Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
What is the endgame in your MMO of choice?
Volkon
Member UncommonPosts: 3,748
Well, here we are, about to settle into that last, exciting week before Guild Wars 2 goes live. One common complaint I hear about GW2 is the supposed "lack of endgame", but there have been many threads discussing what is or isn't endgame in GW2. So here's a different take, and my question to those of you currently involved in an MMO, hopefully at the "endgame"...
What, exactly, is the endgame in your MMO?
Now, I used to play WoW right up to before Cataclysm. Did Lich King raids at least three nights a week on my Pally tank and my hunter. But when I think of the endgame in WoW at the time (I haven't played since), all I can recall for endgame in WoW is two things... PvP and one raid. Yeah, there were dailies at 80... mind-numbing tasks to squeeze out a little more gold between raids, but all endgame was (again, that I can recall) was PvP (which I didn't bother with) and whatever the latest raid was. That was it.
Am I wrong in this, or do the current MMOs with their much lauded endgames really have very little endgame at all? For PvE, is there more than doing the latest raid, over and over and over again?
Oderint, dum metuant.
Comments
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
PvP in Rift was the best endgame i've experienced next to WoW pre arenas
The fact you can get ahold of endgame gear without being dependant on guilds and raids was wonderful. Sure the PvP gear in Rift was next to useless stat wise on raid mobs, but if you don't want to raid to begin with, that was a non issue
End game for me is when I see credits rolling up my screen. Honestly the term "end game" is stupid , especially in a MMO. Some will find pleasure in raiding , others in PvP , others in farming , others in grinding. With that said , not many people know what the hell they want in a MMO in the first place and quit after a week's play.
A notable lack of specifics so far. Sandbox style games, such as Eve, are incomparable because the endgame there is pretty much user generated, and you can get some pretty insane content in that case. Man, I still remember when the Alliances based in NA and EU teamed up to help fight off the Russians in a C6 wormhole when they attacked... alliances that were normally shoot on sight all fighting side by side. It was amazing.
Rift, in the themepark sense, seems to have PvP and raiding, but how much raiding is viable? Is it like WoW where only the latest raid matters, so one raid only (effectively)?
Oderint, dum metuant.
My frame of mind exactly.
PvP and world/territory conquest. BGs can only stave boredom off for a month or two max before it gets stale, and I'm usually already bored of the PvE by the time I get to max level, means to an end and all.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
The best end game I've ever seen in an MMO was Dark Age of Camelot, easily.
To date, it has the best consentual PvP system on the market. The RvR alone have kept people playing for a good 11 years now. Small group, siege force, naval combat, relic raids, it's all there.
On top of that, it had some of the most challenging, yet accessible, raids in the genre. There are still monsters that have only ever been defeated once. They did this without stupid instances. There was no DKP.
I could learn that several guilds are going to raid the dragon on x day, and ask to come along. The answer would always be "Sure!". I'd get put in a random group, given a pep talk on tactics, and we'd have at it.
At the end I would get an equal shot at the loot for contributing.
No tiered raiding, no doing the same mob over and over to get the "full set" so I'd have to go to the next one. Just open team based PvP.
And finally, the crafting mattered a LOT. Crafting fueled RvR.
All 3 of these things stayed in perfect balance for a long time. Those that just wanted to RvR could get masterpiece items from crafters. Those that liked to PvE could get weapons equal in power from raids, but they'd look a lot cooler. PvP folks weren't forced to grind PvE. Until the ToA expansion, which is when everyone left.
I've gotten to the point where they stave off boredom for a minute or two.
I really wish they would bring back more territory conquest and open world PvP. Eve is the only game that does it right.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
For me.. End game should be about "community" building.. NOT character building.. Let me explain, using WoW as an example since that seems to be a game most are familar with..
In WoW you spend your initial time building your character from 1 to max level.. This is the character building phase, and once you peak at max, only minor tweaking is need in gear so that all gear is max level gear.. This does NOT mean gear grinding.. I do NOT believe in having 10+ tiers of end gear..
What I want to see at end game is community building.. I want a dynamic perpetual world that is effected by it's community.. This means programing the game so that as ALL the max level characters have mulitple choices to solo or group that effect their home.. This means that the characters can effect "the Alliance" faction, or Stormwind, etc etc.. Design events and activities where you change the world and factions.. I would like a reason for us players to UNITE, not a reason to divide boast and brag about egos.. That feels too high schoolish for me..
Perhaps its the unrealistic goal that you can "live" in a game (perpetual entertainment from a single purchase) that needs changing.
It seems that doesn't stand up to graphics evolution, anyway.
At least that's the usual stated reason for abandoning those classic "best game evars" from the past, right?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Endgame in my current game I guess is having your own camp stocked with resources, an army of finely tuned fully loaded cars, rare chasis, Firetrucks with dual heavy Lasers, A ton of nicknamed, specialized mutant gang members, and the desire to go out and get more.
DarkWind: War on Wheels
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
That is the trick.. I think it takes more brain power to create a perpetual world, then what the current devs are able to do.. It's alot easier to weave a straight rope, then a blanket..
Example of a working perpetual world, and why aren't you playing it?
The usual answers offered are all "classic" games, but no longer played (graphics evolution).
So even if a modern, perfect game could be designed to satisfy all of these conflicting demands...
In 5-10 years, graphics make it too outdated to continue playing anyway, yes?
Or does playing any game for 5-10 years push the limits of human repetition tolerance?
After a thousand of these conversations, I see no evidence that the usually offered answers provide any more guarantee of long term happiness than the status quo already does.
There's some guy out there that's still playing UO after fifteen years. But the vanishingly small percentage has got to be a tiny tail of the bell curve, several deviations from the mean. Is it worthwhile to build your game's future plans around maintaining his (he's the last one maybe) interest for another six months, a year?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I think there are answers, and I do think a long term MMO can be made.. BUT BUT.. I don't have faith in the devs and CEO's of today wanting, willing and able to do it..
There's one part of the flaw of current endgames. For extended repeatability, endgame progression should be non-linear. Then there would be many raids to do, rather than just one.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
The reason we're not playing classic games is NOTHING to do with graphics. Those games simply don't exist anymore. If I could get a time capsule version of 2002/3 era DAoC, I'd STILL be playing it. I'm sure many feel the same about EQ and UO and SWG and AC, hence why so many people played the EQ classic server that they had to open more.
Perhaps building a graphics engine that has extreme malleability built into it as one of it's core concepts should be a bigger focus of devs working on MMORPGs.
Of course, I've certainly never played any game for 5 - 10 years myself even though I view some of the games I've played as materpieces (such as EVE). And the actual graphic of said game have stayed fairly current due to the development team keeping them fresh over the years. That would point more towards your idea that humans (in this case 1 human) may not have enough patience to live a life in one game.
Yet "classic" servers failed to keep DAoC afloat.
What conclusions are to be drawn?
You're only supporting the basic idea; games cannot maintain forever without evolving, and with each evolution they're sure of losing more "faithfuls". That doesn't speak well for any game, regardless of core design, maintaining a player base forever.
So what's the point of trying to design for what (probably) is not possible for the vast majority of your audience?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
EVE's the only game that's shown positive growth for such an extended period. But even EVE's slowed down. So did the Behemoth.
A contrary data point, and one I'll accept. But it needs to be discounted for that terribly slow startup.
This is kind of hard to describe without statistical math.
But the classic growth/falloff population curves most MMOs typically display doesn't suggest that there's any special, magical design core that reliably overcomes player ennui indefinitely.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
The main problem is that they have created a community that look forward to end game. This is what causes players to rush through content and have people asking the questions similar to what the OP is asking.
If you try and enjoy the game from the beginning by exploring, socializing(partying with others, helping new players), taking your time to read of in game lore, talking to npcs, etc. you will find that even if you do not get to end game, you will be satisfied with the adventure you had in the time you played.
I realized this after trying to force my friends to get max level and I was one of the players who rushed through it and got to max lvl with none of my friends or anyone I knew close to where I was. One of my friends played it for two years from launch and he only ever got into the mid levels, but he talked about the experiences he had in the beginning of the game with such enthusiasm that getting to max did not matter.