Massively^™

There's always a lot of discussion about what's going to be the next big thing in the MMOs industry. We all love to talk about the future and that's largely because it's a very interesting topic. So we just had to attend the "Online Games in 2013" panel at ION 08. This panel was actually introduced by Peter Freese, the ION Conference Director. It was easily one of the most packed panels I've been to thus far which is saying a lot since all the panels have been pretty well populated already.

The panel consisted of Erik Bethke (GoPets Ltd), Scott Jennings (NCsoft), Bridiget Agabra (Metaverse Roadmap) and Damion Schubert (BioWare). With a group of people like this I was expecting some varied and compelling conversation on the topic of MMOs in 2013. In the end we got just that and a quite a bit more.

What's a virtual world? Why do we even call them virtual worlds when we could easily call them digital worlds, or just simply, worlds? This was just one of the many interesting topics discussed at ION 08 this year in a panel entitled, "Redefining Virtual Worlds for Mass Markert Consumption" which is quite the mouthful. So lets put things in a more understandable -- and far more interesting -- perspective.

Whether you're talking about Club Penguin, Gaia Online or Second Life the truth of the mater is that these "worlds" are here to stay and they all share similarities -- social interaction. Not only are they here to stay, but they've only just begun to grow as a market. Which is why this panel was all the more interesting. The panel includes Erik Bethke (GoPets Ltd), John K. Bates (Mindark/Entropia Universe), Craig Sherman (Gaia Online), Rob Lanphier (Linden Lab/Second Life) and was moderated by David Elchoness (Association of Virtual Worlds).

The following is a quite excellent session from the Worlds in Motion GDC track given by Erik Bethke, CEO of GoPets. The takeaway message is about what virtual worlds can learn from MMOs in terms of providing intelligent goal structures.

Erik: How do we apply MMO goal structures to virtual worlds (and to almost everything)? Virtual worlders tend to hate games like WoW because they're not "erudite" enough but look at this screenshot (shows slide of a UI from a raid) and look at how complicated the user interface is. With 10 million people playing, is it hardcore or is it casual? I get really frustrated with arguments about UI: the raid screenshot proves that even this level of complexity can break through to a larger audience.

Shows slide of quest-giver goblin in WoW: "virtual worlds are missing the little guys with exclamation points above their heads." Looking at other examples of goal structures: look at how successful Puzzle Quest got by combining Bejeweled with RPG elements. Look at Chore Wars -- suddenly I get excited about walking the dog (laughter). Even something like the LinkedIn registration process -- I logged in one day and saw that my "progress bar" was only at 40% and how can I live with that?! I had to level up in LinkedIn. I found out I needed to get testimonials from my contacts to get higher -- it was a group quest! I got pissed that I couldn't solo LinkedIn (lots of laughter).

At a morning GDC session, GoPets' Erik Bethke gave a standing-room-only-crowd some sage advice:

People who use green for mana bars instead of blue for mana bars... that's just hubris.

Of course what he means by this is that developers who defy basic gaming trends are setting themselves up for failure. To continue the mana bar metaphor, players have become accustomed to blue mana bars and green health bars from a long history of games. Mixing up this very basic element will only make a game less accessible. On the flip side of this, however, is innovation. If no one breaks the traditional molds, we may never see better games. But at the same time it's hard to argue with Bethke's example: why change a game element that players are accustomed to? It could make the difference between a game that's intuitive and quickly picked up by new players and a game that loses players before the tutorial's finished.

Early this afternoon during Erik Bethke's discussion of the cross-over between Virtual Worlds and Massively multiplayer games, he hit on a fantastic idea that I'd love to see explored. What if you could incentivize people to do things that were good for them by giving them goal structures? Players provide goals for themselves all the time in ostensibly 'goal-less' virtual worlds, from Second Life to Club Penguin.

In an aside, Bethke noted that assigning goal structures - reasons to play - is actually a fairly easy part of game design. Though it takes some effort to make those goals fun and interesting, working them up in the first place is a fairly trivial piece of work.

So what if you could make eating right and exercising fun by leveling up and earning loot?