Interviews

SOE-Seattle’s Matt Wilson talks about the state of MMOs
By Michael Lafferty

“In my opinion, a good MMO is one that a player effortlessly enters (no thoughtless plopping you in the world without a clue) and can then explore with a variety of rewarding approaches.”

On February 3, Sony Online Entertainment announced the opening of a new development studio in Seattle, Wash. While the announcement was a bit of a surprise for a company that has had one of the most successful massively multiplayer online games in the history of the genre, what was even more surprising, and exciting, was the team assembled to power the studio and a yet-to-be-named MMO project.

Matt Wilson, John Smith, Alex Pfaffe, Craig Link and Ed Fries, formerly with Microsoft and FireAnt have joined the team (though Fries will serve in an advisory role) and bring a wealth of experience to the table.

Some of the games they have worked on include Dungeon Siege, Ultima Online, Wing Commander, Asheron’s Call, and the Mythica title (which was cancelled by Microsoft just a few months from projected release).

Of course, they are working on a project and little can be said at this juncture what that project may be. However, Matt, who serves as executive producer of SOE-Seattle, talked with GameZone about the state of MMOs in general, and what he would like to see from the next generation of MMOs.

Question: The MMO market is still in its infancy in many ways. Many titles are being rushed into development but few are emerging from the development phase. Do you think the market is saturated when you think in terms of the community size, or are we just waiting for those titles to emerge that will draw new players into the worlds created?

Matt: When people think MMO, they usually think of fantasy-style games. This has been the proven genre, but I believe that people are starting to look for experiences that are not just fantasy, and possibly not a typical RPG. This will take a bit of experimentation, but it's good to see people looking towards different models. As different models of gameplay become popular, we will start to see subscription based entertainment begin to mean more than a fantasy RPG.

Q: In the same vein, a game like World of Warcraft has done an exceptional job of opening up the doors for new players, but from the standpoint of those of us who have been playing MMOs for a while, the game seems to be an amalgam of all the going points of games in the genre and takes very few risks? What do you think are risks that games should be taking to try to stand out from the crowd a little more?

Matt: For our future MMOs, just being an online game won’t cut it. Gameplay and polish will start to be the key differentiator. Experiences and gameplay that you would normally only have in single-player games will start becoming commonplace in online games. This will not only broaden the market, but it will bring new styles of games into the space.

Q: Mythica was a game that truly had some unique concepts, and ideas that started to redefine the way players would look at avatars. Do you think that the whole concept of avatars and professions are either locked into finite cubby-holes of 'this class must always do this,' or is there room to explore more fully what a hunter/ranger would do, or a barbarian in terms of growth?

Matt: That is an interesting question. There’s a comfort level players have when they can instantly recognize the archetype and abilities inherent within a class system and map them to an obvious play style. Of course, if the class is too rigid or limited, it can grow a little old a little too quickly. On the flipside, classless systems are a balancing act of complexity versus fun that is hard for developers to realize and for many players to negotiate. 

We feel there is room for people to maintain their identity while still allowing for experimentation, not succumbing to the dreaded “tank-mage” syndrome, and not overwhelming players with too many directions that offer too little payoff. 

Q: A lot of games seem to be working from a cookie-cutter plot line. While still viable, do you think there is room for more creative plots and more substantial content evolving from those plotlines? As you and I are both aware, players are incredibly inventive and creative when it comes to twisting the hard work of developers for their own machinations. Do you think it possible for a game to sport player-generated content that allows other players to involve themselves (either in furthering or interfering with plans) without a game devolving into total chaos? When you begin to create a world, how much time do you spend in considering what players can add to or take away from the content you are creating?

Matt: Ultimately all plots are cookie-cutter variations of classical themes. The difference comes not from the unique nature of a plot, but the quality in which it is delivered. After all, Hemingway’s “The Old Man and the Sea” is a (paraphrasing the author’s words when asked about the story in an interview) “Book about a guy who goes out to catch a fish”.  What makes a story like that sing isn’t the core plot but the depth of its characterizations, and its perspective on the experiences and conflicts we’ve all come across in one form or another. 

When developing the stories and arcs for our next title we’re attempting to keep that in mind. So while you might end up with a story whose structure is familiar, the way it plays out should challenge your expectations and give you at least one good thing to smile or think about.

The MMO is one of the most interesting mediums in the gaming space. As people start playing and interacting with each other, experiences we could not have imagined during development take place. Some of the coolest innovations in MMOs have been created by players.  As to the notion of original player-created content, this is a nut that folks industry-wide are trying to crack. Working player actions into visible and invisible levers that allow them to cumulatively and individually alter the world is always at the top of the heap when designing the world, story, and systems. 

Q: It is my belief that players flock to some games because of the look of the game, but it is the content that compels them to stay. Even older games that cannot measure up to the graphical standards we are seeing today still have strong community basis because of the gameplay mechanics and the content. How much of a chore is it, from the developer standpoint, to create a game that is visually compelling, and yet can hold players for longer than three or four months?

Matt: Just like in the real world, initial attraction is based on looks. So we must keep that in mind when creating our games. However, just like in the real word, looks can only get you so far. Gameplay will be king in the next generation of successful online games closely followed by broader applications of persistence for the players, their world, and their stories. With the new engines out there today, we are able to focus much earlier on gameplay than before. So, hopefully, you’ll be getting more than just another Britney Spears. 

Q: When looking at the current MMOs being released, one realizes the incredible depth and ideas that have been ingrained into the game on many levels. There are the quests and the player development as well as economic strata and crafting ... when you create a game, how much time goes into work on each aspect, and do you have teams that focus on one area of a program to work it to, what is hoped is, perfection?

Matt: MMOs are huge. The challenge is balance and continuity between the systems. Many people work on building an online game, and so balancing every individually implemented system in the world can be difficult. A subtle crafting system change could radically effect the efficiency of combat, which could, in turn, throw off character progression.  

We generally have teams implementing core areas together, and other people making sure the effect of their work equals expected behavior in the world. Often during the process you’ll discover systems that were once thought to be distinct can actually be rolled into one another, thus simplifying the whole affair. Other times you’ll discover that monolithic systems are more easily managed as discrete chunks. Oh yeah, did I mention MMOs are huge?  

Q: Without giving anything away as to what you may be working on, what do you consider to be the one or two elements that are currently lacking from the world of MMOs as it is today?

Matt: Today’s market is filled with clones of standard MUD originated RPG games. I feel the next generation of MMOs will need to bring more to the table than just MM. Episodic content and different styles of gameplay (more action, more real-time decision making) will be critical to grow our genre from an experiment to a mainstay. The next steps for the genre involve providing the player the types of high-production quality experiences found in single-player titles while supporting, expanding and extending the cornerstones of MMO gameplay.  

Q: Most games use magic missiles or proximity attacks in their combat systems (I am sort of close enough, I swing, and even if the foe moves out of range, I might still hit and do damage). Asheron's Call 2 had a refined combat system wherein players could sidestep or evade ranged attacks. How hard is that to actualize in a game?

Matt: Whether you’re a focused console action game or an expansive MMO, minute-to-minute and second-to-second decision making marks the difference between a success and a failure.

MMOs have the added handicap of requiring a remote server set validate the actions and activities of hundreds to thousands of people simultaneously while handling all of the logic for the game world (AI, widgets, triggers, time, etc). This massive overhead is one of the reasons we’re only just beginning to see mainstream attempts at fast, non-stop action elements. Up to this point, phase-based decision making has proven much friendlier to development.

As technology advances and broadband becomes commonplace, we’re going to see a slow move towards more real-time experiences (Planetside being a good example of an existing title trying to break out of the traditional MMO mold). 

Although it may get easier to put action mechanics into the game, it’s not going to get any easier to get them right. Some folks spend many years getting their single-player game tuned to the level it needs to be. Tack on the number of ancillary systems an MMO requires and you have a fairly risky concoction. Developers (especially in the MMO space) have to focus on a small number of action mechanics or risk failing at all of them. 

Q: To PvP or not to PvP - that is one of the questions. (Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous trash-talking foes, or to take arms against a sea of n00bs, and by being an upper-level jerk snuff them ... but I digress) Games are getting better in the way PvP is being handled but this also seems to be an area that could be refined much more. What do you consider as the key ingredients in a solid PvP system in an MMO?

Matt: Simply slapping PvP on top of a PvE world is the hardest thing to get right. Supporting the many small gains (“I killed someone!” “I scored a point!”) while minimizing extreme downtime (“I gotta resurrect AGAIN!!! ARRGH!”) is the challenge many games have addressed in different ways.

PvP needs to be provided in remorseless and remorseful flavors. Quick, fun challenges where the only thing at stake is, maybe, your pride and more involved engagements where the reward may be access to, or domination over, an area.

Fear of failure is the biggest thing to overcome in the mind of a new or inexperienced player. They need to feel safe in their decisions and well aware of the consequences. This is true for just about everything in an MMO, but more so in terms of prepping a player for PvP. If you can get people on the same page, they’ll have a lot more fun.

Providing folks fun experiences with and against other players seems to be job number one for a game based on the concept of many, many people purposefully and arbitrarily encountering each other within a shared world.

Q: Games are getting bigger in terms of geographical regions, but does that necessarily mean they are getting better? What defines a good MMO in your opinion, and how important do you consider live events, or continuous content and room to grow for upper level players? (I know it is easy to say that the level cap is 50 and once you have done that, experience it all over again as a different race or profession, but some players simply balk at the idea of starting all over again, and want to feel that the months they spent building a strong upper level character has rewards of its own other than strutting around n00b zones.)

Matt: In my opinion, a good MMO is one that a player effortlessly enters (no thoughtless plopping you in the world without a clue) and can then explore with a variety of rewarding approaches. As the player focuses on a play style, they become more and more aware of the benefits that other players and the world can provide them. Ultimately the world does it’s part by supporting large scale events, offering access to levers and switches that alter it, harboring micro and macro economies for goods and services, and then further engendering community through well designed social spaces that bring disparate players together for common reasons.

Providing players with roles that provide access to meta content at higher levels is crucial to avoid the constant need to just build more and more unique content. Designing your world in a way that the players themselves are content to manage and explore helps a great deal in this regard.

Q: Finally, what do you consider, on a personal level, to be the ideal setting for an MMO?

Matt: On a personal level, the game I’m working on right now has the setting I truly love. Of course, I can’t share more than that at the time.