Originally posted by Rydeson Originally posted by Scot1 specific: Lets make it take longer to get to top level, design MMO's so the average person takes three months to get a character to top level.
Good idea.. I've always thought that leveling is way to fast for my liking since 2004.. The journey needs to take longer.. I personally want to see a leveling curve around the one year mark..
They shortened the leveling time because people were quitting. To you, the leveling time of one month is too short. Most gamers are playing games that can be beat in a weekend, so a leveling time of two months is too long. Now, guess which of these perspectives spends more money?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Of all the genres available, MMO's are the catagory I expect years of gameplay from instead of weeks or a few months. The content of these games is currently to blame more than the locust. However when the "locust" powerlevels to endgame ignoring 80% percent of content and complains there is nothing to do - then that's on you.
The biggest mistake the recent MMO's have done is taking the social out of the game. It's too solo-able. Thats not the way a true virtual world should work. No one person should be able to tend the garden,chop the forest,mine the ore,kill the meal,build the house,make the armor, kill the dragon,cure the plague, overthrow the dictatorship, and then eat lunch!
You should have to group for the vast majority of quests. You should have one class style, one craft style, one gatherer style, and be relient on commerce with other players to fill your remaining needs. Those who think MMO's should be solo-able, quite frankly, should play from the vast selection of current non-MMO rpgs out there. The Witcher, Skyrim, Assassins Creed ..... all contain a storyline and rpg element's. The need to have someone to show off my gear to isn't a reason to play an MMO. The need to have someone to group up with so we all get our gear is.
AH's are another sticking point. Yes we need a place to exchange products to help ourselves and others succeed. What we don't need is a design that kills interaction. The 2 weeks the TP was down during GW2 showed this. There was chat concerning materials and trades thru the mail system. The was no safeguard in place so you had to trust the other end. That was the only downside. Once the TP came up you never saw the same interaction in chat again. The social went away.
The point being - Locusts devouring other genres are fine. They go buy the next game. Locusts devouring MMO's and then swarming forums cause unplanned ill-thought changes by devs trying to do the right thing, but in the end locusts do to mmo's what they do in real life - kill the field.
Originally posted by Scot1 specific: Lets make it take longer to get to top level, design MMO's so the average person takes three months to get a character to top level.
Good idea.. I've always thought that leveling is way to fast for my liking since 2004.. The journey needs to take longer.. I personally want to see a leveling curve around the one year mark..
They shortened the leveling time because people were quitting. To you, the leveling time of one month is too short. Most gamers are playing games that can be beat in a weekend, so a leveling time of two months is too long. Now, guess which of these perspectives spends more money?
Yep. I remember an average-time-to-cap that exceeded a decade.
But I have little delusion that the other 99.9% of the player base would find that notion at all acceptable.
Time to whip out the bell curve again; each step you take toward the farthest extremes (at the "tails" of the curve) eliminates a portion of your audience. When only the two-percenters remain, you don't have much of your audience left. The two-perfecters at the OTHER extreme don't work, either.
The whole industry sped up the leveling curve, not just Blizzard. Between 02 and 06 or so; virtually every title sped up the leveling and intentionally aimed at more soloability. And they did it because they were bleeding money.
Why did "forced grouping" go away? Because the company was bleeding money. How about breakage, droppage, severe death penalties? Companies that used them, bleeding money.
Why are people begging for their return?
Pendulum, reached its peak, now beginning (rhetorically at least) to swing back again.
But if it travels all the way back to the original extreme, the result is just as bad (for the industry) as today (arguably) is.
Remember, all of our "problems" and "doom" are forum yackyack. Our single biggest and most frequent mistake is taking all of this (and ourselves) way too friggin seriously.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Originally posted by Scot1 specific: Lets make it take longer to get to top level, design MMO's so the average person takes three months to get a character to top level.
Good idea.. I've always thought that leveling is way to fast for my liking since 2004.. The journey needs to take longer.. I personally want to see a leveling curve around the one year mark..
They shortened the leveling time because people were quitting. To you, the leveling time of one month is too short. Most gamers are playing games that can be beat in a weekend, so a leveling time of two months is too long. Now, guess which of these perspectives spends more money?
Yep. I remember an average-time-to-cap that exceeded a decade.
But I have little delusion that the other 99.9% of the player base would find that notion at all acceptable.
Time to whip out the bell curve again; each step you take toward the farthest extremes (at the "tails" of the curve) eliminates a portion of your audience. When only the two-percenters remain, you don't have much of your audience left. The two-perfecters at the OTHER extreme don't work, either.
The whole industry sped up the leveling curve, not just Blizzard. Between 02 and 06 or so; virtually every title sped up the leveling and intentionally aimed at more soloability. And they did it because they were bleeding money.
And is that a reason to stop arguing that we have gone too far the other way? We are way off the center of the curve, imho, and the current approach is far too specific to be considered inclusive.
And is that a reason to stop arguing that we have gone too far the other way? We are way off the center of the curve, imho, and the current approach is far too specific to be considered inclusive.
Flame on!
See above.
If reactionary rhetoric gets "Rawr u so rite man!", then surely there must be some people for whom progressive rhetoric has the same effect.
Wait, that might be me. Oh yeah.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Originally posted by Scot1 specific: Lets make it take longer to get to top level, design MMO's so the average person takes three months to get a character to top level.
Good idea.. I've always thought that leveling is way to fast for my liking since 2004.. The journey needs to take longer.. I personally want to see a leveling curve around the one year mark..
They shortened the leveling time because people were quitting. To you, the leveling time of one month is too short. Most gamers are playing games that can be beat in a weekend, so a leveling time of two months is too long. Now, guess which of these perspectives spends more money?
Won't play a game that took a year to level. I don't want to spend that much time on a single game. Three month is already quite long.
We live in a fast-food culture. It shouldn't be any surprise that it is reflected in games.
You say it as if there is something wrong with it.
I don't apologize for wanting my games assessible. I have limited time playing games, and certainly i don't want to spend 1 year to level in a single game.
And is that a reason to stop arguing that we have gone too far the other way? We are way off the center of the curve, imho, and the current approach is far too specific to be considered inclusive.
Flame on!
Really? Do you have evidence that the median player think that the leveling curve is too short? A few guys here ranting do not count.
We live in a fast-food culture. It shouldn't be any surprise that it is reflected in games.
You say it as if there is something wrong with it.
I don't apologize for wanting my games assessible. I have limited time playing games, and certainly i don't want to spend 1 year to level in a single game.
I agree, I think it's much more fun finishing a game in a day or two. Money well spent if you ask me, fantastic value.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by JaedorWe live in a fast-food culture. It shouldn't be any surprise that it is reflected in games.
You say it as if there is something wrong with it.
I don't apologize for wanting my games assessible. I have limited time playing games, and certainly i don't want to spend 1 year to level in a single game.
Well for folks who compare it to how things used to be, there's something wrong. For others, it's how things are today. Neither good nor bad.
But I understand that for some players, there is nostalgia for a game that can engage you for years and make you really invested in your character, the game and the player community.
We live in a fast-food culture. It shouldn't be any surprise that it is reflected in games.
You say it as if there is something wrong with it.
I don't apologize for wanting my games assessible. I have limited time playing games, and certainly i don't want to spend 1 year to level in a single game.
I agree, I think it's much more fun finishing a game in a day or two. Money well spent if you ask me, fantastic value.
You judge your entertainment by duration? Is a 3 hour movie always better than a 2 hour one?
Plus, yeah .. a F2P game in a day or two .. definitely "money" well spent. The value is unbelievable.
And is that a reason to stop arguing that we have gone too far the other way? We are way off the center of the curve, imho, and the current approach is far too specific to be considered inclusive.
Flame on!
Really? Do you have evidence that the median player think that the leveling curve is too short? A few guys here ranting do not count.
Well, yes, it is hard to argue this with mmorpgs being so hugely successful breaking population records left and right...
Anyways, and we are again in the "most people..." area...
And is that a reason to stop arguing that we have gone too far the other way? We are way off the center of the curve, imho, and the current approach is far too specific to be considered inclusive.
Flame on!
See above.
If reactionary rhetoric gets "Rawr u so rite man!", then surely there must be some people for whom progressive rhetoric has the same effect.
Wait, that might be me. Oh yeah.
Depends, if your car is speeding at 150mph downhill approaching a curve, and you are arguing that speed is good because it helped us get uphill...
The OP as well as you, have own preference too. You like to Play Single Player Games with a fee or a Sub or F2P as and for a few Weeks. It is your preference.
But is it your preference because it is really what you like and how you like to play MMO's or because you have not experienced any differently? You know, most of the people around here that do not like the current direction of the genre, have had the opportunity to experience differently.
That is a good question. Since i started MMOs before UO (in a precursor called Kingdom of Drakkar), and have played UO beta, EQ, try Eve, .. and many other MMOs, i would say my choices are informed decisions. WOW is much more a fun game for me than UO and EQ combined. STO is more fun than Eve. In fact, i would much rather play Deus Ex single player than UO (in any incarnation).
And so then, good, it helps to know you have experienced differently. So we have two people wo were there since very early and one prefers the Themepark and the Other the Sanbox. The difference is, you have a ton of games to play that match your prefered style of an MMO and I do not. Mind you however that for me playing an MMO for 3 months is not playing an MMO, I consider than MMo a failure. But I could accept that it is a matter that can be debated, since again it falls under the preference category. I want an MMO that I could play for several years with my guild and friends. And thus far only U has provided that according to our preferences. SWG almost matched it, butthey they WoWised it...with NGE (a prime example of how the Industry tries to steer things and players reacting badly to it).
It is not a question of Older or Newer for me, i could not care less if it is old or new. It is a question of Fun.
The Themeparks fail to provide me with fun as much as the Sandboxes.
And most sandbox i played provides me with less fun than Diablo. The exception may be Planetside 2, which is a world game. However, i wouldn't call it a sandbox. It is pretty much a combat centric open world game (and the important part for me is combat centric).
Planetside is not a world MMO...seeing you say this makes me doubt your experience. You would understand otherwise. Planetside and PS2, are Pure RvR MMO's. It is a Virtual battleground where the different factions fight it out. No Quests no Crating No Economy only Pure Combat between the sides. I liked Planetside and I kinda Like PS2...for casual play it is fine, not something I would consistently spend my time in with my friends though.
Also it is important to specify that in reality a Game MMO and World MMO, are both games, there to provide fun and entertainment. If I wanted a simulation of reality Virtyually I could be living in Second Life, there are millions of people there.
We are talking about Games, and the Design Philosophy behind them. I think and feel, that MMO's designed as Games, are shallow, short sighted, and simply aim to return a profit in the short term, which is a valuable Business Endeavor, but me as the Customer/Consumer/Player of them, is left unsatisfied, and disappointed, empty...
I think like the OP that there is a market for World MMO's. And if you prefer the Gamey ones, by all means stay playing the Gamey ones that you like they are not going away, but why not have something that I can like allong with those who feel the same?
We have stated our prefernces often. And i doubt anyone would care if the other side has some games to play. However, a lot of the discussion is about the size of the market, and whether certain game is likely to be developed. So when i say "i don't think there is a large market for world MMO", it is a discussion of the state of the industry, and not i want to stamp out all world games.
Personally from what i have seen to be successful in online games, i don't see a huge market for sandbox. If you look at what have been tried in the last 2-3 years. the successes are: WOT, LOL, Minecraft (which is more about building than a sandbox pve/pvp game). And games like Darkfall is no where close to the sucess like WOT or LOL. Even TOR is gathering more players than most sandbox games.
And UO or SWG was not about Building? Gee, I guess Building Villages and Towns, and In Game Communities of players was not building then in UO.. If anything games like Minecraft prove how popular a World MMO would be because it is a World Game. Can you Immagine Minecraft as an MMO? groups of people buildingtheir Houses, forming Villages and towns, joining together in alliances, or Declaring war amongst them, establihing Trade between Towns, develloping Local culture and spreading it and exchanging it as well? But you are supposed to have experienced all that before...did you? because that was my 5 years experience of UO.
Compared to that..what is WoW?...but analogically..an Arcade game...good for a few rounds...
No one can deny that there is need for it. As for the Direction of the Genre, the direction evolves how people in the Industry Decide it should go, this is why some of us who have been there since the early days know better than to beleive that it is something which evolves on its own.
In reality Companies steer the players where they want them to. Sometimes it is gamble, and we have seen how players react to them. But most of the time it works...
I question that. Companies try all sort of games, and the market decide. Blizz is successful because they figure out what is fun for players, instead of dictating what is fun.
Companies try only whatthey think will pay them the big bucks... Shoebox MMOs. The only one's left with vision try to innovate and take some risks are Indie Teams.
We began from the Idea that an MMO is a Social Experience shared by the players through their dealings and Interactions within the virtual World of the chosen Setting. To the idea that an MMO is just another single player game but that you play allong side other people so you can both compete/compere your rpogress live in real time.
The players did not choose this transformation...the people influential in the Industry did...
I disagree. Players chose this with vote of their wallet. At least i do. There are sandbox games i can play if i choose to. I chose not to.
Devs have tried sandboxes ... they do not gather the same level of success compared to WOW, LOL, Maple Story ....
I know often there are excuses like the sandbox have low budget and what-not .. note that Maple story, LOL, WOT are not high budget AAA games. Even torchlight is a good success as a low-budget indie game.
I think the market is very revealing of what players like.
Players like Fun. It is as simple as that. WoT is fun, I play it...not like a mad man 8 hours/day, but I play it a couple hours 2 times a week with my friends. We make a few rounds advance our Tanks and have a good time. It is successfull in that regard because it does have enough players that play it in that fashion and because it offers an experience that you cannot find anywhere else...there are no 20 different games with Tank Fighting out...likethere are a myriad of WoW clones...and None of them even comes to 1/10 of WoW's Financial success. And none ever will either.
So in a way yes, even old players like me have evolved I do play several MMO's now days, a bit of WoT, a bit of PS2, a bit of GW2...but, I am not playing 3 MMO's that offer the same experience, I play three that offer three distinct experiences. What I am longing for however is for the world MMO where I could build allong with my friends something that is ours, where I can play consistently, where we could use our immagination to innovate as well...share our experiences with the opther players of that world, cooperate together or compete, depending on our ambitions or values we choose to Champion.
In UO we chose to Champion the Virtuous path, to defend the innocent and protect the weak, we made friends with those that had same values we made enemies with those that sought to dominate the weak and innocent...This dynamic was played out in the world of Britannia with its Lore, History and peoples, and it did not depend on the latest expansion of Artificial Vilains requiring everyone to side step every 2 minutes, sing a song every 5 minutes, Dance the macarena every 8 minutes like Choereographed Robots in order to get rewarded like rats in a maze (with a random reward on top of it gawds..better luck next time...go go dance and isng again and again). It depended on the choices of players in relation to choices of other players....like the real world...only in a fantasy world with Dragons and Deamons too and Players which could be Heroes or Vilains or simply ordinary merchants, entertainers or adventurers sharing their talents to other players...a world dynamic game where not everyone is the Hero, but everyone is having fun with whatever they choose to have fun with, everyone contributeing to its dynamic, a game that you play with other people, not just amongst other people, a game where what is shared is the adventures in its world, not just Gear linking, that is what a true MMO is...the rest are just ordinary games to kill some time.
PS: Darkfall was nothing like UO, it was a Brutish ill conceived game. I hope they make something better with the sequel and wish em success but it is simply not it for me.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
the real problem with a content locust is they are exessively vocal... they burn up the content too fast, then QQ for months about how they have nothing to do while the developer is struggling to finish new content and put out patches.
if they didnt burn up the content of a game over night then bitch about it until the world implodes there wouldnt be such an issue with it. but they expect to complete all content and have brand new stuff the next day...
rather then playing the game and enjoying it they play it just to beat it.. making the whole game production system pointless.
hense why so many games are repeating basicly Pong..
Yep. This. I play to "live" in a surreal world.
But in defense of discontented content locusts there are some peeps it's just their personality trait. I had a buddy like this best friend was great guy but just could not play a game slow to save himself. We agreed to disagree, not that it was ever a real fite, I just seldom party with these types. They're on a race to complete everything, even real life.
So in a way yes, even old players like me have evolved I do play several MMO's now days, a bit of WoT, a bit of PS2, a bit of GW2...but, I am not playing 3 MMO's that offer the same experience, I play three that offer three distinct experiences. What I am longing for however is for the world MMO where I could build allong with my friends something that is ours, where I can play consistently, where we could use our immagination to innovate as well...share our experiences with the opther players of that world, cooperate together or compete, depending on our ambitions or values we choose to Champion.
Thati s your problem. What you describe is usually too much work for many players. 2 hours having some fun on WOT is what a lot wants. And they also want different experience, instead of being stuck in the same world for a long time. I bet many who play WOT is also playing LOL, and PS2, and Diablo.
In fact, even you admit to play these games. If devs can entertain by focusing on slices of good experiences (and not even need a MMO for), why would they spend the effort to make a huge world MMO with many systems, and more things that can go wrong?
So in a way yes, even old players like me have evolved I do play several MMO's now days, a bit of WoT, a bit of PS2, a bit of GW2...but, I am not playing 3 MMO's that offer the same experience, I play three that offer three distinct experiences. What I am longing for however is for the world MMO where I could build allong with my friends something that is ours, where I can play consistently, where we could use our immagination to innovate as well...share our experiences with the opther players of that world, cooperate together or compete, depending on our ambitions or values we choose to Champion.
Thati s your problem. What you describe is usually too much work for many players. 2 hours having some fun on WOT is what a lot wants. And they also want different experience, instead of being stuck in the same world for a long time. I bet many who play WOT is also playing LOL, and PS2, and Diablo.
In fact, even you admit to play these games. If devs can entertain by focusing on slices of good experiences (and not even need a MMO for), why would they spend the effort to make a huge world MMO with many systems, and more things that can go wrong?
Way off man. The new generation of MMO players only play the games that out now because that is all there is to play. It's the new generation of MMO players that have become the locust. Us older guys new what an MMO was all about, and so did the Devs. But because Studios need to make their money back, they listen to their "players", who nowadays, are just a bunch of kids who whine about everything....yes it's true. So it has done nothing but confuse the crap out of the industry. The worst thing the internet ever could have done, was give people a voice, because clearly, we don't know how to use it.
So in a way yes, even old players like me have evolved I do play several MMO's now days, a bit of WoT, a bit of PS2, a bit of GW2...but, I am not playing 3 MMO's that offer the same experience, I play three that offer three distinct experiences. What I am longing for however is for the world MMO where I could build allong with my friends something that is ours, where I can play consistently, where we could use our immagination to innovate as well...share our experiences with the opther players of that world, cooperate together or compete, depending on our ambitions or values we choose to Champion.
Thati s your problem. What you describe is usually too much work for many players. 2 hours having some fun on WOT is what a lot wants. And they also want different experience, instead of being stuck in the same world for a long time. I bet many who play WOT is also playing LOL, and PS2, and Diablo.
In fact, even you admit to play these games. If devs can entertain by focusing on slices of good experiences (and not even need a MMO for), why would they spend the effort to make a huge world MMO with many systems, and more things that can go wrong?
This thinking is Busines Fail. Why would they spemnd the effort? Umm lets see..maybe because it is their job to make games that people could enjoy for mor ethan three months?
Why are they spending efforts to make games that go empty in three months? Close to 100 million $ and a burned down Company to make Warhammer...Geez...it did not even have Housing for crying out loud...why so much money and effort to make a game that has no substance? UO did not cost that much to make..it probably cost a fraction of it to make yet it was so Rich in comparison...how many other Wasted Effort SWTOR being the latest one..no but are you serious here? Do you realise what you are saying...do you realise what you are seeing?
And the statements about what people really enjoy or do not enjoy...are your personal opinion. How doyou know people would not like an UO type game when no UO type game has been made really since? Indie attempts asside with very limited budgets and ressources, there has not been any major release of a sandbox since SWG pre-NGE...
And yes there is no shame to admit what games one plays, but i did say what I really long for is not any of them, which implies I only play them because what i really want does not exist,...but I am still a gamer, I'll manage to play something in between, and they are F2P...they are there...can log in and play for a week and come back to them 6 months later for another week. I do not spend money on them thought....and I am not subscribing to any Themepark that I know I will get bored of in three months...given the available choices I rather stick with F2P...my wallet will open for a Sub when someone makes the game I long for.
People, companies are wondering how to get players to pay in F2P games, and why there seems to be many players that play them without doing any microtransactions. It is not because I am cheap, nor because I make it a point to resist..it is because I know that these games are temporary fun for me, and it is not owrth ot to invest in them, I am not concerned about being competitive...I am not concerned about looking good and colorfull, i am just there for a few hours of fun...win or lose, because in the end these games do not have any elements I care about enough. I am not building anything with my friends in them i do not have to organize i do not have to make sure things work well and everyone is having fun...there is no Industrial engagement there is no in game community to maintain, there is no defenses or a reputation (within the Lore context of the game) to preserve..these games are trivial for me and my friends. Whether we are there or not it doe snot mean anything to anyone other than ourselves having fun together. There is no social interaction with other guilds and entities.
Not even in WoW, all guilds are closed groupings in WoW, most will not invite people in Raids that are not pat of their guild anyways. Now days, you do not even need guilds, just queue for the Instance and raids, Pug it...PvP is the same..Pug it have fun...get your tokens have your fun, go to bed..Trivial...
In Uo people got together to build something they were proud that they bellonged to, to defend, to maintain, and to share with their neigbors, to exchange to enagge in adventure. There has been no MMO other than UO and SWG-Pre NGE where I actually had the opportunity to apply Diplomatic Interaction with other players to forge an agreement, to forge an alliance to mediate a conflict to Lead a War., to Organise a Server Wide Event, or simply a local event, a banquit, a wedding, the innauguration of a Shrine a tavern a Village a new town, providing escort fora Caravan, providing goods and materials for a Library etc...because all other MMO's focus on the interaction of their players with the environment, instead of focussing on the interaction of their players amongst eachother in the environment.
We did not go to Dungeons justto get gear for ourselves or raise the skills ofour characters (that was in the initial stages of the game) but after that a neigboring town could be having an event which was in need of Deamon blood, this gave us the opportunity to organize a visit to the depths of a most dangerous dungeon to gather the deamon blood for them. When was the last time you played an MMO and someone actually spent some playing hours to get something for you out of the goodness of their heart abd for the sake of seeing you having fun?
We did not adventure because it was part of the design's progression curve, we adventured because the trigger was something much more meaningfull, the needs of another player...another real person.
And finally to link all this to the topic, there is nothing wrong with being a content Locust when the behavior and actions making you one contribute to the overall good of the in game world and its players. It can be bad when it only benefits ourselves, for the sake of our selfish vanity. And whether it is the good way or the bad way depends on the design of the MMO. Is the content designed to benefit each player individually or is the content designed to benefit many including the game itself? Someone having fun building a Library spending months gathering artefacts and materials from the four corners of the realm to build a Museum or a Library is a worthy content consumtpion endeavor since in the end, benefits all plus the game itself, one server at a time. And that is a core difference between the world games and the gamy Games in my opinion. Players can be as creative as the devs, even more so in some cases. Provided the game gives them the opportunity. And world MMO's do just that. But it takes Devs that think alike too. It takes devs that can say "here I am creating all this so that you can have fun your way" and not say "Here I am creating this so you can have fun my way"...
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Thanks for your Thought Police advice Quirhad, but no thanks.
I was asking in the post before for a longer time to top level. I was not asking for it to take 6 months to get there. Yes if levelling times were increased too much, then players would go early. But adding on a month does not seem to be that drastic to me. Baby steps is what would be needed here.
How do you add a month? How? Adjust XP rate, stretch the content, forced downtimes... what? Give us your insight please.
Great majority of the suggestions here can be ruled out right away, because authors are either out of touch with the market and/or technology, don't know jackshit about software development or are otherwise living in the past. Rest are not feasible or simply do not work. People don't think things through, and you can't blame 'em, because its not their job. Its the game developer's job, and still you think you know better.
So be my guest, present your silver bullet.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
So in a way yes, even old players like me have evolved I do play several MMO's now days, a bit of WoT, a bit of PS2, a bit of GW2...but, I am not playing 3 MMO's that offer the same experience, I play three that offer three distinct experiences. What I am longing for however is for the world MMO where I could build allong with my friends something that is ours, where I can play consistently, where we could use our immagination to innovate as well...share our experiences with the opther players of that world, cooperate together or compete, depending on our ambitions or values we choose to Champion.
Thati s your problem. What you describe is usually too much work for many players. 2 hours having some fun on WOT is what a lot wants. And they also want different experience, instead of being stuck in the same world for a long time. I bet many who play WOT is also playing LOL, and PS2, and Diablo.
In fact, even you admit to play these games. If devs can entertain by focusing on slices of good experiences (and not even need a MMO for), why would they spend the effort to make a huge world MMO with many systems, and more things that can go wrong?
This thinking is Busines Fail. Why would they spemnd the effort? Umm lets see..maybe because it is their job to make games that people could enjoy for mor ethan three months?
No. It is their job to make good game that sells.
Dishonor took less than a month to finish. It sold tons, and it is a huge success. Who says a MMO cannot be more like SP games? Shorter time to "finish", less investment .. make more money.
Then make another one. Dragging stuff out to years is not necessarily fun.
And why does a single game needs to entertain the same players for years? Even the look term successful games like WOW has a lot of churn. Do you think the 10M currently players are the same from the beginning?
I was asking in the post before for a longer time to top level. I was not asking for it to take 6 months to get there. Yes if levelling times were increased too much, then players would go early. But adding on a month does not seem to be that drastic to me. Baby steps is what would be needed here.
Adding a month to another month is a 100% increase .. very drastic.
Adding a month to 3 month is only a 33% increase, and less drastic.
But is there a good gameplay reason to drag out the leveling? Don't give me the crap about learning to play the class. Learning to play a game is not a college class, and should not take months.
Comments
They shortened the leveling time because people were quitting. To you, the leveling time of one month is too short. Most gamers are playing games that can be beat in a weekend, so a leveling time of two months is too long. Now, guess which of these perspectives spends more money?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Of all the genres available, MMO's are the catagory I expect years of gameplay from instead of weeks or a few months. The content of these games is currently to blame more than the locust. However when the "locust" powerlevels to endgame ignoring 80% percent of content and complains there is nothing to do - then that's on you.
The biggest mistake the recent MMO's have done is taking the social out of the game. It's too solo-able. Thats not the way a true virtual world should work. No one person should be able to tend the garden,chop the forest,mine the ore,kill the meal,build the house,make the armor, kill the dragon,cure the plague, overthrow the dictatorship, and then eat lunch!
You should have to group for the vast majority of quests. You should have one class style, one craft style, one gatherer style, and be relient on commerce with other players to fill your remaining needs. Those who think MMO's should be solo-able, quite frankly, should play from the vast selection of current non-MMO rpgs out there. The Witcher, Skyrim, Assassins Creed ..... all contain a storyline and rpg element's. The need to have someone to show off my gear to isn't a reason to play an MMO. The need to have someone to group up with so we all get our gear is.
AH's are another sticking point. Yes we need a place to exchange products to help ourselves and others succeed. What we don't need is a design that kills interaction. The 2 weeks the TP was down during GW2 showed this. There was chat concerning materials and trades thru the mail system. The was no safeguard in place so you had to trust the other end. That was the only downside. Once the TP came up you never saw the same interaction in chat again. The social went away.
The point being - Locusts devouring other genres are fine. They go buy the next game. Locusts devouring MMO's and then swarming forums cause unplanned ill-thought changes by devs trying to do the right thing, but in the end locusts do to mmo's what they do in real life - kill the field.
Yep. I remember an average-time-to-cap that exceeded a decade.
But I have little delusion that the other 99.9% of the player base would find that notion at all acceptable.
Time to whip out the bell curve again; each step you take toward the farthest extremes (at the "tails" of the curve) eliminates a portion of your audience. When only the two-percenters remain, you don't have much of your audience left. The two-perfecters at the OTHER extreme don't work, either.
The whole industry sped up the leveling curve, not just Blizzard. Between 02 and 06 or so; virtually every title sped up the leveling and intentionally aimed at more soloability. And they did it because they were bleeding money.
Why did "forced grouping" go away? Because the company was bleeding money. How about breakage, droppage, severe death penalties? Companies that used them, bleeding money.
Why are people begging for their return?
Pendulum, reached its peak, now beginning (rhetorically at least) to swing back again.
But if it travels all the way back to the original extreme, the result is just as bad (for the industry) as today (arguably) is.
Remember, all of our "problems" and "doom" are forum yackyack. Our single biggest and most frequent mistake is taking all of this (and ourselves) way too friggin seriously.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
And is that a reason to stop arguing that we have gone too far the other way? We are way off the center of the curve, imho, and the current approach is far too specific to be considered inclusive.
Flame on!
See above.
If reactionary rhetoric gets "Rawr u so rite man!", then surely there must be some people for whom progressive rhetoric has the same effect.
Wait, that might be me. Oh yeah.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
We live in a fast-food culture. It shouldn't be any surprise that it is reflected in games.
Won't play a game that took a year to level. I don't want to spend that much time on a single game. Three month is already quite long.
MMOs cost too much money to be treated like disposable console games. Selling boxes isn't nearly enough for them to make a profit.
I'm a content locust and if everyone was like me there would be no AAA MMOs around.
You say it as if there is something wrong with it.
I don't apologize for wanting my games assessible. I have limited time playing games, and certainly i don't want to spend 1 year to level in a single game.
Really? Do you have evidence that the median player think that the leveling curve is too short? A few guys here ranting do not count.
I agree, I think it's much more fun finishing a game in a day or two. Money well spent if you ask me, fantastic value.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
I don't apologize for wanting my games assessible. I have limited time playing games, and certainly i don't want to spend 1 year to level in a single game.
Well for folks who compare it to how things used to be, there's something wrong. For others, it's how things are today. Neither good nor bad.
But I understand that for some players, there is nostalgia for a game that can engage you for years and make you really invested in your character, the game and the player community.
You judge your entertainment by duration? Is a 3 hour movie always better than a 2 hour one?
Plus, yeah .. a F2P game in a day or two .. definitely "money" well spent. The value is unbelievable.
Well, yes, it is hard to argue this with mmorpgs being so hugely successful breaking population records left and right...
Anyways, and we are again in the "most people..." area...
Flame on!
Depends, if your car is speeding at 150mph downhill approaching a curve, and you are arguing that speed is good because it helped us get uphill...
Flame on!
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Yep. This. I play to "live" in a surreal world.
But in defense of discontented content locusts there are some peeps it's just their personality trait. I had a buddy like this best friend was great guy but just could not play a game slow to save himself. We agreed to disagree, not that it was ever a real fite, I just seldom party with these types. They're on a race to complete everything, even real life.
Thati s your problem. What you describe is usually too much work for many players. 2 hours having some fun on WOT is what a lot wants. And they also want different experience, instead of being stuck in the same world for a long time. I bet many who play WOT is also playing LOL, and PS2, and Diablo.
In fact, even you admit to play these games. If devs can entertain by focusing on slices of good experiences (and not even need a MMO for), why would they spend the effort to make a huge world MMO with many systems, and more things that can go wrong?
Way off man. The new generation of MMO players only play the games that out now because that is all there is to play. It's the new generation of MMO players that have become the locust. Us older guys new what an MMO was all about, and so did the Devs. But because Studios need to make their money back, they listen to their "players", who nowadays, are just a bunch of kids who whine about everything....yes it's true. So it has done nothing but confuse the crap out of the industry. The worst thing the internet ever could have done, was give people a voice, because clearly, we don't know how to use it.
This thinking is Busines Fail. Why would they spemnd the effort? Umm lets see..maybe because it is their job to make games that people could enjoy for mor ethan three months?
Why are they spending efforts to make games that go empty in three months? Close to 100 million $ and a burned down Company to make Warhammer...Geez...it did not even have Housing for crying out loud...why so much money and effort to make a game that has no substance? UO did not cost that much to make..it probably cost a fraction of it to make yet it was so Rich in comparison...how many other Wasted Effort SWTOR being the latest one..no but are you serious here? Do you realise what you are saying...do you realise what you are seeing?
And the statements about what people really enjoy or do not enjoy...are your personal opinion. How doyou know people would not like an UO type game when no UO type game has been made really since? Indie attempts asside with very limited budgets and ressources, there has not been any major release of a sandbox since SWG pre-NGE...
And yes there is no shame to admit what games one plays, but i did say what I really long for is not any of them, which implies I only play them because what i really want does not exist,...but I am still a gamer, I'll manage to play something in between, and they are F2P...they are there...can log in and play for a week and come back to them 6 months later for another week. I do not spend money on them thought....and I am not subscribing to any Themepark that I know I will get bored of in three months...given the available choices I rather stick with F2P...my wallet will open for a Sub when someone makes the game I long for.
People, companies are wondering how to get players to pay in F2P games, and why there seems to be many players that play them without doing any microtransactions. It is not because I am cheap, nor because I make it a point to resist..it is because I know that these games are temporary fun for me, and it is not owrth ot to invest in them, I am not concerned about being competitive...I am not concerned about looking good and colorfull, i am just there for a few hours of fun...win or lose, because in the end these games do not have any elements I care about enough. I am not building anything with my friends in them i do not have to organize i do not have to make sure things work well and everyone is having fun...there is no Industrial engagement there is no in game community to maintain, there is no defenses or a reputation (within the Lore context of the game) to preserve..these games are trivial for me and my friends. Whether we are there or not it doe snot mean anything to anyone other than ourselves having fun together. There is no social interaction with other guilds and entities.
Not even in WoW, all guilds are closed groupings in WoW, most will not invite people in Raids that are not pat of their guild anyways. Now days, you do not even need guilds, just queue for the Instance and raids, Pug it...PvP is the same..Pug it have fun...get your tokens have your fun, go to bed..Trivial...
In Uo people got together to build something they were proud that they bellonged to, to defend, to maintain, and to share with their neigbors, to exchange to enagge in adventure. There has been no MMO other than UO and SWG-Pre NGE where I actually had the opportunity to apply Diplomatic Interaction with other players to forge an agreement, to forge an alliance to mediate a conflict to Lead a War., to Organise a Server Wide Event, or simply a local event, a banquit, a wedding, the innauguration of a Shrine a tavern a Village a new town, providing escort fora Caravan, providing goods and materials for a Library etc...because all other MMO's focus on the interaction of their players with the environment, instead of focussing on the interaction of their players amongst eachother in the environment.
We did not go to Dungeons justto get gear for ourselves or raise the skills ofour characters (that was in the initial stages of the game) but after that a neigboring town could be having an event which was in need of Deamon blood, this gave us the opportunity to organize a visit to the depths of a most dangerous dungeon to gather the deamon blood for them. When was the last time you played an MMO and someone actually spent some playing hours to get something for you out of the goodness of their heart abd for the sake of seeing you having fun?
We did not adventure because it was part of the design's progression curve, we adventured because the trigger was something much more meaningfull, the needs of another player...another real person.
And finally to link all this to the topic, there is nothing wrong with being a content Locust when the behavior and actions making you one contribute to the overall good of the in game world and its players. It can be bad when it only benefits ourselves, for the sake of our selfish vanity. And whether it is the good way or the bad way depends on the design of the MMO. Is the content designed to benefit each player individually or is the content designed to benefit many including the game itself? Someone having fun building a Library spending months gathering artefacts and materials from the four corners of the realm to build a Museum or a Library is a worthy content consumtpion endeavor since in the end, benefits all plus the game itself, one server at a time. And that is a core difference between the world games and the gamy Games in my opinion. Players can be as creative as the devs, even more so in some cases. Provided the game gives them the opportunity. And world MMO's do just that. But it takes Devs that think alike too. It takes devs that can say "here I am creating all this so that you can have fun your way" and not say "Here I am creating this so you can have fun my way"...
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Thanks for your Thought Police advice Quirhad, but no thanks.
I was asking in the post before for a longer time to top level. I was not asking for it to take 6 months to get there. Yes if levelling times were increased too much, then players would go early. But adding on a month does not seem to be that drastic to me. Baby steps is what would be needed here.
How do you add a month? How? Adjust XP rate, stretch the content, forced downtimes... what? Give us your insight please.
Great majority of the suggestions here can be ruled out right away, because authors are either out of touch with the market and/or technology, don't know jackshit about software development or are otherwise living in the past. Rest are not feasible or simply do not work. People don't think things through, and you can't blame 'em, because its not their job. Its the game developer's job, and still you think you know better.
So be my guest, present your silver bullet.I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
No. It is their job to make good game that sells.
Dishonor took less than a month to finish. It sold tons, and it is a huge success. Who says a MMO cannot be more like SP games? Shorter time to "finish", less investment .. make more money.
Then make another one. Dragging stuff out to years is not necessarily fun.
And why does a single game needs to entertain the same players for years? Even the look term successful games like WOW has a lot of churn. Do you think the 10M currently players are the same from the beginning?
Adding a month to another month is a 100% increase .. very drastic.
Adding a month to 3 month is only a 33% increase, and less drastic.
But is there a good gameplay reason to drag out the leveling? Don't give me the crap about learning to play the class. Learning to play a game is not a college class, and should not take months.