ID:109931
 
Keywords: design
Rift still has its hooks in me, but the thing about being a hardcore gamer for 27 years is that something that could hold some people's attention for 7 years only lasted 5 weeks on me. Rift is cut of similar cloth, and I'm sure I'll be back and despondent to create an everlasting gobstopper.

It's research, really. There's two things I find rather interesting about Rift that I think are invaluable lessons for interesting online game experiences.

1. Rift has a flexible character generation system that retains the appeal of a class based system.
Generally speaking, MMORPG character generation mechanics will fall on one of two sides: they'll either be extremely class based and offer you a very limited amount of customization (e.g. EverQuest 2) or they'll be extremely flexible but lost all balance and cohesion (e.g. Champions Online). Mediums, while they can be found, will generally produce an unsatisfactory result that can be attributed to one side or another.

Rift has found a rather interesting compromise that satisfies both camps fairly well. Playing with the ZAM Soul Calculator will probably be easier than me explaining the individual details.

This is an extremely flexible system. You can customize your Warrior, Mage, Rogue, or Cleric across each of their nine different subclasses by simply choosing three sub classes and then choosing where to invest your points into. On top of that, you can switch between four "roles" between combat on the fly, you can switch back and forth from being a Necromancer/Warlock/Pyromancer to a Chloromancer/Dominator/Archon all you like.

You'd expect this to kill all meaning behind the subclasses. It doesn't because you can only play one role at a time and, by maximum level, you'll only have enough points to fully invest in one and a half sub classes (or spread those points around more).

Further, a great deal of balance is maintained, while there are more effective combinations, the way the abilities are balanced between the classes produces surprisingly few redundant abilities.

In practice, players will have their preferences for which configuration of subclasses beneath their main class (Warrior, Rogue, Cleric, Mage) they want to play, and this determines their "actual" class.

Originality is preserved. Balance is preserved. Character generation flexibility is unprecedented. It's a very good system, and one I should gain a lot of familiarity with.

2. Rift has, if not dynamic content, at least a significant step in the right direction over any other mainstream product.
One thing that's often bothered me about MMORPGs are just how static they usually are. They claim to have a virtual world, but they are in reality merely theme parks where (in popular World of Warcraft style) you are directed from quest hub to quest hub performing a procession of quests.

However, no matter how many players perform those quests, things stay the same. There is no true consequence to the players' actions besides advancing their characters. It's a major immersion breaker. Why pay $15/mo for the key to a virtual world that only changes when the developers put out an expansion?

Rift still has the quest hubs and the dungeon instances, but it also adds a completely separate PvE mechanic in the form of invasions from the titular rifts. When a rift opens, it will close after about an hour or so but the payers have the ability to attack and seal the rifts themselves. While open, invasion forces will periodically be launched from the rift against the surrounding area. If not intercepted by players, these invasions will actually claim the quest hubs, requiring players take them back in order to access the quests or other services (healing, general store) there.

That's just business as usual in Rift. Things get even more interesting when "events" occur. These usually involve a massive opening of rifts and largescale invasion while the players on the map are urged to complete certain objectives. The events usually end with a fight with a particularly nasty boss that may require a full raid (four teams of five players each) to take down.

I say Rift's dynamic content exceeds "any other mainstream product" because there are some considerably less mainstream products that push things further. For example, Quel Solaar, while it has several technical and user friendliness issues that make it hard to recommend, it is significantly more dynamic than Rift.

Still, Rift is a good example of how large-scale mainstream dynamic content is not just a pipe dream - important, considering how many people I've seen who try to argue it is. I believe that mastering dynamic content is mandatory to a goal of an everlasting gobstopper virtual world game.

Overall, I think I've a few things to learn from playing a bit more Rift. However, I anticipate that the end game will likely be the same as we've seen in other MMORPGs, and if that comes to pass then I'll no doubt be back here trying to push the envelope.
Someone obviously has not played many MMOs.

Rifts character creation and customization is nothing new or unique.
It is the exact same system that was included in WoW, except instead of having 3 predetermined customization trees to chose from, you pick your own 3 from a small selection.
Other than that, it functions exactly the same as games like WoW, Age of Conan, Warhammer online and possibly a lot more games I am unaware of.

As for Rifts and "dynamic content". They're half assed. Basically, the world goes dark, and a few monsters spawn for you and others to kill. Then a few minutes later this will happen again in a slightly different location.
Warhammer Online had this exact same thing with public quests, except the public quests in Warhammer were a lot more involving and varied.

Rift is another in a long line of World of Warcraft clones that is doomed to fail. It copies too much from WoW, without adding anything of it's own to the mix.
People who want to play WoW will play WoW, those who don't probably wont play Rift for the same reasons they don't play WoW.
Someone obviously has not played many MMOs.

Actually, I've played dozens. This is not even a complete list.

Rifts character creation and customization is nothing new or unique.
It is the exact same system that was included in WoW, except instead of having 3 predetermined customization trees to chose from, you pick your own 3 from a small selection.
Other than that, it functions exactly the same as games like WoW, Age of Conan, Warhammer online and possibly a lot more games I am unaware of.

The devil is in the subtle details. World of Warcraft had tree customizaiton, but these weren't actual classes, they're just customizations of existing classes. Rift takes things considerably further than World of Warcraft or any of these other games.

If you can't tell the difference, you probably not be lecturing people on how little they know game design.

Rift is another in a long line of World of Warcraft clones that is doomed to fail. It copies too much from WoW, without adding anything of it's own to the mix.
People who want to play WoW will play WoW, those who don't probably wont play Rift for the same reasons they don't play WoW.

This thing you're saying here is generally the safe bet.

I don't know if Rift will crawl out of World of Warcraft's shadow unlike the several clones before it. However, I will say this: I've played those clones, and can confidently say that Rift has done a far better job than those that came before it. Warhammer Online was the closest WoW clone to capture WoW's level of craftsmanship, and Rift has exceeded even that.

Putting aside if Rift proves to be the WoW killer, I would not be surprised if Rift actually pulls a million subscribers. That's no mean feat, something very few P2P MMORPGs have done before it. There's no question in my mind that Rift is at "next big thing," levels, although whether the game becomes "the big thing" has less to do with technical merit and more to do with the bandwagon effect.
Geldonyetich wrote:
The devil is in the subtle details. World of Warcraft had tree customizaiton, but these weren't actual classes, they're just customizations of existing classes. Rift takes things considerably further than World of Warcraft or any of these other games.

If you can't tell the difference, you probably not be lecturing people on how little they know game design.

Sure, Rift has lots of "classes". But in reality, these "classes" are functionally the same as a talent tree in WoW. The only difference is in WoW a class is locked too 3 talent trees, while in Rift you get to pick 3 talent trees.

Just do a side by side comparison.
A class in rift has one talent tree, and an average of 18 abilities (but to unlock them all, you have to fully specialize in this class and cannot invest in any other class).
Picking 3 will result in you having 3 talent trees, and depending on build around 30-40 abilities to use at maximum level.

In WoW, a class has 3 talent trees, and at maximum level anywhere from 40-60+ abilities.

Like I said, functionally, the only different between Rifts system and WoWs system is that in Rift you get to pick and choose the talent trees you want (though most combinations simple do not work well together).


This thing you're saying here is generally the safe bet.

I don't know if Rift will crawl out of World of Warcraft's shadow unlike the several clones before it. However, I will say this: I've played those clones, and can confidently say that Rift has done a far better job than those that came before it. Warhammer Online was the closest WoW clone to capture WoW's level of craftsmanship, and Rift has exceeded even that.

Putting aside if Rift proves to be the WoW killer, I would not be surprised if Rift actually pulls a million subscribers. That's no mean feat, something very few P2P MMORPGs have done before it.

Rift simply wont kill WoW. I'll admit, it is the most polished MMO I have played in a while. But it does not have what it takes to rival WoW, provided WoW does everything Rift does, but has 13 million more players.

The problem with Rift is the exact same problem games like Warhammer Online and Age of Conan had. It does not strive to be better or different from WoW, it strives to be the same as it.

Like I said, people who play WoW will continue playing WoW. People who don't wont play a WoW clone for the same reasons they don't play WoW.
Sure, Rift has lots of "classes". But in reality, these "classes" are functionally the same as a talent tree in WoW. The only difference is in WoW a class is locked too 3 talent trees, while in Rift you get to pick 3 talent trees.
[...]
Like I said, functionally, the only different between Rifts system and WoWs system is that in Rift you get to pick and choose the talent trees you want (though most combinations simple do not work well together).

The only difference? So, these aspects...

* Those talent trees are comprise of 100% of the class skills you get, no skills are actually inherited from the base class. (At times a base passive.)

In Rift, the only thing two warriors with different souls will have in common is that they can use the same equipment and accumulate attack points. In World of Warcraft, Warhammer Online, or Age of Conan, two warriors with different talent specs will only differ in stats (often influencing which of their abilities are most effective) and a few bonus skills.

* 9 talent trees to choose from per class, as opposed to the usual 3? You are limited to investing in three at a time, true, but you normally don't have a choice of which three.

* The ability to switch between soul configuration on the fly without the need to visit a trainer?

* Some of those talent trees will do radically different things (e.g. a Rogue with Riftstalker can actually tank and a Rogue with Bard can actually be a primary healer) where on most talent tree systems the main difference is just a few buffs and special abilities?

... aren't functional differences to you?

These differences are not irrelevant. When you take a isometric single player RPG (e.g. Diablo) and give the player several characters to control at once and make it real time, it ends up playing like a RTS (e.g. Spellforce). This is an example about how it takes only a few minor things to change the nature of a game mechanic completely.

Knowing this, I'm firm in my understanding that Rift's character generation mechanic has done enough to distance it from its predecessors. In the same way, one should not underestimate the impact of the rift invasion mechanic on the PvE.

Rift simply wont kill WoW.

So, do you see anyone here who claimed it would?

I'll go so far as to admit I can see a possibility based off of technical merits, but frankly I think a lot of World of Warcraft's numbers have to be with simply being in the right place and the right time with the right product and with the right audience paying attention. That kind of astronomical luck isn't something I can bet on.

At the end of the day, why should I care if the game is going to be more popular than WoW? It's like caring if Justin Beiber is going to be more popular than Britney Spears. That's something you'll see a lot on a MMORPG.com forum, but if I can pull you back from that a bit, what's the point of all that? There is none, it's just fan clamoring like they're rooting for their favorite sports teams.
Geldonyetich wrote:
The only difference? So, these aspects...

* Those talent trees are comprise of 100% of the activatable skills you get, no skills are actually inherited from the base class.

Same thing applies in WoW.
If a Mage never had the fire talent tree, he would not have fire spells. Only difference is, Mages are forced to take the fire talent tree (and by extension forced to have fire spells).

* The only thing two warriors with different souls will have in common is that they can use the same equipment and accumulate attack points?

Only thing a Warrior and Paladin have in common is they use similar equipment. What is the difference here exactly?

* 9 talent trees to choose from per class, as opposed to the usual 3?

4 classes with 9 talent trees, but you can only use 3. (Although technically, each class has a PVP talent tree, and these are almost the same for each class, sharing most abilities and talents in common, so really it's 8 talent trees per class, plus one every class can pick)
But WoW has like 10 classes or something each with 3 talent trees.

* The ability to switch between soul configuration on the fly without the need to visit a trainer?

You can do this in WoW too. But you have to unlock it (you also have to unlock this ability in Rift)

* Some of those talent trees will do radically different things (e.g. a Rogue with Riftstalker can actually tank and a Rogue with Bard can actually be a primary healer) where on most talent tree systems the main difference is just a few buffs and special abilities?

Same thing applies in WoW. A Druid with healing spec is a lot different from a Druid with feral spec, which is a lot different from a druid with magic spec.

So... Where exactly are these differences you keep talking about?
Like I said, the only difference is in Rift you get to pick 3 talent trees from a selection of 9. While in WoW each class only has 3 talent trees which you do not get to pick.
You know, I would like to respect your opinion, but I have to draw the line at rank denial.

This much is clear to me: if you honestly have attempted to trivialize these major differences I've outlined, as I see you're attempting to do in your previous comment, you're either unwilling to see how important they are - probably because you think we're having an argument and you want to win - or unable.

I don't know if it's something I learned from 20 years of being a forum visitor or if I'm simply too damn tired in my old age, but when I feel I have identified Ferrous Cranus, I bail out. It's nothing personal, it's just that I feel nothing I say will matter, so why bother?

[Later comments between me and The Magic Man deleted because nothing good came of it for either party.]
I did not really enjoy the Rift beta at all.
My Main Complaints (game-play only):
- Classes / Souls are too generic with a lot of overlap in skills that do essentially the same thing
- Rifts did not seem in anyway to be unique and often times were more of an annoyance than fun
- Questing was far too linear with little to no variation

Overall it was too similar to Warcraft without the years of polish
- Classes / Souls are too generic with a lot of overlap in skills that do essentially the same thing

There's definitely some overlap in most builds, especially melee builds. However, I just filed away the redundant skills and found I still had over 80% of the skills in any given build as having a purpose.

(With a few exceptions - Nightshade/Assassin would be one - you should take one or the other and not both unless you want to have a ton of redundant skills.)

- Rifts did not seem in anyway to be unique and often times were more of an annoyance than fun
- Questing was far too linear with little to no variation

I could see why you'd find the questing too linear if you found the rifts annoying. Personally, I thought the rifts were what provided a diversion from the quests and kept both fresh.

If you find having to deal with invasions annoying, definitely stay away from Rift. That puts you outside of the niche this game is really intended for.

I suppose you could avoid dealing with invasions if you logged out every time a quest hub was overrun. But, if you're not going to embrace them as an awesome alternative PvE activity, stick with WoW, it does what you want better.