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!

Do I really need to be leet?

1246789

Comments

  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Manchester, NHPosts: 2,926Member Uncommon
    So 20% of players want something that's impossible in an MMO.  They want to be the unique hero.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins
    So 20% of players want something that's impossible in an MMO.  They want to be the unique hero.

    Games are just illusions .. you are not really killing that dragon .. it is just how the devs trick you into feeling so. So it is not that difficult to maket the illusion of being a "unique hero'. Just use a story instance. That is no different than being a unique hero in a SP or online game, where millions of others are also "unique heroes".

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Merilirem
    That's the point of this pole,to start a discussion on which aspect are more appropriate and should be focused on. Having every choice isn't an option yet, but having 10 or something like that is definitely possible. Now I'm not saying the poll is perfect and demonstrates an absolute understanding of anything but it does seem that there would be a market for a game with combat as a secondary concern, development wise. Focus being placed on other aspects when it comes to fleshing and content. Just to live in a world where u don't have to be capable of killing enemies by the dozen just so you can be a smith or collect pretty things.

    I doubt an unscientific poll here would be representative.

    Don't you think devs would have done extensive research before they commit their money on creating these systems?

    I would say combat is by far the most popular with dungeons, quests, raids, battlegrounds and arenas all focus on combat. I think collecting pets/mounts (or other stuff) is also kind of popular given how much you can collect in many of these games. Being a farmer, i don't know, although there is a large population playing farmville.

  • bunnyhopperbunnyhopper LondonPosts: 2,751Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins
    So 20% of players want something that's impossible in an MMO.  They want to be the unique hero.

    Games are just illusions .. you are not really killing that dragon .. it is just how the devs trick you into feeling so. So it is not that difficult to maket the illusion of being a "unique hero'. Just use a story instance. That is no different than being a unique hero in a SP or online game, where millions of others are also "unique heroes".

     

    Everyone outside of complete mentalists are aware they are "playing a game".

     

    Multiplayer games also do afford the opportunity for "unique" or "stand out" players/characters within the context of the game world.

     

    @OP, it is nice when an mmo offers something other than whackamole (and when that "something" is a nicely fleshed out system and not just tacked on crap).

    "Come and have a look at what you could have won."

  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member

    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    I'd love to be the epic villain.  99% of games don't allow that.

     

    FYI - anti-hero and villain aren't the same thing.  Generally anti-heroes are still heroes but have major flaws.  Think the Punisher.

    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    Ok it seems I accidentally used a term, I meant it in the sense of the counter to heroes, but I admit I made a small mistake. No ones perfect lol


    So 20% of players want something that's impossible in an MMO.  They want to be the unique hero.

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Not quite right, nowhere does it say hero. It just means a unique position within the game, such as commander of a kingdoms army or the title of best bard or smith. It doesn't so much matter what it is, just that it's something earned by outdoing every other player. Something unique earned through ones own ability. Being the hero isn't out of the question, but u would have to earn it.


    Originally posted by Merilirem
    That's the point of this pole,to start a discussion on which aspect are more appropriate and should be focused on. Having every choice isn't an option yet, but having 10 or something like that is definitely possible. Now I'm not saying the poll is perfect and demonstrates an absolute understanding of anything but it does seem that there would be a market for a game with combat as a secondary concern, development wise. Focus being placed on other aspects when it comes to fleshing and content. Just to live in a world where u don't have to be capable of killing enemies by the dozen just so you can be a smith or collect pretty things.

    I doubt an unscientific poll here would be representative.

    Don't you think devs would have done extensive research before they commit their money on creating these systems?

    I would say combat is by far the most popular with dungeons, quests, raids, battlegrounds and arenas all focus on combat. I think collecting pets/mounts (or other stuff) is also kind of popular given how much you can collect in many of these games. Being a farmer, i don't know, although there is a large population playing farmville.

     

    Ok I understand your point. Yes I think they do market research, yes I think lots of people enjoy raids and stuff. However it doesn't change the fact that all games in existence are fairly terrible. The graphics are fine, the technology is getting better each year. The problem lies with the laziness and lack of integrity when it comes to making a game. So many perfectly plausible games are just ruined by easily avoidable completely illogical flaws. People are either not trying or constrained by some sort of upper level management issues. The end result is the same. Just because things are the way they are, doesn't mean it's the best way. Please forget the farmer thing, as it was only an example. I'm not saying lots of people want to be farmers, I just don't think any possibility should be ignored. To assume is to stunt the pursuit of knowledge, if you assume everyones likes cats, then bring home a big box of cats you basically just took a huge unfounded risk. A lot of people assume they are heterosexual and never question it. People assumed the world was flat because it looked that way. I don't mean to sound condescending or arrogant or say I know everything. I just want to ask the questions. Asking questions and making mistakes is how we learn after all.

    If a butterfly learnt to speak, to live in human society, paid its bills, had a job, lived in a fancy house and married a human, is it human?

    Now what if that same butterfly knew how to write code better than any human and had years of experience in the game industry, would that make it a game designer?

    If u wouldn't let a construction worker design your house, then why let a programmer design your world?

  • IrylIryl AmersfoortPosts: 15Member
    Choose adventurer, but my perfect path would be to play a Rogue/Ranger type. Explore the world, join guilds and then steal everything just to be on my way again onto the next adventure.
  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Don't you think devs would have done extensive research before they commit their money on creating these systems?

    A common contention here is that devs are lazy non-gamers that don't know what players want. However, if someone is looking to find out what the 162 people that post on these forums each week want in an MMO, this poll is as good as any.

    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

  • spizzspizz BlackForrestPosts: 2,587Member

    Most mmorpgs are just a clone.

    All you do in most of the cases is killing to advance your character.....fps are already about killing, most movies on TV or in the cinema are about killing. At the end its just boring and inflationary.

     

    It seems like the creativity in mmorpgs did stuck and it got even worse with all the upcomming free to play and ingam shop marketing instruments to dump down a game even more.

     

    There are two other points which could be improved with more creativity.

    * In most games you are a "Hollywood" style hero

    * The economics and game content is based on greed, so many other possibilities here to form a better community ingame and 

       therefore a more interesting gameplay with the people of your faction.

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

    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    I'd love to be the epic villain.  99% of games don't allow that.

     

    FYI - anti-hero and villain aren't the same thing.  Generally anti-heroes are still heroes but have major flaws.  Think the Punisher.

    Originally posted by FrodoFragins Ok it seems I accidentally used a term, I meant it in the sense of the counter to heroes, but I admit I made a small mistake. No ones perfect lol
    So 20% of players want something that's impossible in an MMO.  They want to be the unique hero.

    Originally posted by nariusseldon Not quite right, nowhere does it say hero. It just means a unique position within the game, such as commander of a kingdoms army or the title of best bard or smith. It doesn't so much matter what it is, just that it's something earned by outdoing every other player. Something unique earned through ones own ability. Being the hero isn't out of the question, but u would have to earn it.

    Originally posted by Merilirem
    That's the point of this pole,to start a discussion on which aspect are more appropriate and should be focused on. Having every choice isn't an option yet, but having 10 or something like that is definitely possible. Now I'm not saying the poll is perfect and demonstrates an absolute understanding of anything but it does seem that there would be a market for a game with combat as a secondary concern, development wise. Focus being placed on other aspects when it comes to fleshing and content. Just to live in a world where u don't have to be capable of killing enemies by the dozen just so you can be a smith or collect pretty things.

    I doubt an unscientific poll here would be representative.

    Don't you think devs would have done extensive research before they commit their money on creating these systems?

    I would say combat is by far the most popular with dungeons, quests, raids, battlegrounds and arenas all focus on combat. I think collecting pets/mounts (or other stuff) is also kind of popular given how much you can collect in many of these games. Being a farmer, i don't know, although there is a large population playing farmville.

     

    Ok I understand your point. Yes I think they do market research, yes I think lots of people enjoy raids and stuff. However it doesn't change the fact that all games in existence are fairly terrible. The graphics are fine, the technology is getting better each year. The problem lies with the laziness and lack of integrity when it comes to making a game. So many perfectly plausible games are just ruined by easily avoidable completely illogical flaws. People are either not trying or constrained by some sort of upper level management issues. The end result is the same. Just because things are the way they are, doesn't mean it's the best way. Please forget the farmer thing, as it was only an example. I'm not saying lots of people want to be farmers, I just don't think any possibility should be ignored. To assume is to stunt the pursuit of knowledge, if you assume everyones likes cats, then bring home a big box of cats you basically just took a huge unfounded risk. A lot of people assume they are heterosexual and never question it. People assumed the world was flat because it looked that way. I don't mean to sound condescending or arrogant or say I know everything. I just want to ask the questions. Asking questions and making mistakes is how we learn after all.

    You mean terrible to you. If you don't enjoy them, why play at all?

    I highly doubt any of the stuff you said is true for all games. I just played and finished Dishonored several months ago. I don't know how you accuse game makers of "laziness" when obviously a lot of effort have been gone into making of the game. Even a game like D3, which is hated by lots here, has a lot of details and the effort is obviously there.

    And when you say "illogical flaws" .. you need to be more specific.

    And i don't assume anything. I am merely pointing out that evidence suggest many people like combat gameplay (duh .. do i really have to tell you that?). Does that mean that there should be no other games? No .. there are single games, dancing games, sports games, and what-not ... but that does not mena that devs should implement everything you ask for.

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

    Most mmorpgs are just a clone.

    All you do in most of the cases is killing to advance your character.....fps are already about killing, most movies on TV or in the cinema are about killing. At the end its just boring and inflationary.

     

    It seems like the creativity in mmorpgs did stuck and it got even worse with all the upcomming free to play and ingam shop marketing instruments to dump down a game even more.

    To you.

    I don't know about you, but i enjoy movies like The Avengers and while there are quite a bit of character stuff ... a lot of it is about combat and action.

     

  • mrrshann618mrrshann618 Waseca, MNPosts: 227Member Uncommon

    I've always loved just running around the world looking at all the cool stuff that has been coded "just for me!". Games like Rift that let me work at climbing just about any hill I could if I found the right place to jump, or the right place to fall on to a ledge so I could get higher was just great. To find out what was on the other side and seeing into the distance always felt cool. It didn't matter if 100 others had done it.

    Catch is, in a "finite world" where there is no "technological hindrance" (no one sailed from Europe to NA until ships that could were available) explorer is a rather "one time" class.

    Play what you Like. I like SWOTR, Have a referral to get you going!
    -->  http://www.swtor.com/r/nBndbs  <--
    Several Unlocks and a few days game time to make the F2P considerably easier
  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,225Member Uncommon

    Odysseus had it best in the Myth of Er:  sometimes the best life is the life of a common man.

    The characters that I've tended to play the most were the humble ones.  There was simply more material to work with there, from a role playing standpoint.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    Odysseus had it best in the Myth of Er:  sometimes the best life is the life of a common man.

    The characters that I've tended to play the most were the humble ones.  There was simply more material to work with there, from a role playing standpoint.

    We are talking about entertainment, not life.

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,225Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    Odysseus had it best in the Myth of Er:  sometimes the best life is the life of a common man.

    The characters that I've tended to play the most were the humble ones.  There was simply more material to work with there, from a role playing standpoint.

    We are talking about entertainment, not life.

    I don't find the relentless pursuit of überness to be very entertaining.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    Odysseus had it best in the Myth of Er:  sometimes the best life is the life of a common man.

    The characters that I've tended to play the most were the humble ones.  There was simply more material to work with there, from a role playing standpoint.

    We are talking about entertainment, not life.

    I don't find the relentless pursuit of überness to be very entertaining.

    And i don't find doing mundane labor day in and day out very entertaining. I would choose uberness over mundane stuff any time, but of course that is just me.

  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Merilirem
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    I'd love to be the epic villain.  99% of games don't allow that.

     

    FYI - anti-hero and villain aren't the same thing.  Generally anti-heroes are still heroes but have major flaws.  Think the Punisher.

    Originally posted by FrodoFragins Ok it seems I accidentally used a term, I meant it in the sense of the counter to heroes, but I admit I made a small mistake. No ones perfect lol
    So 20% of players want something that's impossible in an MMO.  They want to be the unique hero.

    Originally posted by nariusseldon Not quite right, nowhere does it say hero. It just means a unique position within the game, such as commander of a kingdoms army or the title of best bard or smith. It doesn't so much matter what it is, just that it's something earned by outdoing every other player. Something unique earned through ones own ability. Being the hero isn't out of the question, but u would have to earn it.

    Originally posted by Merilirem
    That's the point of this pole,to start a discussion on which aspect are more appropriate and should be focused on. Having every choice isn't an option yet, but having 10 or something like that is definitely possible. Now I'm not saying the poll is perfect and demonstrates an absolute understanding of anything but it does seem that there would be a market for a game with combat as a secondary concern, development wise. Focus being placed on other aspects when it comes to fleshing and content. Just to live in a world where u don't have to be capable of killing enemies by the dozen just so you can be a smith or collect pretty things.

    I doubt an unscientific poll here would be representative.

    Don't you think devs would have done extensive research before they commit their money on creating these systems?

    I would say combat is by far the most popular with dungeons, quests, raids, battlegrounds and arenas all focus on combat. I think collecting pets/mounts (or other stuff) is also kind of popular given how much you can collect in many of these games. Being a farmer, i don't know, although there is a large population playing farmville.

     

    Ok I understand your point. Yes I think they do market research, yes I think lots of people enjoy raids and stuff. However it doesn't change the fact that all games in existence are fairly terrible. The graphics are fine, the technology is getting better each year. The problem lies with the laziness and lack of integrity when it comes to making a game. So many perfectly plausible games are just ruined by easily avoidable completely illogical flaws. People are either not trying or constrained by some sort of upper level management issues. The end result is the same. Just because things are the way they are, doesn't mean it's the best way. Please forget the farmer thing, as it was only an example. I'm not saying lots of people want to be farmers, I just don't think any possibility should be ignored. To assume is to stunt the pursuit of knowledge, if you assume everyones likes cats, then bring home a big box of cats you basically just took a huge unfounded risk. A lot of people assume they are heterosexual and never question it. People assumed the world was flat because it looked that way. I don't mean to sound condescending or arrogant or say I know everything. I just want to ask the questions. Asking questions and making mistakes is how we learn after all.

    You mean terrible to you. If you don't enjoy them, why play at all?

    I highly doubt any of the stuff you said is true for all games. I just played and finished Dishonored several months ago. I don't know how you accuse game makers of "laziness" when obviously a lot of effort have been gone into making of the game. Even a game like D3, which is hated by lots here, has a lot of details and the effort is obviously there.

    And when you say "illogical flaws" .. you need to be more specific.

    And i don't assume anything. I am merely pointing out that evidence suggest many people like combat gameplay (duh .. do i really have to tell you that?). Does that mean that there should be no other games? No .. there are single games, dancing games, sports games, and what-not ... but that does not mena that devs should implement everything you ask for.

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    I don't really play games anymore for the very reasons I'm stating. I keep looking but the progress is virtually nonexistent, I try every new game, every old game I can find, every form of game, but they all fall short. I did however mess up in my previous post, forgot an important sentence. When i said laziness, integrity, that they just didn't think things through, and illogical flaws, I was mainly referring to games with an open environment or play style. The difference in ability to make a good game differs enormously between games with a set course like Mario and call of duty, versus those with a more choice based orientation. The best definition in terms of single player games will always be the elder scrolls series. The sheer difference between the detail and ability to interact with the world from morrowind to skyrim is ridiculous. Lack of writing, story and consequences for your actions have basically just made skyrim into an offline fantasy mmo. It has present many of the same problems, and more. I will admit it was my disappointment with the direction they have taken which was behind my need to start this discussion. While not every game has the same problems, all open worlds possess the same basic structural flaws. A lot of problems seem to stem from the need for companies to make more money by broadening the player base. However in the end anything made to please everyone will just end up disappointing your player base. Now maybe the devs and such are just not good enough to fix these problems or even see them, but either way we are left with games that have been made not from a labor of love, but are manufactured products with outdated mindsets. If we don't try to better ourselves and understand why things are, we can never truly succeed. If another Wow level game is to be made, it can't be another clone.
    I have played so many games that remembering all the many individual instances is difficult without something to jog my memory. The only thing I do remember is how when all was said and done, none of it seemed worth remembering. Btw I understand everyones tastes are different, but some things are universal,even if they are unseen.

    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Odysseus had it best in the Myth of Er:  sometimes the best life is the life of a common man.

    The characters that I've tended to play the most were the humble ones.  There was simply more material to work with there, from a role playing standpoint.

    We are talking about entertainment, not life.

     

    Just because it's entertainment doesn't mean it should be shallow, books are less flashy then movies but often hold a much more enjoyable experience within. A life that isn't yours isn't real, but bends to your will.

    If a butterfly learnt to speak, to live in human society, paid its bills, had a job, lived in a fancy house and married a human, is it human?

    Now what if that same butterfly knew how to write code better than any human and had years of experience in the game industry, would that make it a game designer?

    If u wouldn't let a construction worker design your house, then why let a programmer design your world?

  • InFlamestwoInFlamestwo HindPosts: 662Member

    I wish crafting and harvesting was better made in games, like in Vanguard: Saga of heroes. You can build your own house, build a guildhouse,build ships, endgame armour and weapons, jewels etc.

    I would defentively become a craftsman warrior that sailed the seas, climbed mountains and adventures with unknown players, have a family at my house in the forest and hunt boar and deers and prepare food etc.

    image

  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Odysseus had it best in the Myth of Er:  sometimes the best life is the life of a common man. The characters that I've tended to play the most were the humble ones.  There was simply more material to work with there, from a role playing standpoint.

    We are talking about entertainment, not life.

    I don't find the relentless pursuit of überness to be very entertaining.

    And i don't find doing mundane labor day in and day out very entertaining. I would choose uberness over mundane stuff any time, but of course that is just me.

     


    Can you really not enjoy yourself unless your the big uber main character, even though it's an illusion? The main point is that you don't need to chose between playing a simple life, an explorer, or attempting to overcome the dark forces of evil through might, magic or glowing sticks and psychic powers. It's fully possible to make a game where u can chose, and so can everyone else. A game where every choice, every step and path not taken, all the failures, successes, and even those where no such clear distinction can be found forge the unique being that is your character.

    If you would prefer to just play the path chosen for you, you can always easily avoid games that don't tell you what to do, or guide your every move. It's not for anyone but you to say.

    If a butterfly learnt to speak, to live in human society, paid its bills, had a job, lived in a fancy house and married a human, is it human?

    Now what if that same butterfly knew how to write code better than any human and had years of experience in the game industry, would that make it a game designer?

    If u wouldn't let a construction worker design your house, then why let a programmer design your world?

  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member
    .

    You overlooked EVE.

     

    Eve is the only reasonable game I have seen in terms of player freedom. If all games were as interesting I would have much less reason to pursue the topic. It does however have some things I take issue with. Some of this may be personal preference like all things but here are my thoughts. Training skills without actually doing anything is by no means engaging, it may take thought but not effort. I believe appropriate mini game style actions should be taken to advance a skill, whether it's real time or not doesn't make a whole lot of difference in the lack effort, skill and experience that should be a staple of advancing anything. You don't get better at things without doing them after all. Well I guess that's the only skill based problem I can think of. The supply demand issues are more a technical issue and do not require too much thought at this time, as their system is fairly adequate. On an unrelated to skills note, escaping/overcoming the law should be part of the game, not a punishable offense. What happens in the game world should stay in the game world. In the end however it is a game limited to flying around in space, you can't play without being a pilot. Not that that's a bad thing, just a fact.

    If a butterfly learnt to speak, to live in human society, paid its bills, had a job, lived in a fancy house and married a human, is it human?

    Now what if that same butterfly knew how to write code better than any human and had years of experience in the game industry, would that make it a game designer?

    If u wouldn't let a construction worker design your house, then why let a programmer design your world?

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Merilirem
    Just because it's entertainment doesn't mean it should be shallow, books are less flashy then movies but often hold a much more enjoyable experience within. A life that isn't yours isn't real, but bends to your will.

    That is just rubbish generalization. I read and watch movies. They give different types of enjoyment. It is just wrong that books are much more enjoyable.

    The Avenger is as enjoyable as the Foundation .. just in different ways .. one appeal to intellectual curiosity, one appeal to the primal need of "hulk smash".

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Merilirem
    Can you really not enjoy yourself unless your the big uber main character, even though it's an illusion? The main point is that you don't need to chose between playing a simple life, an explorer, or attempting to overcome the dark forces of evil through might, magic or glowing sticks and psychic powers. It's fully possible to make a game where u can chose, and so can everyone else. A game where every choice, every step and path not taken, all the failures, successes, and even those where no such clear distinction can be found forge the unique being that is your character. If you would prefer to just play the path chosen for you, you can always easily avoid games that don't tell you what to do, or guide your every move. It's not for anyone but you to say.

    How simple? I don't think i will enjoy myself if the gameplay is about farming, and how to raise chicken the best.

    And illusion of being powerful, and mow down tons of digital goblins with my choice of magic is much preferable.

  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Merilirem
    Just because it's entertainment doesn't mean it should be shallow, books are less flashy then movies but often hold a much more enjoyable experience within. A life that isn't yours isn't real, but bends to your will.

    That is just rubbish generalization. I read and watch movies. They give different types of enjoyment. It is just wrong that books are much more enjoyable.

    The Avenger is as enjoyable as the Foundation .. just in different ways .. one appeal to intellectual curiosity, one appeal to the primal need of "hulk smash".

    I fully understand the joys of hulk smashing Loki, which was awesome. I simply mean that an intellectual pursuit, such as reading is deeper and more thought provoking, entrancing if you will, than your average movie of the same vein. I in no way meant to undermine movies or the thrill of visuals being thrown in your face. Movies are more relaxing in a way, since they don't require the same effort. I simply wished to use movies and books as an example. A good game after all can provide both visuals and deep story, dragging the player into a world of fantasy in a way which is hard for entirely visual or written experiences. I in no way wish to say that any form of entertainment is more valid than another, like you said simply in different ways.

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Merilirem

    Can you really not enjoy yourself unless your the big uber main character, even though it's an illusion? The main point is that you don't need to chose between playing a simple life, an explorer, or attempting to overcome the dark forces of evil through might, magic or glowing sticks and psychic powers. It's fully possible to make a game where u can chose, and so can everyone else. A game where every choice, every step and path not taken, all the failures, successes, and even those where no such clear distinction can be found forge the unique being that is your character. If you would prefer to just play the path chosen for you, you can always easily avoid games that don't tell you what to do, or guide your every move. It's not for anyone but you to say.

    How simple? I don't think i will enjoy myself if the gameplay is about farming, and how to raise chicken the best.

    And illusion of being powerful, and mow down tons of digital goblins with my choice of magic is much preferable.

     

    When I said simple I did not mean the game play, I simply meant the station. An epic hero who saved the world or a queen who rules with an iron fist are both much less "simple" than the idea of exploring the world or living a cosy home life, hoping the epic hero succeeds. A simple life could entail many things, a mercenary, shopkeep, hunter, basically anything. Instead of simple perhaps humble would be more appropriate. Yes I think that would help alleviate the misunderstanding, which I am most sorry I have caused. It's sometimes hard to find the words to make everyone understand what your saying. The gameplay for anything you do should be engaging and enjoyable.

    If a butterfly learnt to speak, to live in human society, paid its bills, had a job, lived in a fancy house and married a human, is it human?

    Now what if that same butterfly knew how to write code better than any human and had years of experience in the game industry, would that make it a game designer?

    If u wouldn't let a construction worker design your house, then why let a programmer design your world?

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Merilirem
     
    I fully understand the joys of hulk smashing Loki, which was awesome. I simply mean that an intellectual pursuit, such as reading is deeper and more thought provoking, entrancing if you will, than your average movie of the same vein. I in no way meant to undermine movies or the thrill of visuals being thrown in your face. Movies are more relaxing in a way, since they don't require the same effort. I simply wished to use movies and books as an example. A good game after all can provide both visuals and deep story, dragging the player into a world of fantasy in a way which is hard for entirely visual or written experiences. I in no way wish to say that any form of entertainment is more valid than another, like you said simply in different ways.

    ANd to expand on the point .. there are different style of entertaining gameplay experience, as different from books to movies.

    I recently play a puzzle game on my iPad called The ROOM. Great game. Nothing but thinking and making connection .. more like a book. But at the same time, on the other spectrum, games does not have to be deep in story to be good. Diablo has a very thin story, but deep in combat mechanics .. and awesome as you can blow up many mobs at the same time.

    I think it is a mistake to think that a MMO has to have this, or has to have that .. it is simply a matter of preference. Some enjoy playing a MMO like a SP game. Some enjoy playing a MMO like a lobby co-op game. Some enjoy a MMO as a world. Not everyone needs a deep world with a real population to enjoy a MMO.

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,255Member Uncommon

    I have a question. In games that allow a more non combat role, like older MMO, how many crafting professions could you have at a single time?

    Was it locked to a few at a time like current mmo?

    image

  • zekeofevzekeofev Mesa, AZPosts: 233Member
    Originally posted by MMOExposed

    I have a question. In games that allow a more non combat role, like older MMO, how many crafting professions could you have at a single time?

    Was it locked to a few at a time like current mmo?

    Depends on the game. SWG and UO had skill point at a time limits and games like AO rewards specialization but were technically unlimited.

     

    Man I miss heavy involved crafting. I was one of the 3 people on the server that could make black dye in AO for the longest time.

Sign In or Register to comment.