You can say that all you want. You can practice that all you want. But if the other players are not being widely social, you can't change that by your actions.
It's not a question of whether players want it or not, when a game offers a design that doesn't do anything for social interactions beyond "yes, there's other players here" then you won't get it from other players as a whole. Even if those other players want it. Because players, generally speaking, are not going to go out of their way to create something that a game doesn't support.
I mean, if you like t-bone steaks, you don't go to McDonalds and take a meat patty off the bun and place some fries in a "T" on top of it and say "you can make of it what you want."
Well...you can. But other people aren't going to play along.
And no, the social aspect is not there in these modern MMORPGs. As I've explained above. It's sad that most of the replies here don't even understand what's missing, how "social" is almost nil in these games.
Thats the point I'm trying to make. You will never find a game where 100% of the population plays the game only one way.
People in those games and many others are being social, the social are there, they may be overshadowed by the majority but they are still there. You need to find the, I guarantee they are looking for you.
Generally speaking players will go out of their way to do something they enjoy if the game allows it, sometimes even if the game doesn't allow it.
And yes the social aspect is there just as much as in most (not all) games of the past, those social people are still playing the games, they still like to socialize and still want to. There are still very active and social guilds, very active and social rp guilds.
True there may be a minority, but there numbers aren't any less, just the other numbers are so much more.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Thats the point I'm trying to make. You will never find a game where 100% of the population plays the game only one way.
People in those games and many others are being social, the social are there, they may be overshadowed by the majority but they are still there. You need to find the, I guarantee they are looking for you.
Generally speaking players will go out of their way to do something they enjoy if the game allows it, sometimes even if the game doesn't allow it.
And yes the social aspect is there just as much as in most (not all) games of the past, those social people are still playing the games, they still like to socialize and still want to. There are still very active and social guilds, very active and social rp guilds.
True there may be a minority, but there numbers aren't any less, just the other numbers are so much more.
Venge
Hehe, if you say so. My point is the opposite, that you don't see much socially tuned game play because the games do not offer that by their designs, which are tailored to grinding for levels, usually with strangers that you may never see again as you zone past or behind others.
Edit to add...and don't assume that I haven't tried to find some social activity. I have. But they always fell off because there are few tools or means to play that way, relying almost entirely on word acting, and always ending with the guild leaders "taking a break" because they were maxed level cap and had nothing more to do, while the guild members separated exactly because of what I said, level gaps and zoned content separation.
Well first off, a Sandbox game shouldn't be pvp centric. Your knowledge of sandbox games suggest that they should be pvp centric. It's a sandbox, so every path possible should be available.
Doesn't flattening out the level curve to a gentle and gradual climb completely fail to solve the problem? Content is designed for a certain number of party members of a certain level. The rewards granted for completing that content will be appropriate for characters of that certain level.
Now, as I see it, you've got two options for equipment, which is typically the only kind of reward that matters. You can either have equipment that can't be used until your level (or one of your stats or skills) is high enough, or you can have equipment that can be used by anyone. The latter was true for many early MMOs, but almost all modern MMOs abide by level restrictions on gear. If a certain instance/dungeon/quest tends to reward you with level 45 gear (whether world drops or mob-specific drops is irrelevant), that content is clearly intended for characters right around level 45. Assuming you can handle the difficulty, it's not a huge problem for a level 30 player to do this content and just bank the gear until he can equip it—though that player will tend to prefer getting immediately usable level 30 gear—but players will balk at the idea of doing that content once they've gone a few levels past the reward level. Even if you made all the zones/instances feature a wide level range of drops (say, levels 30 through 60 at random in one area, 50 through 80 in another), everyone has their "reward comfort zone" and they're going to be unhappy running content that tends to drop worse gear than they could be looting at another area.
Alternatively, if gear isn't restricted by level or stat, you can't keep the power curve flat. Even if level differences don't mean much, the power gap will be compounded by increasingly better gear. Maybe the game's designed so that level 30 and level 45 aren't that much different, but as I'm outpacing you in levels, I'm also getting increasingly better gear. The better gear allows me to skip to doing harder content, which in turn gives me faster exp and more powerful gear. Without level limits on equipment, there's nothing to stop me from accelerating far past you. I won't be content doing your low level content, and you won't survive the content that I'm geared for. (And yes, you could go out of your way to make equipment ALSO not really make any difference, but at that point you've got to ask whether it would be better to simply have a game with no advancement at all.)
Even if equipment is 100% crafted or all rewards are in some mutable form such as the reward points from GW2 dynamic events, one of those two scenarios still applies. The underlying reasons why players get segregated by a power gap can't be undone just by tweaking how much power you gain upon leveling up. It's deeply ingrained.
CoX solved this problem years ago, but strangely few games copied the sidekick system.
My friends and I were almost never unable to play with one another in that game. (It was only when we had some awkward number of friends online where 1 guy was left out...and that's a super easy problem to solve.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Well thats what MMORPGS are, giving people the freedom to do things their way. I'm glad there are gaps otherwise whats the point of being a dedicated player? The game which shouldn't be named started its downroad after allowing everyone (no matter if dedicated or not) to access the same things and it got boring fast.
This could also be a point, where GW 2 will struggle, there aren't any longterm goals but since its b2p people will just playing till they add endgame content or stuff like housing.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play." "Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
So I am not going to go to indepth here as I have on this subject in a couple of other posts. The things the OP keeps mentiong that are breaking the "social aspect" of games are mostly newer. THe leveling thing has been around for ever back to Pen and Paper RPGS. This gets closer to my number one point.
The player base.
The players that played and were involved in the first MMORPG's came from a whole different group of players then those post 2k3-2k4. Almost everyone I met in those old games (Meridian 59 UO, AC, etc) came from a pen and paper background. They gathered around tables with 5-20 people at regular meetings and explored worlds together. They did this for the social aspect of something they had a passion for (gaming and interaction). It was a huge fricken world with thousands of like minded people instead of 5-20. Many cared less about leveling and just having a good time with people. I personally farmed equipment and items and setup my own personal shops with crazy names and invited all to come to my uber discount noob item shops. People new my name, I could not log in without getting praise, thanks, or just a general request.
The game, the style, the grind just did not matter. Players wanted to be there to interact in a world where they could for once have an impact, could be remembered. The grind ment nothing to many, but to those it did they lost out. It sounds like the OP just can not really get into the social aspect of a game because maybe it is not really his style. When you truly love ANYTHING you can overlook the few flaws as if they never existed beyond a small second thought in your mind. The people who were the player base of the original MMO's craved that interaction and made it happen, no level gap could keep me from playing with someone, from helping a guildie, from working on the server first downing of some new content. I was so known throught the community in one game the dev's created an in game reward and quest that involved my namesake.
I feel for you OP cause you seem to desire something you can not understand the true meaning of because your vision is clouded by something that has no bearing on what you think your desired outcome is.
Well, ok. This is like trying to talk to a sidewalk about flying.
You are also to blind in your understanding of others. While your flying by yourself maybe you will take a minute to look down and see all the pieces of sidewalk interconnected having a good time where they are. It is the common denominator theory, if everyone else understand and you do not, maybe it is your outlook that can not come to an understanding of the subject in question.
IT is not the power gap that is the issue in game for un-sociialable climate fo the games, but more to do with several things. First if you make games require grouping you make more instances where you have peopel in a position to talk/socialize, but too much group required content stagnates the game progress for some who prefer to play with friends or guilds or even alone at times. As sure you need to have group content be meaningful enouph to promote it without completely alienating your more solo type players. You also need to make team work, tactics, as well as what each class in a group brings to the table important to the survival of the group or you get the "You're a dps, and they are a dime a dozen." attitude. THis happens as a factor of one or two members of a group having a larger effect on the success or failure of a instance, if more then what dps you brought matters to the group you will have less issues of people feeling they are all impoerant. Also you need to make sure the games classes/role that are in place to fill a group are each unique in playstyle, that way you have more players to draw from for roles that are normally less used. Examples is like tanking roles/classes that are hard to find as people may not like the classes play style that can tank, right now in most mmos you have the mitigation tank and maybe one other types *though the mit. tank is always superior to the other in most fights.), as such those that hate this style of play stay away from it. Making evasion tanks, damage controlers tanks (say spreading the damage you take across the group for ease of aoe healing it), as well as a form of pet-based tanking would bring more peopel t wanting to tank then we see now. The last as well as worst of these reasons is that you speed thru these content sections of the game 9by choice as well as design.) far too fast, it used to be that a instance would tank 1 to 3 hours to finish, yet now we have 45 min to 1 max instance runs unless you really havee issues happening (that is never a good thign and normally causes more un-sociable behavior as wel.). People want to speed thru content mostly to see if they can, and when people knwo they can yet are slowed by othe rplayers it annoys them as you are wasteing their time in their eyes. Also you are dealing with the caltural majority that just do not want to have to talk, as well as socalize to enjoy their gaming, but yet expect others to care more about making it so they have fun even if that is making their own fun less.
Still no sidewalks around here that can look up to the sky?
Look people:
When 90% of all phases of the game you either can't participate in or you are beyond and it's meaningless to you, then there's a lot of other players who you can't play the game with.
On top of that, when your position in this division of the game play, compared to other players that you are currently with, changes...well, then you have to go your separate ways.
Originally posted by Amaranthar Still no sidewalks around here that can look up to the sky? Look people: When 90% of all phases of the game you either can't participate in or you are beyond and it's meaningless to you, then there's a lot of other players who you can't play the game with. On top of that, when your position in this division of the game play, compared to other players that you are currently with, changes...well, then you have to go your separate ways. Now why is this so hard to understand?
What you're suggesting has nothing at all to do with relative power levels and everything to do with how RPG and MMORPG work. Characters progress from weak to strong, from A to Z from beginning to end. That's just how they work. Relative power levels are a side effect, not a cause.
Another aspect of MMORPG is the story line (as weak as it is in some games). The story line has a beginning, middle and an end. Players progress (see paragraph above) through the story line from the beginning to the end. They don't just play at the end or at any random point in the middle because it would eliminate the ability to have a story line.
What you're suggesting as a 'problem' isn't a problem as you've described it. What you're suggesting for a solution would turn any MMORPG you used it on into something like Vindictus with more character development, but less story and no progression.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Still no sidewalks around here that can look up to the sky?
Look people:
When 90% of all phases of the game you either can't participate in or you are beyond and it's meaningless to you, then there's a lot of other players who you can't play the game with. On top of that, when your position in this division of the game play, compared to other players that you are currently with, changes...well, then you have to go your separate ways.
Now why is this so hard to understand?
What you're suggesting has nothing at all to do with relative power levels and everything to do with how RPG and MMORPG work. Characters progress from weak to strong, from A to Z from beginning to end. That's just how they work. Relative power levels are a side effect, not a cause.
Another aspect of MMORPG is the story line (as weak as it is in some games). The story line has a beginning, middle and an end. Players progress (see paragraph above) through the story line from the beginning to the end. They don't just play at the end or at any random point in the middle because it would eliminate the ability to have a story line.
What you're suggesting as a 'problem' isn't a problem as you've described it. What you're suggesting for a solution would turn any MMORPG you used it on into something like Vindictus with more character development, but less story and no progression.
Heh, and this is why I've given up on MMORPGs. It's a really simple thing to see, and to understand. Yet, both the powers that be and the power gamerz who inhabit the boards can't grasp it, much less see what can be done to change it.
I've tried for years. And so have others. I don't see them around anymore, and I'm giving up the ghost too. And I think many others have and will continue to join us as you all insist on more of the same ol' narrow vision.
Partly what made Asherson Call so fun atleast way back when was after level 50 you could pretty much level alongside anyone and not hurt xps and still do enough for them to bring you into the grinding groups. Come to think of it I think that was my most social mmo game and there was no such thing as endgame in it.
Partly what made Asherson Call so fun atleast way back when was after level 50 you could pretty much level alongside anyone and not hurt xps and still do enough for them to bring you into the grinding groups. Come to think of it I think that was my most social mmo game and there was no such thing as endgame in it.
Exactly. There are other things to play MMORPGs for than big jumps in power. You can have much smaller jumps in power and ability, but still be just as exciting. Much more so if there are other things to play for. But these big power gaps prevent those other things from working.
Being social, just hanging and playing with the same people for as long as you want, is only one aspect (but a very, very important one). There's also:
The game's economy, as game play. It's not possible to have a real, functioning economy when it's divided into level groups and coin types to such an extreme as current. Currently, if you want to get richer in these games with such power gaps, just level up and start looting bigger coin and items worth the next coin level. There's no economic game play.
Freedom to explore by choice. You can't do that with these power gaps.
Freedom to call an area home, and to play that area for as long as you desire. With huge power gaps, you level past an area. Or you can decide to not progress further, but that's yet another limit that shouldn't be there. If you want to play a ranger that knows a huge enchanted forest like few others, knows the trails and places, knows the current status of wondering MOBs and what's changed, where the current dangers are, and hire out as a guide, you can't have huge power gaps that remove the validity of that forest to 90% of the player base.
Defense of your home area. If those orcs that keep coming down from the mountain become one hit kills and can't harm you, that's not much for game play.
That's just some of it. With huge power gaps, the entire game has to be zoned to levels. You don't have a world in that sense, you have modules. And all of the possibilities of playing in a world go away with such power gaps.
Originally posted by Amaranthar Still no sidewalks around here that can look up to the sky? Look people:
When 90% of all phases of the game you either can't participate in or you are beyond and it's meaningless to you, then there's a lot of other players who you can't play the game with. On top of that, when your position in this division of the game play, compared to other players that you are currently with, changes...well, then you have to go your separate ways.
Now why is this so hard to understand?
What you're suggesting has nothing at all to do with relative power levels and everything to do with how RPG and MMORPG work. Characters progress from weak to strong, from A to Z from beginning to end. That's just how they work. Relative power levels are a side effect, not a cause.
Another aspect of MMORPG is the story line (as weak as it is in some games). The story line has a beginning, middle and an end. Players progress (see paragraph above) through the story line from the beginning to the end. They don't just play at the end or at any random point in the middle because it would eliminate the ability to have a story line.
What you're suggesting as a 'problem' isn't a problem as you've described it. What you're suggesting for a solution would turn any MMORPG you used it on into something like Vindictus with more character development, but less story and no progression.
Heh, and this is why I've given up on MMORPGs. It's a really simple thing to see, and to understand. Yet, both the powers that be and the power gamerz who inhabit the boards can't grasp it, much less see what can be done to change it. I've tried for years. And so have others. I don't see them around anymore, and I'm giving up the ghost too. And I think many others have and will continue to join us as you all insist on more of the same ol' narrow vision.
The only shared 'world' that ever worked was Second Life. I was around for all that VRML cr@p that never worked and all the virtual worlds that never worked too. The problem is that they are boring. Boh-rang.
That progression that's part of the 'narrow vision' is the reason that mmorpg can actually get financing. Without that, they would have literally ceased to exist, or would be nothing but java based worlds like Wurm. There's nothing wrong with Wurm, but you don't see 500,000 players lining up to play it. You also don't see anything close to cutting edge graphics. Anything beyond late 90's or early 2000's era technology require a significant amount of money. That money won't happen without a lot of people paying to play the game, which won't happen without progression.
I think virtual worlds would be cool (with everyone at a relatively even power level), but it's just boring or repetitive and doesn't make enough money to be anything beyond a 'web app'.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Still no sidewalks around here that can look up to the sky?
Look people:
When 90% of all phases of the game you either can't participate in or you are beyond and it's meaningless to you, then there's a lot of other players who you can't play the game with. On top of that, when your position in this division of the game play, compared to other players that you are currently with, changes...well, then you have to go your separate ways.
Now why is this so hard to understand?
What you're suggesting has nothing at all to do with relative power levels and everything to do with how RPG and MMORPG work. Characters progress from weak to strong, from A to Z from beginning to end. That's just how they work. Relative power levels are a side effect, not a cause.
Another aspect of MMORPG is the story line (as weak as it is in some games). The story line has a beginning, middle and an end. Players progress (see paragraph above) through the story line from the beginning to the end. They don't just play at the end or at any random point in the middle because it would eliminate the ability to have a story line.
What you're suggesting as a 'problem' isn't a problem as you've described it. What you're suggesting for a solution would turn any MMORPG you used it on into something like Vindictus with more character development, but less story and no progression.
Heh, and this is why I've given up on MMORPGs. It's a really simple thing to see, and to understand. Yet, both the powers that be and the power gamerz who inhabit the boards can't grasp it, much less see what can be done to change it.
I've tried for years. And so have others. I don't see them around anymore, and I'm giving up the ghost too. And I think many others have and will continue to join us as you all insist on more of the same ol' narrow vision.
The only shared 'world' that ever worked was Second Life. I was around for all that VRML cr@p that never worked and all the virtual worlds that never worked too. The problem is that they are boring. Boh-rang.
That progression that's part of the 'narrow vision' is the reason that mmorpg can actually get financing. Without that, they would have literally ceased to exist, or would be nothing but java based worlds like Wurm. There's nothing wrong with Wurm, but you don't see 500,000 players lining up to play it. You also don't see anything close to cutting edge graphics. Anything beyond late 90's or early 2000's era technology require a significant amount of money. That money won't happen without a lot of people paying to play the game, which won't happen without progression.
I think virtual worlds would be cool (with everyone at a relatively even power level), but it's just boring or repetitive and doesn't make enough money to be anything beyond a 'web app'.
Let me make sure I understand you correctly here.
Am I to understand that you cannot imagine, under any circumstances, a virtual world that is different than something like Second Life where players are allowed to make anything they want, no matter how outlandish, like flying penises?
Am I to understand that you can't imagine, under any circumstances, a virtual worldly game such as I'm talking about made with the same scale of content due to actually have funding?
Yes, when I used the word "narrow", I think I hit the nail on the head.
You miss how? How is a cross server, insta LFG dungeon tool, that will pair you with people that aren't even on your server a positive social tool? In games like EQ, you acted like a jerk, ninja looted something, or were a horrible player, people put the word out.....Now...you get to LFG tool around and be a tool to everyone!
SWG wasn't level based before CU/NGE...It was skill based and a new person could go out with others.
Level content is fine, you have tons of other people your level to play with, people make alts...etc....As for WoW references, I don't get em...I only played beta and didn't like it.
To be fair in EQ once you became a known jerk you just joined a raid guild.
Then you got help being a jerk.
The old games had some *horrible* social problems also.
See, each one of you don't "get it". How many times did you log on and go to a specific place just to meet up with friends to see what you could find to do? To talk about what's happening in the game world?
I have no doubts that each of you can reply with a "yes". But my entire point is that that was not the norm in SWG or any of the other games. At least after the game was established. One of you (sorry, should have made note of your name) made the comment that I must not have played early on. And that is true. I started SWG after a few months of release, but it was before the changes. If players acted that way in the beginning, they didn't anymore by the time I got there. And again, that's my point. The game's design, whether they called it "levels" or not, had the level gaps. Heck, they had levels of mats to go with it. That does not foster "Sandbox", it fosters level grind. And it divides the player base. And that's anti-social for most of the game, whether a few of you played socially or not. What you did wasn't the norm, because the norm was playing for level gaps, and that was by design.
Sorry but I get the impression that nothing we say will change your opinion and as of your experience with SWG I can only say that either you played the game for 5 minutes or you didn't actually play at all. You didn't appear to know about wounds or fatigue and mats did not have levels as you put it, they had qualities; what's more the quality of any particular mat, for instance a ferrous metal did not dictate who could use it. If you wanted the highest quality mats you either went out prospecting or paid for what someone else was selling; some of the best mats may have been found on the more difficult and dangerous planets but again this is where the social aspect of the game came in. If you didn't have a guild there were merc guilds out there that you could pay to guard you while you were prospecting or sorting out your harvesters etc. The best crafters became very well known on the servers and their goods were highly priced and sought after; not because they were higher level but because they took the time to find the best mats and to perfect their skill. Do you realise that pre cu / nge some classes couldn't punch their way out of a paper bag as they had zero combat skills? These were the social classes like entertainer etc. and suited what the people who played them wanted from the game, a social hub where they could have fun, be useful and chat away with anyone that came along; what's more social than that?
Comments
Thats the point I'm trying to make. You will never find a game where 100% of the population plays the game only one way.
People in those games and many others are being social, the social are there, they may be overshadowed by the majority but they are still there. You need to find the, I guarantee they are looking for you.
Generally speaking players will go out of their way to do something they enjoy if the game allows it, sometimes even if the game doesn't allow it.
And yes the social aspect is there just as much as in most (not all) games of the past, those social people are still playing the games, they still like to socialize and still want to. There are still very active and social guilds, very active and social rp guilds.
True there may be a minority, but there numbers aren't any less, just the other numbers are so much more.
Venge
Hehe, if you say so. My point is the opposite, that you don't see much socially tuned game play because the games do not offer that by their designs, which are tailored to grinding for levels, usually with strangers that you may never see again as you zone past or behind others.
Edit to add...and don't assume that I haven't tried to find some social activity. I have. But they always fell off because there are few tools or means to play that way, relying almost entirely on word acting, and always ending with the guild leaders "taking a break" because they were maxed level cap and had nothing more to do, while the guild members separated exactly because of what I said, level gaps and zoned content separation.
Once upon a time....
Well first off, a Sandbox game shouldn't be pvp centric. Your knowledge of sandbox games suggest that they should be pvp centric. It's a sandbox, so every path possible should be available.
That's my 2 cents for now.
My Blog About Hellgate Global, an ARPG/FPS hybrid MMO:
http://kashiewannaplay.wordpress.com/
Hellgate Global Official Fan Blog
http://t3funhellgate.wordpress.com/
Currently Playing: Hellgate Global, LoL, Skyrim, Morrowind
Recently Played: Cardmon Hero, Cabal, Oblivion
Doesn't flattening out the level curve to a gentle and gradual climb completely fail to solve the problem? Content is designed for a certain number of party members of a certain level. The rewards granted for completing that content will be appropriate for characters of that certain level.
Now, as I see it, you've got two options for equipment, which is typically the only kind of reward that matters. You can either have equipment that can't be used until your level (or one of your stats or skills) is high enough, or you can have equipment that can be used by anyone. The latter was true for many early MMOs, but almost all modern MMOs abide by level restrictions on gear. If a certain instance/dungeon/quest tends to reward you with level 45 gear (whether world drops or mob-specific drops is irrelevant), that content is clearly intended for characters right around level 45. Assuming you can handle the difficulty, it's not a huge problem for a level 30 player to do this content and just bank the gear until he can equip it—though that player will tend to prefer getting immediately usable level 30 gear—but players will balk at the idea of doing that content once they've gone a few levels past the reward level. Even if you made all the zones/instances feature a wide level range of drops (say, levels 30 through 60 at random in one area, 50 through 80 in another), everyone has their "reward comfort zone" and they're going to be unhappy running content that tends to drop worse gear than they could be looting at another area.
Alternatively, if gear isn't restricted by level or stat, you can't keep the power curve flat. Even if level differences don't mean much, the power gap will be compounded by increasingly better gear. Maybe the game's designed so that level 30 and level 45 aren't that much different, but as I'm outpacing you in levels, I'm also getting increasingly better gear. The better gear allows me to skip to doing harder content, which in turn gives me faster exp and more powerful gear. Without level limits on equipment, there's nothing to stop me from accelerating far past you. I won't be content doing your low level content, and you won't survive the content that I'm geared for. (And yes, you could go out of your way to make equipment ALSO not really make any difference, but at that point you've got to ask whether it would be better to simply have a game with no advancement at all.)
Even if equipment is 100% crafted or all rewards are in some mutable form such as the reward points from GW2 dynamic events, one of those two scenarios still applies. The underlying reasons why players get segregated by a power gap can't be undone just by tweaking how much power you gain upon leveling up. It's deeply ingrained.
CoX solved this problem years ago, but strangely few games copied the sidekick system.
My friends and I were almost never unable to play with one another in that game. (It was only when we had some awkward number of friends online where 1 guy was left out...and that's a super easy problem to solve.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Well, ok. This is like trying to talk to a sidewalk about flying.
Once upon a time....
Well thats what MMORPGS are, giving people the freedom to do things their way. I'm glad there are gaps otherwise whats the point of being a dedicated player? The game which shouldn't be named started its downroad after allowing everyone (no matter if dedicated or not) to access the same things and it got boring fast.
This could also be a point, where GW 2 will struggle, there aren't any longterm goals but since its b2p people will just playing till they add endgame content or stuff like housing.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play."
"Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
So I am not going to go to indepth here as I have on this subject in a couple of other posts. The things the OP keeps mentiong that are breaking the "social aspect" of games are mostly newer. THe leveling thing has been around for ever back to Pen and Paper RPGS. This gets closer to my number one point.
The player base.
The players that played and were involved in the first MMORPG's came from a whole different group of players then those post 2k3-2k4. Almost everyone I met in those old games (Meridian 59 UO, AC, etc) came from a pen and paper background. They gathered around tables with 5-20 people at regular meetings and explored worlds together. They did this for the social aspect of something they had a passion for (gaming and interaction). It was a huge fricken world with thousands of like minded people instead of 5-20. Many cared less about leveling and just having a good time with people. I personally farmed equipment and items and setup my own personal shops with crazy names and invited all to come to my uber discount noob item shops. People new my name, I could not log in without getting praise, thanks, or just a general request.
The game, the style, the grind just did not matter. Players wanted to be there to interact in a world where they could for once have an impact, could be remembered. The grind ment nothing to many, but to those it did they lost out. It sounds like the OP just can not really get into the social aspect of a game because maybe it is not really his style. When you truly love ANYTHING you can overlook the few flaws as if they never existed beyond a small second thought in your mind. The people who were the player base of the original MMO's craved that interaction and made it happen, no level gap could keep me from playing with someone, from helping a guildie, from working on the server first downing of some new content. I was so known throught the community in one game the dev's created an in game reward and quest that involved my namesake.
I feel for you OP cause you seem to desire something you can not understand the true meaning of because your vision is clouded by something that has no bearing on what you think your desired outcome is.
You are also to blind in your understanding of others. While your flying by yourself maybe you will take a minute to look down and see all the pieces of sidewalk interconnected having a good time where they are. It is the common denominator theory, if everyone else understand and you do not, maybe it is your outlook that can not come to an understanding of the subject in question.
IT is not the power gap that is the issue in game for un-sociialable climate fo the games, but more to do with several things. First if you make games require grouping you make more instances where you have peopel in a position to talk/socialize, but too much group required content stagnates the game progress for some who prefer to play with friends or guilds or even alone at times. As sure you need to have group content be meaningful enouph to promote it without completely alienating your more solo type players. You also need to make team work, tactics, as well as what each class in a group brings to the table important to the survival of the group or you get the "You're a dps, and they are a dime a dozen." attitude. THis happens as a factor of one or two members of a group having a larger effect on the success or failure of a instance, if more then what dps you brought matters to the group you will have less issues of people feeling they are all impoerant. Also you need to make sure the games classes/role that are in place to fill a group are each unique in playstyle, that way you have more players to draw from for roles that are normally less used. Examples is like tanking roles/classes that are hard to find as people may not like the classes play style that can tank, right now in most mmos you have the mitigation tank and maybe one other types *though the mit. tank is always superior to the other in most fights.), as such those that hate this style of play stay away from it. Making evasion tanks, damage controlers tanks (say spreading the damage you take across the group for ease of aoe healing it), as well as a form of pet-based tanking would bring more peopel t wanting to tank then we see now. The last as well as worst of these reasons is that you speed thru these content sections of the game 9by choice as well as design.) far too fast, it used to be that a instance would tank 1 to 3 hours to finish, yet now we have 45 min to 1 max instance runs unless you really havee issues happening (that is never a good thign and normally causes more un-sociable behavior as wel.). People want to speed thru content mostly to see if they can, and when people knwo they can yet are slowed by othe rplayers it annoys them as you are wasteing their time in their eyes. Also you are dealing with the caltural majority that just do not want to have to talk, as well as socalize to enjoy their gaming, but yet expect others to care more about making it so they have fun even if that is making their own fun less.
Still no sidewalks around here that can look up to the sky?
Look people:
When 90% of all phases of the game you either can't participate in or you are beyond and it's meaningless to you, then there's a lot of other players who you can't play the game with.
On top of that, when your position in this division of the game play, compared to other players that you are currently with, changes...well, then you have to go your separate ways.
Now why is this so hard to understand?
Once upon a time....
What you're suggesting has nothing at all to do with relative power levels and everything to do with how RPG and MMORPG work. Characters progress from weak to strong, from A to Z from beginning to end. That's just how they work. Relative power levels are a side effect, not a cause.
Another aspect of MMORPG is the story line (as weak as it is in some games). The story line has a beginning, middle and an end. Players progress (see paragraph above) through the story line from the beginning to the end. They don't just play at the end or at any random point in the middle because it would eliminate the ability to have a story line.
What you're suggesting as a 'problem' isn't a problem as you've described it. What you're suggesting for a solution would turn any MMORPG you used it on into something like Vindictus with more character development, but less story and no progression.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Heh, and this is why I've given up on MMORPGs. It's a really simple thing to see, and to understand. Yet, both the powers that be and the power gamerz who inhabit the boards can't grasp it, much less see what can be done to change it.
I've tried for years. And so have others. I don't see them around anymore, and I'm giving up the ghost too. And I think many others have and will continue to join us as you all insist on more of the same ol' narrow vision.
Once upon a time....
Partly what made Asherson Call so fun atleast way back when was after level 50 you could pretty much level alongside anyone and not hurt xps and still do enough for them to bring you into the grinding groups. Come to think of it I think that was my most social mmo game and there was no such thing as endgame in it.
Exactly. There are other things to play MMORPGs for than big jumps in power. You can have much smaller jumps in power and ability, but still be just as exciting. Much more so if there are other things to play for. But these big power gaps prevent those other things from working.
Being social, just hanging and playing with the same people for as long as you want, is only one aspect (but a very, very important one). There's also:
The game's economy, as game play. It's not possible to have a real, functioning economy when it's divided into level groups and coin types to such an extreme as current. Currently, if you want to get richer in these games with such power gaps, just level up and start looting bigger coin and items worth the next coin level. There's no economic game play.
Freedom to explore by choice. You can't do that with these power gaps.
Freedom to call an area home, and to play that area for as long as you desire. With huge power gaps, you level past an area. Or you can decide to not progress further, but that's yet another limit that shouldn't be there. If you want to play a ranger that knows a huge enchanted forest like few others, knows the trails and places, knows the current status of wondering MOBs and what's changed, where the current dangers are, and hire out as a guide, you can't have huge power gaps that remove the validity of that forest to 90% of the player base.
Defense of your home area. If those orcs that keep coming down from the mountain become one hit kills and can't harm you, that's not much for game play.
That's just some of it. With huge power gaps, the entire game has to be zoned to levels. You don't have a world in that sense, you have modules. And all of the possibilities of playing in a world go away with such power gaps.
Once upon a time....
The only shared 'world' that ever worked was Second Life. I was around for all that VRML cr@p that never worked and all the virtual worlds that never worked too. The problem is that they are boring. Boh-rang.
That progression that's part of the 'narrow vision' is the reason that mmorpg can actually get financing. Without that, they would have literally ceased to exist, or would be nothing but java based worlds like Wurm. There's nothing wrong with Wurm, but you don't see 500,000 players lining up to play it. You also don't see anything close to cutting edge graphics. Anything beyond late 90's or early 2000's era technology require a significant amount of money. That money won't happen without a lot of people paying to play the game, which won't happen without progression.
I think virtual worlds would be cool (with everyone at a relatively even power level), but it's just boring or repetitive and doesn't make enough money to be anything beyond a 'web app'.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Let me make sure I understand you correctly here.
Am I to understand that you cannot imagine, under any circumstances, a virtual world that is different than something like Second Life where players are allowed to make anything they want, no matter how outlandish, like flying penises?
Am I to understand that you can't imagine, under any circumstances, a virtual worldly game such as I'm talking about made with the same scale of content due to actually have funding?
Yes, when I used the word "narrow", I think I hit the nail on the head.
Once upon a time....
To be fair in EQ once you became a known jerk you just joined a raid guild.
Then you got help being a jerk.
The old games had some *horrible* social problems also.
Sorry but I get the impression that nothing we say will change your opinion and as of your experience with SWG I can only say that either you played the game for 5 minutes or you didn't actually play at all. You didn't appear to know about wounds or fatigue and mats did not have levels as you put it, they had qualities; what's more the quality of any particular mat, for instance a ferrous metal did not dictate who could use it. If you wanted the highest quality mats you either went out prospecting or paid for what someone else was selling; some of the best mats may have been found on the more difficult and dangerous planets but again this is where the social aspect of the game came in. If you didn't have a guild there were merc guilds out there that you could pay to guard you while you were prospecting or sorting out your harvesters etc. The best crafters became very well known on the servers and their goods were highly priced and sought after; not because they were higher level but because they took the time to find the best mats and to perfect their skill. Do you realise that pre cu / nge some classes couldn't punch their way out of a paper bag as they had zero combat skills? These were the social classes like entertainer etc. and suited what the people who played them wanted from the game, a social hub where they could have fun, be useful and chat away with anyone that came along; what's more social than that?