Feedback from a M.U.L.E. obsessed player

from Offworld Forums

Hello everyone, and thanks Soren Johnson for bringing back vibes from my faovurite game of all time: M.U.L.E. - You have made me a happier man!

That's right, I consider Danielle Bunten's game my best ever, so you can imagine why I instantly purchased a founder pakcage and why I am here. I have the crazies stories about M.U.L.E., how I acquired my first copy on tape, or how I called Electronic Arts by phone from Italy in 1994 begging for a new copy when my old one failed to load, and how they actually sent me a mint and shrinkwrapped one because they were amazed at my call. Back when EA wasn't evil. I am sure you can also understand that my comments will be biased by my love for that game, but also that while I wasn't expecting a M.U.L.E. clone, I can use that positive obsession to put Offworld Trading Company's fun and enjoyment value into M.U.L.E.'s declination of "fun".

I also understand that the design for OTC is probably done by this point so I doubt any feedback is gonna be taken into consideration, but I still hope someone will take a look at this notes from time to time and will maybe absorb a hint or two that could benefit what, to get that out of the way, I already consider a great game! OTC is awesome!

Now, on to the sparse comments. Some of them will be old and obvious to all of you, and are probably just going to be fixed by expected graphical updates. Still:

*** UI & Visuals: ***

- It gets hard pretty soon to understand what the opponents are doing. Even after familiarizing with the building models/icons, it's hard to see where all the stuff a certain oppoents has considering it could be anywhere in the map. In a turn based game I could take my timet o scout the map, but in a game like this, where time is literally money, squinting while combing the big map trying to recognize the little colour outline around buildings that could be anywhere to see if the oppoennt I am checking actually has a glass factory... is just too hard.

- Similarly, it is hard enough even to find your onw facilities and buildings. I knew I had a Steel plant but it took me more than it would make sense to find it. Same for an Aluminium plant. None of this is game breaking, but in a game where information is so important I think it would be capital to have it super easily accessible. Whether we need a drop-down list of all our assets that teleport the camera to it, or any other solution, I believe it's important that we can instantly see what we have and access it other than just looking at the beautiful map which gets really crowded later on.

- On the same note: buildings of different companies/players get to be by each other pretty soon, so there needs to be a much better differentiation (colours, whatnot) to make it clear at a glance who onws what.
 

BOTTOM LINE:  You can say that M.U.L.E. didn't have a choice when it came to visual representation 31 years ago but i disagree. They specifically used a graphical style that was very bare even for the time in order to make sure that everything you needed to know was on screen and instantly recognizable at all times. Offworld Trading Company desperately needs to make things clearer at a glance. A good part of the game is spent while watching the left side of the screen and the prices. That's OK, but then we need to be able to deal with everything else with the corner of our eye. I don't know how they can achieve this, but it is critcally important that the UI and the graphics make it much much much much much easier for the players to understand what is going on and where, even if this means dumbing all down to 2D symbols.


*** Game Mechanics: *** 

Honestly, I think it is such a great game that I don't have that many comments here. I guess I will after playing many, many more games and especially lots more multuplayer ones. I need a bunch of people I can break the game with, but I haven't found them yet so I will refrain from commenting too much on this. I will still add some observations: 

- I understand it is a RTS and wants to make sure that RTS players will feel comfortable with it, but is it worth it? It would still be a RTS even if it took a few pauses here and there, a few breaks, and didn't obsess too much with going real time all the time. I mean, do we really think your average Starcraft player will like OTC? Or it's more the Civ players that will eventually come here? As I said, I understand the design is locked especially when it comes to some core decisions, but M.U.L.E. did such aa GREAT JOB in mixing real time contemporary actions and needed breaks to take a short breath, comment the action with your friends, and then dive back into it. M.U.L.E. games lasted 2 or mroe hours though and there was a part where players took turns, which is not happening here. I am not saying OTC should become turn based, I am just saying that there's a lack of what I would call a "monthly report" phase where the game pauses, allows edveryone to take a quick look at some charts and screens, and then dive back in to the fray. What if, say, for every 15 (or whatever) days of in game time a global timeout of one minute (editable) happened presenting the players with all the charts and vital infos? Similar to the end of turn screen recap from M.U.L.E.? The way I envision it, in a full match of OTC there could be about 3 or 4 of these reports, and they would be timed, meaning you have 60 seconds to read the stuff before the action resumes. It will give a little bit of pause, it would provide a lot of good info, it would allow players to brag and taunt each other while readying to get into the next "15 days" period. Would that be such an action/flow killer? We already have auctions that pause the game for a few seconds... (more on that later), so the concept is not too alien. Isn't it worth giving up a few global time outs if that helps the players see clearly what's going on and maybe talk to each other?

- At the moment, it really seems that the first one who gets the Offworld Market to ship out their valuable goods is gonna win. In a game where everyone knows in advance which ones are the goods that should be stacked for when you'll have the offworld market, it's like the goal is set and then it's a race. Sure there are many ways to run this race, but I am not sure about the idea that at the beginning of the game they tell the players to run to point B (which is Offworld market and whatever resource they value so much) and whoever gets there first wins. I understand I am simplifying too much, but I still feel not too great about the fact that while the object of the game is to buy out all your opponents, the way to get there only differs in the first part of the game (early development) while the second becomes just a juggle of resources and money to get to the Offworld Market.

- As someone else said, and connecting back to what I said earlier, I think it's importat to know what's the status of your enemies. Sure, when there's an auction we can get one random chart, but why just one and why just at that point? Considering there are already so many variables, I am not sure the gameplay gains anything from secrecy. Once again, M.U.L.E. showed us that secrecy (which of course couldn't be kept on a split screen) was not needed as the design was so good that having everyone knowing where the others stood was a cool element to play with. This is a game of information and data, and since it's TIGHTLY time based the less we know the more disconnected we are from the game itself and to become obsessed with a number that almost feels arbitrary go up and down. WHAT IF.... under every resource in the left side of the screen we could have a tooltip of how many of that resource every player has (maybe with a 20 seconds delay on updates)? Again, this is from M.U.L.E. This way, we know what is going on, who is our direct enemy on a certain production, or who is hoarding what. We can defend and attack, as opposed to just stare at the value of a resource only to furiously click on + and - when the prices starts moving. This would once again facilitate player interaction, but more importantly add some soul (and identity) to the transactions instead of the price of a resource simply being a number we have to assume is based on players sales and purchases.



*** Player Interaction: ***

- This, to me, is the MOST IMPORTANT part. It's what made M.U.L.E. the immortal masterpiece that it is, and what in my opinion Offworld Trading Company should definitely put more resources into. It's the most lackluster aspect of the game and what could make it into something absolutely special and engaging instead of a gem only recognized in a niche. Over the years I've hooked into M.U.L.E. every single person I convinced to try at least one game, and that happened despite the initial hate for what seemed to them like an economical simulation which is something they had no interest into. So while I am sure there's a lot of people that will love it no matter what, and would love it even if were a text-based game, I am sure this can reach out to so many more people if only it'll give them a set of tools to seriously play cutthtroats with each other instead of mostly playing the numbers outside of the Black Market. The beauty of M.U.L.E. was the war on prices, thanks to productions AND auctions. That was its war. Here, the war is relegated to the blackmarket, the rest plays too much like a solitary in my opinion.

- So as I said, AUCTIONS. This is the part where OTC so far let me down the most. Seriously, you can't claim your game is inspired (even loosely) by M.U.L.E. unless your game is driven by auctions. This was by far the best part of the game and I am sure everyone agrees that few things are more fun and entertaining than auctions, hell even in real life! So, I appreciate the attempt that OTC does with the plot, pirates and patent auctions, but that is not enough. First of all, auctions desperately need to borrow from M.U.L.E. and get that super cool idea of having your character physically moving prices up and down. This would be important, once again, to cement the fact that we are really playing with other people. To have that representation of ourselves, even if only as a symbol "physically" reaching out to rise the price and win the auction would do a lot to make everyone more connected to the game world, which is too abstarct now.

- But then (yes, again on AUCTIONS), I find it very very bad that there's no way for players to trade anything between each other. This is the part I am afraid won't change, because it would too much too much of a design shift, but coming from M.U.L.E. and acknowledging how a huge part of the fun there came from the players battling each other for prices, it is a huge let down to think that even a project inspired from it couldn't find an elegant design solution for a system that worked wonderfully 31 years ago. I don't know what the players could trade with each other, I don't know what they could auction, as I said we might be too deep in development to think of anything now, but this is the one thing that I can't wrap my head around: how could Soren Johnson not build around the most engaging and addictive part of M.U.L.E. which was players going nuts over selling and buying DIRECTLY FROM EACH OTHER? Sorry if I sound aggressive and bitter, I am not. Just a bit disappointed about this one aspect, and one I feel very strongly about because in 3 decades of getting people addicted to M.U.L.E. I can safely say it was every time because of the auctions. 

You know what? I am done. Sure there's a lot more worth saying, but I've stolen enough of your time. I have storng feelings about Offworld Trading Company because I believe it can grove in a masterpiece and become one of my all time favourites. I belong to a cynical but valuable gaming community known as f13 and I started a thread there trying to spread the voice about this game ( http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=24634.0 ). I really REALLY want it to succeed and while I love it already I wouldn't feel OK if I didn't at least try to give my contribution considering the privilege I had by joining the project so early. I hope some Devs will be able to stomach my feedback and even if they'll disagree with it completely they will be able to maybe absorb a few things about how hugely important player interaction is and should be, and how that is the aspect OTC has to improve the most.

Thanks for reading this far, and thanks for making this game!

Drew Falconeer 

128 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from Offworld Forums Top

Hi Drew Falconeer,

I come to offworld from a Starcraft background, and have never played M.U.L.E. and will leave direct M.U.L.E. comments for others. I am a huge fan of the RTS  game mode and probably wouldn't still be playing offworld if it were turn based. With offworld being such a blend of influences its inevitable that there will be a differing of opinions. To me, the appeal of the RTS mode is that time is a factor in decision making and time management is a very valuable skill. You can spend time figuring out what the opponent is doing by "scouting" but the cost is neglecting your own base, or you can worry about your own.

I do agree that it can be  difficult to discern what is going on on the map. It's improved over time and hopefully the developers will continue working on making things clearer on the map.

A lot of your suggestions would strain the desired time frame for match length of 30-45 minutes and make the game choppy, which I can't be in favor of. Extending the game to allow for fixed periods of information gathering just doesn't sit well. Nor do I believe information available should be perfect. Starcraft was appealing because you never knew exactly what the other player was doing. The uncertainty and handling it was what made it fun. As it is in offworld, there is a ton of information that can be gleaned from the map. The buildings indicate the strategy. The resources being collected do too. The great players will be able to see what the opponent is making, know their weakness, and act upon it. Are they skimping on power? Stop auto-selling drive the price up. Being able to stop the game and view exactly what resources everyone has removes the uncertainty and makes the course of action obvious. Instead of being proactive in making decisions based on where the game is going you become reactive trying to min-max current information. 

Focusing more on the mechanics section: the first offworld isn't anywhere close to an auto-win. It's more indicative that the first offworld is built by the person who is leading, and is being used to widen the gap to make winning easier. The offworld is designed to end the game in the desired time frame, which it does a good job doing, but it just isn't an independent race to the end. It's appealing at times to rush the offworld for the "easy win," However, there are things than can be done to weaken the effect of the offworld. You can mess with the resource prices, you can sabotage it. Try mutinying it and stealing the first few launches, for example. Or underground nuking the aluminum or silicon sources early so the cost to build becomes prohibitive.

I have played many games where the game ends in the middle because players were overly aggressive trying to upgrade too fast and left themselves vulnerable. As more multiplayer happens, more refined strategies will be developed. Since the game is still early in development it stands to reason that the offworld is the primary choice to win since its straight forward. Once the game is opened up for release, more players will allow for the emergence of more strategies.

Again thanks for posting comments as there haven't been enough lately. Soren and the other developers certainly read them and value them. I hope you post more thoughts.

Reply #2 from Offworld Forums Top

Good read.

I not sure if I agree with your suggestions about increasing the influence of auctions in the game, but I do like the idea of a periodic status report and recap.  Also, having an easier way of finding your specific resource buildings (a button on each resource display that cyclically selects the next building that produces it, maybe?) and identifying opponents' buildings and capacities would be nice.  Though I can't imagine an interface for the latter...

Object Desktop - Get all of our enhancement utilities in one suite
Reply #3 from Offworld Forums Top

Hi Drew, thanks for your lengthy feedback! We agree that players should be able to more easily grasp what is going on just by looking at the map. In fact, in the next update, you will see little shuttles going back and forth between the HQs and the colony which show what resources the players are all buying and selling. It's been very interesting for me to get a more transparent view of what the AI does!

As for moving to something more turn-based, actually, that was one of the reasons that we paused the game during the auctions. We didn't want to overload the player and give them a little time to look around if they like. However, we found that adding more pauses really broke up the flow of the game because they often happen right when you are in the middle of something important, which is frustrating. We feel the current pace is best but are looking forward to what more new players think as well.

Reply #4 from Offworld Forums Top

also, right now, you can click on any colony and it will show you lines to their buildings color-coded by the resource type. It's a pretty quick way to figure out what other players (or yourself!) are doing.

Reply #5 from Offworld Forums Top

What about new patch! Any notes?

Reply #6 from Offworld Forums Top

Thank you everyone for your feedback on my feedback :)

I understand I am in the minority on some of the issues I've raised. That's fine. One thing I want to state again and again is that I already love OTC the way it is. But of course, having my M.U.L.E. dreams awakened by Soren's interviews made me go that way with all the expectations.

I am sorry if I made it sound like a Starcraft fan couldn't appreciate this game. That's clearly not what I meant. What I meant though was that I would assume a lot of the people into more dynamic and action games like Starcraft would find a game without combat not of their tastes, while on the other hand a lot of people I've alraedy talked into OTC because they seem to be the perfect candidates seem to be very afraid of the lack of pauses and the rushing of time. That is an irrelevant sample, but that's what I based my statemenet. Mr. indczn1? I am sorry.

Special thanks to Mr. Soren Johnson for taking the time to read and write back. I understand your points and I am more than satisfied knowing you considered my perspective. I will take a few steps back from my bold instances in the first post though and will state once again a few simple bullet points:

- Auctions are A LOT OF FUN! As proved by every game EVER that ever had an auction element. There should be more excuses in OTC for player auctions and most importantly an interface that does the auctions justice. Citing M.U.L.E. as an inspiration, and then not giving auctions more space is *in my humble opinion* a wasted opportunity. 

- About the time-outs, my idea was to get one every 12-15 minutes of real time. Almost like a basketball or football "end of quarter". That would make them about 3 or 4 in a whole game, and they would last up to 60 seconds or until all players hit the ready button. Would three 60-seconds timeout/reports in a whole match be such a pace-breaker, considering the amount of info they could provide in order to make players feel more in control of the action? Finally, to prevent the issue of being interrupted in the middle of an action, there could be a 60 seconds countdown informing the players that the next report/break is coming up, allowing them to finish what they are doing. And that would be only three times in every game.

I understand it sounds like I want to change this game into a turn-based one, but that's not the case! I love the real time aspect, it is so innovative, but I see and will always see this game as a hybrid, so why not crank the realtime knob down to 95% (from the superfast 98% we have now) if there's something to be gained in that for the typical audience (in my opinion) of these games? 

With all that said, again, thanks so much for making this game! It is awesome and it can only get better! I will continue to give feedback (eventually on other aspects too, hah) as developments proceeds. Last patch for example, small but awesome! Love to see the new blimps moving stuff back and forth, it gives us more intel and control.

I am so excited for Offworld Trading Company! 

Reply #7 from Offworld Forums Top

Hey Drew,

Thanks for all the great feedback! I work with Jim on the UI and I agree a lot with what you said about understanding what you have and what others have. We have some ideas on how to address those concerns and hope to roll them out in the coming months. We agree that the game doesn't communicate with the player clearly enough about what's going on and we're working hard to make it as clear as possible.

Thank you again!