Lands of the Dead vs. Darkness Falls: Don't mess with perfection
by Brooke Pilley 
Feb 2nd 2009 at 12:00PM
Filed under: Fantasy, Expansions, Game mechanics, Warhammer Online
This announcement has many people drooling and speculating on the possibilities because we haven't been given many details to work with. What we do know is that players will have to fight for control of it. The zone will be called Lands of the Dead (aka Nehekhara) and themed on the Tomb Kings. Controlling the zone will give you access to public quests, instance lairs, and a massive dungeon that holds secrets of something called the Casket of Souls (similar to the Ark of the Covenant).
If Nehekhara is going to be as good for Warhammer Online as Darkness Falls was for Dark Age of Camelot, I believe Mythic must mimic its predecessor as closely as possible. Continue reading below the cut where we'll discuss how they can succeed and how they can fail.
Avid MMORPG blogger, Keen, has several pieces of advice for Mythic if they want to properly implement a "spiritual successor" to DF in WAR. I agree with his points wholeheartedly and will elaborate on many of them here, while also discussing different angles.
Let me say this up front: I am extremely fearful that Mythic will screw this up by trying to modernize all the old mechanics of DF in the new LotD dungeon. I believe everyone has such fond memories of DF because of exactly what it was. There were no instanced bosses in DF. There were no public quests. There was no influence. There was no Vegas Loot System. There were no bind on pickup items. There were no caps on the amount of people who could enter. There were no high level requirements to experience the content. There was no zone lockout system. This may sound "old school," but I urge Mythic: Please don't mess with perfection!Why is everyone so excited about the prospect of a DF 2.0 in WAR? Why has this been the number one requested feature? I think it's fair to say that most of us simply want a carbon copy of DF 1.0 with a new theme and layout. Yes, nostalgia can add a bit of gloss to an old system and many of DF's mechanics could be seen as harsh by the post-WoW generation of players, but I think the original model can still work. Let me detail exactly how I want to see the new dungeon laid out.
I don't care if Nehekhara is full of PQs and instances as long as they're kept out of the Tomb Kings dungeon. Seriously, do whatever the heck you guys want out there. Inside the dungeon, however, I would like to see the zone split into two wings where both sides work their way toward the center. Mobs should be easier near your spawn point and become increasingly more difficult as you go deeper into the dungeon. These mobs should drop coins and tokens of varying quality, which can be used to buy properly itemized gear for players of all ranks (10+). You should be able to trade these tokens to help boost WAR's lackluster economy. This dungeon should be a viable place to gain XP and players should be encouraged to group to get the best XP possible. There should be several non-instanced mini-bosses for players of all ranks to enjoy. There should also be non-instanced bosses/encounters for large groups of max-rank players to take on. There should be a tier of tokens for the max-ranked players to collect for competitive suits of armour (wards for the end dungeon bosses perhaps?). And of course, there should always be the risk of getting jumped by the enemy...
Mythic needs to figure out a way for Destruction and Order to capture this zone/dungeon. Back in DAOC, DF was gated by RvR and the realm with the most keeps could enter it. Currently, flipping keeps in WAR is disgustingly easy, but I think it can still work this way if Mythic improves the current system. Making keeps more dynamic and difficult to capture is a step in the right direction (e.g., better siege options, keep claiming/improvement system, etc.). Of course, you'll still need players to defend them, but I think this will naturally occur if people have more to fight for. Defending keeps was a badge of honour in DAOC for many reasons; one of the biggest reasons was to maintain control of DF.
On the other hand, flipping control of LotD shouldn't be made too difficult because a huge part of the fun is the RvR that can take place in this zone. The offensive and defensive RvR dungeon sweeps were an amazing experience in DF, so I hope they make their way over to the new dungeon as well. Mixing your PvE and PvP is a recipe for the best adrenaline rush you can experience in an MMORPG. It is for this player anyway...Can the public quest, influence, instance, and Vegas Loot Systems work in LotD? Yes they can, but I don't believe they're necessary. One of the coolest parts about DF was how open it was. Keen describes it best by calling DF a little sandbox within a linear MMO. Adding public quests with influence gives players too much direction, which really limits the potential of what players can accomplish if left to their own devices. Influence is a very linear path to gear that has a defined end: your elite reward. But what's the point of going back once you've filled your influence bar? No-one goes back to open-world PQs once their influence bar is filled and it would be a disaster for the critical population mass this dungeon will need to succeed. As for the Vegas Loot System, we all know how borked contribution currently is. Even if they could get it working properly, is it really any better than a token system where the group leader can set the loot rules? Consider all the additional benefits of a token system (e.g., trading, selling, the freedom to choose which gear to purchase and in what order, etc.). Finally, instancing can really kill the feeling of community and sharing that made the original DF so great.
"The one thing that ticks me off about designers, is they don't know when to bloody well stop designing. Fun, you ****ers!" |
Mythic has a chance to capture lightning in a bottle once again with their new Lands of the Dead mega-zone. As they move ahead with their development, I want them to always keep one question on their minds: Why did everyone love DF so much?
If they deliver a New Coke system over the Classic we all know and love, I believe they may yet again help set everyone's expectations at a stratospheric height only to watch them come tumbling down. This is an opportunity for redemption. I'll leave you with a quote by Paul Barnett that gives me a bit of hope:
"The one thing that ticks me off about designers, is they don't know when to bloody well stop designing. Fun, you ****ers!"
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
InfamousBrad said on 12:33PM 2-02-2009
First, a confession: I didn't play Dark Age of Camelot. That being said, I wish they weren't doing this. Maybe I don't know what I'm missing, but when they designed Warhammer Online, they wanted to come up with something new and cool, and I seem to be the only one who thinks they succeeded. I *love* the tier 4 territory control meta-game, the pushing of the battlefronts back and forth to enable and disable various scenarios, to put the capital cities more at risk or less at risk. I think of it as a 3 column wide, 5 row deep chessboard where each square has to be fought over. Better yet, it's effectively a 3D chessboard at that, because of the role that tier 3 plays in being able to move the battlefront. I love going on a global chat channel or an alliance chat server and asking where they need more bodies for the push that's currently going on, and being part of a 150 to 200 person effort to move the front line of the war another one to four rows up one column.
I'd love some minor tweaks to the constants so that the front was less static, and I think the "home rows" (fortresses) need a total redesign. But other than that, I think it's just about the coolest design for an MMO PvP system that has ever been invented, bar none. So you can just imagine how enthused I'm not that they're going to encourage half or all of the people who are currently playing that to abandon it, to instead all pile into one zone and fight there. And for what, to move the battlefield in a way that shows up on the mission tracker? No, for very short term access to something. And what is that something? A dungeon. How innovative. DO NOT WANT.
If people want to play Dark Age of Camelot, why aren't they playing Dark Age of Camelot?
Reply
Holgar said on 12:52PM 2-02-2009
I personally agree on with you on almost all of that WAR is NOT daoc v 2.0. and I personally think Mythic is idiotic to abandon their previous assertion of getting the game fully functional in tier 4 before introducing new areas/content.
Even if they continue to give the endgame (and the rest of it for that matter) some desperatly needed polish, it is still going to be lacking if they are off building Tomb King stuff. I would personally would like to see the last two classes added, seige mechanics and fortresses/keeps/city seiges reworked and HUGE amounts of polish added in before more content.
Pirate Penguin said on 3:24PM 2-02-2009
Having played (and enjoyed) DAoC I think you are being overly pessimistic. Ignoring the fact that an enormous shared dungeon to fight over is actually really fun (danarchy touches on why a few posts down), I believe that it will actually make the RvR fights even better. People who typically are only interested in PvEing will finally enter RvR in order to open up the mega dungeon.
The only worry I'd have is that one thing that made Darkness Falls great was the tug-of-war between the three realms to keep it open. I wonder how well this will translate to two realms, and I wonder how they intend to balance it so that a server with a dominant population on one side or the other does not end up with the new dungeon 90% of the time.
Vulturion said on 1:35PM 2-02-2009
I expect that Pilley & Keen are going to be disappointed by the criteria they have laid out, as :
a] There are no indicators that Mythic are going to remove the "divide rewards by party members" rule, as that would be a sweeping (positive) change affecting the whole game.
b] 'Real' PvE content doesn't exist in WAR thus far, so it seems unlikely that Mythic are suddenly going to introduce mobs that deviate from the "one attack/debuff and a 30 second respawn cycle" model.
c1] The Influence bar system is EXPANDING to every event and RvR region, so there is no basis for believing LotD will buck the trend.
c2] WAR doesn't DO itemisation - expect all the current skins yet again with the stat combos not already covered (some will be the ideals and some will be atrocious tangents), which will not exactly set hearts aflutter.
The mysterious part will be how control of LotD is integrated with the rest of the world ; if it is closely tied then the usual dominant realm will just get it as a perk for no added effort, but if it is separate then activity everywhere else will be diminished.
Personally I'll predict that LotD control will be completely independent of the main campaign, as I don't see how it will make any waves if access is bound to the same old campaign features from launch.
That would certainly have a big negative impact (at least temporarily) on the core campaign, but it should make the LotD itself exciting and - more importantly - showcase 'real' PvP ; forcing everyone into a single area would seem to be the best way to counter the current "players vs NPC defenders" phenomenon.
Reply
danarchy said on 1:54PM 2-02-2009
First off Brad, I stopped reading after "I didn't play Dark Age of Camelot." You have no frame of reference and as usual just run off at the flame filled mouth.
My fondest memories of daoc were the relic raids and more specifically DF. I will never forget the hours of fun me and my guild had after the dungeon got flipped and we spent the rest of the night avoiding the alb zerg while massacring their pve groups. Occasionally this would include everyone finding a safe corner and logging out for a hour or so, a mechanic I hope they don't prevent in the new dungeon! It sure added the object of surprise when 40 enemies suddenly appeared behind you out of nowhere. To this day I STILL heal standing with one eye on the group and one eye behind me...
Their were so many cool things about df, that could be easily integrated into WaR. I wholeheartedly agree with the token system. The flipping should be difficult but no so difficult a full warband couldnt pull it off in a hour or so. There should also be a short lock timer so it isnt just flipping back and forth every 15 minutes. Give the side that owns it a chance to get their groups together and fill it up! Also they are going to need to turn off the chicken effect in here. Yes your lvl 15 alt is going to get pwnd. Get used to it and log your main out near where you are xping!
God I hope they pull this off without jacking it up too much. I really miss df, if i could stand daocs graphics i would still be playing it likely.
Reply
Mr. Digital said on 2:30PM 2-02-2009
The original Darkness Falls was a text-based MUD created by Mythic that you played using a special client they provided. Not having played Dark Age of Camelot myself, I'm not sure if anything more than the game's name was transfered over.
It doesn't really matter though. Warhammer Online is already such a parody of the Warhammer setting that they could stick huge walking marshmallow men in there and it wouldn't surprise me.
Reply
Pingles said on 3:19PM 2-02-2009
What made Darkness Falls so great (and this is from a PvP-hater) was that it was so different than what was out there in the MMO world.
The idea that the new expansion will only be good if it mimicks DF closely is a bit of an insult to Mythic.
Hopefully they will innovate and throw some new ideas in there instead of just copy/paste-ing they're previous successes.
Reply
lagwolf said on 3:23PM 2-02-2009
I think with the last addition of two new classes they lost me. The intros were nothing special. The Beer event was not up to the Heavy Metal standards. They do seem to be rushing out content maybe feeling pressure from the latest release from WoW.
Reply
ymrar said on 6:01PM 2-02-2009
Mythic is in a hard spot (as usual). I think there is a huge cap between "old" MMO veterans and the "new" generation MMO players (for a lack of better term to come in mind). As witnessed by the influence system the "new" players are clearly driven by carrots. They need to get something. The "old" players seem to think there should not be any carrots and that's how the first RvR lakes were built. They ended up empty.
I've never understood the drive for gear, but can't say that I haven't fell for it myself sometimes. But the fact is that it drives a huge amount of players and mythic would be stupid to not take that in account.
I do agree that PQ's are overused, I think it starts right from t2. There are propably 1-2 quests per hub that doesnt lead to PQ area. (Not only is that a bit much, but it makes soloing quite hard.) I have a feeling that LotD will be closer to Gunbad with twist though, with RvR PQs, influence, the whatnot.
Reply
endofwor1d said on 8:57PM 2-02-2009
I used to play DAoC. I do have to say that Darkness Falls was amazing. Not only was it a fun dungeon in general, but think of all the trickle down effects of adding a realm controlled dungeon.
Darkness Falls was only open when a realm earned it. In DAoC there was 3 realms fighting over access to Darkness Falls. I think only having two realms in WAR will create a more heated tug of war for control of the dungeon. I haven't read up on all the ins and outs of how it will be handled in WAR, but I hope control of Lands of the Dead is tied to control of keeps in oRvR. WAR has been struggling with getting players to participate in oRvR and I think a massive awesome dungeon is just the carrot on the end of the stick WAR needs to get players to want to participate in oRvR.
Lands of the Dead will basically be an RvR dungeon. There were always people who logged out in DAoC and then tried to kill players. It was great. It just added to the tension. It would fit the WAR universe and further differentiate them from WoW.
I have faith that Mythic will get things right. As soon as I found out about Lands of the Dead I reactivated my account. I'm betting that it will add greatly to the game.
Reply
coppertopper said on 10:14PM 2-02-2009
For any who didn't play DAOC (for shame! :p) Darkness Falls wasn't an instanced dungeon or a raid only dungeon. It was akin to Moria where the deeper you went the more difficult the monsters encountered. If you went deep enough you did encounter raid monsters, but DF was 95% PvE goodness for all, level 20+ (cap was 50).
I agree with others who have posted here, control of the Land of the Dead needs to be part of the overall ORvR scheme. Another carrot for ORvR participation!
In DF each realm had its own entrance and large wing to PvE in and trade tokens in at the merchants. WARs new dungeon absolutely needs the same mechanic, with you being able to traverse the dungeon to get to the enemy wing if you want to completely clear it out of potential gankers.
I wonder if this zone will be somewhere on the map, with entrances on each side for Chaos/Order? Or something you zone to.
Reply
RJGiskard said on 7:07AM 2-03-2009
I'm having a very hard time understanding why the token system is so good. Isn't this adding a second currency that will have a fluctuating to-gold exchange rate at auction?
If the point to allow people to accumulate points towards purchasing specific uber-gear, rather than getting random uber-loot drops that aren't wanted, why not just have the mobs drop large amounts of gold/silver and have the uber-gear extremely expensive?
Reply
coppertopper said on 10:42AM 2-03-2009
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
In all honestly, it only worked well in DAOC because crafters could salvage the token bought gear for mats. There was no mining in DAOC - you had to salvage gear for metals (or buy it off merchants which was expensive). So there was always a market for tokens. Whether you were a crafter or just trying to make money DF was the best place for you, which it was why it was always so hotly contested.
Outside of that, it was the lowest quality gear in the game.
So Mythic has to really think about what LOD will bring to WAR's world to drive everyone to want to own it. DF ownership was all about economics. LOD ownership brings?....
Reply