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!

Can an MMO have too much content?

2

Comments

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member

    Let me think about this question logically.

    One game contains of a subset of all the gaming I could do.  If I decide it has too many options for what to do, then what's the alternative?  If I look for a new game, that meaning I've choosen to open up *more* options for what to do.   So on the grounds of pure logic alone, I would argue that no, a game can never have "too many options".

    What it sounds like to me is that the OP is projecting a completionist personality and is not seeing a nice series of plateaus that they can strive for.

     

  • greenreengreenreen Punchoo, AKPosts: 2,101Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by maplestone

    Let me think about this question logically.

    One game contains of a subset of all the gaming I could do.  If I decide it has too many options for what to do, then what's the alternative?  If I look for a new game, that meaning I've choosen to open up *more* options for what to do.   So on the grounds of pure logic alone, I would argue that no, a game can never have "too many options".

    What it sounds like to me is that the OP is projecting a completionist personality and is not seeing a nice series of plateaus that they can strive for.

     

    Me, completionist?

    Nah, in GW2 I was wearing green gear when there was yellow and orange as better available.

    I didn't do dailies everyday though I played daily.

    I didn't finish map completion.

    I didn't even finish my personal story.

    I didn't care at all about titles.

    The only thing I completed was getting to player level cap and only one of my two crafts was leveled max. That's really only because of tradition. Each new game my first character always makes consumables - potions, food, whatever is available. I've learned over time that they pay off the best versus making gear when it drops. People always like to test consumables too and buy them to see if they give an appreciable edge.

    I spent more time playing with my character testing build and finding broken skills and doing PVP for no reward and just a money sink really. My PVP bonuses never worked so I didn't even get those (game bug)though I played on a Tier 1 server meaning we had the most active and challenging PVP. We had over 50 people at a time using portals to sneak up on you everywhere. The only thing you could complete reliably was respawning and paying for armor repair. :P

    Hell, I'm paying sub for a game I barely login to twice a month. I'd be pretty far from a completionist.

    Thanks for all the input so far everyone, been good reading seeing other's ideas.

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member
    Originally posted by greenreen

    Nah, in GW2 I was wearing green gear when there was yellow and orange as better available.

    There is a concept called "The Paradox of Choice" where adding more options just leaves you feeling less happy with your choice, whatever it is.

    There's actually a long tangent I could go off on here on my theory of why game designers have over-estimated the interest in story because questing systems were very good at breaking the paradox-of-choice rut people would find themselves in when they had the freedom to go anywhere and fight any mob.

  • toddzetoddze no where, OKPosts: 2,155Member
    Originally posted by greenreen

    Has anyone ever been in a game and found themselves saying, there is too much to do, I can't possibly play this game?

     

    How much is too much or is it never too much.

     

    Can you prioritize what you want to excel at and the rest accept mediocrity letting someone else excel at that portion if they choose that as their priority.

     

    How do completionists deal with too much content or does it just encourage them to spend time on alts spreading out talents that must be specialized to a single character.

     

    As a sideline on the topic, do you consider daily/weekly/monthly tracking systems content themselves? I expect they might get brought up so it makes sense to include them on the table.

     

     

    Is there such a thing as too much fun?

    Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
    Now Playing: N/A
    Worst MMO: FFXIV
    Favorite MMO: FFXI

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon

    Never can be too much. Often there isn't enough.

    Only time you hear someone complaining about too much content is usually from a person limited to casual playing and is unhappy they can't do it all. Causals need to realize they can't be completionists.

     

    Do you consider daily/weekly/monthly tracking systems content themselves?

    Yes, that is content but very shallow content. It works if you can put up with the grind, which is often going to be raiders.

  • TheocritusTheocritus Gary, INPosts: 3,734Member Uncommon
       Vanguard probably has too much content (well maybe too big of a world is a better way of saying it) and EQ1 has too much content (so much so that last I heard about 80-90% of the zones no one even goes in anymore).....Usually most players find the way of least resistance to max level and dont experience the majority of content anyway.
  • EnerzealEnerzeal WarringtonPosts: 326Member

    Really does depend on what that content is.

    I have subbed to EQ2 with the intention of playing it, discovering a world I have tried to on many occasions. I find I am assaulted at levels by a hundred different things, and then I see another hundred things that I can't get because of money issues or the fact I don't own the expansion.

    For example the mercenaries feature, lets you recruit a merc to assist you on your travels, killing things and healing you or even tanking for you. This is a feature I need to unlock by spending $40, something I cannot justify. So I lost interest in the game rapidly.

    I know this is a feature, but is it not features that tend to overwhelm, not content? To me content is twenty dungeons instead of ten dungeons, or five battlegrounds as opposed to three.

    Now when all of the features work in harmony, you can have as many as you want to, but when they are added as after thoughts, they can at their best work, in a bad situation detract, and in the worst turn someone away completely.

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,473Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Yes. When the quality suffers.

     You didn't answer fairly, you decided to twist it to "make a smart point".

    Answer it AGAIN without changing any other variable.

     

  • WalicWalic Fort Polk, LAPosts: 41Member

    I would have to say yes and no....

     

    Yes because if its just repeated quest in a new look then I really don't want to waste my time with it.  I want that quality like some people have been saying.  Not run 50 lvls of go kill x y z. 

     

    No because no matter how much you put on there there will see be people that blow through it just to get to the highest lvl as fast as possible.  Which really brings up the question does content really matter too some people.  I smell a new thread be back later lol.

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

    Nah, in GW2 I was wearing green gear when there was yellow and orange as better available.

    There is a concept called "The Paradox of Choice" where adding more options just leaves you feeling less happy with your choice, whatever it is.

    There's actually a long tangent I could go off on here on my theory of why game designers have over-estimated the interest in story because questing systems were very good at breaking the paradox-of-choice rut people would find themselves in when they had the freedom to go anywhere and fight any mob.

    You mean we should return to the old "grind and camp mob spawns until you outlevel those and move on to the next one"?

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

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    You mean we should return to the old "grind and camp mob spawns until you outlevel those and move on to the next one"?

    No.  What I'm saying is that I sometimes see a mental block in discussions that equate quests with story.  Questing systems (that hand the player a series of finite, achievable goal) are an example of a layer of structure that breaks people out of the rut created by the paradox of choice.  Story is just one example of an excuse for having quests.  Bulk order deeds in UO are an example of a different questing mechanic that is not story driven. 

  • AeliousAelious Portland, ORPosts: 2,853Member Uncommon
    Without putting conditions to the "content" that there is more of I would say no. That's for me personally though because this OP has more to do with personal preference of the player rather than the game. If a completionist can't stand that there is more content than can be completed the quality of said content is irrelevant.

    Here's how I see it. If a game has "too much" content there is an air of mystery to the rest of the game world because you know there is a bigger world out there than where you currently are. In a tighter, more compact game where everything is close at hand that mystery is gone to an extent. Imagine it your life in the real world was 10x10 city blocks. Would your view of the world be different than it is now?
  • madazzmadazz A town, ONPosts: 1,564Member Uncommon
    The only content that I have so far grown a great disdain for would be the whole "tier 1, 2, 3, epic, ultra epic, tier 1 epic, tier 2 epic and so on" type. These games always create 2 different communities. The ones who joined early and got to group up to get that far, and the ones who joined late who typically leave when they can't find anyone on Tier 1 because everyone is already working on their EPIC OMG TIER 2 items. Plus, the "content" to support that play style usually means just repeating the same content over and over anyways (Im looking at you DCUO) but at harder levels.
  • dumbo11dumbo11 GuildfordPosts: 134Member

    An MMO has a population.

    An MMO has a social component.

    If your content causes the population to spread out such that the social component fails... then you have too much content.

    Similarly, if your content requires grouping, then a similar situation can develop.

     

    So, yes, depending on the design, you can have too much content.

  • krevrakrevra Kissimmee, FLPosts: 31Member
    The question was simply can a game have too much content, nowhere did it say at the expense of quality. Your overthinking the question. If it is the case that its at expense of quality the question needs to be better structured.
  • MardukkMardukk Posts: 1,556Member Uncommon
    No.  Completionist types may feel overwhelmed, but most others will be perfectly happy picking their own path.  One of the main reasons I find leveling in EQ1 fun is that there are so many leveling paths with some much different loot available.  I get tired in one zone I go level in countless other zones of that level range.
  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by dumbo11

    An MMO has a population.

    An MMO has a social component.

    If your content causes the population to spread out such that the social component fails... then you have too much content.

    Similarly, if your content requires grouping, then a similar situation can develop.

     

    So, yes, depending on the design, you can have too much content.

    This is altering the subject just like including the quality of content. Content that has no social component will fail to make for a social game. The size of it does not matter.

    Similarly? You think grouping content causes the social component to fail? That doesn't make sense.

  • dumbo11dumbo11 GuildfordPosts: 134Member
    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    This is altering the subject just like including the quality of content. Content that has no social component will fail to make for a social game. The size of it does not matter.

    Similarly? You think grouping content causes the social component to fail? That doesn't make sense.

    Imagine you have 1000 players.

    You make 10 zones of content, and each zone (on average) has 100 people.

    You make 100 zones of content, and each zone (on average) has 10 people.

    For a new player, general chat on the first MMO will be lively, and likely dead on the second - depending on level size they may not see any players at all...

    If players do not meet, they do not form relationships, and a definite MMO 'hook' is lost.

    It's an extremely serious problem, SWTOR suffered from the same problem (but a different cause) and was crippled by it.

    ---

    My comment regarding grouping is similar.

    If you need 10 people to form a group, and you have 1000 players and 100 zones, then a large number of zones would be incapable of forming groups.  That would hurt your game.

     

    Few MMOs suffer from 'too much content', but it is certainly possible to have too much content.

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by dumbo11
    Originally posted by mmoguy43

    This is altering the subject just like including the quality of content. Content that has no social component will fail to make for a social game. The size of it does not matter.

    Similarly? You think grouping content causes the social component to fail? That doesn't make sense.

    Imagine you have 1000 players.

    You make 10 zones of content, and each zone (on average) has 100 people.

    You make 100 zones of content, and each zone (on average) has 10 people.

    For a new player, general chat on the first MMO will be lively, and likely dead on the second - depending on level size they may not see any players at all...

    If players do not meet, they do not form relationships, and a definite MMO 'hook' is lost.

    It's an extremely serious problem, SWTOR suffered from the same problem (but a different cause) and was crippled by it.

    ---

    My comment regarding grouping is similar.

    If you need 10 people to form a group, and you have 1000 players and 100 zones, then a large number of zones would be incapable of forming groups.  That would hurt your game.

     

    Few MMOs suffer from 'too much content', but it is certainly possible to have too much content.

    That is assuming much and is limited to a certain setup. And we aren't talking about content anymore(zones =/= content). It is now about the game's space being too large or disconnected from the rest. The game space per player of EVE is spread even more thin than SWTOR and yet it is a more sociable environment. So because of the "due to design" addition of "can there be too much content?" variable is unreliable it can't be used.

    Also, I don't share your opinion that more people bumping into one another more frequently will equal a social experience. It is about what can happen in that interaction.

  • Lovely_LalyLovely_Laly genevaPosts: 734Member

    never had this problem, if are a lot to do, I just take my time.
    more like if game has poor content, I'm getting bored from repetitive stuff & leave.

    try before buy, even if it's a game to avoid bad surprises.
    Worst surprises for me: Aion, GW2

  • MMOGamer71MMOGamer71 Pittsburgh, PAPosts: 1,930Member Common
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Yes. When the quality suffers.

    I'll add when the content is "thrown in" for the sake of a developer saying "we have this feature".

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by mmoguy43
     

    That is assuming much and is limited to a certain setup. And we aren't talking about content anymore(zones =/= content). It is now about the game's space being too large or disconnected from the rest. The game space per player of EVE is spread even more thin than SWTOR and yet it is a more sociable environment. So because of the "due to design" addition of "can there be too much content?" variable is unreliable it can't be used.

    Also, I don't share your opinion that more people bumping into one another more frequently will equal a social experience. It is about what can happen in that interaction.

    Eve has very little content. It just copies everything over and over and over... You wouldn't accept that in a "terrestrial MMORPG".

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

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon
    Sure I would. The content in MMORPGs is already mostly copied anyway. Same creatures/humaniods but different names and skin. Same mission objectives but different item or location. If I could trade a lot of the same type of missions for less but with more gameplay systems, I would.
  • daltaniousdaltanious waPosts: 2,143Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Yes. When the quality suffers.

    In this case even deficit of quests is too much. :-)

     

    Otherwise ... enver ever. Only thing I hate is being forced to move to next area with half quests still unfinished. Like in Wow since I guess Cata. Best solution so far I see in GW2 where level of player adapts to that of area. Incredible solution which makes all quests fun and still need work instead of one shot kills as in other games.

  • g4m3sh4rkg4m3sh4rk Fairfield, MTPosts: 40Member
    Honestly, there can never be too much conent as long as it is delivered clearly. The biggest issue would come from not fully divulging all the proper information which makes the content confusing. Tooltips, tutorials, introduction of content through lore and questing. All great methods for delivering understandable content. Also, the more content you have the better you can cater to the masses. 
2
Sign In or Register to comment.