One thing that is bothering me is that people equate an option with nothing or no option.
They are indeed different actually.
To me its unclear whether the option is statistically different than the no option scenario.
Why we don´t need Haven
- Thread starter Eldrath
- Start date
- Status
They are indeed different actually.
To me its unclear whether the option is statistically different than the no option scenario.
I think Godkin answered your first point adequately. Putting the poor retention rate on the lack of a tutorial is easier than admitting that they made a game that was crappy in terms of UI, AI and virtually every system a new player had to interact with. Those that stuck around, stuck around dispite all of those problems.
Actually all information a new player needs is already in the skill description. How is a tool tip over the taming icon explaining how the actual mechanic works hand holding? That´s exactly what a game should tell the player. Ideally everything is so intuitiv that very little explaination is needed, but I think we are past that point in Mortal design.
Let´s say someone learns mining (or it might just be activated from the start). Here is the tool tip:
When close to a stone resource press R to begin mining. The amount of resources you get with every 2 swings is dermined by your mining skill and the lore skill of the resource you are gathering. After a while the source you are mining will be depleted and you have to move to another if you want to continue mining. Sources slowly refill over time. Any material mined can further processed by using extraction machine like a crusher.
!Be careful not to gather too many resources, since that will slow you down!
!Be mindful that mining exposes you for being attacked by someone who want your rocks!
I´m sure a native speaker could condense this even more. This gives you all the information you need to understand how mining works but leaves a lot to be discovered.
Yes, players will be discouraged when being killed. That´s part of the game. I´m actually not arguing that they should all spawn in Gaul Kor.
I would love a questionaire that answer me how many players actually read the basic information on the game, paid 40 bucks and then quit out of frustration because of being killed while they learned to mine a rock. It does not sound very credible to me tbh.
What I think is credible is someone falling through the world after teleporting to the priest, because they drowned in a childrens swimming pool.
@barcode
Player have stayed on Haven. That is a fact.
If you make Haven fun enough to stay on, players will do so. Those that stay will argue that they should have more content. Depending on SVs desperation levels at that point in time they might grant it. Again, this is what happened with similar systems in Mortal Online 1.
Desperation levels might be high, because a bunch of people quit because swimming was still broken at launch. Because no one had time fixing it because the tutorial interactions had to be worked on.
That is the reality of SVs resources at the moment. Deny it at your own peril.
how many people have stayed on haven and are actively playing there vs being some vet's alt who is there either for recruiting newbies or for the luls? i believe this fear of people staying is a bit overblown.
i've suggested many changes to haven that would make it more palatable. smaller, more streamlined, less materials, actual tutorial sections, etc. does sv have the time/manpower to spend on an improved new player experience? or rather, can sv afford to not spend the time on it? surely they've crunched the numbers by now and know if haven has helped retention or not. certainly they have numbers from the previous disaster of a steam launch as well
we all want an expansive, living, breathing nave. the more people the better (up to a limit). of course priority has to be making the game actually work and not be in the horrible state it is in now (tho somehow i doubt swimming will be the straw that breaks the camel's back in this case). that doesnt mean you cant also have developers looking at the haven and how it can be improved (no, not by adding more, but by removing the excess).
-barcode
i've suggested many changes to haven that would make it more palatable. smaller, more streamlined, less materials, actual tutorial sections, etc. does sv have the time/manpower to spend on an improved new player experience? or rather, can sv afford to not spend the time on it? surely they've crunched the numbers by now and know if haven has helped retention or not. certainly they have numbers from the previous disaster of a steam launch as well
we all want an expansive, living, breathing nave. the more people the better (up to a limit). of course priority has to be making the game actually work and not be in the horrible state it is in now (tho somehow i doubt swimming will be the straw that breaks the camel's back in this case). that doesnt mean you cant also have developers looking at the haven and how it can be improved (no, not by adding more, but by removing the excess).
-barcode
Nobody is even arguing that point against you. Haven should be over for the general player fairly quickly if it's done well. Like nobody here is saying it should be its own continent that's actually designed to be equal to Myrland. We're saying newbs shouldn't be rushed through their tutorial or denied one entirely just to appease your irrational paranoia.
The point should be to go there, quickly learn the basics of the game move to Myrland. Guides should be teaching people things like "10 advanced tips for combat" not "The basic keybinds of combat and how to interact with objects". By the point you have people looking up guides for things that basic you've already lost a significant percentage of your potential audience.
Last edited:
Yes, this would be the 'best-chance' scenario for the current state of gameplay, why spend opportunity cost in resources making bandaid tutorials and a Haven to attempt to bridge the massive gap spanning inconsistency and unintuitive gameplay in a deep dive sand box.
Water just happens to be a flagship of that inconsistency.
the golden rules of player retention have been guessed and and even defined somewhat, i've never seen mention of tutorials and starter islands, or anything akin to that mode of introduction
this is an interesting read;
The Laws of Online World Design
These are taken from both experience and from the writings of others. Most are the sort of “Duh” things that many who have done this sort of game design take for granted, but others may…
www.raphkoster.com
Raph gets constantly blasted for doing things players don't like on the Crowfall forums. I wouldn't conclude you don't need a tutorial just because Raph says you don't (Or rather doesn't say you do). Funny enough Crowfall is the only game I've made a guide for that explains literally everything and while it was my first video guide ever and could probably be condensed a bit, it's a 6 part video series with a total runtime of roughly an hour.
I haven't played Crowfall in months but last time I heard even they were working on a tutorial to enhance the new-player experience. And they've had have the newb dedicated "God's Reach" area separate from the main campaigns for awhile now.
So is that what you want every single newb coming into MO2 to need to watch? An hour's worth of videos they may not even realize exists to learn the basics of gameplay?
I can make a more condensed version for MO2, and I have a better mic to work with now / a bit more guide making experience under my belt. I'd probably mix a text guide with embedded videos at this point so users can skip to the content that concerns them easier. But most players will quit before they ever see it. I'd rather cover more advanced subjects that shouldn't be in a tutorial.
I haven't played Crowfall in months but last time I heard even they were working on a tutorial to enhance the new-player experience. And they've had have the newb dedicated "God's Reach" area separate from the main campaigns for awhile now.
So is that what you want every single newb coming into MO2 to need to watch? An hour's worth of videos they may not even realize exists to learn the basics of gameplay?
I can make a more condensed version for MO2, and I have a better mic to work with now / a bit more guide making experience under my belt. I'd probably mix a text guide with embedded videos at this point so users can skip to the content that concerns them easier. But most players will quit before they ever see it. I'd rather cover more advanced subjects that shouldn't be in a tutorial.
Last edited:
"So is that what you want every single newb coming into MO2 to need to watch? An hour's worth of videos they may not even realize exists to learn the basics of gameplay? "
no, just consistent and intuitive.
(edit - yes i'd hope they see such a video before even paying since it's not likely to have an F2P model)
no, just consistent and intuitive.
(edit - yes i'd hope they see such a video before even paying since it's not likely to have an F2P model)
Last edited:
sorry for the short reply, it really sums up my thoughts though.
failing that i mean what you're suggesting would most certainly help people, it definitely sounds time consuming, but hey it's community content and that's also key.
i have no problem with MO myself but i do remember how infuriating it was at first, there was so much unintuitive trial and error, the light bulb only came on once a few people actually walked/ran us through stuff, the empathy is real
a lot of what i say is very much just based on my own early days/weeks when the only hints were guys with vids on youtube like @Amadman and others, they showed us what we could expect if we persisted through that unintuitive rough start that was Tindrem Gardens lol
I believe in this game and want to see it succeed. So if there is no tutorial / a bad tutorial you're going to see me produce something that's dramatically better than what I made for the Crowfall alpha.
That being said, as I pointed out, most people will quit before they ever see it. I don't think there is any more worthy investment for the MO2 team than a great tutorial. It might not seem important to people who already know the basics but nothing could be more valuable to new player retention and anyone who really cares about this game should really care about that. Infact, I'd go so far as to say that if anyone DOESN'T care about new player retention that SV should ignore literally all of their feedback as people like that cause games to fail. And if I don't have to make an incredibly lengthy starter guide, there are like 5 other subjects I can think of I want to do guides on when the systems are more finalized.
That being said, as I pointed out, most people will quit before they ever see it. I don't think there is any more worthy investment for the MO2 team than a great tutorial. It might not seem important to people who already know the basics but nothing could be more valuable to new player retention and anyone who really cares about this game should really care about that. Infact, I'd go so far as to say that if anyone DOESN'T care about new player retention that SV should ignore literally all of their feedback as people like that cause games to fail. And if I don't have to make an incredibly lengthy starter guide, there are like 5 other subjects I can think of I want to do guides on when the systems are more finalized.
Last edited:
One possibility is that the larger point for Haven is that Devs, particularly those coordinating Haven, find it more convenient. They may assume it's simply easier to create a tiny box where they have full control and aren't limited by the overall game vision to 'perfect' it. I could sympathize with this, except it shouldn't impact the overall game, and it currently does, and always will if it doesn't contend with the principles of the game's design.
I agree, those are all valid reasons why someone would quit.
I think you'd also agree there are many examples of games (MO included) where people end up loving a game despite its quirks. How many of us fall into that category here with MO?
I'm not saying people are quitting solely because its full loot pvp and thats the only issue. I'm saying this:
MO is an acquired taste.
Is someone more or less likely to aquire that taste in an environment where they can experience the different systems without having to worry about getting killed constantly?
I'm not going to sit here and claim bugs, poor ui, underdeveloped mechanics etc dont lead to people quitting, that'd be silly.
At the same time I think its equally silly to claim that people haven't been chased out of the game before they were able to experience a large part of the game which might have kept them around.
I guess thats the lingering question, do you think that there is no cost to having everyone's initial experience be trial by fire?
Is a slow introduction always bad, or just this specific implementation?
A tutorial area is not a "Separate PVE" server. It's somewhere they can learn the basics like what keybind you use to swing a sword or how to interact with a mining node without trash tier bottom feeders running along and ganking them as they do so.
A separate PVE server would be if Haven were in any way treated as an equal to Myrland as opposed to a very temporary place to learn the most basic mechanics. Which absolutely nobody here is in favor of.
A separate PVE server would be if Haven were in any way treated as an equal to Myrland as opposed to a very temporary place to learn the most basic mechanics. Which absolutely nobody here is in favor of.
Last edited:
Honestly, this comment is a great example of just how pointless it can be to speak like this.
It's as if you come in and give to the community a moment of enlightenment, but honestly it's just a pointless comment. Why make them?
Yes. The negative side effects are being way overblown but the potential positives are hard to overstate. An engaging/intuitive tutorial experience is the first chance for a game to interact with it's players and either draw them in, or push them away.
Historically sandbox MMOs have a very high tendency to push players away. This is why you've seen successful ones like EVE invest a lot of time into tutorial improvement. It's tutorial as of a couple years ago when I last made a new character is pretty on par with the kind of standards I think MO2 should set if they want to be successful.
Like the aforementioned Fable 1, a good tutorial doesn't even need to feel like a tutorial. It can be fun, engaging, a natural part of the game. I've played through Fable 1 multiple times and I would never even want to skip to the tutorial despite learning nothing from it because it does such a good job of getting a feel for who your character is and immersing you in the game's world.
A good tutorial isn't just a chance to learn the game's mechanics. It's an experience all of its own that can set the hook in a player's mouth and leave them hungry for more of what your game has to offer.
This obviously is not the primary mechanic that old-timers are going to care about because we know how to play the game. But if you want to see this community grow and thrive you SHOULD care about it. A lot.
And you can't tell me with a little community support that SV, even as an indie developer, is incapable of making a tutorial that measures up to a 2004 game.
Last edited:
I've decided to make a list of my own pros and cons of having 'Haven'. These are through my eyes, and therefore are subjective. Some items will be objective however for the sake that they -would- be present / happen and I will outline them with an asterisk *.
Pros:
- Teaches players basic concepts and mechanics.
- Gives a memorable starter experience.
- Players are given a single re-roll token to fix race mistakes. *
- Separates veteran players from new players temporarily.
- New players wouldn't get griefed nearly as much.
- Vendors, tutors, librarians, etc. are more compact and easy to find.
- New players could build up better funds in the early game as opposed to struggling without Haven.
- Could offer Haven-only cosmetic like items for participation. (i.e. Bandit Tabard, capes, etc.)
- The starting experience is easier.
- Your items are safe in the lootbag, even if you die.
Cons:
- Does a bad job of introducing PvP to new players.
- Doesn't teach players loss properly.
- Doesn't allow players to fully experience 'griefing' which is very much apart of MO.
- Doesn't have as unique and or organic of an experience if there was no Haven.
- Sets expectations of a game. Haven could be amazing looking, to play on, etc. Then once they go to Myrland their experience 180's and is terrible. (Look at a game like Project Gorgon for an example of this. Amazing and interesting tutorial, but the normal gameplay is pretty below average.)
- Doesn't teach players to teach themselves.
- Doesn't expose them to other materials, creature types, etc.
- Difficulty will radically change upon leaving.
Pros:
- Teaches players basic concepts and mechanics.
- Gives a memorable starter experience.
- Players are given a single re-roll token to fix race mistakes. *
- Separates veteran players from new players temporarily.
- New players wouldn't get griefed nearly as much.
- Vendors, tutors, librarians, etc. are more compact and easy to find.
- New players could build up better funds in the early game as opposed to struggling without Haven.
- Could offer Haven-only cosmetic like items for participation. (i.e. Bandit Tabard, capes, etc.)
- The starting experience is easier.
- Your items are safe in the lootbag, even if you die.
Cons:
- Does a bad job of introducing PvP to new players.
- Doesn't teach players loss properly.
- Doesn't allow players to fully experience 'griefing' which is very much apart of MO.
- Doesn't have as unique and or organic of an experience if there was no Haven.
- Sets expectations of a game. Haven could be amazing looking, to play on, etc. Then once they go to Myrland their experience 180's and is terrible. (Look at a game like Project Gorgon for an example of this. Amazing and interesting tutorial, but the normal gameplay is pretty below average.)
- Doesn't teach players to teach themselves.
- Doesn't expose them to other materials, creature types, etc.
- Difficulty will radically change upon leaving.
Ideally, players shouldn't be on Haven too long and its intent is not to teach them the entire game. This shouldn't be done by any timer, but rather, a lack of things to do on Haven once you master basic mechanics. Going to Myrland for the first time is the next step of the new player experience. That is where they learn PvP, and loss, and griefing. A tutorial can't cover such things perfectly but it can do a bit of it.
I'd also look at EVE for inspiration on this one. First off, I think you actually get podded as a part of the tutorial these days just to teach players the death mechanic and the idea that ships can be lost. A mission that requires you to die and lose your stuff isn't a horrible idea for MO2 done properly. Second off, EVE kind of guides you toward post-tutorial starter missions to further your learning experience. If there are concepts you need to be on Myrland to learn, then have a few options for things to do once you leave Haven.
You don't need to experience PvP, loss, and griefing during the part of the game they are teaching you how to sprint and jump.
I'd also look at EVE for inspiration on this one. First off, I think you actually get podded as a part of the tutorial these days just to teach players the death mechanic and the idea that ships can be lost. A mission that requires you to die and lose your stuff isn't a horrible idea for MO2 done properly. Second off, EVE kind of guides you toward post-tutorial starter missions to further your learning experience. If there are concepts you need to be on Myrland to learn, then have a few options for things to do once you leave Haven.
You don't need to experience PvP, loss, and griefing during the part of the game they are teaching you how to sprint and jump.
I think there needs to be a timer. A dev was quoted saying at one point when Haven came out for MO1 that he didn't see a difference if players indefinitely stayed on Haven, and took no issue with it.
Could you imagine someone within a game company not caring if their game was explored and fully played and just remaining in the starting area? Its a slap in the face really - and that kind of thinking is honestly harmful to MO. Its the equivalent of two different servers but instead of it being EU vs NA it would be PvP vs PvE.
The need for a timer is always the symptom of a greater problem and I believe in attacking those problems head-on, instead of rushing new players through an experience that is 100% about them.
If the problem is people staying too long because there is too much content, remove content that isn't essential to the tutorial experience.
If the problem is griefers then pass out permanent account bans to people who go to Haven just to grief.
But every element of Haven should be designed to make it the best possible experience for a new player learning the basics before they set out and take on the rest of the game. "You got kicked from Haven because you took a dump / forgot your computer was on overnight" is going to diminish that experience. Players shouldn't feel like they are on a time crunch to complete the tutorial and any time limit will convey that because they aren't the ones who know how long Haven is going to take the average player. If you say "Seven days of online hours" they're going to think. "Shit, this tutorial could take up to seven days?!" "I wonder how much I need to hurry to get this done?!" You've just lost a few players by even communicating such a thing to them.
If the problem is people staying too long because there is too much content, remove content that isn't essential to the tutorial experience.
If the problem is griefers then pass out permanent account bans to people who go to Haven just to grief.
But every element of Haven should be designed to make it the best possible experience for a new player learning the basics before they set out and take on the rest of the game. "You got kicked from Haven because you took a dump / forgot your computer was on overnight" is going to diminish that experience. Players shouldn't feel like they are on a time crunch to complete the tutorial and any time limit will convey that because they aren't the ones who know how long Haven is going to take the average player. If you say "Seven days of online hours" they're going to think. "Shit, this tutorial could take up to seven days?!" "I wonder how much I need to hurry to get this done?!" You've just lost a few players by even communicating such a thing to them.
Last edited:
- Status