If you had to choose the three most significant elements of an open-world MMO experience, what would they be? (They can be a pro or a con, determined by you.)
#1 -- Immersion. Nothing makes a world feel more alive than interacting with other players. Real players put the MMO into MMORPG. (PRO)
#2 -- Meaningful Content. I don't want my MMO experience to feel like "Ground Hog Day meets The Matrix" and that's what instancing feels like, to me. (PRO)
#3 -- Choices Matter. I could write a novel on this (Economy, Reputation, Community, Events, Adventure, Exploration, Socialization, Achievement) but if I had to summarize, I would just say that every decision feels more impactful when the world is shared. (PRO)
I actually like your list, 187.
1. Meaningful content. Not just stuff to do, but reasons for doing it.
2. Meaningful PvP. Yes, I understand this is a game focused on PvE, but PvP can be done well in a PvE centric game. I realize that a lot of the people here scoff at taking any resources away from the PvE aspects of the game, especially for PvP development. I just dream of a game that has PvP territories with actual meaning to them. Yes, I'll settle for simple PvP enabled servers, but a guy can dream, right?
3. Community. I love games that have a thriving and overall helpful community. Pantheon has potential to generate a positive community atmosphere within the game.
#1 – Overcrowding (Con). Seeing people in cities and needing to group up to complete content is great. Arriving at one of two leveling zones for your level range to find 6 different groups already fighting over spawns is a total loss.
#2 – One Story Fits all (Con). Without a great deal of dynamic behaviors and spawn system programming and design the entire world is locked at one point in time. You are stuck rereading the same page of the novel you are reading, over and over and over. Nothing you do will ever turn the page for you as everyone will need to turn the page at the same time. Regardless of how many times you kill the king he will just keep coming back, no sleezy Cardinal stepping in to be Regent of the prince, no military dictatorship declaring martial law, no reign of terror in the streets as all the nobles and rich merchants are butchered in front of the crowd (and that's only France in the last 400 years). There is no reason you can't give certain NPCs plot armor but if they can be killed there should be a response to their death.
#3 – The fast get to farm (Con). In an open-world game valuable large group content will be dominated by a very small minority. The fastest and most organized groups will be able to lock down the raid content which in turn vastly boosts their ability to do raid content even faster. This cycle of monopolizing the raid content is brutal and unbreakable unless there is more content than your population of hardcore raiders can actually do in one spawn period. Additionally the power spike from group gear to raid gear is usually vast and contributes to the monopoly, if items were on a log power growth then the disparity between the monopolizers and the fresh to max level would not be too much.
Ultimately I am pro Open-World MMO. I believe technology has advanced enough that a lot of the logistics to a functioning open-world can now be overcome. That being said I think there are a lot of pitfalls to Open-World MMO and to over come them require a ton of developer time and resources.
In short Open-World is superior if it is practically an entire world is open to explore and change. This is honestly no where within the scope of what Pantheon is attempting to be and several attempts to make true open-world games have failed miserably for a multitude of reasons. Most of the perspective Pantheon players will likely be content with a few handcrafted zones per level range and will understand that they will have very few large group encounters of the current endgame content.
Trasak
1) Everything is contested and open, except maybe high end raid stuff you have to key for. Scrubs shouldn't be able to get in there.
2) Tangible rewards for being better than other players. Can be loot, mounts, housing, rare crafting recipes, pets, etc... No cash shops. If you see something cool, it's because that person earned it.
3) Dynamic World. Lots to do. Crafting, Collections, Farming (loots or harvests), Long Quests with Good Rewards, Dungeons, Raids, Exploration Rewards, Player Housing, Guild Hall Creation and Improvements, Fishing, Lots of Lore to discover, etc...
1) Being surrounded by others NOT all there for the same reason. An open world supports multiple play styles or maybe objectives is a better word. Raider, PVPer, Farmer, Craftsman, Explorer, Town Chat Troll. You can focus on just one or more than one because there are many options. (Pro)
2) Open world means you are NOT the damn hero. You start as a peon just like everyone else and the game is not built to put a halo on your head and build you into a demi-god. Now, your own actions may trend you in that direction but the game will not steer you down any path. (Pro)
3) An open world enables each person to have their own ratio of Reality based concepts vs Fantasy based concepts. Trades and crafts, housing, markets are reality based; cone of frost, HoTs and DoTs, dragons; not so much so. Housing or a neighborhood of houses fits into the reality side of the ratio but inviting an Orc into your house; not so much so. Each person chooses their own ratio of suspention of reality. (Pro)
Each of those 3 above can be summerized as the choices a player makes. An open world enables choices.
Any game, open world or not, needs to functionally put my head in the clouds, be my alternate reality for a few hours each day. The people or at least some of the RL people on the same server become a psuedo-family.
1) Freedom (Pro). I can go anywhere, any time. I might die trying, but I can try.
2) Shared experiences (Pro). I could meet and group with different people every day or the same friends, but I will be able to share my adventures with them: grouping/raiding, trading, socialising, helping in various ways.
3) Contested (Con). Some people seem to use "Open World" as an excuse to indulge in Pseudo-PvP with people that don't want it.
Trasak said:
#3 – The fast get to farm (Con). In an open-world game valuable large group content will be dominated by a very small minority. The fastest and most organized groups will be able to lock down the raid content which in turn vastly boosts their ability to do raid content even faster. This cycle of monopolizing the raid content is brutal and unbreakable unless there is more content than your population of hardcore raiders can actually do in one spawn period. Additionally the power spike from group gear to raid gear is usually vast and contributes to the monopoly, if items were on a log power growth then the disparity between the monopolizers and the fresh to max level would not be too much.
You can't really prevent this in most cases. There will always be people who have a core group of friends or guild who live and breath games and are very organized. As completionists that live to do things as fast as they can because they find that fun. I personally do not.
That said, those player types were mainly created during newer MMO's where they could get away with flying through content. They probably aren't used to this type of game. I hope that Pantheon offers a greater challenge to those player types. My guess is that they will be the ones who will be pulling trains early on expecting the same old behaviors and dying as a result. NPC's will chase them endlessly ( without feign death ) until you kill them or perhaps find someone to help. Unlike old EQ we don't have zone lines anymore to save us. It puts an end to what players are currently use to. In theory.
I digress
Open world means to me
1. Exploration galore and getting lost
2. No limits. Except your imagination or imaginations of the designers
3. Meeting good people and dealing with the jerks of the world at the same time
4. Relaxation. Takng my sweet time without the stress of keeping up with the Jones's.
Basically 2 main things - 1 pro and 1 con .
1) Believability . If I stand in front of a cave where lives an evil lich, bane of the surrounding region and see group after group going in to kill the same evil lich , this immediately destroys any sense of immersion and believability . The world turns into a ridiculous and unbelievable caricature of reality . In the same believability sense , an open world may one day become the graal of all MMORPGs which is a true dynamical world . Things will really change . dead kings will not relive , destroyed cities will have to be reconstructed and my character will have a unique life in a unique dynamically changing world . Of course the technology is not yet there at all but the task is feasible only with an open world . (Pro)
2) Contest . It is not because the world is open that I have to put up with toxic behaviour of people who think that everything is a race and that anything goes as long as it suits them . (Con)
1. You aren't funneled to the same areas in the same order every time you start a new character. Multiple racial starting locations and backstories are a great way to provide this while giving flavor and scope to the world.
2. Not every character is almost the same. Classes are intended for different things and have different abilities and limitations. The healer or tank is better at healing or tanking than classes in any other role, and conversely is worse at dps (though it has enough to solo with when the player can't group or isn't in the mood). Classes have special abilities that make them *feel* different. Ideally even within a class there is variation (specialization in one path versus other paths). If not subclasses or AA choices at least allocation of attributes/skills where you must choose one or another - you cannot max out every one. Perhaps to be best at perception you need to be less than the best at something that actually matters.
3. There is often a purpose to what you do. Not as a mandatory thing as in many games where you are the great hero or villain tasked to do whatever great heros or villains do in that mythos. But - and I know some people prefer camping to quests - there *are* quests that give you a reason to kill the 50 pigs. Your character can feel good if she is saving a village by protecting crops or providing food (assuming a good alignment which isn't necessarily better than an evil one - quests can go both ways). If there is pvp there are causes to serve or oppose ae in DAOC's faction system - not just pure personal gain. Not necessarily the strict limitations of factions but some reason to go out and kill people beyond being an amoral murderer.
I didn't repeat "choices matter" from earlier posts but that may be just as important to me. It is so limiting to get 5 conversation choices and whatever you pick the game proceeds the same way in every respect.
Any resemblance of these goals to the way Pantheon is likely to work is far from coincidental - I didn't pick Pantheon to support by rolling a 20 sider.
I rather like how everyone seems to be answering 187s post in a completely different way. I am guilty of focusing on the negatives of a limited content No-Instanced world as have a few others. Others are posting their idea's of what a good Open-World game should include, the closer you can get to High Fantasy Second Life the better.
In some ways I am seeing the genius behind SWG in its semi original format. It limited you to one character per server and choosing to be a crafting class actually prevented you from choosing a full combat class. This made your crafters that much more rare and valuable. Additionally the crafters really could not function without combat classes feeding them resources or protecting them while they collect the resources.
What SWG lacked was any form of real structured content outside of Mandalorian armor raids, which required both combat classes and crafting classes to raid together. SWG was sadly a little hampered by its IP as well. At the time Lucas Arts was very specific about the types of things that could be created under the Star Wars umbrella. This I imagine contributed to the lack of structured content. I imagine a few of the guys at VR might really know what went on from their involvement in the industry at that time.
Finding some way to blend the true Open-World structure of SWG with good lore defined content that is continually produced with a high focus of player interdependence both in and out of combat is sort of the pie in the sky for me. Sadly again there may be no way to marry true open-world structure to what Pantheon needs to be to get it to market.
Trasak said:Finding some way to blend the true Open-World structure of SWG with good lore defined content that is continually produced with a high focus of player interdependence both in and out of combat is sort of the pie in the sky for me. Sadly again there may be no way to marry true open-world structure to what Pantheon needs to be to get it to market.
Speaking as someone who lived it, I would say you're spot on in your analysis of both the good things and the bad things about SWG.
The lesson to be learned is that there's a balance between directed experiences and meaningful player choice. It is possible to do this, and there's been several games over the years that have gotten it right - at least, initially. From a design perspective, the trick is to build the world and the world systems first, and then layer the directed content (intelligently) on top of that. Sort of like baking a lasagna, if you don't mind the analogy. You have to layer things in the right order or the whole thing falls apart when people try to consume it.
#1 - immersion. Complete and total immersion ala "The Oasis" of R.P.O.
#2 - Fear of Consequences. Painful, frustrating and punitive results so everything is a risk and even travel can be terrifying.
#3 - Immutable laws. Drawing a corrollary between real human religions and the worlds humans live in to Terminus, the Devs are creating the world. They are the "equivalent" of the Gods to our characters - they create the world the characters live in. They need to be unwavering, not explain themselves, not capitulate - even if something is hated as "unfair" it has to be consistent. Any deviation from this ruins this relationship and then immersion.
1. Loading screens everywhere (CON): i hate it in "open world" MMOs. A very negative example is Final Fantasy 14. A loading screen or a loading blackscreen every 10 meters. A very positive example was/is WoW. You have almost no loading screens, only when you're changing the continent or an instanced area. But it does not disturb me.
2. Leveling on rails (CON): i do not like it also when the leveling way is exactly pre defined by the devs. Negative examples are Teso or Final Fantasy 14 or WoW since WotLK. You had almost no freedom. Outside of the questhubs and the near quest mobs there was ... nothing.
3. Invisible walls (CON): That's also an immersion breaker for me.
Greetings
Open world to me means more sandbox like, with no character driven narrative. That is, when I enter the game I'm just a guy trying to find my own way. The store is not catered to me specifically.
Additionally, the game world is designed to be explored, as in non-linear progression. I can go anywhere I want, anytime, and deal with the consequences as they come (high level mobs, traps, etc). There are areas in the game that fill in the gaps. The design does not have just set piece locations. You have to travel between locations. The world has the perception of being real size and scope.
oneADseven said:
If you had to choose the three most significant elements of an open-world MMO experience, what would they be? (They can be a pro or a con, determined by you.)
#1 Community. You see the same people all the time. You get to know people for good or bad. There tends to be MUCH more conversation. The world feels bigger because more people are in it.
#2 Competition. There is nothing like the rush of scouting a raid target, announcing it is up and forming up to grab it before someone else does.
#3 Wonder. The design decision to have different tiers of mobs in the same area is brilliant. The low level player sees a high level mob and says ohh crap.. run away! and then notices that it is almost dead and running from some bad ass looking player decked out in amazing looking gear. That event triggers different things in different people. Some want the gear. Some want the levels. Some want the fame. Some want all three.
Another thing to point out is the difference in dungeons. Think about what it took to get an FBSS in EQ1. In an instanced game, you would just clear the instance over and over until you got your drop. In a non instanced game like EQ1 getting to the camp itself was a chore. Non instanced dungeons are designed totally different than instanced ones. Many times if the camp you wanted was taken you would take a camp nearby and watch for the other group to wipe or leave. Then once you finally got your shot at the camp you might have to kill the mob 50 times to get the drop you need. With place holders pops and RNG loot tables this could take weeks or even months. Instances usually are just hitting your head against a wall until it breaks. The alternative is a challenge just to get to the wall to beat your head against it :)
You've all touched on a lot already so I'll just add one.
Players impacting players. We often talk about the impact the environment and the npcs have on the world and us, but MMOs today suffer greatly from their inability to allow players to interact with other players besides both hitting the same NPC in a group. Offering class specific skills like teleporting far distances for another player's quest or coin, bartering and trading with one another's gear, challenging someone to a duel who made fun of your boots or trained you, buffing lowbies in an area and letting them pay in bat wings, or dragging a friend's corpse out of lava, it's important that the players themselves are able to impose a will into the game that can affect the community, positive or negative.
Open world means just that. It is open to whoever wants to venture there. I do not want " you have reached level 5, now you may go to x-zone" If I am level 5 and want to explore a zone designed for level 25 then that is my privilege. If I get wiped then that is my fault and problem. As long as I do not interfere with proper leel folks in the zone then I think it shuld be my choice to go there.
The only exception should be if the zone is designed for groups of a certain level to experience. Then you should not be allowed to enter unless you are the proper level and grouped.
I find exploring a lot of fun regardless of the danger.
From my perspective, the words Open World simply mean that there is no direct story line that I must follow in order to progress. In other words I am free to progress down many different paths as I choose and in any order that I choose. There is no set goal that tells me that I've finished, and if I reach a plateau I can change direction and progress in a different way. This does not mean that I can go everywhere at any time, but that I can choose to progress in a way that gets me to where I want to go.
As for MMO's specifically, oneADDseven asked for 3 things I want to be in an Open World MMO.
1) There needs to be multiple ways that I can play the game and still be having fun. Many games create alternate things to do, but only one way is intended to be the best way to progress and have fun.
2) I need to be able to be under or overpowered for things. Games that adjust to your power so that it's always the same level of challenge no matter where you go really suck. I want there to be times that I walk into an area and I'm totally unprepared and I'll get toasted. But I also want to be able to work hard to become tough enough so that that same area is now EZmode and I can dominate it.
3) I want to both be able to 'save the day' for somebody who is not in my immediate party, but also sometimes be the one who gets saved by somebody else who isn't supposed to be helping me. It's really awesome when you can do something that makes somebody elses gameplay more fun just because you happend along. It's also great when your day is made by somebody else who is able to do something selfless for you that they didn't need to do just because they were in your party and it was expected. This you can get in an open world mmo.
Good question!
1. The specific term "open world" immediately conjures to my mind a seamless world. While dungeons may be instanced, the broader world zones should be interconnected in every way. I love being able to roam across mountain ranges, valleys, canyons, coastlines, etc. No level barriers or invisible walls.
2. Multiple paths to get through content. I love it when I can take each of my alts through completely different game experiences - not just because of a different class or race I chose, but because I can take them to different zones to quest in. It gets boring when you have to repeat the same zones over and over and over because everyone gets funneled into a single leveling path.
3. Unexpected challenges. I love stumbling upon a monster that makes me go, "Oh shi--" and backpedal. I also love encountering a cave maze or a puzzle that distracts me for an hour. I understand that the replayability of these things is not necessarily large (when you encounter them the first time, it's exciting, and then it diminishes after), but they're fun to me.
Larirawiel said:1. Loading screens everywhere (CON): i hate it in "open world" MMOs. A very negative example is Final Fantasy 14. A loading screen or a loading blackscreen every 10 meters. A very positive example was/is WoW. You have almost no loading screens, only when you're changing the continent or an instanced area. But it does not disturb me.
I wanted to add this to my list of things I love about open world. :D No loading screens is a big plus.
oneADseven said:
If you had to choose the three most significant elements of an open-world MMO experience, what would they be? (They can be a pro or a con, determined by you.)#1 -- Immersion. Nothing makes a world feel more alive than interacting with other players. Real players put the MMO into MMORPG. (PRO)
#2 -- Meaningful Content. I don't want my MMO experience to feel like "Ground Hog Day meets The Matrix" and that's what instancing feels like, to me. (PRO)
#3 -- Choices Matter. I could write a novel on this (Economy, Reputation, Community, Events, Adventure, Exploration, Socialization, Achievement) but if I had to summarize, I would just say that every decision feels more impactful when the world is shared. (PRO)
You nailed it.