Argonus' site

Beating an undead horse.

Mon, 14 May 2012 01:46:40 +0000

I would like to ask the community: what concepts are you sick of seeing in games on BYOND or games in general? I want to know what you all think has been done to death and the very premise in a game is nauseating (so we, of course, can learn to improve/ avoid such things).

Sequels That Are Not Sequels: S.T.A.N.S

Sun, 05 Feb 2012 18:10:44 +0000

When making a sequel to a game, most developers don't seem to add enough new content to really validate making an entire new sequel. It seems that they are afraid to change or improve what made the previous game successful, so instead they take the safe route and simply add a few new features & expand the story line further. I have coined a phrase to describe these games: S.T.A.N.S (Sequels That Are Not Sequels) This is not a good thing, especially now that we have DLC that can add new content without the need of making an entirely new game. There is also another case of S.T.A.N.S, sequels that are not full sequels, for example the Assassin's Creed series Brotherhood and Revelations, which are examples of sequels not introducing enough content to differentiate themselves from their previous games. Of course they will be saving their more game changing content for the [i]actual[/i] sequel (in this case it being assassin's creed 3), but Revelations, which I have played, is almost the same as brotherhood except a few minor features, new map & storyline. Is it really enough to warrant an entirely new 60 dollar game? And what's worse it doesn't progress the major story line that much, it's almost a spinoff. Is it worth creating a completely new title worth 60 dollars instead of simply providing a major DLC to extend the story like that?
Now for an example of a GOOD sequel that is not a S.T.A.N.S: Mass Effect 2. They completely refurbished the game play based on player feedback, push forward the major plot from the last game, even made it so the character in ME1 and your decisions in it pass to ME2, and instead of making a big spinoff title for subplots they simply introduce major DLC packs. This is a sequel that presents itself as an entirely new game,as it should, instead of being a minor upgrade to the previous title. It gives you much greater hope and anticipation to the next title because there is so much more to look forward to. I don't want to pay 60 dollars for something I already played a year ago.

Just take my money so I won't feel bad anymore :(

Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:31:44 +0000

It's rare when you run into a free to play MMO and fear for the financial situation of the developer from looking at how weak the premium content is. I've encountered this while playing DC: Universe, which has recently gone f2p and occurred such a grand surplus of new players that it queued up their server logins past 10,000 (I had to wait over an hour to log in the first time). However they quickly expanded server capacity at an impressive speed. DC:U has adopted a somewhat hybrid model for their premium content... You may either individually buy stuff from their cash shop such as costume pieces, fancy toys, inventory and character slots, ect. OR you can get a monthly subscription that gives you a ton of shit (expanded inventory and bank slots, no money cap, access to DLC, more character slots). The thing is... the top dog monthly payment package doesn't seem worth it right now... I don't need to make a ton of alt character, I don't need to expand my pocket money limit from $1,500 if everything costs under $1,000, I never came close to filling up my inventory, & there isn't any DLC out right now. Perhaps when my character reaches the level cap and things get serious I might require these additions, because apparently DC:U has a system similar to Guild Wars where you reach the cap relatively quickly then the serious content comes into play. Although I like how DC:U doesn't force you into buying their premium stuff... I feel bad for them because I wonder if they're making any money off of this at all. I've played games that give you skimpy inventories and reduce the EXP rate to dwindling levels to force you to buy cash shop crap, but with this I almost feel guilty for taking a free ride. Perhaps that is their grand financial scheme: Guilt trip the player to giving them money... Brilliant!

The Sliding Scale of Character Cusomization.

Thu, 03 Nov 2011 21:04:05 +0000

If you have ever played an RPG, or for that matter any game that said it had "RPG qualities" or any sort of character progression, it's imperative that the player has some sort of influence on how their character works. Many games will give you a huge map of abilities, equipment, and other ways to tweak and personalize your play style and role while others will restrict you to a certain class. But those are just the two extreme ends of a rather bigger scale, most games fit somewhere in the middle by combining elements such as a class system with individual skill trees and more diverse equipment sets so a player can make a more unique character.

I have compiled a general assessment on the level of freedom a game allows to shape a character or play style on a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being no freedom whatsoever and 5 being complete, unrestricted customization.

1 - Static Characters
A 1 on the scale means little to no player influence on a character's abilities, armor, statistics, ect. Instead the player is given a static character and it's up to the player to use that character's given abilities in the way he or she chooses. While these games do have some form of progression such as finding different items or weapons, the character's outcome will still be the same. A few examples of this are traditional shooters, platformers, adventure games, fighting games ect. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, as it provides a more controlled environment so that developers do not have to be concerned on balancing different character builds and eliminating possible exploits. The Legend of Zelda series is a notable example of this, you are given a character with a linear progression by collecting weapons and items, but it's up to the player to decide how they use these items that makes the game entertaining. This model may be successful in single player games, in MMOs this is a bad idea.

2 - Minor Character Options
Some games will give you static characters, but will offer some tweaks such as various equipment items or optional abilities that can provide a player some influence. Most RPG's that have strict character classes use this model by providing an extensive array of equipment that can somewhat adjust a character's statistics, however it may not be entirely enough to completely change the direction the character was intended to go. Examples of this are Team Fortress 2, which allow you to change weapons to tweak your playstyle while still retaining the main purpose of the game's classes. An example of this in a BYOND game would be pre-v1.52 NEStalgia, which provided a large array of equipment to influence your character as well as optional abilities, but despite this it still used rather strict classes. Casual Quest would also fall under this scale.

3 - Greater Character Options
Similar to the previous model, but with much more flexibility. This is usually a model that includes archetypes along with more diverse equipment, ability trees, and/ or direct influence over a character's stats. This also includes a game that provides various options, but still does not deviate or doesn't do much to the main play style. This model best describes what post-v1.52 NEStalgia is like now. WoW or LoL would also be considered a 3 on the scale.

4 - Freelance Character Customization
Games like this usually abandon archetypes to give the player a great array of options to build a character. This model gives a player building blocks to create their own unique builds, but still has some restrictions but they are very few. A game can still have archetypes and be considered a 4 on the scale as long as they are flexible enough. Rift is a good example of this, a character can "equip" 3 different individual skill trees to make a unique character for themselves. An example of a BYOND game that uses this model is Stolen Lands: While it uses classes to determine your skills, you can also learn some skills of a different class as well as have full control of stat distribution and equipment.

5 - Complete Free Form Character Building
This model gives the player complete control of their character in great detail and with little to no restrictions. The player is given a buffet of options and they can pick and choose whatever combination to fill their plates. This is the usual model for sandbox styled games such as the Fallout or Elder scrolls series. Sadly this model is rather rare in MMOs as it's a statistical nightmare to try and balance every character possibility and remove any exploitative or overpowered builds, especially in competitive game play.

An apology for the lack of updates

Sat, 29 Oct 2011 04:46:39 +0000

I'm sorry for not posting anything, my computer has been hit with a rather nasty virus that has wiped the article I was going to post off my hard drive so I am in the process of writing a new one. That combined with some personal stuff has delayed me from posting anything here as well as preventing me from hosting D&Dis on BYOND Tabletop as often as I would like. Bare with me fans (yes, all 6 of you) I will be up and running as soon as possible, I have already dealt with the major problems of the virus and I'm taking steps to get rid of it. Again, sorry for the inactivity.

D&Dis hosting times

Tue, 18 Oct 2011 19:33:56 +0000

I will try to host D&Dis on a daily basis on 6:00 EST. I am still looking for players for the first campaign, I am hopeing to find 3-5 players for the campaign and it will be a relatively short one that will introduce the game. If you are interested in playing please join my server on BYOND Tabletop, and if we have enough players we will start the campaign.

Dungeons & Discourse

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 03:27:35 +0000

I will be running my own tabletop campaign using an interesting tabletop RPG system I have found called "Dungeon & Discourse", which is based on 2 comics by Dresden Codak (link here and here). It's a philosophy based RPG... no really! After the comic was made a group of fans made it into a pen and paper RPG system.

It's a very interesting system and I really want to try running a campaign. I have run campaigns before on BYOND tabletop with an experimental prototype system I developed myself that worked almost completely on player input, so I'm confident I could run this system successfully. I'm already in the process of setting up blank character sheets and filling out the first campaign, so I should be finished and ready to host soon.

RPG Character Archetypes

Sun, 04 Sep 2011 06:46:56 +0000

In any RPG with a decent system, wither it uses strict character classes or a freeform skill system, characters will gravitate towards certain roles (hence the R in RPG). Of course, this is common knowledge for any RPG player from tabletops to video games, however I feel that for both players and game developers that these roles have not been properly explained in depth. By being aware of these major archetypes it can make game balancing for RPGs much easier and can give a base for developing a character development system. This is all based on my personal observations and I have full confidence in my own findings, and I hope it will help some developers as well as players.

The first and most important point I would like to make is that character roles tend to revolve around 4 major archetypes which I will be discussing in depth. These archetypes are in no way rigid templates for character roles, but are simply guidelines based on the common goals of players in a multiple character group RPG setting (such as an MMO or an RPG with a 'party'). I will also be using common terminology for the sake of familiarity, if you ever played an MMO you might recognize these.
The four archetypes I'm referring to are 'Tank', 'Damage Per Second', 'Crowd Control', and 'Support'. I'm sure many of you are already familiar with this terminology in MMOs, and if so you already have some knowledge of what these roles are.

Glorified meat shields

Lets begin with The Tank. As the name suggests it's a character built like a tank: Something that can take a lot of punishment. The main role of a Tank character is to hold the attention of enemies (mobs) in order to protect the rest of the team from being attacked. They push the group forward towards their goal and are usually in the front lines. Tanks behave as the outer protective shell that protects the inner workings of your party so they can properly function without the worry of being overwhelmed.
This role is usually pulled off properly in most games, it is typically defined by a stout warrior type character that uses a sword and perhaps a shield and wears heavy armor. The abilities of a successful tank would be high defense (or at least a way to prevent damage to themselves) along with decent damage output and 'taunting' skills to be able to hold the attention of enemies and to make sure you're in the target of their aggression instead of your teammates. Tanks can also utilize skills that would prevent targets from taking offensive maneuvers against the party, such as interrupting spell casting or 'stunning' enemies.
Common subtypes are characters that prefer to boost their defense and/ or HP so they can survive, usually depicted as a 'Soldier' or 'Warrior', and if they use minor self healing abilities they might be classified as a 'Paladin'. A character might also improve their offensive capabilities instead of their defensive, using offensive tactics to put pressure on enemies and holding their attention. These 'Barbarians' or 'Beserker' characters can maintain more enemy aggression but may take more damage as a result of trading defense for offense, it is common to see these subtypes to become stronger the more damage they take. A less common type of tank is a character who would rely on dodging/ parrying/ blocking damage, while somewhat less unreliable than their counterparts still achieves the same goals. A tank wouldn't even have to be a stereotypical melee soldier either, consider a magician with strong defensive spells and magic that can draw in enemies, a character like that can also act just as good as any of the examples mentioned above.

Can you say 'Backstab'?

Next on the list is DPS (Damage Per Second), as it implies it represents a character that is built to do the maximum amount of damage per second. This role's purpose is to provide the group's main source of offensive damage and to defeat key targets in an enemy group as quickly as possible. Possibly the most straight forward archetype in any game, and also the most common. DPS characters can vary in the method of how they achieve their goal, and it is common to see it overlap with several different roles and cause imbalance. DPS characters are the heavy artillery of the group, they are the ones who get the kills. Typical DPS classes are represented as agile and cunning and use light weapons and armor like knives or short swords, or ranged weapons such as bows. The abilities of a DPS would be ones that increase their overall offensive capabilities or even weaken the opposition so they may quickly dispatch their targets. a DPS character might also have methods of self preservation such as avoiding enemy aggression or being able to escape tight situations.
DPS subtypes usually are split into melee and ranged types, the former commonly using small weapons such as knives and represented as a 'Thief' or 'Assassin', and the latter being one that uses a bow or even a gun (and could even have some sort of NPC 'pet' that fights with them) such as a 'Ranger' or 'Archer'. While weak yet fast attacks are common in DPS characters who prefer to dice up an opponent with several low damaging but rapid fired attacks, Slow but heavy attacks can work just the same, as long as the character's average damage per second is high and can be maintained long enough to efficiently kill a target. DoT (damage over time) abilities such as 'poisons' can also aid a DPS character, or even be the sole source of their damage, so even a magic user character can be a successful DPS.

A rather sexy example

The fourth archetype is CC (Crowd Control), which is a rather evasive role to describe. While commonly represented as the magic wielding class, a CC character's main purpose is not to kill targets (that's the DPS' job) but instead to weaken them. This goal can be obtained in a large verity of ways: You could weaken an enemy's status directly, use large AoE (Area of Effect) or multi-targetting abilities that deal damage to a large area or several targets at once, or even deny enemies from using abilities or slowing their movements. Possibly the most explored role there is, there have been several adaptations which has lead to some confusion of what the role's true purpose is. The CC's role is to weaken or even outright halt an enemy's approach to their own goals by holding dominance over a battlefield, thus controlling the crowd.
Subtypes for this class come in many flavors... But almost always it is represented by some sort of spell-casting class. However, this role has as much verity of representations as any other class, and I implore developers to be more creative and to try not to stick with the linear magic type character and possibly try to be more creative. The most common subtype is a 'Nuker', a class that deals heavy damage in a large area or over several individual targets, a typical "kill it with fire" mage character is a good example. The next common subtype is a character that weakens an enemy directly, usually by decreasing their stats directly and/ or preventing them from taking actions, usually coupled with DoT abilities (like poisons or life-draining spells), commonly defined as a "Necromancer" or "Illusionist". Like I said before it doesn't have to be a magic-type class, it could use melee to achieve it's goals such as a "Saboteur" class that poisons enemies and disables limbs, or an "Engineer" that constructs explosive devices to damage enemies in an area. I personally think this role has a lot of unused potential.

NO!

Much better...

Finally there is the Support, the most currently underrated role. Most commonly the healer, making sure the rest of the team doesn't die, and typically in most MMORPGs it doesn't get any deeper than that. While a support character doesn't always mean restoring hit points, it can also mean applying buffs on teammates or providing backup. A support's main goal is just that... support! It backs up the rest of the team by either preserving them or making them stronger and more efficient and even fighting along side their allies. Possibly the most important role, it is also the least popular and most misunderstood.
Most games stick the support role into a weak spell-caster mold, meaning they have little to no offensive or defensive capabilities whatsoever. Whatever little offense they do have ends up being magic, meaning it usually uses up the same spell points they use for healing, so in a group their offense becomes useless as not only do they have to save their points for healing their offensive abilities are much too weak to make much of a difference. Not only this, but because support characters are the prime targets of enemies due to their importance, they have no way to defend themselves due to a lack of defense or offense (or both). This subtype is sadly the most common and the most broken, if all a character can do is heal then it's not very exiting to play (I personally call these types "healbots"). A much better example would be characters who are balanced in all fields, but excels in support abilities such as healing and buffs. There is also the subtype devoted more to providing strengthening buffs, such as a "bard". This Archetype is possibly the most versatile as support abilities can be coupled with any other role, and I believe that it has the most unseen potential out of all the 4, even more than crowd control.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There are also some common mistakes some MMOs have with strict character class systems that I want to point out:

The most common is grouping CC and Support into one class, usually splitting off into their own roles after a "class advancement". This makes the Support role into a defenseless spell caster who's only purpose is to heal (Like the "Healbots" I mentioned before). Even if the classes are separate most games still portray the Support class as a squishy wizard, which can be fine if given enough depth and doesn't take away from the overall offense of the party.

Another mistake is splitting a DPS class into ranged and melee classes. While this is fine as long as the other 3 roles are given 2 classes of their own, but this usually isn't the case. It will usually end up with DPS having more attention than other roles.

A less common but still prominent example is fusing Tank and DPS into one superior melee class, this is usually coupled with ranged DPS given it's own class. Commonly it will let players split off to either DPS or Tank roles with the class, but it has the same effect as the above example.

I find that the most common example is all three combined (tank/DPS, ranged DPS, melee DPS, CC/Support). The most notorious example being the old Maplestory class setup, before they went overboard...

The horror!

This has become so common I started to refer to it as the "Korea Syndrome", as Korea being the biggest producer of MMOs and this template being the prominent example in their character development systems. While newer games are deviating from this, the older ones stick to it like glue.

If you keep these major archetypes in mind when developing an RPG character system, it can make balancing much easier if you apply equal attention to all 4 fields. Of course these are not rigid molds, they can be played with and mixed to create an endless amount of potential characters, and creativity is always encouraged.

Busy Busy Busy

Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:17:48 +0000

Forgive me for the lack of updates, I've been rather busy with personal things. I'm going to be moving back to Michigan soon and I'll be starting a new semester near the end of August. But it's not all bad I suppose, I get to see my friends and my significant other after 3 months in D.C. I'm sure am going to miss our nation's capitol. I've also been focusing a lot of my time trying to find a new job in Michigan, which I know from past experience that finding a job there is like pulling teeth. BYOND is still not working for me, I've been trying to resolve the issue but I'm kind of at a dead end at this point, I don't know what else I can do to try and fix it.
I promise to write up a nice article for the blog as soon as I find the time, I already have a few subjects in mind, just bare with me.

Virtual Ecosystems

Thu, 04 Aug 2011 20:50:39 +0000

I've recently been playing the beta of a little known game called Wakfu, developed by French developer Ankama and Square Enix. It is the spiritual sucessor to Dofus (another game you may or may not have heard of *applies hipster glasses*) and also has it's own animated series in France. What I find most interesting about the game, and what will be the main subject of this blogpost, is that it has it's own living virtual ecosystem that players can affect based on their actions. In Wakfu there are several resources you can collect in the wild to supply your various crafting professions, however gathering said resources can have an impact on the environment just like in real life. In the game resources do not grow back on their own, you will have to regrow them in order to maintain the environment, even enemy NPCs which are all wild animals can easily die out if players kill them off without promoting repopulation. So if players start chopping down trees and do not plant new ones an area can literally become completely desolate until someone starts growing them back. This provides an interesting level of player impact on the game: while most MMOs that require resource gathering for crafting have automatically spawning resources, games with an ecosystem such as this is dependent on players and their maintenance of these natural resources. I would really like to see a system like this in future MMOs, it would create a whole new economic layer if resources were player regulated like this instead of being inherently infinite, also it does feel good to unleash your inner environmentalist when you save an entire region from the brink of desolation by transplanting a few trees. I also wonder if such a system could be implemented in a BYOND game: It might be a good experiment to try for a worthy programmer out there *hint hint*, it could bring out the dynamics in a game's crafting economy if made correctly. This sort of system has a lot of potential and it's something that needs to see more action.