|
Asheron's Call
was released on Halloween of 1999, and has found a niche in the massive
gaming market. Loyal fans were overjoyed late last year when it was
announced that Turbine, now sole owners of the game, would be
publishing an expansion for the title and its sequel Asheron's Call 2. Jessica Mulligan is the Executive Producer for Asheron's Call, and the Creative Director on the Asheron's Call: Throne of Destiny expansion.
Ms.
Mulligan has been in the online gaming industry since the days of GEnie
and boasts writing credits on the Skotos series 'Biting the Hand', as
well as co-authorship of the New Riders tome Developing Online Games
with Bridgette Patrovsky. Ms. Mulligan was kind enough to answer
questions about the upcoming expansion, trends in the massive gaming
industry in general, and the eyebrow raising announcement that Sony
Online Entertainment would be publishing the new expansions to
Turbine's games.
Industry Trends
Gamasutra:
One of the GDC 2005 roundtables featured a discussion about instancing
and its place in massively multiplayer gaming, with speakers both
supporting and discounting the value of personalized game zones. What
are your feelings on this trend in MMO game design?
Jessica Mulligan:
I think instancing is a positive step. It isn't the end-all and be-all,
however; it is one piece of the puzzle. There are times when players
want to have a short, sharp experience with a small group of buddies
without having to worry about the occasional griefer or other jerk
ruining the experience; instancing is perfect for that.
There
are also times when players want to engage in huge battles or
intricate, static quests, or festivals, or live, human-run events. We
need to make sure we have as many of those choices available as we
reasonably can. Instancing is all about giving players more choices,
and that is a good thing.
GS:
Looking at the original Virtual Worlds (VW), what do you feel is the
most significant development or improvement that modern games have over
spaces like MUD1 or The Realm Online? Is there something that you feel that the forebears to MMOGs did better that you want to see in newer games?
JM:
As an industry, our main advantages over the first and second
generations of VWs is experience and money; from the examples of all
those games we old farts worked on going back to 1978, we know what
works and what doesn't and now we have much bigger budgets with which
to work.
To
give you a comparison example: In the five year period of 1987 to 1992,
when I was producing games at the old online services of AOL and GEnie,
I started a total of a dozen MMOs. Total advances for those twelve
MMOs: Less than $100,000.
Now,
making a decent MMO can run upwards of $30 million to get a decent game
out the door with enough content to please today's customers.
As
for what the old guard may have done better than today's games: In some
ways, it is comparing apples and oranges because of how the technology
has changed; it is hard to compare the old text games with today's
graphics-heavy games.
In
some ways, graphics greatly limit what we can do compared to the
flexibility of text descriptions. For example, it takes about ten
seconds to add a text description of "You reach down and pick up the
book;" it takes days to create the art and models for that
simple action and then animate an avatar to do it. This drives the
development time and cost upward by at least an order of magnitude, if
not several.
GS:
Many commentators seem to feel that mass-market appeal is a goal of the
MMOG industry right now. What do you feel it will take for massively
multiplayer games to achieve the level of penetration in the public
consciousness that games like The Sims or Doom currently enjoy?
JM: This is another of those apples and oranges things. When you're talking about MMOGs versus The Sims or Doom,
we're talking about three entirely different markets. I liken it to a
pyramid and look! I have a pretty picture to show with it!
These
are the three general markets in online gaming, as they apply to MMOGs.
There are several points to understand about the groups:
- The
"Mass Market" is both time and price sensitive. They don't want to
spend a lot of time or money playing online games. These are the folks
play online card, puzzle games and The Sims. Right now, they comprise about 75% of the market, but only 5% of the income;
- The
"Moderate" gamer is generally not price-sensitive but is
time-sensitive; he doesn't want to be required to spend 20 hours per
week just to keep up. These can be typified by the folks playing Counter-Strike and Unreal online. These players are about 15% of both the player base and revenue;
- The
"Hardcore" is the group most often playing MMOGs today. They are
neither price nor time sensitive; they'll whatever time and money is
necessary to get the game experience they want. They are only about 10%
of the total player base, but they are providing about 80% of our
income right now;
- Gamers
have a hard time justifying climbing up the pyramid to the next level
because of their sensitivity to either price or time commitment. That
is a prime component in making them separate markets.
To
answer the question, then: If you want the "Mass Market" to play more
MMOGs, you have to build games to specifically address their needs. To
date, no one has done that very well, but it is just a matter of time.
GS: The virtual worlds A Tale in the Desert and Second Life
are having a great deal of success with user created or edited content.
What are your feelings on this as a VW design choice? What impact do
you think user generated content will have on the future of massive
gaming?
JM:
Are they enjoying "a great deal of success"? I'm not dogging their
achievements, which are very interesting, but both games have extremely
low subscriber bases. What we need to do as an industry is look both
games over very carefully and figure out why something many players ask
for - the ability to create or edit content - isn't doing as
spectacularly as one might imagine.
In the long-term, I think player-generated content is going to play a very large role in virtual worlds and MMOGs.
Asheron's Call
GS: It has been several years since the last Asheron's Call expansion. The expansion includes some major additions, including a graphical upgrade. Your blue sky list for the upcoming Throne of Destiny
expansion must have been quite long. How were you able to choose among
your design concepts in order to decide on the expansion's feature set?
JM: The list of features the team came up with for Throne of Destiny
was humongous, indeed. To trim it down to manageable size was actually
pretty easy: I simply asked the Live Development team - each and every
one of them a long-time Asheron's Call player before they
joined the company - what they would most want to see in the expansion.
Then we prioritized the list, investigated development times and made
our choices from there.
One feature that was in the original proposal for Throne of Destiny
that we'll be getting back to after the launch in May is "Land
Control". Basically, we wanted a feature whereby players, without being
forced into player-versus-player combat, were able to gain control of a
new structure on the landscape that would give a benefit by itself,
such as a skill or attribute increase. A number of those structures
could be formed into large alliances of owners to control nearby
cities. Controlling a city would bestow additional benefits to everyone
in the alliance. Losing control of an alliance, such as one or more
players/allegiances withdrawing from it, would lose control over the
city benefits. And at some level, we wanted there to be non-PvP
competition between the cities.
When
we took the idea public in 2004 for reaction, the player feedback was:
"Great idea, but it needs more design work." So rather than launch an
idea that many players thought was only half-baked, we decided to push
it out of the expansion pack and have the lead designer spend more time
in the spring and summer of 2005 talking to players about various
designs and implementation ideas. Once we have something that more
players feel has a better chance of working to their needs, we'll dig
in and start coding. Our current plan calls for it to have its own
Booster Pack in the fall of 2005.
GS: Given the realities of the MMOG market, you seem to be in a unique situation. Not only are you fighting for players with Everquest, World of Warcraft, Anarchy Online,
et al, but you appear to be in a position such that other games
developed by your own company are competition as well. How does your
development team deal with this situation? Does the design of Asheron's Call seek a comfortable niche, or is the intent to provide mass-market appeal to all players?
JM: AC
has it's own unique charms, as does every massively multiplayer game.
Rather than try to compete with every other game out there, we
concentrate on what has worked for the game and the players for over
five years:
- Free
content updates: Every month, we add in new quests, games systems
and/or features, generally tied together in a continuing story arc that
spans most of the year. We've had 52 of these updates since we launched
in late 1999 - the equivalent of 8 or 9 free expansion packs. Heck,
we've saved our players of somewhere between $150 and $200, money they
didn't have to shell out at retail just to get the latest features and
content.
- Solo and
group content: Having the choice to play any time is a key for our
players. One feature our players appreciate is that we take care to
have solo content in the game. If a player just wants to jump in and
play for 30 or 60 minutes and have a great time, she can. On the other
hand, Allegiances - AC's Guild mechanism - and pick-up
Fellowship teams have epic quests they can play, usually for epic
rewards. So we don't limit how and when they can play; they make those
choices for themselves.
In
terms of mass-market appeal: We don't try to appeal specifically to the
mass-market; this is a medieval fantasy game, after all. We are
constantly trying to make it easier to start and learn the game,
however. We want new players to dig the content, not spend their first
30 to 60 minutes trying to figure out an arcane user interface. Part of
the graphic upgrade, in fact, is a total rewrite of the user interface
code, so that it is easier for the engineers to work with and easier to
add interface features in the future.
Sony Publishing Deal
GS:
In an interview with HomeLAN, Torrie Dorrell states: "SOE has been
approached on a few occasions by outside developers looking to take
advantage of the infrastructure and experience that we have built up
over the last few years." Were you one of the developers who approached
Sony about this arrangement, or did they come to you? What prompted
your decision to go with Sony to distribute the new expansions?
JM: When we began to look at distributors for Throne of Destiny,
we approached a number of companies. Of course, several of us at the
company, including CEO Jeff Anderson and Executive Vice-President,
Jason Bell, know and have worked with people at SOE before and their
track record of sales at retail is top-notch. When it came time to
choose someone off the short list, the advantages of working with SOE
and their highly experienced and successful distribution and marketing
team were obvious.
GS:
Given the distribution relationship with Sony that exists with these
expansions, do you expect to collaborate again in the future on further
distribution projects? Has there been any talk of collaboration on any
level other than distribution?
Let's
just get through the launch in May and see how it goes. We're not
discussing anything that I know of, but we're always open to
discussions of collaboration on any level. Any project that comes out
of any such discussions just has to make sense for our players.
GS: Many thanks to Ms. Mulligan for her time and thoughtfulness in answering our questions.
______________________________________________________
|