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!

There is no such thing as a "Content Locust."

13»

Comments

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Cephus404
    Originally posted by Novusod
    Originally posted by eyelolled
    So your argument is that there isn't such a thing as a player that consumes in months, the content produced by years of developers efforts, because some different types of games don't have content?

     

    Is there an echo in here?  There are no content locusts, just poorly designed games that failed to provide enough open ended elements. If said content took years to develop then those were years of wasted efforts on the part of those developers. MMORPGs need to have open ended player driven content if people are going to play these games long term. That is the logic behind my thesis.

    Your thesis is just wrong, there are many self-professed content locusts, myself included.  All I want to do is consume fun content.  When the content stops being fun, or when I've consumed it all, I go elsewhere.

    The amount of content available has no bearing whatsoever on whether people want to consume it like locusts.

    That is the wrong definition of "poorly designed".

    I say a game is well design if it is fun to play. Duration does not matter.

    I didn't write that, but I do agree with you.  He  seems to think that people will stop consuming content for the sake of consuming content, which is what a  content locust is, if there is just more content.  No, that'll just keep them busy longer.  He also seems to think that content locusts are going to go out and create their own content if they are given those tools.  I have zero interest in creating content.  I want to play a game, not write a game.  I've done more than enough content creation in my life, I just want to have a good time and play a game.

    Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
    Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
    Now Playing: None
    Hope: None

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by Cephus404
     

    I didn't write that, but I do agree with you.  He  seems to think that people will stop consuming content for the sake of consuming content, which is what a  content locust is, if there is just more content.  No, that'll just keep them busy longer.  He also seems to think that content locusts are going to go out and create their own content if they are given those tools.  I have zero interest in creating content.  I want to play a game, not write a game.  I've done more than enough content creation in my life, I just want to have a good time and play a game.

    I agree with this post.

    It is similar to wanting to read a book and not write a book.

    I am awful at writing and will never write a novel in my life.

    That doesn't mean I don't have the tools to do so (cause I have notepad! :P).

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • NovusodNovusod Lakewood, NJPosts: 892Member Uncommon

    Just some clification on the thesis.

    The reason I say there is no such thing as a content locust is because that is the way players always played the games. Players always had to get through the content in some way or another. Consuming the content rapidly was just the way players played through the games. Tearing through content was the way players got through the games. "Content locust" is a made up term to excuse game failure and poor design. Players didn't change, it was the games that changed as developers abandoned sandbox in favor of poorly designed themeparks. That is why I say there is no such thing as a content locust.

     

    "Content locust" is a poorly thought up excuse not an actual subset of players. Every player is a content locust if you buy into this excuse. It is ultimately a defeatist mentality. It is like expecting children to not to rip the wraping paper when they open gifts on Christmas morning. Do we call these children Christmas locusts? No, they are just children. That is just the way it is. "Content locust" just means player. The sooner we stop making these excuses and labeling players as "content locusts" it will be a step forward for MMORPG industry.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Novusod
    Just some clification on the thesis.The reason I say there is no such thing as a content locust is because that is the way players always played the games. Players always had to get through the content in some way or another. Consuming the content rapidly was just the way players played through the games. Tearing through content was the way players got through the games. "Content locust" is a made up term to excuse game failure and poor design. Players didn't change, it was the games that changed as developers abandoned sandbox in favor of poorly designed themeparks. That is why I say there is no such thing as a content locust. "Content locust" is a poorly thought up excuse not an actual subset of players. Every player is a content locust if you buy into this excuse. It is ultimately a defeatist mentality. It is like expecting children to not to rip the wraping paper when they open gifts on Christmas morning. Do we call these children Christmas locusts? No, they are just children. That is just the way it is. "Content locust" just means player. The sooner we stop making these excuses and labeling players as "content locusts" it will be a step forward for MMORPG industry.

    Developers aren't calling anyone content locusts. We are. Specifically, this website.

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

  • BladestromBladestrom edinburghPosts: 4,943Member Uncommon
    Content locust: someone who burns through a game as fast as possible while failing to engage their imagination or appreciate anything beyond progress for progress sake. Someone who is not a content locust tends to engage with the game world and their imagination.

    In terms of books a content locust skims as fast as they can to he to the last chapter instead of reading the full book and enjoying the chacterisation and story as the author intended.

    rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar

    Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,277Member Uncommon

    didn't read the thread, but the title gets +1.

     

    Make better games.

  • BladestromBladestrom edinburghPosts: 4,943Member Uncommon
    Content locust is a great term and describes well the % of the gaming population ^^.

    rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar

    Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,762Member Uncommon

    "I say a game is well design if it is fun to play. Duration does not matter"

    When gaming studios are putting millions into making these games and the certainty of them getting a return on invesment is being brought into question, it matters a lot.

    Duration may not matter to you, but it does to many players. More importantly it matters to the gaming company. Already we see MMO design focused on the short term. The changes in finance model and lay offs which have happened within 12 months for SWTOR, TSW and Terra do not bode well for future MMO's. MMO's in the pipeline will already have downgraded their forcasts of after sales profit. This is bad news for the MMO genre because duration does matter.

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

    "I say a game is well design if it is fun to play. Duration does not matter"

    When gaming studios are putting millions into making these games and the certainty of them getting a return on invesment is being brought into question, it matters a lot.

    Duration may not matter to you, but it does to many players. More importantly it matters to the gaming company. Already we see MMO design focused on the short term. The changes in finance model and lay offs which have happened within 12 months for SWTOR, TSW and Terra do not bode well for future MMO's. MMO's in the pipeline will already have downgraded their forcasts of after sales profit. This is bad news for the MMO genre because duration does matter.

    "well" is a matter of perspective. More shorter MMO with better content (but not as much) is totally fine with me. I get that you don't like it. But you don't make up the whole MMO market, do you?

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,255Member Uncommon
    I have to agree.

    image

  • KingJigglyKingJiggly Simpsonville, SCPosts: 777Member

    Yes there are. Content Locusts are people who speed through the content like... locusts. Games fault? Sure. Players fault? Sure. But they are out there.

    And, since they are, Snadboxes seem like they would be the best answer to the problem. However, since the vast, vast majority of people are not content locusts, themeparks will continue coming. So go ahead and go to your sandboxes. They will always be there. And leave us casual themeparkers alone. PLEASE

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

    "I say a game is well design if it is fun to play. Duration does not matter"

    When gaming studios are putting millions into making these games and the certainty of them getting a return on invesment is being brought into question, it matters a lot.

    Duration may not matter to you, but it does to many players. More importantly it matters to the gaming company. Already we see MMO design focused on the short term. The changes in finance model and lay offs which have happened within 12 months for SWTOR, TSW and Terra do not bode well for future MMO's. MMO's in the pipeline will already have downgraded their forcasts of after sales profit. This is bad news for the MMO genre because duration does matter.

    "well" is a matter of perspective. More shorter MMO with better content (but not as much) is totally fine with me. I get that you don't like it. But you don't make up the whole MMO market, do you?

    Why dont you do a poll and see which side has more supporters ;) Bet you your play style will have less, many of the people here are sandbox junkies and people that want more from their games. So yeah he does make up a good portion of the market.

    To me there is no reason not to put them together to make a good game and not catter to one side or the other. Te constant bickering and baiting people that dont agree with someone around here is pathetic. We all want the same thing, no reason in trying to divide the industry.

  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Novusod

    That's right there is no such thing as a content locust. It is a made up term that is brandied about fairly often on the subject of why games fail or see a massive drop off in subs just one month after release. Or more rather it is an excuse why players can completely beat through all the content in games like GW2 or SWTOR in a week.

     

    Our games are NOT small or easymode they say it is players that are content locusts. Those content locusts are insatiable and there is no way to produce enough content that cannot keep them occupied for more than a couple of days. These players are constently rushing through the content, skipping cut scenes and not reading all the dialog. Then those same players are the first to complain when they reach the level cap that there is nothing for them to do. I could go on and on about this mythological creature called the content locust. Woe unto thee who suffers from the ravages of the content locust.

     

    Well the truth is there is no content locust. It is figment of our colective immaginations though a dangerous one at that becuase it distracts from the real issues that modern MMO themeparks are poorly designed and shifts the blame to the players. The phenomenon asociated with content locusts are self made problems. It is fundemental flaw in game design that every story has a built in ending. Pretty much every player will eventually reach that ending and complete the game. It is at that point every player falls into the content locust trap that it is your own fault if you beat the game too quickly. However, it is the developer's fault that this happens for failing to build open ended game play elements into their MMO.

     

    Sandbox games have no ending and thus can never be beaten by the content locust. In a sandbox game the content locust is just another player going about their business co-creating the story that has yet to be writen. If you look at SWG how did one complete the goal of player owned taverns? Or how did one become a 'feared' bounty hunter? There was no magical number you could reach that said ok you are successful tavern owner now or are 'feared" bounty hunter. These were open ended objectives that were left open to interpretation. The players determined those goals not the developers. Some sandbox games had entire player created cities.

     

    Even if you go back to EverQuest which some say is the first themepark the quest in EverQuest was a singlar open ended player goal that never ended. The game was not called EverQuest because the game was full of quests with endings. Everquest was a themepark built on a sandbox goal that 'your' quest never ended. That is the origin of the name.

     

    MMORPGs were player goal focused before the sandbox formula was changed. When developers started making strick themeparks with endings the result is the players got labled as "content locusts" even though the players themselves did not change. Modern MMOs have forgotten their roots and why people play these games and thus the player base is punished and blamed for doing what they always did. It is time bury the idea that players are content locusts and go back to making open ended games that are more sandbox focused.

    I agree that this is a structural issue with the content.  This whole 'end game' concept where you 'run' through levelling content to get to the 'real' game doesn't make sense and is proven to not be sustainable.

    With that said, there ARE gamers who rush through the (easy) content and then COMPLAIN about having nothing to do.  Content Locusts does fit their behavior.  You can rush through content trying to get to the end (regardless of how easy it is to do) and then expect something different when you finish.  Its naive and annoying.

    image
  • HrimnirHrimnir Qeynos, COPosts: 1,597Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Novusod
    Originally posted by eyelolled
    So your argument is that there isn't such a thing as a player that consumes in months, the content produced by years of developers efforts, because some different types of games don't have content?

     

    Is there an echo in here?  There are no content locusts, just poorly designed games that failed to provide enough open ended elements. If said content took years to develop then those were years of wasted efforts on the part of those developers. MMORPGs need to have open ended player driven content if people are going to play these games long term. That is the logic behind my thesis.

    Then your logic fails, miserably.

    We'll jump back to your example of EverQuest.  In everquest there ABSOLUTELY was a "limited" amount of content.  The difference was the mindset of the developers and the mindset of the playerbase.  The idea of an "Endgame" didnt exist.  People enjoyed the process of leveling, and once leveling enjoyed the process of raiding or grouping to obtain better and better gear.  People were ok with it taking months to acheive these goals. We didn't mind spending 4 hours a day, 4 or 5 days a week in the same part of the same dungeon, killing the same mobs, in the same order.  We didnt mind that it took us 5 minutes to run to the entrance of said dungeon.  We didnt mind that dying meant we lost the last 30minutes or more of XP, it actually made you pay attention and try to actually be skillful in your playing of the game.

    The SOLE difference between a game like EQ and a game like a modern "themepark" MMO is the playerbase.  WOW came out and opened the genre up (or twisted it to be something else, but thats another argument) to a broader group of players.  Mostly what it did was brought it what were normally single player RPG players by promising them epic scale and scope and worlds.  The problem is these games didnt set the expectation of time investiture and as a result started lowering the pole to dumb things down and speed things up because it became about making money hand over fist, which meant open your game up to as broad an audience as possible.

    The content locust is absolutely real.  They existed prior to modern themeparks.  One of my best friends is a self admitted content locust.  We used to talk about it 8-10 years ago because he would literally burn through a single player RPG, and then never play it again.  Where as me and some of my other friends would play through it again with a different class or character, etc.  Or play it online.   My "content locust" friend was only concerned about one thing, consuming content.  Once he had seen/heard the story, the actual playing of the game wasnt of concern to him.  SO playing it through as a warrior instead of a mage was pointless to him, because he had already "been there, done that".

    "The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."

    - Friedrich Nietzsche

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,474Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Novusod

    That's right there is no such thing as a content locust. It is a made up term that is brandied about fairly often on the subject of why games fail or see a massive drop off in subs just one month after release. Or more rather it is an excuse why players can completely beat through all the content in games like GW2 or SWTOR in a week.

     

    Our games are NOT small or easymode they say it is players that are content locusts. Those content locusts are insatiable and there is no way to produce enough content that cannot keep them occupied for more than a couple of days. These players are constently rushing through the content, skipping cut scenes and not reading all the dialog. Then those same players are the first to complain when they reach the level cap that there is nothing for them to do. I could go on and on about this mythological creature called the content locust. Woe unto thee who suffers from the ravages of the content locust.

     

    Well the truth is there is no content locust. It is figment of our colective immaginations though a dangerous one at that becuase it distracts from the real issues that modern MMO themeparks are poorly designed and shifts the blame to the players. The phenomenon asociated with content locusts are self made problems. It is fundemental flaw in game design that every story has a built in ending. Pretty much every player will eventually reach that ending and complete the game. It is at that point every player falls into the content locust trap that it is your own fault if you beat the game too quickly. However, it is the developer's fault that this happens for failing to build open ended game play elements into their MMO.

     

    Sandbox games have no ending and thus can never be beaten by the content locust. In a sandbox game the content locust is just another player going about their business co-creating the story that has yet to be writen. If you look at SWG how did one complete the goal of player owned taverns? Or how did one become a 'feared' bounty hunter? There was no magical number you could reach that said ok you are successful tavern owner now or are 'feared" bounty hunter. These were open ended objectives that were left open to interpretation. The players determined those goals not the developers. Some sandbox games had entire player created cities.

     

    Even if you go back to EverQuest which some say is the first themepark the quest in EverQuest was a singlar open ended player goal that never ended. The game was not called EverQuest because the game was full of quests with endings. Everquest was a themepark built on a sandbox goal that 'your' quest never ended. That is the origin of the name.

     

    MMORPGs were player goal focused before the sandbox formula was changed. When developers started making strick themeparks with endings the result is the players got labled as "content locusts" even though the players themselves did not change. Modern MMOs have forgotten their roots and why people play these games and thus the player base is punished and blamed for doing what they always did. It is time bury the idea that players are content locusts and go back to making open ended games that are more sandbox focused.

     Ok, let's replace the term endgame and replace it with the idea, what is going to keep players coming back to play day to day after years of playing?

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,908Member Uncommon
     "content locust" is simply a descriptor for a certain type of gamer, nothing more, nothing less. As for the actual point you're making, yes, some games are not designed with longevity in mind (seemingly). Can't think of much else to say.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

13»
Sign In or Register to comment.