Blizzard's Rob Pardo spoke about the core tenets of the company's design philosophy and outlined specific failures and successes.
Speaking at GDC 2010, the lead designer of World of Warcraft knows what it takes to make a game that delivers on every level. Rob Pardo said that he was preparing an internal speech for Blizzard and that he decided to test it out at GDC. He thinks it's a smart idea for developers to clearly state their design philosophy, so that every team member is on the same page. He outlined Blizzard's core values, and backed it up with specific instances in which the design succeeded across all of its titles but also where it failed.
A well-known tenet of Blizzard's philosophy is "Easy to learn, difficult to master." Pardo elaborated that in his talk by claiming that, at least for World Of Warcraft, the real phrase is "Easy to learn, almost impossible to master."
"WoW is a pretty hardcore game," Pardo said. "It just happens to be a much more accessible game. Once you get to that endgame, there's hundreds of hours of gameplay with raids, PvP battlegrounds, arena teams, all this incredibly hardcore stuff. Designing all of that depth is really important to us."
Where Blizzard failed in making a game almost impossible to master was with the Diablo II economy. "Once you got into the escalated difficulty modes, money quickly becomes meaningless," Pardo said. That led to the rise of Stones of Jordan as currency, which was something that the dev team never intended.
Another philosophy is the idea that "control is king." A game has to feel responsive to the player and that can sometimes come at the cost of coolness. The example that Pardo gave was the mounts in World of Warcraft. The first animation implemented was the puff of smoke and you appearing on your mount automatically. "When we first put that [animation] in, we all thought it was retarded. Why don't we do it more like Zelda?" said Pardo, referring to Link calling Epona, who galloped from over the horizon to you in Ocarina of Time.
"We actually mocked that up. The problem was that it took several seconds for the animation to play out and if a rogue just jumped on you and stunlocked you and was up your butt, you probably didn't want to be watching a horse galloping over the horizon." So while the puff of smoke animation wasn't as cool, Pardo thought giving responsive controls was more important to the player experience.
Some of Blizzard's philosophies are more operational as far as how ideas are presented within the team. Pardo wants developers to be as communicative as possible so that big failures can be averted. The big story here is with the Horde capital of Silvermoon which was implemented in Burning crusade. Silvermoon was built in parts and it was very difficult to assemble it all together and play a test version of it.
"We only played it once or twice over the course of a year. And since we never did that, we couldn't see it and play it and iterate upon it. So Silvermoon ended up a very beautiful city, not a particularly playable city. Now we call it 'silvermooning' anytime anyone does something like that," Pardo said.
In contrast, the battleground of Arathi Basin was shown to the team from inception. Pardo showed a very basic diagram that was the original design document. "It looks like some Atari 2600 tank game or something," he said. They continued to make a very early playable version so that everyone could sound off on what worked and what didn't. "It ended up being one of our best battlegrounds and one of the fastest battlegrounds to make."
Greg Tito: Where Blizzard failed in making a game almost impossible to master was with the Diablo II economy. "Once you got into the escalated difficulty modes, money quickly becomes meaningless," Pardo said. That led to the rise of Stones of Jordan as currency, which was something that the dev team never intended.
That's pretty much how WoW is now as well, now that marks are the new gold.
But real life economy works when it wants to, so I can only imagine how hard it would be to simulate a real one. At least their games aren't completely broken in that regard. I just wished that the goblins would have their own little Nasdaq. That would be freakin' awesome.
there is one thing that wow did that I wish other mmos would, make it rather easy to lvl, warhammer did a good job on it for most of the game but near the end it got kinda annoying but aion, aion really needed to copy that logic, it became a massive pain in the ass
Greg Tito: Where Blizzard failed in making a game almost impossible to master was with the Diablo II economy. "Once you got into the escalated difficulty modes, money quickly becomes meaningless," Pardo said. That led to the rise of Stones of Jordan as currency, which was something that the dev team never intended.
That's pretty much how WoW is now as well, now that marks are the new gold.
But real life economy works when it wants to, so I can only imagine how hard it would be to simulate a real one. At least their games aren't completely broken in that regard. I just wished that the goblins would have their own little Nasdaq. That would be freakin' awesome.
Personally I wish more games would insert something like Runescape (Yes, I admit I play it from time to time) did with the Grand Exchange. It keeps the governing force behind the items in the game mostly in the developers control, and allows rare items to become more easily accessible.
Greg Tito: Where Blizzard failed in making a game almost impossible to master was with the Diablo II economy. "Once you got into the escalated difficulty modes, money quickly becomes meaningless," Pardo said. That led to the rise of Stones of Jordan as currency, which was something that the dev team never intended.
That's pretty much how WoW is now as well, now that marks are the new gold.
But real life economy works when it wants to, so I can only imagine how hard it would be to simulate a real one. At least their games aren't completely broken in that regard. I just wished that the goblins would have their own little Nasdaq. That would be freakin' awesome.
Personally I wish more games would insert something like Runescape (Yes, I admit I play it from time to time) did with the Grand Exchange. It keeps the governing force behind the items in the game mostly in the developers control, and allows rare items to become more easily accessible.
Having never played Runescape, I had to look up the Grand Exchange, and that does sound pretty awesome. The closest thing you can get to that in WoW were the faction reputation discounts, which was nice in it's own way.
Worgen: there is one thing that wow did that I wish other mmos would, make it rather easy to lvl, warhammer did a good job on it for most of the game but near the end it got kinda annoying but aion, aion really needed to copy that logic, it became a massive pain in the ass
I'd have to agree with you there, mostly. For me, leveling up, exploring new places and learning the story of what's changed since WarCraft 3 was why i played it for so long. But i will admit, the hell that was leveling from 40-50 was too long. If you made it past the early levels, chances were that you'd either quit at 40, or be good and tight for endgame.
Is it just me, or does he look like he's been mauled by a Predator, given the scars on his neck? This dude is one bad-ass fucker.
I've always disliked the World of Warcraft examples. In my opinion, Blizzard's magnum opus lies in Warcraft III. Talk about accessibility all you want; WC3 has it in spades and then some. Also, the map creator is incredibly easy-to-use and intuitive; you could probably train some broccoli to operate it (though you'd have to domesticate the broccoli first).
Game design. Normal item = grey, magic = green, rare =blue, epic = purple.
What they failed on is well most of WOW's build was a lot on diablo 2. And since they took 10 years to make diablo 3, they lost cash not making new games and piddling with WOW so much.
CuddlyCombine: ...I've always disliked the World of Warcraft examples. In my opinion, Blizzard's magnum opus lies in Warcraft III. Talk about accessibility all you want; WC3 has it in spades and then some. Also, the map creator is incredibly easy-to-use and intuitive; you could probably train some broccoli to operate it (though you'd have to domesticate the broccoli first).
I agree with Cuddly as far as Warcraft 3. I fell in love with the map design in that game. It wasn't realistic, which it didn't need to be, but it was beautiful. I always wanted to make just a park map, sit there and read a book by a waterfall. The hero system they implemented there also was an awesome tool, though I wished at times that the heroes had some of their own leadership skills, and save some effort on the player's part. At the least leaving a hero to direct defense of a colony would give the player more direction over offensives. I would imagine in multiplayer, however, that wouldn't be as effective, though still useful. In front of every great General is a great Sergeant. I should point out that broccoli can never be domesticated. It is its own vegetable. With all the things Blizzard learned with developing WoW over the years, it gets me curious what we have to look forward to with their next MMO that is just over the horizon. Especially with Pardo's thoughts on what helps with great development.
samsonguy920: I agree with Cuddly as far as Warcraft 3. I fell in love with the map design in that game. It wasn't realistic, which it didn't need to be, but it was beautiful. I always wanted to make just a park map, sit there and read a book by a waterfall.
That's another thing that should be mentioned. Warcraft III retains its playability because it went for a (at the time) sophisticated, yet cartoonish, look. In my opinion, having a game that knows it's slightly ridiculous is great when said game just runs with the ludicrous character design. Throw in well-balanced gameplay and you've got a recipe for success.
samsonguy920: I should point out that broccoli can never be domesticated. It is its own vegetable.
Warband does it in a way where you can actually accelerate the horse almost instantly after stepping on the harness. That means that you can finish mounting the horse while on the move. If Blizzard did it that way, it'd provide a decent compromise.
Worgen: there is one thing that wow did that I wish other mmos would, make it rather easy to lvl, warhammer did a good job on it for most of the game but near the end it got kinda annoying but aion, aion really needed to copy that logic, it became a massive pain in the ass
I'd have to agree with you there, mostly. For me, leveling up, exploring new places and learning the story of what's changed since WarCraft 3 was why i played it for so long. But i will admit, the hell that was leveling from 40-50 was too long. If you made it past the early levels, chances were that you'd either quit at 40, or be good and tight for endgame.
oh yeah, the 40-60 grind, I dont miss that, really in wow after 30 it started to get annoying. Im always confused when ppl say they played wow for the story, I mean its just so easy to miss.... and doesnt really make much sense if you think about it too much.
Carlston: Game design. Normal item = grey, magic = green, rare =blue, epic = purple.
What they failed on is well most of WOW's build was a lot on diablo 2. And since they took 10 years to make diablo 3, they lost cash not making new games and piddling with WOW so much.
Except WoW rakes in an estimated 800 million a year. They aren't losing any money.
Im always confused when ppl say they played wow for the story, I mean its just so easy to miss.... and doesnt really make much sense if you think about it too much.
because they love the lore of the early warcraft games? anyway it additionally made less sense due to the fact that they retconned quite a bit of stuff. but i totally understand it (i played on a less the legal server to check up on the lore first hand)
I can't help but feel like this "Blizzard design philosophy" is basically the same as everyone else's. "Easy to learn, difficult to master" and "responsive controls" are mottos everywhere.
Another philosophy is the idea that "control is king."
This here is (IMO) one of the main and most overlooked reasons WoW is so popular. The game is so easy to play and responsive. I remember trying Warhammer Online and being immediately turned off by the sluggish controls. Then I played a few more MMOs and realized that the "sluggish" controls are the norm, and WoW is a superior product in that regard. It's a minor thing and easy to overlook, but makes a game far more enjoyable to play.
I loled pretty hard at "WoW is a pretty hardcore game".
They definitely succeeded by adding in many many different things to do at different points in the game. Their endgame however is nothing different than in any other MMO. If they have a failure anywhere, its their lack of innovating anything. They're great at building on top though and polishing through to create high standards.
Since most of business is just building and polishing upon whats already out there, taking huge risks doesn't seem to be in Blizzard's business plan. (Granted one could argue creating an MMO is a huge risk), but really it wasn't that different from any other MMO when it came out. They didn't pioneer anything in the MMO industry, just built on it, after many companies had their issues and risks out in the open for them to learn from. Smart move.
always a good idea to work together. you might think your wasting time getting in everyones grill about every little thing but when the group gets together, ideas come quicker, implementation becomes easier, and in the end u save time and money! win win! \o/
Well, as for his comments on Silvermoon, i found it to be quite a playable city. Yeah there are long walking distances, but Stormwind has them too, being all segmented and that, and Silvermoon is just one of the most beautiful things in the game. The reason it's empty is hardly its design, but location. It's just out of everyone's way, only low level blood elves and jewelcrafters have reasons to go there. For everything else, you go to Orgrimmar. Undercity is also empty. So is Darnassus and Exodar, because they are also secluded. Nothing wrong with the cities themselves.
Blizzard do polish better than any other brand I can think of and they were industry-leaders for years with the amazing run of war3>frozen thone>WoW... In my opinion it all ended with WoW:TBC, as that game - I know it's a cliche - signaled blizzard's decision to dissasemble large portions of the very "hardcore" game they had made for the sake of attraction towards casual players.
What they did to 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
It's a shame that Blizzard went the way of EA and co - honestly. I remember reading some probably-false news report about a Blizzard exec saying that it was no longer about making good games but about squeezing money out of the WoW franchise - I believed what I read about that.
Here's hoping that DIII brings back what WoW Vanilla lost: A sense of epic rewards for epic contribution.
Im always confused when ppl say they played wow for the story, I mean its just so easy to miss.... and doesnt really make much sense if you think about it too much.
because they love the lore of the early warcraft games? anyway it additionally made less sense due to the fact that they retconned quite a bit of stuff. but i totally understand it (i played on a less the legal server to check up on the lore first hand)
the lore isnt consistant even in the games, they pretty much redid alot of it between each game and much more so for wow, the story line has always been a mess and mostly char driven, I mean thrall is an interesting char and I suppose I have to give them credit for making orks something more then just the usual savages but really they only did that in war 3... and I suppose the adventure game that never came out.
Very true, their engine design philosophies are actually really good. Increasing playability at the cost of realism has really helped as WoW matured. I wish that I could say the same for their raid and pvp design philosophies. The veterans are bored and the newbies are left alone and intimidated by the staggering amount of empty content and the already-matured gaming community.
Either you're at endgame and have been there for a while or you're new and will probably quit after a week or two.
Carlston: Game design. Normal item = grey, magic = green, rare =blue, epic = purple.
What they failed on is well most of WOW's build was a lot on diablo 2. And since they took 10 years to make diablo 3, they lost cash not making new games and piddling with WOW so much.
Except WoW rakes in an estimated 800 million a year. They aren't losing any money.
Yeah, that's great. But from what I hear Starcraft 2 is pathetic and looks and feels 10 years old, and diablo 3 probley will to. I guess if they make us not want to play the great games they built their name on they can just continue with the good old WOW money pit. And nothing creative will ever flow again....
Carlston: Game design. Normal item = grey, magic = green, rare =blue, epic = purple.
What they failed on is well most of WOW's build was a lot on diablo 2. And since they took 10 years to make diablo 3, they lost cash not making new games and piddling with WOW so much.
Except WoW rakes in an estimated 800 million a year. They aren't losing any money.
Yeah, that's great. But from what I hear Starcraft 2 is pathetic and looks and feels 10 years old, and diablo 3 probley will to. I guess if they make us not want to play the great games they built their name on they can just continue with the good old WOW money pit. And nothing creative will ever flow again....
Uh, I'm in the starcraft 2 beta.. and as someone who barely played the original, and was never a fan of the series in particular, I very much like the game.
Extra Punctuation
Experienced Points
MovieBob: Intermission
Miracle of Sound: Encore
Loading Time
First Person
No Right Explanation
Ask Dr Mark
Backchat
Drinking Games
Escape to the Movies
Escapecraft
Escapist Podcast
Feed Dump
GinxTV
Jimquisition
LoadingReadyRun
Mahalo
Meatbag and Co
Media Sandwich
Miracle of Sound
No Right Answer
Pro-Gamer Gauntlet
Reviews
Tales from the Table
The Big Picture
The Escapist Presents
Trailers
Unskippable
Zero Punctuation
Twisted Metal Review
Happy Action Theater Review
NeverDead Review
King Arthur II Review
The Darkness II Review
Reckoning Review
Exodus Review
Final Fantasy XIII-2 Review
Critical Miss
Name Game
Where Blizzard's Design Philosophy Failed (And Succeeded)
Blizzard's Rob Pardo spoke about the core tenets of the company's design philosophy and outlined specific failures and successes.
Speaking at GDC 2010, the lead designer of World of Warcraft knows what it takes to make a game that delivers on every level. Rob Pardo said that he was preparing an internal speech for Blizzard and that he decided to test it out at GDC. He thinks it's a smart idea for developers to clearly state their design philosophy, so that every team member is on the same page. He outlined Blizzard's core values, and backed it up with specific instances in which the design succeeded across all of its titles but also where it failed.
A well-known tenet of Blizzard's philosophy is "Easy to learn, difficult to master." Pardo elaborated that in his talk by claiming that, at least for World Of Warcraft, the real phrase is "Easy to learn, almost impossible to master."
"WoW is a pretty hardcore game," Pardo said. "It just happens to be a much more accessible game. Once you get to that endgame, there's hundreds of hours of gameplay with raids, PvP battlegrounds, arena teams, all this incredibly hardcore stuff. Designing all of that depth is really important to us."
Where Blizzard failed in making a game almost impossible to master was with the Diablo II economy. "Once you got into the escalated difficulty modes, money quickly becomes meaningless," Pardo said. That led to the rise of Stones of Jordan as currency, which was something that the dev team never intended.
Another philosophy is the idea that "control is king." A game has to feel responsive to the player and that can sometimes come at the cost of coolness. The example that Pardo gave was the mounts in World of Warcraft. The first animation implemented was the puff of smoke and you appearing on your mount automatically. "When we first put that [animation] in, we all thought it was retarded. Why don't we do it more like Zelda?" said Pardo, referring to Link calling Epona, who galloped from over the horizon to you in Ocarina of Time.
"We actually mocked that up. The problem was that it took several seconds for the animation to play out and if a rogue just jumped on you and stunlocked you and was up your butt, you probably didn't want to be watching a horse galloping over the horizon." So while the puff of smoke animation wasn't as cool, Pardo thought giving responsive controls was more important to the player experience.
Some of Blizzard's philosophies are more operational as far as how ideas are presented within the team. Pardo wants developers to be as communicative as possible so that big failures can be averted. The big story here is with the Horde capital of Silvermoon which was implemented in Burning crusade. Silvermoon was built in parts and it was very difficult to assemble it all together and play a test version of it.
"We only played it once or twice over the course of a year. And since we never did that, we couldn't see it and play it and iterate upon it. So Silvermoon ended up a very beautiful city, not a particularly playable city. Now we call it 'silvermooning' anytime anyone does something like that," Pardo said.
In contrast, the battleground of Arathi Basin was shown to the team from inception. Pardo showed a very basic diagram that was the original design document. "It looks like some Atari 2600 tank game or something," he said. They continued to make a very early playable version so that everyone could sound off on what worked and what didn't. "It ended up being one of our best battlegrounds and one of the fastest battlegrounds to make."
Permalink