Players always find the path of least resistence in games and that shows the dev's that players want a linear world and this will happen to the lauded GW2 most players will not explore to find the skill point challenges or hidden Dynamic Events they will look them up on a wiki like players in SW:TOR do for the Datacron positions and Codex's you are really swimming upstream with a liking for open worlds where you have to find objectives or make your own and here's where I get to the moderm MMO cliche, you are not the market modern games are aimed at its a bitter pill to swallow but thats the reality.
That's not true. Players will both look up in the informaiton online and figure it out themselves. Don't assume that just because some people will skip content that the content has no value.
I'm not saying everyone does it but enough do it so that affects the development process.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
So someone has picked a new "Savior of the Genre" in Archeage, hm? Seriously....will you guys ever learn? No game...N O
GAME is going to be the Savior of the Genre. Do you know why? Because gamers have ALL DIFFERENT ideas about what they prefer in games, and there is enough variety in those preferences that ONE game is never going to be "the" game. Period.
Aside from that, Pony....great blog with many good points. But I think I'm one of those "different" gamers that doesn't care for the Archeage direction of things and I'm one of the many people that is holding your blessed genre back (in your eyes). I mean, after all, I like GW2 and I don't see WoW as the devil and I felt like SWTOR was a really good single player RPG and enjoyed it for what it was and didn't try to make it more than it was. I gave SoE a sub AND extra money in their cash shops playing EQ2 and loved, loved, loved the game....was happy as a clam. So I don't fit into the mold of disgruntled players looking for salvation from some new game. Many games are good, a few are great, but none of them will be the "savior" of the genre.
Post onward, Pony! I love reading your thoughts even if I don't agree with them.
I don't agree with much of your analysis or conclusions and I'm an intelligent person, imagine that.
Do you have some sort of proof? In my experience the only people who claim to be intelligent are usually complete morons.
"When I left him, I reasoned thus with myself: I am wiser than this man, for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know."
That was in response to the first poster who implied anyone who doesn't agree with the blog to be ignorant. Also, I'm a better judge of my intelligence than some anonymous poster on a backwater website who hasn't a clue who I am or what I am capable of.
It's funny that you mention item placement, because that is one set of incidents in SWG I was talking about. I guess they never learned from Koster's fix in UO for that, because it happened quite a bit, and the only solution was to contact a GM.
But it's not just that, it's everything players had done over those years. Exploiting open dungeons despite multiple warnings about it from GM's, griefing of any kind be it clone camping ( in games where death mattered this was a pain in the ass). Ganking newbs etc..
In games where this stuff is possible it's always abused.
I still don't think I understand your complaints. What about an dungeon being open makes it exploitable? What about dropping Items in SWG caused problems (items could not be dropped in SWG except in private areas)?
How does a game being sandboxy cause griefing and ganking? Open world PvP games may result in spawn camping, but as DarkPony says in his article, sandbox games do not require PvP (SWG for instance). Furthermore theres many ways to deter spawn camping so I am not sure why you brought it up: Multiple spawn points, safe timer, safe zones, etc.
So someone has picked a new "Savior of the Genre" in Archeage, hm? Seriously....will you guys ever learn? No game...N O
GAME is going to be the Savior of the Genre. Do you know why? Because gamers have ALL DIFFERENT ideas about what they prefer in games, and there is enough variety in those preferences that ONE game is never going to be "the" game. Period.
Aside from that, Pony....great blog with many good points. But I think I'm one of those "different" gamers that doesn't care for the Archeage direction of things and I'm one of the many people that is holding your blessed genre back (in your eyes). I mean, after all, I like GW2 and I don't see WoW as the devil and I felt like SWTOR was a really good single player RPG and enjoyed it for what it was and didn't try to make it more than it was. I gave SoE a sub AND extra money in their cash shops playing EQ2 and loved, loved, loved the game....was happy as a clam. So I don't fit into the mold of disgruntled players looking for salvation from some new game. Many games are good, a few are great, but none of them will be the "savior" of the genre.
Post onward, Pony! I love reading your thoughts even if I don't agree with them.
It would be great if this sentiment was felt by more around here modern MMO's are what they are and you should just try and balance the good and the bad to make your ultimate decision on whether you like a game and as you say not pin your hopes on an up coming game. If its all bad with every game then its time to get your coat and move on to different games or leave games behind for awhile. I know that would be tough if you've played for many many years but thats the reality that some vets have to realise. For me I've looked at GW2 and there are to many problems with it for me so I'm not buying it but thats a personal decision and it doesn't mean its going to be a bad game, I'm enjoying TERA and TOR at the moment just got off from playing my Bounty Hunter and feel great about the game and I'm looking forward to future development. Hopefully there is game thats floats Dark Pony et al's boat in the future because its tiresome sometimes reading all the deep negativity, thats almost hopelessness at times, that happens around here.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
I don't agree with much of your analysis or conclusions and I'm an intelligent person, imagine that.
Do you have some sort of proof? In my experience the only people who claim to be intelligent are usually complete morons.
"When I left him, I reasoned thus with myself: I am wiser than this man, for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know."
That was in response to the first poster who implied anyone who doesn't agree with the blog to be ignorant. Also, I'm a better judge of my intelligence than some anonymous poster on a backwater website who hasn't a clue who I am or what I am capable of.
For an intelligent man you spend far too much time arguing about your intelligence with strangers on a random website.
So someone has picked a new "Savior of the Genre" in Archeage, hm? Seriously....will you guys ever learn? No game...N O
GAME is going to be the Savior of the Genre. Do you know why? Because gamers have ALL DIFFERENT ideas about what they prefer in games, and there is enough variety in those preferences that ONE game is never going to be "the" game. Period.
Aside from that, Pony....great blog with many good points. But I think I'm one of those "different" gamers that doesn't care for the Archeage direction of things and I'm one of the many people that is holding your blessed genre back (in your eyes). I mean, after all, I like GW2 and I don't see WoW as the devil and I felt like SWTOR was a really good single player RPG and enjoyed it for what it was and didn't try to make it more than it was. I gave SoE a sub AND extra money in their cash shops playing EQ2 and loved, loved, loved the game....was happy as a clam. So I don't fit into the mold of disgruntled players looking for salvation from some new game. Many games are good, a few are great, but none of them will be the "savior" of the genre.
Post onward, Pony! I love reading your thoughts even if I don't agree with them.
Thanks for your reply, Just1.
Actually, ArchAge isn't so much the savior of the genre to me but more of an inkling of hope. It isn't so much that I gushed all over over AA in this post, I mentioned it as it had to be mentioned because it is an in development mmorpg that attempts to break the mold and be more sandboxy in many places and maybe the only one that reeks of AAA quality that tries to do so, currently. But yeah, I'd much rather bet on multiple horses.
I fully realize that placing all your faith on a single title is a great way to set yourself up for disappointment. There are things which I really like to it (mostly in the feature set) and there are things that I don't like so much (disco dancing in bikinis or bermuda shorts in a high fantasy setting, for one). And then there's tons of things we don't really know yet.
And if anything: when and how it will release in the west is still anyone's guess. Whether it will be able to really appeal to those like me is still very uncertain. But yeah, had to mention it. It's also why I wrote "it isn't by choice."
Preaching to the choir here. You have to wonder how so many intelligent people can be so ignorant of what you state.
The problem is they are making games for the "I want it now" generation. They don't want challenges in any shape or form, just hurry up and get through the game so they can move on to the next one. And this stupid developers continue to turn out these lead me by the hand games one after the other.
Just take SWTOR for example. Everyone was lauding it for the hand holding, but now many people are already bored with the game. Now many of them are moving on to TERA. Except for graphical differences they are essentially the same game. By fall TERA will be a ghost town and the developers hastily converting it to a free to play. SWTOR will remain around a bit longer as the Star Wars theme will entice a few to stick around.
GW2 is no savior, it is essentially a theme park with a few different angles.
It will probably take an outsider from the east to change that thinking. Like with Archage or another game.
Since when have you had a list of people's intelligence? I am curious.
Actually that was in reference to the development studios, I am making the assumption they are fairly intelligent to code such games.
Where have you seen scientific studies about what an average IQ person is able to achieve when it comes to coding games?
How about personal experience. Coding a game is not a trivial experience, from what I have seen it takes talented and intelligent people to understand and create the complex designs that make up games. Did you think otherwise?
How about personal experience. Coding a game is not a trivial experience, from what I have seen it takes talented and intelligent people to understand and create the complex designs that make up games. Did you think otherwise?
I'll believe that it requires "talented and intelligent" people to do that when I see scientific studies proving that. What makes you so sure that a hard-working person with average IQ but with great discipline wouldn't be able to do that?
How about personal experience. Coding a game is not a trivial experience, from what I have seen it takes talented and intelligent people to understand and create the complex designs that make up games. Did you think otherwise?
I'll believe that it requires "talented and intelligent" people to do that when I see scientific studies proving that. What makes you so sure that a hard-working person with average IQ but with great discipline wouldn't be able to do that?
Discipline alone can get you through college and into the working field. But that's all.
How about personal experience. Coding a game is not a trivial experience, from what I have seen it takes talented and intelligent people to understand and create the complex designs that make up games. Did you think otherwise?
I'll believe that it requires "talented and intelligent" people to do that when I see scientific studies proving that. What makes you so sure that a hard-working person with average IQ but with great discipline wouldn't be able to do that?
No task is required to have "talented and intellignet" people as hard work, discipline, dedication can all do that. Like the classical "smart as a book but no common sense" phrase comes to mind. However I think it does require a whole higher level in intelligence (could be practical intelligence or book smarts) to design innovative or revolutionary features in a game not coding.
As far as the coding difficulty... is it you need to be intelligent or is it simpely a very complex and time consuming job?
How about personal experience. Coding a game is not a trivial experience, from what I have seen it takes talented and intelligent people to understand and create the complex designs that make up games. Did you think otherwise?
I'll believe that it requires "talented and intelligent" people to do that when I see scientific studies proving that. What makes you so sure that a hard-working person with average IQ but with great discipline wouldn't be able to do that?
Discipline alone can get you through college and into the working field. But that's all.
What are you basing your belief on? I very much doubt that you know the IQ of those people, which is currently the only widespread intelligence measurement we have.
There are of course different definitions of what "talent" is, but if we assume that is a genetically predetermined quality that affects how well you can do something: a question to be asked is: how much does it actually matter?
Where are the limits of how much and how well a genetically average person can do something? These are questions which shouldn't be left to prejudices and speculation, but to science.
How about personal experience. Coding a game is not a trivial experience, from what I have seen it takes talented and intelligent people to understand and create the complex designs that make up games. Did you think otherwise?
I'll believe that it requires "talented and intelligent" people to do that when I see scientific studies proving that. What makes you so sure that a hard-working person with average IQ but with great discipline wouldn't be able to do that?
No task is required to have "talented and intellignet" people as hard work, discipline, dedication can all do that. Like the classical "smart as a book but no common sense" phrase comes to mind. However I think it does require a whole higher level in intelligence (could be practical intelligence or book smarts) to design innovative or revolutionary features in a game not coding.
As far as the coding difficulty... is it you need to be intelligent or is it simpely a very complex and time consuming job?
Certain tasks, such as running sufficiently fast, is extremely facilitated by having certain genetic predispositions, which is why we see so many "black" people doing well in 100 m races.
Maybe it is required to be at higher level in either "practical" intelligence or "book smarts" to design innovative or revolutionary features in a game, but maybe you just need to have a certain level of know-how and then other environmental factors decide how likely it is that you manage to do something great.
So someone has picked a new "Savior of the Genre" in Archeage, hm? Seriously....will you guys ever learn? No game...N O
GAME is going to be the Savior of the Genre. Do you know why? Because gamers have ALL DIFFERENT ideas about what they prefer in games, and there is enough variety in those preferences that ONE game is never going to be "the" game. Period.
Aside from that, Pony....great blog with many good points. But I think I'm one of those "different" gamers that doesn't care for the Archeage direction of things and I'm one of the many people that is holding your blessed genre back (in your eyes). I mean, after all, I like GW2 and I don't see WoW as the devil and I felt like SWTOR was a really good single player RPG and enjoyed it for what it was and didn't try to make it more than it was. I gave SoE a sub AND extra money in their cash shops playing EQ2 and loved, loved, loved the game....was happy as a clam. So I don't fit into the mold of disgruntled players looking for salvation from some new game. Many games are good, a few are great, but none of them will be the "savior" of the genre.
Post onward, Pony! I love reading your thoughts even if I don't agree with them.
Thanks for your reply, Just1.
Actually, ArchAge isn't so much the savior of the genre to me but more of an inkling of hope. It isn't so much that I gushed all over over AA in this post, I mentioned it as it had to be mentioned because it is an in development mmorpg that attempts to break the mold and be more sandboxy in many places and maybe the only one that reeks of AAA quality that tries to do so, currently. But yeah, I'd much rather bet on multiple horses.
I fully realize that placing all your faith on a single title is a great way to set yourself up for disappointment. There are things which I really like to it (mostly in the feature set) and there are things that I don't like so much (disco dancing in bikinis or bermuda shorts in a high fantasy setting, for one). And then there's tons of things we don't really know yet.
And if anything: when and how it will release in the west is still anyone's guess. Whether it will be able to really appeal to those like me is still very uncertain. But yeah, had to mention it. It's also why I wrote "it isn't by choice."
Thanks for the reply, Pony. You know I have the utmost respect for you. There are things I have seen of ArchAge in beta videos that have been really cool, like building houses. I think I probably, with the exception of GW2, have just become one of those "I'll never get my hopes up" people, to a degree. For me that started with Warhammer. I somehow managed to avoid grievous disappointment before that (don't ask me how, I have no idea). But since WAR I have been pretty cynical, and I have also noticed that my taste in games is just a bit different than the majority around here. I'm usually liking the underdog game, like....I loved Fallen Earth for quite a while after it came out. I felt totally alone. lol I think there may have been about 10 of us on here....I don't remember.
Anyway....time will tell with ArchAge, as with all games, huh? I can see why you see it as offering some possible hope. I think it's just not really my "style," but I'll be watching it too....along with a few other games, Firefall, The Secret World....and whatever else might crop up on the horizon.
Thanks for understanding that I wasn't slammin' YOU. It's nice to be able to carry on a conversation without a lot of misunderstanding. Sometimes that's tough around here.
Comments
Finally, a little positive news here.
I'm not saying everyone does it but enough do it so that affects the development process.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
So someone has picked a new "Savior of the Genre" in Archeage, hm? Seriously....will you guys ever learn? No game...N O
GAME is going to be the Savior of the Genre. Do you know why? Because gamers have ALL DIFFERENT ideas about what they prefer in games, and there is enough variety in those preferences that ONE game is never going to be "the" game. Period.
Aside from that, Pony....great blog with many good points. But I think I'm one of those "different" gamers that doesn't care for the Archeage direction of things and I'm one of the many people that is holding your blessed genre back (in your eyes). I mean, after all, I like GW2 and I don't see WoW as the devil and I felt like SWTOR was a really good single player RPG and enjoyed it for what it was and didn't try to make it more than it was. I gave SoE a sub AND extra money in their cash shops playing EQ2 and loved, loved, loved the game....was happy as a clam. So I don't fit into the mold of disgruntled players looking for salvation from some new game. Many games are good, a few are great, but none of them will be the "savior" of the genre.
Post onward, Pony! I love reading your thoughts even if I don't agree with them.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
That was in response to the first poster who implied anyone who doesn't agree with the blog to be ignorant. Also, I'm a better judge of my intelligence than some anonymous poster on a backwater website who hasn't a clue who I am or what I am capable of.
I still don't think I understand your complaints. What about an dungeon being open makes it exploitable? What about dropping Items in SWG caused problems (items could not be dropped in SWG except in private areas)?
How does a game being sandboxy cause griefing and ganking? Open world PvP games may result in spawn camping, but as DarkPony says in his article, sandbox games do not require PvP (SWG for instance). Furthermore theres many ways to deter spawn camping so I am not sure why you brought it up: Multiple spawn points, safe timer, safe zones, etc.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
It would be great if this sentiment was felt by more around here modern MMO's are what they are and you should just try and balance the good and the bad to make your ultimate decision on whether you like a game and as you say not pin your hopes on an up coming game. If its all bad with every game then its time to get your coat and move on to different games or leave games behind for awhile. I know that would be tough if you've played for many many years but thats the reality that some vets have to realise. For me I've looked at GW2 and there are to many problems with it for me so I'm not buying it but thats a personal decision and it doesn't mean its going to be a bad game, I'm enjoying TERA and TOR at the moment just got off from playing my Bounty Hunter and feel great about the game and I'm looking forward to future development. Hopefully there is game thats floats Dark Pony et al's boat in the future because its tiresome sometimes reading all the deep negativity, thats almost hopelessness at times, that happens around here.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Do you have some sort of proof? In my experience the only people who claim to be intelligent are usually complete morons.
"When I left him, I reasoned thus with myself: I am wiser than this man, for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know."
That was in response to the first poster who implied anyone who doesn't agree with the blog to be ignorant. Also, I'm a better judge of my intelligence than some anonymous poster on a backwater website who hasn't a clue who I am or what I am capable of.
For an intelligent man you spend far too much time arguing about your intelligence with strangers on a random website.I would have given this even the smallest thought if the whole thing didnt have ponies involved.
Thanks for your reply, Just1.
Actually, ArchAge isn't so much the savior of the genre to me but more of an inkling of hope. It isn't so much that I gushed all over over AA in this post, I mentioned it as it had to be mentioned because it is an in development mmorpg that attempts to break the mold and be more sandboxy in many places and maybe the only one that reeks of AAA quality that tries to do so, currently. But yeah, I'd much rather bet on multiple horses.
I fully realize that placing all your faith on a single title is a great way to set yourself up for disappointment. There are things which I really like to it (mostly in the feature set) and there are things that I don't like so much (disco dancing in bikinis or bermuda shorts in a high fantasy setting, for one). And then there's tons of things we don't really know yet.
And if anything: when and how it will release in the west is still anyone's guess. Whether it will be able to really appeal to those like me is still very uncertain. But yeah, had to mention it. It's also why I wrote "it isn't by choice."
My brand new bloggity blog.
Where have you seen scientific studies about what an average IQ person is able to achieve when it comes to coding games?
How about personal experience. Coding a game is not a trivial experience, from what I have seen it takes talented and intelligent people to understand and create the complex designs that make up games. Did you think otherwise?
I'll believe that it requires "talented and intelligent" people to do that when I see scientific studies proving that. What makes you so sure that a hard-working person with average IQ but with great discipline wouldn't be able to do that?
Discipline alone can get you through college and into the working field. But that's all.
No task is required to have "talented and intellignet" people as hard work, discipline, dedication can all do that. Like the classical "smart as a book but no common sense" phrase comes to mind. However I think it does require a whole higher level in intelligence (could be practical intelligence or book smarts) to design innovative or revolutionary features in a game not coding.
As far as the coding difficulty... is it you need to be intelligent or is it simpely a very complex and time consuming job?
What are you basing your belief on? I very much doubt that you know the IQ of those people, which is currently the only widespread intelligence measurement we have.
There are of course different definitions of what "talent" is, but if we assume that is a genetically predetermined quality that affects how well you can do something: a question to be asked is: how much does it actually matter?
Where are the limits of how much and how well a genetically average person can do something? These are questions which shouldn't be left to prejudices and speculation, but to science.
Certain tasks, such as running sufficiently fast, is extremely facilitated by having certain genetic predispositions, which is why we see so many "black" people doing well in 100 m races.
Maybe it is required to be at higher level in either "practical" intelligence or "book smarts" to design innovative or revolutionary features in a game, but maybe you just need to have a certain level of know-how and then other environmental factors decide how likely it is that you manage to do something great.
Thanks for the reply, Pony. You know I have the utmost respect for you. There are things I have seen of ArchAge in beta videos that have been really cool, like building houses. I think I probably, with the exception of GW2, have just become one of those "I'll never get my hopes up" people, to a degree. For me that started with Warhammer. I somehow managed to avoid grievous disappointment before that (don't ask me how, I have no idea). But since WAR I have been pretty cynical, and I have also noticed that my taste in games is just a bit different than the majority around here. I'm usually liking the underdog game, like....I loved Fallen Earth for quite a while after it came out. I felt totally alone. lol I think there may have been about 10 of us on here....I don't remember.
Anyway....time will tell with ArchAge, as with all games, huh? I can see why you see it as offering some possible hope. I think it's just not really my "style," but I'll be watching it too....along with a few other games, Firefall, The Secret World....and whatever else might crop up on the horizon.
Thanks for understanding that I wasn't slammin' YOU. It's nice to be able to carry on a conversation without a lot of misunderstanding. Sometimes that's tough around here.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club