It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Anything that puts players together, makes them spend some time out or join in an activity together makes a game more social. The degree of one on one interaction and the length of time you get to communicate determine how social any aspect of game play is.
Not having quest hubs makes for antisocial play. Having dynamic events is good for the social aspect but by removing a hub of any kind you do a lot of damage to the social aspect. So overall a negative effect has occurred.
You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy? :P
yes they are.
they dont want you bothering them, interupting them, or getting in their way.
they should be playing skyrim.
the only thing mmo's have to offer really is other people.
Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by Kyleran Originally posted by Loktofeit There's an unrealistic expectation among some MMO gamers that others should make the effort to interact with them. Some even go as far as wanting games changed to force others to have to be tethered to them in hopes that it will also force others to interact with them.
Oh come now, I expected you to know better. Programming in interdependency between players is a common, well accepted practice in most MMORPG's...
I never said it wasn't or shouldn't be. The issue I presented is that some people aren't social but want to be part of the social environment, so they want or, worse, expect the game mechanics to force others to interact with them.
Take dating for example. Some people go to clubs, bars and other social circles to meet others. Some go to those 5-minute date musical chairs things to meet others. Two very different types of people. The first type is social and outgoing. The second type wants to be social and doesn't know how to, so they seek outside catalysts to create the desired situation. Where MMOs are different is that others have their social circles and may not be playing to make new friends online. Just because the person isn't talking to you doesn't mean they aren't talking.
Oh man. Well ok. Since you brough dating.
People in clubs, bars, etc main let's call it ugly "objective" it to have good time and / or pick-up someone. In order to do this you HAVE TO be social. You're forced to be social or you won't have fun. Unless your kind of fun is dancing alone or getting drunk yourself in bar or somewhere in the corner. Same with making a move on someone.
You just said perfect example of how people are forced to be social. If they want to have fun with other people. (unless they pay someone to be with them, but I would not consider this having fun with someone)
Payed speed-dating - no idea who use those. People that put effectiveness in people met / per hour maybe? Don't know. If anything this is more similar to modern mmorpg's. Solo and effectiveness race to get enogh xp / tokens per hour.
Second thing - I don't want to force anyone. I don't want to change anyone's game. I doubt many people advocate that in example GW2 totally change it's game design.
People are simply advocating to have some dew decent new games that are more socal in their way. Nothng else. Not because I want to force you.
I don't want to change majority of mmorpg's. Hell I don't care about 99% of mmorpg's. I am just non-content because this huge mmorpg market cannot spawn decent game of KIND I like.
Originally posted by Z3R01 Originally posted by karmath Themepark players yes. Sandbox players no.
The majority of the players in games liek Eve or Dark fall farm solo and in Eves case they solo with multiple accounts.
How many solo players in Eve hold sov in 0.0?
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
Originally posted by fenistil Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by Kyleran Originally posted by Loktofeit There's an unrealistic expectation among some MMO gamers that others should make the effort to interact with them. Some even go as far as wanting games changed to force others to have to be tethered to them in hopes that it will also force others to interact with them.
You just said perfect example of how people are forced to be social. If they want to have fun with other people. (unless they pay someone to be with them, but I would not consider this having fun with someone.
That's an extremely odd view of voluntarily going to a location to accomplish a voluntary social goal through one's own efforts and initiative.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by fenistil Originally posted by Loktofeit
Same as it is extremly odd view of being forced to voluntarily playing a game to accomplish a voluntary game goal through one's own efforts and initiative.
Thing is playing a game with design that anyone see as 'forced' is also totally voluntary. People say - they are forced to be social in a game because in example there is some kind of "wait time" like travelling to an dungeon on a ship and not being instantly teleported there. (simplistic example for discussion matter).
Thing is this is voluntarily things. You don't have to play a game if you don't like how things are done in this game. Noone is forcing you.
It took me alot of time to realize that. I was playing mmorpg's that turned to fast matchmaking instanced gameplay and I was vocal about it. I did not like that focus in many mmorpg's changed to almost solely playing in various kinds of instances using matchmaking systems.
I also felt that I am FORCED to play those mmorpg's in their new way. Because it was practially impossible to play not using this since almost everyone was using those tools right. I realized that noone force me to do anything. I was forcing myself to still play those games. I left and I almost don't play any mmorpg's since I cannot find one of decent quality and with design I like at same time.
So if there will be some new game some day that will have so called "forced social mechanics" in your view - you will NOT be forced to play it. Since noone will stand with gun in their hand to force you play it.
Games are totally volunarily activities. Exactly same as going out to club and socializing with other people. You're no more forced in any game that you're in club.
Reposting something I wrote in another thread because it's pretty central to this discussion:
I think a big part of what's happaned with MMO's and also possibly explaining part of the "solofication" trend is the breakdown and minimization of COMMUNITY.
Coming to MMO's from MUDS that point is really driven home to me.
In MUDS community and your interaction with it was REALLY IMPORTANT and the rulesets and designs reinforced that.
Who you were MATTERED. The things you did MATTERED...to other players and to the community as a whole. Your actions had signifigant consequences both to you and to the community as a whole. Bad behavior could have very serious consequences to you. It could cause you to lose a certain kind of unspoken "social currency" that was harder to earn and more precious then gold or gear. At the same time exceptional behavior had rewards far beyond anything that appeared on your character sheet.
The entire game as structured and designed around these assumptions and supporting them. I think alot of this bled into the design and gameplay of the early MMO's, many of which were often labeled as "Graphical MUDS". Developers were familiar with these paradigms of the MUD because many had played in or had working experience with them themselves. Many of the initial playerbase had also migrated from or played MUDS. So much of what existed within them was reflected in these early games. They had a little bit of the "small village" atmosphere that MUDS had. Somewhere along the way this gradualy started to change...until the "small village" had morphed into a large faceless city that lost it's sense of community.
I think that may be part of what happaned with the increasing trend toward socialization. It became less desirable to players because it was less rewarding both tangibly and emotionaly. It didn't matter that YOU were there or what YOU did because those had little consequences beyond the immediate rewards. You were easly interchangable with faceless fighter #557. The same held true for negative behavior, the consequences for it became far less significant so those with an inclination toward it persisted...many because they had never been taught otherwise. The games had lost thier sense of community...so participation in social based activites was less desirable.
Some I think try to recapture a bit of that with Guilds...but even there that's problematic because the game systems don't really reinforce the interdepency and one can easly slip from Guild to Guild.
I think if a game really wants to appeal to those of us who like and miss that "small village" feel, it's going to have to drasticaly change it's character. It will need to create actual villages and towns, pockets of civilization in a vast wilderness where players can spend a significant portion of thier careers...not just breeze through in 45 minutes before they move onto the next quest hub...and it's designs are going to have to be based around the idea of interdependance. Players who are on thier own should still have some things that they can do solo, as it was in the MUDS, because there will always be times when you can't or don't want (for some reason) to go out with others...but it shouldn't be the core game-play of the game.
It would be a risky proposition...because it's a large departure of what most of todays MMO players and designers are used to seeing. However, I think it has some inherent appeal because human beings ARE inherently social animals and they like to do social things. Maybe it'll even draw in a different crowd then typical plays MMO's....there are plenty of folks that have interest in online social venues (facebook, linked-in, etc).
Originally posted by fenistil Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by fenistil Originally posted by Loktofeit
So you agree with me that people who want mechanics designed to make others interact with them to compensate for their inability to initiate interaction are off their rocker. Thank you.
Originally posted by Loktofeit There's an unrealistic expectation among some MMO gamers that others should make the effort to interact with them. Some even go as far as wanting games changed to force others to have to be tethered to them in hopes that it will also force others to interact with them.
Baseball is an inherently team based game. You really can't play baseball without being part of a team. The rules are designed to enforce interdependancy between the players and require teamwork if you want to achieve anything in play.
Golf is an inherenitly individual based game. You generaly play as an individual. You can play around others or choose to interact with others as you play, but the rules do nothing to support or encourage Team based play. You are essentialy playing as an individual whether you choose to do so or not.
Baseball and Golf offer entirely different play experiences.
Some people like to play baseball...
Some people like to play golf..
Some people like to play both...
What is the problem with that?
Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by fenistil Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by fenistil Originally posted by Loktofeit
Are you purposefully being inflammitory?? People simply want game mechanics that focus on the types of activities they enjoy. Baseball and Football are team sports who's mechanics require interaction and interdependancy between the players. Are people "off thier rocker" for wanting to play Baseball or Football rather then Golf? Because that's what you seem to be contentding here.
I honestly do want my MMO's to not only encourage cooperation and communication, I want the player to be sharply disadvantaged if they refuse to do so.
It seems that with every launch that I've bothered to participate in the chat channels at best are a billboard for flame wars and at their worst just an empty box wasting space.
Everyones soloing everything, dungeons and storyline instances are being designed almost entirely for the solo player and the users themselves intentionally isolate themselves from the populace barely associating with their pre-existing niche groups. In fact, most groups I find that would be label elitists are generally the ones more willing to reach out to unknown individuals to offer and to request help.
Ironic, I would think, that a genre founded by stereotyped sociophobes is losing its social elements as a wider range of people partake.
Originally posted by Kyleran So I think what is missing from modern MMO's is the opportunity for socializing.
Your average oh call it 30-40 minutes instance run provides ample opportunity.
If you can stop people shouting "gogogogogo" to shave off another three minutes, that is.
What's our working label for someone who's almost always partnered up with specific other players full time?
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.
Originally posted by Loktofeit So you agree with me that people who want mechanics designed to make others interact with them to compensate for their inability to initiate interaction are off their rocker. Thank you.
Either you're trolling or you don't understand.
No some people want to have things that make players dependant on each other and that make them influence each other. That activities if complex enough also require long-term cooperation which frequently also include socialization.
So no there are some people that want some separate games that include diffrent kind of experience and cooperation. You're taking some real world social disorders and trying to somehow fit them into discussion.
You feel that someone is attacking you or tryign to take something away from you?
If I ever made you feel that way then I want to say that was not my intention.
If anything games that are designed to make possible to achieve everything without talking and interacting socially are types of games that are more friendly to people that have problems with interacting with other people.
Originally posted by Icewhite Originally posted by Kyleran So I think what is missing from modern MMO's is the opportunity for socializing.
Well see, that's one thing that's changed a lot IMO, I recall playing vanilla WOW back in 2004-2006 and there still was enough downtime between fights that I actually socialized quite a bit in pug dungeons and even full on AQ 40 raids. (actually with all the wipes we had lots of time for chatting, falling asleep while waiting at 1:00 in the morning was a bigger issue)
I went back for Cata and everyone was like, go, go go, just as you said. I kept stopping to try and type something to my group mates (no doubt some fabulous witticism) only to look up and see the rest of them had left me standing in my tracks and they were off in the next room. (and eventually threatening kick me for not keeping up or doing DPS or healing them, something trival like that)
Finish up the instance and perhaps I'd see the first chat from any of them, saying either "thanks for the group" and drop or.... "again?"
Regarding your last comment, I'd call those folks "lucky", and in fact its usually the folks who have regular gaming partners (wives, relatives, real life friends) who are most often likely to tell me that there are no issues in socialization in MMORPG's.
Not for them maybe, the rest of us are not quite so fortunate I guess.
"Winning" at EVE Online since May, 2007!
In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™ "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
WOW, I so totally disagree with you, I hope they don't listen to you too often over there at CCP.
(and thanks for insulting we socially inadequate individuals, really appreciate that, not)
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2 In MUDS community and your interaction with it was REALLY IMPORTANT and the rulesets and designs reinforced that.
Of course, the consequences of misbehavior were an order of magnitude more serious, too.
I worked for one of the only for-profit companies that ever actually banned players for violation of roleplaying rules.
Gosh, 'we consider the integrity of the game's vision more important than the loss of accounts'? When's the last time you heard a company announcement even in that general ballpark?
Originally posted by Icewhite Originally posted by GrumpyMel2 In MUDS community and your interaction with it was REALLY IMPORTANT and the rulesets and designs reinforced that.
Aw, c'mon, you're making that up, more likely to see a dragon in the real world.
Originally posted by Kyleran I went back for Cata and everyone was like, go, go go, just as you said.
What happened in-between? Blizz tied post-cap advancement directly to sheer repetition.
Originally posted by Kyleran Not for them maybe, the rest of us are not quite so fortunate I guess.
Huh. All this time I've just been calling it 'guilded'.
Originally posted by Icewhite Originally posted by Kyleran Not for them maybe, the rest of us are not quite so fortunate I guess.
I dunno, with the current quest base design of most MMO's, I find it rare that a guildmate is running the same chain or even the same dungeon) until I get to end game when we all tend to catch up.
Played TERA, SWTOR and TSW this year and in every case most of my guildmates leveled at different speeds and if there was more than a couple anywhere near me it was unusal, and even less likely we were on the same quest chains.
The people who play MMORPGs for the social grouping/guild aspect were playing MMOs in the beginning. This wasn't an overly large group of people. In order to make more money MMOs catered to the solo game and the single player RPG crowd. They play the game as a single player RPG and there are alot more of them.
As more and more solo players entered into MMORPGs you saw more and more solo features being added until what you see today. MMOs that no longer required any type of grouping. These types of players consider someone in the same area as them who helps kill a mob as grouping even though they have no type of interaction at all. You can even belong to multiple guilds without having to actually be in the guild, you are there as just a number just to get guild perks.
The genre is very confused atm, there are many a post where people argue what MMORPG means with the biggest being some say it means grouping and interacting and the other side saying it just means being online with a bunch of people.
My thought, how is being online and playing solo any different than plaing a single player game offline? For me there is no difference. Playing a MMO solo is juet the same as playing a single player RPG offline.