16.0.1 How will you deal with griefing in general?
Griefing will never totally go away as long as there are a healthy number of players. That said, better customer service, better trained GMs, and game mechanics and systems designed to curtail exploitation should better minimize their effect than in previous MMOG generations.
16.0.2 How will you deal with exploiting, cheating, duping, etc.?
Short answer: we won’t tolerate it.
Here's one perspective on exploiting or cheating in MMOGs:
First, an assumption: the desire of the development team and the expectation of the players is that there is a large virtual world to play in, with lots of different areas to explore and advance, and with all sorts of cool items to create and acquire. Obviously, then, there needs to be MANY avenues of advancement: locations, classes/skills, items, etc.
One of the most dangerous types of exploit is one that makes all or most advancement paths significantly less efficient than one or the few. Not only does this drastically reduce the amount of content in the game, it makes those not on the accelerated advancement path unhappy and/or compelled to use the faster method. This variety of exploit has to be stopped quickly. Even worse are 'dupe bugs' and the like, which can ruin an MMOG's economy in hours.
The less dangerous types are when new strategies are found that weren't really planned for, but don't threaten the economy and/or drastically reduce content and advancement paths. These have to be dealt with individually, and sometimes turn out to be pretty cool. Obviously the 'sum' of an MMOG is greater than the 'parts' put into it by the devs -- in fact, we think that's where the 'magic' comes from. And certainly player contributions can be as cool or cooler than what was 'planned'.
So the trick is to watch carefully, and to care for the game's overall health, whether you are a player or a developer. If something is discovered that could damage the game, reporting it is important, and the onus is then on the devs to listen and react.
But, at the same time, if the devs can figure out a way to incorporate a new play style dynamically, post-launch, and it's something that adds to the game for virtually everyone (e.g. is essentially inclusionary, not exclusionary)... well, it's a stop on the long road to player generated content.
16.0.3 Can a game go too far in its attempts to stop cheating and other similar issues?
Yes, I do want to re-state though that we are very aware that if we go too draconian, trying to stop all exploits, that the game usually suffers to the degree it wasn't worth it. That's why it's very critical we get these things tested in beta. One can come up with a mechanic or restriction that stops an exploit but not realize the full ramifications. I guess what I'm trying to say is there are many things in EQ and in other games that we worked on that didn't turn out the way we wanted, or where some players found ways to use an idea in a harmful way. And we want to address those. But we're going to be very careful about it. And we're going to do our best to make sure the fix isn't worse than what was already there, or that while it stops a few from exploiting, it adversely affects the average player. I just want to make sure you guys know that as much as we don't like exploits and the like, that we're not so fixated on them that we're willing to sacrifice fun. (This answer is courtesy of Silky Venom)
16.0.4 How will you address the problems associated with treadmilling and camping?
People have all sorts of opinions not just on 'treadmilling' but also on what 'treadmilling' means.
In a very general sense, we suppose it's referring to the fact that the vast majority of MMOGs use 'time invested' as their primary advancement mechanism. Sure, there's a lot of skill and knowledge involved, but at the same time one of the great things about MMOGs is that people can advance simply by being tenacious (unlike, say, a twitch game where no matter how hard you practice there's always somebody else with a higher dexterity in real life).
In a more specific sense, we see the 'treadmill' indicted as often being too slow, or too repetitive and boring. And we agree here. The time you invest in leveling your character, or honing his skills, or seeking after that valued item should be neither boring nor repetitive. It's on us game developers to make sure that advancement is fun. Easier said than done, sure, but looking back we've identified a LOT of areas where we'll do better next time (camping is the big one for us).
'Camping', to us, is sitting in one spot for a ludicrous amount of time waiting for a mob to spawn, hoping that it has an item you are looking for.
To be clear, Sigil very much believes in the concept of rare items, long quests, and a challenging game. We just believe players should be 'doing' dungeons/adventure areas... moving about, having fun, PLAYING the game. Vanguard: Saga of Heroes will employ an advanced encounter system that should address the camping issue and make dungeon crawling a lot more fun.
16.0.5 Can you tell us more about the 'grind'?
First, the grind I think happens in an MMOG where you are progressing but not having fun doing it. All of these games are about character development -- advancing your character in some way, be it experience, skills, items, whatever. If you are doing this while seeing new areas, being challenged in new ways, not having to endure pointless downtime, etc. you should be having fun while you are advancing. Achieving this eliminates the grind, IMHO. Easier said than, done, of course. So far I think we're doing a much better job, but still, yeah, at times you grind. Or even at times you just feel like grinding exp, sitting around in or around one area, chatting and killing stuff. We don't want to eradicate that -- we just don't want that to be what you have to do, or what is more efficient than playing the game.
And for clarity and to manage expectations, no matter how hard we try, there will still be places where you can sit there and grind. And, as some have stated who don't mind or even like this, that's probably a good thing. Variety and options and different types of encounters = good. What's important to me is that you don't have to grind, not that we neccessarily eradicate any possibility of it from the face of Telon. (This answer is courtesy of Silky Venom)
16.0.6 How will you address ‘Ninja Looting’?
Our advanced encounter system should all but eliminate the ability of a player outside a group to loot an item they didn't earn.
16.0.7 How will you address ‘Training’?
Mostly through better AI, pathing, and the fact that with a seamless world, NPCs will be on a 'leash' system. This doesn't mean that a 'train' cannot occur in a small area, but it does address a lot of egregious scenarios.
16.0.8 How will you deal with competition for resources?
A degree of competition for resources is good in an otherwise primarily PvE (Player vs. Environment) game. There should still be an incentive to have a sense of urgency and to reach certain areas before others, etc. Certainly, were everyone guaranteed equal access to all content, the players' sense of accomplishment would be virtually eliminated.
That said, it can go too far. By having a large world, plenty of content, and an advanced encounter system, we hope to avoid 'too much' competition.
16.0.9 Will there be over-crowded servers?
Hopefully not. By providing sufficient content and by launching and splitting servers as necessary, we hope to minimize this issue.
16.0.10 How do you feel about downtime in general?
Some downtime is good... resting between fights, memming up, healing, strategizing for the next battle, using the restroom, grabbing a Dr. Pepper... But too much downtime means you're not really playing the game, and that's bad.
16.0.11 What about downtime related to travel?
Boats were put into EverQuest because we thought (and still do think) that travel should mean something, and that faraway lands should be exotic. Traveling somewhere distant should be an accomplishment as much as anything else. However, they turned out to be boring -- you'd sit on them, doing very little, which means you weren't playing the game.
The trick is to make it such that travel is still meaningful, distant lands are still distant and exotic, but to make the journey fun and interesting in and of itself. This is really one of those areas where, like instancing, we feel there is a trend to 'throw the baby out with the bath water': ‘traveling has been boring, so let's get rid of travel! Teleport where thou will’t!’
Sigil's philosophy on this and many other issues is to attack the problem, not the premise (assuming the premise is sound, and we think almost all of us want distant lands to have an allure and a rarity, and to be rewarded for exploration).
16.0.12 What about downtime between battles?
Some downtime should exist between battles to rest up, talk about the previous encounter, plan for the next one, use the restroom, grab a soda, etc.
It's likely the time it takes to recover between battles or sets of battles will vary depending on what the target audience (level range) of the area is, and whether it's casual, group, or raid.
Regardless, the total amount of downtime will be capped, and that cap tweaked during beta such that it hopefully feels 'right' to most players.
16.0.13 What about downtime waiting for spawns and/or other events
Spawns will be based on timers, but our advanced encounter system is designed to reward players for moving through dungeons and other adventure areas. This should seriously minimize the amount of sitting around in one spot doing nothing but waiting for a spawn (camping).
16.0.14 What about downtime looking for groups or waiting for a bind?
Depending on how many people you need in your group and what types of characters you want in it, there certainly will be some waiting.
That said, there will be functionality in the game to assist players in both finding groups and keeping groups together.
Players will be able to bind in areas marked 'bind points'; you will not normally need another character to bind you in Vanguard. There is also the Caravan system which allows for offline travel, such that if your group moved one night when you were not online, you would then have the option of appearing at the Caravan Leader's last bind location in addition to where your character last logged off. Helping people find groups, facilitating guilds, and keeping friends together are all extremely important in Vanguard and there will be a number of features and mechanics to assist players in this goal.
16.0.15 What is Sigil’s feeling on Instancing and the use of private, virtual spaces?
We understand why some games have implemented Instancing (private virtual spaces) in which to adventure and play the game. There are certainly issues of crowding, camping, ninja-looting, and general competition for resources that are very real problems plaguing many MMOGs.
That said, we feel that Instancing is really 'throwing the baby out with the bath water' -- it's like saying, well, in these massively multiplayer games, players are a problem, so get rid of them.
We are working on an advanced encounter system that will allow multiple players and groups to co-exist within the same adventure area or dungeon but that should also all but eliminate the problems above.
This way the problems instancing addresses should be addressed, but the problems it introduces should be absent. These include:
• Lack of immersion -- not running into other parties and people in what is supposed to be a virtual world.
• Problems with community building by eliminating situations such as when someone you don't know saves you in the depths of a dungeon and you become friends.
• Issues when, late into the night, as people leave and group sizes shrink, eventually the group is small enough that they cannot proceed in the dungeon or adventure area they are in. Without instancing, multiple groups that are shrinking can combine and remaining players continue onward.
16.0.16 What is Sigil’s stance on ‘twinking’ and what mechanics will be in place to reduce the negative aspects of ‘twinking’?
Where twinking is bad: when people are equipped with items they didn't earn, diminishing the sense of accomplishment of others who did earn similar treasure, and cheapening the game experience for those who are twinked.
Where twinking is good: a player has played to high levels and wants to start another character but (and rightfully so) would like some advantage in advancing this second character due to the time he's already committed to the game, and therefore equips his new character with some sweet, higher level items. Replayability = good.
There are all sorts of ways to try to address these issues: hard level limits, soft level limits, trivial loot code, one character per server, etc. We lean towards soft level limits (you can wear the items, but you're not nearly as powerful as a higher level person wielding the same items), and some sort of trivial loot code to minimize farming in areas where the target audience is significantly lower level than the farmers. Also, please look at the other FAQ entry that talks about the Veteran system, which makes item scaling not as severe for players who start alternate characters on the same server and decide to equip these new characters with high level items from their older characters.
But there's no easy solution. We have some pretty nifty ideas though that we want to try out, above and beyond what is alluded to above. More on that later, but rest assured we are aware of the issue, and both the positives and negatives, and will attempt to address and accommodate both.
16.0.17 Tell us more about how you feel about Twinking?
Anyone can use any item -- there are no hard caps. There are soft caps, or, more specifically what we call 'item scaling' that scales, say, an level 40 item, down in power if wielded by a level 10 player.
The goal is to avoid twinked lower level players being gods and just thrashing through content with impunity. We also plan on scaling buffs and such so that you can sill, as a high level player, buff a low level player, but the bonus the lower level player would recieve it not the same as a higher level player -- again, it's scaled to the lower level player is not suddenly god-like.
We think twinking can be an issue, especially if some noob gets outfitted with uber lewt because he's somebody's brother or girl friend. But we also know that replayability is key to these games, and feel that you should be able to equip your second or third character with some of the items you earned at higher levels with your first character. It's a nice reward, and it makes playing the 2nd or 3rd character a little easier and a little more rewarding in the sense that you feel you've earned this bonus. So we'll be using soft level limits, not hard (e.g. you can equip anything, regardless of your level, but you'll not receive the same bonuses you would if you equipped that item with a high level character). You'll have a slight advantage, to encourage replayability, but not a broke-ass advantage, which cheapens the game.
I think this is important to keep in mind as we work on TLC but also on vertical interdependence in general. We want players of different levels to need each other to a certain degree, just as different classes and spheres need each other (This answer is courtesy of Silky Venom)
16.0.18 What is the "Veteran Bonus System"?
Anyone can use any item -- there are no hard caps. here are soft caps, or, more specifically what we call 'item scaling' that scales, say, an level 40 item, down in power if wielded by a level 10 player.
The goal is to avoid twinked lower level players being gods and just thrashing through content with impunity. We also plan on scaling buffs and such so that you can sill, as a high level player, buff a low level player, but the bonus the lower level player would recieve it not the same as a higher level player -- again, it's scaled to the lower level player is not suddenly god-like.
And then there is the Veteran bonus I mentioned that makes item scaling not quite as severe assuming you have other characters on your account as higher or higher than the level of the item you are twinking your 'alt' with. This is to encourage replayability and reward veterant players when they create new characters to experience, say, a different part of the world or a different class or race. Egregious twinking of brand new players usually isn't a good thing, but can't be totally eradicated either. Twinking of your own alt, however, is a very good thing and something I think veteran players will both appreciate and deserve. (This answer is courtesy of Silky Venom)
16.0.19 How will you deal with griefing in general? Will it be tolerated?
Because history has shown that they drive away more customers than they attract, and then eventually leave themselves. Why would I want to subject paying customers, players, to such an environment? It just doesn't make sense. Nor is it, at least to me, very interesting or challenging. Creating an unrestricted PvP online game isn't that hard, especially when it's a persistent RPG world (yes, making an FPS is hard, no disrespect to those guys).
So no, griefers won't be welcome on any server. But I really don't think that's the group you're talking about. I think you and most PvPers want a challenge and worthy opponent.
What's challenging and arguably not totally solved is creating an MMO that is PvP centric but keeps people around, all are entertained at least some of the time, character power is balanced with player knowledge and 'twitch' abilities, etc. Again, that's not what Vanguard is all about, although we have some cool ideas that I think will be very exciting to PvP players who enjoy PvE worlds. But somebody has to make that persistent online pure PvP environment, with the right mix of character advancement, player knowledge, but making twitch matter too...
Doesn't have to be an RPG either. I think we'll see cool MMOFPS games in the future, although they face some even tougher design challenges (the more twitch and less character advancement/power problem as it relates to retention). But at least personally I'd like to play an RPG that realized much or all of this.
A player can never be allowed to derive his or her fun at the expense of another player's fun, or, worse yet, several or many other player's fun.
As others posted, the type of player who is like a wolf and must prey on sheep really isn't compatible with these games, even if they were dedicated to PvP. The sheep get eaten and go away. It doesn't work. You can't have fun by making someone else not have fun. Well, you can, but you'll have a game with some serious problems, especially with long term retention. Because after the sheep leave, then the wolf does too, having no more sheep to consume.
Whether players are in a PvE or PvP centric environment or game, the above cannot be allowed. That said, competition will still exist. Someone will be chased away by something someone else does or says or represents. This is where tight mechanics, though not too tight, come in to curb this. This is where customer service comes in. It's also where that balance comes in, where there is competition that is healthy and drives people to excel. A tricky balance, and no solution is right for everyone.
And as others have mentioned, griefing or whatever you want to call the above has nothing to do with PvP specifically. You can grief on a PvE server. And by no means are most or even many PvP fans griefers -- that's a very unfortunate stereotype. The PvPer wants to challenge himself by competing directly with other players, and not just the AI or the environment. And those other players want the same thing. So it's consensual. No sheep. (This answer is courtesy of Silky Venom)