Recently we've seen a LOT of effort and time being taken up by the development of Characters (classes etc.).
What's more important.
The game world that is actually a World.
or
The game characters that you'll use to roam that world.
Should they (the characters) be so in depth that a lack of interesting points in the game world are over looked or excused because the characters we have are so unique that it's acceptable that the world is mostly generic, loot is mostly random bot generated and quests are (with a few exceptions) mostly a secondary thought.
I just remember Brad's quote. He wants to make worlds. And I think I'd be ok with a game of 4 classes if there were an actualy world to explore, get lost in, discover, and actual loot to get excited about that not everyone else will eventually get.
It's the world that provides us with all the possible options of gameplay. The items to earn and/or craft, the places to explore, the monsters to fight. But a boring class, even in an exciting world or an exciting class in a boring world always means you're going to be unfullfilled in some, or many, ways.
If you're looking for a percentage here, it's 55/45 in the world's favor.
What is more important in an FPS game: Guns or Bullets?
What is more important in a space game: Ships or Planets & Stars?
What is more important in an RTS game: Buildings or Units?
Sorry if this seems condescending but it seems to me that you are trying to quibble over the importance of things that are both vitally important. In an MMORPG you must have a world worth adventuring in and you must have characters worth using to adventure. Trying to decide which is more important is like trying to decide if it's more important for your Heart to be beating or your Brain to be functioning. If either isn't... your equally in trouble.
The world is *far* more important. I have no interest in the best and most interactive character models ever made if they do not have a well created world to do anything in. On the other hand I can live with a pathetically unattractive non-interactive model if it has a lot of interesting things to do.
Unless you are scientist investigating flora, fauna, geology, etc the most interesting parts of the world are the direct result of the people that live(d) in it. So I would say the most important thing is that the people and the world feel enmeshed. NPCs should tell the story of the world around them through things like patterns of speach and dress as well as by directly telling its story. There should be plenty of NPCs that don't have a story to tell with words, and should just be facets of the world.
I dunno, it seems to me that the world and the people are aspects of the exact same thing.
They are both extremely important. Spending time on classes/abilities isn't just for players either, those same mechanics/abilities/tools/etc are also applied to all the various NPCs in the world for them to use. Spending time getting all of this stuff in first allows the world and the inhabitants of it to come together in a much more rich way.
With great characters and a bad world the game dies, with a great world and bad characters the game dies. But, if I had to choose, I'd lean toward the world being slightly more important. The thing about Brad's quote "I want to make worlds, not games." is that the players, characters, npcs, are all part of that world. It's not a world without them.
Vandraad said:It's the world that provides us with all the possible options of gameplay. The items to earn and/or craft, the places to explore, the monsters to fight. But a boring class, even in an exciting world or an exciting class in a boring world always means you're going to be unfullfilled in some, or many, ways.
If you're looking for a percentage here, it's 55/45 in the world's favor.
I have to agree with this. I feel like the world is slightly more important when compared to the characters, however, characters are the lens through which a player experiences the world. As Van said, if either end of the equation is off players are going to be unfulfilled in some way.
I think about GW2. My initial opinion of the world was that it was great, However, over time, the lack of a trinity system and a dedicated healing class eroded my desire to keep playing.
I also think about WoW. World development has taken a nose dive off a cliff. On the other hand, class gameplay is in a semi-decent state and combat provides a fluid experience. I recently stopped playing for a number of reasons. One of those reasons is that outside of raiding and mythic+ dungeons there isn't much to engage with.
Then I think about FF14, which I am currently playing. I would say that world design is decent and class design is decent. Neither is at 100%, for me personally, but both are present at a passable level. There is a decent amount of content to engage with, and the classes provide a decent enough experience to facilitate the want to engage.
Going back to Brad and his quote about worlds. Trying to build a world that feels like a world is important. However, it is also important to remember that classes are part of making a world feel like a world. Classes are important for races and their lore. Some races and factions may even hold a certain class above others based on how their culture developed. I don't think that limiting class choice is a healthy option for world development, much less player satisfaction.
It is also probably important to mention that development teams are composed of many people all with different areas of expertise. You will have environmental artists and you will have character development artists. The character developmental artists are not the ones building the environment, just like the environmental artists are not creating the classes. Both are working on the game at the same time and making progress in both areas.