Competitive MMO
Interesting idea for a post, but it’s a bit short isn’t it?
I’d like to see analysed what ANet did right, what they did wrong, and how would you change it, going by your points:
- Team focused combat
- A sense of development
- A rewarding combat experience
- Room to truly define a unique play style
- A dramatic combat experience with a sense of drama that can develop as the game goes on.
and
“I would do everything within my power to make certain that crossing the realms from pve to pvp did not change how I intimately interact and feel about the game.”
etc.
Mainly, the discussion that even went into Anet was more as an example to illustrate how the concept works. Discussing what Anet has done in regards to this would be an interesting corollary that would be massive if fully written out (but don’t worry, I could, just no one would ever read it lol.)
Mainly, the discussion that even went into Anet was more as an example to illustrate how the concept works. Discussing what Anet has done in regards to this would be an interesting corollary that would be massive if fully written out (but don’t worry, I could, just no one would ever read it lol.)
Why not go into what you would do different then?
I think a constructive post like that would be a really good read.
So frankly I think the mistakes Anet made in competitive pvp are more rooted in execution than design philosophy. My problems with pvp were more class design and balance, bugginess, and lack of fleshed out pvp features at launch. A lot of those issues are greatly improved now. More game modes and stronger support roles/abilities would also make me happy.
That said, I really love a lot of the core design decisions for pvp. I’ve never liked having a gear strength disparity in pvp, and separate pvp/pve balance should be better for both. I’m also a big fan of having the freedom to experiment with builds and gear.
I never said anything about gear score… Gear score is in no way a good indication of skill. The fact that you bring up game modes emphasizes my point exactly. The primary areas that would help to move the play style of the game are essentially in the balance and the game modes. Imagine if instead you had to focus on a smaller selection of objectives with unequal weight. In this sort of instance, you are more likely to find yourself fighting as a team.
This sort of manifestation is entirely in the game mode. But to go further, Things such as their design philosophy for class balance really focus on a sort of independence for each race. If each and everything was built with a team balance in mind, then you will see everything vary a lot. I LOVE the idea of removing direct healing for a more passive mitigation, however they didn’t follow through with sufficient passive mitigation, and in fact in this highly independent team fight scenario, a high ability to mitigate would be overpowered.
When people discuss balance, you must first ask around what are we balancing?
Are we balancing around 5v5, 2v2, 1v1? A game such as capture points doesn’t have any sort of meta combinations which you can easily balance around (I shouldn’t say capture points exclusively, but the play style which is created by capture points.)
Anyhow, this is a hot mess of random ramblings, the only point I am trying to get across is I am not looking at an MMO and saying all that they have to offer is gear, I am looking at the PLAY STYLE of an MMO. One rooted heavily in group play and composure. A saga that plays out through the duration of the game. Not something which can be categorized as “Fast and Fun.” Fast and fun defines FPS games not MMO. MMO players spend hours working through dungeons and fighting bosses, the story that builds. This sort of drama is also the same thing you see unfold in real life sports. Watch as tensions build in a Soccer game, the timer counting against you as the events of the past lay forth a very unique future bendable only by the wills of the players on the field.
One more note, I understand that the way I wrote that sounds unachievable, but it isn’t… There was one game that had such a play style, but it was a victim of neglect. This game was ironically made by the same development team.
Sounds easy in theory, but is really hard and somtimes nearly impossible to achieve in practice.
Bringing this concept home, I want to analyze what Anet did.
For GW2, they wanted to create a competitive experience. In doing so, they looked to games that are already considered competitive and tried to emulate those things.
Ya… they didn’t really borrow from Guild Wars 1 though. Not even a little. Not even a little ittle bitty bit.
So you’re right, they wind up with no niche, and an unfun game. They had a shoe in to a niche, but they didn’t take it.
Arenanet are the greatest bunch of bond villains of all time. They had Bond cornered (Had a fan base and a model for fun PvP), they just had to change his status to dead (add a z-axis, some new graphics, reduce the skills list and add visible animations to the ones you kept)… but instead they devised some flawed mechanism to do the job for them while they left the room (attempted to be unique and make up new gameplay / copy from other games in other genre’s — ignore their fanbases feedback telling them what they wanted instead and then failed to provide basic structures like spectator, match making, etc.).
All in all I think a lot of Anet’s PvP team should apply to work with Disney on this new starwars film, continue George Lucas’ legacy.