How sad is this… it’s easier to find time to comment at work than while on “vacation”. Heh.
If there is any concept related to MMOs that I despise more, I don’t know what it would be. (There are quite a few things that come close, tho, admittedly.)
The “end game”. A kludged convention of convenience used to putty over a gaping hole in the typical MMORPG design… and usually pretty poorly, at that.
Let’s just start with a few basics.
1) There is not a single company operating such a service anywhere on the planet that actually wants the player to stop paying… I mean, playing. Having an “end game” kinda implies an “end” to play, right? (Yes, I do realize that, in terms of current implementation, the end game is actually a desperate attempt to prevent an end to play…)
2) If the “end game” is drastically different than the “regular game”, three questions come to mind.
- First, why did the developer want to go and spend the money to make two games, instead of just one?
- Second, was it really necessary to make the players who want to play this “end game” slog through a game they possibly/probably didn’t want to play (the “regular game”) to get to it?
- Third, if a player actually likes the “regular game”, are they really going to want to stop playing it at some arbitrary point, and play a different one instead?
3) If the “end game” is not drastically different from the “regular game”… well, it’s not really an “end game” at all then, is it?
(more loony raving after the jump)
What the end game “solves”
So, why do most current MMORPGs have an end game? Simple. Because a core aspect of their design needs an end.
The regular game in most MMORPGs revolves around “advancement”, an artifact of the de facto definition of computer RPGs. (Clarification: in the original pen-and-paper RPGs, character advancement was one of several features of the gameplay, not the core feature of it.) RPGs in the computer gaming realm focus on building up a character, becoming more and more capable and powerful as the result of the activities undertaken in the game.
There comes a point when that advancement simply must be stopped… allowing it to continue would make the character so much more powerful than any of the challenges already developed that there would effectively be no game. The character could defeat any or all of the existing challenges without even trying, potentially even by simply standing there in certain systems (for example, in the realm of combat, imagine an ever-more-powerful damage aura combined with an ever-more-unhittable defense rating, or perhaps an ever-more-damaging automated “counter-attack” ability coupled with ever-more-utterly-impenetrable armor.)
The end game concept “solves” this issue by placing caps on such advancement, and introducing an alternative style of play largely tuned to the level of power those caps represent. Typical examples of this have been the “raiding” game and the PvP/RvR game.
In the raiding game, a game of social organization and strictly synchronized activity is offered as an alternative to the advancement game. Success is based primarily on an ability to form a group capable of performing strictly defined roles at precise moments in time. Systemic rewards are small, randomly offered boosts of power via “epic gear” or a similar mechanic, but these are largely offered simply to provide enticements and/or excuses for players to undertake the task in the first place. The primary rewards for the activity are actually in the generation of a reputation for competence with other players, and the satisfaction of a difficult challenge met and overcome.
In the PvP/RvR end game, the challenge and excitement of facing other players as opponents is offered as a replacement for the advancement game. Success is based on an ability to guess an opponent’s tactics and respond to them more effectively than that opponent can do in return. Often, small group tactics and even minor strategic considerations can come into play as well. Rewards are very similar to the raiding game: minor random systemic rewards as an enticement, with the significant rewards coming from reputation amongst other players and the satisfaction of meeting difficult challenges.
Note that neither of these types of play would necessarily have to wait for an “end game” to be viable. And to be fair, some MMOs have started to offer these styles of activity as alternative activities in the mid and late stages of the advancement game in a limited fashion. The particulars of the current prototypical advancement game often get in the way, however, requiring strict limitations on who can participate and so on.
The problem (as I see it)
There are actually several aspects that all conspire to create the problem here. Most of them are artifacts of the original D+D system that inspired the genre, and have never been re-evaluated in the fresh light and different set of challenges of the MMORPG concept. (DDO provided an objective example of some of the ways the pen-and-paper ruleset can fall a little short in direct translation to the realm of the MMO, although it’s biggest issue was unrelated, admittedly.)
At heart, however, the biggest part of the problem is simply a matter of scale. In typical-MMO-clone-2475, a first level character has 20 hit points. A 50th level character has 5000. A first level character has a +0% to hit. A 50th level character has +500% or more. The first level character has stats in the low double digits; a 50th level character has stats in the high triple digits. And so on, and so on, and so on.
Players have now been trained to expect massive improvement on a virtual host of abilities and resistances with each level they obtain… in addition to new abilities and additional opportunities (for example, equipment that is only usable above a certain level). And thus, even ridiculously powerful challenges quickly become simple and straightforward… with a couple extra levels under the belt.
It’s not just class-level systems, either. Skill-based systems can easily suffer the exact same fate, although if they are properly defined, they can extend the effective lifespan of the regular game significantly by providing more than one avenue of advancement to be conquered. Class/level systems can and do achieve a similar effect through alternative advancement models like AAs, Realm points, epic equipment, and so on.
Some games also extend the lifespan of the advancement style of play by offering multiple paths of advancement, as opposed to only the combat-focused vanilla class/level/XP model. Vanguard’s crafting and diplomacy systems are somewhat of this flavor. Horizons’ original crafting model (it’s been a while, may have changed), with a completely separate class/level system for crafting vs. combat, was a better example. Skill systems should more naturally accommodate this, but it still requires that supportive gameplay options be implemented.
Solutions?
Typically, there are two alternatives that present themselves. One is to simply largely eliminate, or at least reduce, “advancement” as an element of play. “Skill-based” gameplay, for example, whether that skill be reflex-based (i.e. “twitch”), or more cerebral (puzzle solving, for example), are examples of this. There is no obvious need for a second “end-game” under such a paradigm.
The other option acknowledges that “advancement play” is an enjoyable style of play in and of itself, and seeks ways to instead achieve results that still provide the desired reward structure, but in ways such that the typical range of challenges remain challenging across a far long period of time. There are precious few examples of such a philosophy, although the “end games” of certain long-running games like EQ and DAoC offers hints at some possible alternatives here. (Some of the lessons of DDO apply here as well, I should add.)
My question for the audience at large: are there other possibilities? Also, does anyone else have an issue with the “end game” contrivance, or is that just me?
Voyages in Eternity 
16 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 25, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Aaron
I started writing about a similar subject yesterday. I was going to wait to post that one until tomorrow, but your article convinced me to go ahead and put it up now. Blogger will apparently let me lie about the post date, claiming it was published on 6/26. =)
Anyway, I’ve always hated any mention of an End Game too, mostly because my fellow players would tell me to keep playing a game because “it gets better in the End Game.” That annoyed the hell out of me. With what other product is acceptable to say “yeah, it sucks now, but keep paying us and one day you’ll be surprised!”? If a game doesn’t grab me within the first 2 or 3 hours, I’m not going to explore anymore, and it’s high-end content is essentially worthless.
To keep this from being just a rant though, here’s an idea. What about designing an extensive skill system that stretches out, rather than up? one that makes you more versatile, rather than more powerful? It could be interesting if a game’s primary goals were not limited to power progression, and the game also involved a steadily expanding palette of means with which to approach those goals. Skills could be designed more for personalization than for power. In fact, in addition to some form of skill-tree (class) system), I’ve long though it would be more interesting if players could acquire skills through artifacts, scrolls, quests, and training…and the design ensured that someone’s collection of skills could truly feel unique.
Some growth in power, of course, is probably a good thing. But I definitely agree that most MMOs make that growth too dramatic. I loved SWG’s health system, in which one was kept alive more by tactics and careful action than by health capacity.
June 25, 2007 at 5:18 pm
damianov
How does the saying go? Great minds think alike…
I don’t know if you’ve read through any of my Voyages/Dream Game stuff, but that was exactly my angle on it, too. Adding diversity/versatility through advancement systems, instead of just raw power.
Another angle was to make as many tasks as possible “contested” or “opposed”, such that the player’s impact is in some way reduced or even negated by the opponent’s response.
A dirt simple example: say Player 1 has an attack that normally does 10 hp per hit, and NPC 1 has a parry that stops 8 hp per parry. Player 1 thus does 2 hp per hit when NPC 1 parries, which he usually does whenever possible.
Now, Player 1 gains a new attack thru advancement, one that does 12 hp per hit. Each attack is now doing noticeably more (twice as much) damage against NPC 1, 4 hp instead of 2… but the actual overall attack strength only went up 20%. So attacks against defenseless foes didn’t go up 100% as well, for example.
It’s another possible way to keep the numbers more in check, but still give the feeling of significant advancement. There are a host of other tactics I’d love to try sometime as well… but my meeting is starting.
More later, perhaps. Thanks for the feedback…
June 26, 2007 at 8:57 am
JuJutsu
I’d like to comment but I can’t….with the possible exception of pre-CU SWG, I’ve never actually reached an end game.
“Players have now been trained to expect massive improvement on a virtual host of abilities and resistances with each level they obtain…”
That has not been my experience at all. Instead, what I always run into is a massive amount of grinding to get a new level which [for example] gives a “new” spell which is an old spell with a new name, a trivial increase in damage and [if I’m really lucky] a slightly different particle effect.
There are usually a small number of skills/levels that provide a qualitative difference [you get a mount, a class defining ability, etc] but I’d emphasize the ‘small’. I always run out of fun & motivation when the power curve flattens out….
I’ve clearly played too many DIKU games.
June 26, 2007 at 10:27 am
Aaron
Yeah, as I said somewhere before, what ultimately matters with new skills is the affective value, the coolness factor. No matter how much it helps the player kill future enemies or accomplish whatever other goal, the player has to have a “wow, cool!” moment or the skill’s not worth the design cost. The ideal is that the skill will continue to elicit the player’s enthusiasm, likely by feeling a bit different under different circumstances…like a lightning spell causing nearby metal to crackle with electricity, but only if there’s metal in the environment.
“A dirt simple example: say Player 1 has an attack that normally does 10 hp per hit, and NPC 1 has a parry that stops 8 hp per parry. Player 1 thus does 2 hp per hit when NPC 1 parries, which he usually does whenever possible.”
I haven’t gone through your old articles yet, though I plan to. But just by reading that, my initial impression is that it seems to work well, but I wonder if it would become annoyingly complex toward higher levels. With just the attack and parry skills present, it’s easy to understand and implement. But add in a palette of 10+ skills for each combatant involved and it could get hard to balance, I’d imagine. That’s just intuition though, so I may be wrong.
June 26, 2007 at 3:04 pm
damianov
@Jujutsu: what I was really aiming at with that statement was that it rarely takes more than 2-3 levels to be able to completely overpower an opponent that once was kicking you around. I fully agree it can be difficult to remember that during “hell levels”…
I think the discrepancy between the objective/numeric reality and the subjective perception comes from another design “feature”. The fact is that the player’s awareness of the power level increase is muted because the opponents you are directed toward in play via various means are boosted by a commensurate increase in power as well… in fact, often the opponents are granted an increase in power that is _more_ sizable than that given the character.
@Aaron: re the complexity issue, that’s one of my concerns as well. Another one of the reasons I am so hot to get a little “test of concept” engine (see my semi-rant from last week) up and running is to be able to start putting some of this stuff, some of these ideas to the test. I am _so_ tired of having to _wonder_ how some of these ideas would work…
June 27, 2007 at 10:45 pm
Spaz_Attack300
The only MMO I play is WoW. Try not to start saying “The WoW only noob knows nothing” or something, I don’t know what constitutes as a moron on this forum, I’m just sharing my opinion.
WoW seems to fit well with what you all are saying. It does introduce PvP early on, it’s talent system makes you go upwards yes, but also as you said outwards, spreading you from someone even the same class with the same gear. And it does kind of have two games, but the end game you talk about comes very soon, making the “start game” too small to remember usually. Very early on there are those raids, with coordinated and synchronized efforts, and PvP is introduced at about the same time. So WoW rather than building up to a second game as the game goes on, just makes the game more difficult, advanced, and generally fun. Also, as the game goes on, it gets more diverse for roles and talents severely effects roles too. At level one, a mage can fight almost as well in melee combat as a rouge, at 12ish mages stop using weapons between spells and just cast another spell, and rogues are starting to spring to the top of melee damage. By 70 the mage does an unnoticable amount of melee damage, and the rogues are the top of the damage meter almost always.
You may be thinking “Yeah, but that’s classes, we want more customization than that.” How about talents. Ask anyone that plays WoW, hunters suck at melee. That’s because most people go marksman or *shudder* Beast mastery. Survival at least doubles melee damage. And there aren’t only three trees when you think about it, you don’t just click marksman. There are at least 20 talents to go into in each tree, and how many you put into each talent makes a difference too. You can sub into other trees, there’s infinite customization.
At the actual end game though, it does start to get dreary. You stop learning new moves, people start expecting you to be a certain specialization that is best for groups, and Blizzard can only milk their many storylines so long before they have to come to an end.
Please note that I did not look over this and the paragraph splits were almost completely random, and that I’m tired.
June 28, 2007 at 3:21 am
I Think I May Be Wearing Cranky Pants at MMOG Nation
[…] writing here. Just the same, within the last few weeks it seems like everyone is second guessing years of design work, or dismissing others’ gameplay styles out of […]
June 28, 2007 at 5:51 am
damianov
@Spaz_attack300:
There are no “noobs” on this forum, at least as far as the host of the forum is concerned, no worries. All opinions that are expressed with respect are respected in return.
For my part, I’ve always felt that WoW has made one of the most significant efforts to date toward addressing this type of thing, on multiple fronts, and I’ve occasionally wondered if it’s longer-than-average replay value has been extended for some as a result. Talents are essentially a simplified “skill system” replacement, after all. (It isn’t enough for me personally, but I can easily see how it works, and works _well_, for others.)
Your final comment about “new moves” and “expecting certain specializations” kind of gets to the heart of what I’m trying to explore. Blizzard delayed the end quite a bit, using some of the tactics I mentioned above amongst others, but there is still an end. I’m casting about for alternatives which might bypass that entirely. There may be no such thing, I don’t know… but even if I’m searching for El Dorado, tilting at windmills as it were, that’s what I’m aiming at.
June 28, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Spaz_Attack300
I believe that type of game is impossible. At the end of most games, after beating it, you generally go back to the point before beating it and get 100%, or restart with everything you’ve collected throughout the game. The closest you could get to the lack of an end would be the Harvest Moon/Animal crossing type games. Even then it eventually gets to the point that you essentially have everything. The idea of getting more versatile as opposed to more powerful doesn’t work either. I play Super Smash Bros. Melee on a technical level, and I’ve learned that the more versatile something is, the more powerful it is. Honestly, I don’t think it’s about not having an end so much as making the end as enjoyable, or more enjoyable than the regular game, and making both the regular and end game very similar. Also, for all MMOs, there is the fact that other people are constantly playing it with you, giving more variables so that even at the end, people are there making it different every day.
June 29, 2007 at 4:49 am
damianov
What I’m personally driving at is not avoiding an end, per se, but rather about not having an “end game”, a separate game that you largely cannot partake in without going thru a drastically different “starting game” first. As we both pointed out earlier, there are games, like WoW, that are making strides in that direction… but I don’t believe it’s gone as far as it could yet.
As for impossible… perhaps. I don’t personally agree, obviously, but until such a thing is either done or all known options explored thoroughly and discarded as unworkable, who can really say with absolute certainty?
Versatility does equal power, but not necessarily on anything near the level that current games implement via the D+D abstractions. For example, there are few MMOs on the market today where you need worry at level 50 about standing AFK in a level 20-30 zone. You can literally walk buck naked into the middle of the largest group of mobs in such a zone, taunt them all to attack you, go to the theatre to see a movie for a few hours, then come back, grab up a weapon, and kill all the creatures in a couple seconds with a single swing for each, maybe 2 if the random number generator fails you… the creatures that haven’t despawned or wandered off in frustration by then, at least. Versatility as I envision it would still allow you to defeat that horde, but it would require effort and ability on your part as a player… if your character went inactive for a significant length of time, they would (eventually, at least) defeat you.
True versatility also means alternative forms of play must be made viable options. Combat should not have to be the only or even primary valid activity. It has definite advantages as a gameplay option, as Damion Schubert has pointed out in the past (I recommend his “Men In Tights” presentation from last August over at Zen of Design, if you haven’t seen it yet), but I remain unconvinced that it is the only viable option. Games like Animal Crossing and Harvest Moon, as you mention, plus the original Sims, flight sims and racing games, Tiger Woods Golf, Myst, and so on, all represent alternate styles of play that might be made viable as well… plus, who really knows what other possibilities might be uncovered once you start down an alternate path?
In the end, I think we’re both on the same page, just from somewhat different directions/perspectives. The quote “making the end enjoyable… and making both the regular and end game very similar” is a good encapsulation of what I am looking for as well.
June 29, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Spaz_Attack300
“Versatility as I envision it would still allow you to defeat that horde, but it would require effort and ability on your part as a player… if your character went inactive for a significant length of time, they would (eventually, at least) defeat you.”
I’m pretty sure Silkroad Online does a fair job of that. I’ve never seen an incredibly high level but the game does require special attacks. Without special attacks, your character dies faster than an enemy the same level, and fighting two things is a good way to die. I’m pretty sure at higher levels it’s the same, and that taking on too many lower NPCs is a bad idea.
June 29, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Spaz_Attack300
I see what you mean with the alternative paths other than fighting I think, but think about the Elder Scrolls games. I don’t think many people have Mercantile, Repairing, or Speechcraft as thier first choice for a main skill. They choose Blade/Long Blade/Short Blade or Spear or Acrobactics or something first. Anyway, most people would raise thier combat ability first and foremost, then maybe learn some side things to raise thier combat ability.
June 29, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Spaz_Attack300
I’m beginning to get aggrivated that I’m having these ideas pop into my head after pressing submit, but here comes post number 3.
What if there was an MMO that didn’t have improved gear or levels or anything, you just picked a class and start with all the moves, pick a few customizations, and you’re just as powerful as anyone else. The game would be entirely about skill!
I see some problems already. If you start with all your moves, then how will you learn to use them? With a leveling up system, whenever you get a new move, generally you test it out, see what it’s useful for, and learn all of the moves and thier uses over time. With this system, you might completely ignore an amazing move because it SEEMS useless at first. Also, with the leveling system you gain skill at the game as time progresses. With the start at the top system, you’re thrown into something you’ve never seen. It would be like giving a monkey a computer and telling it to look up Jonathan Coulton and download a song. Also the game would be incredibly simple and have a playability of about an hour, and without leveling or gear, it would be a purely PvP game, because killing NPCs wouldn’t help.
Although all of this is true, other players WOULD tell you which moves are and aren’t useful and you would probably start in a place where it doesn’t take too much skill. Too bad it’s generally a bad idea to rely on the old players to teach the new players. The NPCs being useless seems unavoidable too. And no matter what, the game would probably be very simple.
I’m tossing this idea out in the chance that someone could improve on it.
June 30, 2007 at 6:03 am
damianov
Heh, I know what you mean about getting new ideas after hitting submit… one of the many reasons I started my own blog was so I could edit my posts as often as I liked… 🙂
I haven’t tried Silkroad Online yet, I’ll have to check it out… thank you for the tip.
If I understand correctly, the game you’re describing sounds kind of like a “fighting game” like Super Mario Smash Bros or the like, but make it an MMO? (Let me know if I’m off-track here…) It would be possible, I suspect, though I do doubt many current MMO players would be interested in it as described. The advancement meme is what draws current players to the genre, I believe. That said, how many new, different players would find it engaging? That, I really can’t say…
In terms of teaching the player to play, you could still have a set of training “quests”, that help you explore each move and perhaps highlight some of it’s uses. Make them optional so that players who are already familiar with the game can skip them, and it should be viable.
The relative simplicity is probably the largest challenge. The combat itself would have to be pretty engaging, and a solid ranking system with multiple facets would probably be helpful. Regular tournaments, maybe? Or how about a “Highlander” theme, ala “There can be only one”? That has it’s own problems, of course… do you only get one character, and have to sit out of play once killed until someone gains the prize and the world starts over? If you get multiple characters, how does anyone ever get to be “The One”… or can they?
A potential advancement model, setting aside levels and gear, might be gathering friends and allies amongst the NPCs, up to and including having them willing to fight (and potentially die) alongside you.
I like the advancement game, myself, so most of my own ideas are along the lines of expanding and broadening it, as opposed to abandoning it. However, it is interesting to consider ways to supplant it, and generates some interesting questions… you provided a nice thought-experiment to chew on, thanks!
July 1, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Spaz_Attack300
1) Don’t try silkroad, my friend that used to play it says it sucks in every way, other than looking flashy.
2) I agree, I like the advancement system, I was just tossing around the idea.
July 26, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Free Online MMORPG
Great site allot of good information. Most people dont put so much effort into thier sites. Found what i was looking for just wanted to show some appreciation.