Sure, we've changed the game significantly at its foundation several times. But each time was necessary. There is not successful blueprint of how to make a PvE MMOFPS. There was nothing to copy, nothing to emulate. When I worked on WoW, we had Everquest to emulate.

We tried levels, tiers and now resource based progression. Levels was copied from MMOs, but it didn't feel right for a shooter and people were voting by quitting early and not playing as much. When we switched to tiers, retention shot way up, but it still had fundamental broken issues that were highlighted by the community. When we switched to resource based progression, and the new crafting system, we had an interesting result. The bad part was that it alienated half our users as much as it entertained the other half. The good news was that metrics were up everywhere...people are playing for longer and are more engaged than ever before. Now we have to work on the alienation of a good chunk of our users due to an incomplete crafting UI and testling limits on progresssion being made too difficult.

But we don't make these chnages on a whim. Had we shipped with the original leveling system, the game would have been a disaster. Thankfullly, since we develop features with our community, we discovered the problem early on. We share features early, before the last 10% where 90% of the work is, so that we *can* make these changes without throwing away a ton of work, or become so invested in a system that we refuse to change it.

Our process has been a new one for all of us, devs and community. But we can measure its success and improvements each step, while avoiding some bad systems that got put to rest early...all thanks to community driven development.

In case anyone was curious, one of our designers describes a little bit of what Firefall is trying to do to advance dynamic events:

http://www.firefallthegame.com/2012/09/27/developer-blog-creating-dynamic-world-events/

- Mark Kern

I've heard the MMORPG audience is a tough crowd. I think you guys have every right to be angry that MMOs haven't changed much in the past 10 years. Glad to see people still want more, as it really makes me want to figure out what the "more" is as a game maker.

- Mark Kern

There is a lot that can improve beyond quests and dynamic events, true. But I just mentioned one of many possible ways we could change things.

When we made WoW, we looked around and said, let's make a themepark...but we could have chosen anything. There were so many types of MMOs before WoW, and Blizzard took just ONE of them and popularized it.

We can dig back and find lots of other ideas to mine and shape and polish as WoW did. I see lots of potential in online games if we can just take our WoW blinders off.

I just wanted to thank everyone for a truely stimulating debate. While it has gotten heated at times, I think the fact that it has generated so much opinion is good for the industry, which needs to do better and "think different."

This article is, of course, just my opinion. Many of you have a very different opinion and that is just fine. 

Many of you are suggesting ways to improve DE's and take what GW2 has done even father. Next week I'll outline some things that I would love to see in MMOs in the future, and hopefully we can have a great discussion then too.

I just have one request. Please don't attack each other personally in these comments. I love to see debate, arguments and thoughtful posts, but it should not be personal. Attack the ideas with counter-ideas, yes. But please don't attack the commentor.

Thanks again for the great response, controversial though it might be. See you in the next column.

- Mark

Originally posted by Krytycal

I'm sure Mr. Kern would love Dynamic Events to kill quest hubs considering he's using DEs as content for his own game (Firefall) in the form of Chosen invasions.

 

Shouldn't there be some type of conflict of interest check before you start writing columns for this site?

My interests are fully disclosed, so you know where I'm coming from. This is why its an editorial, not journalistic article.

Originally posted by Angier2758

Originally posted by GeezerGamer

 

---

Originally posted by itgrowls

---

Originally posted by GeezerGamer  

---

Originally posted by itgrowls Just love the nonsense posts here in these forums about games these people obviously don't play. Claiming that GW2 questing is linear is like saying that the earth is still flat or that it's the center of the solar system.   Wandering around one runs into the zones that DE events happen in, one doesn't get directed to go to the next town by a quest handed to you by the quest hub guy you just stumble onto them. Add the feature of hidden underground and underwater zones the mixup is complete. I went inside the norn mine via swimming underwater in their small river and ended up where the dredge were mining the mountain in the norn area instead of going the standard way through the heart area (hearts deplete over time so there eventually ARE no guides aside from the shield or boss symbols on the map as only SOME events are occurring), And Drops scale to your level, you don't get a level 1 item when you are level 80 fighting a level 15 vet/miniboss. So where these weird haters are fabricating these notions is beyond me. They really are getting tiresome spreading nonsense about a game they really have no intention of ever playing and need to spend their time playing some other title instead of lying about this one.   Quest hubs are dead, the holy trinity is dead. Get over it move on and have fun. That's my advice to them.

---

  So, basically, you wrote a wall of text saying you stumbled into a quest hub only you don't want to call it a quest hub?

---

So basically you didn't read a thing i wrote and assumed something? just like most here do. smh hearts disappear eventually, and they are only there to help transition the less fortunate (those lke you stuck in the past who want quest hubs to be everywhere and continue to claim quest hubs exist where there are none).

 

It's okay tho, if those who claim quest hubs exist in gw2 actually played they would spend less time being monsters-under-the-bridge on these forums and more time killing monsters-under-the-bridge in game.

---

 

Nope had to go back and read it 3-4 times before posting. Couldn't find where you substantiated that quest hubs were in fact dead.

Why is it that in every thread I have read that you have posted in, you always seem to label someone who disagrees with you or as a hater, troll or a liar?

 As a GW2 fan: quests hubs are not dead they are just more hidden and not necessary.  They were added late in development because people complained that they had no idea what DEs were for what level and which ones to try for.

They added hearts to give you a general idea of where you were content wise and something to do if no DE were active.

Yep, this is a big issue. People think you have to pursue hearts, but you're supposed to be doing DE's. People still want a guided experience, to have hints of where to go and what to do. But GW2 has opened the door, and I'm sure these improvements will come in other games.

Originally posted by GeezerGamer

How is this an evolution in any way?
I like what DEs bring. Hearts on the other hand.....Terrible, They are awful.

You play your personal story and are practically heralded as the next savior of the world. Everyone likes you and respects you wherever you go, in that story, you become one of the most important people in the (your) game.

Oh and while you are at it, you need to go kick bushes for birds, pick more apples, prod some cattle, kill some wasps, plug holes with rocks, scoop chickens up and put them back in their pens, protect the livestock, Feed the cows, water the corn.....

AHHH! How mind numbingly uninspiring! If I wanted the complete real life GW2 experience, I can go get a job at a local farm. And they are fer more grindy that individual quests. And the only difference is you don't have to click accept or finish buttons. Really? all that hype to save a few button clicks without any change in game play whatsoever?

If Red5 or anyone for that matter is going to adopt this model, It needs work...serious work.

Next week on mmorpg.com  I'll be diving into how Firefall is going to approach things, and maybe it will address some of your issues, and probably open up new ones.

Originally posted by grummz

Originally posted by WhiteLantern

Originally posted by grummz

/snip

For example, Firefall has a handful of quests laid out in a chain, and given to the player as soon as they create a new character. This creates a false impression that questing is what you do in Firefall, when it isnt. Firefall is meant to be more sandboxy. But because of how we presented it to the player, expectations were set about it's Dominant Mode of Play that were incorrect. 

This is very off-topic and probably best served for a future topic, but may I ask if you think this could be setting yourselves up for failure? It doesn't seem very best-practice to teach someone how to play a game one way, and then expect them to continue playing it another way.

But I haven't seen much of FF, so maybe I don't totally understand what you are getting at.

Yes, you are right. I was trying to say that Firefall is making a mistake by leading you to think the game is one way (by missions) when it is not. We're correcting that in our PvE update patch in beta.

Yes, you are right. I was trying to say that Firefall is making a mistake by leading you to think the game is one way (by missions) when it is not. We're correcting that in our PvE update patch in beta.

Originally posted by WhiteLantern

Originally posted by grummz

/snip

For example, Firefall has a handful of quests laid out in a chain, and given to the player as soon as they create a new character. This creates a false impression that questing is what you do in Firefall, when it isnt. Firefall is meant to be more sandboxy. But because of how we presented it to the player, expectations were set about it's Dominant Mode of Play that were incorrect. 

This is very off-topic and probably best served for a future topic, but may I ask if you think this could be setting yourselves up for failure? It doesn't seem very best-practice to teach someone how to play a game one way, and then expect them to continue playing it another way.

But I haven't seen much of FF, so maybe I don't totally understand what you are getting at.

Originally posted by lizardbones

Everything has its place, even the quest hub with spokes design. I hate quest hubs while progressing through content, but when I'm not progressing through content and just accumulating resources, the quest hub/spoke design is pretty optimal.

 

I still think a "guided" experience is still important. Quest hubs served to guide you through the content one hub at a time. GW2 has frustrated some players by not offering this type of guidance. 

Originally posted by Caldrin

well i got bored within 2 weeks as the heart quests are some of the most boring pve i have come accross..

 

Maybe other games will incorporate some things from GW2 but i hope its not the boring quests..

 

but that at the end of the day is my opinion..

 

It's important to note that the DE's are what is supposed to be the focues of GW2 and not the hearts. But their prominence on the map certainly makes people feel that this is the primary thing they need to do. I call this the "Dominant Mode of Play" and how it is communicated to players.

For example, Firefall has a handful of quests laid out in a chain, and given to the player as soon as they create a new character. This creates a false impression that questing is what you do in Firefall, when it isnt. Firefall is meant to be more sandboxy. But because of how we presented it to the player, expectations were set about it's Dominant Mode of Play that were incorrect. 

Originally posted by Thillian

Saying WoW came up with quest hub just underlines the "quality" of the article.

Darkfall also suspended sales (probably too "niche" for the author). 

Anyway, hearts and DEs are actually quest hubs. Quests and quest hubs were not removed, just transformed into automated lore-less zerg fests. 

 

 

 

Hearts are DE's are not hubs. Hearts give you 2-3 tasks which all serve towards filling a bar and completion. DE's are single events. Quest hubs are like 3-8 NPC sitting around a POI that give you 8-12 quests. WoW was the first game to rely soley on quest hubs as the primary means of playing and progression (its the best XP), and really polished them and made them a consistent and dominant form of play.

Thanks for having me. Yes, D2 had the marks as well, but both games were in development for a long time, and WoW was being developed even before D2 shipped. 

DAOC had quests, but not nearly to the level that WoW did. During WoW, the feeling was that you always had to have a stuffed quest log that never ran out, so you always had "one more thing to do" 

We actually started with Open World PvP, but then decided to get the fundamentals with weapons and classes and PvE down first.

We have about 2 years of design and dev into open world PvP, so when we are ready to do it, it will go pretty fast. 

Well, I came from Blizzard, so "it's done when it's done" runs deeply in my veins. :)

But really...what we are working on now is the Open World. It takes a lot longer to do that than the PvP aspect. We don't have a release date, but bring the game up in phases of features and content. Each phase is accompanied by more testers. At some point, the store will be brought online, but the game will still be in beta but with even more users. At some point, we drop the beta tag altogether and let users invite whoever they want.

Planetside was one of my favorite games. I'm looking forward to PS2.

That said, Firefall offers a very different experence. We have huge open world PvE co-op play, fighitng off Chosen invasions, locating and refining Crystite resources into tech modules to upgrade your battleframes, and a story campaign.

There is room for both games. And Firefall will also feature open world PvP in the future.