A Cycle of Change...
Filed under: Culture, Patches, Opinion

Logging into Guild Wars for the weekly guild night this Tuesday saw a bit of an unwelcome surprise; the personal fallout of the latest in a very long line of skill balancing patches. As a Mesmer, I'd generally done quite well out of these in recent months; a somewhat less popular class than most, they had seen quite a bit of improvement over a number of months, but this latest patch saw 'Visions of Regret' and 'Cry of Pain', two very potent skills I use almost all the time, significantly reined in.
Of course the initial reaction was one of personal indignation, coupled with envy at the perceived winners of this round of adjustments. It isn't fair! A moment of reflection however and I began to consider more than just my own side of the thing, and perhaps for the improvement of the wider game, the changes to these specific skills might indeed have been warranted, and in any event, those imposing the changes were sure to have far more data at their disposal, and a view of a much larger picture than me.
Balance is something all MMOs seek for themselves and their players, and yet very few achieve a state of equilibrium, in which all players share equal potential, equal possibility and equal enjoyment. Can the cycle of buffs and nerfs ever please everyone, or is an continual procession of patches a sign of life and vibrancy that the single player off-line game lacks?
I'd always been fascinated with the idea of patches. Starting from early EverQuest and continuing through to today, the idea that a fixed and finished product, such as a computer game, could still remain malleable and in a state of continued growth and development was stunning. At regular intervals, we would all hold our breath and wait anxiously to discover what the patch notes would bring and our game would change in subtle ways.
Sometimes it would be fixes. This in itself went a long way toward justifying a monthly fee for me, a concept which was difficult to swallow in my early MMO gaming, and one which still deters potential players today. Naturally, the game should not be broken in the first place, but developers are human and mistakes occur. By the very medium on which we played, the Internet, updates and adjustments could be delivered too. An almost organic process, it did indeed seem as if the game itself was actually healing in some fashion, and as the months and years progressed, becoming more robust and more complete, which in comparison to the off-line games that came before, was an almost miraculous thing.
This ability to fix on-the-fly does have down sides though; where an off-line game of the pre-MMO era would get one chance to get it right, the modern MMO is often released to the public in a much more questionable state, with the understanding that any missing features or broken content can be fixed later on. Perhaps the convenience and easy availability of the patching mechanism relaxes standards somewhat?
Patches also provide new things. Extra additional content can be delivered to the customer in an almost incidental manner. The original Asheron's Call is an old MMO, but a consistently updated one, and has delivered 108 content updates, making the Dereth of today a markedly different place to the Dereth of 1999. Clearly, the use of patches to regularly increase an online world and its options goes a long way to justify monthly fees, and we increasingly see the concept applied beyond MMOs; most current console titles have some form of 'DLC' available these days.
"No-one likes being hit with the nerf stick." |
In games that have them at all, classes are a frequently adjusted thing, and many sets of patch notes have the familiar breakdowns. We all scramble to see what has been done to us, and what others are getting, as a continual process of balance is applied, seemingly without ever being reached. Did we win? Who got shafted this time?
Running on an assumption that all players should be equally potent and useful, but in fundamentally different ways, a given class can see all manner of tweaks and changes over their months of play, some good and some bad. It is possible that the very things that make one class different from another will mean that no functional balance between them can ever be achieved, leading to frustrating and repeated rounds of buff and nerf and general upheaval in the ranks as a result.
Perhaps it is not a balance of power that is sought, but a more even distribution of players among the classes on offer. Unpopular classes may be made more attractive with increases in power, or over-subscribed ones toned down a bit through specific patches, both measures which can be applied to create a more balanced pool of potential group members.
In games with no specific classes, these kinds of lever are more subtle, but still exist, typically revolving around the tools and equipment with which basic gameplay is conducted, and these things can be dynamically altered as the overall design demands.
"In general "They" aren't out to ruin our gaming." |
There are limits however, and even four years on, disgruntled ex-players of Star Wars: Galaxies mutter darkly about the Combat Upgrade and New Game Enhancement. In these cases, the combined effect of the two patches was so dramatic as to significantly alter the very nature of the game itself, something many players could no longer bear.
So a kind of balance of our own is sought, in response to the attempt at balance presented to us by an ongoing MMO. The MMO adapts to us, so we adapt to its adaptation. Truly game-redefining patches are generally rare, but it is up to us to decide which those actually are, and how to act on those changes. In most cases we can take them in our stride with no real upset. In some cases, a change in our play is the appropriate response; rolling a new alt, for example. In the most extreme cases, a re-evaluation of the game itself is in order; is this suddenly new game still worth sticking with, or not? In all cases, the accumulation of patches means that we are rarely playing the same game we initially signed up to.
I'll probably be okay with two changed skills in Guild Wars, but who knows what the future may bring? Have the patch notes ever pushed you too far? Or have they enticed you in for a second look?

















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Arnie said on 2:11PM 6-26-2009
Hehe!! Speaking of Guild Wars patches, I was really really pissed when they had updated the AI a long time back to make the enemies less dumb. The biggest change was they moved away from taking AoE spells and would thus aggro onto your backline if the backline did not anticipate it appropriately. My guild used to help do missions and any given time we always had a few new players trying out the game. This led to so many borked missions because folks who came from other games were not so used to moving around(me being one of them). Range is such an absolute thing in Guild Wars and is one of the reasons I appreciate the game. It did not try to obfuscate its mechanics, they were out there in the open and the designers wanted you to play and improve your skills on them. While I appreciate the mechanics and the idea, its hard to rationally judge game updates as a player.
Reply
Hypester said on 2:23PM 6-26-2009
Balance is subjective. That is why it can never be achieved.
Equal enjoyment? Equal potential of what, exactly? All subjective. No one can get a bullseye on an undefined target.
Reply
pogger said on 2:45PM 6-26-2009
Still... the GW balancing is a lot less painful than what I experienced while playing WoW. Maybe it's because most of WoW's balancing seems to be for arenas; and that aint my gig.
Reply
Tom said on 3:21PM 6-26-2009
My biggest peeve with GW is that a lot of the skill tweaking was done to address exploits and issues that had come up in PvP, something I have ZERO interest in. : /
Reply
Arnie said on 4:12PM 6-26-2009
They had this for a long long time but then some time back they divided the skillset into PvP and PvE. It meant that any balancing done for PvP would only be reflected in a PvP area and in PvE areas they behaved like normal PvE skills. This allowed them to tweak skillsets as and when then liked for the differing environments. It was one of things people complained a lot about and although they did not have to do it they went ahead and implemented it.
Metroid said on 4:52PM 6-26-2009
Guild Wars is a PvP game, so naturally most of the the updates will be for PvP, shocking, I know. PvE also doesn't need balance nearly as much as PvP does; as long as there isn't anything that's impossible to complete or a skill/skill combo that's incredibly broken, like Ursan Blessing, PvE can be left alone. The Visions of Regret nerf wasn't all that necessary, but Cry of Pain had a nerf coming since it was created. Hopefully Arenanet will get around to nerfing some more commonly abused PvE skills in the future (cough, Save Yourselves!, cough).
steve said on 2:13PM 6-29-2009
my biggest problem with any patch notes is when
im playing a char for say a year only to have the patch notes suddenly reduce my char to the point of being i have never played before it like a new char.
in some cases they total mess up and go to far then after playing im left with so do i redo another char again or do i just del it.
if im playing city of X i have gotten to the point now i no longer make a lot of alts for that very reason i get sick of having to reroll the char. so i one play less and two i usually just Del char's.
i dont want to even go into the mess they have going right now
Reply
Cithrax said on 9:10PM 6-26-2009
Guild Wars was meant to be a PvP game. Now the focus has shifted greatly to PvE. Only time will tell if they'll make some new PvP content in one of the new larger updates.
Reply
Sean said on 12:47AM 6-27-2009
The one game I've encountered that continues to grow and change without engendering the sort of knee jerk response typical of many MMO players is Magic the Gathering. The lateral expansion and evolving designation of what constitutes the "standard" versus "extended" or "legacy" types of play allows the game to stay fresh by essentially remaking it every few months. While the basic game mechanics remain the same, and certain archetypes transcend the various expansion and rereleases, the cards that make up your Type 2 legal "White Weenie" deck will probably be completely different in a year from now. Still the game, at least in the short time I played it, managed to walk to the tight line of having familiar enough, overarching mechanics, while still constantly introducing and adapting itself to new ones over time.
I'm not sure if or how one would apply such a system to a typical MMORPG but I suspect that some of the MMOFPSs releasing in the near future might come close. Any game with a short or trivial progression to the "endgame" and a focus on PvP as the central activity would be a good candidate for a TCG analogue in the MMORPG/MMOFPS mold.
Reply