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!

Is this the birth of a new mmo genre?

MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member

I recently posted the thread/poll below asking people what aspect of an mmo people most enjoyed. 

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/373395/page/1

 

The results so far and conversations within have helped affirm my own thoughts and brought me to this new thread

 

I dream of a world where games are more than roles we act out,  of a virtual world that asks nothing of us. In our everyday lives; 

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all players are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

 

Life is a perfect game, a game should likewise be a perfect life.

 

Such a world would hold us in its arms, but never so tightly as to strangle and deflate us.

 

You may state that such games already exist, but do they? A game in which you have the right to not bear arms, yet at the same time can take them up for what you hold dear. A world willing to let you find your own way, no matter what it may be.

 

Do you know what a self determining gaming genre without the strictest roles we have taken as fact would be called? I do not. 

 

Such a genre cannot exist while we sit on idle hands waiting for this age of programmed destiny to end. Let me hear you, let everyone hear you, your voices full of sorrow. The voices of those who have had a dream crushed by the cold indifference of money and it's influence on those who decide our fates.

 

Tell me now, what is our future and what is its name?

 

 

 

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?

«1

Comments

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member

    Huh?

     

    Not sure I really know where you are going with this but I guess my answer is 'real life'. Of course that is if I could actually get to the core of your point through all that other crap.

  • ScalplessScalpless SnowballvillePosts: 1,395Member Uncommon
    Uh, what? So you want a sandbox with lots of combat-free activities?
  • XAPKenXAPKen Northwest, INPosts: 4,905Member Uncommon

    Voted No, other...  Read the post, looked at the other thread...  and I still don't have a clue what the question is.

     

    Care to be a bit less esoteric?


    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now turned Amateur Game Developer.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  Realm Lords 2 on MMORPG.com
  • jimdandy26jimdandy26 salem, ORPosts: 527Member
    Second Life already exists.

    I did battle with ignorance today, and ignorance won.

    To exercise power costs effort and demands courage. That is why so many fail to assert rights to which they are perfectly entitled - because a right is a kind of power but they are too lazy or too cowardly to exercise it. The virtues which cloak these faults are called patience and forbearance.

  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member

    Originally posted by Scalpless
    Uh, what? So you want a sandbox with lots of combat-free activities?

    Originally posted by Maelwydd

    Huh?

     

    Not sure I really know where you are going with this but I guess my answer is 'real life'. Of course that is if I could actually get to the core of your point through all that other crap.

    Originally posted by XAPGames

    Voted No, other...  Read the post, looked at the other thread...  and I still don't have a clue what the question is.

     

    Care to be a bit less esoteric?

     All your responses were fairly expected and I apologies for being as XAPGames stated , a little too esoteric. Describing something without a frame of reference, so that everyone understands, can however be difficult. This was my best initial attempt. To be extremely simplistic, not that it's a complicated idea, a game where your role is undecided. Until you as the player find your way through the virtual world before you and arrive at your chosen place. In games today we are always bound by some "understanding" whether it's being a fighter or building a city from a gods eye view. I simply propose the idea of a game with freedom to choose. The setting mechanics and other specifics can be decided on a personal basis. Rather than a sandbox with combat free activities, I mean a game where you don't require combat. A game where your existence isn't automatically centered around any single aspect and can be chosen at your leisure. At the same time of course what happens in the world would affect those that live in it. If you don't fight, you can run or have someone else fight for you. Not everyone can do everything by themselves, but i wouldnt stop them from trying either. Did this help at all or are you still unsure about what I mean?

    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?

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,496Member Uncommon

    The problem with this game and the difficulty of making it is the scope and the lack of focus of what the game would be "good" at.

    What I am saying is games where combat is not a central role tend to have crappy combat, games where crafting and building is not central tend to have those systems be inferior.

    To have a game that is so open to offer all these possibilities, all of them would have to be done at a highly focused level to be enticing, otherwise players would simply focus at whatever is done the best and with most polish and gravitate towards that.

    I think the idea is awesome, but the difficulty of bringing this game to life with all systems working and being equally compelling is beyond what any Dev team would be willing to even attempt.

    Don't get me wrong an indie studio might take a crack at something like this, but I bet you that combat, crafting, diplomacy, community, and all other in game systems would be very crappy in comparison to what well focused games offer.

  • emikochanemikochan StaffordPosts: 284Member
    it's called a sandbox mmo

    image

  • MicManMicMan LudwigshafenPosts: 5Member

    Yes, sandbox MMOs seem to be the answer to most questions right now.

    While a great many people still enjoy themeparks (well, at least one themepark) more and more players seem to be burnt out on them.

    However sandboxes tend to be more than a bit rougher with much steeper learning curves and difficult to balance systems, in short they are still considered taking a risk in a niche market.

    I myself look forward to the "age of sandboxes" and games like Pathfinder Online.

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Anchorage, AKPosts: 1,788Member
    Most of the people complaining about MMO's being too themepark or not sandbox enough, just need to go out and get a table top RPG started with some friends.

    You make me like charity

  • VolkonVolkon Sterling, VAPosts: 3,788Member
    HOW ABOUT GLOBAL THERMONUCLEAR WAR?

    Oderint, dum metuant.
    image

  • GreyfaceGreyface Detroit, MIPosts: 390Member
    If I read through all your highfalutin language correctly, I think the thing you described is called a "Sandbox MMO."  In the old days, we used to call them "MMOs" without any adjective.
  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member

    Originally posted by DMKano

    The problem with this game and the difficulty of making it is the scope and the lack of focus of what the game would be "good" at.

    What I am saying is games where combat is not a central role tend to have crappy combat, games where crafting and building is not central tend to have those systems be inferior.

    To have a game that is so open to offer all these possibilities, all of them would have to be done at a highly focused level to be enticing, otherwise players would simply focus at whatever is done the best and with most polish and gravitate towards that.

    I think the idea is awesome, but the difficulty of bringing this game to life with all systems working and being equally compelling is beyond what any Dev team would be willing to even attempt.

    Don't get me wrong an indie studio might take a crack at something like this, but I bet you that combat, crafting, diplomacy, community, and all other in game systems would be very crappy in comparison to what well focused games offer.

    Originally posted by MicMan

    Yes, sandbox MMOs seem to be the answer to most questions right now.

    While a great many people still enjoy themeparks (well, at least one themepark) more and more players seem to be burnt out on them.

    However sandboxes tend to be more than a bit rougher with much steeper learning curves and difficult to balance systems, in short they are still considered taking a risk in a niche market.

    I myself look forward to the "age of sandboxes" and games like Pathfinder Online.

    Originally posted by asmkm22
    Most of the people complaining about MMO's being too themepark or not sandbox enough, just need to go out and get a table top RPG started with some friends.

     

     

    Originally posted by Greyface
    If I read through all your highfalutin language correctly, I think the thing you described is called a "Sandbox MMO."  In the old days, we used to call them "MMOs" without any adjective.

    The sandbox is a step in the right direction to be sure, however the primary interest is still non optional. I understand it would take quite a bit of work to keep balanced content over a variety rather than focus on a single choice and still have the required level of quality one would expect. A decade ago it was absolutely impossible, five years ago it was still impossible. I however after much research on the subject have come to the conclusion that now is the time to start trying.  Your also right that in the past people were more open, but now we have become too jaded to see what's right over the hill, so to speak. Sandbox came out of the need to redefine a slight change in the nature of gaming. I simply think that change is not yet enough, that we should re-examine the possibility of a more realistic gaming experience. All it takes is one well made game. One willing party to take a chance on whether they can pull off what some might call the holy grail of online gaming. Not that everyone enjoys such an emmersive experience of course. Everything I say is simply a question to others based on my own knowledge and experience on the matter.  To ask why is a wonderful thing afterall, is it not?

    I also mean no disrespect to the makers of games but just because they couldn't pull off a more open game doesn't mean it can't be done. It just means that those before have made mistakes or even simply not wanted to. Whatever the reason my research on the matter suggests its highly possible starting with out current level of technology. As I mention from time to time, new things take vision, will and skill to bring about. Passion helps, money helps obtain, but without the will there is no way.

     

    Also to tabletop guy, your right that without technical limitation it's easier to make more flexible gaming. The only problem lies in the limited number of other players. A world with 4 or even 20 people is still fairly empty. Npcs can only do so much and alot of noncombatant persuasions become empty without someone to use what you make or benefit from whatever it is you do. That is the  reason mmos are at the same time as being the hardest to implement free will into, are the most in need of it. Until we advance AI tehnology enough to fool us, humans are the best and only option. Not to mention some people lack the imagination to enjoy less visual mediums, nothing wrong with that, I lack the ability to do those stupid number puzzles on IQ tests, just how we are. 

     

    If I missed anything feel free to mention it, I look forward to a constructive discussion. Also the poll question is afterall a question I'm  interested in the outcome.

    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?

  • MicManMicMan LudwigshafenPosts: 5Member

    I wonder what, for instance, Blizzard works on as a sequel to WoW.

    I would bet it's not a themepark MMO.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    'Genre' is entirely the wrong word for what you are trying to describe...
  • AdamantineAdamantine NowherePosts: 3,514Member
    Originally posted by Greyface
    If I read through all your highfalutin language correctly, I think the thing you described is called a "Sandbox MMO."  In the old days, we used to call them "MMOs" without any adjective.

    In the old days = when you did talk with nobody but people playing UO (or whatever) with you ?

    Meridian 59, EverQuest, Dark Age of Camelot and many other early MMOs are all NOT sandboxes.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,638Member Uncommon
    MAME Online

    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

  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member

    Originally posted by MicMan

    I wonder what, for instance, Blizzard works on as a sequel to WoW.

    I would bet it's not a themepark MMO.

    Well personally I Doubt they would stick with something everyone's doing since they already won that argument with wow. What do you think they would do??

    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    'Genre' is entirely the wrong word for what you are trying to describe...

    Well what word should I use? What am I trying to describe? This is exactly the reason I asked if it was a new genre, because I lacked a more appropriate word which could be understood by others. I'm more than happy to hear your thoughts on the matter.

    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    MAME Online

    Ok, I'm not sure at all what you mean. Would you please elaborate?

    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
    Originally posted by jimdandy26
    Second Life already exists.
    Well while second life is an absolutely wonderful existence and shares similarities with what I propose, it is not quite the same. Distinc differences exist which radically alter the experience. I propose a game world created by the developers like we use now. However I have nothing against people being blue to manipulate whatever they can. Your ability to manipulate the world would be decided by the worlds rules, whatever they may be. You would live in this world and play by its rules just like you do in your everyday lives. This allows for a kind of consistent fantasy. To me atleaat a game should be entertaining, providing you with some sort of challenge. Whether you chose to challenge a dragon or a horseshoe, or even play golf on an artificially created nebula with the heads of little green men is entirely up to you and the setting your inhabiting. Second life is not bound by such concrete laws of physics and has no actual challenges as far I have experienced. It's more of an collective imagining. A place to express your own alter egos and socialize with others. Which don't get me wrong is absolutely wonderful.

    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?

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon

    MMORPGs are just distilled versions of the good American life: you wander into the wilderness with nothing, where every bit of work you do is rewarded with additional power and wealth.  Amassing power and wealth is simply an application of the old bourgeois formula: it is there for everyone who puts forth the effort to earn it.

    MMORPGs give those who do not experience the good American life a chance to experience what the good American life is like.  Because we don't all start at level 1 in reality, there's hardly any wilderness to wander into that hasn't already been claimed, and the vast majority of us are working harder and harder only to get poorer and poorer.

    MMOs aren't a reflection of reality.  They are the manifestation of what reality ought to look like.  As Baudrillard would say, MMOs are a "hyperreality."

    I believe that we wouldn't find MMOs so appealing if life resembled MMOs, if "life was a perfect game," as the OP says.  The fact that MMOs are already "perfect lives" is the reason we play them.  Because it is nice to know that we have a chance at some rare loot when we pwn bosses, when we work for bosses that can't be pwned, and don't drop any loot we can keep when we do pwn them.

    __________________________
    "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

  • Raithe-NorRaithe-Nor Moscow, IDPosts: 315Member
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    MMORPGs are just distilled versions of the good American life: you wander into the wilderness with nothing, where every bit of work you do is rewarded with additional power and wealth.  Amassing power and wealth is simply an application of the old bourgeois formula: it is there for everyone who puts forth the effort to earn it.

    Actually MMO's were originally designed to follow the RPG formula, meaning storytelling with dynamic (changing) characters.  The common theme of rags to riches follows the general trend in fantasy literature - adventuring brings challenges that offer wealth, success at those challenges gives a character greater knowledge and skill.  The object of the game from the player's point of view never really had much to do with the skill, power, or wealth.  The object was the story, and it could just as well be tragic as it could be heroic.

    MMOs worked best when story was the purpose.  Combat in open worlds generally ONLY works if story is the purpose.  Until someone (anyone) is able to return story to its purpose, the point of having thousands of people in the same gaming instance will continue to elude the self-deluded.

  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    MMORPGs are just distilled versions of the good American life: you wander into the wilderness with nothing, where every bit of work you do is rewarded with additional power and wealth.  Amassing power and wealth is simply an application of the old bourgeois formula: it is there for everyone who puts forth the effort to earn it.

    MMORPGs give those who do not experience the good American life a chance to experience what the good American life is like.  Because we don't all start at level 1 in reality, there's hardly any wilderness to wander into that hasn't already been claimed, and the vast majority of us are working harder and harder only to get poorer and poorer.

    MMOs aren't a reflection of reality.  They are the manifestation of what reality ought to look like.  As Baudrillard would say, MMOs are a "hyperreality."

    I believe that we wouldn't find MMOs so appealing if life resembled MMOs, if "life was a perfect game," as the OP says.  The fact that MMOs are already "perfect lives" is the reason we play them.  Because it is nice to know that we have a chance at some rare loot when we pwn bosses, when we work for bosses that can't be pwned, and don't drop any loot we can keep when we do pwn them.

    Well everyone has their own preferences. I just personally don't think a life in which you get everything handed to you and nothing makes sense is all that interesting. Maybe it's just because I have such an easy life, however getting praised for doing nothing is never as enjoyable as earning it. If everyone is above average that just means everyone is average. Feel free to soothe the hardships of life with fluff all you want, that's your right. Just don't assume anything and be open to new experiences, even if they take some effort.

    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?

  • LizardoneLizardone baltimore, MDPosts: 93Member
    An MMO without PvP? I am in.
  • MyTabbycatMyTabbycat SP, MOPosts: 312Member
    Your statement was too vague so I didn't vote in your poll.
  • MeriliremMerilirem Port AugustaPosts: 77Member
    Originally posted by MyTabbycat
    Your statement was too vague so I didn't vote in your poll.

    Fair enough. It basically just means a game with a free form start and a more loosely set path. For example, choose race, name, starting outfit/appearance and drop into the game. From random or prechosen start point within a relatively safe area, explore and find things out. Eventually figure out your likes and choose something more specific to do, or not. Does that help?

    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?

  • Godshelp12Godshelp12 Let me hide city, WAPosts: 30Member Uncommon
    edited August 12

    [Delete]

    Post edited by Godshelp12 on
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.