Destiny's Eric Osborne Explains How Feedback Informs Development

[This article was archived by the Internet Archive following the dissolution of GameFront. ]

The Dark Below is the first expansion and 12th update for Destiny that aims to "expand the world of Destiny" with, among other changes, more gear, a new six-player raid, a fast-paced strike, and three new Crucible multiplayer maps.

As the first expansion for Destiny, The Dark Below, released on Dec. 9, represents the first step into the game's future. Yet, as a live experience, Destiny is constantly evolving. On a number of occasions, Bungie has responded either to player feedback or players' in-game actions to make big changes to how the game works.

Just how big of an effect does the Destiny community have on the further development of the game? GameFront contributor Morgan Ramsay turned to Eric Osborne, community and marketing relations manager at Bungie, for the answer.

Morgan Ramsay: Destiny has a large community. How much feedback does the game receive? What do you do with that information?

Eric Osborne: There's an unlimited amount of feedback coming in. We gather anecdotal feedback, bug reports, and feature requests from our forums, social, and digital. We were just in Las Vegas at the PlayStation Experience, where we had a ton of conversations, gathering personal feedback, too. We also have a user research team that gathers data about the experience, what players are doing in the game, which activities they're playing and for how long, and all that kind of fun stuff. They report that data to our designers, ask them questions, make hypotheses, and see if that data proves out.

It's a pretty complex, multifaceted process that involves a lot of teams. We have our community and user research teams but we also have our live support and sustain team, server infrastructure team, customer service team, and then, of course, our studio itself. We have a fairly large studio at more than 500 developers. We're all playing the game, injecting our own feedback into the mix. We knew Destiny was going to be a game that we would be updating and patching short- and long-term, so we built the game to sustain this type of activity.

Ramsay: What role do you play in that process as a community relations manager?

Osborne: Our job is to bring together all the feedback, the trends we're seeing in the community, what influencers are asking for, and what people are doing on our forums, and help the development team prioritize and figure out what we can and can't do for future patches and updates. We get in the room with the development team and make sure the community's voice is heard. That means we have to constantly keep in touch with all those people out there, not just on our forums but on Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, and all the various places we can have conversations with our community. We have to figure out what makes sense for us to bring to the development team.

Ramsay: Not all feedback is useful. How do you determine what recommendations to make?

Osborne: There are a number of factors. How many people would benefit from a feature or update? Is it feasible to build internally? How long will it take to get it out into the wild? Is it already something that's planned? The Bungie community has been a fundamental part of the process. For example, our customer service team looks at data from the game, how many people are getting specific errors, the volume of errors, the trend line for errors, and what people are saying about those errors; and then we point resources to where we can make the biggest impact.

Ramsay: Can you give me an example of how you addressed feedback in a big way that players would recognize?

Osborne: We saw player feedback about Engrams, their lack of satisfaction with the Cryptarch, and we saw that a certain class of players was spending an awful lot of time shooting into caves that had high volumes of enemy respawn.

The "Loot Cave" became a divining rod that told us players were dissatisfied with the quality and drop rate of Engrams, so the solution on our end was to slow the rate of enemy spawns in those caves, tweak the Cryptarch and Engram system to stop delivering lower-tier items, make Strikes pay out a little more regularly and consistently, and tweak planet materials, like Relic Iron and Spinmetal, to be useful for Crucible players as well.

That's the sort of update that took weeks to get out into the wild and in several stages. We saw player feedback on forums and social aligning perfectly with in-game behavior, so we were pretty certain that what people were saying was representative of a large number of players. We could make changes that would benefit a lot of people and make the game better.

Ramsay: Has player feedback reshaped the creative direction of Destiny? With so many voices, at what point do you draw the line and say, "There can be only one behind the wheel?"

Osborne: Destiny is a first-person shooter; it's not going to suddenly evolve into a strategy game. Destiny is a loot game; it requires investment. There are core pillars we adhere to and we posted those online. We designed the game to be social and cooperative. We designed the game to be a first-person action game. We designed the game to be fun when you're playing with your friends. Those are things that won't ever change.

That is the core of Destiny, but we can look at the experiences players are having and say, "Oh, they want more weapon variety or better rewards." We can look at the raid and say, "A lot of people weren't satisfied with the way rewards were being doled out, so let's make them more consistent and predictable." Moving from the Vault of Glass to Crota's End, that's what we've done. The raid is still the raid with the same core goals. The raid is intended to be the most challenging thing we've created, to put six players to the test, and to require coordination. But we can change the way the rewards spool out.

Ramsay: Prior to Crota's End, the Vault of Glass was considered by some to be the best content in the game. Of the 10 million or so registered players, only two million have played the Vault of Glass. As endgame content, Crota's End is likely to be played by just as many. Is the fact that so few players have experienced Destiny's best content a problem?

Osborne: For players who are looking for a really rewarding but ultimately very challenging experience, the raid is the thing to do, but there are players who consider the Crucible their favorite activity and there are players who consider Strikes their favorite activity. Most players play a little bit of everything and then you have more specialized segments who really fit into one band or another. Iron Banner, for example, is the pinnacle content for somebody who really enjoys the Crucible, whereas the raid is the pinnacle content for someone who enjoys a super-deep PvE challenge. For players who are not looking to test their will and spirit, there's the strike, which is what my wife plays. The strike is a really fun and quick thing she can do while my son naps. She always gets rewards and feels great about the arcade action aspect.

Ramsay: One challenge of getting new players into the raid is gearing up those players. With randomized loot, whether players can gear up for the raid is down to probability. How can a casual player expect to gear up in time to play with their friends?

Osborne: We've heard that feedback pretty loud and clear. We've taken some steps already to make levels 26 to 30 more consistent.

We've added endgame gear to the Iron Banner, our competitive multiplayer "where power matters" event. We've made changes to requirements on Exotics so they don't take Ascendant Materials. A lot of players weren't spending Ascendants on Legendaries because they were stockpiling them, but they were limiting their movement through the levels, so we freed them up to be more generous about where they apply those on their other weapons. And we've added another path where you can spend Crucible Marks to get and exchange planetary materials if you're just doing competitive multiplayer.

We certainly don't want to take away the sense of accomplishment, and the rarity and power of that gear, but our goal is also to not make the game feel punitive and too grindy. That will also bear out in Crota's End. We've made adjustments to the loot tables and drops, so players will be getting that Raid gear more frequently, more consistently, and more predictably.

Ramsay: Entertainment time per dollar is an important consideration for many players. The Dark Below is priced at $20. That's one-third the price of a new game.

Osborne: When we look at the content on offer in Destiny, we're seeing millions of players come in every day and spend hours a day with that content. What we wanted to do is give them some fresh experiences. That means a new raid, which people will spend an insane amount of time with. It's a really complex, really fun aspect of the game, and one of the fresher experiences you can have in a first-person shooter.

We saw players spend an awful lot of time in the Tower, visiting vendors, having dance parties, and trading in gear. We wanted to make sure that we could enrich that experience with not just a vendor but a character who was part of the story. We have three new Crucible multiplayer maps. We have the Will of Crota Strike, which I think is the best Strike we've produced to date and fairly different from the format we've used. The Will of Crota is a more frenetic back-against-the-wall Strike than we've ever produced before.

I think ultimately whether players believe The Dark Below is a good value is their call. When someone opens up their wallet, our job is to absolutely produce value for money. I think we've done that with The Dark Below.

The Inside Story of How a Major MMO Went Wrong

In 1999, Brad McQuaid cofounded Verant Interactive alongside 56 other game developers who were forced out of 989 Studios, a Sony company, upon the arrival of the PlayStation 2. Verant Interactive was best known for EverQuest, the seminal 3D massively multiplayer online (MMO) role-playing game. The company was later acquired by Sony Online Entertainment (SOE), which has continued to expand EverQuest into one of the largest video-game franchises in the world.

By the end of 2001, McQuaid, who had been working in executive management, became disillusioned with managing a large enterprise and sought a return to a hands-on design role. Together with Jeff Butler, he cofounded Sigil Games Online to develop Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. Spurred by a promising publishing relationship with Microsoft, the new studio quickly grew to more than 100 employees who worked tirelessly on the next great fantasy MMO.

A regime change at the software giant in 2004, however, meant that Microsoft wanted Vanguard released immediately, sending McQuaid spiraling toward another partner. He found refuge with SOE, which rescued the publishing rights from Microsoft and gave the game a fighting chance. Today, Vanguard is remembered by a loyal fanbase who will see the world of Telon come to an end after a good seven-year run in July 2014.

With a renewed sense of purpose, McQuaid, with a core team of eight veteran game developers, cofounded Visionary Realms last year to develop Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen, a high fantasy MMO that will incorporate the lessons he has learned over the past 25 years. Pantheon is currently seeking funding on Kickstarter.

Read the full interview at IGN ›

Press Startup: Rubin, Spector and Others Talk Business in Gamers at Work

"In quieter times, both [Jason] Rubin and [Warren] Spector were interviewed by Morgan Ramsay for his book Gamers at Work: Stories Behind the Games People Play, which was published last year. Ramsay's intent in collecting long-form interviews with 18 gaming luminaries, from Nolan Bushnell of Atari to the Sony rivals Rubin and Ted Price of Insomniac Games, was to paint a picture of the pitfalls and challenges of making a gaming business work."

Read the full article at Forbes ›

Gamers at Work reveals the risks and emotional complications in entrepreneurship

How Gamers at Work can benefit students

Ramsay: Gamers at Work is first and foremost a business book. The Entrepreneurial Management Center at San Diego State University has a copy in their library. Wagner College, one of the top private business schools in New York, has a copy in their library, too. I think the book would be perfect as a teaching tool for founders, a reference that bridges the gap between professional managers and founders, and a resource for game developers who should understand the how and why of the decisions that might one day affect their employment.

Read the full interview at VentureBeat ›

The Rise of Naughty Dog, Part 2

Ramsay: Why did you leave Crash for Jak and Daxter?

Rubin: Naughty Dog would have liked continuing with Crash beyond Crash Team Racing, but the relationship with Universal was untenable. Originally, we had signed a three-project deal; however, when Sony became enamored with the game and eventually negotiated to publish Crash, Universal cut a deal for a sizable yet much smaller cut of the game than they would have received as the publisher. Our contract with Universal never contemplated this occurrence. We were effectively crammed down into a cut of their cut. This made no sense. Our costs and recoup were the same. Our effort was the same, but we were getting a much smaller amount per copy sold. On the other hand, the arrangement meant that Universal had no more marketing costs, very little internal management costs, and eventually they even managed to push the financing costs back to Sony.

It is perfectly fair to say that they did next to nothing on the project and yet reaped a larger amount on the early games' profit than we did. The only reason I cannot say that Universal contributed nothing is that Mark Cerny, a Universal employee, was our producer. He was a massive force in the success of our games. His salary and work could be called Universal's contribution to the first few Crash titles. But Mark eventually left Universal, and we started contracting him directly. Sony effectively paid for his work. While Mark continued to be incredibly important to our titles, his contribution could no longer be attributable to Universal. From that point forward, they did literally nothing but collect royalties that should have been, at least in large part, ours.

Read the full interview on GamesIndustry.biz ›

The Rise of Naughty Dog, Part 1

Jason Rubin and Andy Gavin cofounded Naughty Dog in 1986, becoming two of the youngest contractors to develop for Electronic Arts. During its rise from a scrappy startup to an industry powerhouse with three of the top-ten games for Sony PlayStation, Naughty Dog established a reputation as one of the most innovative developers of video games on the planet.

In 1994, the company created its first major franchise, Crash Bandicoot, of which the titular character became the de facto mascot of the Sony PlayStation. Now spanning at least 16 titles, the Crash Bandicoot series has since sold more than 50 million units worldwide, and the third title in the series was the top-selling foreign-made video game in Japan. After parting ways with its publisher, Universal Interactive, Naughty Dog followed Crash Bandicoot with another bestselling series, Jak and Daxter, but not before being acquired by Sony Computer Entertainment in 2001. Rubin and Gavin left the studio in 2004.

After Rubin and Gavin had left the company, Naughty Dog released Uncharted: Drake's Fortune for the PlayStation 3 in 2007, and then the sequel, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, in 2009. The sequel received critical acclaim and won more than 100 awards, including the coveted Game of the Year awards at both the Interactive Achievement Awards and the Game Developers Choice Awards.

Read the full interview on GamesIndustry.biz ›

Book offers inside look at video games

How did you decide who to interview?

As the son of a former pro bowler, I learned that if you want to be a champion, don’t watch the people who are throwing gutter balls; watch the people who are throwing strikes. Gamers at Work would have to feature "the world's most successful entrepreneurs in the video game industry" because nobody reaches the top without at least a few scratches. These business leaders would have the necessary experiences, and the appropriate distance from which to reflect, to make insightful, entertaining and motivational stories.

What do you think people will get out of reading it?

I think most readers have learned that successful video-game developers and publishers require focus, discipline, and skill. When fear would cause you to waver, you need to be committed to one direction. When competitors appear more interested in opportunities that you're not pursuing, you need to stay the course. When your view of your goal becomes obstructed and the path begins to twist and turn, you need to adapt. Ultimately, Gamers at Work explores what happens when the right or wrong people are in charge.

Read the full interview at The San Diego Union-Tribune ›