What do I mean by contradictory? Well, here are just a few examples:

I want large, open, living, breathing worlds that lets me set my own goals.

But I guess I don’t. I like having some sort of a goal to work towards, as much as I’d really like to say that the journey is what I find fun. And, really, I think that is a very truthful statement, but without some sort of a goal, I seem to be unwilling to go out and have fun for the sake of having fun. Yet, if I’m allowed to choose my own goals, I have a very difficult time doing so. That’s why I never enjoyed Star Wars Galaxies much, because I could never figure out what I wanted to do.

I want players to be the ones that I’m working with and against to change the world, and share a dynamic setting that is far from dull and static.

But I guess not. EVE Online is a fantastic game that I highly recommend, and as much as I love the basic idea of the game, it has real issues for me. One of the biggest is the ‘atmosphere’ of the game. It is set in cold, harsh, uncompromising, and uncaring space: exactly like the game itself. Even when I am teamed up with with other players, there is always the fear of betrayal, and there is always the constant undefined conflicts. While it is very interesting, I know deep down I prefer a more cooperative environment.

Playing off both of those combined, I would like to see PvP that is more realistic and open, instead of artificial scenarios.

But I know that isn’t true. On some intellectual level, yes, I love the idea of open PvP. Yet, similar to the reasons above, I prefer a more cooperative environment. More importantly, it is extremely rare for any open world PvP fight to be anything remotely fair. I prefer my fights to be fair and fun, and not one-sided.

I want to have a high level of interactivity and dependency on other players.

But I guess not to the extent I use to think, at the very least. I like soloing often enough, simply because I like to play much more casually these days. I love grouping all the same, but I actually have never cared for raids. Yet, if I’m mostly concerned with playing in small (although frequently changing) groups of people, I almost question why I play MMOs to begin with. Ultimately, I guess what I mostly want is to have some sort of meta-game-esque thing that I’m working on with other players. For example, building a city in Star Wars Galaxies was pretty cool.

I would like to see MMOs incorporate more story into them.

Which… yeah, that one is pretty much true. Yet, it seems like most MMOs that try to do that do it very wrong. I don’t want to be the lone hero – because I know that a few thousand other people also just rescued the princess and defeated the big-bad-dude. Ultimately, I want a story that makes me feel like I am among the heroes, and the other heroes are the players – and I don’t want to feel like every accomplishment I make in the game is what everyone else has done as well, as near-impossible a it is to avoid that. Basically, I don’t want to be the lone hero, but I don’t want to be just some other random person.

Ultimately…

I want a game that is a themepark, so it can give me some sort of a goal, but is also an open world, and gives me the freedom to go out and do what I want. It should have open and more realistic PvP, but PvP that isn’t one-sided and unfair. I want to be heavily tied into playing with other people and have what they do affect me in a way that makes me feel like I am playing a game with thousands of people instead of a single-player game – but I should be able to do things on my own as much as I want. I would like to see an MMO with a real story, but one that doesn’t revolve around just me. It should make me feel like I am participating in it with many people, and in a way that still makes me feel like I am impacting things.

So, basically, I want something similar to this:

All styles of games, be they sandbox, themepark, open pvp, battlegrounds, or whatever, they all have problems. I idealize open, sandbox worlds, but I’ve never played one that I actually liked. Again, I love EVE on an intellectual level, but I know it isn’t for me. I think themepark worlds are pretty dull and far from an ideal, but I’ve spent more time playing them than sandboxes, and I’ve enjoyed some of them quite a bit. However, I always get bored with them rather quickly.

I imagine I’m not all that alone in my desire for this game of great contradiction, but I also don’t think that it is really feasible to create something like it. The only contradictory part that I think could really be fixed is the story one, and maybe the player interaction one. Neither would be easy to do.

When it comes down to it, many Free-to-Play games are not well designed for the consumer. You can probably see that in games like Allods, which despite apparently being a very solid MMO, has been taking a lot of flack because of their microtransactions. I think this isn’t because people aren’t unwilling to pay, but rather because people aren’t willing to pay for certain things.

Don’t charge for small things that people don’t value beyond the fact that they make the game more convenient, playable, or are considered required by the player-base.

Ultimately, a lot of Free-to-Play games charge for the wrong things. That is to say, they charge for things that the player-base considers to be ‘required’ to play the game, such as the ability to get rid of massive stat-loss from death or extra bag space in Allods (sorry to keep picking on you guys, but you’re timely!).

Bags usually aren't awesome enough to charge for.

Honestly, I don’t think a bag is worth ten cents. It is just a bag. Heck, I have a hard time spending money on a bag in real life, much less a virtual one. That isn’t something that people value. It also isn’t something that adds to the game experience. Rather, it is something that they feel they need to buy to keep playing. It is a requirement to buy, not a fun thing that enhances their experience.

While many games that have items like these in their cash shops, they do tend to provide ways to get these items using in-game means. The in-game means are often gruelingly difficult to actually do. I understand why that is the case, of course. If it is just as easy to grab the item in-game as it would be to pay for it, then certainly no one would pay for it. But this highlights the other flaw:

The purpose behind games are for them to be fun and enjoyable. Your core game, without any add-ons, needs to be that. If your game is free-to-play, I shouldn’t have to engage in microtrasactions to enjoy it.

That might seem extremely unfair to the developer – and it is! A lot of work goes into creating a very polished, good, and fun game. However, I’m only going to drop money down on a game that I actually like and find enjoyable. If I have to keep shelling out real cash for upgrades that keep my character viable, I am probably not going to have fun with the core game, so I am less likely to keep playing.

I do think that there are ways to implement microtransactions correctly. While I haven’t spent overly long playing Dungeons and Dragons Online, and while there are flaws, I think part of their cash shop is a good example of Doing It Right. While they still have items that you can buy which buff your character somehow, generally speaking, their core game experience is playable and fairly fun.

While players shouldn’t have to pay to enjoy your game, they should pay for things that extend and broaden their enjoyment of the game.

Dungeons and Dragons Online provides a decent core experience. You have a character that can be all but two of the available classes and races. The things you cant be aren’t really overpowered. You can play through a fairly decent amount of quests and adventures that are supplied to you, free of charge, when you first install the game. You can, if you want, live off of that content and nothing else – although you will probably repeat dungeons often enough for lack of content, but they are, in theory, designed to be fun enough that you can repeat them. That’s fine, and I can live with that.

Wait, why would I want to pay to be like this guy?

However, if I’m a little bored of the content, I can buy a new module. A new module features new quest lines, new things to fight, new traps to work past, and new puzzles to solve. It is, effectively, a mini-expansion at a mini-price. I already pay for expansions to subscription-based MMOs, and I have a hard time saying that extra content isn’t worth money. It is obvious to me that someone took the time to craft dungeons and write plots, and it gives me a few more hours of fun times in the game. A “+5 Longsword of Ass Kicking” on the other hand may sound cool, but it doesn’t give me anything new to experience after I’ve worn out the content of the game. Why would I waste money on that?

Players need to be able to decide when they want to spend their cash on their own terms. You shouldn’t be deciding that for them. Let the players have as much control as possible.

You know it sounds like an epic adventure.

When I reach level 20 I don’t want to feel required to buy the “Bag of Carrying More Worthless Junk”, because more things drop from mobs at that level, and I’m expected to carry around a boat-load more stuff than I did a few levels before. However, I’m totally cool with purchasing the “Adventure Through the Grue Infested Caves of Darkness” adventure pack because I like the sound of it and I’d rather like to play through it. I don’t have to, but it sounds, well, fun. That’s the point of gaming after all, right? The freedom to decide when to drop my cash is important to me. Sometimes I can afford it, and other times I can’t. I also like the ability to choose what content I want to buy, and what content I don’t want to buy. I can tailor the game to my needs – which is actually really unique to Free-to-Play models.

The things you sell should encourage you to keep providing new content to your players.

It takes no time at all to create that “+5 Longsword of Ass Kicking” but it does take a while to create a new set of dungeons and quests. When you’re selling the latter, you’ll be encouraged to invest the time and effort to actually create new content for the community. When you’re doing the former, you have much less motivation to do so. Heck, I’ve played a ton of MMOs with subscription fees – which partly exist to fund live teams to keep producing new content – only to get nothing out of them until a $30 or $40 expansion comes around.

While I’m certain this isn’t a complete list, these are certainly key things that I would like to see future Free-to-Play MMOs work to implement. Also, this isn’t to suggest that Allods is a bad game, or that DDO is some sort of gaming Messiah (it isn’t). Rather, the former is just one of many games that I don’t think handle microtransactions correctly, while the latter is an example of a game that partly does it right – and partly does the same stuff that every other game seems to.

Serving up new adventure packs isn’t necessarily the end-all-be-all, but is rather one idea that I think works pretty well. What are some other ideas? Well, I’ll worry about coming up with them if someone pays me to do so. But I like being a community manager, so you’ll have to figure that out yourselves!

Sometimes math can really sum up a situation well.

.Today brings both interesting news and bad news out of Electric Arts. It was announced that EA has sank $300 million into purchasing Playfish, a casual game studio that’s made a splash on Facebook. While casual web games are certainly no new thing for EA, there is no doubt in my mind that they’ll be pulling in some good revenue with this purchase. Which makes the other news announced about them today all the more surprising:

Even though they just spent $300 million on that purchase, EA has also laid off a significant portion of their employees, and sources are saying that includes 40% of Mythic. According to EA, the total number of people being laid off totaled to somewhere around 1500 – no small amount – and was done because it was necessary to transform their company. Gamasutra has a ton of information in those links on this if you are looking to find out more exact details.

This was surprising for me to hear, and definitely pretty depressing. To all of you who lost your jobs, I wish you the best of luck. To EA… Probably not the best idea to announce a major studio purchase when you’re laying off a bunch of people, related or not.

According to 3D Realms, the $12 million that Take-Two is suing the company for is baseless. They claim that while Take-Two may have paid that much to get the rights to publish the game, 3D realms never saw any funding from them until July of 2008, which totaled a much smaller $2.5 million. That is compared to the $20 million 3D Realms claims to have put into the project.

Duke Nukem Forever, indeed.

I find this to be an interesting route for online games to be taking. We’re starting to now see a number of them targeted toward a younger audience, which never seemed to be the case with past online game titles. In a lot of ways, I find this to be rather telling. There is, of course, a sizable segment of gamers out there in the world that are rather young. Plenty of traditional games are created to suite this audience, but few online games are. As society becomes more and more connected to the Internet, people of younger and younger ages are becoming citizens of the web.

While none of these games will be pushing the graphical levels high, it also shows a continued step toward more browser-based games, which seems to be a new trend gaining popularity. I’m curious to see how this trend will develop as well – but time will tell on this one. Games that run through a browser aren’t likely to ever compare with the performance you could get out of a local copy, but there is a certain amount of convenience to it as well. Then again, most of these sorts of games require sizable plugin installs anyway.