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!

Dear MMO Developers: Social Media does not make your game Social

MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member

Is there anyone on this website who wants your MMO game integrated with Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, or anything else?  Does anyone here believe such features make an MMO game innovative or social?

I'm sorry, but when I hear developers talking about features like this, I just cringe and wonder who the hell it is exactly that is making these games. How much coding time are they going to waste on this?

Another example of wasted development was TSW including an in-game browser.  Guess what, Funcom, I enjoyed your game, but your browser sucks.  I alt-tabbed out to a real browser on the big *three* occasions I needed it.

When we gamers say we want more social games, we mean we want the game itself to have features that will build a strong in-game community, not that we want to share our completely nerdy passtime with masses of people on Facebook who consider watching Jersey Shore great entertainment.

No, I don't want to tweet about a great quest, or make a Facebook post of a screenshot with my toon standing over a dead dragon.  I don't want to upload crafting recipes to Pinterest.  Out of two hundred "friends" I have on Facebook, there are about five people who would even begin to have a clue what I was talking about, should I post something about an MMO game.  I know some of you may know more MMO gamers than that, but still there's nothing from any of my video games that I want to share on social media.

I want your game to include features that form an interesting in-game community of players. I want your content to be less static, and more emergent.  I want there to be a reason for me to group up with people, and to stay in touch with new people I meet in game.  I want to form relationships with great crafters who I can rely on, and I want crafting to be fun and meaningful.  I want player housing that is PART OF THE GAME, not some instance where no one cares and your thousands of hours of coding are turned into  a place I consider nothing more than vault space.  We want some non-combat classes and features too, while you are at it.

Please just stop with the social media BS and concntrate on getting away from also-WoW themepark design with tacked on, BS features.

A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

«1

Comments

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?
  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    -dependency on others

    -good chat system (not voice chat, written chat so everyone can participate)

    -slow gameplay which allows for chat sessions (EQ had camps, you didn't have to move around every 2 minutes)

    -no automated grouping

    -no cross-server grouping

    -classes that can't solo

    -buffs that last a long time

    -no AH

    -penalties for dying

    -discourage multiboxing

    All the elements for a good community are found in EQ. It's not a mystery what they are. EQ had the strongest community of any MMO. (multiboxing is the only thing EQ didn't handle correctly)

  • MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    For me, this includes designing your game so that players come together more.  It's a fallacy that all gamers want a solo experience, and it's also a fallacy that you cannot design a game that allows for both solo and group play. 

    The best way to answer your question though, is to say that these games need to start evolving back towards virtual world gameplay, and away from theme park static gameplay.  Encourage people to work together, but give them the ability to lone wolf if they so desire.  Add social and non-combat player classes to these games such as full crafting classes, entertainers, scientists, etc.  Make it so all of these different classes fit into the larger puzzle of the game.

    Here's a potential shocker for you.  One of the reasons these current themepark games are anti-social and/or socially mind-numbing is because they all attract basically the same kind of game player.  They are attracting people who just want combat, for the most part.  If these games were more diverse and interesting in their gameplay options, they would attract a lot more personality into the game, and communities would emerge.  This is why broken, buggy games like Star Wars Galaxies are loved even to this day.  I met more interesting people in that game than I have in any game since, and that was because there was room for all kinds of different people to play and work together there.

    I could write a book on what constitutes truly social gameplay, but adding Social Media to your game is not it.

    A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  • AerowynAerowyn BUZZARDS BAY, MAPosts: 7,928Member
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    For me, this includes designing your game so that players come together more.  It's a fallacy that all gamers want a solo experience, and it's also a fallacy that you cannot design a game that allows for both solo and group play. 

    The best way to answer your question though, is to say that these games need to start evolving back towards virtual world gameplay, and away from theme park static gameplay.  Encourage people to work together, but give them the ability to lone wolf if they so desire.  Add social and non-combat player classes to these games such as full crafting classes, entertainers, scientists, etc.  Make it so all of these different classes fit into the larger puzzle of the game.

    Here's a potential shocker for you.  One of the reasons these current themepark games are anti-social and/or socially mind-numbing is because they all attract basically the same kind of game player.  They are attracting people who just want combat, for the most part.  If these games were more diverse and interesting in their gameplay options, they would attract a lot more personality into the game, and communities would emerge.  This is why broken, buggy games like Star Wars Galaxies are loved even to this day.  I met more interesting people in that game than I have in any game since, and that was because there was room for all kinds of different people to play and work together there.

    I could write a book on what constitutes truly social gameplay, but adding Social Media to your game is not it.

    if that's all it takes GW2 would be the most social MMO ever made since ever single quest is designed to bring people together.. lack of kill stealing and such also leads to this.. but what you really want is stuff like territory control and ingame systems that allow players to establish trading routes and control the economy by controlling resources, you want guild features that allow guilds to wage war on each other to take over each others holdings on certain areas. You want a world not built around a level progression but one where you can shape the character you want.. i know the want of these types of games and want a great one to play as well but i can still enjoy what we got and hope for a future with more open ended types of games.. i find complaining all day long about how games aren't being made how I want them doesn't acomplish much:)

    I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,428Member Uncommon

    OP, I completely agree. I think that building a game with some reliable social needs in a "realistic" worldly sense is the key.

    Once upon a time....

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Yeah good thread, devs stop wasting time and money on bookface and such shite, the sort of people that like mmos aren't typically into such things anyway.
  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,428Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    For me, this includes designing your game so that players come together more.  It's a fallacy that all gamers want a solo experience, and it's also a fallacy that you cannot design a game that allows for both solo and group play. 

    The best way to answer your question though, is to say that these games need to start evolving back towards virtual world gameplay, and away from theme park static gameplay.  Encourage people to work together, but give them the ability to lone wolf if they so desire.  Add social and non-combat player classes to these games such as full crafting classes, entertainers, scientists, etc.  Make it so all of these different classes fit into the larger puzzle of the game.

    Here's a potential shocker for you.  One of the reasons these current themepark games are anti-social and/or socially mind-numbing is because they all attract basically the same kind of game player.  They are attracting people who just want combat, for the most part.  If these games were more diverse and interesting in their gameplay options, they would attract a lot more personality into the game, and communities would emerge.  This is why broken, buggy games like Star Wars Galaxies are loved even to this day.  I met more interesting people in that game than I have in any game since, and that was because there was room for all kinds of different people to play and work together there.

    I could write a book on what constitutes truly social gameplay, but adding Social Media to your game is not it.

    if that's all it takes GW2 would be the most social MMO ever made since ever single quest is designed to bring people together.. lack of kill stealing and such also leads to this.. but what you really want is stuff like territory control and ingame systems that allow players to establish trading routes and control the economy by controlling resources, you want guild features that allow guilds to wage war on each other to take over each others holdings on certain areas. You want a world not built around a level progression but one where you can shape the character you want.. i know the want of these types of games and want a great one to play as well but i can still enjoy what we got and hope for a future with more open ended types of games.. i find complaining all day long about how games aren't being made how I want them doesn't acomplish much:)

    "if that's all it takes GW2 would be the most social MMO ever made since ever single quest is designed to bring people together.. lack of kill stealing and such also leads to this.."

    That's not social game play. Those other players are just numbers. Most gamers don't even remember their names. It doesn't do anything for building a social environment.

    You have a pretty good point on the rest of your post though. That sort of thing does help, because it requires a group effort. It requires organizing, planning, and seeking out "like minded" fellow players to cooperate with.

    However, there are lots of other design systems that the OP was referring to, and these need to be in the game as well. For example, just for one instance, having crafting players need things made by other crafters as parts or tools of your own trade. And having group effort somehow allow players to be more productive. Things like that.

    Once upon a time....

  • botrytisbotrytis In Flux, MIPosts: 2,567Member
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    For me, this includes designing your game so that players come together more.  It's a fallacy that all gamers want a solo experience, and it's also a fallacy that you cannot design a game that allows for both solo and group play. 

    The best way to answer your question though, is to say that these games need to start evolving back towards virtual world gameplay, and away from theme park static gameplay.  Encourage people to work together, but give them the ability to lone wolf if they so desire.  Add social and non-combat player classes to these games such as full crafting classes, entertainers, scientists, etc.  Make it so all of these different classes fit into the larger puzzle of the game.

    Here's a potential shocker for you.  One of the reasons these current themepark games are anti-social and/or socially mind-numbing is because they all attract basically the same kind of game player.  They are attracting people who just want combat, for the most part.  If these games were more diverse and interesting in their gameplay options, they would attract a lot more personality into the game, and communities would emerge.  This is why broken, buggy games like Star Wars Galaxies are loved even to this day.  I met more interesting people in that game than I have in any game since, and that was because there was room for all kinds of different people to play and work together there.

    I could write a book on what constitutes truly social gameplay, but adding Social Media to your game is not it.

    if that's all it takes GW2 would be the most social MMO ever made since ever single quest is designed to bring people together.. lack of kill stealing and such also leads to this.. but what you really want is stuff like territory control and ingame systems that allow players to establish trading routes and control the economy by controlling resources, you want guild features that allow guilds to wage war on each other to take over each others holdings on certain areas. You want a world not built around a level progression but one where you can shape the character you want.. i know the want of these types of games and want a great one to play as well but i can still enjoy what we got and hope for a future with more open ended types of games.. i find complaining all day long about how games aren't being made how I want them doesn't acomplish much:)

    "if that's all it takes GW2 would be the most social MMO ever made since ever single quest is designed to bring people together.. lack of kill stealing and such also leads to this.."

    That's not social game play. Those other players are just numbers. Most gamers don't even remember their names. It doesn't do anything for building a social environment.

    You have a pretty good point on the rest of your post though. That sort of thing does help, because it requires a group effort. It requires organizing, planning, and seeking out "like minded" fellow players to cooperate with.

    However, there are lots of other design systems that the OP was referring to, and these need to be in the game as well. For example, just for one instance, having crafting players need things made by other crafters as parts or tools of your own trade. And having group effort somehow allow players to be more productive. Things like that.

    I do remember people I played other games with - why? I am playing with them in new games and run into each in other games.

     

    The guild I am currently was from GW1 and still play there sometimes.

    image

    "In 50 years, when I talk to my grandchildren about these days, I'll make sure to mention what an accomplished MMO player I was. They are going to be so proud ..."
    by Naqaj - 7/17/2013 MMORPG.com forum

  • MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    For me, this includes designing your game so that players come together more.  It's a fallacy that all gamers want a solo experience, and it's also a fallacy that you cannot design a game that allows for both solo and group play. 

    The best way to answer your question though, is to say that these games need to start evolving back towards virtual world gameplay, and away from theme park static gameplay.  Encourage people to work together, but give them the ability to lone wolf if they so desire.  Add social and non-combat player classes to these games such as full crafting classes, entertainers, scientists, etc.  Make it so all of these different classes fit into the larger puzzle of the game.

    Here's a potential shocker for you.  One of the reasons these current themepark games are anti-social and/or socially mind-numbing is because they all attract basically the same kind of game player.  They are attracting people who just want combat, for the most part.  If these games were more diverse and interesting in their gameplay options, they would attract a lot more personality into the game, and communities would emerge.  This is why broken, buggy games like Star Wars Galaxies are loved even to this day.  I met more interesting people in that game than I have in any game since, and that was because there was room for all kinds of different people to play and work together there.

    I could write a book on what constitutes truly social gameplay, but adding Social Media to your game is not it.

    if that's all it takes GW2 would be the most social MMO ever made since ever single quest is designed to bring people together.. lack of kill stealing and such also leads to this.. but what you really want is stuff like territory control and ingame systems that allow players to establish trading routes and control the economy by controlling resources, you want guild features that allow guilds to wage war on each other to take over each others holdings on certain areas. You want a world not built around a level progression but one where you can shape the character you want.. i know the want of these types of games and want a great one to play as well but i can still enjoy what we got and hope for a future with more open ended types of games.. i find complaining all day long about how games aren't being made how I want them doesn't acomplish much:)

    We all know, from your myriad of posts about it, that you love GW2.  That's great.  Howerver, GW2 is about as anti-social as any other theme park I have played in the past five plus years.  In fact, I would even go as far as saying it's probably THE MOST anti-social of them all.  I've never seen a game where even Guilds were almost completely pointless before until GW2.

    At any rate, the point it that someone decided all players just want to run around in an online game all by themselves, and have no contact with each other.  Perhaps the real issue is that these games don't attract players who are social, because the game's features do not cater to that crowd of people.

    Yes, there is room for different types of games on the market, even solo-based themeparks like we have now, but that's not the end-all-be-all of MMO gaming.  It seems to me that more and more people are yawning at these games, and pining for the days when they actually *gasp* had to group with and communicate with other people in their game.

    A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  • Entris38Entris38 Somewhere, OHPosts: 321Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    -dependency on others

    -good chat system (not voice chat, written chat so everyone can participate)

    -slow gameplay which allows for chat sessions (EQ had camps, you didn't have to move around every 2 minutes)

    -no automated grouping

    -no cross-server grouping

    -classes that can't solo

    -buffs that last a long time

    -no AH

    -penalties for dying

    -discourage multiboxing

    All the elements for a good community are found in EQ. It's not a mystery what they are. EQ had the strongest community of any MMO. (multiboxing is the only thing EQ didn't handle correctly)

    This!.i'm not saying to make all MMO's this way, just one would be nice. How about just upgrade EQ's engine, and go back to classic EQ, maybe add a bunch of quests, I would be game, though most wouldn't.

  • AerowynAerowyn BUZZARDS BAY, MAPosts: 7,928Member
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
     

    We all know, from your myriad of posts about it, that you love GW2.  That's great.  Howerver, GW2 is about as anti-social as any other theme park I have played in the past five plus years.  In fact, I would even go as far as saying it's probably THE MOST anti-social of them all.  I've never seen a game where even Guilds were almost completely pointless before until GW2.

    At any rate, the point it that someone decided all players just want to run around in an online game all by themselves, and have no contact with each other.  Perhaps the real issue is that these games don't attract players who are social, because the game's features do not cater to that crowd of people.

    Yes, there is room for different types of games on the market, even solo-based themeparks like we have now, but that's not the end-all-be-all of MMO gaming.  It seems to me that more and more people are yawning at these games, and pining for the days when they actually *gasp* had to group with and communicate with other people in their game.

    did you just read the first sentance and skip the rest of what I wrote? 

    I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,428Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by botrytis
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    For me, this includes designing your game so that players come together more.  It's a fallacy that all gamers want a solo experience, and it's also a fallacy that you cannot design a game that allows for both solo and group play. 

    The best way to answer your question though, is to say that these games need to start evolving back towards virtual world gameplay, and away from theme park static gameplay.  Encourage people to work together, but give them the ability to lone wolf if they so desire.  Add social and non-combat player classes to these games such as full crafting classes, entertainers, scientists, etc.  Make it so all of these different classes fit into the larger puzzle of the game.

    Here's a potential shocker for you.  One of the reasons these current themepark games are anti-social and/or socially mind-numbing is because they all attract basically the same kind of game player.  They are attracting people who just want combat, for the most part.  If these games were more diverse and interesting in their gameplay options, they would attract a lot more personality into the game, and communities would emerge.  This is why broken, buggy games like Star Wars Galaxies are loved even to this day.  I met more interesting people in that game than I have in any game since, and that was because there was room for all kinds of different people to play and work together there.

    I could write a book on what constitutes truly social gameplay, but adding Social Media to your game is not it.

    if that's all it takes GW2 would be the most social MMO ever made since ever single quest is designed to bring people together.. lack of kill stealing and such also leads to this.. but what you really want is stuff like territory control and ingame systems that allow players to establish trading routes and control the economy by controlling resources, you want guild features that allow guilds to wage war on each other to take over each others holdings on certain areas. You want a world not built around a level progression but one where you can shape the character you want.. i know the want of these types of games and want a great one to play as well but i can still enjoy what we got and hope for a future with more open ended types of games.. i find complaining all day long about how games aren't being made how I want them doesn't acomplish much:)

    "if that's all it takes GW2 would be the most social MMO ever made since ever single quest is designed to bring people together.. lack of kill stealing and such also leads to this.."

    That's not social game play. Those other players are just numbers. Most gamers don't even remember their names. It doesn't do anything for building a social environment.

    You have a pretty good point on the rest of your post though. That sort of thing does help, because it requires a group effort. It requires organizing, planning, and seeking out "like minded" fellow players to cooperate with.

    However, there are lots of other design systems that the OP was referring to, and these need to be in the game as well. For example, just for one instance, having crafting players need things made by other crafters as parts or tools of your own trade. And having group effort somehow allow players to be more productive. Things like that.

    I do remember people I played other games with - why? I am playing with them in new games and run into each in other games.

     

    The guild I am currently was from GW1 and still play there sometimes.

    Is that "social" from an in-game perspective? So you have a group that you play games with. How many conversations and plans have you had with them about the game you play? About what you are doing inside that game? Other than just, "lets play x tonight". Strategies for raids is some "social", but it's just the bare bones of what could be happening.

    Edit to add: Fact is, most gamers don't even bother with finding a player group like you have. They don't need it. They can just read play-throughs and then "LFG" in game.

    Once upon a time....

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    -dependency on others

    -good chat system (not voice chat, written chat so everyone can participate)

    -slow gameplay which allows for chat sessions (EQ had camps, you didn't have to move around every 2 minutes)

    -no automated grouping

    -no cross-server grouping

    -classes that can't solo

    -buffs that last a long time

    -no AH

    -penalties for dying

    -discourage multiboxing

    All the elements for a good community are found in EQ. It's not a mystery what they are. EQ had the strongest community of any MMO. (multiboxing is the only thing EQ didn't handle correctly)

    I agree with all but classes that can't solo. Soloing should always be the option, but it shouldn't be the best option like in modern MMOs. But you are right, classes that can't solo certainly encourages socializing!

     

    But yeah the statement that ESO will be the most social MMO ever because it has facebook built in was a HUUUGE red flag to add to all the other red flags that game is throwing up.

  • MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member

    Player interdependence is a huge one.  Diversity of gameplay path options is another.  As has been mentioned by me and others in different threads, non-combat classes would be a welcomed item to return to MMO gaming.  It's true that some gamers don't care for non-combat gameplay, but it's also true that many do.  You don't see them in these games, because there's no place for them.  

    Fire up another game with options like Star Wars Galaxies had, and I assure you people will fill the roles of entertainers, doctors, scientists, image designers, crafters, traders, politicians and just about anything else you can think of.  The craziest part about it is that a lot of people who came to the MMORPG genre with WoW haven't even had the opportunity to discover these other kinds of MMO gameplay to see if they would like them.

    As I have said before, I came to MMORPGs with Star Wars Galaxies from years of hardcore clan match shooter gaming. While I enjoyed combat professions in SWG, I had more fun just doing whatever I wanted, including several classes that had nothing at all to do with combat, but still fit into the game world.  

     

    A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    One that I'd like to see implemented?

    1. Crafting systems where players can provide goods and services for other players directly.

    Auction house is convenient, but destroys a community. Forcing players to have vendors or purchasing vendors for their homes is just as bad - no centralized location for commerce. Players putting up trading posts (kiosks) all over the place like in some Eastern MMOs is terrible too - as most will just AFK.

    The solution?

    Allow players to put up a trading post (think street cart / fruit stand / trade show kiosk) only in certain areas. In the market district of a city, in the town square, and in the case of the large market in the city, only in a specific section pertaining to their wares - i.e. all blacksmiths put up their stand to offer goods/services near the other player and NPC blacksmiths.

    Allow players to sell loot to NPC vendors for real prices, and not just grey items, that the NPCs can turn around and sell for profit. Obviously allow players to sell loot to players this way too.

    So like if it requires a Blacksmith to repair damaged armor, player blacksmiths can provide that service and set up shop in the smithing area of the City markets.

    Important point - always have NPCs available to provide the same services and even goods.

    The NPC will always be able to provide the "base" level of service if no player merchants are available. NPC merchants/craftsmen will also buy and re-sell player sold loot like in a Skyrim or Fable.

    What does this accomplish?

    Players that want to be a craftsmen/merchant can set up shop in town/city, other players know where to find them, they compete with each other (best price/service wins) as well as have the NPCs available if no players around AND to serve as a baseline to prevent players from price gauging (which was a problem in SWG with Doctors and such.)

    Players can sell loot directly to merchants (both player and NPC) and then of course buy from merchants. Obviously players can also hock their wears at their stands - but it requires interaction and socializing.

    If you are just crafting to make a quick buck, can sell to NPC merchants or other players and walk away.

    If you are just crafting to help yourself/guildies/friends and don't care about being a merchant, you don't have to ever set up shop in the markets.

    Best part?

    Allow players to work for NPC merchants in their shops in the market - build their skills and work with NPCs to sell/create their goods.

    Allow players who have built up enough $ and reputation with a particular shop/craftsmen to buy the shop from the NPC and run it themselves, with NPCs and potentially even other players working for them.

    Would give that SWG type feel - only for the truly dedicated craftsmen, yet keep it centralized to the population centers so players know where to go to shop - without the price gauging and would force some level of competition in the market.

    Player run shop could then even employ other players to help apprentice players in crafting skills and fill orders, break down excess goods sold to them by players, etc.

    Second best part?

    Allow every item, player crafted obviously but ANY looted item to be broken down and the recipe to craft learned by a skilled enough player crafter.

    Make it require multiple break downs of the same item to learn to recipe, or you have to build prototype versions and master them before matching quality of looted item.

    So you could have a super sweet looking Epic quality Purple item drop in a dungeon/raid, maybe something very rare. You could wear that item and know that only other players who get the drop will have it too.

    Or you could deconstruct the item, learn to build it, and after several trial/error versions (maybe green/blue quality) you finally learn to craft the Epic version.

    You as a crafter could keep that recipe all to yourself. Become to soul supplier of a particular rare armor set.

    Of course other players might get it as loot, and other crafters could buy one of yours and then deconstruct it and learn to make it themselves, but as with all things in the market - things are constantly moving.

    The very best crafters could have the support of their guilds and have multiple "unique" lines of equipment only they create for their guildies.

    The very best could develope a name for themselves and be the "go to" for selling a rare piece of loot to.

    Like away from the bustle and competition of the city, Epic Crafter Joe sets up shop in a small village, owns the blacksmith shop, and players come from all over to browse his wares and trade in high quality rare items, as well as create custom orders for unique sets. Joe has to keep his prices competitive, but due to the demand and travel Joe earns a very healthy upkeep and owns the large farm house next to his shop.

    (Obviously have to implement some form of player housing, and my favorite idea has always been to do Fable style player housing - all the housing exists in the world at launch, is owned by NPCs, and players buy the homes from NPCs. - it eliminates ghost towns and urban sprawl of UO/SWG style housing, and is more community and open world by FAR than any instanced housing could be.)

    etc. etc.

    Hopefully ya'll see what I'm envisioning here.

  • ApraxisApraxis RegensburgPosts: 1,515Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    -dependency on others

    -good chat system (not voice chat, written chat so everyone can participate)

    and i would prefer no zone, world or trade channels, what you see is what you can hear. With other words just yell, whisper, say with maybe the addition of send and guild chat.. and speach bubble above your head.. old UO style. World was much more alive and not that seperative... you could always join.. and yeap.. maybe no group chat too

    -slow gameplay which allows for chat sessions (EQ had camps, you didn't have to move around every 2 minutes)

    it dont have to be slow gameplay per se, but of course some natural breaks, like a tavern with purpose, player markets and/or vendor, social places to meet others like the local smithy without AH to actually trade and/or offer your service.. and more importantly useful activities outside of combat

    -no automated grouping

    -no cross-server grouping

    -classes that can't solo

    i dont think forced grouping is the way to go, but grouping should have benifits, and some areas should be just for groups.. non instanced of course

    -buffs that last a long time

    -no AH 100% agree

    -penalties for dying

    -discourage multiboxing

    All the elements for a good community are found in EQ. It's not a mystery what they are. EQ had the strongest community of any MMO. (multiboxing is the only thing EQ didn't handle correctly)

    Some good ideas, if i would think a little bit longer about it, i could add some more features.

    Like

    • activities for more than just a group, like city building, conquere or defence
    • dependency from each other, and i dont talk about combat here. Different ressource and crafting chains, where you have to work together with a lot of ppl. And crafting have to be more usefull/effective as raid loot.. give money for raids/dungeons/mob killing, but items for crafting
    • social activities, like musician, art, and opportunities to actually roleplay
    • ...
  • fenistilfenistil GliwicePosts: 3,005Member
    Originally posted by MindTrigger

    Is there anyone on this website who wants your MMO game integrated with Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, or anything else?  Does anyone here believe such features make an MMO game innovative or social?


    No I don't want to and I don't think it make game more social.  Using facebook or twitter or similar sites while I am playing an mmorpg is one of last things I would want to do.

     

     

     

     

     

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    How does what I wrote above encourage community?

    1. Villages/cities/towns have actual community. The houses next to yours is owned by other players. The shops and marketplaces are owned/operated by other players.

    Yet these are not little islands of community away from the rest of the population - these are the same cities/towns/villages all players will be traveling through and visiting on their adventures.

    2. Crafters and merchants have to interact with the players and each other. Competition is fair and enforced. The best prices, best service, and most dedicated win.

    3. You get the convenience of one-stop shopping, with a small community feel.

    There are more details and more points I could go into... but yeah I agree with the OP for the most part - things like social media integration do not and will not work.

    It's all about the systems and features.

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon

    Well said OP and BadSpock too. However I'm under the impression that social media isn't used for filling the gaping hole in MMOs as a social feature but instead that it is used as a means for advertising the game. And as you know it is a trend that has spread everywhere.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    -dependency on others

    -good chat system (not voice chat, written chat so everyone can participate)

    -slow gameplay which allows for chat sessions (EQ had camps, you didn't have to move around every 2 minutes)

    -no automated grouping

    -no cross-server grouping

    -classes that can't solo

    -buffs that last a long time

    -no AH

    -penalties for dying

    -discourage multiboxing

    All the elements for a good community are found in EQ. It's not a mystery what they are. EQ had the strongest community of any MMO. (multiboxing is the only thing EQ didn't handle correctly)

    Such a non-fun game for me. I don't play games for the community.

    if i want to chat, i go to a chat room.

    No auto-group = waste of time not playing.

    no x-server grouping = i can't group with some friends .. artificial restrictions are bad

    no AH = very inefficient buying & selling

    I am not playing a MMORP GAME without those features.

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,428Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    Well said OP and BadSpock too. However I'm under the impression that social media isn't used for filling the gaping hole in MMOs as a social feature but instead that it is used as a means for advertising the game. And as you know it is a trend that has spread everywhere.

    Yeah, gaming marketeers have gone with the "you can sell anything if you can reach enough people" strategy.

    Once upon a time....

  • FoomerangFoomerang Portland, ORPosts: 5,565Member Uncommon

    Channel all content through player made quests, events, and contracts. Crafter needs a mine protected, contract a henchman to fight off the waves of bandits. Henchman needs a new weapon, commision a weaponsmith to make a custom lance. Exponentiate that to all classes and professions. Allow players to do play solo but they yeild a smaller amount of resources or that weapon doesnt have the look or stats you really want. I have nearly a book of ideas on multiple class and interdependency systems.

  • Crazy_StickCrazy_Stick Privacy Preferred, NCPosts: 1,059Member

    Oh, I am sure most DEV teams will agree with you OP. So they will likely set it up so that you can text message pals, share tweets, post them pics and vids, and interact on facebook in the future so they don't have to code and police all these other features people say they want but never really use anyway... O.o

     

    Don't mind me. I am just being completely cynical.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,666Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MindTrigger

    Is there anyone on this website who wants your MMO game integrated with Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, or anything else?  Does anyone here believe such features make an MMO game innovative or social?

    When did a dev say or suggest that they were adding these features to makes their MMOs more innovative or social? Do you have a link to what prompted this post?

    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

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,666Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by aesperus
    I'm curious as to what you think are examples of features that create a good in-game community?

    -dependency on others

    -good chat system (not voice chat, written chat so everyone can participate)

    -slow gameplay which allows for chat sessions (EQ had camps, you didn't have to move around every 2 minutes)

    -no automated grouping

    -no cross-server grouping

    -classes that can't solo

    -buffs that last a long time

    -no AH

    -penalties for dying

    -discourage multiboxing

    UO, Puzzle Pirates, Wizard 101, and EVE Online have great player communities and most of their features are the exact opposite of what you posted.

    If there has been anything that proven a common aspect in fostering community across MMOs it has been sheer diversity of gameplay content.  When the game is more than just waving swords at increasingly more difficult tiers of rats, players become more interactive and more dependent on each other.

    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

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.