Designing for the past

October 17, 2006 on 7:02 pm | In MMO (Upcoming), General Gaming, Innovation, Industry

People seem to be talking about Vanguard in the past tense, as if the game were already many years old. I haven't been an ardent follower of the game, as I do not feel I am their target player. However, having followed some of what Sigil Games is doing and saying, the game does feel as though it is looking to refine tradition.

And that got me thinking about designing for the past, or at least, designing an old idea during an age of change.

 

These games take years to produce, refine, tweak and launch. And then they generally have years more to continue producing, refining, tweaking and expanding. There is no clear dilineation between generations, beyond what is used in advertising. There is also, as yet, no metric by which people measure when a game should close. The entire genre itself (depending on where you start) is only slightly older than the more recognizable names in it. Within the span of time that covers MMORPGs, some games have been around "forever".

So we're in an age of both new and old, where old ideas are rehashed such that they aren't even considered old anymore.

Some designers take a look at the contemporary space, identify the successes and look to refine the problems. Yet in doing so, they are automatically designing for the past. Their vision will not be realized for at least a year (if it's a small-scope game) or three (if it's not). What has happened throughout that development process though? Who has come in from left field to radically alter the measures of success or introduce new "must have" features? How have player sensibilities changed, either due to the players themselves changing or by a massive influx of new ones with new ideas?

Development is no easy task. In some cases, the process is so complex it can effectively take people out of the genre, almost altogether, the old "we don't have time to play anymore" problem. In a way, they can enter a form of temporal stasis. Their focus on their project prevents the constant exploration of an ever-changing space.

To offset this, they rely on their fans and early testers. Unfortunately, both groups are generally fairly narrow in their own perspectives, depending on the sort of game being made. These groups come from the genre as it is. They love what is there and are seeking merely a slightly tweaked version of it. Hopefully that group is big enough to get the market share one needs. Often times it is not though, something discovered only much later, after a number of binding decisions have already been made.

Trendspotting is an art and a science. It requires constant diligence, either by the designer or by the right group of people inputing. It's basic research at a time when it seems some companies still think these games are labors of love, garage-brewed on a shoe-string budget until a venture capitalist or publisher can be convinced otherwise.

We are well beyond the point where just being an MMORPG is an automatic ticket to some success though. Gamers make their choices these days well before they pay for the game. It has long been my contention that open betas are folly, for they allow everyone, from gamers to reporters, to make their assessment of a game before they've paid a dime into it. And as more games continue to come, more are preordained successes or failures earlier in the proto-stages of their lives.

The keys to success continue to change.

• It's not just IP, but how well one understands both it and what makes the fans like it.
• It's not just about launching content complete, but whether that content is any good throughout the game.
• It's not just about players being able to customized their character or spaces (or WoW and GW would have long ago tanked), but whether that personalization is part of a broader game mechanic that is compelling to many.
• And, it's not about how many players you can attract, but whether you attract a sufficient quantity of the right ones for your game.

There is no bullet-point list of answers, just an ever-changing list of questions. They need to continually be asked lest one be left behind. This is more than just knowing your audience. It's knowing who they will be at launch and beyond.