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!

We dont want games - we want worlds.

1202123252630

Comments

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,310Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Cecropia
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by toddze

    One problem, the majority of MMO players are not true MMO players, most are single player rpg players.

    Why is this a "problem"? MMO should be adapting to players, not the other way around.

    There is nothing sacred about "true MMOs" .. they are just a form of entertainment.

    Enough already, we all understand that games are entertainment. You are not having an epiphany the 20 times a day you post this. lol.

    Also, I am completely aware that you are struggling to understand why some of us hold this genre in a different light. A lot of us treat MMOs as more of a hobby than a mere game. They aren't "sacred", that's just being dramatic and silly. The concept of playing a game in a huge world with massive amounts of other players, that had so much to offer that people could potentially play for periods longer than a few weeks or months is what brought me here. Commitment to a good mmo does not mean that that's the only game that can be played. I have still remained a RTS/FPS gamer throughout my time with MMOs.

    Singleplayer/multiplayer online games have all benefitted from borrowed MMO features and design. MMOs, on the hand, have had their foundation ripped out and are quickly losing any sense of what they were intended for. Now we have people literally gobbling them up like potato chips because they have zero lasting power. MMOs really got the shit end of the stick as these new disposable gamers started flooding the industry. 

    You might be having a fiesta with this unfortunate abomination, but surely you can see why so many of us do not like where this genre is heading. Frankly, when we do get to the other side, I doubt many will be thrilled with the end result; yourself included.

     It's not that we don't understand.  We do understand however we do not agree.  I don't agree that MMO's have had their foundation ripped out from under them. I do feel they are becoming more and more inclusive they are having more varied experiences.  I do feel that MMO's by and large have significantly been positively impacted by the inclusion of many things that are in spg.

    Today even with a busier schedule, I feel I have far more value for my dollar, far more choice in what games to play and how to pay for them, and far more choice in how I choose to play the game than in days gone by.  I see this trend increasing. 

    Other people don't like them, thats fine.  I by and large don't like many games either (be they spg, mmo, muliplayer, fps...) that hasn't really changed from basically my whole life.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • OnomasOnomas Rock Hill, SCPosts: 1,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
     

    If not popular then why are 9 of them coming out soon? Some are AAA as well. Fact is themeparks have become worse and had their day. Now things will progress in a different direction. Bet you half of those will do better than the last 50 themeparks, because since Rift......... none have been worthy. So 1 out of 100 themeparks amount to anything, and this is your arguement for why themeparks are better and shouldnt change? Because im confused. I want a real mmo, an epic game with a massive world. Most you guys attacking sandboxes want the opposite.

    Because despite what you believe, companies try new things all the time. Some becomes popualr (like Dishonored), and some not so much (like the new Xcom remake).

    In fact, you can't say these 9 games are popular until they are out, can you?

    Sure i can, just look at the front page ;)

    And you keep comparing single player games to mmorpgs, yet again. We dont care about your single player games, we are sandbox junkies.....get it?

  • LobotomistLobotomist ZagrebPosts: 5,048Member Uncommon

    Ok, you want a good example of a virtual world game that changes according to players influence and creates its own "themepark" naturally -

    Here is Elite: Dangerous dev diary 2

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uKD1ap5hsI&feature=youtu.be

    image

  • JemcrystalJemcrystal Champaign, ILPosts: 1,548Member Uncommon
     Bigga, fat worlds!  Round like a pregnant women's belly.  Bursting with fruit.


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

    Ok, you want a good example of a virtual world game that changes according to players influence and creates its own "themepark" naturally -

    Here is Elite: Dangerous dev diary 2

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uKD1ap5hsI&feature=youtu.be

    So... its a system similar to what GW2 uses plus a touch of WAR where completing missions will advance your side's influence?

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

  • LobotomistLobotomist ZagrebPosts: 5,048Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Lobotomist

    Ok, you want a good example of a virtual world game that changes according to players influence and creates its own "themepark" naturally -

    Here is Elite: Dangerous dev diary 2

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uKD1ap5hsI&feature=youtu.be

    So... its a system similar to what GW2 uses plus a touch of WAR where completing missions will advance your side's influence?

    Yes and no

    What you mention would be themepark simulation of the real thing. Premade events set to trigger if certan requirements are met. It looks like the real thing , but as all themepark its just a prop.

    In example of virtual world changes are not prescripted events they are run by NPC AI.

    For example if a certain faction (planet in above elite example) is suffering food shortage it will start importing food , perhaps try to invide other faction and steal their food. Other faction will maybe take advantage of their weaknes and attack , or blocade food import.

    Anything can happen and its not pre-scripted at all (as in examples you mentioned)

    And this time themepark players (the ones that enjoy quests and story) will really have what to talk about with their friends :)

    image

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,757Member Uncommon

    I was very interested in the concept of putting a themepark in the same game as a sandbox. it is something we have talked about on here before. The idea that one lot of players goes one way, doing all the quests, running the raids and so on. While another group of players goes of and never does a quest, they pillage a village or build one, craft a set of armour and puts their name on it, dam a river and start a fisihing industry.

    Hard to achieve, but the best of both worlds.

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

    Yes and no

    What you mention would be themepark simulation of the real thing. Premade events set to trigger if certan requirements are met. It looks like the real thing , but as all themepark its just a prop.

    In example of virtual world changes are not prescripted events they are run by NPC AI.

    For example if a certain faction (planet in above elite example) is suffering food shortage it will start importing food , perhaps try to invide other faction and steal their food. Other faction will maybe take advantage of their weaknes and attack , or blocade food import.

    Anything can happen and its not pre-scripted at all (as in examples you mentioned)

    And this time themepark players (the ones that enjoy quests and story) will really have what to talk about with their friends :)

    You don't know whether they are scripted or not (likely to an extent, they are) and even if they weren't the end result is the same. Don't see what the fuzz is about. There's not much difference.

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

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Scot

    I was very interested in the concept of putting a themepark in the same game as a sandbox. it is something we have talked about on here before. The idea that one lot of players goes one way, doing all the quests, running the raids and so on. While another group of players goes of and never does a quest, they pillage a village or build one, craft a set of armour and puts their name on it, dam a river and start a fisihing industry.

    Hard to achieve, but the best of both worlds.

    again I'm in agreement with you..

         I have always wanted a game that is built like a spider web..  Imagine a game that has 6 starting races and cities.. Each race owning a section of land that allows each to reach max level without ever leaving their home faction.. So if you have a new zone per 10 levels, you would have 6 zones per race, making it 36 zones FOR themepark enthuist.. In addition I would have 6 zones that are basically "sandbox".. Anyone at any given time can go into these zones voluntarly and take part of the sandbox.. Therefore we end up 42 zones in all.. Each zone would have their own sub factions and perks as well, and players would not be limited to only doing their home faction.. Just like GW2 has done, players can cross race zones at anytime and enjoy ALL 42 zones..

         However, I do want to see leveling alot slower then it is now..  For someone to build up faction in all 42 zones takes more then just a few months.. I'm talking YEARS..  When a character starts their lifetime journey, I want them to be able to customize their biography based on their personal actions, not be some predetermines storyline themepark..  Example would be if I started an elf druid, while another players started a human druid..  By the time the both of us are max level, our choices on what zones we ventured in, and our actions will make us unique..

         Having 6 zones per stage of leveling, (if I did my math right) means the odds of meeting another character that chose the same path as you did is 1 of 46,656.... Sure eventually over the years, everyone will have faction in all 6 starting races and 36 sub factions.. BUT that will take years, and I do means more then 2.. I'm thinking 4 or 5 years for the hardcore players..  by then more zones would have been produces and you have more zones to play in..

  • LobotomistLobotomist ZagrebPosts: 5,048Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Lobotomist
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    Yes and no

    What you mention would be themepark simulation of the real thing. Premade events set to trigger if certan requirements are met. It looks like the real thing , but as all themepark its just a prop.

    In example of virtual world changes are not prescripted events they are run by NPC AI.

    For example if a certain faction (planet in above elite example) is suffering food shortage it will start importing food , perhaps try to invide other faction and steal their food. Other faction will maybe take advantage of their weaknes and attack , or blocade food import.

    Anything can happen and its not pre-scripted at all (as in examples you mentioned)

    And this time themepark players (the ones that enjoy quests and story) will really have what to talk about with their friends :)

    You don't know whether they are scripted or not (likely to an extent, they are) and even if they weren't the end result is the same. Don't see what the fuzz is about. There's not much difference.

    You are grasping. To invalidate my idea you are talking about actual technical implementation of a game that I only used as example. Game that is not yet finished , and we dont know if its going to be MMO or not.

    What I lay before you is a concept. And this you should concentrate and discuss upon.

    image

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

    You are grasping. To invalidate my idea you are talking about actual technical implementation of a game that I only used as example. Game that is not yet finished , and we dont know if its going to be MMO or not.

    What I lay before you is a concept. And this you should concentrate and discuss upon.

    I'm grasping? But your whole distinction seems to be based on actual technical implementation!

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

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Scot
    I was very interested in the concept of putting a themepark in the same game as a sandbox. it is something we have talked about on here before. The idea that one lot of players goes one way, doing all the quests, running the raids and so on. While another group of players goes of and never does a quest, they pillage a village or build one, craft a set of armour and puts their name on it, dam a river and start a fisihing industry.

    Hard to achieve, but the best of both worlds.



    I always wondered if a game where the usual leveling game was in place, but the end game, instead of being nothing but raids, was a sandbox style world. It would be like reading a book, and at the end of the book you get to hang around in the world of the book and do stuff.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • LobotomistLobotomist ZagrebPosts: 5,048Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Lobotomist
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    You are grasping. To invalidate my idea you are talking about actual technical implementation of a game that I only used as example. Game that is not yet finished , and we dont know if its going to be MMO or not.

    What I lay before you is a concept. And this you should concentrate and discuss upon.

    I'm grasping? But your whole distinction seems to be based on actual technical implementation!

    Based on design concept.

    image

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Cecropia
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by toddze

    One problem, the majority of MMO players are not true MMO players, most are single player rpg players.

    Why is this a "problem"? MMO should be adapting to players, not the other way around.

    There is nothing sacred about "true MMOs" .. they are just a form of entertainment.

    Enough already, we all understand that games are entertainment. You are not having an epiphany the 20 times a day you post this. lol.

    The same that posting "i want a sandbox" 200 times does not magically make sandbox game appearing. It is an internet forum, i am not the only one repeating my opinions.

    Also, I am completely aware that you are struggling to understand why some of us hold this genre in a different light. A lot of us treat MMOs as more of a hobby than a mere game. They aren't "sacred", that's just being dramatic and silly. The concept of playing a game in a huge world with massive amounts of other players, that had so much to offer that people could potentially play for periods longer than a few weeks or months is what brought me here. Commitment to a good mmo does not mean that that's the only game that can be played. I have still remained a RTS/FPS gamer throughout my time with MMOs.

    That is your problem .. so emotionally attached to a hobby. Oh, i understand what you want, i just don't care for it .. and think that it is a lot of hoola for entertainment.

    Singleplayer/multiplayer online games have all benefitted from borrowed MMO features and design. MMOs, on the hand, have had their foundation ripped out and are quickly losing any sense of what they were intended for. Now we have people literally gobbling them up like potato chips because they have zero lasting power. MMOs really got the shit end of the stick as these new disposable gamers started flooding the industry. 

    All good. And this obsessino with "staying power". Do you enjoy Avenger, the movie? Do you need to watch it 200 times? If many good single players can be fun for 2 weeks, MMOs can .. and are too. Disposable .. entertainment .. you are damn right. Some entertainment is and should be disposable. Whether MMO is such, depends on what players prefer.

    You might be having a fiesta with this unfortunate abomination, but surely you can see why so many of us do not like where this genre is heading. Frankly, when we do get to the other side, I doubt many will be thrilled with the end result; yourself included.

    "unfortunate abombination"? That is just a point of view. Note that if MMO stops to be fun to me, i will just do something else. Like i said before, there is an abundance of entertainment .. games, novels, anime, movies .... so i am not beholden to ONE hobby.

     

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

    Sure i can, just look at the front page ;)

    And you keep comparing single player games to mmorpgs, yet again. We dont care about your single player games, we are sandbox junkies.....get it?

    You are that narrow? You can't appreciate a good SP game? How about movies? You don't watch movies either?

    I am surprised if all you do (or want to do) is play sandbox MMOs.

    Personally i am not beholden to any hobby like that. I play MMOs, SP games, online games, read, watch movies ....

    Sad to have all your entertainment eggs in one basket, don't you think?

  • ApraxisApraxis RegensburgPosts: 1,515Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
     

    Sure i can, just look at the front page ;)

    And you keep comparing single player games to mmorpgs, yet again. We dont care about your single player games, we are sandbox junkies.....get it?

    You are that narrow? You can't appreciate a good SP game? How about movies? You don't watch movies either?

    I am surprised if all you do (or want to do) is play sandbox MMOs.

    Personally i am not beholden to any hobby like that. I play MMOs, SP games, online games, read, watch movies ....

    Sad to have all your entertainment eggs in one basket, don't you think?

    First of all i dont care much about the discussion.. just because a few people babble about something nothing will change anyway.. so it is just babbling.

    About your response and get you some insight on other gamers interests and motiviations. Actually a lot of player are seriously not really interested in any single player game, or games playing just against some AI controlled enemy, and still more a bad AI in most cases.

    There are a lot of players, which are solely interested in games with other human players, be it tabletop games, sport games or computer games for a lot of reasons. And therefore they prefer games, which are heavily multiplayer and with the option to play with and against other humans.. and actually Sandbox gaming is one of those options, where player interaction is the core of those gameplay.

    As example, i player singleplayer games with a good multiplayer mode, and i play more or less just the multiplayer version of it.. and about story.. if i want a good story i read a book, or listen to a audiobook.. games lack  considerably in that department. But as always different people, different opinions, different tastes.. do what ever you want and let other do whatever they want. Just imho of course.

  • OnomasOnomas Rock Hill, SCPosts: 1,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
     

    Sure i can, just look at the front page ;)

    And you keep comparing single player games to mmorpgs, yet again. We dont care about your single player games, we are sandbox junkies.....get it?

    You are that narrow? You can't appreciate a good SP game? How about movies? You don't watch movies either?

    I am surprised if all you do (or want to do) is play sandbox MMOs.

    Personally i am not beholden to any hobby like that. I play MMOs, SP games, online games, read, watch movies ....

    Sad to have all your entertainment eggs in one basket, don't you think?

    Actualy i work, take care of my family, spend time with my 2 year old.

    And when i have time i try to find a sandbox, but enjoy strategy games. Total war series, civ series, etc. Every so often ill play BF3, PS2, etc.

    I even play themepark mmo's. Currently i dabble in EQ2, Rift, PoTBS, Tera.

     

    But you see....this conversation isnt about all that. Its about large open worlds. Something you cant seem to grasp!

     

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,978Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
     

    Sure i can, just look at the front page ;)

    And you keep comparing single player games to mmorpgs, yet again. We dont care about your single player games, we are sandbox junkies.....get it?

    You are that narrow? You can't appreciate a good SP game? How about movies? You don't watch movies either?

    I am surprised if all you do (or want to do) is play sandbox MMOs.

    Personally i am not beholden to any hobby like that. I play MMOs, SP games, online games, read, watch movies ....

    Sad to have all your entertainment eggs in one basket, don't you think?

    Of course we enjoy other hobbies, including movies (all kinds), reading, running and of course, time with the family.

    But when it comes to some things, my tastes are very narrow.  I only drink beer.  All kinds of beer, but I don't drink hard liquor or wine in any form.  Reading, pretty much limited only to Science Fiction, with occasionally forays into horror, or even Fantasy (though why bookstores think those two catgories belong mixed together is beyond me. I don't do recreational drugs of any kind, and wouldn't even in a state where some are legal now.

    And when it comes to gaming, for the past 10 years, only MMORPG's for the most part.  No console games of any kind, and while I've tried an occasional single player game here and there (Starcraft II and Skyrim most recently) they just don't hold  my interest like even the worst MMORPG does.

    But this makes sense, one of my primary reasons for playing MMORPG's is for social interaction, hence why I favor more vitrual world design vs the lobby style that you enjoy.

    Doesn't really matter if its a sandbox style game, truthfully I've really only played one, EVE, (Xyson didn't count, I didn't actually run into anyone when I was there) but I do enjoy games with strong mechanics that permit socialization (I really should have played SWG, I'm sure I would have loved it)

    Point is, sometimes my tastes are fairly broad (music being one such thing) and other times quite narrow (I won't eat fish in any form, its just nasty) image

    But no, I don't find my preferences sad in any way, it's what I like after all right?

     

     

     

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "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

  • ZekiahZekiah Aurora, COPosts: 2,499Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
     

    Sure i can, just look at the front page ;)

    And you keep comparing single player games to mmorpgs, yet again. We dont care about your single player games, we are sandbox junkies.....get it?

    You are that narrow? You can't appreciate a good SP game?

    I believe they meant we don't care about YOUR single player games. IE, the discussion is about world design and not your game preference.

    image

    "Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky

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

    But you see....this conversation isnt about all that. Its about large open worlds. Something you cant seem to grasp!

     

    No the conservation is about whether a choice between world and games. No one says i have to agree with the OP's assertation in the topic.

    And if the discussion is about world and games, certainly it is fair game to discuss the game side of things. You don't seem to grasp that.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
     

    Sure i can, just look at the front page ;)

    And you keep comparing single player games to mmorpgs, yet again. We dont care about your single player games, we are sandbox junkies.....get it?

    You are that narrow? You can't appreciate a good SP game? How about movies? You don't watch movies either?

    I am surprised if all you do (or want to do) is play sandbox MMOs.

    Personally i am not beholden to any hobby like that. I play MMOs, SP games, online games, read, watch movies ....

    Sad to have all your entertainment eggs in one basket, don't you think?

    Of course we enjoy other hobbies, including movies (all kinds), reading, running and of course, time with the family.

    But when it comes to some things, my tastes are very narrow.  I only drink beer.  All kinds of beer, but I don't drink hard liquor or wine in any form.  Reading, pretty much limited only to Science Fiction, with occasionally forays into horror, or even Fantasy (though why bookstores think those two catgories belong mixed together is beyond me. I don't do recreational drugs of any kind, and wouldn't even in a state where some are legal now.

    And when it comes to gaming, for the past 10 years, only MMORPG's for the most part.  No console games of any kind, and while I've tried an occasional single player game here and there (Starcraft II and Skyrim most recently) they just don't hold  my interest like even the worst MMORPG does.

    But this makes sense, one of my primary reasons for playing MMORPG's is for social interaction, hence why I favor more vitrual world design vs the lobby style that you enjoy.

    Doesn't really matter if its a sandbox style game, truthfully I've really only played one, EVE, (Xyson didn't count, I didn't actually run into anyone when I was there) but I do enjoy games with strong mechanics that permit socialization (I really should have played SWG, I'm sure I would have loved it)

    Point is, sometimes my tastes are fairly broad (music being one such thing) and other times quite narrow (I won't eat fish in any form, its just nasty) image

    But no, I don't find my preferences sad in any way, it's what I like after all right?

     

     

    Well, i guess there are those who are extremely narrow in their gaming preference. But you certainly agree taht there are those who are broader. Not every play only play MMOs. In fact, not every gamer cares about social aspects of games.

    (BTW, i drink wine, not beer, so that is a second difference).

    So if your preference is not sad, then it is the same taht my (or those who prefer broader, non-virtual world MMOs) also not sad. After all, they are just preferences. Thus, i find it condenscending that someone here talk as if the trend of MMOs is a bad thing. It is only a bad thing for SOME pregferences, not all.

    I don't dictate what you like .. and neither should you.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas But you see....this conversation isnt about all that. Its about large open worlds. Something you cant seem to grasp!  
    No the conservation is about whether a choice between world and games. No one says i have to agree with the OP's assertation in the topic.

    And if the discussion is about world and games, certainly it is fair game to discuss the game side of things. You don't seem to grasp that.




    According to the OP, it has nothing to do with the size of the world. It's about the interactivity of the world. The description was something like this:

    The player enters an area and kills some goblins. Because the player killed some goblins, the people in the town have some additional work for the player.

    There's more, but that's a bare bones summary.

    I would add something like the town becoming more prosperous, or more run down depending on how the player interacts with the town. The player is changing the world in an indirect manner by interacting with it, and the world is responding to the player's actions in both direct and indirect manners.

    There's no particular reason this couldn't exist in game centric MMO.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • LucioonLucioon Palm Harbor, FLPosts: 814Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas
     

    Sure i can, just look at the front page ;)

    And you keep comparing single player games to mmorpgs, yet again. We dont care about your single player games, we are sandbox junkies.....get it?

    You are that narrow? You can't appreciate a good SP game? How about movies? You don't watch movies either?

    I am surprised if all you do (or want to do) is play sandbox MMOs.

    Personally i am not beholden to any hobby like that. I play MMOs, SP games, online games, read, watch movies ....

    Sad to have all your entertainment eggs in one basket, don't you think?

    Of course we enjoy other hobbies, including movies (all kinds), reading, running and of course, time with the family.

    But when it comes to some things, my tastes are very narrow.  I only drink beer.  All kinds of beer, but I don't drink hard liquor or wine in any form.  Reading, pretty much limited only to Science Fiction, with occasionally forays into horror, or even Fantasy (though why bookstores think those two catgories belong mixed together is beyond me. I don't do recreational drugs of any kind, and wouldn't even in a state where some are legal now.

    And when it comes to gaming, for the past 10 years, only MMORPG's for the most part.  No console games of any kind, and while I've tried an occasional single player game here and there (Starcraft II and Skyrim most recently) they just don't hold  my interest like even the worst MMORPG does.

    But this makes sense, one of my primary reasons for playing MMORPG's is for social interaction, hence why I favor more vitrual world design vs the lobby style that you enjoy.

    Doesn't really matter if its a sandbox style game, truthfully I've really only played one, EVE, (Xyson didn't count, I didn't actually run into anyone when I was there) but I do enjoy games with strong mechanics that permit socialization (I really should have played SWG, I'm sure I would have loved it)

    Point is, sometimes my tastes are fairly broad (music being one such thing) and other times quite narrow (I won't eat fish in any form, its just nasty) image

    But no, I don't find my preferences sad in any way, it's what I like after all right?

     

     

    Well, i guess there are those who are extremely narrow in their gaming preference. But you certainly agree taht there are those who are broader. Not every play only play MMOs. In fact, not every gamer cares about social aspects of games.

    (BTW, i drink wine, not beer, so that is a second difference).

    So if your preference is not sad, then it is the same taht my (or those who prefer broader, non-virtual world MMOs) also not sad. After all, they are just preferences. Thus, i find it condenscending that someone here talk as if the trend of MMOs is a bad thing. It is only a bad thing for SOME pregferences, not all.

    I don't dictate what you like .. and neither should you.

    I can't believe that you can't understand what the OP meant in the original post. It isn't about whether or not Single Player games is better or worst than MMorpg, or certain MMORPG is better than another. Its not about preference nor taste nor is it an discussion on Themepark versus Sandbox.

    What everyone is trying to inform you is, we are having an discussion on Worlds in our MMORPG. 

    This term of Worlds, means an living breathing Virtual Playground that is of an entire new world to some and to others something entirely different, and thats where the discussion is. 

    You keep beating on preferences and games on your discussions that really adds nothing to the argument. 

    You said it yourself, once the MMO loses its fun factor, you move on, you move on to other MMO or SP, FPS, RTS....etc other genres, so to you MMORPG can be replaced easily. 

    Yet those that adds to the Discussion are saying they don't want MMO to disappear, they don't want it to be replaced by other Genre. They want MMO to stay strong and get better. And how does it get better? Maybe Worlds instead of games!!!

    Do you now see the discussion part of the post.

    If you still don't get it, then how about this, you said you brink Beer, so when you order an Beer, you expect Beer, but instead they give you some fruity drink that has 10 % beer in it. Sure you can drink it, and if you hate it you move on, but what we are doing is telling the bartender that when you order Beer, you expect it to be Beer, even if its atleast 80% beer, not 10% beer. 

     

    Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.

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

     


    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Onomas But you see....this conversation isnt about all that. Its about large open worlds. Something you cant seem to grasp!  
    No the conservation is about whether a choice between world and games. No one says i have to agree with the OP's assertation in the topic.

     

    And if the discussion is about world and games, certainly it is fair game to discuss the game side of things. You don't seem to grasp that.



    According to the OP, it has nothing to do with the size of the world. It's about the interactivity of the world. The description was something like this:

    The player enters an area and kills some goblins. Because the player killed some goblins, the people in the town have some additional work for the player.

    There's more, but that's a bare bones summary.

    I would add something like the town becoming more prosperous, or more run down depending on how the player interacts with the town. The player is changing the world in an indirect manner by interacting with it, and the world is responding to the player's actions in both direct and indirect manners.

    There's no particular reason this couldn't exist in game centric MMO.

     

    Cost of programming and testing?

    Popularity of the style of gameplay?

    There is no technical reason this couldn't exist in a game centric MMO .. but technical reasons are not the only reasons out there. Putting in a gameplay system with high interactivity takes resources ... so a devs need to determine if each kind of interactivity is needed.

     

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

    You keep beating on preferences and games on your discussions that really adds nothing to the argument. 

    That is your point of view. I feel that i added the notion that MMOs need to change .. and take what is good in other genre. It is a message of change.

    You said it yourself, once the MMO loses its fun factor, you move on, you move on to other MMO or SP, FPS, RTS....etc other genres, so to you MMORPG can be replaced easily. 

    Yes.

    Yet those that adds to the Discussion are saying they don't want MMO to disappear, they don't want it to be replaced by other Genre. They want MMO to stay strong and get better. And how does it get better? Maybe Worlds instead of games!!!

    And i say that is a narrow view. They should look at other genre and take what works. If MMO changes ... so what .. i am arguing against only using old ideas, and don't allow for any innovation. "Better" is a loaded word .. it is in the eye of the beholder. If you close your mind, and don't try MOBA, how do you know if MOBA is not also a fun game?

    Do you now see the discussion part of the post.

    If you still don't get it, then how about this, you said you brink Beer, so when you order an Beer, you expect Beer, but instead they give you some fruity drink that has 10 % beer in it. Sure you can drink it, and if you hate it you move on, but what we are doing is telling the bartender that when you order Beer, you expect it to be Beer, even if its atleast 80% beer, not 10% beer. 

    (BTW, i drink wine).

    That is a very rigid, and close minded position. May be you should try wine once in a while. Beer is not sacred, you know. It is just a drink.

     

     

     

Sign In or Register to comment.