Personally, I like to play it small and modest for my RP. Starting with an insignificant character that can evolve later, is way more engrossing to me. Funnier. Less deux ex machina. More subtle.
As for these MMO stories, I don't care much if we are pictured as a world hero or a mundane character as long as the story is good, and of quality (don't get me started on the awful stories in SWTOR, imperial spy excepted..). Of course i'm a bit annoyed currently at the fact that we have been the invincible warrior of light for a long time, we eat primals for breakfast as well as garleans and ancient threats, and it's getting a bit... deja vu, if you know what i mean. It lost its appeal long ago.
Don't get me wrong, i'm quite impressed with the story they managed to pull on a MMO format since 2.5 and 3.0. I just wish we get more setbacks and drama. Doubt. Harsh times.
Then again I don't care much overall what the story tells us compared to the world we RP and evolve in. When I do my MSQ, I play in my little bubble and the people in the party are just mundane adventurers or whatever. I don't even try to explain it to myself that much...
The story is almost a separate game to me. Like I'm jumping in the shoes of the warrior of light and the scions, living the world story, and the jumping back in the little shoes of my insignificant character that have to live with all those events happening in the background when I RP.
If I may derail a bit on that part, yes, most developers don't play their games (but some do at their leisure). That's not a necessary condition, but it's always good that they know a bit what they are working on.
The ones playing extensively are part of the QA department, as well as beta testers. And they do it more than most of us.Â
Then again, on the various points you raise, I can try to bring some answers as I work in the industry myself.
- On the inconsistency between the story and the game, it is something that I usually find very sad yet true: the game takes precedence. The main issue when developing games is that nothing is set in stone and things are always in motion. The end product barely has anything left from early drafts. When you have already laid down most of the lore and story, and when the QA feedbacks tell that the game is not good, not fun, or that some things have to change, then they have to. And then all the other department have to take that into account and modify what they did as much as they can... All of this during heavy time constraints. Most of the time, the more advanced is the development, the more inconsistencies tend to appear. Of course yes, I think that the stories offered by themepark MMOs often don't quit fit the kind of game they serve, as you say. I don't have an answer to that, maybe then that's the themepark model that is flawed... But if you remove those badly fitting stories, what is left to keep the grind... I mean, leveling, compelling, at least a little?
- "Gameplay issues" is subjective. Most players tend to state that X or Y is obviously OP or UP, or broken and should be fixed, based on their own experience. The mistake they do is always to assume that because they came to that conclusion, everyone else did. They often answer to that that you just have to read "forums". Which means, a vocal minority most of the time. I have found out most of the time that when something is not fixed or corrected the way some people expect it, it's often because they are actually the minority, and that the devs don't necessarily cater to their whims. Players, simply put, often lack the bigger picture. Of course, you also have the gamebreaking bugs that are not totally blocking you to play the game, but are not fixed for years, and that, even if companies have to prioritize heavily what is to fix first, can be quite telling of the quality of the service, yes...
- For features that nobody likes, it's always a gamble. You think that your feature or game is fun or compelling, or should work fine, and your QA has been enthusiastic about it. And yet, it fails to meet the expectations. That can happen. Creating "fun", is maybe the most volatile and subjective task ever invented. What is "fun"? Will all those different players find something fun too? Then of course, there is also the features that gets added because marketing asked them to be, no matter what...
As for these MMO stories, I don't care much if we are pictured as a world hero or a mundane character as long as the story is good, and of quality (don't get me started on the awful stories in SWTOR, imperial spy excepted..). Of course i'm a bit annoyed currently at the fact that we have been the invincible warrior of light for a long time, we eat primals for breakfast as well as garleans and ancient threats, and it's getting a bit... deja vu, if you know what i mean. It lost its appeal long ago.
Don't get me wrong, i'm quite impressed with the story they managed to pull on a MMO format since 2.5 and 3.0. I just wish we get more setbacks and drama. Doubt. Harsh times.
Then again I don't care much overall what the story tells us compared to the world we RP and evolve in. When I do my MSQ, I play in my little bubble and the people in the party are just mundane adventurers or whatever. I don't even try to explain it to myself that much...
The story is almost a separate game to me. Like I'm jumping in the shoes of the warrior of light and the scions, living the world story, and the jumping back in the little shoes of my insignificant character that have to live with all those events happening in the background when I RP.
(12-13-2015, 02:56 PM)Calliope Cloverbloom Wrote: But, then, I'm also a firm believer that game developers don't play their games. It's the only reasonable explanation, to me, for why the stories in the games often don't fit the type of game that the game is, why it's considered acceptable for QOL features to be missing, why there are sometimes gameplay issues that are baffling in their obviousness yet persist indefinitely, and why there are sometimes "new features" which get added to a game that kinnnnda nobody playing the game actually really likes or had been asking for...
If I may derail a bit on that part, yes, most developers don't play their games (but some do at their leisure). That's not a necessary condition, but it's always good that they know a bit what they are working on.
The ones playing extensively are part of the QA department, as well as beta testers. And they do it more than most of us.Â
Then again, on the various points you raise, I can try to bring some answers as I work in the industry myself.
- On the inconsistency between the story and the game, it is something that I usually find very sad yet true: the game takes precedence. The main issue when developing games is that nothing is set in stone and things are always in motion. The end product barely has anything left from early drafts. When you have already laid down most of the lore and story, and when the QA feedbacks tell that the game is not good, not fun, or that some things have to change, then they have to. And then all the other department have to take that into account and modify what they did as much as they can... All of this during heavy time constraints. Most of the time, the more advanced is the development, the more inconsistencies tend to appear. Of course yes, I think that the stories offered by themepark MMOs often don't quit fit the kind of game they serve, as you say. I don't have an answer to that, maybe then that's the themepark model that is flawed... But if you remove those badly fitting stories, what is left to keep the grind... I mean, leveling, compelling, at least a little?
- "Gameplay issues" is subjective. Most players tend to state that X or Y is obviously OP or UP, or broken and should be fixed, based on their own experience. The mistake they do is always to assume that because they came to that conclusion, everyone else did. They often answer to that that you just have to read "forums". Which means, a vocal minority most of the time. I have found out most of the time that when something is not fixed or corrected the way some people expect it, it's often because they are actually the minority, and that the devs don't necessarily cater to their whims. Players, simply put, often lack the bigger picture. Of course, you also have the gamebreaking bugs that are not totally blocking you to play the game, but are not fixed for years, and that, even if companies have to prioritize heavily what is to fix first, can be quite telling of the quality of the service, yes...
- For features that nobody likes, it's always a gamble. You think that your feature or game is fun or compelling, or should work fine, and your QA has been enthusiastic about it. And yet, it fails to meet the expectations. That can happen. Creating "fun", is maybe the most volatile and subjective task ever invented. What is "fun"? Will all those different players find something fun too? Then of course, there is also the features that gets added because marketing asked them to be, no matter what...
Balmung:Â Suen Shyu
