Let Tankers be Tankers: Remove the Agro Cap

Since we both agree that farming and power leveling are acceptable play styles then you can't really call AE a trivialization of the leveling curve. The developers are still actively monitoring activity within AE and adjusting it where necessary. I have no doubt that as time goes by the AE system will continue to evolve to the point where it is no longer the farming tool that it is today. Super-Sidekicking is a step in the right direction. It will do nothing to change the non-AE game content. It just makes it easier to fund and form teams outside of AE which I believe has been another big seller for AE farms as most of them are auto-level.

This not an indication of a failure of the game content. It is merely an indication of the general laziness of the average person. It is human nature to follow the path of least resistance. If tomorrow they add an NPC that asks you a series of CoH lore trivia questions for huge XP rewards the AE buildings would empty fairly quickly in favor of standing around the NPC with teams of people working together to get all the questions correct. Not that the AE farms have changed but just that the trivia questions are easier and faster. Blaming the developers for the mass exploitation of AE is really just an evasion of personal responsibility. Just because someone puts something in front of you and says help yourself does not mean they are responsible for making sure that you do not over indulge.

That's a bit strong. It's unfortunate maybe but not inexcusable. What would be inexcusable is using up resources, money and time to attempt to hunt down and squash every possible exploit that could be ferreted out or dreamed up by roughly 100,000 people before releasing it and moving on to other projects. Ultimately the regular game content still exists for those who are not interested in or bored with AE farms. I was actually part of an 8 man team last night that was doing nothing but radio missions in Brickstown.


>

You may want to take into consideration now that not everybody is on a $14.99/month monthly subscription.

The WoW style of MMORPGs is not the only one. Consider sandbox MMORPGs. Consider PvP-focused MMORPGs. Consider, say, Eve Online.

The problem with the WoW approach is that it is very, very expensive to manufacture. You're creating new content constantly, planned for obsolescence, rather than being able to reuse your existing work. Blizzard is creating highly polished raid content, but at the cost of millions of dollars per raid instance. The content is focused around people with lots of spare time (which often correlates with low income). These players may quickly drop their hobby if they get a better-paying (and more time-consuming) job, if they find a new girlfriend/boyfriend, and so forth. Even if they are still interested in MMORPGs, they may not have the time to keep pace with the speed of endgame progression. It's very difficult to compete with WoW on their own chosen ground, with a volatile target audience while constantly building expensive content. That WoW is successful does not mean that it is a good business model to imitate for smaller publishers.

/signs

I'd be happy with that

Forgetting game titles for a moment (and since none of the titles or scenarios you've mentioned were unique to MMOs but were brought up from past game systems) the essence of a subscription based service is recurring incoming based upon retaining and (hopefully) expanding the customer base. As far as I know this holds true for virtually every subscription based service, whether it be MMOs or your phone service. Can we agree on this?

If so, then one could reasonably conclude that an ongoing service must be established that gives the person a reason to continue to pay, while at the same time offering a service that is attractive to potential new customers. Are we still in agreement?

In this regard I think CoH fails, in that the current content relies upon players being satisfied with achieving maximum level and repeating the process over and over again. While you could argue that every MMO offers this, many other MMOs also offer a substantial way of developing ones character once max level has been achieved. CoH's post max level development is extremely finite and in general not very rewarding (badges). The current MA system having made that even more trivial.

Your analysis of WoW vs CoH in the current market place I think is dead wrong (and where on earth did you get the idea it costs millions for them to produce a raid instance?!). 12 million subscribers wrong in fact (not to mention probably the highest retention rate ratio wise of any MMO to date). And this is what kills me most about CoH ... it could easily compete with WoW. If not exactly WoW's staggering numbers it could surely be garnering more then .0.9% or less of of and sadly with nothing more technologically speaking then they have vested in the game currently.

That is to say, the difference between WoW and CoH isn't production value ... its game direction. One is obviously much more popular then the other.

You have me until you say this.

This statement is from the perspective of someone who races through content and farms/power levels their way up.

I don't agree at all that the current content relies on players achieving maximum level then repeating it. I have some characters that I created in 2004, still play them every once and a while, and are sitting just now in their mid-late 30's. I don't play them frequently at all, but I've had a blast playing the character.

I've been playing off and on for 5 years, and I have a grant total of 4 50's. 2 hero, 2 villain. Other than that I have a character in just about every single level range in the game. I've had some fantastic experiences with characters I created, leveled until pretty much all of the ranges and then let sit to try another one. Some of them as low as level 8 and others as high as 42, just sitting there because I'm not in any gigantic rush. I had some great great times playing those characters, but this game is not about getting to 50 to me, and clearly that is where the disconnect is.

I think we are about to see CoH head in a more competitive direction. Issue 16 will have power customization, more power proliferation, super side kicking and at least one new power set. Going Rogue will offer side switching, brand new content for all levels and two new powersets. Paragon Studios has shown that they now have the resources to expand the game and that they are not afraid to use them. Based on the current plans, looming competition and increased resources I think that we will see CoH continue to expand. Not that I expect it to become the WoW of the superhero genre but it will easily hold it's own up against the other MMOs within the genre.


>

In order to understand that, consider that there are players with a playstyle totally different from your own. I'm not saying anything against yours, but you cannot extrapolate from your playstyle towards that of others. You cannot even begin to imagine, it appears, that other players may not even have a desire to hit level 50 as fast as possible, especially since CoH is inching closer and closer to an effectively level-less system.

Ballpark extrapolation from knowing approximately how many developers and artists work for Blizzard, how much of their content is focused on raid instances, adding in benefits, hardware, and so forth. Corroborated by knowing that their total expenses from release to September 2008 were around $200 million.

If you have the secret of how to make an MMORPG as successful as WoW, I am sure the MMORPG industry is waiting with bated breath for your insights. WoW and Fantasy Westward Journey are unique cases, not easily copied recipes.

It's most likely a critical mass thing, starting out with Blizzard's originally high popularity in gaming circles. Success begets success.

Going back to this one point, consider this particular subscription-based online gaming service. Oddly enough, the service doesn't offer a traditional endgame. In fact, you experience a complete reset for all characters on your team after every "mission". Yet, people pay for it, despite a generous trial version and plenty of free alternatives.

Ok first, as you've pointed out, there was no WoW when CoH was launched. At the time CoH's primary competition (or aspiration if you will) was EverQuest at around 500k active subs, and yes ... NCSoft and Cryptic both had their eye on achieving those kinds of numbers and probably would have been ecstatic for achieving half those (which they never did, no matter whose numbers you want to believe). As it turns out, CoH has been profitable (as far as I can tell) but not a smashing success (and this ultimately depends on how you determine "smashing" success). Again, stating how long it's been around for is not indicative of its success, but rather it illustrated that it wasn't an outright failure. DAoC has been around for 8 years or so .... do you consider that game more successful then CoH? Gross income wise they're not even close currently.

WoW didn't start out with a lot of advertising. In fact they were so behind the eight ball with due to constantly delaying their release, their bankrupt parent company at the time (Vivendi) practically kicked them out the door. And whle yes, they had a bigger IP then CoH, consider that it was virtually the smallest IP of many other MMOs that were published before and after that have never come close to achieving the success of WoW. Most notably EQ2, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Dungeons and Dragons and Conan. Also, Blizzard's management was quoted as saying they were wishing for half of EQ's success (although I'm pretty sure they hoped to match it) ... as it turns out, they blew that out of the water by a landslide.

Is it some weird trade secret as to how they managed this? Heck no. They very simply copied EQ, smoothed over the most common complaints and rough edges and produced a very playable game based on a time tested mode of persistant play (the Dungeons and Dragons PnP model). The absolute most single area that they excelled in over other MMOs in development was this ... they built their own graphics engine rather than liscensing one, so that performance and development speed would meet their needs (and this was ultimately the cause of their delays). Hey strangely enough, one of the only other MMOs to do this was CoH (gasp) .... except while the graphics engine was done beautifully (from a performance and visual standpoint) the development speed was made a ton worse which ultimately has led to the extremely slow development of CoH (and in fairness, I remember Jack E. back in the day saying that they were hamstrung by NCSoft's QC release processes which I assume are still in effect today).

So yeah Aett ... I think CoH could have competed with WoW's numbers ... at least much more so then what they ended up with. All it took was a basic understanding of persistant world game design ... something they didn't have. Everything else they needed was (and is) in place.

And that lack of agile development is still in action today. Anytime someone brings up just how much of a wasted chance CoH is, someone else always brings up the next update. Well the next update is different colored powers and the next "expansion" (CoH has yet to have a real expansion) is a co-op zone. You really think that's fulfilling meaningful content? If so, you are more easily amused then I am.

That may be part of the reason. City of Heroes has aspects of a "make your own fun" sandbox MMORPG, and gives players considerably more leeway in using the elements of the game system than the WoW style games. If you expect to be spoonfed endgame content in a defined fashion, you're probably going to be disappointed.

The Mission Architect exemplifies that. You use it for powerleveling. I use it for stories. You run out of content. I have more content than I know what to do with.

What apparently you are failing to understand here is that this is not about playstyles, but about revenue. And to your point, *your* apparent playstyle is in the minority based on popular MMOs and their mode of play in what makes for a lucrative MMO. Don't take my word for it ... the most popular (and financially successful MMOs) all follow similar game mechanics.

Also what you fail to realize is that the best MMOs cater to multiple playstyles, not one particular over another.

Not sure where you got this figure from, but let's play around with it. Based on their current stream of advertising (including some of the large name personalities used), the gigantic network and server farms that are used to run WoW, all of the support staff that do everything but program and design ... I'm fairly positive that a very tiny fraction of that $200 million was actually put into hard development time in terms of producing a raid instance.

Heck, Blizzard doesn't even license much of its tools that it used in development ... they were made in house. And their dev team follow a very strict agile development policy.

So no, it didn't cost them millions to produce Blackwing Lair, or Uludar (maybe millions to produce the full expansion ... that I'd agree).

BTW Blizzard's entire company has about 250 employees. Not sure what number of that translates into the programming and design dev teams for WoW but guestimating (and what I know about the business) I'd say around 30-40.

Yes and it's a very big secret. In fact it's been around for over 30 years now and most everyone who has ever played an RPG has discovered it. Shhhhh.

Or more probably ... it's nothing more then a solidly built game on time honored game mechanics and a little creative fun by people who have experience doing it. And they just keep doing what works.

Sigh ... talk about not even putting a thought into what you post.

P.S. - Way to erase that Online Chess example real quick .... lawl.

Ok that's even worse ... then according to you the current content relies on the players not even *getting* to max level.

But no ... despite Aett's exclamations of "CoH was made to be a different MMO" .... and Sorciere's persian bizarre ideas of what MMO game play (and CoH's for that matter) are and should be, CoH was developed as a classic MMO with a super hero skin. The only truly revolutionary idea they had (past the physics which are awesome) was a "lootless" system, and we've all seen how well that worked out.

The one thing they (the devs) have simply failed to provide in any meaningful way is something for your character to do once it hits max level (no matter how fast or slow you get there).

Then if you are that unhappy leave and let those of us who enjoy the system they've created enjoy it. I'm sure you won't be missed. In fact I would encourage it since one less farmer/power leveler makes my game experience that much better.

It's not the end, and neither is it the beginning. "Endgame" is just not that interesting to a lot of players- I'd be curious to know just what percentage of players have ever done a Hamidon raid, or the Rikti ship, or even STF/LRSF. Most players are switching off between alts, enjoying their characters and not powerleveling to level 50. Some have been here for years and don't even have a level 50 yet.

My main character has been 50 for over four years and he's still my most played. There may not be much level 50-specific content, but between Oroborous, AE, and exemplaring down to play with lower level teams, there's always something to do.



I'll be having a great week (back on vacation!)

Eve Online doesn't, to name just an example. Second Life, while not technically an MMOG, is an online virtual environment that beats all western MMOGs that are not called "World of Warcraft" in terms of active population. Both have been consistently growing since their inception. You really need to look at more MMORPGs instead of just WoW.

And if the most popular MMOs follow that example, it's mostly because, well, most MMOs just blindly follow WoWs example rather than trying to carve out their own niche. That can fall flat, of course, such as with Age of Conan, where the developers simply didn't have the manpower to produce a compelling endgame after making the first 20 levels or so very attractive, but designed a WoW-style MMORPG. Result? Lots of initial good press from players and reviewers impressed by the low-level game, then left. Age of Conan is now down to 7 servers from 49 at release.

I not only realize that, I've never said otherwise. The one who is focused on just one single playstyle (get to max level and then do endgame content) is you. I am the person who sees more than one way to play a game.

Hint: Google for "blizzard 200 million". You really need to learn to use the web.

Their biggest expense (relative to others) is actually customer service.

Try again. The number of Blizzard developers was around 140 at the time of BlizzCast Episode 7, not counting the huge QA team (they have around 2000 employees total). The WotLK credits list 10 character artists alone, for example.

If it's so easy, why isn't there a single other western MMORPG that even remotely apporaches Blizzard's numbers and having 10% of Blizzard's numbers is considered an enormous success? (Fantasy Westward Journey, of course, can make WoW look small, but I'm not sure if you can compare WoW fairly to a game designed specifically for the huge Chinese market, where Blizzard as a western company has been actively handicapped.)

Huh? I didn't erase anything.

No. CoH is moving more and more to a model where the content you can experience does not depend on your level. The original sidekick/exemplar system, Ouroboros, auto-sidekicking/exemplaring in the MA, the new SSK system and unlocked hazard zones all make level less and less important, aside from determining which powers you have access to.

And establishing a sense of progression and achievement.

(just somthing I see people forgeting about in the 'levels' disscussion alot, I now return you to your regular shedualed WoW fanboy insanity)

And how they are slotted, which can make a big difference.

I fully agree -- I was just limiting my discussion to the game-mechanical effects that constrain you, not the equally important effects on player psychology.

You seem to be biasing the income heavily toward box sales and microtransactions - to the point of assigning nearly 47% of CoH's quarterly income toward income that doesn't actually increase subscription time. What you're proposing is that subscribers are spending (and still spending now) an average of $14-15/month on microtransactions. While I do think people are buying the costume packs (1 time fees), character slots (repeatable), and story arc slots (up to 8, so max $25 if you buy them one at a time), I'm not sure that people are buying them - on average - at quite that rate.

Also, a lot of box sales go to existing players, who buy them for the bonus items + additional month, as it's cheaper than buying both separately...and extends their subscription time.

The spike in Q1 also coincides with the "subscribe for 14 months for the price of 12" offer last December.

I don't believe there's any concrete evidence that CoH subscriptions have dropped below 100,000, let alone that far.

Wikipedia is not a disreputable source, and the actual number was easily confirmed by checking NCSoft's reports (linked from the citation on the wikipedia page).

This isn't a university classroom. No one here is writing a doctoral thesis. Since Wikipedia's number happens to be accurate, referring to it should be good enough - but because people have this inane idea that since Wikipedia is user-maintained, everything on it is automatically wrong (rather than potentially unreliable), this canard gets trotted out to derail the discussion.