Problem with MMOs is the amount of resources they take to make. They are not cost effective games to make to start with. After that you dont know how the game will be received. You could have a great game, but if it doesnt stick then you wasted 5+ years and probably around 100 million with nothing to show. If a company made a game like WoW right now I dont think that it would be anywhere near as successfull. People have such a short attention span that after a few months I think the players would drop off. I think currently only Blizzard may be able to pull it off, but why would they even try? WoW is making money and they are releasing classic servers so it would be dumb of them to split the fan base. I just dont see any companies risking it now
Define the greatest or one of the greatest. Then ask other people to define their greatest. Then try to resolve the differences. Then do that with 50 people, then 100. Heck - if you can get 3 people to agree on what the greatest MMO would be you will be waaaay ahead of the game
So what do we need in a game ? fun ? fame ? fortune ? What the game reward me for play it ? I think it's all the matter ... summary : what i will get for play a game ?
When you said about WOW , you only speak about the light that you see but not the dark that keep that game being big ... aa gold farmer . Believe or not , mostly it was what keep a MMORPG being hot , an MMORPG being a gold mine always hot MMORPG where people keep jump in And some people earn internet and reallife fame just by playing and do silly things in game
As for fun ... nope , no idea . I have fun by watch the boobs jingle , run around try to get to high place , get some good look suits Rarely i fond playing normal fun , doing quest ? nope . grind ? nope . Chat with people ? okay , it fun . Gears treadmill ? nope .
Basically aside from dress up and doing something silly , i found most part of MMORPG not worth doing
Why i bore to kill something , i just like to go around , enjoy it look or try to jump on in head
my favorate mmo is durango unfortunately it's not for the pc.. it's basically a wilderness survival game where you build your base, craft and fight dinosaurs as a group or solo.. i hope it releases on steam or pc /browser might end up playing it on a emulator if they dont release it soon
This is such a great subject, in part because it's unlikely we'll ever find the answer so we can just theory craft all day long
I'm going to ignore mechanics completely for this post as I don't think its particularly useful to discuss them - it is the underlying goal of the mechanics that is much more important. Instead, I think it's better to focus on human psychology in terms of how it relates to gaming and communities.
Also, before we begin, its worth defining what I think being one of the greatest would mean. For me, to boost it above everything except WoW, the game must achieve a stable, active playerbase of 1m+. By stable, I mean it must sit at 1m+ players for 12months or more. By active, I mean playing a minimum of 4 hours a month. (yes, i know only WoW achieves this, but that's what we're aiming for right?)
So, what must an MMORPG have to take it to the top?
1) Expression of self
Only applies to MMORPGs, rather than MMOs in general. The game must allow you to express yourself. This is the fundamental building block that can often get overlooked. Firstly, as players, we need to be able to create a character that we feel connected to. This means having things like a great character creator as well as great class / armour diversity. Your character is a virtual expression of part of your personality.
If you are unable to express yourself through your character then you will lose a vital connection to the game. It is integral for immersion and a strong connection will keep you coming back to the game because you are, in essence, watching a part of you grow and that is satisfying. This is a very strong reason not to do things like gender locking or having only a limited number of classes. Whilst you can get away with such things in single player games where average game time may be 50 hours, you cannot get away with it in an MMO where the desire is 1000+ hours played.
2) A sense of purpose
If the game is able to instil a sense of purpose into the players then it can keep them playing longer and harder. Some games use the story to give purpose - helping the fellowship reach mordor to destory evil - some use the background lore, some rely on social structures, some on financial, some just use loot. Whatever method used, a sense of purpose can be a real strong motivation to keep playing. It is also important to remember the vast array of people playing the game, so whilst story might motivate one player, it may not work for another.
3) A sense of achievement
When we achieve something, our brains release nice chemicals that make us feel good. So, your game must give players a sense of achievement on a regular basis. This is done in such a wide variety of ways. You have the traditional RPG tropes of levels unlocking skills as well as gear. There is also gameplay - I got better so now I can do this. There is social - achieving recognition from others or simply being able to measure yourself against others.
Again, the problem here is to do with the wide variety of humanity that we're dealing with. Bigger numbers through levels and gear provide a false sense of progression which players quickly tire of, so you must back it up with something more fundamental. Can players actually play the game better? Does your game allow for creative solutions to tough situations? How do you create a game which provides a suitable challenge for both complete idiots and hardcore elite gamers?
4) Social connections
This is the thing that gets overlooked most often with modern MMOs. Other players are a resource. 1000s of other players is this genres only unique selling point. Yet it has been ignored almost completely!
I often use the saying "friends don't let friends quit". Its an easy way to explain how increased social bonding within a game can dramatically increase retention. So, design your game around social bonds. You don't have to force grouping, the solo player should always be supported especially in the modern era of MMOs. But, you should aim to build social bonds. This can be done through group content, player housing, player-driven economies, class inter-dependency, guilds or whatever else you want. The key is to build a game where repeated contact with other players is common (can't build a bond with someone you never see again!) and where there is a clear benefit to the social bonding.
5) A sense of belonging / place
This is all about making the player feel at home. A large part of this is going to come from the IP - do your players actually want to live in this virtual world? - but a more important part once players are in is that no one playstyle is supreme. In the modern MMO world, the killer reigns supreme. The overwhelming majority of content is designed for killers, the main activity is killing stuff and the main rewards help you kill stuff better.
A truly great MMO will create a place for a much wider variety of society. There should always be content for killers -because the minute-to-minute gameplay is simply more fun than many types of gameplay - but a proper MMO will equally value crafters, roleplayers, builders, card players, socialisers etc. Remember, WoW achieved it's success by attracting non-MMO gamers and keeping hold of them. You can't keep hold of such players if you make them feel like second class citizens.
Where I feel a lot of modern MMOs fail is that for each of these psychological gaming pillars, they only focus on a very narrow interpretation. Western MMOs are heavily focusing on story, so your sense of purpose is derived from the story. But, if you are like me, you hate stories in your games and so that sense of purpose is gone. So, why am I playing? Often there is no further reason beyond grinding some loot or playing with a friend, hardly compelling reasons to stick around.
Or, the games are too narrow when it comes to expressing yourself. What if the game uses the trinity, but my personality doesn't fit with the trinity model?
As a designer, you also have to make a choice as to where you are going to draw the line. You cannot please everyone. The more people you try to please, the worse each individual feature is going to be. But, narrow the focus too much and your target market shrinks and the lack of variety reduces retention. It is a very fine balancing act.
This is such a great subject, in part because it's unlikely we'll ever find the answer so we can just theory craft all day long
I'm going to ignore mechanics completely for this post as I don't think its particularly useful to discuss them - it is the underlying goal of the mechanics that is much more important. Instead, I think it's better to focus on human psychology in terms of how it relates to gaming and communities.
Also, before we begin, its worth defining what I think being one of the greatest would mean. For me, to boost it above everything except WoW, the game must achieve a stable, active playerbase of 1m+. By stable, I mean it must sit at 1m+ players for 12months or more. By active, I mean playing a minimum of 4 hours a month. (yes, i know only WoW achieves this, but that's what we're aiming for right?)
So, what must an MMORPG have to take it s is the fundamental building block that can often get overlooked. Firstly, as players, we need to be able to create a character that we feel connected to. This means having things like a great character creator as well as great class / armour diversity. Your character is a virtual expression of part of your personality.
..............................
Where I feel a lot of modern MMOs fail is that for each of these psychological gaming pillars, they only focus on a very narrow interpretation. Western MMOs are heavily focusing on story, so your sense of purpose is derived from the story. But, if you are like me, you hate stories in your games and so that sense of purpose is gone. So, why am I playing? Often there is no further reason beyond grinding some loot or playing with a friend, hardly compelling reasons to stick around.
Or, the games are too narrow when it comes to expressing yourself. What if the game uses the trinity, but my personality doesn't fit with the trinity model?
As a designer, you also have to make a choice as to where you are going to draw the line. You cannot please everyone. The more people you try to please, the worse each individual feature is going to be. But, narrow the focus too much and your target market shrinks and the lack of variety reduces retention. It is a very fine balancing act.
All great stuff there. I think we should theory craft since it’s something enjoyable (at least for myself but I’m sure most others here). Also it could help craft a great game. Whether that one comes to release is another question. There are just so many variables, different things for people who to spend time doing. It will probably always be never ending until we get something like S.A.O maybe haha. Having a number of well fleshed out things for players to do is important since people get tired of the exact same thing.
To some degree I think a lot of the issues in trying to shoestring a startup without investing personal funds in a demo will lead to a lot of skepticism on whether it gets good talent. Most are highly skeptical of these kind of projects because most fail. I really don't blame people for being skeptic.
The guys (Pete and Ali) I had were really good at originality and game design. They did most of the flowchart work and made it really easy to program it in a matter of a few days. We built the templates for the entire game crafting and building system in under a month. Without their help the project would never have gotten that far. After the project failed I spent some time working on customization of character, text to lip and text to speech. Lot of flack about the t and a kind of finalized the abortion of the project.
The biggest hurdle was art and getting a writer that was willing to sacrifice a couple months of work so it could be presented to the investors and finding PR. I just did not have funds to pay a marketing firm and it was NO WHERE ready for public eyes anyway.
HONESTLY it was a fantastic experience and I am rather glad at the outcome. It was better to do the abortion then end up loosing large sums of money with lots of postmortem analysis.
The future looks bright for those willing to invest time and effort if they can find the missing links this project had.
This is a great perspective for myself. I have tried and continue to familiarize myself with the reality of making a game such as this. I realize it takes an army of people to have a reasonably quick development.
However far I get I enjoy designing, researching, going over small aspects. Just all the factors I can learn about.
Thats is one of the most important things, loving what you do and feeling good about time spent. That and managing expectations.
The way I look at mmorpg is they are a jack of all trade game. Meaning they have a bit of everything.
But most people who prefer a specific type of game play simply play other game.
For example if I want pvp why don't I just play a game which is only about pvp.
If I want to play a game about the world, why don't I just play Minecraft.
If I want to play open world no bar pvp why don't I just play king of the hill games.
That can be very true, mmos being a jack of all trades. Although I think that sometimes spreads a game too thin and some aspects just aren’t very good. Leading to people going to another game for that part they like, since it’s better. I think it unfortunately happens too often, that a game stretches the truth about its variety to try and make more money. Things do have a cost and businesses need money to maintain a game but just feels like a lot of shady stuff going on neutral: The draw of having an mmo that does a wide variety of things well, all working together would be big. Helping people feel more connected to the game world etc. Just takes far more development resources. The right blend and opertunity is out there. WoW struck lightning at the right time and has continued to ride it. Props to them.
This is all about making the player feel at home. A large part of this is going to come from the IP - do your players actually want to live in this virtual world? - but a more important part once players are in is that no one playstyle is supreme. In the modern MMO world, the killer reigns supreme. The overwhelming majority of content is designed for killers, the main activity is killing stuff and the main rewards help you kill stuff better.
A truly great MMO will create a place for a much wider variety of society. There should always be content for killers -because the minute-to-minute gameplay is simply more fun than many types of gameplay - but a proper MMO will equally value crafters, roleplayers, builders, card players, socialisers etc. Remember, WoW achieved it's success by attracting non-MMO gamers and keeping hold of them. You can't keep hold of such players if you make them feel like second class citizens.
<snip>
I love what you've said here.
To keep this reply brief (ish), let me focus on point 5, a sense of belonging. The fundamental social component that provides a sense of belonging is the family. No game has ever tried to incorporate a family into the game. Games need lots of NPCs to populate cities, towns and out of the way villages, but none has ever tried to generate two or three family members to be around in game. Players get to generate characters, but have no family ties into the game world. It would be relatively easy to create NPCs in starter towns, and have the PCs assigned to parents. It wouldn't be overly difficult to have PCs start as siblings with other PCs.
Having NPC parents and siblings provide a means for simple hooks for a character to create their own story. Providing PCs with an in-game family would create a sense of fundamentals of aspects of 'home', another building block of society. It could also foster a different form of in-game community, as opposed to the usual definition of people playing the game.
Nothing drives conflict like family.
---------- Eventually, the RPG form will evolve from its 1972 D&D foundations. It needs to now. I'd like to think that games will find new ways to represent the human form and conflict. Modern games (and all on the drawing boards currently) use analog systems for statistics, progression and resolution. Nothing really harnesses the power of the digital computer to represent the human body. I would hope that the mechanics of the RPG will expand beyond the combat and crafting functions to include other, less tangible aspects of life -- social, ethical, religious, political and legal encounters to challenge the player. Our games need to move away from the pure game and strive to be simulations. These won't be our games, but our great-great-great-grandchildren's games.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
This is all about making the player feel at home. A large part of this is going to come from the IP - do your players actually want to live in this virtual world? - but a more important part once players are in is that no one playstyle is supreme. In the modern MMO world, the killer reigns supreme. The overwhelming majority of content is designed for killers, the main activity is killing stuff and the main rewards help you kill stuff better.
A truly great MMO will create a place for a much wider variety of society. There should always be content for killers -because the minute-to-minute gameplay is simply more fun than many types of gameplay - but a proper MMO will equally value crafters, roleplayers, builders, card players, socialisers etc. Remember, WoW achieved it's success by attracting non-MMO gamers and keeping hold of them. You can't keep hold of such players if you make them feel like second class citizens.
<snip>
I love what you've said here.
To keep this reply brief (ish), let me focus on point 5, a sense of belonging. The fundamental social component that provides a sense of belonging is the family. No game has ever tried to incorporate a family into the game. Games need lots of NPCs to populate cities, towns and out of the way villages, but none has ever tried to generate two or three family members to be around in game. Players get to generate characters, but have no family ties into the game world. It would be relatively easy to create NPCs in starter towns, and have the PCs assigned to parents. It wouldn't be overly difficult to have PCs start as siblings with other PCs.
Having NPC parents and siblings provide a means for simple hooks for a character to create their own story. Providing PCs with an in-game family would create a sense of fundamentals of aspects of 'home', another building block of society. It could also foster a different form of in-game community, as opposed to the usual definition of people playing the game.
Nothing drives conflict like family.
Thanks for the response :-)
I think a sense of belonging comes from being 100% comfortable being yourself around others. For most of us, family is where we feel most comfortable being ourselves so they do provide that feeling, but that same feeling can be generated wherever you can create that safe space. For example, I haven't had a sense of belonging from my family since I was about 16 but have been part of a couple of groups/teams/societies which did provide me with that feeling.
With regards to putting family into MMOs by having NPC family members.....hit and miss. For me personally, this wouldn't create a sense of belonging at all because all feedback from the family would be programmed, not genuine. NPC family members might create an additional attachment to the game which could increase retention, but I don't think it would contribute to the sense of belonging.
Also, I can't remember which one, but one of the kickstarter sandboxes is putting in family members (Pantheon?). I can't remember exact details, but you can create your family and do minor micro-management of them. Then, when your main character dies, you become your son/daughter/wife. The micromanagement bit is about passing on your skills, so when you die you do not completely reset.
I don't think anyone know the perfect concept or they would get a sponsor and make it.
In my case it would be something very close to a pen and paper roleplaying game with mobs & npc done with the help of an AI.
Intrigue for instance is something I generally miss in MMOs, they tend to focus on combat and avoid anything needing a bit of brain.
The story, particularly the very important backstory (players can create a regular story together but a good backstory is a big plus and make the world far more interesting to explore even in sandboxes) is usually rather poor and often pathetic. At best we get something that could have come from one of the worse Savage sword of Conan comics (if they still are making those).
Also, how the games tell the story together with the players is bad. Usually that is done in quests and sometimes with DEs, dungeons or in a similar way but it is often rather annoying. We get stupid sidequests that doesn't feel either heroic or villanous like killing rats, bugs and other menial tasks instead of doing something interesting.
Combat tends to be very predictive and "hard" stuff often means mobs with many HP and high damage that might require a wiki read instead of forcing you to adept you tactics to any given situation. It doesn't really matter if we are talking trinity, action combat or something else, after playing a short time nothing is really surprising and forces the players to rethink their strategy on the spot in PvE. I think an AI closer to a real person (or animal if that is the case) would make things more interesting.
Crafting is poor. Usually it requires you to grind a skill and gather some materials but you never get the pride to actually create something yourself. IRL there are many ways to make a knife and you would get a variety of different interesting results. In MMOs you get one choice each 10 levels or maybe 3 with different rarity but all exactly the same as anyone else no matter what culture, race or preference the smith have.
I just feel that I basically do the same things in any themepark games and the same things in any sandbox games (besides Eve), they all feel like reskinned version of 2 simple templates and nothing new or very interesting.
There is just so much to roleplaying games besides getting a D&D copy with a rather unimaginative DM that thinks the only rewards a game can give you is better gear and XP. For me at least the perfect MMO would feel more like a good PnP game with a competent gamemaster and less like the terrible D&D movies.
Don't get me wrong, I played a lot of MMOs since I tried M59 the first time and I have had a lot of fun with them but they never even been close to a pen and paper game, not even one with a terrible GM. In fact they have moved further and further away from that and more and more closer to a massive version of Diablo. Diablo can be fun as well but it get less fun with time, a good PnP campaign get more fun the longer you play.
(1) Create a P2P game that stays far, far away from the "F2P or bust" idiocy we have been smothered with for years now. Not one of those games has had any real staying power, and that's not going to change.
(2) Finish the game with your own internal financing, and release it as a finished product, instead of milking gamers with more sense than money for their cash before the game is even playable.
Right about now, anybody doing either of those things would be doing the entire MMO genre a great service, because both aspects are sorely missing, and two of the biggest examples of why the genre is in such terrible shape.
"We are all as God made us, and many of us much worse." - Don Quixote
There will never be an MMO that could be called the greatest ever, as MMO players, as a collective, can not agree on what would make an MMO the greatest ever.
Just as an example, in my opinion, SWG: An Empire Divided became the greatest MMORPG ever when they added the Jump to Lightspeed expansion.
Not everyone who frequents this site, never mind everyone that plays MMOs, would agree.
As far as theorycrafting, my personal theory is that it is actually better to design games for a narrower audience. I feel there's more value in being a great game to a small audience segment then there is in being a mediocre game to a broad audience segment. Specifically I feel that those players whose favorite thing is to attack other players and destroy their stuff is an audience segment that's already well served by existing MMOs and whose presence in the game would be detrimental to my vision of a great MMO as a virtual world players can take joy in living in.
Why do I feel this way? Well, I feel that in reality, the humans who enjoy treating others badly pretty much ruin the world for the rest of us. And they are also eager to damage others' play experiences within an MMO if the devs allow them to do so. So I think that the first principle of designing an MMO (excluding those specifically focused on PvP) should be to prevent players from being able to harm each other or their possessions. On player's right to swing their fist ends at the tip of the next player's nose. If you start with this as a foundational design principle, you can't create a good PvP game anyway, so you shouldn't compromise your principles by trying to attract or placate PvP players, and should instead focus on making the best PvE.
Similarly, I feel that those who think that competition is awesome and the gameplay you can most take pride in is PvP because other humans are the best opponents, you all should design a great game with that core principle and not try to lure in or placate non-PvP players who aren't going to be happy in your virtual world.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
@TarzanGreen, One out of Four isn't going to make the greatest mmo
Sense of accomplishment. As seen in WoW, Rare Loot Drops are what make people dream of playing WoW.
Variety that makes (in game) sense. I'm sorry but as you describe variety is a lesson learned in what the vast majority of players don't want. Players don't want there game play tied or limited to other gamers. Several games have tried interdependence crafting. Most have pulled the plug on it over players' dissatisfaction with the system. Why are so many upset with the Trinity in MMO's? Because their bad behaviour makes it impossible for them to find Healers willing to play with them.
Unforced PvP. If this were the case then WoW would have been the number one MMO for the past Twelve years. Lets me just say, MOBAs, PUBG, & SWBF2 just to name a few. Open world PvP is a sharp double edged sword. It is both hated and demanded at the same time by near equal in number factions. And there are many games in development that support or have it as a basic feature.
No Global Chat. This is a joke, because those that want it can chose it in the setup. The vast majority Don't want it, and will use third party software to get around it. So why not include it? To make a game where being anti-Social is a major feature?
Personally I'm a fan of items One through Three, and when I'm questing I tend to ignore the Global chat. But I do make use of it on occasion. But I also feel that the lessons learned regarding them, are ignore at your own peril.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
@TarzanGreen, One out of Four isn't going to make the greatest mmo
Sense of accomplishment. As seen in WoW, Rare Loot Drops are what make people dream of playing WoW.
Variety that makes (in game) sense. I'm sorry but as you describe variety is a lesson learned in what the vast majority of players don't want. Players don't want there game play tied or limited to other gamers. Several games have tried interdependence crafting. Most have pulled the plug on it over players' dissatisfaction with the system. Why are so many upset with the Trinity in MMO's? Because their bad behaviour makes it impossible for them to find Healers willing to play with them.
Unforced PvP. If this were the case then WoW would have been the number one MMO for the past Twelve years. Lets me just say, MOBAs, PUBG, & SWBF2 just to name a few. Open world PvP is a sharp double edged sword. It is both hated and demanded at the same time by near equal in number factions. And there are many games in development that support or have it as a basic feature.
No Global Chat. This is a joke, because those that want it can chose it in the setup. The vast majority Don't want it, and will use third party software to get around it. So why not include it? To make a game where being anti-Social is a major feature?
Personally I'm a fan of items One through Three, and when I'm questing I tend to ignore the Global chat. But I do make use of it on occasion. But I also feel that the lessons learned regarding them, are ignore at your own peril.
1. Yes absolutely, there has to be some amount of rare/unique drops. There is something to be said for finally getting that item after what seems like a countless number of tries.
2. I agree completely, tieing players to others does not feel good. Forcing things is not good. My thoughts with variety would be that is isn’t forcing players together but giving them options with what they would want to do with their time. Farming, gathering, crafting, all those things except each more interesting than many mmos out there.
3. Oh for sure, there are a couple keys things we know now that WoW could have done. It would have been absolutely untouchable. It seems to me the full loot PvP everywhere games are too neiche. I always liked the thought but seemed liked player retention etc isn't very good.
4. This is true, just saying that does sound bad lol. I explained a bit more what I was thinking. Could still talk in a large area just not the entire game world. A separate trade channel would be a plus, right of the start. I ignore the global chat Cancer when possible. Can be fun to shoot the **** with a bunch of randoms.
Comments
What the game reward me for play it ?
I think it's all the matter ... summary : what i will get for play a game ?
When you said about WOW , you only speak about the light that you see but not the dark that keep that game being big ... aa gold farmer . Believe or not , mostly it was what keep a MMORPG being hot , an MMORPG being a gold mine always hot MMORPG where people keep jump in
And some people earn internet and reallife fame just by playing and do silly things in game
As for fun ... nope , no idea .
I have fun by watch the boobs jingle , run around try to get to high place , get some good look suits
Rarely i fond playing normal fun , doing quest ? nope . grind ? nope . Chat with people ? okay , it fun . Gears treadmill ? nope .
Basically aside from dress up and doing something silly , i found most part of MMORPG not worth doing
Why i bore to kill something , i just like to go around , enjoy it look or try to jump on in head
I'm going to ignore mechanics completely for this post as I don't think its particularly useful to discuss them - it is the underlying goal of the mechanics that is much more important. Instead, I think it's better to focus on human psychology in terms of how it relates to gaming and communities.
Also, before we begin, its worth defining what I think being one of the greatest would mean. For me, to boost it above everything except WoW, the game must achieve a stable, active playerbase of 1m+. By stable, I mean it must sit at 1m+ players for 12months or more. By active, I mean playing a minimum of 4 hours a month. (yes, i know only WoW achieves this, but that's what we're aiming for right?)
So, what must an MMORPG have to take it to the top?
1) Expression of self
Only applies to MMORPGs, rather than MMOs in general. The game must allow you to express yourself. This is the fundamental building block that can often get overlooked. Firstly, as players, we need to be able to create a character that we feel connected to. This means having things like a great character creator as well as great class / armour diversity. Your character is a virtual expression of part of your personality.
If you are unable to express yourself through your character then you will lose a vital connection to the game. It is integral for immersion and a strong connection will keep you coming back to the game because you are, in essence, watching a part of you grow and that is satisfying. This is a very strong reason not to do things like gender locking or having only a limited number of classes. Whilst you can get away with such things in single player games where average game time may be 50 hours, you cannot get away with it in an MMO where the desire is 1000+ hours played.
2) A sense of purpose
If the game is able to instil a sense of purpose into the players then it can keep them playing longer and harder. Some games use the story to give purpose - helping the fellowship reach mordor to destory evil - some use the background lore, some rely on social structures, some on financial, some just use loot. Whatever method used, a sense of purpose can be a real strong motivation to keep playing. It is also important to remember the vast array of people playing the game, so whilst story might motivate one player, it may not work for another.
3) A sense of achievement
When we achieve something, our brains release nice chemicals that make us feel good. So, your game must give players a sense of achievement on a regular basis. This is done in such a wide variety of ways. You have the traditional RPG tropes of levels unlocking skills as well as gear. There is also gameplay - I got better so now I can do this. There is social - achieving recognition from others or simply being able to measure yourself against others.
Again, the problem here is to do with the wide variety of humanity that we're dealing with. Bigger numbers through levels and gear provide a false sense of progression which players quickly tire of, so you must back it up with something more fundamental. Can players actually play the game better? Does your game allow for creative solutions to tough situations? How do you create a game which provides a suitable challenge for both complete idiots and hardcore elite gamers?
4) Social connections
This is the thing that gets overlooked most often with modern MMOs. Other players are a resource. 1000s of other players is this genres only unique selling point. Yet it has been ignored almost completely!
I often use the saying "friends don't let friends quit". Its an easy way to explain how increased social bonding within a game can dramatically increase retention. So, design your game around social bonds. You don't have to force grouping, the solo player should always be supported especially in the modern era of MMOs. But, you should aim to build social bonds. This can be done through group content, player housing, player-driven economies, class inter-dependency, guilds or whatever else you want. The key is to build a game where repeated contact with other players is common (can't build a bond with someone you never see again!) and where there is a clear benefit to the social bonding.
5) A sense of belonging / place
This is all about making the player feel at home. A large part of this is going to come from the IP - do your players actually want to live in this virtual world? - but a more important part once players are in is that no one playstyle is supreme. In the modern MMO world, the killer reigns supreme. The overwhelming majority of content is designed for killers, the main activity is killing stuff and the main rewards help you kill stuff better.
A truly great MMO will create a place for a much wider variety of society. There should always be content for killers -because the minute-to-minute gameplay is simply more fun than many types of gameplay - but a proper MMO will equally value crafters, roleplayers, builders, card players, socialisers etc. Remember, WoW achieved it's success by attracting non-MMO gamers and keeping hold of them. You can't keep hold of such players if you make them feel like second class citizens.
Where I feel a lot of modern MMOs fail is that for each of these psychological gaming pillars, they only focus on a very narrow interpretation. Western MMOs are heavily focusing on story, so your sense of purpose is derived from the story. But, if you are like me, you hate stories in your games and so that sense of purpose is gone. So, why am I playing? Often there is no further reason beyond grinding some loot or playing with a friend, hardly compelling reasons to stick around.
Or, the games are too narrow when it comes to expressing yourself. What if the game uses the trinity, but my personality doesn't fit with the trinity model?
As a designer, you also have to make a choice as to where you are going to draw the line. You cannot please everyone. The more people you try to please, the worse each individual feature is going to be. But, narrow the focus too much and your target market shrinks and the lack of variety reduces retention. It is a very fine balancing act.
Having a number of well fleshed out things for players to do is important since people get tired of the exact same thing.
This is a great perspective for myself. I have tried and continue to familiarize myself with the reality of making a game such as this. I realize it takes an army of people to have a reasonably quick development.
However far I get I enjoy designing, researching, going over small aspects. Just all the factors I can learn about.
Thats is one of the most important things, loving what you do and feeling good about time spent. That and managing expectations.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
But most people who prefer a specific type of game play simply play other game.
For example if I want pvp why don't I just play a game which is only about pvp.
If I want to play a game about the world, why don't I just play Minecraft.
If I want to play open world no bar pvp why don't I just play king of the hill games.
I think it unfortunately happens too often, that a game stretches the truth about its variety to try and make more money. Things do have a cost and businesses need money to maintain a game but just feels like a lot of shady stuff going on neutral:
The draw of having an mmo that does a wide variety of things well, all working together would be big. Helping people feel more connected to the game world etc.
Just takes far more development resources. The right blend and opertunity is out there. WoW struck lightning at the right time and has continued to ride it. Props to them.
To keep this reply brief (ish), let me focus on point 5, a sense of belonging. The fundamental social component that provides a sense of belonging is the family. No game has ever tried to incorporate a family into the game. Games need lots of NPCs to populate cities, towns and out of the way villages, but none has ever tried to generate two or three family members to be around in game. Players get to generate characters, but have no family ties into the game world. It would be relatively easy to create NPCs in starter towns, and have the PCs assigned to parents. It wouldn't be overly difficult to have PCs start as siblings with other PCs.
Having NPC parents and siblings provide a means for simple hooks for a character to create their own story. Providing PCs with an in-game family would create a sense of fundamentals of aspects of 'home', another building block of society. It could also foster a different form of in-game community, as opposed to the usual definition of people playing the game.
Nothing drives conflict like family.
----------
Eventually, the RPG form will evolve from its 1972 D&D foundations. It needs to now. I'd like to think that games will find new ways to represent the human form and conflict. Modern games (and all on the drawing boards currently) use analog systems for statistics, progression and resolution. Nothing really harnesses the power of the digital computer to represent the human body. I would hope that the mechanics of the RPG will expand beyond the combat and crafting functions to include other, less tangible aspects of life -- social, ethical, religious, political and legal encounters to challenge the player. Our games need to move away from the pure game and strive to be simulations. These won't be our games, but our great-great-great-grandchildren's games.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I think a sense of belonging comes from being 100% comfortable being yourself around others. For most of us, family is where we feel most comfortable being ourselves so they do provide that feeling, but that same feeling can be generated wherever you can create that safe space. For example, I haven't had a sense of belonging from my family since I was about 16 but have been part of a couple of groups/teams/societies which did provide me with that feeling.
With regards to putting family into MMOs by having NPC family members.....hit and miss. For me personally, this wouldn't create a sense of belonging at all because all feedback from the family would be programmed, not genuine. NPC family members might create an additional attachment to the game which could increase retention, but I don't think it would contribute to the sense of belonging.
Also, I can't remember which one, but one of the kickstarter sandboxes is putting in family members (Pantheon?). I can't remember exact details, but you can create your family and do minor micro-management of them. Then, when your main character dies, you become your son/daughter/wife. The micromanagement bit is about passing on your skills, so when you die you do not completely reset.
In my case it would be something very close to a pen and paper roleplaying game with mobs & npc done with the help of an AI.
Intrigue for instance is something I generally miss in MMOs, they tend to focus on combat and avoid anything needing a bit of brain.
The story, particularly the very important backstory (players can create a regular story together but a good backstory is a big plus and make the world far more interesting to explore even in sandboxes) is usually rather poor and often pathetic. At best we get something that could have come from one of the worse Savage sword of Conan comics (if they still are making those).
Also, how the games tell the story together with the players is bad. Usually that is done in quests and sometimes with DEs, dungeons or in a similar way but it is often rather annoying. We get stupid sidequests that doesn't feel either heroic or villanous like killing rats, bugs and other menial tasks instead of doing something interesting.
Combat tends to be very predictive and "hard" stuff often means mobs with many HP and high damage that might require a wiki read instead of forcing you to adept you tactics to any given situation. It doesn't really matter if we are talking trinity, action combat or something else, after playing a short time nothing is really surprising and forces the players to rethink their strategy on the spot in PvE. I think an AI closer to a real person (or animal if that is the case) would make things more interesting.
Crafting is poor. Usually it requires you to grind a skill and gather some materials but you never get the pride to actually create something yourself. IRL there are many ways to make a knife and you would get a variety of different interesting results. In MMOs you get one choice each 10 levels or maybe 3 with different rarity but all exactly the same as anyone else no matter what culture, race or preference the smith have.
I just feel that I basically do the same things in any themepark games and the same things in any sandbox games (besides Eve), they all feel like reskinned version of 2 simple templates and nothing new or very interesting.
There is just so much to roleplaying games besides getting a D&D copy with a rather unimaginative DM that thinks the only rewards a game can give you is better gear and XP. For me at least the perfect MMO would feel more like a good PnP game with a competent gamemaster and less like the terrible D&D movies.
Don't get me wrong, I played a lot of MMOs since I tried M59 the first time and I have had a lot of fun with them but they never even been close to a pen and paper game, not even one with a terrible GM. In fact they have moved further and further away from that and more and more closer to a massive version of Diablo. Diablo can be fun as well but it get less fun with time, a good PnP campaign get more fun the longer you play.
(2) Finish the game with your own internal financing, and release it as a finished product, instead of milking gamers with more sense than money for their cash before the game is even playable.
Right about now, anybody doing either of those things would be doing the entire MMO genre a great service, because both aspects are sorely missing, and two of the biggest examples of why the genre is in such terrible shape.
Just as an example, in my opinion, SWG: An Empire Divided became the greatest MMORPG ever when they added the Jump to Lightspeed expansion.
Not everyone who frequents this site, never mind everyone that plays MMOs, would agree.
Why do I feel this way? Well, I feel that in reality, the humans who enjoy treating others badly pretty much ruin the world for the rest of us. And they are also eager to damage others' play experiences within an MMO if the devs allow them to do so. So I think that the first principle of designing an MMO (excluding those specifically focused on PvP) should be to prevent players from being able to harm each other or their possessions. On player's right to swing their fist ends at the tip of the next player's nose. If you start with this as a foundational design principle, you can't create a good PvP game anyway, so you shouldn't compromise your principles by trying to attract or placate PvP players, and should instead focus on making the best PvE.
Similarly, I feel that those who think that competition is awesome and the gameplay you can most take pride in is PvP because other humans are the best opponents, you all should design a great game with that core principle and not try to lure in or placate non-PvP players who aren't going to be happy in your virtual world.
- Sense of accomplishment. As seen in WoW, Rare Loot Drops are what make people dream of playing WoW.
- Variety that makes (in game) sense. I'm sorry but as you describe variety is a lesson learned in what the vast majority of players don't want. Players don't want there game play tied or limited to other gamers. Several games have tried interdependence crafting. Most have pulled the plug on it over players' dissatisfaction with the system. Why are so many upset with the Trinity in MMO's? Because their bad behaviour makes it impossible for them to find Healers willing to play with them.
- Unforced PvP. If this were the case then WoW would have been the number one MMO for the past Twelve years. Lets me just say, MOBAs, PUBG, & SWBF2 just to name a few. Open world PvP is a sharp double edged sword. It is both hated and demanded at the same time by near equal in number factions. And there are many games in development that support or have it as a basic feature.
- No Global Chat. This is a joke, because those that want it can chose it in the setup. The vast majority Don't want it, and will use third party software to get around it. So why not include it? To make a game where being anti-Social is a major feature?
Personally I'm a fan of items One through Three, and when I'm questing I tend to ignore the Global chat. But I do make use of it on occasion. But I also feel that the lessons learned regarding them, are ignore at your own peril.Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
2. I agree completely, tieing players to others does not feel good. Forcing things is not good. My thoughts with variety would be that is isn’t forcing players together but giving them options with what they would want to do with their time. Farming, gathering, crafting, all those things except each more interesting than many mmos out there.
3. Oh for sure, there are a couple keys things we know now that WoW could have done. It would have been absolutely untouchable. It seems to me the full loot PvP everywhere games are too neiche. I always liked the thought but seemed liked player retention etc isn't very good.
4. This is true, just saying that does sound bad lol. I explained a bit more what I was thinking. Could still talk in a large area just not the entire game world. A separate trade channel would be a plus, right of the start. I ignore the global chat Cancer when possible. Can be fun to shoot the **** with a bunch of randoms.