Vanguard: Making the game as they go?

[Utnayan]

The other thread was locked, and I asked permission to post a new one. With me behind this one, you know what you are getting yourself into. So keep the Utnayan love/hate down to a minimum, and I would like to get opinions on what people think of this.

Vanguard has been in development for 4 and a half years. Beta testers are not logging in. The game is simply not fun or keeping people playing even in beta as a fresh MMORPG. Fanboy's are rampant in defending the game, beta testers are now being called upon to actually develop it.

This was an email I got from a beta tester. In the other thread, it was mentioned that beta testers were actually being asked serious design questions. I am all for feedback, but when you have to ask your beta testers questions around core fundamental concepts regarding questing, community building, interdependence, etc - I think itis plainly obvious that this game is now being built as they go.

Here is the info I have received, and I have injected some of my comments.

Right now, Sigil and Vanguard have a ton of problems. I just received this email and I will highlight the important aspects. Let me go ahead and preface the post with this:

While I don't agree with your posting methods or the way you go about getting your point across, I do agree with the message.

Some important things I think the players and fans of this game should know before they make a purchase decision. These words from the senior lead of Vanguard.

"Inside the Box: The Uninteresting Edges of the World
Please read the post entitled: Inside the Box Experiment prior to posting in
this thread.

Vanguard has a fairly large world, and we won’t be able to fill /all/
of it with interesting content by the time we ship.

Well, at least they admit it. To bad they aren't telling the people that are buying the game. What is going to be unfinished? Where in the world? Just how much content missing is acceptable to you? Going to be finished on subscription revenue I am guessing? Either way, they do not have the ideas on how to do it. And this isn't touching the fact that is world content isn't going to be finished on an overland level, just how much high end content will you actually have finished before you ship. A long leveling curve basically means you will be dedicating your resources to finishing a high end raiding design doc. Hap hazardly in most cases as we have all seen before with EQ expansions. Bugs will again get thrown to the way side, and subscription revenue to finish what should have already came with the game. How much are you going to ship incomplete with regards to the end game?

What reasons can you think of to visit the ends of the earth, to visit
the uninteresting areas? Keep in mind, these areas may not have any compelling points of interest, or any real special NPC population. What /game mechanics/ not content could pull you to these areas?

I am all for feedback. But asking what type of game mechanics should be used here? Are you expecting the beta testers to make the game?

I have heard many different opinions on how difficult the game should
be in the first few levels. I’d like to hear yours, with a bit of reasoning.

Level 1
What should you fear in combat if anything?
Should you have to manage resources to win?
How many creatures should you battle before resting?

Level 2
What should you fear in combat if anything?
Should you have to manage resources to win?
How many creatures should you battle before resting?

Level 3
What should you fear in combat if anything?
Should you have to manage resources to win?
How many creatures should you battle before resting?

Level 4
What should you fear in combat if anything?
Should you have to manage resources to win?
How many creatures should you battle before resting?

Level 5
What should you fear in combat if anything?
Should you have to manage resources to win?
How many creatures should you battle before resting?

This question and summary for answers is just absurd. Shouldn't you know how to make the game? You're asking beta testers to basically write the first 5 levels of a design doc for combat. What's happening here? Again, I am all for feedback -- but this goes beyond it. It shows that you just don't know what you are doing.

Aside from grouping, list 3 community building mechanics or activities
that should be included in Vanguard. Also, list 3 reasons why high level players should interact with low level players.

Community Building 1

Community Building 2

Community Building 3

Vertical Interdependence 1

Vertical Interdependence 2

Vertical Interdependence 3

Wow. Just wow. First of all, I hope you explain what vertical interdependence is to most people who aren't going to know even though it is somewhat explained in the statement of the question. Second, this is something that should have been thought of YEARS ago. You are asking your beta testers for community building and interdependence ideas. Things that are buried deep in the core foundation of the game itself. The very fact that you do not have skill sets already set up around this interdependence at this stage shows just how little you have completed, and to me on a subjective level, almost makes it seem that you have no plan of action and are making the game as you go. That is a terrible way to release a title - especially when you plan on shipping in 6 months. Microsoft wanted to release this in July - and I appluad your effort at buying at least a little more time - even though it is blatantly obvious you missed major milestones from poor producing and it would have REALLY flopped had it launched, but good God, this isn't something that should be asked of beta testers if you have a well thought out plan for this. This is conceptual design type of stuff.

"Inside the Box: Quests
Please read the post entitled: Inside the Box Experiment prior to posting in
this thread. Many people post that they have great ideas for quests, or complain that all of the quests in the game are the same / boring.

Well, instead of meandering and arguing back and forth, let’s see some
suggestions within a limited set of parameters. A quest can be thought of as a set of objectives that must be reached in order to be completed. Many different objectives can be had for a single quest. You can chain together different objectives into “parts of a quest”.

In your descriptions use NPCs and Areas specific to Vanguard – if something
is really cool, perhaps a designer will run with your suggestion.

Quest Name or Series Name: What would you name this quest?

Method of Gaining the Quest
How do you gain the quest? Is it via dialog? Is it via clicking an item? Is
it via walking past a location? Are there any conditions that must be met
prior to gaining the quest?

Description Text Told to Player
In 512 /characters/ or less what text would be told to the character?
It can be harder than it sounds if you want to give out lore.

Objectives
Describe the objectives of the quest. These must be things that can be tracked in a numeric or Boolean manner. I.E. Do something 5 times or Go to this spot.

Accepting – What Happens?

What happens when a player accepts the quest? Does nothing happen and
the player needs to run around and complete the objectives? Do ten wolves
spawn and immediately attack the player?

Outcome – What Happens?

What happens when a player finishes the quest? Are you rewarded with
items, given new quests? Does a majestic eagle spawn and fly into the sunset?"

The first thing I think of when I read the first statement, to me anyway, seems like the writer is throwing a temper tantrum with all the negative feedback they are getting about content, throwing what needs to be done logistically at the beta tester, and saying, "Fine. See if you can do any better" Another part of me thinks they are just looking for ideas for fun quests. Another part of me wonders, given the relatively experience-less associate designers hired on the buddy system - if they are just not able to do the above. It's one thing to be able to have an idea, it's one thing to do it via table top gaming and be an on the fly DM. It's quite another to follow a strict set of instruction sets while making interesting combat choices based on a skill set with intricate grouping dependancies, while following the lore of the world, making it match with the world, designing the right reward system to not imbalance the other areas of the game, make some items not overpower the other items in a given content area, etc. I am sure some of these friends of McQuaid that got hired have some good ideas - but implementing them is entirely different - and now they are being forced to go to the gamer to see if they can think of anything. Again, that is how I see it.

That's about all I have at this point. Most of the other questions asked of beta testers I thought were of normal feedback variety that wasn't something that should have been thought of years ago.

I'll end it with what the emailer wrote to me.

The responses are quite.. interesting, to say the least. I'm currently
considering whether its worth compiling a collection of various "debates"
that occur on the VG forums and releasing the information anonymously, so
people can see for themselves exactly how badly thing are messed up, but I
haven't made much of a decision yet.

My entire argument, even though I know a lot of people do not like the way I get it across, has been to announce an indefinite delay to go back to the drawing board and do something else with this game. I think it is fairly obvious, as it stands now, that it will release as a pay now patch later MMORPG, that I think we can all agree on, has no room in this market any longer.

[Tongue]

Vanguard is but one over-hyped drop in the bucket to flood of MMO games coming out in the near future. Does it really matter if they are developing on the fly? Does it really matter if it's going to suck?

IMO there are just too many alternatives to Vanguard to get my panties in a wad about it. If Vanguard wants to "give the people what they want" by asking the people what they want, more power to em.

[Utnayan]

Originally Posted by Tongue

Vanguard is but one over-hyped drop in the bucket to flood of MMO games coming out in the near future. Does it really matter if they are developing on the fly? Does it really matter if it's going to suck?

I think it does. For gamers that want more quality in this genre. The "gamespace" that wasn't realized until WoW came out shows, in my opinion, that botched MMORPG's being released into the market damn near gave the entire genre a black eye which didn't go away. You won't see that excuse used though because someone, somewhere, would have to be culpable. I think it got to the point where normal consumers were not buying these games because of poor feedback about bugs, unfinished game, inaccessibility, etc. It hurt the market, and because of it, gave everyone the impression that games like this were fighting over a core market base of a very limited niche when in all actuality those gamers were there all along (Which shows today) but weren't going to pay money for such horrid product.

Now not only are the inaccessible design ideas back in full force, but the fact that another MMORPG is about to hit the market in another horrid state. We don't need any more of that in this genre. It's already taken a beating enough as it is because of that stigma that was glued to it. I would rather see Vanguard go through a revamp, delay the game indefinitely. Instead, we're about to get another SWG. I guess the only upside this time is it isn't taking a popular IP down with it. Unfortunately, it is another shot in the face to a genre that was finally getting back up off it's knees.

[Faddor]

This seems telling. I can't wait till this launches, if only to see the fireworks.

[Nerion]

To me it seems like they are losing a clear vision of what they want and instead are just wanting this product to be successful. I think its vital that these games have a vision of exactly how the gaming experience should be when played. When I first saw this game I thought this was the anti-WoW. Slow combat, no pvp, and a distinct lack of instancing nearly made it complete opposites. Is this a good thing to be a complete opposite of a game holding over 50% of the market? I think eyes are being opened over at SoH and they are realizing this little dreamworld isn't going to be as accepted and enjoyed as much as expected. I'm honestly curious how this game is going to turn out but I really am not expecting much.

[Angry Amadeus]

Three points:

1. This isn't Mith Marr Daily News.

2. You aren't in the Beta for Vanguard (right?), and therefore have no justifiable argument one way or another for the game (right?).

3. Why do you feel you need to sway everyone with your much too lengthy posts, your thousands of note-pages, and your high-browed chicanery?

I mean, all vitriol aside; I agree with a few points that you made. Who among us doesn't agree with those points though; a stagnant world, a SWG launch, etc.? You're making vague generalizations about a game that isn't even out yet in a forum where you don't have much of a sympathetic audience to begin with.

Really. I know you'll be online all day, so um... hit that reply button. 60,000 characters inc. I'm geniunely curious as to how you cannot see that every time you type the word "Vanguard" into one of your posts, FoH users all across the globe dip their eyebrows in a solemn prayer for your removal.

[Utnayan]

Originally Posted by Angry Amadeus

Three points:

Discuss the points made please or don't post. Keep me out of it.

[Angry Amadeus]

Originally Posted by Utnayan

Discuss the points made please or don't post. Keep me out of it.

That's just it; they're all *your fucking points*.

Get over yourself.

[Lhon]

Objectives
Describe the objectives of the quest. These must be things that can be tracked in a numeric or Boolean manner. I.E. Do something 5 times or Go to this spot.

Accepting – What Happens?

What happens when a player accepts the quest? Does nothing happen and
the player needs to run around and complete the objectives? Do ten wolves
spawn and immediately attack the player?

Outcome – What Happens?

What happens when a player finishes the quest? Are you rewarded with
items, given new quests? Does a majestic eagle spawn and fly into the sunset?"

This is a real letdown. I was hoping for a more advanced questing system. It seems like it's more primitive than WoW's. For example, it doesn't sound like it could support escort style quests, or time limit quests.

When is someone going to apply some imagination to MMORPG quests? Where are the quests with branching objectives? Where are the quests that are more than just complete or uncomplete, but have variable rewards depending on how well you met the objectives?

[Duppin]

Just tagging this thread because it's sure to be another Utnayan Classic!

[Awanka]

I am embarassed to say that I do not know what vertical interdependence means.

Hmmm.. Assuming that this Email you got is for real and not from one of your imaginary fans Ut, I would have to say that it does reveal some odd things. There are a lot of questions being asked here that are better left in the hands of a good content creator.

Then again, the fans do come up with good ideas now and then and can offer insights to the designers from the perspective of someone who plays the game at a higher level of intensity. Maybe Sigil is just being receptive to this possibility. I remember when I was playing EQ:OA, the first truly stupid and game-breaking thing I saw in the game was chain petting boss mobs. Basically pet damage didn't create aggro for a caster, so if you got 4 pet casters together you could take down any epic boss in the game by chain petting it(Pets had freakishly high resistances so they were quite resistant to AEs as well). SOE had a special line at their website for feedback about the game, so for the first(and hopefully last) time I sent a complaint letter to a game company. I told them about the problem and recommended a solution of transferring 25% of a pet's aggro to the caster when the pet dies. It seemed to me to be an effective and easily implemented solution.

Well, the next patch that's exactly what they did to the wailing of pet casters and screams of nerf. Did they get the idea from me? I don't know, they never sent me back a reply. The point being, a game company can benefit from listening to their player base, but they have to be good at filtering out because anyone who has visited Battlenet knows that 99.97% of player suggestions are garbage.

[Utnayan]

Originally Posted by Awanka

I am embarassed to say that I do not know what vertical interdependence means.

Pretty much, in a nutshell, high level players and low level players having skills that display the need for each other. Similar to something like higher level melee players in EQ still grouping with a low level caster and depending on them for a bind.

[Tagad Sigil]

Utnayan, you really need to go into politics because you can spin anything Take that as a compliment.

The purpose of those threads, however, is not to "have the beta players design the game". The purpose is to provide a structured forum for feedback on subjects that beta players like to normally argue about in a free form manner.

I'm /sure/ you've read the thread entitled "Vanguards Problems: The Fans?". Where people are saying that Sigil only listens to the vocal minority - and that many people are "afraid to give feedback lest they be lambasted by the evil hardcore players". Well, to counteract any of that "perception" we made the "Inside the Box" series of posts - where we simply delete any posts that go off topic or off format.

Thanks for your, strange, but continued interest in Vanguard

~Tagad

P.S. I'm still waiting to receive your resume in my email box.

[Rayne]

I said as far back as 18 months ago, that a majority of Vanguard's forum members were getting way out of hand with wild speculations, and insane feature expectations. The bottom line is, this game has fallen victim to its own overhype. And its as much the fans fault as it is Brads. The fans for having some pretty wild expectations, and Brads for not getting that shit in check when it started.

When fans start "overly expecting" that certain features would be implemented, and how those features might work, its time to step in and correct it. But that opportunity came and went. Long ago. Beta testers went in believing they would experience something, then found that it didn't live up to its hype.

The outdated FAQ, and Brads "loose" description of his term "core gamer", paint a picture thats obviously worlds different than the type of game thats actually being built.

The MOST important part of ANY game is the beginning. Its the developers one shot at hooking the player in for the long haul that makes up the rest of the game. Its like they're trying to build the game in reverse. Awesome content at the end, with not much to keep the player interested in getting to it at the beginning.

Levels 1-10 should pander to the players confidence, helping to elevate it along the way. Especially if you're designing a "hardcore" game. With 50 levels to work through, theres plenty of time to "ease" the player into the hardcore aspect.

But at the early levels, the player should be introduced to the various aspects of the game. Like how dependant thier chosen class might be on certain tradeskills. And how thier chosen faction/diety determines thier place in the world, and what the consequences of thier actions are. How the questing and tradeskilling systems work. The basic story of the games world, and its various settings, and how the player came to be there.

These guys are supposed to be gamers. They should know all this already. It should have been the FIRST thing they considered when they began building this game.

[Anyen]

At least Utnayan uses specifics. I don't mean to say Utnayan's not rabidly anti-Sigil or fully informed (or even close to it) but all you do is talk without saying anything Rayne.