I would agree that building communities in an MMO is very important - it makes the game more sociable, encourages people to stay playing a game and improves the chance that the random character you might meet is worth interacting with.
I think people are holding onto old ideas of what community means here.
1) There is no reason why you have to focus on a "server" community in a MMO. With all the social tools, chat, x-realm grouping, friend list on STEAM/battle net and what no, no one needs to restrcit themselves too play with others on the same server. That is an old concept that begs to be broken. If i met a new friend, who also play the MMO i play, why can't we play together just because we are on different servers?
2) There is no point in encourages people to stay playing a game. You should encourage people to stay friend and play together DISREGARDING what game it is. Many of my guildies in WOW moves to D3. Why should i force/beg them to stay in WOW? I should just play whatever game i like, and if they like it, they can join me in the new game.
3) Random character is just random .. you can always quit if you don't like the guy. I met and made friends with people in WOW, D3, and what-not .. there is really no need to encourage anything. The "quit" or "befriend" button is just a click away.
Closely translating the flexibility and potential of classic role-playing games was literally impossible in the early days of computing but this does not mean that we will never get there.
What you are expessing with regards to computing is a scepticism about gaming artificial intelligence and responsiveness. I've seem computing improve from mainframes, which used magnetic tapes, to systems that can play Jeopardy - I'm far more likely to never say never when it comes to the flexibility of computer games.
In a classic role-playing game you are not even necessarily bound by the rules of physics (ever heard of Toon the Cartoon Role-Playing Game) or dogged by complex accounting (Ghost Busters role-playing game). Murphy's Law issues often point out where conventional classic role-playing games inadvertently break the laws of physics too.
Remember not all MMOs are like World of Warcraft and even if they are people can still use such a MMO as a chat session with 3D avatars if they find this more interesting than the game-play offered.
The reason I brought up classic role-playing games on this thread is because if someone is trying to understand why other MMO players choose not to craft and trade then they need to understand the overall experience of the game.
If an MMO is built around a primitive twitch combat system then you might find people are unwilling to do other things unless they are just as cool and just as fast. Such gaming might attract people with short attention spans who just want to fight.
The non-combat, social activities, which fans of standard MMOs describe as role-playing, probably would benefit from being part of a less frantically paced game with increased human interaction and a responsive, flexible game world.
Closely translating the flexibility and potential of classic role-playing games was literally impossible in the early days of computing but this does not mean that we will never get there.
What you are expessing with regards to computing is a scepticism about gaming artificial intelligence and responsiveness. I've seem computing improve from mainframes, which used magnetic tapes, to systems that can play Jeopardy - I'm far more likely to never say never when it comes to the flexibility of computer games.
In a classic role-playing game you are not even necessarily bound by the rules of physics (ever heard of Toon the Cartoon Role-Playing Game) or dogged by complex accounting (Ghost Busters role-playing game). Murphy's Law issues often point out where conventional classic role-playing games inadvertently break the laws of physics too.
Remember not all MMOs are like World of Warcraft and even if they are people can still use such a MMO as a chat session with 3D avatars if they find this more interesting than the game-play offered.
The reason I brought up classic role-playing games on this thread is because if someone is trying to understand why other MMO players choose not to craft and trade then they need to understand the overall experience of the game.
If an MMO is built around a primitive twitch combat system then you might find people are unwilling to do other things unless they are just as cool and just as fast. Such gaming might attract people with short attention spans who just want to fight.
The non-combat, social activities, which fans of standard MMOs describe as role-playing, probably would benefit from being part of a less frantically paced game with increased human interaction and a responsive, flexible game world.
Twitch combat is not primitive. Nor is it about short attention span or ADD (although you didn't use it). Its about the fact that no matter how elaborate the non-combat activities are, in the case of economy, it never reaches the depth of gameplay games such as Transport Tycoon or some other business-sim has. They are all too often just not good enough. Everything relating to economy (gathering, crafting, trade) is repetitive and trivial. If everything can be done by a bot, its not good enough. Games such as Vanguard had to go their way to prevent using bots and macros. This is a sure sign of failed design imo.
Atleast in combat, MMOs have atleast one edge: Co-op play. Not many SRPGs have it.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Twitch combat is not primitive. Nor is it about short attention span or ADD (although you didn't use it). Its about the fact that no matter how elaborate the non-combat activities are, in the case of economy, it never reaches the depth of gameplay games such as Transport Tycoon or some other business-sim has. They are all too often just not good enough. Everything relating to economy (gathering, crafting, trade) is repetitive and trivial. If everything can be done by a bot, its not good enough. Games such as Vanguard had to go their way to prevent using bots and macros. This is a sure sign of failed design imo.
Atleast in combat, MMOs have atleast one edge: Co-op play. Not many SRPGs have it.
However you do acknowledge the common mis-match between the combat and the non-combat activities.
Also you are explicitly mentioning game design. If players feel the need to complain about people not participating in the non-combat side of an MMO then this is probably due to poor games design.
Co-op play has been around at least as long as the Gauntlet arcade game although it is admittedly a good feature of MMOs.
For me the holy grail of MMO is integrated, consistent combat, non-combat and in-game relationship building set within an interesting, well-written setting with flexible, responsive content.
And why should they? I played a little bit of PnP RPG (how about that? PnP RPG for the old table top games, RPG for CRPG) when i was in grad school ... and it was not a better experience than CRPG.
Then I suspect you didn't play a very well-done game.
I was playing AD&D, and in particular, the accounting is just horribly cumbersome without a computer. Combat slows to a crawl with die rolls and stuff. Sure it is a bit more free form, but you are still mostly casting magic missiles and fireballs at monsters.
PnP RPGs aren't supposed to be fast action games and you can certainly use a computer to automate a lot of the more cumbersome aspects. Then again, if all you're doing is constant combat, I suspect you're not taking advantage of the full range of choices that can be made in a PnP RPG. I guess that's not too surprising as most people who play combat-heavy games naturally gravitate toward combat. They play the games to kill things, not to roleplay.
Personally, i would be happy to forgo that "roleplaying" just to get the combat game more playable. There is a reason why CRPG is 10000x more successful/popular than PnP RPGs.
Sure, you don't have to have a group of friends and time to get together. You can sit down at your computer in your underwear and play with a lot of people. It's popular because it's simple.
Just because people who used to PnP game made computer games doesn't mean they were successful in translating that experience to the computer world. It may be just me but I don't think it is possible to have the same essential experience you get sitting around a table with real people, with a human GM, as you can get in an online world with computer AI. The fundamental problem is that the computer is inherently limited in what it can do. It cannot react to the unexpected, therefore it simply does not allow the unexpected. You ride it's rails whether you want to or not.
Computers are great at simulations and book-keeping - the animations that computers can do today are amazing, the inventory management and attribute management are far superior to handling it all on paper. The problem is that for all the animations and stats, the worlds themselves are hollow, lifeless shells. There's no ecology, there are no NPC moods/personalities, there's very little emergent behavior at all. All the world details I used to dream about farming out to computers as a PnP GM are still being hand-coded room-by-room, quest-by-quest in MMOs.
Computers are great at simulations and book-keeping - the animations that computers can do today are amazing, the inventory management and attribute management are far superior to handling it all on paper. The problem is that for all the animations and stats, the worlds themselves are hollow, lifeless shells. There's no ecology, there are no NPC moods/personalities, there's very little emergent behavior at all. All the world details I used to dream about farming out to computers as a PnP GM are still being hand-coded room-by-room, quest-by-quest in MMOs.
Computers can't handle the unexpected and don't even allow you to do anything unexpected. If you're slogging through a dungeon, you can go a few pre-determined ways. You can't decide to pull out a pickaxe or use magic to blow your way through a wall and go a different way, you can only do what the programmers have decided you can do. Things you can do in a PnP RPG just can't be done at all in an MMO.
Computers are great at simulations and book-keeping - the animations that computers can do today are amazing, the inventory management and attribute management are far superior to handling it all on paper. The problem is that for all the animations and stats, the worlds themselves are hollow, lifeless shells. There's no ecology, there are no NPC moods/personalities, there's very little emergent behavior at all. All the world details I used to dream about farming out to computers as a PnP GM are still being hand-coded room-by-room, quest-by-quest in MMOs.
Computers can't handle the unexpected and don't even allow you to do anything unexpected. If you're slogging through a dungeon, you can go a few pre-determined ways. You can't decide to pull out a pickaxe or use magic to blow your way through a wall and go a different way, you can only do what the programmers have decided you can do. Things you can do in a PnP RPG just can't be done at all in an MMO.
They can be in MMOs it just like real PnP RPGs you can do what ever you want so long as it's in the rules and the GM lets you do it. The same is true with MMOs, you can do what ever you want so long it's in the rules and the devs allow you to do it. When they made SWG did the devs expect players to make walls out of houses? I doubt it but the system let you do it. The problem is that as MMOs "advance" Devs/studios are getting more and more controling, now they only want you to do what they made for you, no thinking outside of the box allowed.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
And why should they? I played a little bit of PnP RPG (how about that? PnP RPG for the old table top games, RPG for CRPG) when i was in grad school ... and it was not a better experience than CRPG.
Then I suspect you didn't play a very well-done game.
I was playing AD&D, and in particular, the accounting is just horribly cumbersome without a computer. Combat slows to a crawl with die rolls and stuff. Sure it is a bit more free form, but you are still mostly casting magic missiles and fireballs at monsters.
PnP RPGs aren't supposed to be fast action games and you can certainly use a computer to automate a lot of the more cumbersome aspects. Then again, if all you're doing is constant combat, I suspect you're not taking advantage of the full range of choices that can be made in a PnP RPG. I guess that's not too surprising as most people who play combat-heavy games naturally gravitate toward combat. They play the games to kill things, not to roleplay.
Personally, i would be happy to forgo that "roleplaying" just to get the combat game more playable. There is a reason why CRPG is 10000x more successful/popular than PnP RPGs.
Sure, you don't have to have a group of friends and time to get together. You can sit down at your computer in your underwear and play with a lot of people. It's popular because it's simple.
I was playing AD&D .. you judge if it is a good game or not.
LOL .. i don't except a fast pace action game but spending 20 min to resolve a few actions (that would take 30 sec in a CRPG) ... it is so slow that it took all the excitement out of combat. It is a drag when i have to wait 2 min before knowing if i successfully roll beneath a wagon to avoid an attack.
And CRPG is popular because exactly the opposite of what you said .. it is 100x more complex, in combat considerations, then PnP RPG.
Even the old gold box games have more combat compleixty than a few friends doing PnP RPG. You can visualize the exactly placement of the characters. You can consider movement in and out of spell range. You can trade off between covering 3 weaker mobs or 2 strong one in your fireball range. All these cannot be done in a reasonable time frame with pnp rpgs.
CRPG is popular because it is more assessible and you can do more in less time.
I was playing AD&D .. you judge if it is a good game or not.
That's the system you were using. Unlike a video game, where everyone plays the same game using the same code, a PnP RPG depends a great deal on the GM and the players. The rules in a PnP RPG are a framework into which the GM builds the game world. I've played more than a couple of games where the GM just drags the players around by the nose and forced them into the situations he's completely scripted and will brook no deviation. Those are horrible games. By the same token, it requires players who are willing to go where their characters lead, not necessarily down the path set out for them.
LOL .. i don't except a fast pace action game but spending 20 min to resolve a few actions (that would take 30 sec in a CRPG) ... it is so slow that it took all the excitement out of combat. It is a drag when i have to wait 2 min before knowing if i successfully roll beneath a wagon to avoid an attack.
Sounds to me like you had a bad GM. The good ones can make those determinations in a few seconds at best and don't have to spend an hour consulting charts. Good GMs understand their games and know their job is to create a fluid narrative.
And CRPG is popular because exactly the opposite of what you said .. it is 100x more complex, in combat considerations, then PnP RPG.
There's very little complexity to a CRPG. Combat is a bunch of button mashing. Kill! Kill! Kill! Kill! Take their stuff. Go lather, rinse, repeat ad nauseum. There's no consideration of tactics, sneaking around enemies, using the environment, etc. It's just pull your sword and hack and slash.
CRPG is popular because it is more assessible and you can do more in less time.
I might agree with you to some degree. It doesn't take time. It doesn't take thought. It just takes a computer and an Internet connection and the ability to mash buttons. That doesn't make it better, it just makes it simpler.
Comments
I think people are holding onto old ideas of what community means here.
1) There is no reason why you have to focus on a "server" community in a MMO. With all the social tools, chat, x-realm grouping, friend list on STEAM/battle net and what no, no one needs to restrcit themselves too play with others on the same server. That is an old concept that begs to be broken. If i met a new friend, who also play the MMO i play, why can't we play together just because we are on different servers?
2) There is no point in encourages people to stay playing a game. You should encourage people to stay friend and play together DISREGARDING what game it is. Many of my guildies in WOW moves to D3. Why should i force/beg them to stay in WOW? I should just play whatever game i like, and if they like it, they can join me in the new game.
3) Random character is just random .. you can always quit if you don't like the guy. I met and made friends with people in WOW, D3, and what-not .. there is really no need to encourage anything. The "quit" or "befriend" button is just a click away.
Closely translating the flexibility and potential of classic role-playing games was literally impossible in the early days of computing but this does not mean that we will never get there.
What you are expessing with regards to computing is a scepticism about gaming artificial intelligence and responsiveness. I've seem computing improve from mainframes, which used magnetic tapes, to systems that can play Jeopardy - I'm far more likely to never say never when it comes to the flexibility of computer games.
In a classic role-playing game you are not even necessarily bound by the rules of physics (ever heard of Toon the Cartoon Role-Playing Game) or dogged by complex accounting (Ghost Busters role-playing game). Murphy's Law issues often point out where conventional classic role-playing games inadvertently break the laws of physics too.
Remember not all MMOs are like World of Warcraft and even if they are people can still use such a MMO as a chat session with 3D avatars if they find this more interesting than the game-play offered.
The reason I brought up classic role-playing games on this thread is because if someone is trying to understand why other MMO players choose not to craft and trade then they need to understand the overall experience of the game.
If an MMO is built around a primitive twitch combat system then you might find people are unwilling to do other things unless they are just as cool and just as fast. Such gaming might attract people with short attention spans who just want to fight.
The non-combat, social activities, which fans of standard MMOs describe as role-playing, probably would benefit from being part of a less frantically paced game with increased human interaction and a responsive, flexible game world.
Twitch combat is not primitive. Nor is it about short attention span or ADD (although you didn't use it). Its about the fact that no matter how elaborate the non-combat activities are, in the case of economy, it never reaches the depth of gameplay games such as Transport Tycoon or some other business-sim has. They are all too often just not good enough. Everything relating to economy (gathering, crafting, trade) is repetitive and trivial. If everything can be done by a bot, its not good enough. Games such as Vanguard had to go their way to prevent using bots and macros. This is a sure sign of failed design imo.
Atleast in combat, MMOs have atleast one edge: Co-op play. Not many SRPGs have it.I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
This is the key to good MMOs. Good combat mechanics, and with synery to other classes.
However you do acknowledge the common mis-match between the combat and the non-combat activities.
Also you are explicitly mentioning game design. If players feel the need to complain about people not participating in the non-combat side of an MMO then this is probably due to poor games design.
Co-op play has been around at least as long as the Gauntlet arcade game although it is admittedly a good feature of MMOs.
For me the holy grail of MMO is integrated, consistent combat, non-combat and in-game relationship building set within an interesting, well-written setting with flexible, responsive content.
The key to a good MMORPG is a game that is a canvas to create an interesting and engaging community of players...
^Pretty much nailed it on the head
Balance Over All
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Computers are great at simulations and book-keeping - the animations that computers can do today are amazing, the inventory management and attribute management are far superior to handling it all on paper. The problem is that for all the animations and stats, the worlds themselves are hollow, lifeless shells. There's no ecology, there are no NPC moods/personalities, there's very little emergent behavior at all. All the world details I used to dream about farming out to computers as a PnP GM are still being hand-coded room-by-room, quest-by-quest in MMOs.
Yep
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Computers can't handle the unexpected and don't even allow you to do anything unexpected. If you're slogging through a dungeon, you can go a few pre-determined ways. You can't decide to pull out a pickaxe or use magic to blow your way through a wall and go a different way, you can only do what the programmers have decided you can do. Things you can do in a PnP RPG just can't be done at all in an MMO.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
They can be in MMOs it just like real PnP RPGs you can do what ever you want so long as it's in the rules and the GM lets you do it. The same is true with MMOs, you can do what ever you want so long it's in the rules and the devs allow you to do it. When they made SWG did the devs expect players to make walls out of houses? I doubt it but the system let you do it. The problem is that as MMOs "advance" Devs/studios are getting more and more controling, now they only want you to do what they made for you, no thinking outside of the box allowed.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
I was playing AD&D .. you judge if it is a good game or not.
LOL .. i don't except a fast pace action game but spending 20 min to resolve a few actions (that would take 30 sec in a CRPG) ... it is so slow that it took all the excitement out of combat. It is a drag when i have to wait 2 min before knowing if i successfully roll beneath a wagon to avoid an attack.
And CRPG is popular because exactly the opposite of what you said .. it is 100x more complex, in combat considerations, then PnP RPG.
Even the old gold box games have more combat compleixty than a few friends doing PnP RPG. You can visualize the exactly placement of the characters. You can consider movement in and out of spell range. You can trade off between covering 3 weaker mobs or 2 strong one in your fireball range. All these cannot be done in a reasonable time frame with pnp rpgs.
CRPG is popular because it is more assessible and you can do more in less time.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None