You Can Please Some of the People All of the Time

As MMO designers, the team at Paragon Studios has come to a brutal realization. No matter what we put into the game, someone will find fault with it and complain.

I think this stems from the fact that MMOs have a mass appeal. They attempt (and succeed) in getting all walks of gamers to play them, they are literally the buffet table of games. You can take what you want and leave out the stuff you don’t. You get to custom-craft the perfect game experience for you. I know a lot of people who get to max-level in WoW and stop playing, simply because “Raiding” holds no appeal to them, and that’s fine. An MMO that doesn’t offer the “staples” that you can get from other games is going to face an uphill battle in getting people to stick with it.

When we design stuff for City of Heroes we want to make sure that what we are putting into the game is not only fun to play, but also follows the theme established when CoH was fist conceived: it was an MMO about comic-book superheroes. One of the biggest things we had to tackle was “gear”. How do we add improvable gear to a game based on a genre where looting the bodies of your defeated foes was a big no-no? You never saw Batman take down Scarecrow and loot his fear gas to add to his utility belt, or see the Flash use Captain Cold’s freeze-ray gun. The star of the show is YOU and YOUR POWERS, not the equipment and not whatever piece of tech Dr. Doom dropped when you finally defeated him. We eventually settled on “Enhancements” that were flavored to your Origin. Eventually we added an Invention System that added more hardcore “drops” to the game, but they were still based on the Enhancement scheme of taking what you already had and making it better. For City of Heroes, this was part of the charm and immersion of the game.

Now not everyone loved the Invention system when we added it. Some felt that adding loot to City of Heroes was the “worst idea ever”, which is why when we introduced it we didn’t go and make the rest of the game harder since you now had access to things that made you more powerful. (We have added things since then that take into account more-powerful characters, but the majority of the content is at the same difficulty as Pre-Inventions.) We made this decision because we knew we had players who were there because CoH had no traditional loot system. It was something from other games that they absolutely hated.

We’ve tried to do this will all the new “systems” we’ve added in the past, making them optional, at least at their inception. If they prove popular and the lion’s share of players are “into it”, then we can start making them more and more mandatory parts of the game.

There are players who only care about game mechanics, the rules of the game itself, with no care for flavor or theme. There are those players who want themed mechanics, and would rather have something “feel” appropriate to the game than simply be a mechanic that the game just does.

These two groups of players constantly find themselves at odds with one another, and sometimes at odds with the developers. If a designer puts something into the game that is rules intensive, but has no theme or flavor, the latter group will have a hard time rationalizing its place in the game. If a designer puts something into the game that is themey, and works the way something should work given the game-world, history, canon, and background, then he’ll likely irritate the former group because some part of making it “fit” just doesn’t jibe with what they want that specific thing to do; theme be damned.

How do we as designers solve this? Well, we take our best shots, and iterate where needed. We will usually start something as “themed” and then pull back farther and farther during testing where we are noting that staying flavorful is not a popular decision, or is simply getting in the way of game balance. I liken it back to the buffet table I refer to at the beginning. We see how popular an item is and (if it’s cost effective) make sure that there is more of the popular items than the less popular ones. Of course, you keep around the less popular ones for those who are coming specifically for those items.

“You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time” – John Lydgate

16 Responses to “You Can Please Some of the People All of the Time”

  1. A.L. says:

    I have always disagreed with the middle part of that statement. Because sometimes there is just no pleasing people, and ‘All of the People’ will always disagree on something.

    That being said, good post. This is one of the lessons of design that I’ve seen a lot of new people to big games (by big games I mean like 12+ player RPGs, not 100k player MMOs, though I imagine it holds true) make. They get bogged down in trying to please everyone, which is just an impossible task, and in the process of trying to make something able to please everyone it gets completely destroyed.

    Mass appeal with a commercial venture seems like the right answer. If the majority of players like it, even if they have some issues, then it is probably a good thing.

  2. C_Amazing says:

    Quite interesting as always! Sorry I haven’t been responding RL AND COX makes for a busy time ;) the lesson I took from this I feel I can apply to smaller things in life and the AE related issues. I wonder what the hardest compromise you have to have made was? Good stuff sir do continue!

    Regards,
    -C.A.

  3. Jonathan G / infallible says:

    Good post, Posi. The lack of traditional loot is always the first thing I champion when I talk about CoH. It’s super frustrating killing 1000 dudes and still not getting that Elbow Pad of The Sea that you need. The innovation and outside-the-box thinking is the best meta part of CoH, so keep it up.

  4. Samuraiko says:

    You never saw Batman take down Scarecrow and loot his fear gas to add to his utility belt, or see the Flash use Captain Cold’s freeze-ray gun. The star of the show is YOU and YOUR POWERS, not the equipment and not whatever piece of tech Dr. Doom dropped when you finally defeated him.

    Although “I got a rock!” is great fun, just once it’d be nice if we got hold of something like Dr. Aeon’s orbital death ray, if only to carve a great big smiley face on the beach in Grandville just to REALLY irritate Lord Recluse.

    (We have added things since then that take into account more-powerful characters, but the majority of the content is at the same difficulty as Pre-Inventions.)

    Like what, if I might ask? I came into the game at the very tail end of Issue 9, when Inventions were launched.

    And overall, I think you guys must have some of the most thankless jobs. For every ‘fanboi’ you seem to have (*raises hand*), you seem to have at least 10 people baying for your heads and burning you in effigy on their lawns for ruining ‘their’ game. God knows it must be hard putting all that effort into something that’s so open for interpretation as to how ‘appropriate’ or ‘balanced’ or whatnot it is.

    Still, though, don’t let the b******s grind you down. :)

  5. Golden Girl says:

    I think an important part of pleasing as many players as posible with any new additions/changes is to always explain the thinking behind them, even if it’s just a basic “we’ve done this because it will tie in with a coming feature that we can’t talk about just yet” – it’s much eaiser for players to give constructive feedback if they have a handle on why the additions/changes were made.
    For example, the recent change to the Hamidon encounter in the Lady Gray Task Force got a lot of negative feedback, but because Castle gave a brief explaination of the reasons for the changes, most of the feedback avoided the sort of nerdrage that happens with unexplained changes.

    New systems being optional is very important, so that no one feels they’re being forced into a particular play-style or routine – although I think exceptions should be made for team-related content, as the defining feature of an MMO is players coming together to work towards a common goal, and to make these goals challenging for teams, they really have to be pretty much un-soloable – and I think even most solo players accept that in an MMO there’ll be some things that will require them to team from time to time.

  6. Obsidius says:

    “Like what, if I might ask? I came into the game at the very tail end of Issue 9, when Inventions were launched.”

    I think he’s talking about things like the improved difficulty sliders and such – things that the player can do to have the game challenge him/ her more while playing tricked-out characters. Of course, we’re also starting to see outside-the-box boss mechanics, like what we have with Lord Recluse, Reichsman, and Protean, to name a few – encounters that relay more on thinking and strategy than tricked-out builds.

    Back somewhat on topic, there will invariably be dichotomies of players within an MMO – Min-maxers vs. Casuals, Farmers vs. Story Followers, PvPers vs. RPers, etc. I agree that trying to please all these dichotomies all of the time is a tricky task. Admittedly, not every Issue update appeals to me, but I know that others like them.

    But since it seems like you’re thinking about the Incarnate System… :D

  7. Ura Hero says:

    “No matter what you do, someone will complain.” – Tech support maxim that proves itself every week that I am on the job.

    This is so true that it hurts. Like was said above, having rednames post on the changes seems to help considerably. I do admire that the marketing department had the sense to let the designers loose on the forums to actually talk to the fanbase.

    Where I work we have a saying, “It doesn’t matter if we like or don’t like something. What matter’s is if the folks who buy our products like or don’t like it.”

    This saying is even more true for MMO’s. I can only imagine the number of meetings where great ideas get shot down for exploit-ability, not following canon, technical issues, or any number or other reasons. What does make into the game is always fun (for me at least) and seems to fit pretty well into the whole game picture.

    I think CoH has done a great job at keeping the customers (fanbase) in the loop and I wish more folks would follow in these same footsteps.

  8. Liquid says:

    I straddle the middle of the two groups you’ve described. I value good game mechanics and I value good themes for those mechanics. I think I generally understand the perspective of both sides. Take loot for example. I’ve been a powergamer for the majority of my life. I’ve always pored over manuals, forums, in-game stat listings, and whatever source I could get my hands on to determine the most effective build for my characters. Meanwhile, I have a strong feeling that superheroes do not take items off of fallen foes for personal use except in extreme situations (which would be represented in-game by temp powers that expire when the arc is completed, like the Wheel of Destruction). So, when the Invention system was announced, I was both excited and concerned. The superhero-lover in me opposed it on principle but the powergamer in me enjoyed it in practice. Fortunately, the system is subtle enough–you don’t have to make your character physically loot bodies and the “equipable” loot is usually not of a physical nature (unlike a certain other superhero MMO). Also, if the team is good enough, even those extra-difficult tasks are possible without the best loot.

    That being said, while I agree with your general statement here about pleasing some of the people all time, and the conflict between people who care about theme over mechanics (lets call them “theme-focused”) and those who care about mechanics over theme (let’s call them “game-focused”), I was surprised at the two examples you use.

    While Invention enhancements are generally themed in a way that doesn’t conflict with the idea that superheroes don’t loot the bodies of fallen villains to increase their power, salvage is rarely themed in that way (Demonic Threat Report? That’s information s hero would gather after fighting demons, so it fits. Improvised Cybernetic? Are we really pulling implants out of our foes’ bodies? Living Tattoo? We’re *cutting the skin* off of our foes?), and to cement the idea that we are looting our fallen foes, we buy and sell these items at a consignment house. This is not only counter-productive to the intended superheroization of loot, but it also harms the theme of the in-game currency: Influence. Once Wentworth’s was made a literal consignment house, the argument that Influence wasn’t money (an argument I fully supported prior to I9) became extremely weak. This wasn’t unavoidable. Salvage could have been more “Demonic Threat Report” and less “Improvised Cybernetic”, and Wentworth’s could have been a research lab where evidence was donated (increasing one’s influence), and could be used by those who needed it most (exerting their influence).

    You linked to Issue 14: Mission Architect when describing a situation where you feel making the mechanic “fit” thematically is upsetting the game-focused. The impression I get is that you are saying that the theme of the Mission Architect (Architect Entertainment, a virtual reality “amusement park” of sorts created and run by Supervillains) is somehow standing in the way of what the game-focused want. I’m having trouble following you on this, as my observations since the release of Mission Architect are that the theme-focused people feel that the theme that was chosen is actually counter productive to the entire point of having an in-game theme. Just as Batman doesn’t add Scarecrow’s fear gas to his utility belt for regular use, superheroes don’t stand around and create and play video games instead of fighting crime, especially not through a system that was created by a mad scientist, maintained by an evil corporation, and digitizes you. The theme could have been a Danger Room style system intended for honing skills during downtime, or it could have been entirely UI based, so that running player content could, while being obviously separated from developer content through the UI, feel like your character was actively fighting or perpetrating crime instead of creating and playing video games. One might argue that the theme of the latter is “no theme”, but I think the theme is “crime-fighting/perpetrating”. Sometimes a mechanic doesn’t need its own special theme–it can use an existing theme in the game, and be accessed via the user interface.

    I was surprised reading this post, because the design of AE really seems to favor the game-focused over the theme-focused, yet I’m inferring that you think it’s the opposite. The game-focused like the removal of travel time between missions and having everything take place inside the same building, the theme-focused generally do not (though I think most appreciate not having to go from Peregrine to Atlas Park and back, traveling within the zone has rarely been a complaint I’ve seen). The game-focused don’t mind their characters being digitized by a device invented by Dr. Aeon and run by Crey industries, the theme-focused do. The game-focused don’t care one bit about the idea that their characters are playing/creating video games instead of fighting/perpetrating crime, the theme-focused do. I’m not what features the game-focused have been denied as a result of the Architect Entertainment theme, but I do see what the theme-focused don’t like about it.

    I don’t intend this comment to be harsh or overly critical. I love City of Heroes more than I’ve ever loved any other game. I still think you’re doing a fantastic job, and I’m excited about the future. However, I think that CoH has made two errors when it comes to fitting game mechanics into the superhero genre, and Wentworth’s and Architect Entertainment are those errors. I don’t believe those errors have harmed the game in terms of subscription numbers, but I do think that they have harmed adoption of the mechanics by the theme-focused. Consequently, I felt that the AE and to a lesser extent loot were not the best examples to use here, though I do agree with the message behind your post.

  9. Liquid says:

    Wish I could edit that comment for mistakes.

    The parenthetical of first sentence in the third paragraph should begin, “Demonic Threat Report? That’s information a hero”.

    The last sentence of the second to last paragraph should begin: “I’m not sure what”.

    Sorry about that.

    I’m really enjoying this blog, by the way. Please do keep it up!

  10. Texas Justice says:

    I think my forum signature says it fairly well. It’s a paraphrased version of what I was told a very wise man says at times around the office.

    “If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren’t sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren’t random enough.”

    That man is indeed a wise man.

  11. TonyV says:

    Always remember that people are always way more motivated to post negative comments than positive ones. If, say, 5% of the players love a change and 5% hate it, you’re going to have 5% of the player base posting “This sucks, I’m quitting!” comments. You’re going to have maybe 1% posting, “This is great!” comments. Maybe 2% will start bickering with the 5%.

    The important thing to remember, though, is that 90% of the people will truck right along and not care one way or another. Funny thing, though, the other 10% will do their damnedest to convince you that they speak for that 90%.

    I really think you guys have a good handle on the game. I don’t agree with everything you do, but I do agree with most of it. Obviously, if I were to write my own game, I’d do some things differently, but I have no intention of writing my own game. I hear it’s quite hard. ;)

  12. WHTJunior says:

    : “…superheroes don’t stand around and create and play video games instead of fighting crime, especially not through a system that was created by a mad scientist, maintained by an evil corporation, and digitizes you. The theme could have been a Danger Room style system intended for honing skills during downtime, or it could have been entirely UI based, so that running player content could, while being obviously separated from developer content through the UI, feel like your character was actively fighting or perpetrating crime instead of creating and playing video games…”

    While I agree with many of your points, I feel that the beauty of CoH is that it doesn’t take much imagination to use this system thematically. The only thing holding you back at this point is the “Why?” I don’t think that the amusement park and danger room are mutually exclusive. Namely, if the Arcitect Entertainment system is built, lore-wise, as a virtual reality simulation, your hero or villain only has to make the decision of whether to vegetate and experience content, or actively use this new technology to hone their skills. I beleive that it can serve both purposes, given the mindset of the player. I feel like you do, in that I am somewhere in the middle. I don’t RP, and I don’t min/max. I just play the game because I enjoy it.

  13. Liquid says:

    :

    The comment was not specifically about me, but about those two groups. Sure, individuals can make the decision you make, but that puts them outside of the “theme-focused” group, as that is the definition of theme-focused– they are interested in the in-game theme more than mechanics. What they can (pardon the crudity of the term) fan-wank the theme into supporting is irrelevant to what I was trying to say.

    This was not a complaint about the AE (though criticism did exist within), it was a comment on the theme of the post and the examples used.

    My comment was probably too long, confusing the point with the details. I suppose I should have just asked Positron, “Why do you feel the theme of the AE is impeding the game-focused? My experience is that it is impeding the theme-focused, as the VR entertainment center run by supervillains doesn’t seem an appropriate use of a superhero’s time. I’m not sure what game functionality the theme is preventing.”

  14. WHTJunior says:

    Gotcha. I don’t think it was as much your fault as the fact that I started reading it as if you were the one who didn’t think it fit the theme. I can see how hand-waving your characters reasons is not the same as the character participating in a villain-sponsored activity. In some cases, it may be a means to an end, but for those hardcore Hero types, I guess they just can’t justify it.

    I always saw the AE system as a treasure trove for the game-focused, since they found ways to exploit the system for easy 50s within a day. I even had two people at work tell me which arcs to run for the fastest levelling. One was back during the Fire Imps, and the other was due to the MM exploit. I never did use them, though, because it just feels wrong. Maybe Ouroboros would be a better example of flavor over mechanics?

  15. Liquid says:

    “I always saw the AE system as a treasure trove for the game-focused, since they found ways to exploit the system for easy 50s within a day.”

    This touches on some thoughts I had about what Positron meant when he said the theme of the AE was conflicting with what the game-focused wanted. When I made my comment, I assumed that both groups, the game-focused and the theme-focused, were reasonable. I assumed that the game-focused didn’t include people who wanted easy 50s within a day, and that the theme-focused didn’t expect unrealistic things like their actions changing the game-world permanently for all within the game.

    So, maybe I’m wrong on those assumptions, and Positron is implying that he’s denying the game-focused the ability to get insta-50s. Even then, I’m not sure why it would be the *theme* that is denying that ability.

    I’m not sure Ouroboros is a good example of theme over mechanics either, as I’m not sure what the theme is impeding. The only thing I can think of is that maybe the game-focused would rather they could get the missions directly from the contacts instead of having to go to Ouroboros for all Flashback missions, but that seems unlikely, as the game focused probably appreciate having as much as possible in a central location (like the AE).

    I actually think Ouroboros is a great example of theme and mechanics coexisting perfectly, with neither interfering with the other to any significant extent.

    One possible example of theme impeding mechanics would be keeping the markets separate. A market merge has often been argued against from that perspective. However, given the fact that the Black Market is run out of the back of a Wentworth’s truck, I find that argument hard to swallow. It looks to me like the theme was specifically designed to allow an eventual market merge if that decision was made.

    I think the best example for theme impeding the game-focused is Patron Powers. You used to be unable to change Patron Pools, as the theme dictated that you swore allegiance to a specific Patron. That was changed for mechanical (balance and/or QoL) reasons. It also now may be impeding mechanics with side-switching; the developers are likely in the process of weighing theme vs mechanics on the question of whether a villain turned-hero should be able to keep their Patron Powers.

  16. Arcana says:

    Ah, my favorite game design topic.

    First of all:

    “There are players who only care about game mechanics, the rules of the game itself, with no care for flavor or theme. There are those players who want themed mechanics, and would rather have something “feel” appropriate to the game than simply be a mechanic that the game just does.

    These two groups of players constantly find themselves at odds with one another, and sometimes at odds with the developers.”

    Actually, the opposite side to people who only care about mechanics are those who only care about their specific conceptualizations of the game, irrespective of either the need to encompass other conceptualizations or themes, or the need to actually make a game that has structure and coherency.

    Developers should always side with the players in the middle, that want “themed mechanics” or rather: MMO devs should always make themed mechanics and attempt to capture everyone in the middle and as many people to either side as possible. Mechanics without theme is a boring game: theme without mechanics is not a game at all.

    Theme and mechanics are not opposites: the people who think they are don’t understand either. Mechanics are the *language* of game design, at least the interactive components of it. Mechanics and Theme or Concept are related in the same way paint and brush-stroke are for a painter.

    I believe that you have to have a firm idea of what you’re trying to do in your game, the goal should be something very well conceptualized. But then that concept has to be realized with as much skillful implementation of mechanics as possible. Its when something is light on either that things go awry. If you aren’t sure what you’re supposed to do, the mechanics have no target to aim at. If you aren’t very rigorous with your mechanical implementation, it doesn’t matter what you aim at because you’ll land somewhere random.

    I believe a well designed game always knows where its going, and always knows how it intends to get there. And in such a game, there is no conflict between theme and mechanics. There will still be no pleasing some players, but their displeasure will either be with the game delivering a theme they don’t agree with, or implementing mechanics they don’t agree fit the theme. No one should ever think that mechanics and theme are ever in opposition. When mechanics and theme are specifically serving the same goal as they should be, they never are.

Leave a Reply