Green Monster Games - Curt Schilling

Cadrid said:

Despite the undying faith my parents and I have in you on the mound, Curt, there are a few issues that appear to have become epidemics within the MMO genre. I understand that this early on in development you can"t possibly give much more than a cursory nod to these problems, acknowledging their presence, but nonetheless I have to get it off my chest.

Click to expand...

No problem. I won"t be revealing anything here for the first time anyway. As far as addressing epidemics, or perceived problems, I will do that as a player. Obviously how I feel as a player will at times translate into GMG, there are way too many people that are smarter than I when it comes to what I do and don"t do or want and don"t want. What I like or what I THINK players like is, in my opinion, where a lot of designers get into serious problems.

Cadrid said:

First and foremost, it seems to me that developers are abhorrent to change. Everyone here knows about "The Vision(tm)", and many have sour memories of it; The Vision was FUBAR, but the EQ team decided to stay the course anyways, shrugging off players" complaints with infamous phrases like "Working as intended." Even WoW has seen its fair share of stubborn developer syndrome, where broken mechanics would go unchanged, despite hordes of fans giving mountains of proof and dozens of ideas for fixes.

Click to expand...

I think this is a valid perspective, but one done in a small window of time. Every comparison done in here, for the most part, is done with EQ, EQ2 and WoW as the models. Not sure that"s fair or right, but I am not sure it"s wrong either. As a creator I think you have to have a vision of what you want it to be, but I think the key is in holding to that vision as the development process moves along. You also have to have a company of people that buy into your vision because of THE VISION, and not the person.
One thing I"ve always realized, and most of the perspective comes from listening to hordes of Sox fans "recommend fixes" for the team.
Not being "inside" greatly clouds your ability to understand what can and can"t be done. That"s not to say that ideas presented aren"t worthwhile or intelligent, but in a lot of cases said fixes or ideas just aren"t physically possible due to a pre-existing set of conditions within the work enviroment.
Any good company uses customer feedback, but the great companies only do so where it works best for them, the product, and the customers. If you can meet those three criteria you win. If not all three, then you don"t do it.

Cadrid said:

I realize that your experience with MMOs has originated from a player"s point of view, and that alone reassures me that GMG won"t give customers the complete shaft. However, are you ready to look to your playerbase for ideas to fix and balance your game, should the time arise? Are you willing to say "We blew it with this mechanic." if the fans bring it up? Or should we all expect another "We"re the ones with the professional experience, so we"re right and you"re wrong" attitude when people complain that Class_A turns out to be a Priest in plate, instead of the as-advertised melee support character?

Click to expand...

The MAJOR component to this is "We blew it with this mechanic....".
That indicates that you are seeing something major BEFORE we are done with it. That"s a major problem these days imo. Companies are in such a rush to get your eyes IN and ON their games that you are seeing things, IMO, WAY TOO SOON.
That scenario leads right back to the issue talked about earlier. If you let players into your game at a time when there is still a lot to be done, and you are counting on major input to "finish" things then you"ve done a few things wrong.
1) Picked the wrong creative and technical people to make your game
2) Don"t have the confidence in your people to make a great game

My thoughts are this. If you open your beta, and you"ve designed something great, does it matter how far into completion you are? If it"s a great game it"s a great game, regardless of when you as players, see it. The key is in knowing when and where to expose your game and creation to the public. You, as a company are aiming to complete some objective when you launch into public beta right? IMO that can"t be FINISHING your game. To me Beta is about "cleaning it up" and fixing minor issues you feel more comfortable with the masses deciding. That means addressing your server load issues if need be.

I just feel that Beta, if you are a top tier company, is more about early exposure to advertise your great product as much as anything.

Cadrid said:

Secondly, as has been mentioned before, public relations are ofmassiveimportance in the gaming industry. I"m hardly into my twenties and already I am highly cynical and jaded, mostly thanks to unfulfilled promises, poor communication, and general disconcern for fans by game developers. Pleasing everyone 100% of the time is impossible; it"s a fact of life. Itispossible, however, to keep most people satisfied with what you have to offer.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure that GMG is going to be ahead of the curve when it comes to the media and public relations aspects of this business. Let me also add that GMG will possess the best customer service department this industry has ever had. That"s a promise from me as the President of the Company. You cannot promote (within or without) an operational philosophy founded on character, integrity, principle and accountability and allow what will end up as the most important aspect of your company (CS) to be handled by someone else. We will create an in house core team of CS people that will follow these guidelines.

The media aspects of this are actually one of the selling points of GMG when we presented ourselves to our soon to be partners in this venture. At some point in the near future you will be seeing another press release in which our partnerships have been agreed upon and I think when you do hear this you will understand, and see, how serious we, and our partners in this venture, are.

Cadrid said:

While being upfront and honest is a big part of the PR equation, you also have to remember that those of us on these boards are not suceptible to hype camaigns like Brad"s Vanguard crusade. Yes, the general masses will gobble up screenshots and in-game clips like candy, but it"s insulting to me (and others that frequent these forums) when someone comes along trying to sell their game via a travelling salesman routine. "It"s slices, it dices, it has high-tech graphics! Lookit that sky! Not satisfied? Here"s a teeny clip of gameplay!" While you"re more than welcome here, you"ll need substantive information to come around and promote your game without riling up the masses.

Click to expand...

Your only real error above is in assuming that we would use this forum as an advertising space. When you are talking about a product, and an IP, with the potential of a $60+ million budget you don"t, or shouldn"t, see the FOH board as an big time advertising venue. This board is PERFECT for guys like me and our community guys to talk, argue, and solicit input on things in the MMO space.

I mean honestly, can you envision a company that would use a board where members user names are "F#@ $#@"???

This forum is at times a fantastic way to garner opinions and get a feel for a niche of the MMO world.

Cadrid said:

Lastly, you"ve shown you have a passion for MMO gaming, and you"re no stranger to the various playstyles of MMO"ers. From casual to hardcore, different games tend to cater to different levels of gamers. Some, like WoW, attempt to please all the sects. With its success, WoW has investors licking their chops in anticipation of huge cashflows, looking to new games that will rake in the big bucks. While it"s a good thing for the industry as a whole, the proof that MMOs are profitable can (and has) lead to developers looking for a way to make highly-accessible games in hopes of mimicking Blizzard"s goldmine?

Click to expand...

Ya passion would be an understatement WoW has done two things to new companies looking into the MMO space. It has opened up numerous VC opportunies for third party folks. It has given people unrealistic expectations of what can be achieved to others.

My goal, with this first title, is to bring something epic in every sense of the word, to the MMO gamespace. We know what"s out there, we know what"s not. What we won"t do is assemble bits and pieces to create a hodge podge of concepts into a game trying to please every MMO player on the planet.

Cadrid said:

I"d like to know: Is your plan to make a game that is easily accessible (and thus highly profitable), even if it means dumbing down the gameplay? If so, how do you plan on satisfying the desires of hardcore players alongside the more casual and core gamers? Even WoW, despite its success, has been more of a seesaw of contentment between the gaming levels: at launch, there wasn"t enough to keep hardcore players happy; as time has gone on, hardcore players have recieved more attention while the core/casual gamers have been bereft of stuff to do for quite some time.?

Click to expand...

You don"t think someone could assemble a team of creative genius to appease both sects? I do, and I think we already have quite a few of those people on board. Not to mention I think all of our ideas and concepts to this point work on so many levels to so many players.....

Cadrid said:

If youaren"tseeking to please everyone, what kind of audienceareyou currently planning to design the game towards? The more casual gamer (7-14 hour weekly playtime), the core gamer (15-24 hours weekly playtime), the hardcore gamer (25+ hours weekly playtime), or a combination of the above??

Click to expand...

I won"t go into detail on this stuff now.

Cadrid said:

I apologize if I came off as a bit of an ass; it tends to happen when I speak my mind. I am just genuinely interested in how someone who has been on the same side of poor service as I have will deal with some of these glaring issues that have arisen.?

Click to expand...

No need to apologize. If you aren"t dropping f bombs left and right and your post is thought out and rational (at least to me) then if time presents itself I love to chat on this stuff.

None of what you posted was anywhere near difficult to talk on. I am excited about the give and take here and in some other forums and looking forward to RA jumping in at some point to add stuff if time presents itself.

Cadrid said:

But hey, even if you can"t deal withanyof those problems, thanks for helping let me witness a Red Sox World Series win in my lifetime.

Click to expand...

No problem, was somewhat fun for me to be a part of as well!

Curt

keflex said:

As is the word "is", I suppose.

Anyway...http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1335511.shtml

Click to expand...

Funny that the article itself questions the meaning of "incomplete".

The more you post, the more excited I"m getting for GMG, just reading your own gaming philosophy. Thank you for sharing your views even though given the nature of this forum people will flame you for saying the sky is blue.

People will flame, it goes back to the saying someone mentioned earlier. Trying to please everyone is a surefire way to please no one. I am not concerned about being flamed unless I/we do something that merits being flamed.
GMG won"t be a company that works to do things that don"t get us flamed. GMG will be a company that strives to do what we believe we can do better than anyones ever done it. That comes down to talent, passion and leadership.
Those three things are core components to every person that is, and will, work for GMG.
In the end it"s all about accountability, inside the company to each other, and to the customers. Nothing else matters in the grand scheme of things.
If you have talent, passion, leadership and a company composed of accountable people, you can"t lose.

I like the yankee"s but I love your way of thinking as a gamer! I hope your dreams come true onto your company and look forward to one day playing what you"ve created.

Create the promised land since everyone else is failing.

Kaljin said:

I like the yankee"s but I love your way of thinking as a gamer! I hope your dreams come true onto your company and look forward to one day playing what you"ve created.

Create the promised land since everyone else is failing.

Click to expand...

I was reading through the Vanguard NDA agreement and saw a comment near the end stating something to the effect that MMO players, more than any other genre, are sticklers for pumping up one game, and bashing everything else.

I"ve always felt that the timesink MMO"s are makes people defend their choice of games as a way of explaining our addiction. IMO it"s impossible, unless you don"t need sleep, food, bathing, or a social life, to get the most out of more than one MMO as a hardcore player.

However I think Blizzard broke that barrier, not completely, but to some degree. Being able to get some enjoyment out of a 30 minute session has been virtually non-existant to us dyed in the wool EQ players. I"ve literally spent hours "hanging out" in EQ (prior to people finding out who I was in RL, then it became the exact opposite) trying to find a group.

What was an attraction to me in EQ, the social aspects of the game, at high levels became a detriment.

To compete in the MMO market I think it"s absolutely 100% imperative that you have 1-50/60/70 solo content. The people have spoken and 7+ million of them say that having that solo gameplay to max level ability works.

I also think that EQ and EQ2 have laid the path for the Blizzards of the world to see this and "fix it".

I still don"t think you can really play more than one MMORPG at a high "level" (by this I mean level of competency, not character level; the two do NOT go hand in hand, as anyone at max level in WoW can tell you).

It"s not the days of EQ where you often raided every single day; but you still have to devote time outside of even raiding to farming cash/consumables/etc.

It"s why I"ve kinda given up on the MMORPG genre now; I want to be able to log on and off at will when I get bored and need to move on to something else.

Getting old sucks.

Ngruk said:

[...] To compete in the MMO market I think it"s absolutely 100% imperative that you have 1-50/60/70 solo content. The people have spoken and 7+ million of them say that having that solo gameplay to max level ability works. [...]

Click to expand...

I agree with this sentiment 100%. While I find I have the most fun playing with friends, sometimes they"re busy or I just feel like spending some alone time online. Unfortunately, a lot of games really push the "online community" mantra to the point where they forget some folks may want to enjoy the game solo. This is especially true at the high-end (in terms of levels) of the games, where dungeon crawling and raiding becomes more prevalent, often requiring a group to beat.

WoW definately took a step in the right direction with solo levelling content. I remember back when I played my Necro in EQ I had no trouble soloing, but I was bored out of my mind just grinding experience for hours on end. With WoW, however, every class has the ability to do quests and reap rewards on their own.

Where WoW dropped the ball in terms of solo content was when players hit level 60. At the level cap all that"s left to do solo is PvP (a can of worms I"d rather not open this late at night) and crafting. Even with those two avenues it"s not terribly difficult to "finish" the solo game, Mr. Soloplay now with no form of progressing his character.

There are a few ways to remedy this issue, be it through Alternate Advancement systems, AI for NPCs so Solo players can enjoy the grouping experience to some degree, an increased number of world events to take part in, or something else entirely. As long as the team is properly staffed and funded, it should be feasible for developers to incorporate such a sphere of play into their game.

Edit: Peer editing myself.

First off, I just have to say...that it warms my BoSox loving heart all the way down here in TX to know that you"re coming back next season, Curt. Gonna be one hell of a pitching rotation you guys are going to have.

Onto the actual thread topic, it"s refreshing to see your views on the whole genre and what you"re hoping to accomplish with GMG. Can"t wait to see what you and the team you"re assembling come up with as the company comes together.

Cadrid said:

There are a few ways to remedy this issue, be it through Alternate Advancement systems, AI for NPCs so Solo players can enjoy the grouping experience to some degree, an increased number of world events to take part in, or something else entirely. As long as the team is properly staffed and funded, it should be feasible for developers to incorporate such a sphere of play into their game.

Edit: Peer editing myself.

Click to expand...

I can"t and won"t elaborate, but I can tell you that this is something (the remedy part of it) that"s been given incredible attention.

The whole funding issue/problem is non-existant, so that"s not a concern, nor is there any concern of creative oversight or pressure by people(s) that aren"t IN GMG.

The staffing part is turning into every bit the incredible team that I forsee people, when it"s announced, reacting with the same excitement most did when RA and Todd were identified as key creative contributors to GMG.

Make a non-high fantasy MMO, please, Curt.

*begs*

While that would indeed be quite awesome, I"m leaning towards them creating a game in Salvatore"s Demon Wars setting. It already has an established backstory and 7 novels working in its favor. Unless he"s been hiding something on the back burner for a few years. Most authors have things like that sitting around. I know I do.

Come on man. 93.5% of the MMOG subscribers in the world play Fantasy MMO"s. Why would GMG, if it intends to change the landscape of the MMO world in a business sense, and product sense, not shoot for that market?

Also, I can"t see convincing Todd McFarlane, and R.A. Salvatore, who"ve both made an incredible living and are supreme talents in the genre, to create a baseball MMO, which while cool, would steer them away from their core talents.

I am a HUGE MMO fan, and a huge fan of what"s been done. I don"t want to come out and just make a game, that takes nothing but dollars and some coders, I want GMG to enter the space in unprecedented fashion with something the gaming world is eagerly anticipating.

I don"t want to do it with false hype, years of lead up to something that fizzles.

To truly make an impact doesn"t it make sense to hit the market where everyone is interested in playing?

And no, it won"t be Demon Wars.

I definately agree that fantasy lends itself to a better MMO experience. What I would like to see though is an alternative take on fantasy. Something that blends technology with fantasy. Not like Arcanum, more like Longest Journey.

A baseball MMO would be really strange and probably not that much fun.

I think the market for non-fantasy games in the MMO market is wildly underestimated. 93.5% percent of the MMOG subscribers play fantasy MMOs because that"s where the best made games currently are. The fantasy theme probably helps to a certainly extent, but people will go where the good games are.

Look at (to pull an example from RTSes) Starcraft. It"s one of the most popular games ever, and it"s not based in a fantasy world. People like it because it"s a well-made game.

Pretty much every non-fantasy MMO game so far has either been a deeply flawed game, or designed to appeal to a certain very specific niche.

Games I"d put in the former category:
-Anarchy Online (turned out to be better later on but had an abysmal launch)
-Earth and Beyond (had an abysmal launch AND never ended up being a good game)
-Neocron (see above)

Games I"d put in the latter category:
-EvE Online (designed for hardcore PvPers and/or people who want a sandbox-style world with no real established objectives)
-Planetside (MMOFPS/squad combat in an MMO setting)

Frankly (and this isn"t a dig at you specifically, more the game publishers in general) I think we keep getting all of these high fantasy games because it"s relatively "safe". I"d like to see someone who is well-funded and who wants to push the envelope really do something innovative.

There isn"t much left to innovate in high fantasy. As an example, let"s compare WoW classes with their EQ "equivalents":

-Warrior: Warrior
-Rogue: Rogue
-Druid: Druid (this is a bit specious because the playstyles do differ somewhat)
-Shaman: Shaman (see above)
-Warlock: basically a Necromancer with some additional toys
-Mage: Wizard
-Hunter: Ranger
-Priest: Cleric
-Paladin: Paladin

Yes, you can tear the above bit apart somewhat because the classes do play differently. I acknowledge this. My point is more about there only being so many different archetypes for fantasy classes, and stylistic differences are all that are left to do.

edit: I apparently fell in love with the word "genre".

^ That sort of sums it up when it comes to Fantasy MMOs.

I actually think a system like EVE would be awesome for a fantasy MMO. You gain skills over time and you can skill up in anything available. Your character has "slots" where you stick skills. Like in the armor slot you can throw in your "Heavy Armor" skill and you can now wear plate. There"s slots for weapon skills and abilities/spells. Restrictions would be in place so a heavy tank couldn"t toss a fireball at you, i.e. in the description of the spell it would state something like "While wearing plate armor, spell cast time is increased by 300% and spell damage is reduced by 75%."

It would be tricky but it could be done with a bit of finesse. You can even keep the "raid game" intact, just balance the item rewards with a certain "skill point" threshhold. Like an Onyxia encounter would offer rewards pertinent to a person with 2 months of skills trained, while Naxx would equate to something on the order of a whole year.

Super Mario MMORPG or Earthbound MMORPG. That would kickass.

Come on man. 93.5% of the MMOG subscribers in the world play Fantasy MMO"s. Why would GMG, if it intends to change the landscape of the MMO world in a business sense, and product sense, not shoot for that market?

Click to expand...

It"s good to get in on that piece of the pie (fantasy mmo), but in many ways its trickier to get noticed there in this WoW-dominated age. You either need a solid piece of IP (which will sell based on the IP alone), you need some big names (which you have), or you need some really awesome mechanics/engine/setting that stand apart from the other titles in the genre. The big names part can be tricky as well, since people will have preconcieved expectations (in GMG"s case: Drow Rangers, Demons, and Bloody Socks).

Numbers 1 and 2 will generally aid initial sales (generally #1 more then #2), while #3 will aid long term growth (see: Eve). Obviously if you can combine one of the first two with the 3rd, then you"ve got yourself a killer app in the making. Of course the rub is trying to get #3.

For instance, part of the problem with Vanguard (in my eyes anyways) is it reminds me of EQ2 a little too much. While it does have some features that are nifty, upon initial inspection it seems somewhat generic fantasy. Nothing truely stands out, unlike Conan which immediately hits you with "unique" features and thus catches your eye (such as the decapitation happy M rating, mounted combat, and casters who will go insane and start slaughtering everyone).

Now while I know Salvatore and yourself are big EQ fans, I think you need to try to distance yourself from trying to make "EQ done GMG style" which is what many fantasy MMOs can find themselves mired in. And one surefire way of doing this is to try to exploit different settings rather then the tired and true "high fantasy mmo". And if you did decide to do fantasy, go for something that hasnt been explored too much...like a Planescape: Torment type setting or something along the lines of Arcanum (which was basically a D&D setting that was experiencing the industrial revolution). The Forgotten Realms/Tolkien/EQ-type settings have been done to death and are probably a surefire way to not get noticed

Fantasy is all well and good, but like Cyb said, High Fantasy is hard to innovate in and be noticably different while still maintaining the feel. A way to possibly approach this would be to take the key elements of the high fantasy genre and skew them a bit. Elves being universally evil and your standard goblin chud type mobs, gnomes being way less insane and more prone to getting drunk in taverns, dwarves who sail the seas as opposed to working in mines. At the same time, however, you risk alienating all those kids who just want to play an elf with a bow and name themselves Legolas. Fine line to walk imo.

Innovation and differentiation are concerns only where lack of creative genius is involved. I am very very confident that is not the case here.

Obviously at this stage from my end, it"s all talk, and while talking is a skill some would argue I do too well, I will do my best to not overextend myself, or the people in GMG.

But as far as being different, and cutting edge, I think the fact that most, if not all of the people so far involved, know MMOs or are hardcore players. We know what"s out there, we know what"s not.