So we can't have more than 1 criterion when deciding what game to play? How about you go play one of the many non-mmos that don't have harsh death penalties? If it's so important to you, then you should be able to settle for a non-mmo. And WoW losing millions of subs doesn't necessarily mean the market would move specifically towards sandbox games. Clearly games like The Repopulation, Embers of Caerus etc are being developed because people show an interest in it.
Yes, you can have as many criteria as you want. However, it is moot if such a game does not exist. Either you don't play anything, or you have to relax and have fewer criteria.
Of course i play lots of non-MMOs that have no death penalties. i hope you don't think i only play MMO .. or that i am a mmo-only player.
And why would you think that it is important to me? I am just commenting that if harsh DP is important to the OP (which he stated), he should be more flexible in OTHER criteria if he wants to find a game.
I know what you mean. The rush you got in EQ and UO in unknown areas due to the risks involved with death I have never experienced in any other game. Not sure I miss it though.
Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.
Some people don't understand what an MMO should be and dismiss it as entertainment. while MMO's should be virtual worlds. There is a shift towards sandbox the developers are hearing us, they are implementing the stuff they think we want. but alas they are doing it wrong. They focus too much on making a game. instead of letting us wander around and see for ourselves.
i hear ya m8. Death penatly's, no quest hubs etc etc
nah ... I don't believe MMOs should be anything. I think they are just entertainment. Here you go .. i "dismiss" it as entertainment and will treat them as such.
And i play many MMOs as solo games, and don't care if they are virtual worlds. I applaud devs if they make MMOs into better games. In fact, if they are not better games today than in the past (like UO & EQ .. yuck!), i won't even be here.
"wrong" for you. "Right" for me, and many others. Otherwise, why do you think the market grew?
Originally posted by Zydari I know what you mean. The rush you got in EQ and UO in unknown areas due to the risks involved with death I have never experienced in any other game. Not sure I miss it though.
Oh i remember those risks. Risks of wasting time regrinding stuff.
I am glad that i can choose games without those "risks" today.
So we can't have more than 1 criterion when deciding what game to play? How about you go play one of the many non-mmos that don't have harsh death penalties? If it's so important to you, then you should be able to settle for a non-mmo. And WoW losing millions of subs doesn't necessarily mean the market would move specifically towards sandbox games. Clearly games like The Repopulation, Embers of Caerus etc are being developed because people show an interest in it.
Yes, you can have as many criteria as you want. However, it is moot if such a game does not exist. Either you don't play anything, or you have to relax and have fewer criteria.
Of course i play lots of non-MMOs that have no death penalties. i hope you don't think i only play MMO .. or that i am a mmo-only player.
And why would you think that it is important to me? I am just commenting that if harsh DP is important to the OP (which he stated), he should be more flexible in OTHER criteria if he wants to find a game.
So you're saying nobody should talk about the things they want? The type of game he's asking for doesnt exist so he shouldnt ask for it? As I've pointed out, games are indeed coming out at least partially because of people belly aching on forums.
The OP makes a great point, and I agree with him but for a different reason.
The actual mechanic of death in UO and EQ has created a fear of death in the game that can be felt as you play, it gets your adrenaline pumping. It is something you can feel just like finally beating that boss after a week of raiding, you feel accomplished. When you finally get that rare bow off a boss and equip it, you feel proud. As long as a game is making you feel something then you will be engaged in it.
Now, with that being said, to the people that prefer to defeat the boss, get that rare weapon, or feel inspired when they explore a virtual landscape, All those things are limited in comparison to fear, they are finite. The bosses all get killed, the gear gets collected, and virtual worlds can only get so big. Death on the other hand doesn't require devs to put out new content. It will always be there no matter how long a game is being played for.
Some people don't like to be "punished" for dying because it's just a game and they want to have fun while they play it and not have it waste their time with corpse runs or whatever it is. Like you said...ITS JUST A GAME. The goal of the game is not to get the best gear or kill the most powerful boss, these are goals you have set yourself. If you go in with the mentality of just having fun with your friends then fear becomes fun. Getting murdered becomes exhilarating. Those 10 seconds when you and your friends hopelessly fight for your lives only to find 8 corpses on the ground becomes a story, and if that story ended in victory, the emotion felt is always greater because of what you went through, you know it wasn't easy.
Even LoL has a death penalty (respawn timer) that gets harsher as the game progresses. It adds to the replayability because when you are in a team fight you know that it matters. It matters because if you die, it is very likely that the other team is going to take the advantage on the battlefield due to you being dead for 30 seconds. You are focused, your heart is pumping, you don't want to die, and it is fun because it is just a game, so when you do die, it's not that big of a deal, no matter what you lost in game.
hmmm.... how should i put this... i come from the UO era, yeah sure dying had its bad side and it had its own type of fun.
but when did this thread turn into a debate between FFA OW PVP and other games
sure ffa ow pvp is the extreme hardcore end of the spectrum but thats not all the term "fear factor" includes atleast in my opinion.
sure there should be some kind of penalty in dying even Super mario bros wouldnt be what it is today if there wasnt dwindling lives and limited ammount of retries per session
i can accept ffa ow PvP if the gear is super easy to get and dirt cheap but still isnt a huge time sink
i like the idea of experience and level loss, but only to a point if i die 30 times in 60 minutes something is seriously wrong with the game.
Fear of death emerges naturaly if the game allows Deep character progression that takes hours and hours of gameplay and is more than levels and numbers. when one death can pull back the characters progression for hours.
and this depends on the gameplay if the gameplay is shallow this can be considered a useless time sink but if its deep the player can continue what he was doing before he died and degraded but this time with a party or 2
death penalty shouldnt be an obstacle (corpse runs)
same with level based quests, dying becomes an obstacle if the character loses levels upon death so what do we do? lets get rid of the leveling system all together! and make the experience loss affect skill experience and skill levels instead.
or something........ not like my opinion has any effect but well atleast i put it on the table
*edit to sum it up to few words, If death penalty becomes an obstacle to fun and "meaningfull" gameplay it is wrong
So we can't have more than 1 criterion when deciding what game to play? How about you go play one of the many non-mmos that don't have harsh death penalties? If it's so important to you, then you should be able to settle for a non-mmo. And WoW losing millions of subs doesn't necessarily mean the market would move specifically towards sandbox games. Clearly games like The Repopulation, Embers of Caerus etc are being developed because people show an interest in it.
Yes, you can have as many criteria as you want. However, it is moot if such a game does not exist. Either you don't play anything, or you have to relax and have fewer criteria.
Of course i play lots of non-MMOs that have no death penalties. i hope you don't think i only play MMO .. or that i am a mmo-only player.
And why would you think that it is important to me? I am just commenting that if harsh DP is important to the OP (which he stated), he should be more flexible in OTHER criteria if he wants to find a game.
So you're saying nobody should talk about the things they want? The type of game he's asking for doesnt exist so he shouldnt ask for it? As I've pointed out, games are indeed coming out at least partially because of people belly aching on forums.
Oh, i have no doubt people will talk. I just don't agree that it is useful. Look at the rant about lack of perma death penalty ... that dead horse has been flogged for YEARS.
The only AAA game that put that in, as an OPTION, is not even a MMO.
Originally posted by Zydari I know what you mean. The rush you got in EQ and UO in unknown areas due to the risks involved with death I have never experienced in any other game. Not sure I miss it though.
Oh i remember those risks. Risks of wasting time regrinding stuff.
I am glad that i can choose games without those "risks" today.
Could you not choose those types of games in the past?
I feel you are failing to grasp the idea that people like a challenge. For instance as a hobby some people put together models it takes a long time 1 mistake can ruin the whole thing but when its finished it is an achievement.
Some people look for this in their gaming as a hobby, not a form of entertainment. So like yourself some people want to choose, If you choose to be offended or intimidated by these games go for it.
an MMO is a game you can play for years not weeks or months and there are very few newer games with these options IMO
So we can't have more than 1 criterion when deciding what game to play? How about you go play one of the many non-mmos that don't have harsh death penalties? If it's so important to you, then you should be able to settle for a non-mmo. And WoW losing millions of subs doesn't necessarily mean the market would move specifically towards sandbox games. Clearly games like The Repopulation, Embers of Caerus etc are being developed because people show an interest in it.
Yes, you can have as many criteria as you want. However, it is moot if such a game does not exist. Either you don't play anything, or you have to relax and have fewer criteria.
Of course i play lots of non-MMOs that have no death penalties. i hope you don't think i only play MMO .. or that i am a mmo-only player.
And why would you think that it is important to me? I am just commenting that if harsh DP is important to the OP (which he stated), he should be more flexible in OTHER criteria if he wants to find a game.
So you're saying nobody should talk about the things they want? The type of game he's asking for doesnt exist so he shouldnt ask for it? As I've pointed out, games are indeed coming out at least partially because of people belly aching on forums.
Oh, i have no doubt people will talk. I just don't agree that it is useful. Look at the rant about lack of perma death penalty ... that dead horse has been flogged for YEARS.
The only AAA game that put that in, as an OPTION, is not even a MMO.
So why do you not agree that it's useful? I mean obviously developers at least TRY to pay attention to what the community wants (some developers more than others). What reasoning leads you to believe that talking about the things you want on a public forum won't in some small way contribute to how developers design their games?
So why do you not agree that it's useful? I mean obviously developers at least TRY to pay attention to what the community wants (some developers more than others). What reasoning leads you to believe that talking about the things you want on a public forum won't in some small way contribute to how developers design their games?
Because history suggested otherwise? I thought this place agree devs pay more attention to money than what people say?
Lots of people here complains about solo-centric gameplay ... MMOs are full of solo-able gameplay.
Lots of people here complains about instances ... MMOs are full of instances.
Lots of people here complains about lack of FFA pvp .... few MMOs have any FFA pvp.
Lots of people here complains about lack of forced slow travel .... most MMOs have fast travels.
So why do you not agree that it's useful? I mean obviously developers at least TRY to pay attention to what the community wants (some developers more than others). What reasoning leads you to believe that talking about the things you want on a public forum won't in some small way contribute to how developers design their games?
Because history suggested otherwise? I thought this place agree devs pay more attention to money than what people say?
Yeah, they do. They pay MORE attention to money than what people say. Part of caring about money means caring about what people want. That's why niche markets exist in every aspect of life. Just because a group may be a minority, doesn't mean there's no money to be made in catering to them. Also, I said some developers pay more attention than others.
Lots of people here complains about solo-centric gameplay ... MMOs are full of solo-able gameplay.
Lots of people here complains about instances ... MMOs are full of instances.
Lots of people here complains about lack of FFA pvp .... few MMOs have any FFA pvp.
Lots of people here complains about lack of forced slow travel .... most MMOs have fast travels.
.... i think you get the idea.
Yeah people complain about all of those things, but on the other side of those complaints there are people who PREFER them. Developers put things in their game based on what people say they want and based on technical limitations. That's just common sense.
Originally posted by Alasti I haven't been afraid to die in a game in.....way too long.
You obviously have not played D3 hard core.
There are even MMOs that have corpse runs/harsh death penalties as wellWizardry, Darkfall, Conquer, Eve, etc (off the top of my head)
Yes, but people like the OP don't actually miss that feeling. They are upset that other people have the option to play a game that doesn't feature harsh death penalties. It's about playing a game in which you enjoy a mechanic, knowing that others are being frustrated by it so that you can feel superior. The problem is that the people playing those hardcore modes, is that they all want to be there. No one is suffering, and so that sense of superiority is lost (save for going to that game's forums to call people who play the other modes casuals/carebears) - gotta get that superiority fix somehow!
You couldn't be further from the mark. It's pretty obvious you don't understand our intentions or what we want. I'm not sure why it's so hard to understand that more risk = more reward. And having something like corpse runs/looting adds more unscripted and exciting events than something like "every time you die your items lose 10 durability."why do you guys always choose to make stuff up about us instead of just reading what we write?
"You guys"? Why do you believe yourself to be separate? Is it so hard to imagine that many of us 30+ year old gamers have been there and done that, and in some cases, for 5-10 years. The truth is the truth. The games and hardcore modes are out there. Those communities are tiny with only those who truly enjoy playing in that manner.I know exactly what it's like to play perma-death and plenty of EQ corpse running. Like I said, a small portion actually enjoys that playstyle and goes to those games. Then there's people like the OP (which is most of the whiners) who don't want to go play that type of game with other people who enjoy it. They want to play that game style only if it's forced on the general public so that they can feel superior.I don't know why self-proclaimed "hardcore" people have a million and one excuses why they're not playing a particular game. And why the next big AAA should have what they want.Look, it's sad enough when the FFA PvP crowd wants a major MMO dedicated to them when they know full well that they're not a large portion of the MMO gamer population. And those who want perma-death are an even smaller group than that. If a game offers it, you should be playing it because you're not going to get what you want from any AAA games.Like I said, been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Big whoop.
I'm one of "those guys." Funny thing... I cannot for the life of me see where the OP said word one about "perma-death", yet that is what you read?
Want to know why I don't play any of the games you so nicely provided? OWPvP. All of them. (I think. Not sure about Conquer.)
It is not a "hardcore" thing, which shows your ignorance. It is a personal preference. When was the last time you felt dieing mattered in an MMO?
"Us guys" know that today's MMO players want nothing of this sort of thing. It interrupts their efficient leveling and time to end game grind. What it adds for me is a spontaneous occurrence where my focus in the game changes suddenly.
Really, though, I don't expect you to understand, which your posts have shown quite well that you do not.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Yeah people complain about all of those things, but on the other side of those complaints there are people who PREFER them. Developers put things in their game based on what people say they want and based on technical limitations. That's just common sense.
That is why ranting here is useless. There are always those on the other side of those complaints of people who PREFER them.
Yeah people complain about all of those things, but on the other side of those complaints there are people who PREFER them. Developers put things in their game based on what people say they want and based on technical limitations. That's just common sense.
That is why ranting here is useless. There are always those on the other side of those complaints of people who PREFER them.
Thank you for making my point.
No that's the exact opposite of your point. If there are people on the other side of what you want and you're the one that ISN'T letting people know what you want, guess what developers are going to do? If some people want A and tell everybody they want A, and other people want B but nobody says they want B.... why would developers NOT implement A over B?
Yeah people complain about all of those things, but on the other side of those complaints there are people who PREFER them. Developers put things in their game based on what people say they want and based on technical limitations. That's just common sense.
That is why ranting here is useless. There are always those on the other side of those complaints of people who PREFER them.
Thank you for making my point.
No that's the exact opposite of your point. If there are people on the other side of what you want and you're the one that ISN'T letting people know what you want, guess what developers are going to do? If some people want A and tell everybody they want A, and other people want B but nobody says they want B.... why would developers NOT implement A over B?
Because all the rants are repetitive, and the horses are all dead.
Also because devs can look at actual behavior and make decisions. You don't think Blizz took world pvp out just because people rant about it, right? They took it out because it is not popular. Just like LFD is extremely popular so they put it in all dungeons.
You sound like ranting is informative. If you believe that, do you want to buy a bridge?
Yeah people complain about all of those things, but on the other side of those complaints there are people who PREFER them. Developers put things in their game based on what people say they want and based on technical limitations. That's just common sense.
That is why ranting here is useless. There are always those on the other side of those complaints of people who PREFER them.
Thank you for making my point.
No that's the exact opposite of your point. If there are people on the other side of what you want and you're the one that ISN'T letting people know what you want, guess what developers are going to do? If some people want A and tell everybody they want A, and other people want B but nobody says they want B.... why would developers NOT implement A over B?
Because all the rants are repetitive, and the horses are all dead.
Also because devs can look at actual behavior and make decisions. You don't think Blizz took world pvp out just because people rant about it, right? They took it out because it is not popular. Just like LFD is extremely popular so they put it in all dungeons.
You sound like ranting is informative. If you believe that, do you want to buy a bridge?
I never said anything about "ranting." The OP wasn't ranting at all. His was a calm, personal and reasonable post about his own desires. Making your preferences known is how developers, particularly small developers, can hone in on untapped markets and have a finger on the pulse of the community. Do you think it's just a coincidence that there's a resurgence in sandbox games in development recently?
EDIT: Also, that's the second time you've used the bridge joke. It didn't work then and it's not working now.
Great post OP, and thanks for the interesting info about UO. I didn't know losing gear wasn't uncommon and replacing it was not a huge deal. I tried hard to play UO but had major framerate or lag issues; the game was simply unplayable. Which was sad considering I spent many hundreds of hours in Ultimate III and IV.
When second age came out, I intended to give UO another try; but stopped by gamecenter.com to check reviews; and EQ was front page news, so I tried that. No lag or framerate issues at all. I thought it was the same computer, too. Hmmm.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
I never said anything about "ranting." The OP wasn't ranting at all. His was a calm, personal and reasonable post about his own desires. Making your preferences known is how developers, particularly small developers, can hone in on untapped markets and have a finger on the pulse of the community. Do you think it's just a coincidence that there's a resurgence in sandbox games in development recently?
And yet, it is beating the dead horse about the lack of death penalty. And these quotes:
"I miss it!! I have not played a game in a LONG time that gave me the same feeling that UO and EQ did."
"I haven't been afraid to die in a game in.....way too long."
... are rants .. may be polite rants .. but rants nevertheless.
On the other issue, i don't think it is a coincidence. I think devs are trying different things now. Many try new things like Destiny (not even a MMO!) or MOBA, and a few is going back to older ideas. The market will decide who wins.
In my opinion, there are two parts to this: the perceived risk and the actual risk.
I am quite good at generating my own anxiety out of thin air - I don't actually need permadeath or other high penalities to make me fear for my character's life. And I sometimes even miss out on content that is really risk-free just because I don't like the idea of suicide-exploration.
On the other side of the spectrum will be people with the exact opposite problem - their courage surpasses their strategic thinking and they will bankrupt their character with recklessness.
If you increase the actual risk, you make the shy players shier and the reckless players burn out faster. If you lower the actual risk, the shy players may increase their comfort zone and the reckless players will play longer. In other words - the reason things aren't finely balanced as a pure risk-reward calculation is that (for better or worse) not all of us are playing the games as a pure risk-reward calculation in the first place.
I never said anything about "ranting." The OP wasn't ranting at all. His was a calm, personal and reasonable post about his own desires. Making your preferences known is how developers, particularly small developers, can hone in on untapped markets and have a finger on the pulse of the community. Do you think it's just a coincidence that there's a resurgence in sandbox games in development recently?
And yet, it is beating the dead horse about the lack of death penalty. And these quotes:
"I miss it!! I have not played a game in a LONG time that gave me the same feeling that UO and EQ did."
"I haven't been afraid to die in a game in.....way too long."
... are rants .. may be polite rants .. but rants nevertheless.
Neither of those are rants. Not even close. Saying what you like/don't like doesn't make something a rant.
On the other issue, i don't think it is a coincidence. I think devs are trying different things now. Many try new things like Destiny (not even a MMO!) or MOBA, and a few is going back to older ideas. The market will decide who wins.
And that "something new" is based on what people want. They're not just randomly trying new things. Even games like Destiny are implementing features that players communicate that they want. MOBA's exist because people liked killing creeps in WC3 but didn't like the mechanic skill involved in macroing and multitasking. Game developers don't just do things randomly for no reason. They do things because people say they want those things. It may be time to just let go of your pride and admit this obvious and otherwise undisputed fact of product development.
And that "something new" is based on what people want. They're not just randomly trying new things. Even games like Destiny are implementing features that players communicate that they want. MOBA's exist because people liked killing creeps in WC3 but didn't like the mechanic skill involved in macroing and multitasking. Game developers don't just do things randomly for no reason. They do things because people say they want those things. It may be time to just let go of your pride and admit this obvious and otherwise undisputed fact of product development.
I never say devs do things for no reason. Specifically, money, and supply and demands are the reasons.
I think you are just blinded to the fact that many things people have ranted (or as you put it "express their desire") here day in and day out with little effect.
So you want to sound like you are doing something positive rather than just ranting. But sticking your head into the sand does not make it true.
But i suppose many here are used to sticking their head in the sand anyway.
In my opinion, there are two parts to this: the perceived risk and the actual risk.
I am quite good at generating my own anxiety out of thin air - I don't actually need permadeath to make me fear for my character's life. And I sometimes even miss out on content that is really risk-free just because I don't like the idea of suicide-exploration.
On the other side of the spectrum will be people with the exact opposite problem - their courage surpasses their strategic thinking and they will bankrupt their character with recklessness.
If you increase the actual risk, you make the shy players shier and the reckless players burn out faster. If you lower the actual risk, the shy players may increase their comfort zone and the reckless players will play longer. In other words - the reason things aren't finely balanced as a pure risk-reward calculation is that (for better or worse) not everyone is playing the game as a pure risk-reward calculation in the first place.
Why do you assume that if you lower the risk the "reckless players" will play longer? They may not play at all or play briefly until they realize it's not their type of game because it's too forgiving. And what do you mean by "reckless players"?
And that "something new" is based on what people want. They're not just randomly trying new things. Even games like Destiny are implementing features that players communicate that they want. MOBA's exist because people liked killing creeps in WC3 but didn't like the mechanic skill involved in macroing and multitasking. Game developers don't just do things randomly for no reason. They do things because people say they want those things. It may be time to just let go of your pride and admit this obvious and otherwise undisputed fact of product development.
I never say devs do things for no reason. Specifically, money, and supply and demands are the reasons.
Money is based on people buying their game. People buy their game if it has the features they like. They know what features they like by listening to them. Not every time, of course, but as a general rule that's how it works. Just because they're doing it for money doesn't mean they're not listening to people, it's the opposite.
I think you are just blinded to the fact that many things people have ranted (or as you put it "express their desire") here day in and day out with little effect.
I didn't say nobody has ranted. But OP wasn't ranting. And I'm not sure what you mean by "little effect." The things that people rant about on the internet make their way into games. Maybe the developers don't come here and PM you personally that they're doing it because they read your post, but it's not a coincidence that people whine about themepark games and demand more sandbox elements and now sandbox games are making a resurgence.
So you want to sound like you are doing something positive rather than just ranting. But sticking your head into the sand does not make it true.
But i suppose many here are used to sticking their head in the sand anyway.
I actually am not particularly emotionally invested in what happens with games. I have strong opinions about the kind of game I want, but I'm not heartbroken by any means when games like EQN and TESO turn out to not be what I'm looking for. It doesn't bother me.
Money is based on people buying their game. People buy their game if it has the features they like. They know what features they like by listening to them. Not every time, of course, but as a general rule that's how it works. Just because they're doing it for money doesn't mean they're not listening to people, it's the opposite.
Yes. If someone want to impact game dev, vote with their dollars. The impact may not be big but at least it is not like posting on forums.
You really think they listen to people beating dead horses day in and day out? Again, we just have to agree to disagree.
Comments
Yes, you can have as many criteria as you want. However, it is moot if such a game does not exist. Either you don't play anything, or you have to relax and have fewer criteria.
Of course i play lots of non-MMOs that have no death penalties. i hope you don't think i only play MMO .. or that i am a mmo-only player.
And why would you think that it is important to me? I am just commenting that if harsh DP is important to the OP (which he stated), he should be more flexible in OTHER criteria if he wants to find a game.
Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.
Thomas Jefferson
nah ... I don't believe MMOs should be anything. I think they are just entertainment. Here you go .. i "dismiss" it as entertainment and will treat them as such.
And i play many MMOs as solo games, and don't care if they are virtual worlds. I applaud devs if they make MMOs into better games. In fact, if they are not better games today than in the past (like UO & EQ .. yuck!), i won't even be here.
"wrong" for you. "Right" for me, and many others. Otherwise, why do you think the market grew?
Oh i remember those risks. Risks of wasting time regrinding stuff.
I am glad that i can choose games without those "risks" today.
So we can't have more than 1 criterion when deciding what game to play? How about you go play one of the many non-mmos that don't have harsh death penalties? If it's so important to you, then you should be able to settle for a non-mmo. And WoW losing millions of subs doesn't necessarily mean the market would move specifically towards sandbox games. Clearly games like The Repopulation, Embers of Caerus etc are being developed because people show an interest in it.Yes, you can have as many criteria as you want. However, it is moot if such a game does not exist. Either you don't play anything, or you have to relax and have fewer criteria.
Of course i play lots of non-MMOs that have no death penalties. i hope you don't think i only play MMO .. or that i am a mmo-only player.
And why would you think that it is important to me? I am just commenting that if harsh DP is important to the OP (which he stated), he should be more flexible in OTHER criteria if he wants to find a game.
So you're saying nobody should talk about the things they want? The type of game he's asking for doesnt exist so he shouldnt ask for it? As I've pointed out, games are indeed coming out at least partially because of people belly aching on forums.The OP makes a great point, and I agree with him but for a different reason.
The actual mechanic of death in UO and EQ has created a fear of death in the game that can be felt as you play, it gets your adrenaline pumping. It is something you can feel just like finally beating that boss after a week of raiding, you feel accomplished. When you finally get that rare bow off a boss and equip it, you feel proud. As long as a game is making you feel something then you will be engaged in it.
Now, with that being said, to the people that prefer to defeat the boss, get that rare weapon, or feel inspired when they explore a virtual landscape, All those things are limited in comparison to fear, they are finite. The bosses all get killed, the gear gets collected, and virtual worlds can only get so big. Death on the other hand doesn't require devs to put out new content. It will always be there no matter how long a game is being played for.
Some people don't like to be "punished" for dying because it's just a game and they want to have fun while they play it and not have it waste their time with corpse runs or whatever it is. Like you said...ITS JUST A GAME. The goal of the game is not to get the best gear or kill the most powerful boss, these are goals you have set yourself. If you go in with the mentality of just having fun with your friends then fear becomes fun. Getting murdered becomes exhilarating. Those 10 seconds when you and your friends hopelessly fight for your lives only to find 8 corpses on the ground becomes a story, and if that story ended in victory, the emotion felt is always greater because of what you went through, you know it wasn't easy.
Even LoL has a death penalty (respawn timer) that gets harsher as the game progresses. It adds to the replayability because when you are in a team fight you know that it matters. It matters because if you die, it is very likely that the other team is going to take the advantage on the battlefield due to you being dead for 30 seconds. You are focused, your heart is pumping, you don't want to die, and it is fun because it is just a game, so when you do die, it's not that big of a deal, no matter what you lost in game.
hmmm.... how should i put this... i come from the UO era, yeah sure dying had its bad side and it had its own type of fun.
but when did this thread turn into a debate between FFA OW PVP and other games
sure ffa ow pvp is the extreme hardcore end of the spectrum but thats not all the term "fear factor" includes atleast in my opinion.
sure there should be some kind of penalty in dying even Super mario bros wouldnt be what it is today if there wasnt dwindling lives and limited ammount of retries per session
i can accept ffa ow PvP if the gear is super easy to get and dirt cheap but still isnt a huge time sink
i like the idea of experience and level loss, but only to a point if i die 30 times in 60 minutes something is seriously wrong with the game.
Fear of death emerges naturaly if the game allows Deep character progression that takes hours and hours of gameplay and is more than levels and numbers. when one death can pull back the characters progression for hours.
and this depends on the gameplay if the gameplay is shallow this can be considered a useless time sink but if its deep the player can continue what he was doing before he died and degraded but this time with a party or 2
death penalty shouldnt be an obstacle (corpse runs)
same with level based quests, dying becomes an obstacle if the character loses levels upon death so what do we do? lets get rid of the leveling system all together! and make the experience loss affect skill experience and skill levels instead.
or something........ not like my opinion has any effect but well atleast i put it on the table
*edit to sum it up to few words, If death penalty becomes an obstacle to fun and "meaningfull" gameplay it is wrong
Oh, i have no doubt people will talk. I just don't agree that it is useful. Look at the rant about lack of perma death penalty ... that dead horse has been flogged for YEARS.
The only AAA game that put that in, as an OPTION, is not even a MMO.
Could you not choose those types of games in the past?
I feel you are failing to grasp the idea that people like a challenge. For instance as a hobby some people put together models it takes a long time 1 mistake can ruin the whole thing but when its finished it is an achievement.
Some people look for this in their gaming as a hobby, not a form of entertainment. So like yourself some people want to choose, If you choose to be offended or intimidated by these games go for it.
an MMO is a game you can play for years not weeks or months and there are very few newer games with these options IMO
So why do you not agree that it's useful? I mean obviously developers at least TRY to pay attention to what the community wants (some developers more than others). What reasoning leads you to believe that talking about the things you want on a public forum won't in some small way contribute to how developers design their games?
Because history suggested otherwise? I thought this place agree devs pay more attention to money than what people say?
Lots of people here complains about solo-centric gameplay ... MMOs are full of solo-able gameplay.
Lots of people here complains about instances ... MMOs are full of instances.
Lots of people here complains about lack of FFA pvp .... few MMOs have any FFA pvp.
Lots of people here complains about lack of forced slow travel .... most MMOs have fast travels.
.... i think you get the idea.
Yeah, they do. They pay MORE attention to money than what people say. Part of caring about money means caring about what people want. That's why niche markets exist in every aspect of life. Just because a group may be a minority, doesn't mean there's no money to be made in catering to them. Also, I said some developers pay more attention than others.
Yeah people complain about all of those things, but on the other side of those complaints there are people who PREFER them. Developers put things in their game based on what people say they want and based on technical limitations. That's just common sense.
Want to know why I don't play any of the games you so nicely provided? OWPvP. All of them. (I think. Not sure about Conquer.)
It is not a "hardcore" thing, which shows your ignorance. It is a personal preference. When was the last time you felt dieing mattered in an MMO?
"Us guys" know that today's MMO players want nothing of this sort of thing. It interrupts their efficient leveling and time to end game grind. What it adds for me is a spontaneous occurrence where my focus in the game changes suddenly.
Really, though, I don't expect you to understand, which your posts have shown quite well that you do not.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
That is why ranting here is useless. There are always those on the other side of those complaints of people who PREFER them.
Thank you for making my point.
No that's the exact opposite of your point. If there are people on the other side of what you want and you're the one that ISN'T letting people know what you want, guess what developers are going to do? If some people want A and tell everybody they want A, and other people want B but nobody says they want B.... why would developers NOT implement A over B?
Because all the rants are repetitive, and the horses are all dead.
Also because devs can look at actual behavior and make decisions. You don't think Blizz took world pvp out just because people rant about it, right? They took it out because it is not popular. Just like LFD is extremely popular so they put it in all dungeons.
You sound like ranting is informative. If you believe that, do you want to buy a bridge?
I never said anything about "ranting." The OP wasn't ranting at all. His was a calm, personal and reasonable post about his own desires. Making your preferences known is how developers, particularly small developers, can hone in on untapped markets and have a finger on the pulse of the community. Do you think it's just a coincidence that there's a resurgence in sandbox games in development recently?
EDIT: Also, that's the second time you've used the bridge joke. It didn't work then and it's not working now.
Great post OP, and thanks for the interesting info about UO. I didn't know losing gear wasn't uncommon and replacing it was not a huge deal. I tried hard to play UO but had major framerate or lag issues; the game was simply unplayable. Which was sad considering I spent many hundreds of hours in Ultimate III and IV.
When second age came out, I intended to give UO another try; but stopped by gamecenter.com to check reviews; and EQ was front page news, so I tried that. No lag or framerate issues at all. I thought it was the same computer, too. Hmmm.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
And yet, it is beating the dead horse about the lack of death penalty. And these quotes:
"I miss it!! I have not played a game in a LONG time that gave me the same feeling that UO and EQ did."
"I haven't been afraid to die in a game in.....way too long."
... are rants .. may be polite rants .. but rants nevertheless.
On the other issue, i don't think it is a coincidence. I think devs are trying different things now. Many try new things like Destiny (not even a MMO!) or MOBA, and a few is going back to older ideas. The market will decide who wins.
In my opinion, there are two parts to this: the perceived risk and the actual risk.
I am quite good at generating my own anxiety out of thin air - I don't actually need permadeath or other high penalities to make me fear for my character's life. And I sometimes even miss out on content that is really risk-free just because I don't like the idea of suicide-exploration.
On the other side of the spectrum will be people with the exact opposite problem - their courage surpasses their strategic thinking and they will bankrupt their character with recklessness.
If you increase the actual risk, you make the shy players shier and the reckless players burn out faster. If you lower the actual risk, the shy players may increase their comfort zone and the reckless players will play longer. In other words - the reason things aren't finely balanced as a pure risk-reward calculation is that (for better or worse) not all of us are playing the games as a pure risk-reward calculation in the first place.
Neither of those are rants. Not even close. Saying what you like/don't like doesn't make something a rant.
And that "something new" is based on what people want. They're not just randomly trying new things. Even games like Destiny are implementing features that players communicate that they want. MOBA's exist because people liked killing creeps in WC3 but didn't like the mechanic skill involved in macroing and multitasking. Game developers don't just do things randomly for no reason. They do things because people say they want those things. It may be time to just let go of your pride and admit this obvious and otherwise undisputed fact of product development.
I never say devs do things for no reason. Specifically, money, and supply and demands are the reasons.
I think you are just blinded to the fact that many things people have ranted (or as you put it "express their desire") here day in and day out with little effect.
So you want to sound like you are doing something positive rather than just ranting. But sticking your head into the sand does not make it true.
But i suppose many here are used to sticking their head in the sand anyway.
Why do you assume that if you lower the risk the "reckless players" will play longer? They may not play at all or play briefly until they realize it's not their type of game because it's too forgiving. And what do you mean by "reckless players"?
Money is based on people buying their game. People buy their game if it has the features they like. They know what features they like by listening to them. Not every time, of course, but as a general rule that's how it works. Just because they're doing it for money doesn't mean they're not listening to people, it's the opposite.
I didn't say nobody has ranted. But OP wasn't ranting. And I'm not sure what you mean by "little effect." The things that people rant about on the internet make their way into games. Maybe the developers don't come here and PM you personally that they're doing it because they read your post, but it's not a coincidence that people whine about themepark games and demand more sandbox elements and now sandbox games are making a resurgence.
I actually am not particularly emotionally invested in what happens with games. I have strong opinions about the kind of game I want, but I'm not heartbroken by any means when games like EQN and TESO turn out to not be what I'm looking for. It doesn't bother me.
Yes. If someone want to impact game dev, vote with their dollars. The impact may not be big but at least it is not like posting on forums.
You really think they listen to people beating dead horses day in and day out? Again, we just have to agree to disagree.