Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Will most player even notice if the virtual world is taken away from MMO pve gameplay?

1457910

Comments

  • PhelcherPhelcher Member CommonPosts: 1,053
    Originally posted by laokoko

    I never really get why people care that the world is empty. 

    I understand for pvp you need people to play with.  But take GW2 for example, who even care if the world is empty or not.  There isn't even much to do in there. 

    I mean, most of the dynamic event are soloable.  Those that have champion mob you can just skip it, it is no big deal.  I mean other people play dark fall before, do you ever hear them say, "oh wow, there is a monster I can't kill and no one want to kill it".

    And people keep saying exploring.  What is there to explore if you already been to a place.  It is not like some random thing pop up and you get excited.  To me virtual world is boring and unexcited unless it have pvp. 

    Yes, in the virtual world created by ArenaNet...

     

    GuildWars2 failed, because as you got older and explored more, the frontier has safety harlets everywhere like in the earlier "zones". So as you traveled off away from society, things never got harder, they only stayed reletive to your level, never incresing in difficulty.

     

    But why pick GW2 to discuss... it cost nothing to play and was meant to be all YOU wanted. Imagine of that open area had not lookout points, no safety and you were left to explore without harbor. 

    "No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


    -Nariusseldon

  • PhelcherPhelcher Member CommonPosts: 1,053
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by RefMinor
     

    You are the one telling people that MMOs will become lobby based, I am not trying to push virtual worlds into non MMOs, ESO, EQ:Next, Archeage amongst others are not your favoured lobby games but are full AAA MMORPGs, the virtual world continues, whether you sell your lobby based bridge to anyone here or not.

    What do you mean by "will"? Aren't a lot of MMO already have lobby based gameplay. I didn't say all of them, did i? But isn't it true that there are many MMOs with lobby-based gameplay?

    In fact, almost all end-game pve gameplay in WOW, STO, DDO ... (and a long list of MMOs) are lobby based. Do you disagree?

    Dude...

     

    Give ur troll a rest. You post history is all anyone needs to read, to see how little you know about MMORPG's.  In every post you constantly say that the best games and where everything is headed is instanced rooms, with action PvP..

    So either stick by your premonitions and take the heat for all your thread-crapping, or STFU..! You cannot come into every thread and incessantly keep telling people how things are going to be, then say "I am not saying that"...   when you've puked that same idea in every thread.

    Lets face it, you only know World of Warcraft and have no understanding of Dungeon & Dragons...

     

    Your a kid gamer who likes to be entertained, you are not out seeking adventure.

    All you want (You've repeatedly told everyone this), is to sit in a game and told when you can enter a room and fight... you like to sit in a lobby. But there is more to World of Warcraft than a lobby... it just become a lobby game, because you have not realized the game is boring now and you should've stop playing that kiddie game about 5 years ago. Once you graduate from the idea of WoW you will see that open world design is the future, is what we all yearn again..

     

     

    "No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


    -Nariusseldon

  • HedeonHedeon Member UncommonPosts: 997
    Originally posted by Myria
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    In fact, almost all end-game pve gameplay in WOW, STO, DDO ... (and a long list of MMOs) are lobby based. Do you disagree?

    It's not clear if you even know what "lobby based" means or not. It does not, in point of fact, mean 'a game that has instances'. It does not even mean 'a game that can be played as essentially lobby based if I want to play it that way'.

    Multiple persons in this thread have stated that they do not in fact play their MMO of choice anything like a 'lobby game', games you say *are* lobby games.

    Until and unless you can provide actual evidence -- not your assumptions, not your surmises, and not "that's what my guild did in game X some indeterminant time ago and it's pretty clear that I never really played the game at all" assertions, actual evidence that a majority, or even significant minority, of the playerbase never goes into the game world -- I'll take their assertions far more seriously than I take your self-serving assumptions.

    will have to disagree with you, the time when you close a set number of people into their own personal version of a "part of the world" it is lobby based gaming, just without a handy instant run tool...which is not a quality.

    I do like to have major quest updates in instances, in more or less hard to reach places...the travel to the instances in a group/raid should be a must imo.

  • SwiftrevoirSwiftrevoir Member UncommonPosts: 158
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Swiftrevoir
    When and if this ever happens to MMOs I will be back on a full diet of UnmassivelySingleplayerOfflineRPGs.  I have quit several MMOs already that just had the feel of being in a lobby waiting for action.  When this happens with a game I go back to prancing and gallivanting in games like Skyrim......and have a BLAST!

    wait .. why? If you like SKYRIM, why discriminate against MMOs that play like SKYRIM? Shouldn't you like that instead?

    Personally i would play MMOs like a SP game if it plays as a fun SP game.

    I think what I said was being taken out of context.  Skyrim never puts you in a lobby.  While you're able to warp around using the map I still prefer to travel manually a lot of the time.  I would love to play an MMO that plays like a single player RPG.  I'm not sure why you think I was descriminating against it. 

    What I meant was that if MMOs take out the sense of exploration and adventure....I will not play MMOs.  Period.  I will play my single player games and if I want to play online I'll most likely just keep playing the FPS games I have lying around.  Chivalry, Planetside 2, ect.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by Phelcher

     

    But why pick GW2 to discuss... it cost nothing to play and was meant to be all YOU wanted. Imagine of that open area had not lookout points, no safety and you were left to explore without harbor. 

    Because it is one of the successful MMOs released recently.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by Swiftrevoir
     

    I think what I said was being taken out of context.  Skyrim never puts you in a lobby.  While you're able to warp around using the map I still prefer to travel manually a lot of the time.  I would love to play an MMO that plays like a single player RPG.  I'm not sure why you think I was descriminating against it. 

    What I meant was that if MMOs take out the sense of exploration and adventure....I will not play MMOs.  Period.  I will play my single player games and if I want to play online I'll most likely just keep playing the FPS games I have lying around.  Chivalry, Planetside 2, ect.

    ah .. i get you. If adventure & exploration is what you want, then you should play your game short term, and stop when you consume the content.

    For example, if you play STO and follow the mission episodes, there are plenty of adventure and exploration .. just because the content is new. When you get to end-game, the only thing left is progression and repeated content. In that sense, you can always play the "leveling" part of the MMO for exploration and adventure.

    The same is true for almost any themepark MMO.

    Or you can play SP games. In fact, if you want exploration and adventure, you can play MMO like SP games.

  • SwiftrevoirSwiftrevoir Member UncommonPosts: 158

    Whether or not I have seen every inch of the world in MMO X it still has to be there.  I have to know I can ride my horse to that particular vista I've become fond of and look out and reminisce over the good times I've had in the past.  Maybe I don't do this too often but I know I love the freedom to do so.  And the new tinies that are catching up to me who are traveling through the same lands should not be deprived the same luxury.  Where it would not be me at the top of the vista, it would be them in my stead.   

    I do love endgame in my MMOs but I still make use of the older content in some fashion or another.  It may not be the desired use but I'm a romantic at heart and I love to take in sights and dream.  I do this in real life too.  I don't hike very often but when I do I sometimes like to go back to the same areas I've visited before.  It may be the same place but I'm a different person at that point so the land around me changes perceptually. 

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by Swiftrevoir

    Whether or not I have seen every inch of the world in MMO X it still has to be there.  I have to know I can ride my horse to that particular vista I've become fond of and look out and reminisce over the good times I've had in the past.  Maybe I don't do this too often but I know I love the freedom to do so.  And the new tinies that are catching up to me who are traveling through the same lands should not be deprived the same luxury.  Where it would not be me at the top of the vista, it would be them in my stead.   

    I do love endgame in my MMOs but I still make use of the older content in some fashion or another.  It may not be the desired use but I'm a romantic at heart and I love to take in sights and dream.  I do this in real life too.  I don't hike very often but when I do I sometimes like to go back to the same areas I've visited before.  It may be the same place but I'm a different person at that point so the land around me changes perceptually. 

    You certainly are a romantic, and differ from most players i know, including myself, who cares more about optimizing the build's combat effectiveness and progression (level, gear, .....).

    At the same time, i don't think you even need a MMO to do all that you describe. What you said can be done in SKYRIM. In fact, it is probably BETTER done in a SP open world game because the world can "remember" your specific actions.

     

  • RefMinorRefMinor Member UncommonPosts: 3,452
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Swiftrevoir

    Whether or not I have seen every inch of the world in MMO X it still has to be there.  I have to know I can ride my horse to that particular vista I've become fond of and look out and reminisce over the good times I've had in the past.  Maybe I don't do this too often but I know I love the freedom to do so.  And the new tinies that are catching up to me who are traveling through the same lands should not be deprived the same luxury.  Where it would not be me at the top of the vista, it would be them in my stead.   

    I do love endgame in my MMOs but I still make use of the older content in some fashion or another.  It may not be the desired use but I'm a romantic at heart and I love to take in sights and dream.  I do this in real life too.  I don't hike very often but when I do I sometimes like to go back to the same areas I've visited before.  It may be the same place but I'm a different person at that point so the land around me changes perceptually. 

    You certainly are a romantic, and differ from most players i know, including myself, who cares more about optimizing the build's combat effectiveness and progression (level, gear, .....).

    At the same time, i don't think you even need a MMO to do all that you describe. What you said can be done in SKYRIM. In fact, it is probably BETTER done in a SP open world game because the world can "remember" your specific actions.

     

    Really it boils down to the fact YOU don't like MMORPG's, maybe you should try a game like D3, that would suit you better.

  • SwiftrevoirSwiftrevoir Member UncommonPosts: 158

    I have no idea where you're getting that.  At this point I feel like I'm being trolled.  I have played and loved MMOs for many many years.  I still love the multiplayer cooperative aspects of MMOs.  Why do I have to want to abolish the outside world of an MMO in order to love it?  I'm done with this thread.

    Okay I can't resist one more thing.  D3 had practically NO world!  I played that game for everything its worth for around 2 weeks and couldn't stomach a second more.  I love min/maxing, playing with builds, and trying to be "better" than everyone else.  Does it mean I should want it to be the equivalent of an MMORPG-FPS-lobby styled drawn and quartered game that has been reduced to its basic element?  There...that's everything I have to say about that.

  • laokokolaokoko Member UncommonPosts: 2,004
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Originally posted by laokoko

    I never really get why people care that the world is empty. 

    I understand for pvp you need people to play with.  But take GW2 for example, who even care if the world is empty or not.  There isn't even much to do in there. 

    I mean, most of the dynamic event are soloable.  Those that have champion mob you can just skip it, it is no big deal.  I mean other people play dark fall before, do you ever hear them say, "oh wow, there is a monster I can't kill and no one want to kill it".

    And people keep saying exploring.  What is there to explore if you already been to a place.  It is not like some random thing pop up and you get excited.  To me virtual world is boring and unexcited unless it have pvp. 

    Yes, in the virtual world created by ArenaNet...

     

    GuildWars2 failed, because as you got older and explored more, the frontier has safety harlets everywhere like in the earlier "zones". So as you traveled off away from society, things never got harder, they only stayed reletive to your level, never incresing in difficulty.

     

    But why pick GW2 to discuss... it cost nothing to play and was meant to be all YOU wanted. Imagine of that open area had not lookout points, no safety and you were left to explore without harbor. 

    No, Orr is harder, and people complained it too hard and all the waypoint is contested.  So Anet is going to make more "safe harbour".

    And my point isn't about dificulty.  My point is what is there left to do "when you already explored the area".  I mean, the map is only so big.

    But I do understand what you are trying to say.  Make every godblin or zombie hit like crazy.  Making everything not soloable to hinder progress. 

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by Swiftrevoir

     

    Okay I can't resist one more thing.  D3 had practically NO world!  I played that game for everything its worth for around 2 weeks and couldn't stomach a second more.  I love min/maxing, playing with builds, and trying to be "better" than everyone else.  Does it mean I should want it to be the equivalent of an MMORPG-FPS-lobby styled drawn and quartered game that has been reduced to its basic element?  There...that's everything I have to say about that.

    Sure .. clearly you have very different preferences than those who play D3 for hundred and hundred of hours. It is also obvious that the large number of players who like D3 is not because of the world, nor the story. It is basically a good hack-n-slash with a AH .. nothing more, nothing less.

    In fact, a good example that a fantasy game can be good fun for many, without a world.

  • MyownGodMyownGod Member UncommonPosts: 205
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Take WOW as an example. What are the pve gameplay? Solo-quest, 5-man instanced dungeons and raids. In between dungeons, players waited in a city.

    So what if there is no virtual world? Just a city lobby. Will they even notice the difference?

    You may say .. what about meeting other players when you solo quest? Well, that also don't need a persistent virtual world. You can use an instanced and match random players into it. You will never be seeing 10000 others outside of a city anyway. In fact, most questing players won't want 10000 others to share their quest mobs.

    In DDO, most of the gameplay is in the dungeons. There isn't much of even the open world solo-questing like in WOW.

    LOTRO is similar to WOW.

    In STO, most mission/pve content is in instanced. I do see lots of other players (space ships) in sector space. However, i doubt i would even notice if the sector space is not persistent, or if some of the space ships are NPCs (in fact, some of them are).

    In fact, didn't GW1 tried this idea and was very successful. 

     

     

    "LOTRO is similar to WOW." 

    Sir! I love you for saying "similar" instead of WoW clone.

  • RefMinorRefMinor Member UncommonPosts: 3,452
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Swiftrevoir

     

    Okay I can't resist one more thing.  D3 had practically NO world!  I played that game for everything its worth for around 2 weeks and couldn't stomach a second more.  I love min/maxing, playing with builds, and trying to be "better" than everyone else.  Does it mean I should want it to be the equivalent of an MMORPG-FPS-lobby styled drawn and quartered game that has been reduced to its basic element?  There...that's everything I have to say about that.

    Sure .. clearly you have very different preferences than those who play D3 for hundred and hundred of hours. It is also obvious that the large number of players who like D3 is not because of the world, nor the story. It is basically a good hack-n-slash with a AH .. nothing more, nothing less.

    In fact, a good example that a fantasy game can be good fun for many, without a world.

    I like fish, why do you like beef, can't they make the beef more fishy. Go to a fish restaurant and stop visiting the steakhouse.

  • MyownGodMyownGod Member UncommonPosts: 205
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Originally posted by laokoko

    I never really get why people care that the world is empty. 

    I understand for pvp you need people to play with.  But take GW2 for example, who even care if the world is empty or not.  There isn't even much to do in there. 

    I mean, most of the dynamic event are soloable.  Those that have champion mob you can just skip it, it is no big deal.  I mean other people play dark fall before, do you ever hear them say, "oh wow, there is a monster I can't kill and no one want to kill it".

    And people keep saying exploring.  What is there to explore if you already been to a place.  It is not like some random thing pop up and you get excited.  To me virtual world is boring and unexcited unless it have pvp. 

    Yes, in the virtual world created by ArenaNet...

     

    GuildWars2 failed, because as you got older and explored more, the frontier has safety harlets everywhere like in the earlier "zones". So as you traveled off away from society, things never got harder, they only stayed reletive to your level, never incresing in difficulty.

     

    But why pick GW2 to discuss... it cost nothing to play and was meant to be all YOU wanted. Imagine of that open area had not lookout points, no safety and you were left to explore without harbor. 

     We are talking about virtual worlds, we can't really expect to have a good end game for a role playing game, can we? I mean once the story is done, it's done, everything you do become repetitive. So technically speaking with mmorpgs we are paying them to tell us the story of the game by taking part of the story quests. If we expect to have a non lobby based end game, I suggest playing a sandbox games, or the actual Virtual world game instead like Second life for example.

     

  • ignore_meignore_me Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 1,987

    This discussion is about being only able to have a race track for your car, vs. being able to have mountain roads, garages, rally tracks, etc. in addition to the race track. Which one sounds better?

     

    Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011

  • BanaghranBanaghran Member Posts: 869
    Originally posted by ignore_me

    This discussion is about being only able to have a race track for your car, vs. being able to have mountain roads, garages, rally tracks, etc. in addition to the race track. Which one sounds better?

     

    In b4 "it would cost too much money" and "the race track is superior playstyle anyway, no deer to jump you, no other people/cars you have to drive around".

    Flame on!

    :)

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by RefMinor
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Swiftrevoir

     

    Okay I can't resist one more thing.  D3 had practically NO world!  I played that game for everything its worth for around 2 weeks and couldn't stomach a second more.  I love min/maxing, playing with builds, and trying to be "better" than everyone else.  Does it mean I should want it to be the equivalent of an MMORPG-FPS-lobby styled drawn and quartered game that has been reduced to its basic element?  There...that's everything I have to say about that.

    Sure .. clearly you have very different preferences than those who play D3 for hundred and hundred of hours. It is also obvious that the large number of players who like D3 is not because of the world, nor the story. It is basically a good hack-n-slash with a AH .. nothing more, nothing less.

    In fact, a good example that a fantasy game can be good fun for many, without a world.

    I like fish, why do you like beef, can't they make the beef more fishy. Go to a fish restaurant and stop visiting the steakhouse.

    you, apparently, have never heard of surf and turf. If seafood restaurant starts selling beef, why should i penalize them by ignoring their offerings?

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by ignore_me

    This discussion is about being only able to have a race track for your car, vs. being able to have mountain roads, garages, rally tracks, etc. in addition to the race track. Which one sounds better?

     

    Racetrack, if you like speed. You can go much faster on a race track, then a mountain road.

  • sunshadow21sunshadow21 Member UncommonPosts: 357
    Originally posted by ignore_me

    This discussion is about being only able to have a race track for your car, vs. being able to have mountain roads, garages, rally tracks, etc. in addition to the race track. Which one sounds better?

     

    Depends on what you are looking for. A lot of people will want only one, maybe two, of those options and not care if the others even exist.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • JemcrystalJemcrystal Member UncommonPosts: 1,983

    I don't get it.  "Will most player[s] even notice if the virtual world is taken away from [an] MMO pve......?"  Ah, the entire reason I play PvE is to discover imaginary worlds, like when you read a fiction novel.  But without getting ganked!  I hate questing.  Dungeons are only nice if I can find a full party quick.   I prefer skill up models and I put a lot in to character creation.  I am there for the art and to see if mankind can use their imagination.  So, yeah, the world means a lot.  A heck of a lot.

     

    Example, I played Rift for a short time.  I appreciated open world movement; less running into the "imaginary wall."  The questing was boring.  Rifts were fun before they got level sanctioned.  Rogue/Ranger was fun before it got gimped thanks to PvP cry babbies.  My funnest time was spent taking pics of my character climbing trees.  That I could climb a tree was impressive.  World matters.  The more virtual the better.

     

     

     



  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004

    2 things, call them the basics of a MMORPG without which utter failure is the only possible outcome.

    1. Decent Character creation tool

    2. Game world.

    and thats before you even get to the added content bit, but without that foundation, epic fail. image

  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 22,741
    Originally posted by Lonestryder
    If you don't want the frogs to jump out of the pot of boiling water, you simply turn up the heat slowly.

     

    Which is what has happened over the years, we did not go from a seamless open world to a lobby. It has been done in stages, zones, instances and so on. Often with the good intention of handling player numbers and lag. This has not been a conspiracy to lead us to lobby games, but many factors have pushed us to smaller and smaller game worlds.

    But they are pretty game worlds, with such lovely graphics, and free to play. Beautiful and cheap, the tarts of the gaming world, but marriage material? I think not, one night stands that leave you wanting more but realising that she does not have much upstairs.

  • MurlockDanceMurlockDance Member Posts: 1,223
    Originally posted by sunshadow

    Like I said, I would expect most people here to have that view, but if you think that is representative of the the gaming population as a whole, I think you would find that most people don't actually care if it's an open world or an instance, which is why for pve, instances are not going away, and are probably going to be even more common in the future. It's not a game I would play, but most people speak with their wallets, not on the forums, and that response is what devs are going to listen to ultimately; that response, in the recent past, has been bring on the instances, we don't need the open world as long as we get what we want when we want it.

    That is not really what you were saying in the post I commented on. You were claiming that most people could be put in their own private instance and would not notice the difference. This is not the same thing as a large zone instance in the world were you have hundreds of people interacting and competing with each other.
     

    There are so few truly open worlds, I can only really think of one and that is Vanguard's world. It still has zones and you still have minor transitions. It is just easier for computers to handle that. Besides, I believe that the OP was saying take away all world areas and have just a lobby game with instanced dungeons, which means large zone instances would get nixxed...

    Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.