Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

This genre is dead

18911131434

Comments

  • KhinRuniteKhinRunite ManilaPosts: 879Member
    Originally posted by Foomerang

    100% combat oriented online games. Cash shops come standard. Purely developer driven content. Esport is the name of the game for pvp. Socialization has become automatized.

    If you were to tell me ten years ago that this is what MMORPGS would be like, I would have never even bothered to get involved.

    MMO versions of old console games from a decade ago. Thats what we have right now. The irony is that console games today are actually more open and diverse than these so called mmorpgs.

    Its a shame. I have faith in indie devs, as always. But the AAA mmo devs have really led the genre astray as of late. I wonder if it will ever get back on track.

    In my observation a huge majority of players prefer an arcadey game than a virtual world. If you're patient enough you can just wait for everything to implode and prompt the genre to go back to its roots, if ever that would happen.

  • GaoxinGaoxin BluhPosts: 196Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Foomerang

    100% combat oriented online games. Cash shops come standard. Purely developer driven content. Esport is the name of the game for pvp. Socialization has become automatized.

    If you were to tell me ten years ago that this is what MMORPGS would be like, I would have never even bothered to get involved.

    MMO versions of old console games from a decade ago. Thats what we have right now. The irony is that console games today are actually more open and diverse than these so called mmorpgs.

    Its a shame. I have faith in indie devs, as always. But the AAA mmo devs have really led the genre astray as of late. I wonder if it will ever get back on track.

    Not all games are 100% combat oriented. Just look at TSW, one of the newest MMORPGs. A big part of this game is exploration and "puzzle" solving. Another good example is Guild Wars 2 where you get XP for exploration, crafting and solving certain tasks which dont involve combat (jump n run f.e.). SWTOR is a good example for a story driven game.
     

    The problem you encounter after many years of gaming experience is the same most of us have to face:

    your expectations rise with each game. Your pattern recognition gets better, which results in shorter suscriber times and an early awakening: "I did this before.." or "This is very similar to.."

  • LordOfPitLordOfPit North Bay, ONPosts: 86Member

     


    Originally posted by Garvon3

     

    Then how come WoW clones have all merged their servers a few months after launch and then stagnante into nothingness? And virtual world != sandbox. The strange idea that if its not a WoW clone its a sandbox, and that if its a virtual world then you can't play casually, needs to go away. It's perpetuated by the same short sighted WoW players who don't understand how a game without instancing would work.


    It seems to me you basically tie-in WoW players, instancing, casual-play together in an angry rant and that's definitely not what I was talking about, sorry.

     

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,431Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Garvon3
    Originally posted by LordOfPit
     

    Then how come WoW clones have all merged their servers a few months after launch and then stagnante into nothingness?

    And virtual world != sandbox.

    The strange idea that if its not a WoW clone its a sandbox, and that if its a virtual world then you can't play casually, needs to go away. It's perpetuated by the same short sighted WoW players who don't understand how a game without instancing would work.

    What?! You want people to travel for hours to accomplish anything. You want people to take hours to shop and look for items. You want people to spend hours looking for the right group composition before engaging a dungeon (where they may be forced to wait for their turn).

    All of those are directly against casual-friendliness. The game is not casual if it takes ages to do anything worthwhile. Casual is something where you can log in, do stuff, and log out all within 15min to half an hour.

    That's why there's LFG tools, instant travel, jump-in PvP, auction house etc. -To make the game casual-friendly. Many features in virtual world is against this.

    Who's talking about "hours"?

    Once upon a time....

  • FoomerangFoomerang Portland, ORPosts: 5,565Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Gaoxin
    Originally posted by Foomerang 100% combat oriented online games. Cash shops come standard. Purely developer driven content. Esport is the name of the game for pvp. Socialization has become automatized. If you were to tell me ten years ago that this is what MMORPGS would be like, I would have never even bothered to get involved. MMO versions of old console games from a decade ago. Thats what we have right now. The irony is that console games today are actually more open and diverse than these so called mmorpgs. Its a shame. I have faith in indie devs, as always. But the AAA mmo devs have really led the genre astray as of late. I wonder if it will ever get back on track.
    Not all games are 100% combat oriented. Just look at TSW, one of the newest MMORPGs. A big part of this game is exploration and "puzzle" solving. Another good example is Guild Wars 2 where you get XP for exploration, crafting and solving certain tasks which dont involve combat (jump n run f.e.). SWTOR is a good example for a story driven game. 

    The problem you encounter after many years of gaming experience is the same most of us have to face:

    your expectations rise with each game. Your pattern recognition gets better, which results in shorter suscriber times and an early awakening: "I did this before.." or "This is very similar to.."



    You only have access to combat classes and/or combat abilities. You craft items to enhance combat. You gain xp to increase stats for combat. TSW has some interesting puzzles. GW2 has some good exploration and platforming. SWTOR has an interesting interactive story. Your means to an end is always combat. Its hard to explain without a reference point. There were mmorpgs before WoW where you could make a non combat character because it was designed into the game. It wasnt a matter of "hmm, well I could avoid this and bypass that.. and then Id technically have a non combat character". No, Im talking about the option to create a completely viable class that was not combat centric. You experienced developed content that was not for combat, and you character had progression and development.
  • LordOfPitLordOfPit North Bay, ONPosts: 86Member
    Originally posted by Foomerang

    Your means to an end is always combat.

    If someone wants a racing car game, they go buy a racing care game. If they want a fishing simulation, that's what they go out and buy. If they want a game where they flap their hands in front of their TV pretending to be an Angry Bird on Kinects, I'm sure someone will make that game for them, eventually.

     

    It's not just MMO's that have changed — for better and worse — it's the entire eco-system of Gaming, and over multiple platforms. And so, if it's not about combat, it's not interesting and captivating enough to bother with and the people who do bother with games that aren't combat-based, well they form their own communities around the focal point of their choice.

     

    I guess developers aren't as interested in creating Virtual Worlds where people LIVE in as they once were before.

  • FoomerangFoomerang Portland, ORPosts: 5,565Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by LordOfPit
    And so, if it's not about combat, it's not interesting and captivating enough to bother with and the people who do bother with games that aren't combat-based, well they form their own communities around the focal point of their choice.

    That used to be mmorpgs. And for the record, I never said get rid of combat.
  • RavenRaven LondonPosts: 1,974Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by 3-4thElf
     

    I mean 10-12 million users of something isn't a number to sneeze at, but that's the MMORPG market. You draw from there.

    I would actually posit that 10-12 million users are not the western mmo market.

    I realize that since WoW has roughtly that amount people like to point out that those players are just ripe for the picking for other mmo games.

    Except from what I have seen from WoW players who fall in different circles than I inhabit, they aren't mmo gamres. They are acuallly WoW players.

    So, the woman I worked with who was in a WoW raidign guild knew nothing about any other mmo. Nothing. Another woman I worked with at a different job who was sort of high up in the marketing department and played WoW also didnt' know much about mmos' when I got on the subject with her.

    Of my few friends who play video games only 2 play an mmo. guess which one? WoW. And honestly they know nothing about any other mmo's. I met another woman at a dinner party who was an avid wow player and she knew of LOTRO. She also heard of Everquest.

    This is not to say that of that 10-12 million players that none of them ever want to leave wow. But I have seen the WoW players go to other games and complain that they weren't WoW. SWToR and Aion being the two in question. And actually throw lotro into that pile.

    My guess is that the western mmo market is a lot smaller than 10-12 million. And actually, of those 10-12 million, are all those western wow players or "all wow players". Because I thought the western number was something like 3 to 5 million?

     

    This is absolutely spot on, lots of people I speak to, most being console gamers that play WoW, they know nothing about the genre apart from playing WoW, and they have no desire at all to play any other MMORPG. It is actually funny because the other day I was talking to someone I know that plays WoW and I showed him other games, GW2, ArchAge, EVE, Ultima Online and Lineage 2 just to show them that there is more to MMORPGs than WoW and he was completely uninterested he  just didnt care about knowing features or anything like that I didnt get more than a "that's nice" and it was quickly forgotten.

    image

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Garvon3
    Originally posted by LordOfPit
     

    Then how come WoW clones have all merged their servers a few months after launch and then stagnante into nothingness?

    And virtual world != sandbox.

    The strange idea that if its not a WoW clone its a sandbox, and that if its a virtual world then you can't play casually, needs to go away. It's perpetuated by the same short sighted WoW players who don't understand how a game without instancing would work.

    What?! You want people to travel for hours to accomplish anything. You want people to take hours to shop and look for items. You want people to spend hours looking for the right group composition before engaging a dungeon (where they may be forced to wait for their turn).

    All of those are directly against casual-friendliness. The game is not casual if it takes ages to do anything worthwhile. Casual is something where you can log in, do stuff, and log out all within 15min to half an hour.

    That's why there's LFG tools, instant travel, jump-in PvP, auction house etc. -To make the game casual-friendly. Many features in virtual world is against this.

    Who's talking about "hours"?

    I won't even want to travel for 10 min if it is boring. Why should i take the SAME boat ride again and again? It is a game. If i want boring commute, i just have to wake up and go to work.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Garvon3
    Originally posted by LordOfPit

     

    I'm not saying current theme-park MMO's are perfect the way they are, but I am saying more people these days are willing to pay top-dollar to companies developing theme-park MMO's rather than Sandbox ones.

    Then how come WoW clones have all merged their servers a few months after launch and then stagnante into nothingness?

    Because they recup their investment and make some money from initial box sales? Who says a game need to be long to be good?

    I played Deus Ex Human Evolution ... great game ... don't last more than a few weeks. There is no reason why MMOs need to be long.

  • RavenRaven LondonPosts: 1,974Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Garvon3
    Originally posted by LordOfPit

     

    I'm not saying current theme-park MMO's are perfect the way they are, but I am saying more people these days are willing to pay top-dollar to companies developing theme-park MMO's rather than Sandbox ones.

    Then how come WoW clones have all merged their servers a few months after launch and then stagnante into nothingness?

    Because they recup their investment and make some money from initial box sales? Who says a game need to be long to be good?

    I played Deus Ex Human Evolution ... great game ... don't last more than a few weeks. There is no reason why MMOs need to be long.

    It completely goes against the genre, I have spent over 200h on Skyrim and I still have tons of stuff I want to do, and I still go back once in a while to do stuff I want to do, I want to be part of that world, and there are plenty of people who have spent hundreds of hours in Skyrim aswell doing boring stuff like decorating their house and just riding around for hours. Because DX:HR only lasted a few weeks means nothing, its only a great game by your standards I personally enjoyed the first much more where you know you could do more "boring" stuff. Even the fact that in DX:HR you can only pickup items that are relevant to you bothers me, it breaks the immersion in the first DX you could actually pickup and move just about anything that alone added lots to the immersion, HR was just made so you cannot stray away very much from the path they set you on.

    image

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,431Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Garvon3
    Originally posted by LordOfPit
     

    Then how come WoW clones have all merged their servers a few months after launch and then stagnante into nothingness?

    And virtual world != sandbox.

    The strange idea that if its not a WoW clone its a sandbox, and that if its a virtual world then you can't play casually, needs to go away. It's perpetuated by the same short sighted WoW players who don't understand how a game without instancing would work.

    What?! You want people to travel for hours to accomplish anything. You want people to take hours to shop and look for items. You want people to spend hours looking for the right group composition before engaging a dungeon (where they may be forced to wait for their turn).

    All of those are directly against casual-friendliness. The game is not casual if it takes ages to do anything worthwhile. Casual is something where you can log in, do stuff, and log out all within 15min to half an hour.

    That's why there's LFG tools, instant travel, jump-in PvP, auction house etc. -To make the game casual-friendly. Many features in virtual world is against this.

    Who's talking about "hours"?

    I won't even want to travel for 10 min if it is boring. Why should i take the SAME boat ride again and again? It is a game. If i want boring commute, i just have to wake up and go to work.


    Yeah, but that's you. And as you're next quote shows, you don't even believe that an MMO needs to last more than a few weeks.

    Someone like you talking about MMO's seems very out of place compared to most of us. You have a totally different, hardcore gamer perspective.

     

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Garvon3
    Originally posted by LordOfPit

     

    I'm not saying current theme-park MMO's are perfect the way they are, but I am saying more people these days are willing to pay top-dollar to companies developing theme-park MMO's rather than Sandbox ones.

    Then how come WoW clones have all merged their servers a few months after launch and then stagnante into nothingness?

    Because they recup their investment and make some money from initial box sales? Who says a game need to be long to be good?

    I played Deus Ex Human Evolution ... great game ... don't last more than a few weeks. There is no reason why MMOs need to be long.

     

    Once upon a time....

  • LordOfPitLordOfPit North Bay, ONPosts: 86Member
    Originally posted by Foomerang

    That used to be mmorpgs. And for the record, I never said get rid of combat.

     

    Yes, it used to be, and then things change, but I bet you already know the only constant is change. I hope the next tidal wave of change will introduce communal story-telling into MMO's, possibly through UGC, but only times will tell.

  • FoomerangFoomerang Portland, ORPosts: 5,565Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by LordOfPit
    Originally posted by Foomerang That used to be mmorpgs. And for the record, I never said get rid of combat.  
    Yes, it used to be, and then things change, but I bet you already know the only constant is change. I hope the next tidal wave of change will introduce communal story-telling into MMO's, possibly through UGC, but only times will tell.

    /agreed
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Amaranthar

    I won't even want to travel for 10 min if it is boring. Why should i take the SAME boat ride again and again? It is a game. If i want boring commute, i just have to wake up and go to work.


    Yeah, but that's you. And as you're next quote shows, you don't even believe that an MMO needs to last more than a few weeks.

    Someone like you talking about MMO's seems very out of place compared to most of us. You have a totally different, hardcore gamer perspective.

     

     

    Sure that is me.

    Now you do know that features like LFD is popular on WOW, right? So it is not just me. Just that most people don't post on forums.

    I mean, it is your perogative if you want the same boring boatride again and again, but i (and probably many other) will vote with our wallets, and devs will respond to the market. Supply & demand never fails.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,765Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amaranthar


    Yeah, but that's you. And as you're next quote shows, you don't even believe that an MMO needs to last more than a few weeks.

    Someone like you talking about MMO's seems very out of place compared to most of us. You have a totally different, hardcore gamer perspective. 

    You think nariu is the only gamer who isn't interested in 10+ minutes of non-gameplay?

    Gamers want gameplay.  That's all they want.  In most games, and certainly the vast majority of MMORPG travel, travel is non-gameplay.  The exact opposite of what gamers want.

    The fastest way to kill your game in the first 2 weeks is to have it focus on excessive amounts of non-gameplay travel.

    Interesting decisions make or break games, and travel lacks interesting decisions.

     

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • ClerigoClerigo MatosinhosPosts: 400Member Common
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by Clerigo
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Dead?

    The market is huge and may still be expanding. Going into a direction you do not like != dead.

    In fact, i think it is becoming MORE ALIVE, solving all the old problems (like camping & finding groups with instances & LFD/LFR), while giving a large part of the games to the players for FREE.

    It is getting BETTER.

    Did you really put some time into that response or you did it by heart in the heat of the hour?

    I honestly cant say i agree 100% with the OP, but i sure can say you are 100% wrong. How can the last years of mmorpg life make it better in any model or conception? Do you really believe in what you are saying?

    If i close my eyes to GW2, a tittle that many gamers are following and expecting to bring some freash air to a genre in a decline path, what other new mmorpg launches you can name that actually brought some solid concept? rift? swtor? what...2..3..4 names? Name them plz...after you name them, open the mmorpg list in this site....start counting them, start reading community feedback....and ask yourself....

    "what the heck am i talking about??"

    Sorry Clerigo but he's right.

    Let's take your examples, rift, swtor, etc.

    More people play those games NOW after the initial excitement has worn off than any of the early games. didn't EQ have 200 or 250k? did ultima have more? How much? I can't imagine it was hundreds of thousands more. What you seem to be asserting is that the small group of people who started in the mmo genre were right and the many more who are now playing and enjoying these games are wrong.

    This is not to say that your opinion of today's games is "wrong" because you like what you like. But the mmo genre has grown and it seems that the majority of people playing are into today's games.

    you might rebut with "they never stay in them for more than a few months if that". And I would say "that's because today's mmo gamers are probably not looking for anything with a greater commitment.

    You can't take the template of the early adopters and apply that to everyone who has become a current mmo player.

    Truth of the matter is that most of these games gather way more people at launch than they rightfully should have. Some of these people are looking for something different from WoW and then start crying because the games are not WoW; some of them are just looking for something to play for a small bit and then they can hop onto the next game that comes out.

    When you cut away the players who really would never be interested in some of these games you do find that they still have players.

    Rift has players. SWToR has players. AoC has players. Star Trek online has playres. And who do I listen to? The jaded and unhappy mmo gamres who decry the current set of games; where everything is shit, or the guy at work who isn't an mmo gamer but he tried Star Trek online and then says to me "I don't know why some people dont' like this game, it's really fun".

    Do I listen to post after post of angry, angry forum goers or the father who plays SWToR with his daughter and I see them going on about how much they enjoy it and how much fun they are having?

    Have you ever heard the expression "water finds its own level"? Many of these games had/have issues, true, but they still have an audience playing them. They still have fans.

    Heck, I remember one woman at work who, to my surprise, was in a WoW raiding guild and she was applauding the changes that were being made to WoW because it meant that she would have more time to play. Essentially she liked the more casual aspect that was being added.

    The mmo genre is growing and like any media, it has gathered greater fans but fans who are not as hardcore or who do not have the desire to play games that are "virtual worlds". Heck, even another guy at work, who I would say is a "gamer" told me last month that he preferred his games to be more like games and less like "worlds".

    And the current mmos' are just up his alley.

    Sovrath, i understand that, but im talking growth in terms of quality, not quantity.

    Yes the mmorpg genre market is not a niche anymore. It is not big, but not small also. You can have dismall comparisons between every market segment, both in consoles and pc, for every known genre, but we can all agree that it, the mmorpg, has grown over the years.

    But we all know why it has grown. Lets face it, games like World of Warcraft, Guild Wars, Lineage 2, EQ 2, EVE, etc helped this genre to achieve new heights.

    Im not saying that Ultima Online was not great. Yes it was. In late 90s it was the best this genre had to offer. It served as launch pad for all the rpg onlines to be, as its success boosted the development of games in the genre. The late 90s also brings both Everquest and Lineage as solid games, with great acceptance and favorable feedback.  So when Dark Age of Camelot hits the stands, bringing some radical concepts on PvP environment, everyone knows that a new market segment is born there.

    So what happens next?

    Early new millinnium brought us a large increase in genre numbers boosted by the phenome of World of Warcraft, and the highly selling Everquest 2 and Lineage 2, with Guild wars presenting itself as a core rpg online game gaining its followers also.

    Now when you compare them to its predecessors, no one can blame the late 90s platforms to be worse than the new millennium games, its just evolution as its best, for it has grown in the quality of the final product also.

    So, you got a clearly evolution on both quantity and quality of the available platforms, with the direct ranslation in player base numbers. And here i agree with with the word "growth"...

    ...but...

    Following this golden era, everyone was expecting the next jump of the genre. Where can we go next? What can we bring? New graphic engine? New sound stages? New mechanics and game designs?

    See, this genre brought some recent big names, backing a big punch in both lore and concept, that failed and failed big.

    Where is Warhammer Age of Reckoning?

    Where is Age of Conan?

    Where is Lord of the Rings Online?

    Where is AION?

    Where is Star Trek online?

    Where is Final Fantasy?

    ...Where is Star Wars TOR going?...

    You can call this evolution, as its the word used to describe the path walked by the genre, but you cant say it is "growth" in particular in quality terms. Its clearly the oppposite.

    What failed here? What went wrong? Design misconceptions? Production values, or maybe production rush outs? Mistreated player base?

    All of them are open for debate, but what remains is: what should had been the next step in this genre growth, in terms of evolution, brought only its demise.

    Now we are currently watching a new effort in this genre. Developers trying hard to bring something new to the genre and indie devs launching new concepts, like The Repopulation. Games like TERA, The Secret World, love it or hate it, trying to innovate, and upcoming Guild Wars 2 and ArcheAge promising a change for better.

    I dare to ask: if this new step fails, what will happen to this genre? Can it hold on? Can the indie developers bring new concepts? Can big labels change their politics towards this industry?

    Untill then, the genre is not dead, it is plugged to the life support system.

     

     

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    Who's talking about "hours"?

    It all adds up. You could roam for 2 hours in Eve for a single 1 minute fight. Thats far from casual, nor is it a very good ratio between looking for a fight and the actual fight.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • RavenRaven LondonPosts: 1,974Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Amaranthar


    Yeah, but that's you. And as you're next quote shows, you don't even believe that an MMO needs to last more than a few weeks.

    Someone like you talking about MMO's seems very out of place compared to most of us. You have a totally different, hardcore gamer perspective. 

    You think nariu is the only gamer who isn't interested in 10+ minutes of non-gameplay?

    Gamers want gameplay.  That's all they want.  In most games, and certainly the vast majority of MMORPG travel, travel is non-gameplay.  The exact opposite of what gamers want.

    The fastest way to kill your game in the first 2 weeks is to have it focus on excessive amounts of non-gameplay travel.

    Interesting decisions make or break games, and travel lacks interesting decisions.

     

    Travel by itself is pretty pointless, like me going to work on my daily commute, it is pointless and has no fun involved, but when I go hiking for instance and I decide I want to go up some peak and it requires a 2 or 3h hike, it is not boring like my daily commute I can certainly enjoy the journey there, because it is unknown, there are awesome views I have never seen before, etc...

    What I am saying, is, that travelling is made non-gameplay, its not like you can't make travelling part of the experience, its just that in recent years travelling has become a time sink and or just a means to go from A to C there is nothing in between B is just moving to the nearest teleporter or wait around while your griphin flies for 4min before you get to your destination or just putting your mount on auto run while you get to C. 

    Travelling can def be integrated into the gameplay to provide a more meaningful experience, I can come up with a few ideas right here that would make it fun for ME to travel, I am sure a team of paid designers can come up with hundreds of fun ideas that would appeal to a wider audience with the added benefit of being able to actually test things with hundreds if not thousands of people. So yeah I agree, with you, travel is non-gameplay because it has become a standard of being just a boring time sink of giving you a mild feeling that the world is big rather than actually being part of gameplay.

    Ill give you a quick example of a concept which would make travel awesome for me, think Infinity Quest for Earth, where they have said that galaxies and planets will be seeded as players travel further ( much like Minecraft's world is generated as you explore ), preparing a massive expedition with friends to explore different planets and unknown star systems for me would be gratifying in itself let alone getting there and having other activities that I may or not have seen before. I think there are plenty interesting decisions if you factor in all the dangers that travelling through space pose, the constant decision making in the middle of the unknown, this same concept can be applied anywhere this is just one concept out of a design page of Infinity.

    image

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Clerigo
     

    Sovrath, i understand that, but im talking growth in terms of quality, not quantity.

     

     

    Quality is in the eye of the beholder.
     

    For example, personally, i find STO a MUCH better space combat game than Eve. Combat is more interesting. There are good scripted ground missions.

    So from where i am seeing ... quailty grows too.

    Plus, all the new good features like LFD/LFR are new ... certainly a growth in my eyes.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Raven
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Amaranthar


    Yeah, but that's you. And as you're next quote shows, you don't even believe that an MMO needs to last more than a few weeks.

    Someone like you talking about MMO's seems very out of place compared to most of us. You have a totally different, hardcore gamer perspective. 

    You think nariu is the only gamer who isn't interested in 10+ minutes of non-gameplay?

    Gamers want gameplay.  That's all they want.  In most games, and certainly the vast majority of MMORPG travel, travel is non-gameplay.  The exact opposite of what gamers want.

    The fastest way to kill your game in the first 2 weeks is to have it focus on excessive amounts of non-gameplay travel.

    Interesting decisions make or break games, and travel lacks interesting decisions.

     

    Travel by itself is pretty pointless, like me going to work on my daily commute, it is pointless and has no fun involved, but when I go hiking for instance and I decide I want to go up some peak and it requires a 2 or 3h hike, it is not boring like my daily commute I can certainly enjoy the journey there, because it is unknown, there are awesome views I have never seen before, etc...

    What I am saying, is, that travelling is made non-gameplay, its not like you can't make travelling part of the experience, its just that in recent years travelling has become a time sink and or just a means to go from A to C there is nothing in between B is just moving to the nearest teleporter or wait around while your griphin flies for 4min before you get to your destination or just putting your mount on auto run while you get to C. 

    Travelling can def be integrated into the gameplay to provide a more meaningful experience, I can come up with a few ideas right here that would make it fun for ME to travel, I am sure a team of paid designers can come up with hundreds of fun ideas that would appeal to a wider audience with the added benefit of being able to actually test things with hundreds if not thousands of people. So yeah I agree, with you, travel is non-gameplay because it has become a standard of being just a boring time sink of giving you a mild feeling that the world is big rather than actually being part of gameplay.

    Ill give you a quick example of a concept which would make travel awesome for me, think Infinity Quest for Earth, where they have said that galaxies and planets will be seeded as players travel further ( much like Minecraft's world is generated as you explore ), preparing a massive expedition with friends to explore different planets and unknown star systems for me would be gratifying in itself let alone getting there and having other activities that I may or not have seen before. I think there are plenty interesting decisions if you factor in all the dangers that travelling through space pose, the constant decision making in the middle of the unknown, this same concept can be applied anywhere this is just one concept out of a design page of Infinity.

    That happens only ONCE, the first time you get there. So that is not an excuse not to have fast travel. Do it the WOW way. First time, you have to hike there. Second time, you have the option of fast travel.

    And travel is NOT the only dead time. How about waiting for groups. Waiting is waiting, no matter how you cut & dice it. LFD solves that problem to some extent.

  • RavenRaven LondonPosts: 1,974Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Raven
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Amaranthar


    Yeah, but that's you. And as you're next quote shows, you don't even believe that an MMO needs to last more than a few weeks.

    Someone like you talking about MMO's seems very out of place compared to most of us. You have a totally different, hardcore gamer perspective. 

    You think nariu is the only gamer who isn't interested in 10+ minutes of non-gameplay?

    Gamers want gameplay.  That's all they want.  In most games, and certainly the vast majority of MMORPG travel, travel is non-gameplay.  The exact opposite of what gamers want.

    The fastest way to kill your game in the first 2 weeks is to have it focus on excessive amounts of non-gameplay travel.

    Interesting decisions make or break games, and travel lacks interesting decisions.

     

    Travel by itself is pretty pointless, like me going to work on my daily commute, it is pointless and has no fun involved, but when I go hiking for instance and I decide I want to go up some peak and it requires a 2 or 3h hike, it is not boring like my daily commute I can certainly enjoy the journey there, because it is unknown, there are awesome views I have never seen before, etc...

    What I am saying, is, that travelling is made non-gameplay, its not like you can't make travelling part of the experience, its just that in recent years travelling has become a time sink and or just a means to go from A to C there is nothing in between B is just moving to the nearest teleporter or wait around while your griphin flies for 4min before you get to your destination or just putting your mount on auto run while you get to C. 

    Travelling can def be integrated into the gameplay to provide a more meaningful experience, I can come up with a few ideas right here that would make it fun for ME to travel, I am sure a team of paid designers can come up with hundreds of fun ideas that would appeal to a wider audience with the added benefit of being able to actually test things with hundreds if not thousands of people. So yeah I agree, with you, travel is non-gameplay because it has become a standard of being just a boring time sink of giving you a mild feeling that the world is big rather than actually being part of gameplay.

    Ill give you a quick example of a concept which would make travel awesome for me, think Infinity Quest for Earth, where they have said that galaxies and planets will be seeded as players travel further ( much like Minecraft's world is generated as you explore ), preparing a massive expedition with friends to explore different planets and unknown star systems for me would be gratifying in itself let alone getting there and having other activities that I may or not have seen before. I think there are plenty interesting decisions if you factor in all the dangers that travelling through space pose, the constant decision making in the middle of the unknown, this same concept can be applied anywhere this is just one concept out of a design page of Infinity.

    That happens only ONCE, the first time you get there. So that is not an excuse not to have fast travel. Do it the WOW way. First time, you have to hike there. Second time, you have the option of fast travel.

    And travel is NOT the only dead time. How about waiting for groups. Waiting is waiting, no matter how you cut & dice it. LFD solves that problem to some extent.

     

    Yes and I agree and design decisions work towards it, if you read the rest of my post on procedural generated content, it would work to continue exploring, but I agree once something has been estabilished you cannot have the back and forth, the go do a quest, walk to town and sell, go and make a quest, rinse and repeat is boring, and that should be addressed, there are ways of addressing this problem, by adding ways of quick travel as people discover things, by adding mechanics that encourage you to stay where you are instead of mindlessly going back to town every 30min, which is something fairly annoying on pretty much every MMORPG released in the last 10 years, this cycle of go back to town your bags are full.

    I wish going back to town was more like an event rather than a chore, as I said there are ways of making the "have to travel" experience much better by tweaking the design, travel itself isnt the problem is how travel is integrated into an already broken design that doesnt need travelling.

    Everytime I find a town near a dungeon that is essentially just placeholder for a couple of vendors and a couple of quest givers I die a little bit inside. 

    image

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,765Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Raven

    Travel by itself is pretty pointless, like me going to work on my daily commute, it is pointless and has no fun involved, but when I go hiking for instance and I decide I want to go up some peak and it requires a 2 or 3h hike, it is not boring like my daily commute I can certainly enjoy the journey there, because it is unknown, there are awesome views I have never seen before, etc...

    What I am saying, is, that travelling is made non-gameplay, its not like you can't make travelling part of the experience, its just that in recent years travelling has become a time sink and or just a means to go from A to C there is nothing in between B is just moving to the nearest teleporter or wait around while your griphin flies for 4min before you get to your destination or just putting your mount on auto run while you get to C. 

    Travelling can def be integrated into the gameplay to provide a more meaningful experience, I can come up with a few ideas right here that would make it fun for ME to travel, I am sure a team of paid designers can come up with hundreds of fun ideas that would appeal to a wider audience with the added benefit of being able to actually test things with hundreds if not thousands of people. So yeah I agree, with you, travel is non-gameplay because it has become a standard of being just a boring time sink of giving you a mild feeling that the world is big rather than actually being part of gameplay.

    Ill give you a quick example of a concept which would make travel awesome for me, think Infinity Quest for Earth, where they have said that galaxies and planets will be seeded as players travel further ( much like Minecraft's world is generated as you explore ), preparing a massive expedition with friends to explore different planets and unknown star systems for me would be gratifying in itself let alone getting there and having other activities that I may or not have seen before. I think there are plenty interesting decisions if you factor in all the dangers that travelling through space pose, the constant decision making in the middle of the unknown, this same concept can be applied anywhere this is just one concept out of a design page of Infinity.

    Yeah as soon as the non-gameplay of travel becomes gameplay (as it is in Puzzle Pirates, for example) then that completely reverses the situation, and travel becomes the thing pursued. The problem is most defenders of travel defend the current implementation of travel, which contains virtually no gameplay (no decisions apart from avoiding mobs, which is a really flat form of gameplay.)

    But yeah there's tons of potential for adding travel gameplay to games.  Dynamic encounters are a start.  But say you had a spaceship MMO and during travel a Travel Hotbar appeared with various abilities you use to overdrive your engine.  And depending on how you handle the dynamic challenges the game throws at you (overheating, breakdowns, overdrive opportunities, activate nitrous) that determines how fast you travel through space.  Now this minigame would have to be deep and fun enough to be worth playing over and over, but if it was then you'd have a game where travel involved worthwhile gameplay -- a game where it'd be fine to spend most of your time traveling.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • FoomerangFoomerang Portland, ORPosts: 5,565Member Uncommon


    The problem is most defenders of travel defend the current no-gameplay* implementation of travel.

    Really? Who?
  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,765Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Foomerang
    Really? Who?

    Basically everyone except the people asking for travel to be kept to an absolute minimum.

    Given that almost no games involve gameplay during travel (Puzzle PIrates is the only example I've come up with so far), anyone defending travel is almost certainly defending the way travel is actually implemented in 99.99% of games.  And that style of travel involves virtually no gameplay -- it's overwhelmingly just an empty, shallow timesink.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

Sign In or Register to comment.