Poster: Acrofales at 1/26/2006 1:05:13 AM PST Subject: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
The original discussion can be found here:
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?FN=wow-general&T=6768908&P=19
And here is Cay's last response:
Q u o t e:
Acrofales, I'm the one who made the end of Beta event. Those infernals, those demons? All planned out by me.
That was a special case. Everyone enjoyed the "forced" event because no one cared. It was the end of Beta. These characters were being deleted the next day. GMs weren't taking tickets -- they were watching the action, spawning in mobs occasionally to keep people interested.
And yeah, it was fun for a lot of people. But that's not something we can duplicate right now (certainly not the way it was done in Beta, anyway). And it's not something we want to duplicate. These characters we're playing aren't going to be deleted the next day. Repair costs matter. Time matters. I understand that you feel it was fun, and I understand that you, personally, wouldn't mind it now... but I hope that, as I'm the person who made the encounter, you'll take my word for it when I say it's not the best thing to do at this point due to the factors I've mentioned in this thread.
As for the suggestion of hitting Thunder Bluff and Darnassus with bug invasions, not only are those two cities the most impractical to hit with Silithid lore-wise, but it's still forcing it on people. No, our general outlook at this time is that we're not forcing you to participate. You can if you like, but if you don't want to, you're not shoved into the action anyway. I don't think that's changing.
Now, Queptar!
Hah, Queptar, my friend, I know how human actors in these games work all too well. And because of that, I can tell you that with the number of realms we have, there is no way we could deliver content on a wide-reaching and high-quality scale with human actors at this point without the cost being astronomical (folks, I continue to make the point that this isn't about money, and in this case too it's primarily about quality. The business practicality does step in, however, since it's regarding personnel. Read on).
Here's the dilemma.
When you have a small number of available servers -- say you can count them on your hands -- employed actors are certainly an option. You can cover the ground you need to cover in a reasonable timeframe. Because your actors are employed by the company, you have strict control over the quality of their work, and the result can be a wonderful and engrossing experience.
When you have "dozens" of servers, depending on the number, you can probably field them with volunteer actors -- at this point, employed actors aren't remotely cost-effective for the impact they'll have -- but you can't control the quality as strictly. This results in a lot more human error and lore mistakes that are taken as canon.
When you have hundreds of realms worldwide, as we do, even volunteers (which we don't wish to use in this capacity for a number of reasons. Research volunteers for past games if you're curious) become difficult -- the sheer number you'd need to properly field these realms (and understand I'm talking a small crew covering several realms on a schedule, not a small crew to every realm) is insane. Your quality control tanks unless they're employees, and for the impact human actors make, it's just not worth it.
Now, myself, as a player? I love that human interaction. The idea of speaking to a famous NPC and having them respond to me in a human way is very immersive, and can definitely bring more players into the story. I understand well the merits of such a program, as they're something that interest me. But at the same time, human actors simply are not feasible with our model.
I've already covered the arguments regarding the Thrall event a few pages back, folks...
And as for a video, that's definitely a possibility, but only a while after the fact. The vast majority of realms have yet to unlock the gates, and we don't want to spoil it for them. ;)
EDIT: It appears now that this thread is broken. Thank you all for the conversation!
For those who haven't read the thread, it is a discussing the lack of interactivity in Azeroth. It started as being purely from a PvP viewpoint, but soon changed to include PvE and the world in general. Several of the ideas mentioned were:
-NPC organized 'campaigns' to capture an opposing city, with Thrall l
eading a raid on SW as main example.
-AV Extreme. Player capturable towns and landmarks in the whole of Azeroth. This then giving some kind of reward to the captors, while bringing World Objectives back to PvP, while giving the feeling that a war is going on.
-Evolution of the world. The world changes while we play. Gnomes recapture Gnomeregan, Tirion founds his order, humans move from Refuge Point back to Stromgarde, things like that.
-NPC interactivity. In stead of giving you the same canned response every time, NPCs seem to recognize you in their dialog as being the person who completed their quests. Grudging respect from Nathanos Blightcaller for example, after killing Rammstein and the Scarlet Oracle.
-Human actors behind the NPCs. Let some NPCs from time to time be controlled by actors, specially at key events on a server.
These are just some of the ideas mentioned in the thread, and they don't have any of the arguments FOR or AGAINST them. Caydiem has posted a lot of information about why a lot of the above examples are unfeasible in the current (and future) setup of WoW, but let the discussion continue!
Cheers,
Acro
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6816098 | | | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 1:52:34 AM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
The difference, Acrofales, is in the definition of what is intruding "too much" on others' playstyles. You have your definition, and we have ours... and honestly, I think we're going to continue with ours in this case.
Also, I never said "forcing the game" -- I said forcing events. That's a marked difference. You like them. That's great. Some people don't. World events are not the entirety of the game; they're a feature. As such, no, we're not going to force everyone to participate in that content.
Of course you want to get people exploring and discovering things, but I maintain that shoving things in their face with no quarter is not the way to go about doing that. You lead them; you don't shove them.
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6816304 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 2:29:38 AM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
I defined what is "too far" pretty well in the last thread -- basically, major cities being taken out/raided by these world events (world PvP is a little different) is going too far.
The War Effort isn't forcing me to do anything, Acrofales. I can still get all the materials I needed previously through the primary means they're achieved -- finding them in the world through the methods given since the game's inception. I don't have to lift a finger. The NPCs in the major cities are pretty unobtrusive; there's a "breadcrumb" NPC in front of the Auction House that leads you there, but I don't have to follow it. Honestly, the most obtrusive part of this whole deal (in terms of unwanted and unrelated contact -- if you're in Silithus, for example, you're near or at cap and thus can probably handle whatever's thrown at you) for players is the Moonglade event, which can make Druids in their teens very, very confused. The economy change is no different from when we, say, introduced Zul'Gurub and Black Diamond prices shot up. It's a typical fluctuation in the economy based on new content, and will normalize in time.
Your idea on forcing events is one method -- one. It's not the tried and true one, and in my past experience, often leads to a serious backlash.
We're going to continue to do events in the manner that we've been doing them... leading people to where they are.
For those of you saying that I don't realize you want change -- I realize that quite well, actually. We're bringing more dynamic events into the game, and we're working on revitalizing world PvP. Again, I highly suggest you go back and read all my responses in the previous thread, as I'd prefer to repeat myself as little as possible.
And for those of you bringing unrelated (even if they're peripheral) topics into this one (casual vs. hardcore, server issues, I'm lookin' at you) the New Topic button is outside of this post. Thanks.
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6816448 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 2:32:25 AM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
And I maintain, from my experience, that much of what's been suggested isn't actually realistic. ;)
EDIT: To elaborate...
People are fond of quoting their favorite type of dynamic event and then pointing at some other MMO that has used them. They feel it's a logical step, therefore, that we'd be able to do precisely that too. That's not always the case. In fact, the smaller the MMO in question, the more likely it's unrealistic in our situation.
Of course, it looks perfectly realistic to the player who isn't familiar with a lot of what goes on behind-the-scenes, and I totally understand that. I do want you to understand, though, that these ideas that are being pitched here, in the majority, are not new or original to our ears -- we've discussed them at length. There are reasons for our choices along this line being what they are.[ post edited by Caydiem ]
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6816462 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 2:41:49 AM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
Q u o t e: So its realistic for Thrall to stand in his chamber all day, every day in the midst of a "war"?
Okay, let's define what I was referring to when I said realistic.
I'm not talking about what should logically be happening in game. That's applied logic. That's not necessarily realism.
When I talk about things being "realistic" I'm saying that it is not realistic in a common and/or business sense to spend manhours implementing said suggestion for a variety of reasons (naturally dependent on the suggestion in question).
I hope that's better defined for you.
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6816514 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 2:47:43 AM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
Q u o t e: "...but I maintain that shoving things in their face with no quarter is not the way to go about doing that. You lead them; you don't shove them."
Of course not but does that mean that things can't change at all? Silithids expanding their nest in the Barrens for example? Or the cleansing of Dreadmist peak?
Building up the 'tension' with the threat of war between the Alliance and Horde, the Quiraj, Scourge and Demon invasions is great but what is a story without a climax?
What we have now is two thirds of a story. Are we ever going to get the ending?
I don't think it is a matter of "this game is bad without interactivity" it's just that is is less interesting that it could be and will have a shorter lifespan than is possible.
I think most people realise what Blizzard storylines are capable of (Starcraft anyone?) and it is unfortunate that this aspect seems to have been largely ingnored so far. I am aware of the limitations placed on the game and employees but what reasons are there to stay in the game if the only additions are going to be "now you can level up to level 70"? That (and gaining better items) is truly the only 'end' that is achievable at the moment.
AQ, the expansion and the current state of affairs is, IMO, fine for the moment but it would be disheartening to think that this is all it is ever going to be. AQ is a great starting point but it is surely obvious why players want to influence their world (even if only slightly) and experience it in a more 'dynamic' way (weather effects).
I hope this doesn't come off as complaining but rather wanting Blizzard to show what it is truly capable of. If not... well it would be a shame.
Taum, I addressed this in the last post, and I did say I didn't want to repeat myself.
However, for the benefit of the new audience and those who may have glossed over it...
A regularly advancing storyline is fabulous when you're in a direct progression. Past games we've done have been precisely that. However, there might be a Warcraft 4, say. It might come out while World of Warcraft is running. What then? This isn't necessarily the definitive end of the franchise, and as such, those considerations do need to be made.
But again, what you're asking for (I know not directly, but at its core, this is what the request boils down to) is repeatable content to be replaced. As I've stated, the developers would rather spend their manhours adding content rather than replacing or removing content, as addition affects a larger group than replacement. Naturally we want to make the best game we can, but at the same time, we do need to be efficient about it. It's the practical and smart choice. It may not be the most engrossing storywise, and I do understand that viewpoint, but for the time being it's not a wise decision to replace content rather than add to it.
EDIT: And even then, you're hinting at diverging content, which is a LARGE portion of what I said previously was not smart. I would not expect deeply diverging content, to be honest.[ post edited by Caydiem ]
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6816548 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 12:06:26 PM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
A few things.
How is it that I can take this stance when I'm a fan of lore and writing? It's easy, folks. I love the lore, and I greatly enjoy dynamic content. I've been the player that hunts for more in games -- and I still am. So I've been where you are.
The difference is that I've paid attention to the man behind the curtain. I know what results are wanted, but I also know what it takes to make those results happen, and to do so within the framework of what you have to work with. Often times, no, that framework cannot be changed drastically. So while I share your enthusiasm and passion for dynamic worlds, it's tempered by the knowledge of what can realistically be done in our situation, and also what design philosophies are driving the game.
Now, Rhodes, you mistook my design philosophy to be general rather than specific. I'm speaking in the confines of World of Warcraft's philosophy, primarily. In general, there are certainly arguments to be made that "forcing" events can work on a certain model, and players can certainly want their world to be dynamic -- I'm one of them! In terms of this game, however, the philosophy on world events is to lead, not to force.
Now, back to general comments...
What's going to be done with World PvP is a ways away, and is still in discussion, so I can't really dive into that.
Now, in terms of a living world, I can certainly see other cities being brought up to Stormwind's level at some point, to give an example. Little things like that can certainly be accomplished.
Those of you asking to free Gnomeregan, etc., have already been addressed -- that's replacing content, not adding content, and at the moment we prefer to do the latter. Freeing Gnomeregan is awesome for the long-standing players, but for new players, not so much. Content that's added, however, will be available to all.
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6824023 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 12:07:46 PM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
Q u o t e: I'm not certain that any game can come close to the SEER program in UO. That allowed volunteer players to utilize the behind the scene game mechanics with game master approved story lines, with game master/volunteer usage of NPC characters in the realms. It is unfortunate that current USA law prohibits the use of volunteers in this manner.
From a purely game player perspective, it was the closest thing to picking up Lord of The Rings or Wheel of Time and actually participating, that i've ever seen. I've been playing MMORPG's since Diablo.
I've not read the entire thread, but until a time when game mechanics can be utilized in this special way, if a company would allow that ever again?, nothing will come close.
Imagine, a healer from the Tauren Mill area, requesting you go speak with Onyxia on a potion elixer to solve the water problem plagueing Ironforge. Getting to Onyxia and having to solve several game riddles she requests you solve before giving the answer. -- This story line I lived in UO... best fun i've ever had... doubt we ever see that again.
I don't expect a reply, but just giving you my... Wish List.
I addressed volunteers in the previous thread.
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6791246&tmp=1#post6791246
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6824059 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 12:11:33 PM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II |
| |
Q u o t e: One, very specific way to progress the storline in Azeroth, has to deal with instanced zones. Take Gnomregan for example. It has been a year and countless millions of players have exterminated the troggs, yet they still exist. Now, what if, there was a way to completely exterminate them forever? An epic quest, for each player, to flag themselves, for the zone Gnomeregan 2.
Basically, the questline would be epic, something that would cover a span of many lvls. The end reward of the quest would be, the extermination of the troggs, and the rebuilding of the gnomish city. You could then create more quests deriving from the rebuilding of the city, so that you could, over many lvls, finally have rebuilt gnomeregan to its former glory.
On the technical side of this, wouldn't it be possible to create a flag on each character, that would allow them to be given a choice of which instance to enter? If they are flagged, they would be given access to the gnomish gnomeregan, as well as having the option to enter the non trogg infested instance. If they are not flagged, then they have no choice but to enter the trogg infested instance of gnomeregan.
On top of progressing the storyline, you also allow yourself to add repeatable content on top of repeatable content. The new Gnomeregan could be a hub for high lvl quests, could have instances inside, deep down inside the mountain. It could open up new engineering recipes, new vendors, another means of transportation throughout the world of azeroth in the form of trams, teleportation devices, ect. An entire town is build out of an existing zone map.
What you suggest isn't really conducive to a persistent world, and could potentially split a lot of players up.
A lot of you are attempting to use Caverns of Time as a scapegoat on this, but honestly, we're not going to build the entirety of Azeroth one year in the future -- which is what's basically being suggested, through a variety of suggestions -- so that people can choose which era they'd like to adventure in. Interesting idea, yes, but wholly unfeasible.
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6824151 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 12:06:26 PM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II *edited post* |
| |
A few things.
How is it that I can take this stance when I'm a fan of lore and writing? It's easy, folks. I love the lore, and I greatly enjoy dynamic content. I've been the player that hunts for more in games -- and I still am. So I've been where you are.
The difference is that I've paid attention to the man behind the curtain. I know what results are wanted, but I also know what it takes to make those results happen, and to do so within the framework of what you have to work with. Often times, no, that framework cannot be changed drastically. So while I share your enthusiasm and passion for dynamic worlds, it's tempered by the knowledge of what can realistically be done in our situation, and also what design philosophies are driving the game.
Now, Rhodes, you mistook my design philosophy to be general rather than specific. I'm speaking in the confines of World of Warcraft's philosophy, primarily. In general, there are certainly arguments to be made that "forcing" events can work on a certain model, and players can certainly want their world to be dynamic -- I'm one of them! In terms of this game, however, the philosophy on world events is to lead, not to force.
Now, back to general comments...
What's going to be done with World PvP is a ways away, and is still in discussion, so I can't really dive into that.
Now, in terms of a living world, I can certainly see other cities being brought up to Stormwind's level at some point, to give an example. Little things like that can certainly be accomplished.
Those of you asking to free Gnomeregan, etc., have already been addressed -- that's replacing content, not adding content, and at the moment we prefer to do the latter. Freeing Gnomeregan is awesome for the long-standing players, but for new players, not so much. Content that's added, however, will be available to all.
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6824023 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 12:07:46 PM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e: I'm not certain that any game can come close to the SEER program in UO. That allowed volunteer players to utilize the behind the scene game mechanics with game master approved story lines, with game master/volunteer usage of NPC characters in the realms. It is unfortunate that current USA law prohibits the use of volunteers in this manner.
From a purely game player perspective, it was the closest thing to picking up Lord of The Rings or Wheel of Time and actually participating, that i've ever seen. I've been playing MMORPG's since Diablo.
I've not read the entire thread, but until a time when game mechanics can be utilized in this special way, if a company would allow that ever again?, nothing will come close.
Imagine, a healer from the Tauren Mill area, requesting you go speak with Onyxia on a potion elixer to solve the water problem plagueing Ironforge. Getting to Onyxia and having to solve several game riddles she requests you solve before giving the answer. -- This story line I lived in UO... best fun i've ever had... doubt we ever see that again.
I don't expect a reply, but just giving you my... Wish List.
I addressed volunteers in the previous thread.
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6791246&tmp=1#post6791246
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6824059 | Poster: Caydiem at 1/26/2006 12:11:33 PM PST Subject: Re: The Lack of Interactivity - MG Part II *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e: One, very specific way to progress the storline in Azeroth, has to deal with instanced zones. Take Gnomregan for example. It has been a year and countless millions of players have exterminated the troggs, yet they still exist. Now, what if, there was a way to completely exterminate them forever? An epic quest, for each player, to flag themselves, for the zone Gnomeregan 2.
Basically, the questline would be epic, something that would cover a span of many lvls. The end reward of the quest would be, the extermination of the troggs, and the rebuilding of the gnomish city. You could then create more quests deriving from the rebuilding of the city, so that you could, over many lvls, finally have rebuilt gnomeregan to its former glory.
On the technical side of this, wouldn't it be possible to create a flag on each character, that would allow them to be given a choice of which instance to enter? If they are flagged, they would be given access to the gnomish gnomeregan, as well as having the option to enter the non trogg infested instance. If they are not flagged, then they have no choice but to enter the trogg infested instance of gnomeregan.
On top of progressing the storyline, you also allow yourself to add repeatable content on top of repeatable content. The new Gnomeregan could be a hub for high lvl quests, could have instances inside, deep down inside the mountain. It could open up new engineering recipes, new vendors, another means of transportation throughout the world of azeroth in the form of trams, teleportation devices, ect. An entire town is build out of an existing zone map.
What you suggest isn't really conducive to a persistent world, and could potentially split a lot of players up.
A lot of you are attempting to use Caverns of Time as a scapegoat on this, but honestly, we're not going to build the entirety of Azeroth one year in the future -- which is what's basically being suggested, through a variety of suggestions -- so that people can choose which era they'd like to adventure in. Interesting idea, yes, but wholly unfeasible.
I'm not a malefactor, I'm a lagomorph!
| | | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6816098&p=#post6824151 |
View all recent official Blue Posts
|