Guild Wars 2

So, I’ve noticed a lot of folks posting here that seem to be operating under the misconception that MMO and MMORPG mean the same thing… that they’re synonymous.

Well, just so ya know… this isn’t the case.

MMO is a genre category that encompasses a very wide range of games. In fact, this category is so broad, it includes things that we’d be hard-pressed to call games at all. For example, Second Life qualifies as an MMO, but whether or not it can be counted as a game is quite debatable, to say the least.

MMOs all share three basic defining attributes. 1: they are hosted, online, 2: they have some manner of a shared and persistent world, independent of user interaction and 3: they are able to accommodate a large number of users (thousands or more). MMOs are, by definition, a social experience.

MMORPG is a subgenre of the MMO genre category. Even with this refinement of focus, it’s still a very encompassing designation. To see what I mean, you can check out this list of over 200 MMORPGs, past, present and planned.

MMORPGs are typically defined by the following characteristics: 1. having a player avatar (character) that the player can customize, 2. an “immersive” world, 3. some form of character progression and 4. the building and organization of social groups (guilds and the like).

A MMORPG is also, by definition, a social experience. This means a MMORPG is not just a game. It has design and development considerations that are not game-oriented, but are instead all about social dynamics. While such design concerns have crept into other genres in ever-increasing degrees, for the MMORPG it is a fundamental consideration.

There are many MMORPG conventions, but conventions change, and the genre is constantly evolving. The “traditional” model we see today is distinct from its antecedents in many ways. There is no singular, definitive MMORPG game model, and there never really has been (as the list cited above should clearly illustrate). The genre has a history that goes back 20, even 30 years, depending on where one draws the line in the scope of definition. There are many models that have enjoyed varying degrees of success. And if one were to factor retention of audience into their measure of success, rather than just the sheer number of box sales, the most profitable games have actually been outperformed by (much) smaller enterprises.

Which is a clear indication that the MMORPG audience is not monolithic. Not only does it represent a wide variety of play preferences and styles, how any given player prioritizes those preferences and styles can vary dramatically. There are niches in the market that can be successfully and profitably exploited. Many already have been. What this shows is that there is no single rigid, narrow, proper way to design and develop a MMORPG, regardless of any authoritative declarations to the contrary.

I offer all of this in the hope that it will inform and expand the dialogue. This is a forum in which we can discuss Guild Wars 2 in the broader context of genre, convention and industry. That’s something I’m always going to be inclined to engage in, because my interest in games, and MMORPGs in particular, goes beyond just playing them.

I have a MMORPG ideal. Guild Wars 2 is not it, and, honestly, it never will be. But that doesn’t mean I don’t want it to move closer to that mark. I’d like it to do so while being as inclusive as possible. And that’s going to take reasonable and informed discussion.

Thanks for reading.

What is your MMORPG ideal?

utildai.5319:

What is your MMORPG ideal?

Well, firstly I’m what I’ve called a gaming omnivore, so a broad range of game activities is preferred. Even if I don’t mess with some of them all that much, they’ll serve to bring in a wider audience, which benefits me indirectly. In the context of GW2, sPvP would be a good example of this.

I’m also an immersionist. This speaks to things like depth of lore, world detail, and character customization. I want the lore to be rich, the world to be vibrant. In my estimation, GW2 scores very high on both of these points. However, character customization is an even bigger deal for me, and this game only just barely squeaks by there.

Setting-wise, I prefer fantasy or contemporary. I’ve never been particularly drawn to sci-fi. I also want a vital economy, because I enjoy market play. I want a mix of solo play and team play, and I enjoy exploration. GW2 hits all of these marks (though it could hit some of them better).

I’m very big on user-generated content and creative expression. On this point, GW2 barely registers. It also falls short in the social arena. To be fair, most (all?) MMORPGs are surprisingly lacking on this front, but there are others that’ve done it better.

I prefer plateaus in progression. I don’t grind and I have a low tolerance threshold for farming. I like to build a character and have it be finished, at least for a good stretch of time. I much prefer alternative builds and multiple characters over one build, one character. GW2 is mostly good here, but it could be improved, and I do have my concerns about direction.

There’s more, but that’s a good framework.

I think the social aspect is key and at the same time it’s something that seems to be given less thought than other aspects by developers. Guild Wars 2 has taken many (small) steps to bringing players together. It’s still in a way that makes it feel more like we are playing along side each other, than with, but it’s a start. Some things that foster playing together (along side one another):

• Everyone has access to supportive abilities and can resurrect defeated players
• Few skills are without side effects that benefit your allies
• No mob tagging
• No resource stealing
• Dynamic events (automatic shared questing)
• Large raid-like encounters “in the world” (well, instanced zones with overflow instances to control population)
• Dynamic level adjustment based on zone/activity
• Mini-dungeons
• Guild achievements/unlocks

What it does to interfere with social aspects. Note these are not necessarily bad, but I don’t think they should be the focus in my ideal MMORPG/Guild Wars 2:

• Personal story
• 5-man instanced dungeons
• Gated, gear checking content (recently added)

I think one of those needs more explanation. I am not a big fan of instanced content, as I think it goes against the MMO in MMORPG. I noticed when playing WoW that the open world only serves as leveling tool, and once one reached the “end game” a town (Ironforge or Stormwind) became the only MMO aspect where players would gather to form groups or show off their gear, only to go play a 5-40 (later 25) player game somewhere hidden from the rest of the player base. (Note: In GW, sometimes wrongly considered being outside the MMORPG genre, it is the case that towns/outposts act as social hubs for instanced content. Not so different than the “endgame” in the current batch of MMORPGs).

I much prefer my threats to the world to be visible to all players, and defeated by the player base coming together. I understand that instancing needs to be used to some degree due to technical hurdles, and that there just isn’t enough world out there for players to not bunch up in huge, unmanageable clusters in some cases (see recent karka invasion for huge, unmanageable clusters of players).

What it could improve on:

• Multi-objective “in the world” boss encounters that require coordination and communication between players (i.e., the difficulty of instanced raids/dungeons, but for everyone not just the organized guild of 10/15/25/40 players)
• Less zerging, more thinking in dynamic events. This goes hand in hand with the above. I’ve had much fun solving mini-dungeon puzzles with random groups that stumble upon them with me. Dynamic events that require players to use more of their environment and less of the skills they’ve been using can aid this.
• More mini-dungeons
• Outward scaling in dynamic events: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/events/We-need-Outward-Scaling-not-just-Upward/first

What it is missing:

• Guild halls
• Player customization in their home instance
• Horizontal progression other than armor sets and weapons (e.g., things that could be done with player housing/guild halls, skills, emotes, etc.)

SirMoogie.9263:

I think the social aspect is key and at the same time it’s something that seems to be given less thought than other aspects by developers.

I couldn’t agree more. And considering that the social element is a defining attribute of the genre, I’m almost perpetually surprised by the systemic lack of attention that it’s given.

My suspicion is that it’s because game designers are simply that: game designers. Social structures aren’t their area of expertise. Consequently, we, as players, have to contend with their ongoing process of trial and error.

However, a few game studios, ArenaNet included, have brought an economist on board. Maybe a specialized sociologist should be added to the roster as well? Might save everyone some hassle and time.

I do have to disagree with you, though, about what promotes and doesn’t promote community. Communities have anchors in the form of subgroups (guilds), and subgroups have anchors in the form of individuals. It’s my belief that, in order to cultivate a stable, invested game community, a sense of ownership has to be fostered on these levels.

One way to do that is through the introduction of more personalized content, such as the character story arcs. User-generated/customizable content is another avenue for this.

In any event, GW2 is very weak on this front (so far). While, as you’ve pointed out, the game’s model successfully engenders an environment of cooperation (which makes the experience of open-world play considerably more pleasant and positive), it doesn’t contribute much to interactivity on a personal level. Also, the social tools available to us—way too few of ‘em—aren’t very robust.

And while I appreciate that there are official forums… they’re very limited, both in terms of functionality and scope. This is an example of how social considerations extend beyond (and can be separate from) the design of the game itself. These forums, even with the apparent technical limitations of the software that was used, could still be leveraged more effectively to create depth in community experience.

After over a decade of poking at the idea of MMORPGs, I now firmly believe that every MMO game designer should familiarize themselves with the concept of the Third Place.