Green Monster Games - Curt Schilling

What constitutes over-development? I don"t think the fantasy genre is over developed. How many current MMOs do we have that are fantasy? Key-word: Current.

WOW and EQ2 have been here for years. LOTRO is fairly new just reaching their 1 year mark. VG doesn"t count. What other games have a decent market share and are relevant to today"s market?

The biggest thing seems to be that the FANTASY MMO market is well established, other genre"s haven"t really proven to be big money makers. Investors are probably scared as hell to throw money down the rabbit hole with a game like Matrix Online or the ever increasing non-fantasy flops that have been crapped out.

Draegan said:

What constitutes over-development? I don"t think the fantasy genre is over developed. How many current MMOs do we have that are fantasy? Key-word: Current.

WOW and EQ2 have been here for years. LOTRO is fairly new just reaching their 1 year mark. VG doesn"t count. What other games have a decent market share and are relevant to today"s market?

Click to expand...

How much more can be done with fantasy, though? Granted, we are coming out with Age of Conan and WAR in the near future. WAR will be very similar to WoW in terms of content, races, for obvious reasons, but with different mechanics. AoC will differ (supposedly) heavily both in terms of mechanics, and in the type of fantasy offered.

All I can suggest, though, is to offer up plenty of lore to accompany the game. I"ve read about the release of other media related to the game earlier in this thread, and I think it"s wise.

Bring well-developed and immersive content in the form of lore to quests, NPCs, and environments that help to give meaning for the player to be there, and a sense of accomplishment and entertainment to "play through" that portion of the story.

One of the biggest travesties of Vanguard, imo, was that certain areas which had wonderful atmophere and design (Lord Tsang"s Tomb, Coterie Infinium Sanctuary, Wardship of the Sleeping Moon, Vault of Heroes, Pantheon of the Ancients, many others in the premier dungeons) had compelling design and at times bare-bones hints of background in their quests, ultimately were squandered due to lack of interesting, cohesive,developedlore.

Some of those areas had a true sense of the epic, and it was potential unrealized.

UnchainedAcolyte said:

How much more can be done with fantasy, though?

Click to expand...

I"m assuming you"re talking about theme and setting.

If this is the case, then why do authors keep putting out Fantasy novels, or SciFi novels or keep writing books on World War II? A new story is always cool to read or play through.

Game play and design go a lot into making a game fun to play, a good story only enhances it.

UnchainedAcolyte said:

How much more can be done with fantasy, though?

Click to expand...

The scope of Fantasy is nearly immeasurable. Just because certain things have been done before, doesn"t mean they will not be even more fun the second time around, with a fresh take and more advanced technology.

EQ and EQ2 have barely touched what could be done with the Planes. Imagine an expansion that borrows elements from Planescape, with a city like Sigil where planeswalkers gather, looking down on you like vermin until you have proven yourself worthy of facing the challenges of the Planes. Instead of reducing the Gods to mere raid mobs (I always thought it was somewhat ridiculous to kill your own God with no repercussion in EQ) the game could put the choice in the hands of the players, your alignment and devotion to a chosen deity could actually mean something.

Dragonslaying has not evolved much since EQ and could be much more epic and remarkable than the current state. Picture an encounter on par with the scale of a boss fight in "God of War" forcing players to run along a crumbling corridor as the dragon"s head smashes through at various intervals, which they must reduce by a certain % HP before continuing on. Eventually the players would reach its lair to find it blinded by their earlier assault, but in even more of a rage. Have them use terrain to avoid its breath attack (can"t be much harder than some of the raid fights in WoW), and dodge falling debris while whittling away at its HP. There"s no reason a fight with a dragon should not be one of the most memorable encounters in the entire game.

I could go on for hours, and that"s only looking at gameplay elements and not lore. Fantasy also offers the chance to craft a much more engrossing and enticing world than other genres. It is much harder to make every player feel like a hero in a post-apocalyptic or science fiction setting, imo.

Gaereth said:

I would say you are missing the point Rayne.

LOTR had an arguably LARGER IP to draw from and it did worse. Why?? It was a sucky game.

WOW got a grand kickstart with its IP but that doesn"t retain or create anything other than initial purchase from fans.

Click to expand...

Another example is the debacle that was Super Mario Sunshine and Metroid Prime 2. Gamers were hotly in anticipation of these sequels after their predecessors and once they knew these iterations were subpar the games sold less than what you would expect from something within these series.

Need I also remind you that gamers used to be in great anticipation for a game made by developers who promised to make us their bitches? High quality from the past doesn"t mean there won"t be a relapse, just a smaller probability.

----

I just listened to your interview Curt and personally I really don"t like these type of sessions but you came across really well and wish you and your team luck on your endevours. Maybe you"ll dominate the world through gaming before I give it a shot


One thing that stood out for me I wanted to to rehash here was your reasoning that offering the solo player experience is critical to making a mass market game. You use both the existence of consoles and the long wait times to set up a group as your explanation of why the solo experience allows for more fun than the grouping experience.


I find this reasoning strange because you"ve alluded to the idea that you prefer grouping. So I"m thinking you made the prior claim partly because you think it"s hard for games to be set up so people can transition into a group quickly.

Maybe I"m wrong in percepting this attitude but I know I"m right when I say that grouping is better than playing solo. I owned a pc while my friends owned consoles since I was 8. I had a far greater memories playing games on the NES than on the Commodore because I was interacting with other people more frequently on the NES.

In every mmo I"ve played/beta"ed the fun factor ratchets up significantly when I join a group or just get into simple small talk with other people.

In my estimation the best MMOs in the future are the ones that allow the quickest and easest transition from solo play to group play and back again.

I have more thoughts on this but I get pretty long winded.

UnchainedAcolyte said:

How much more can be done with fantasy, though?.

Click to expand...

That"s like asking how much more can be done with rock and roll, jazz, new age, etc. People rip off elements of past artists but they still manage to make a unique fresh sound for their generation.

Draegan said:

I"m assuming you"re talking about theme and setting.

If this is the case, then why do authors keep putting out Fantasy novels, or SciFi novels or keep writing books on World War II? A new story is always cool to read or play through.

Game play and design go a lot into making a game fun to play, a good story only enhances it.

Click to expand...

Well, more specifically, I"m talking about variety in the content. In every major MMO we have humans, elves, dark elves, dwarves, gnomes, orcs/ogres - basically some minor variant of Tolkien-esque races and world elements. If it strays too far I don"t know that the appeal would be as strong to most people who are used to the Tolkien content/model.

MMOs are based on an RPG model, and require a good story to support the variety and depth of content. Name an MMO where the story was only an "enhancement" - maybe UO, but the game had a base of previous CRPG games with previously developed lore.

While some people play for the next level/set of abilities/cool weapon you can get, some of us like a good story as well, and in MMOs I think they"re crucial.

EDIT:

EQ and EQ2 have barely touched what could be done with the Planes. Imagine an expansion that borrows elements from Planescape, with a city like Sigil where planeswalkers gather, looking down on you like vermin until you have proven yourself worthy of facing the challenges of the Planes. Instead of reducing the Gods to mere raid mobs (I always thought it was somewhat ridiculous to kill your own God with no repercussion in EQ) the game could put the choice in the hands of the players, your alignment and devotion to a chosen deity could actually mean something.

Click to expand...

I wouldn"t argue the gameplay issue at all, I whole-heartedly agree. But the alignment/devotion element is a lore/backstory element that is well-implemented in terms of game mechanics (except for the "god-killing").

Again, necessary. The gameplay is entertaining, but loses a lot of its appeal without decent context. Even the example of God of War has an interesting backstory.

Grave said:

The scope of Fantasy is nearly immeasurable.

Click to expand...

No. Its NOT immeasurable. Its extremely "predictable". Its always the same "you are the hero, and this is your goal..... blah blah blah...." story thats always been told from a zillion different angles already. The "manner" in which you interact within that story (mechanics), comes with little room for variation. And with all the different ways that have been done thus far, theres not a whole lot of wiggle room left.

Mechanics will NOT make that story any different. You have to slay the dragon to prove your heroism. Then what? You have to slay the next dragon, because the first one was actually insignificant. Then what? Yep, you guessed it, theres YET ANOTHER dragon for you to kill in the neverending attempt to validate your heroism. Its never about "being" the hero at all. Its more about "striving to be" the hero. Same old, same old. The biggest problem is, in a fantasy "story", the hero finally achieves his goal and the story ends. For an mmo, this isn"t an option. So the story needs to persist. And you can only do that ONE way. By never letting the player "actually become" the hero.

The mmo genre is SO saturated with stories in which you "could be" the hero, that its getting extremely crowded. Your own examples referenced nothing more than a "slightly different way" of telling that same old story. And the mechanics you described didn"t even begin to touch on the technical limitations.

Have them use terrain to avoid its breath attack (can"t be much harder than some of the raid fights in WoW), and dodge falling debris while whittling away at its HP.

Click to expand...

Thats a shitton of data if you didn"t realise.

Look, i"m not trying to be a doomsayer here. I"m just looking at the situation realistically. And realistically, I don"t think that tossing yet another fantasy game into the genre is going to prove any threat to Blizzard"s market share. And if thats thier goal, I don"t realistically see it happening.

From the sounds of it, you just don"t like the MMO genre period, Rayne.

Rayne said:

Its never about "being" the hero at all. Its more about "striving to be" the hero. Same old, same old. The biggest problem is, in a fantasy "story", the hero finally achieves his goal and the story ends. For an mmo, this isn"t an option. So the story needs to persist. And you can only do that ONE way. By never letting the player "actually become" the hero.

Click to expand...

So Drizzt Do"Urden was not a hero for leaving the evils of Menzoberranzan behind in the first novel? Were he and his companions not heroes for defeating Akar Kessel and bringing down the crystal tower? Was Bruenor Battlehammer not a hero for leaping on the back of the dragon Shimmergloom to save his friends?

Was Luke Skywalker not a hero after destroying the first Death Star? Last I checked there were a couple of movies after that.

The story does not have to end when the player becomes a hero, in fact, I would argue that is merely a beginning.

Rayne said:

Thats a shitton of data if you didn"t realise.

Click to expand...

Sure, does it mean it can"t be done? Nope. The Gruul encounter in WoW already has the illusion of falling debris with the cave-in effect that must be moved out of. The breath portion of the fight could be figured out by someone with more experience than me for sure, but at the very least a hidden buff could be placed on the player when standing in a certain location that rendered him immune to the breath attack. Seems fairly basic to me, and I"m no programmer.

The only difference in an epic sci-fi story and a fantasy one is that one uses cold steel and arrows while the other has a "laser sword" and a blaster.

The mechanics for either game can be identical, the only thing that will change is the skin.

Those examples are pretty classic examples of heroes Grave. What exactly is your point by mentioning them?

Every game is ultimately about you being the hero even if the idea of a hero within a story is to ultimately be something considered evil by ordinary people. Noone wants to play a game where you"re an average joe doing average things.

ShroudedMist said:

Those examples are pretty classic examples of heroes Grave. What exactly is your point by mentioning them?

Every game is ultimately about you being the hero even if the idea of a hero within a story is to ultimately be something considered evil by ordinary people.

Click to expand...

My point was that Rayne said MMOs were never about BEING the hero, but about trying to become the hero, and that you never reach that point in MMOs because they are never ending.

I was simply giving examples of heroes whose stories continue even after they become what one would consider a "hero". There is no reason it can"t be imitated in MMOs, and that the player can"t truly feel like one even at lower levels of play.

ShroudedMist said:

Noone wants to play a game where you"re an average joe doing average things.

Click to expand...

Yeah, like killing zebras and owls in Nagrand at level 67? Exactly my point.

Ahh ok now it makes sense.

As far as Skywalker goes, anyone that has read the Star Wars novels knows that his storyline goes on and on and on and there are plenty of quality novels that involved him far after Star Wars (wtf is the word for a 6 part story lol).

Grave said:

From the sounds of it, you just don"t like the MMO genre period, Rayne.

Click to expand...

I don"t dislike the mmo genre in the least. I"ve been an mmo gamer for years. Starting with EQ in "99. My problem is with the genre"s lack of variety. You can sit there and argue that the variety in endless if you want. It WON"T make you right. And now these guys want to drop "nothing more than more of the same" into the mix? And in "direct competition" with Blizzard? Good luck with that.

And please, if you"re going to argue the point of heroism in mmos, at least do it from a solid angle. Using a few hero personalities in your example is meaningless and in no way relative to what a player experiences in an mmo, where you"re SURROUNDED by "heroes". Correct me if i"m wrong, but didn"t the Star Wars story END with Return of the Jedi? Or maybe I missed the part where you actually PLAYED those particular characters in some super-secret mmos I missed out on?

But enough of the pointless bullshit. I"ll ask this question again:

Is 38 Studios "directly competing" on the level of Blizzard or not? If they aren"t, then this entire argument is moot. But, if they are, and heres the important part so pay attention.....I WILL NOT be the only person expecting a game that makes me say "fuck WoW man! I"m gonna play THIS game now".

That last part is especially important. Because we ALL know the outcome of if it doesn"t.

I think you"re too inclined to making it an all or nothing situation Rayne.

The way to beat WoW is to make a truly compelling game. Worrying about beating WoW is totally putting the cart before the horse because past history has shown us thatmaking a compelling game is really difficult. I really get the feeling that too many development houses are worrying about beating Blizzard and less concerned about making damn fucking sure their game doesn"t suck at or even make it to release.

The game company that will best Blizzard will do so by releasing a quality product to modest numbers (by WoW"s standards) and build upon their intial success through positive word of mouth and quality marketing. It isn"t a stretch to suggest that this game will also be firmly ground in high fantasy.

As far as Star Wars goes, the films occur in the Rebellion Era of that list if that tells you anything.
Star Wars books


By the way as far as heroes and low/mid fantasy go, I was reading one of the Terry Goodkind novels from the Sword of Truth series the other day and thought to myself: Damn, this would make a horrible MMORPG.

ShroudedMist said:

I think you"re too inclined to making it an all or nothing situation Rayne.

Click to expand...

Not really. When you make the claim that you"re going to go after Blizzard for a substantial piece of thier market share, you need to come BIG. REALLY BIG. Potential fans will expect nothing less. I simply disagree that this can be accomplished by an as of yet unknown IP, for all the reasons i"ve covered and probably more. At least not in the fantasy sector, that Blizzard took by storm.

Rayne said:

Is 38 Studios "directly competing" on the level of Blizzard or not? If they aren"t, then this entire argument is moot. But, if they are, and heres the important part so pay attention.....I WILL NOT be the only person expecting a game that makes me say "fuck WoW man! I"m gonna play THIS game now".

Click to expand...

Yes, that is their intent. Why wouldn"t it be? I"m not interested in any game that says "No, we can"t even begin to compare to WoW, no reason to even try." To me, that says people should just keep playing WoW.

It"s important to realize though, that directly competingdoes notmean dethroning or completely beating WoW in subs. No one is going to do that, as I said before, except simple attrition and Blizzard themselves making poor choices or possibly even releasing another game. But by going into this thing with the intent of being just as good, and better in some areas, than WoW shows that they know what they have to do in this market. They don"t have to match 10m subs to be considered competition. The quality of the game is what says that, currently no game is even close to WoW.

And it"s funny that you end your statement with that remark. Curt has actually been quoted multiple times saying "If our game doesn"t make you go HOLY CRAP three or four times within the first 30 minutes, we don"t stand a chance." They understand what they are up against, and they know what it will take to make people even give a second glance to their game.

ShroudedMist said:

Noone wants to play a game where you"re an average joe doing average things.

Click to expand...

Not AVERAGE things, but being an average joe doing slightly above average things is just fine. I"ve always held that perspective about my characters, that they are participants rather than features in the great drama.

I"d love to have a high fantasy Sims with a little bit more 1on1 control and a generational game. Where I just manipulate average folks and propel them along successful paths throughout time while interacting with other players" characters doing the exact same thing. There would be highs, lows, progression, expansions, etc., but no single character you help build will be "the man". Rather, the success is in building a lineage and a success story that empowers future generations. Yes, sword-fighting, dungeon crawling, dragons and sorcery would be the most common realm of progression.

I think it would be a cool game, and my characters could be just slightly above average and I"d be happy. I"d actually be disappointed if they were heroes or demigods. That"s not at all the point.


I don"t see why we"re comparing 38 Studios and Blizzard. They could barely be more different. Expectations being low is a good thing. If the game is good it will be a hit with or without supporting product lines and a solid IP. If it isn"t, it will sink like so many others. DDO, LOTRO, EQ2, and SWG are proof that subpar delivery will sink a well founded IP. Yet EQ, EVE, DAOC, and WoW are evidence of solid mechanics drawing in a crowd whether you"ve got fans or not. IP comes in somewhere around 4th to gameplay, appearance, and performance.

Grave said:

It"s important to realize though, that directly competingdoes notmean dethroning or completely beating WoW in subs. No one is going to do that, as I said before, except simple attrition and Blizzard themselves making poor choices or possibly even releasing another game. But by going into this thing with the intent of being just as good, and better in some areas, than WoW shows that they know what they have to do in this market. They don"t have to match 10m subs to be considered competition. The quality of the game is what says that, currently no game is even close to WoW.

Click to expand...

Ok. Its obvious you think i"m arguing that point. I"m not. If they build thier IP, and develop thier mmo, and pull down 1-2 million subs, i"d consider that a success. I have no doubt that ANY company could do that with the proper funding, motivation, and creativity. The point i"ve been making all along here, is that I DO doubt that it can be done with yet another "FANTASY GAME". Because the sector of the market in which they"re looking to compete in, against the current dominant entity of all things, is oversaturated with these types of games. Nearly everything has already been done. Nearly every manner of doing those things has been ventured into. To a point where theres little room left for improvement.

You can argue that "this way" of doing "this thing" is different and more fun. But what you CANNOT argue, is that its STILL the same damn thing!

Agraza said:

Expectations being low is a good thing.If the game is good it will be a hit with or without supporting product lines and a solid IP. If it isn"t, it will sink like so many others. DDO, LOTRO, EQ2, and SWG are proof that subpar delivery will sink a well founded IP.

Click to expand...

Thank you. This really drives the point home. When you come straight out of the gate with a clear "intent" of "directly competing" with Blizzard, you"ve placed your own hurdle into the upper stratosphere. And potential players WILL expect you to deliver. Anything less, and you dug your own grave.

Rayne said:

Not really. When you make the claim that you"re going to go after Blizzard for a substantial piece of thier market share, you need to come BIG. REALLY BIG. Potential fans will expect nothing less. I simply disagree that this can be accomplished by an as of yet unknown IP, for all the reasons i"ve covered and probably more. At least not in the fantasy sector, that Blizzard took by storm.

Click to expand...

You keep getting stuck on the numbers. From all appearances it does seem like you equate it to an all or nothing game.

If they bring out a quality game, a polished game, a fun game, an engaging game, then they are very much competing with WOW. Every single release from 2004 on by other companies has not managed to hit all of those points.

You"re looking at this from a binary point of view and you need to look at it from a market point of view. If we have 4 quality games out there right now then Blizz"s market share would be lower because there would be options. The reason Blizzard has the numbers it has is simply because no one else has released anything that people are compelled to play.

If 38 were to get 25% of Blizz"s initial numbers and 25% of Blizz"s growth per year then they would still be a resounding success. Hell, if they were to get 10% if would still be a damn popular game. What if a couple of other companies were to bring out a good game that got 10% as well? Suddenly, simply because of the options, Blizz"s market share wouldn"t be as large.

The reason Blizz has the numbers it does it because most everything else sucks in comparision. Its very much akin to back in the day with foreign cars and domestic cars. Everyone laughed and said there was no way the Japanese cars could compete with the american cars but within a very short time that changed significantly. There is always room for innovation, polish, and quality control even if your are building something as simple a metal frame on 4 wheels.

What you are saying, to use the car analogy, is that Japan should have never tried to sell their cars in the US simple because the market was already dominated by other cars. Thats pretty silly isn"t it.