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.
Yes, but also a lot of them are gone because if you don't remember the old forums got hit with a nuke and a lot of data was lost from it.I don't know If already written but don't forget that there are already a lot of MO1 guides that could help a MO2 player.
Haven wasn't content heavy. It was safe. People couldn't get griefed if they didn't want to. This detracts from the purpose of the game. This is an objective fact because I played during the release of Haven, and while I agree with it's concept - the fact you could remain there indefinitely was not healthy - especially when a person from SV saw "no issue" in players staying there. It was as if ignore the rest of the game if you want, we don't care; we're benefitting from it - rather than incorporating that player into the community fully.
As many people have said, if players are allowed to permanently stay on Haven - it's going to turn into a mini-trammel.
Haven did a pretty good job of it in MO1, it was barebones but the concepts were there.
The time can be a massive amount of time. Just not permanently. Don't confuse a timer with "rushed experience." Help channel lasted for new players for like.. what..? 250+ hours of in-game time? That's literally 10 and a half days of in-game time played. Do I think it should be that extreme of a number? No, but the time limit doesn't need to feel as if it's looming upon new players.
A veteran could fully skill out a foot fighter in about 2 days, 1 day and a half if they straight no life it.
I'd say a decent amount of time is 2-3 in-game days played (48 hours - 72 hours). That is more then enough time to learn the basics and be on your way, and it also wont fall into this pit of "take a crap and get kicked". I know your example is illustrating players might misconstrue the time given as the amount that is 'needed', but if SV is smart they will put a disclaimer as soon as new players log-in for the first time to describe where they are, why they are there, and the decisions they make to stay and learn or to leave is all upon them.
Haven is a good idea.
Letting it be a refuge indefinitely is not. It goes against the games core.
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.
I don't find the developer thinking this way as negative or insulting at all. Allowing as many different types of playstyles in the world is what will allow the game to have a larger player base. Forcing players to play a certain way is what will keep it small.
Of coarse they have to maintain the core of the game over all though.
It is similar to SV's stance on cities. Some players think SV should make it where players are forced out of the cites and into the wild. While SV feels it is fine to have players that want to live their whole life in a city.
I completely agree with their stance here as well. Since the cities are a place where one would expect much activity in a world.
Chasing the players out of the city to play in a way they do not choose to play is basically just forcing them out of the game.
Which really makes no sense when the game needs that type of player as well.
If we actually were talking any significant population living in Haven as a safe area I'd prefer it be handled like high-security space in EVE. A much more secure area with lower value resources that you can travel back and forth from. I do have issues with cutting off certain parts of the game from others. Though I also am against splitting NA and EU into two servers so I'm pretty consistent on that stance.
I don't feel like even a high-security area fits inside the model and vision of this game but I do agree that not having something like that will absolutely limit the success potential of this title.
That's not even really what we're talking about here though. I just don't think it's appropriate to be introducing newbs to ganking and griefing before they are done learning the basics of how to play the game.
I can agree with the line of thinking that 'Sandbox is sandbox, you are free to do what you like.' But I feel being 'okay' with players staying on what is meant to be a tutorial island is not something to encourage or be okay with.
If I were a developer, and I knew some of the population was going to stay on the tutorial island either because it's more enjoyable or that there are mechanics in the game that they don't agree with past the island - then I would feel compelled to correct these problems. A lot of people saw Haven in MO1 as a potential to harken back to the 'old days' where people didn't have absolutely everything in their banks ready to go. But turns out, PvP wasn't even an option on Haven unless you went through efforts to grief.
I just.. don't agree with it. I don't find the logic in designing a game only to be okay with players staying at the start. It -does- detract from the hardcore aspect of the game 100%.
Cities are different. I'm okay with players indefinitely staying in cities... because the city is apart of the rest of the game world. Haven, is not. It's closed off, one way, and designed with a specific set of rules that are vastly different to how things work.
There is a difference in having reasons to leave the city, and the game forcing you from the city. MO1 lacked reasons to leave.. meaningful ones. Sure you could go farm, but a city like Tindrem for example was self-sustainable from the inside (While a bit shit, but totally possible.)
Living in cities and playing mostly out of cities is fine in this context, players living on Haven and not leaving and being able to stay indefinitely, in my eyes, is not.
There’s simply no data to support that haven population supports myrland population.Players should be leaving Haven with so many resources that it will matter greatly when they lose them. I don't think there is much benefit that comes from being griefed when you're at the "Press W to walk forward" phase of the game. I think a good tutorial that focuses on teaching players good fundamentals is a great thing for players to have behind them before they step into their first PvP scenario.
The fundamental principle behind Haven should be quickly and effectively teaching players with no knowledge the basics of the game in as engaging of a manner as possible. If you just want to learn movement and one combat style you should be in and out in under half an hour. If you want to stay and try every lesson it has to offer you should be out within 2-4 hours tops learning magic, archery, melee mounted combat, gathering, extraction, fishing etc. (No I'm not switching positions on the time limit, just giving an estimation of how long someone should be inside there)
Either way, the main thing a player should leave Haven with is knowledge of how to play the game.
They absolutely need to aggressively pursue making it the best new player experience possible and make zero compromises with veterans antsy they'll be in there too long and they won't get enough opportunities to stab them.
Haven is not about you. It's not about me. It's about making the best investment SV can make toward growing this game. Bringing new players in and giving them a great experience. And if they focus solely and entirely on that goal then the only end impact on veterans is going to be a lot more new players coming in and sticking with the game a bit... and a lot less people asking "How do I parry an attack?"
There’s simply no data to support that haven population supports myrland population.
I think industry titans of the same genre like EVE which have very good tutorial systems are a better measure than games that clone 90% of the mechanics from eachother rendering tutorials redundant if you've played any of them, and which have well organized / extensive wikis to teach you about the more detailed aspects of the game.
Mortal has a lot of mechanics that are fairly unique to Mortal starting from the basics of how to use a sword or cast a spell. If playing Mortal felt like playing every other cut and paste survival title I might agree that so many players coming in already know the drill they can easily teach the few who don't. That is not the case here. At all.
Pretty sure I can find you plenty of studies that show a good tutorial increases player retention if you want to argue the point I'm actually making though.
Yeah, have you looked for material on MO1? It's like 10+ years old and you still have to sift through multiple pages on Google to find an answer to some pretty damn basic questions.
If you want to rely entirely on out of game resources then I may as well get to work building a wiki. That's something every single game you're holding up as an example has in common, at least of the ones I've played. Great wikis that answer my questions quickly without having to sift through 5-10 guides that don't.
Doubt it. The market of multiplayer open world PvP games is not that big to warrant actual studies.