of a sheep. Will they be able to go discover how to have fun? Or will they instead just sit around waiting for someone else to tell them what to work on? How do you get people to actually go to Razorfen Kraul if “none of the cool people” are doing it?
I came across a great article on people who basically copy whatever the current fad in game design is:
http://malstrom.50webs.com/birdman.html
(warning: long)
Aye, Melf, that’s a great article. Shamus over on Twenty Sided mentioned it, which is where I first saw it. It’s a long read, but a very good one.
Argh I started following Tesh too late to catch the brunt of this, but I’ll throw in my 2c anyway because this is something I feel very strongly about.
First off, levels in an MMO should go. They serve only to prompt people to get to whatever the max is and that’s it. All the changes in stats, skills, talents, etc can be handled without levels.
With the removal of levels, you’re free to put content anywhere and everywhere. The challenge lies in whether or not you have the skills to kill something before it kills you.
Example: Traditional MMO: I’m a level 5 noob fighting a level 11 kobold. I will surely die because I’ll miss with either melee or spells and his damage to me will be insane.
New Age MMO: I’m fighting a kobold who’s happened upon me and I’m a fairly new adventurer, but I have a sword and shield and he just has a little hunting spear. Kobolds aren’t very smart in nature and unless there’s more hiding somewhere I should be ok as long as I block and attack at the right times. Truth be told I could probably hide and make a lot of noise to scare him off.
Now, the New Age example assumes a few things, but all that was said can be done simply with skills. If you’re a survivalist and know how to make animal noises, then you can mimic a bear and possibly scare something away to survive. If you think you can take him then do so, but be able to use your weapon and shield skills where appropriate to do damage and deflect damage. The best part? By choosing simply to survive, you’re not missing out on XP because there IS none. In fact, you’ve used your skill appropriately and will probably excel in using it because of it (there has to be some kind of progression in skills).
Another thing I believe is that everyone should feel like a hero at any time, from entering the game until years down the road. You may not be well known, but you ARE the focus of the game, at least from your point of view. Just because you choose to do something or can only do something that’s less potent than someone more skilled in your profession or hobby shouldn’t mean it’s less useful. There should always be a use for “level 1″ potions and the like. Hell, a blacksmith in a small town could make copper or even wooden blades to fill the nearby fortress’ training weapons cache when they break or chip, etc.
As far as endgame or raiding goes, my whole ambition is to change WHY people raid. The old setup of kill boss X for loot Y and rinse / repeat until people are all geared out is played out and presents a boring world to play in where now your spare time is spent in the time sinks like rep building, since crafting doesn’t do much for any game.
I’d like to see raiding come in the form of actually raiding fortresses and tearing them down or culling the numbers of the opposition in them as much as possible.
Example: A dark fortress is set up not to far from a large city. The king knows the fortress is a threat, but most attempts to breach it have been in vain. Now he sends you in and you do so with a main assault force and a splinter cell which breaks off to set traps, ambush, etc. A stealth team sneaks in and unlocks doors and your main assault force breaks in two: one side going to the armory and the other going to the barracks. You infiltrate the barracks to see the black ops team has secured the doors on all the slumbering infantry rooms, but the roaming guards still need to be taken care of. Meanwhile in the armory you’re stuffing your bags with as many good quality weapons and armor as you can carry, then breaking the rest so they have none.
Unfortunately one of the roaming guards is not dealt with and sounds the alarm. The lieutenant in charge of the fortress calls for aide, but only a smattering of guards can make it due to the traps in place. You confront and kill him, causing the rest of the guards to flee. Your mission is complete as the ranks are broken and you return to the king who has a reward for each raiding member.
He tells you that with a bigger force, you could raze the fortress to the ground, or even take it over yourself!
So, repeatable events that aren’t just killing the same boss over and over, but actually dynamically impacting villainous presences in your area or what have you. You’re not raiding JUST to collect epic lewts, you’re now raiding because if you don’t the possibility exists for those NPCs in the fortress to invade your towns and kill you, stop trade routes, etc. best thing, it’s not restricted to levels, just skills. So if you fancy yourself a black ops person and you play a rogue-like class, that’s really all you have to concentrate on in your adventuring or criminalizing, etc.
I hope at least some of that made sense.
Regarding crafting, I think you’re not giving it enough credit. There is huge potential in player-driven markets. Puzzle Pirates, EVE and A Tale in the Desert all feature such prominently. A hypothetical Harvest Moon online, or any other combat-free game would be all about crafting in one way or another.
Other than that, nice ideas! I especially like the black ops strike team. I’m also firmly in the “skill>time” camp, and making gameplay about that (the way a player handles the game mechanics) is ideal. Dynamic content is also ideal, but could be expensive to put together.
Oh, and don’t I mind necro commenting at all. If you or anyone else has something to add to a thread, please do so. That’s why I’ve got the “Recent Comments” widget over there, so we can keep up.
Oh don’t misunderstand me, I LOVE crafting (as you’ve seen from some of my posts on Ysh’s blog :P). What I meant was that the current incarnations of crafting systems don’t offer much to the world aside from endgame stuff. You raise your crafting level to be as marketable as you can so you have an influx of money here and there and possibly make some nice epic things for yourself at the end.
My vision of crafting is for it to be its own world along with adventuring. I know lots of people who, if a game came along that was just about crafting and economics, would play it. Pair that with people who love to hack and slash stuff and it’s a win :D
So yes, crafting is essential and needs an overhaul as well. Actually, the crafting system a game has will, more often than not, drive my desire to buy / play the game.
Ah, gotcha. Yes, definitely. :D
*slaps forehead for forgetting Ysh commentaries*
Wiqd, many people share your idea of the traditional and new age MMO. I discussed this with my czech friend Zweistein while we were playing Guild Wars almost a year ago already.
I am surprised and also quite happy that many people feel the same. Levels are indeed an artifical barrier that in my book even prevents new ideas from originating.
http://www.zweistein.cz/mmorpg/levels.html
Zweistein about Zones, Levels and general gameplay. He is commenting on an article of Thott, the maker of WoW’s database Thottbot and prolific EverQuest Raider.
Nice article link, Longasc, thanks! As Melf notes over in Breaking the Triangle, such freedom might not be universally heralded or welcomed, but I’m absolutely certain there would be a sufficient market for it to make a handful of games profitable in that design space.
@Melf!
http://malstrom.50webs.com/birdman.html
Awesome. I totally support his view, “casual” and “accessible” is really just meaning dumb and retarded… unfortunately!
I hope for a “spiral” company to make the next generation MMO.
It is most likely to be Blizzard. But will they really do it, as long as the cash cow WoW can be milked for several more years? :(
What do YOU think of ArenaNet and Guild Wars 2? They do not give any info about the production status, this might be a good thing, but I am really anxious about GW2.
I did not like the direction they were taking in Eye of the North. Lots of awesome and cool ideas, but the implementation was again so half-hearted.
I also fear that there will not be any major other contenders for a really good new type of MMO in 2009 if GW2 fails to deliver.
Aion, yes… but I have seen it, does not seem to be my kind of cake.
I’m predicting that GW2 will be out in 2010. I have no fears of it being vaporware or anything, as ArenaNet are really the major success that NCSoft has had recently, with a couple of its other operations having some flops they’d never want to dump them.
I am keenly, keenly awaiting it, as GW was just so well designed in so many different ways. However I’m not holding my breath and trawling for info from it, because I find that getting sucked into hype too much is a really good way for me to jinx new MMO’s that get released :p
I quite liked EotN, although I missed having a new character to roll from scratch like in the other expansions. Also, I tend not to PvE that much anyway so my opinion about what makes PvP fun is probably a bit misguided. What did you think was half-hearted?
Other than that, I’m probably going to try (or at least read many reviews of) Darkfall and then Aion, as they both appeal to me for various reasons. I fear that Darkfall will be a gankfest gear-grind so will have more chance of failing. But I think Aion sounds pretty awesome (seriously, the flight alone will bring a lot of people in). The only thing that they will probably mess up for me is the combat system, as most every MMO I’ve played has had sucky combat mechanics (excluding GW), imo, so I’m not holding my breath.
I’ve found that games that aren’t MMO’s can *gasp* actually provide at least as much fun. I’m currently playing Left 4 Dead, which definitely ranks up there as one of my all time favourite games after only a couple of months of being released.
I will try to keep it short and simple, before I start another page-filling GW design debate. :)
Minigames: Polymock, Norn Tournament and Dwarven Boxing. They got the idea that minigames are fun even before Muckbeast posted in his blog about them.
Polymock is fun the first time. Definitely. But the idea to collect polymock pieces and always having to fight AI opponents that simply cannot compete with the better pieces just does not work. Even the pieces you have after doing the quest series related to Polymock are already more than enough to make the game pointless, as you will just overpower the AI. Funnily, players asked for this to be nerfed, as they could not do it. Or for alternate ways to grab the Asuran skill you get as reward for winning vs the Polymock Master. Oh my. Main Issue: The game is no longer fun once you are through the quest series. The collect pieces idea just does not work either.
Norn Tournament: It serves the purpose to get the crown, Zho’s Journal and thus the Moa and then nobody will enter the arena again. But you are probably right if you say I demand too much from the minigame, if I think about it again.
Dwarven Boxing: Turned into a super-easy farming run. I am always sad to see areas solo-farmed to death like this. But this is actually not a problem of the minigame… it is the achievement craziness that is the problem.
Eye of the North promoted even more so the “achieve this or that” mentality. I recently tried to return to GW. I stopped playing after I no longer felt excitement while playing. I was hunting for shallow titles, too! Most of my friends who still play GW are title hunters that are “working” towards the next rank.
Is this a good thing? It makes them continue to play GW, right. But then it becomes some kind of work. They do not do dungeon runs, they run chests in always the same area in the same pattern or farm Kurzick/Luxon rank in a similar fashion. Now you can at least gain Faction for vanquishing an area. I think this is a good idea: It promotes “normal” gameplay and not the hyper-specialized farming run type of gameplay that turns me off.
I also simply hate that EOTN is largely what was leftover from Utopia/Chapter IV. It had so much more potential, all wasted.
Balance was also screwed up with more and more PvE only skills. THIS was what broke EOTN for me. PvE became totally mindless. People say it was always simple, but well, never that mindlessly simple as with easy mode skills. We do not need hard mode if items like Power Stones and other items are provided to make it easier. This is also a deviation from the GW mantra that there are no potions, no other buff items and stuff like that. Now you can just take enough of the so-called consumables and make a very easy game even easier.
PvP: It was sold as the strong point of GW, and the 8 skill system indeed is the heart of GW. But PvP never got as much care and/or content as the PvE game. Constant skill balancing, and the issue that skills often worked well in PvE or PvP but caused problems in the other one. They never managed to make PvE players PvP players, as the idea for “fun neverending content = PvP” was in GW1.
The introduction of PvE skills tried to avoid the issues with skills being useful or useless for one of the two types of GW, which have a hard time to co-exist. But it seems their idea for PvE was that there is not any kind of “balance” needed there, and while the first few PvE skills worked out well, the EOTN skills were not balanced anymore at all, but overpowering.
They dumbed down the game, made it more “casual”… please remember the birdman article! Ironically, PvP made sure that skills do not get as extremely overpowered in PvE. The current split in PvE and PvP versions makes the system more complex and the sheer mass of skills can indeed scare away people, while they focus on build and skill wars rather than smart skill combos and playing a certain strategy.
I am running out of time, I will continue this later. :)
P.S.: I am going to play Left 4 Dead soon, too. Right now I am having a blast with Fallout 3. You are right, people forgot about single player games for quite some time. I am among this crowd, unfortunately. But with the current stagnation in the MMO genre I re-discovered them, and Mount & Blade and Fallout 3 are just awesome. :)