How small of a time frame are we talking about here? 15 minutes, 10 minutes, 2 minutes?
At what point does it begin to get absurd? Maybe there's a point where you have to say to yourself, "I don't have time to play video games right now".
For a themepark pve game, IMO, the point where people want 15 minute runs to have the gear of people who are spending many more hours raiding endgame. They might as well add shops where you can buy gear with cash or in game tokens. Oh wait...
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
I don't see why we can't have short gaming sessions.
There is no reason why a game can't last years, but have whatever content broken up into smaller sections.
Dungeon runs that take hours to complete but can be broken up into many sections. Quests are the same. I can't see any downsides to having a short session be part of a longer experience.
Yup, just like a SP game, have checkpoints within dungeons. You should be able to reach checkpoints in 5-10 minutes so that if you only have a little while to play, you get to a checkpoint, your game is saved and you can log off. If you log off before reaching a checkpoint, you go back to the last checkpoint you reached.
That will work. I prefer ability to save anywhere, but checkpoint is better than nothing.
There is no reason why people shouldn't be able to "save" after each boss/segment in an instanced dungeon.
How small of a time frame are we talking about here? 15 minutes, 10 minutes, 2 minutes?
At what point does it begin to get absurd? Maybe there's a point where you have to say to yourself, "I don't have time to play video games right now".
For a themepark pve game, IMO, the point where people want 15 minute runs to have the gear of people who are spending many more hours raiding endgame. They might as well add shops where you can buy gear with cash or in game tokens. Oh wait...
You confuse about the duration of EACH session vs how many session to play.
It does not take more than 15 min to fight ONE boss in a raid. Just do LFR, and let people choose individual boss to fight. To get all the good stuff, you still have to play lots of 15 min sessions ...
but you don't have to commit to 3 hours long session before you can actually play.
Just my personal opinion. Open world (if done right) beats every lobby based mmorpg combined.
And it is my person opinion that many lobby based games are more fun than every open world MMORPG combined.
Which begs the question, since you've said in other threads there are already too many games available for you to ever play, why don't you play the games you do like, instead of trying to influence change in the few remaining open world mmorpgs to something reminiscent of console rpgs to suit your ftp lobby tastes?
Just my personal opinion. Open world (if done right) beats every lobby based mmorpg combined.
And it is my person opinion that many lobby based games are more fun than every open world MMORPG combined.
Which begs the question, since you've said in other threads there are already too many games available for you to ever play, why don't you play the games you like instead of trying to change all the open world mmorpgs to suit your lobby tastes?
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
How small of a time frame are we talking about here? 15 minutes, 10 minutes, 2 minutes?
At what point does it begin to get absurd? Maybe there's a point where you have to say to yourself, "I don't have time to play video games right now".
For a themepark pve game, IMO, the point where people want 15 minute runs to have the gear of people who are spending many more hours raiding endgame. They might as well add shops where you can buy gear with cash or in game tokens. Oh wait...
You confuse about the duration of EACH session vs how many session to play.
It does not take more than 15 min to fight ONE boss in a raid. Just do LFR, and let people choose individual boss to fight. To get all the good stuff, you still have to play lots of 15 min sessions ...
but you don't have to commit to 3 hours long session before you can actually play.
Well, I think there should be benefits to the hardcore over the 15 minute people. 15 minutes to a boss is too short imo.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Well, I think there should be benefits to the hardcore over the 15 minute people. 15 minutes to a boss is too short imo.
First, most boss fights are under 15 min right now. In fact, most are under 5 min. You only need 15 min to buff up and kill trash. So it is already there. The only difference is that currently most pve MMOs don't let you just fight one boss.
Secondly, why should there be benefits to the hardcore? Their money is just the same as teh 15 min players.
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
How small of a time frame are we talking about here? 15 minutes, 10 minutes, 2 minutes?
At what point does it begin to get absurd? Maybe there's a point where you have to say to yourself, "I don't have time to play video games right now".
I would say 15-30 min.
22 min is an episode of sitcom (without commercial).
I can agree with 30 minutes. Anything less I probably wouldn't bother starting a game.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Originally posted by nariusseldon It is a time to adapt and change.
Or they could be more conservative with their budgets and goals, target the audience who wants something that fits over a grander scale of time and corner the market.
They would get my money for sure.
That's just not going to happen, apart from design mistakes or poor business decisions allowing it to happen.
The demand starts extremely low: few are able or willing to invest the time in a forced, long-session game.
Then the demand is reduced by the fact that existing products already reward long-session gamers! I can do one 10-20 min WOW dungeon in a short session, or I can do an 8-hour marathon session and really advance my character.
The fredom of players to choose their session length is rewarded with better sales.
The last sentence is of course true but better sales doesn't necessarily mean that lesser sales will still make it successful.
Well, look at EVE. the game is what it is. The developers have tried to make the learning curve a bit more palatable but the game is this incredibly deep universe of player interaction. They don't have millions of players. They basically made the game they wanted and then allowed players do discover it.
I don't see why someone couldn't make a game that had more in depth, longer game play experiences and the demographic for those experiences would then play that game provided they did a good job.
I mean "I" would be able to play a game that had longer experiences. Are you saying that I'm the only person left on the planet who is willing to do that? Or maybe there are two of us? And if there are two of us might there not be more? 90k people maybe?
Of course one might have to temper their expectations as far as how "shiny" the game is compared to AAA games out there who might try for millions.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
This is a general statement about the adapting to survive in the marketplace. That is different from "I *want* them to change due to personal preference".
Don't you think devs should adapt to the market place, given the competition, no matter what you personal preference is?
I don't see why someone couldn't make a game that had more in depth, longer game play experiences and the demographic for those experiences would then play that game provided they did a good job.
I don't see what depth has to do with the option of short game sessions.
Break up a dungeon of 4 bosses into 4 independent part do NOT change the depth of the combat experience with each of them. Think about a dungeon with 4 boss that takes you 2 hours to go through. What if now there is a save point after each boss, so you can kill one, go have dinner, and come back for the next one.
There is no change in terms of depth, challenge, except it is more convenient.
In fact, play-time has nothing to do with challenge. A 5 min encounter with an elite or ubder boss on MP10 in D3 (which can be played in 15 min) is more challenging than 3 hours dungeon runs.
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
This is a general statement about the adapting to survive in the marketplace. That is different from "I *want* them to change due to personal preference".
Don't you think devs should adapt to the market place, given the competition, no matter what you personal preference is?
No actually I don't, otherwise we will all end up with less choice, kinda like having nothing but Targets and Wal-Marts to shop at instead of specialized shops that give us those unique items that large chains don't see a "market" for. Just because the masses want something doesn't mean we all do nor should we. Just think of some of the inventions we've seen in our own lifetimes because some"one" decided the status quo wasn't quite cutting if for them? Maybe we should all go back to the days of walking... going faster, farther, and with less effort due to someone being dissatified with what the masses did, what a concept eh?
I don't see why someone couldn't make a game that had more in depth, longer game play experiences and the demographic for those experiences would then play that game provided they did a good job.
I don't see what depth has to do with the option of short game sessions.
Break up a dungeon of 4 bosses into 4 independent part do NOT change the depth of the combat experience with each of them. Think about a dungeon with 4 boss that takes you 2 hours to go through. What if now there is a save point after each boss, so you can kill one, go have dinner, and come back for the next one.
There is no change in terms of depth, challenge, except it is more convenient.
In fact, play-time has nothing to do with challenge. A 5 min encounter with an elite or ubder boss on MP10 in D3 (which can be played in 15 min) is more challenging than 3 hours dungeon runs.
From my perspective, depth may not have much to do with optional short game sessions but it does have everything to do with immersion, the key imo to a great mmorpg. Instead of waiting at some checkpoint because the group you started a dungeon with moved on without you and you now need to find another to get to the next checkpoint, does break immersion. If all you want is a ladder game, go for it, but if you want epic battles in a virtual world.....
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
This is a general statement about the adapting to survive in the marketplace. That is different from "I *want* them to change due to personal preference".
Don't you think devs should adapt to the market place, given the competition, no matter what you personal preference is?
No actually I don't, otherwise we will all end up with less choice, kinda like having nothing but Targets and Wal-Marts to shop at instead of specialized shops that give us those unique items that large chains don't see a "market" for. Just because the masses want something doesn't mean we all do nor should we. Just think of some of the inventions we've seen in our own lifetimes because some"one" decided the status quo wasn't quite cutting if for them? Maybe we should all go back to the days of walking... going faster, farther, and with less effort due to someone being dissatified with what the masses did, what a concept eh?
Status Quo and what the market wants ae two different issues. Sometimes they are the same, sometimes not.
I would counter with your walking example and say many many were not satisfied with the status quo and so when something new came along they were intrigued enough to look anyway.
Any company that does not follow their market and change with their market will die, without exception. That doesn't mean that the companies all have to follow the herd remainor remain status quo... it does mean that once they identify their market, whichever market it is, if that market changes and they don't the company will die.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change.
Time to adapt and change simply because the world has moved on. EVERYTHING is done in 30-second to 15-minute sessions. Facebook, Twitter, Texting, every aspect of our lives has been reduced to much smaller and much faster segments of information, entertainment and business.
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
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
This is a general statement about the adapting to survive in the marketplace. That is different from "I *want* them to change due to personal preference".
Don't you think devs should adapt to the market place, given the competition, no matter what you personal preference is?
No actually I don't, otherwise we will all end up with less choice, kinda like having nothing but Targets and Wal-Marts to shop at instead of specialized shops that give us those unique items that large chains don't see a "market" for. Just because the masses want something doesn't mean we all do nor should we. Just think of some of the inventions we've seen in our own lifetimes because some"one" decided the status quo wasn't quite cutting if for them? Maybe we should all go back to the days of walking... going faster, farther, and with less effort due to someone being dissatified with what the masses did, what a concept eh?
Status Quo and what the market wants ae two different issues. Sometimes they are the same, sometimes not.
I would counter with your walking example and say many many were not satisfied with the status quo and so when something new came along they were intrigued enough to look anyway.
Any company that does not follow their market and change with their market will die, without exception. That doesn't mean that the companies all have to follow the herd remainor remain status quo... it does mean that once they identify their market, whichever market it is, if that market changes and they don't the company will die.
The whole problem with this whole argument is who exactly decides that the "market" has changed? Does the whole market get a say or is it strictly the bean counters that say that since some are willing to swallow hook, line and sinker anything new the rest will follow and damn the rest? Or will there be some who are willing to stand their ground and say heh, we have a loyal following that do not want to rush to endgame but want to live in our virtual world and help us develop new activities and lore as we move forward together and those players provide more than enough profit for us?
The last sentence is of course true but better sales doesn't necessarily mean that lesser sales will still make it successful.
Well, look at EVE. the game is what it is. The developers have tried to make the learning curve a bit more palatable but the game is this incredibly deep universe of player interaction. They don't have millions of players. They basically made the game they wanted and then allowed players do discover it.
I don't see why someone couldn't make a game that had more in depth, longer game play experiences and the demographic for those experiences would then play that game provided they did a good job.
I mean "I" would be able to play a game that had longer experiences. Are you saying that I'm the only person left on the planet who is willing to do that? Or maybe there are two of us? And if there are two of us might there not be more? 90k people maybe?
Of course one might have to temper their expectations as far as how "shiny" the game is compared to AAA games out there who might try for millions.
Of course you're not the only one. Like I said in my prior post: the demographic starts small and gets even smaller due to its overlap with short-session games (which let you play exactly as long as you want, and therefore satisfy both types of players.)
Small doesn't mean nonexistant, but there's really almost no benefit to intentionally cutting off a massive amount of players. Very few types of experiences require long sessions. I've had those experiences, and honestly prefer smaller sessions (of course the overall quality of moment-to-moment gameplay, regardless of session length, is by far the most important element. But given a choice I'd choose a game which offered me more freedom over how long I can play.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change.
Time to adapt and change simply because the world has moved on. EVERYTHING is done in 30-second to 15-minute sessions. Facebook, Twitter, Texting, every aspect of our lives has been reduced to much smaller and much faster segments of information, entertainment and business.
Not everyone... in fact it's the minority that even subscribes to these ad infested mediums.
MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change.
Time to adapt and change simply because the world has moved on. EVERYTHING is done in 30-second to 15-minute sessions. Facebook, Twitter, Texting, every aspect of our lives has been reduced to much smaller and much faster segments of information, entertainment and business.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
This is a general statement about the adapting to survive in the marketplace. That is different from "I *want* them to change due to personal preference".
Don't you think devs should adapt to the market place, given the competition, no matter what you personal preference is?
No actually I don't, otherwise we will all end up with less choice, kinda like having nothing but Targets and Wal-Marts to shop at instead of specialized shops that give us those unique items that large chains don't see a "market" for. Just because the masses want something doesn't mean we all do nor should we. Just think of some of the inventions we've seen in our own lifetimes because some"one" decided the status quo wasn't quite cutting if for them? Maybe we should all go back to the days of walking... going faster, farther, and with less effort due to someone being dissatified with what the masses did, what a concept eh?
Status Quo and what the market wants ae two different issues. Sometimes they are the same, sometimes not.
I would counter with your walking example and say many many were not satisfied with the status quo and so when something new came along they were intrigued enough to look anyway.
Any company that does not follow their market and change with their market will die, without exception. That doesn't mean that the companies all have to follow the herd remainor remain status quo... it does mean that once they identify their market, whichever market it is, if that market changes and they don't the company will die.
The whole problem with this whole argument is who exactly decides that the "market" has changed? Does the whole market get a say or is it strictly the bean counters that say that since some are willing to swallow hook, line and sinker anything new the rest will follow and damn the rest? Or will there be some who are willing to stand their ground and say heh, we have a loyal following that do not want to rush to endgame but want to live in our virtual world and help us develop new activities and lore as we move forward together and those players provide more than enough profit for us?
There is only one objective measure of what the market wants and that is sales. Thats it. The number of sales of a particular product is the determination of what the market wants.
And I said the company needs to determine what their market wants. In the case of MMO's a particular company's market may not be all gamers, or wow players. Eve's market is probably different than WoW's market, although there is overlap. But the rule applies if your market changes and you don't your company will go under.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I don't see why someone couldn't make a game that had more in depth, longer game play experiences and the demographic for those experiences would then play that game provided they did a good job.
I don't see what depth has to do with the option of short game sessions.
Break up a dungeon of 4 bosses into 4 independent part do NOT change the depth of the combat experience with each of them. Think about a dungeon with 4 boss that takes you 2 hours to go through. What if now there is a save point after each boss, so you can kill one, go have dinner, and come back for the next one.
There is no change in terms of depth, challenge, except it is more convenient.
In fact, play-time has nothing to do with challenge. A 5 min encounter with an elite or ubder boss on MP10 in D3 (which can be played in 15 min) is more challenging than 3 hours dungeon runs.
well 5 minutes is a bit short, but say 30 mins, i kinda agree with you here.
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
This is a general statement about the adapting to survive in the marketplace. That is different from "I *want* them to change due to personal preference".
Don't you think devs should adapt to the market place, given the competition, no matter what you personal preference is?
No actually I don't, otherwise we will all end up with less choice, kinda like having nothing but Targets and Wal-Marts to shop at instead of specialized shops that give us those unique items that large chains don't see a "market" for. Just because the masses want something doesn't mean we all do nor should we. Just think of some of the inventions we've seen in our own lifetimes because some"one" decided the status quo wasn't quite cutting if for them? Maybe we should all go back to the days of walking... going faster, farther, and with less effort due to someone being dissatified with what the masses did, what a concept eh?
Status Quo and what the market wants ae two different issues. Sometimes they are the same, sometimes not.
I would counter with your walking example and say many many were not satisfied with the status quo and so when something new came along they were intrigued enough to look anyway.
Any company that does not follow their market and change with their market will die, without exception. That doesn't mean that the companies all have to follow the herd remainor remain status quo... it does mean that once they identify their market, whichever market it is, if that market changes and they don't the company will die.
The whole problem with this whole argument is who exactly decides that the "market" has changed? Does the whole market get a say or is it strictly the bean counters that say that since some are willing to swallow hook, line and sinker anything new the rest will follow and damn the rest? Or will there be some who are willing to stand their ground and say heh, we have a loyal following that do not want to rush to endgame but want to live in our virtual world and help us develop new activities and lore as we move forward together and those players provide more than enough profit for us?
There is only one objective measure of what the market wants and that is sales. Thats it. The number of sales of a particular product is the determination of what the market wants.
And I said the company needs to determine what their market wants. In the case of MMO's a particular company's market may not be all gamers, or wow players. Eve's market is probably different than WoW's market, although there is overlap. But the rule applies if your market changes and you don't your company will go under.
hence the emphasis on flashy cutscenes, voice over and in game graphics, even if it makes the game on the rails and instanced to fuck. this is the current trend in big budget games in general though, not just mmos. Us old farts used to PLAY games, the modern trend is to EXPERIENCE games and have a story told at you.
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
This is a general statement about the adapting to survive in the marketplace. That is different from "I *want* them to change due to personal preference".
Don't you think devs should adapt to the market place, given the competition, no matter what you personal preference is?
No actually I don't, otherwise we will all end up with less choice, kinda like having nothing but Targets and Wal-Marts to shop at instead of specialized shops that give us those unique items that large chains don't see a "market" for. Just because the masses want something doesn't mean we all do nor should we. Just think of some of the inventions we've seen in our own lifetimes because some"one" decided the status quo wasn't quite cutting if for them? Maybe we should all go back to the days of walking... going faster, farther, and with less effort due to someone being dissatified with what the masses did, what a concept eh?
Status Quo and what the market wants ae two different issues. Sometimes they are the same, sometimes not.
I would counter with your walking example and say many many were not satisfied with the status quo and so when something new came along they were intrigued enough to look anyway.
Any company that does not follow their market and change with their market will die, without exception. That doesn't mean that the companies all have to follow the herd remainor remain status quo... it does mean that once they identify their market, whichever market it is, if that market changes and they don't the company will die.
The whole problem with this whole argument is who exactly decides that the "market" has changed? Does the whole market get a say or is it strictly the bean counters that say that since some are willing to swallow hook, line and sinker anything new the rest will follow and damn the rest? Or will there be some who are willing to stand their ground and say heh, we have a loyal following that do not want to rush to endgame but want to live in our virtual world and help us develop new activities and lore as we move forward together and those players provide more than enough profit for us?
There is only one objective measure of what the market wants and that is sales. Thats it. The number of sales of a particular product is the determination of what the market wants.
And I said the company needs to determine what their market wants. In the case of MMO's a particular company's market may not be all gamers, or wow players. Eve's market is probably different than WoW's market, although there is overlap. But the rule applies if your market changes and you don't your company will go under.
Sooo, if the company is still selling their product to the same people for the same amount and noone is leaving dissatisfied, then I would argue it's not the market leading the change.
Again, the premise of this argument is that the market is dissatisfied... where's the proof other than people are curious enough to check out a new game/product, heck i may even try hundreds of new products every year but I always end up going back to the ones that have earned my loyalty. I would venture a guess that's why WoW still has such a following, even with their misteps they are still better than most of what's out there.
When I read game forums there are always the same ones screaming for change, those ones are never satisfied, but the majority seem to be posts wishing for what had been before their product had been changed for the still unsatisfied screamers that have since moved on to scream about some other product that also doesn't satisfy them, and they never will.
Short duration gaming is very casual friendly. One can play for a few minutes, do all there is to do, and log out.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
Comments
For a themepark pve game, IMO, the point where people want 15 minute runs to have the gear of people who are spending many more hours raiding endgame. They might as well add shops where you can buy gear with cash or in game tokens. Oh wait...
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
That will work. I prefer ability to save anywhere, but checkpoint is better than nothing.
There is no reason why people shouldn't be able to "save" after each boss/segment in an instanced dungeon.
You confuse about the duration of EACH session vs how many session to play.
It does not take more than 15 min to fight ONE boss in a raid. Just do LFR, and let people choose individual boss to fight. To get all the good stuff, you still have to play lots of 15 min sessions ...
but you don't have to commit to 3 hours long session before you can actually play.
Which begs the question, since you've said in other threads there are already too many games available for you to ever play, why don't you play the games you do like, instead of trying to influence change in the few remaining open world mmorpgs to something reminiscent of console rpgs to suit your ftp lobby tastes?
Where do you read that i want to change open world MMORPGs?
Of course i play the many games available for me .. i never hid that .. i play D3, PoE, STO, Dead Space 3 ......
And it is fair game to express my opinion of which games i find fun, just like the other guy. This thread is about the trend i have seen, not a plead to change things.
Gaming is pretty fun to me. Why should i want to change things? There are more games than i have time for anyway.
Well, I think there should be benefits to the hardcore over the 15 minute people. 15 minutes to a boss is too short imo.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
First, most boss fights are under 15 min right now. In fact, most are under 5 min. You only need 15 min to buff up and kill trash. So it is already there. The only difference is that currently most pve MMOs don't let you just fight one boss.
Secondly, why should there be benefits to the hardcore? Their money is just the same as teh 15 min players.
Hmm well this quote from your first post surely implies to me that you think they should change "MMO devs certainly should feel pressured by some of these non-MMOs where the playstyle can be quite similar to MMOs. It is a time to adapt and change."
I can agree with 30 minutes. Anything less I probably wouldn't bother starting a game.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
The last sentence is of course true but better sales doesn't necessarily mean that lesser sales will still make it successful.
Well, look at EVE. the game is what it is. The developers have tried to make the learning curve a bit more palatable but the game is this incredibly deep universe of player interaction. They don't have millions of players. They basically made the game they wanted and then allowed players do discover it.
I don't see why someone couldn't make a game that had more in depth, longer game play experiences and the demographic for those experiences would then play that game provided they did a good job.
I mean "I" would be able to play a game that had longer experiences. Are you saying that I'm the only person left on the planet who is willing to do that? Or maybe there are two of us? And if there are two of us might there not be more? 90k people maybe?
Of course one might have to temper their expectations as far as how "shiny" the game is compared to AAA games out there who might try for millions.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
This is a general statement about the adapting to survive in the marketplace. That is different from "I *want* them to change due to personal preference".
Don't you think devs should adapt to the market place, given the competition, no matter what you personal preference is?
I don't see what depth has to do with the option of short game sessions.
Break up a dungeon of 4 bosses into 4 independent part do NOT change the depth of the combat experience with each of them. Think about a dungeon with 4 boss that takes you 2 hours to go through. What if now there is a save point after each boss, so you can kill one, go have dinner, and come back for the next one.
There is no change in terms of depth, challenge, except it is more convenient.
In fact, play-time has nothing to do with challenge. A 5 min encounter with an elite or ubder boss on MP10 in D3 (which can be played in 15 min) is more challenging than 3 hours dungeon runs.
No actually I don't, otherwise we will all end up with less choice, kinda like having nothing but Targets and Wal-Marts to shop at instead of specialized shops that give us those unique items that large chains don't see a "market" for. Just because the masses want something doesn't mean we all do nor should we. Just think of some of the inventions we've seen in our own lifetimes because some"one" decided the status quo wasn't quite cutting if for them? Maybe we should all go back to the days of walking... going faster, farther, and with less effort due to someone being dissatified with what the masses did, what a concept eh?
From my perspective, depth may not have much to do with optional short game sessions but it does have everything to do with immersion, the key imo to a great mmorpg. Instead of waiting at some checkpoint because the group you started a dungeon with moved on without you and you now need to find another to get to the next checkpoint, does break immersion. If all you want is a ladder game, go for it, but if you want epic battles in a virtual world.....
Status Quo and what the market wants ae two different issues. Sometimes they are the same, sometimes not.
I would counter with your walking example and say many many were not satisfied with the status quo and so when something new came along they were intrigued enough to look anyway.
Any company that does not follow their market and change with their market will die, without exception. That doesn't mean that the companies all have to follow the herd remainor remain status quo... it does mean that once they identify their market, whichever market it is, if that market changes and they don't the company will die.
Time to adapt and change simply because the world has moved on. EVERYTHING is done in 30-second to 15-minute sessions. Facebook, Twitter, Texting, every aspect of our lives has been reduced to much smaller and much faster segments of information, entertainment and business.
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
The whole problem with this whole argument is who exactly decides that the "market" has changed? Does the whole market get a say or is it strictly the bean counters that say that since some are willing to swallow hook, line and sinker anything new the rest will follow and damn the rest? Or will there be some who are willing to stand their ground and say heh, we have a loyal following that do not want to rush to endgame but want to live in our virtual world and help us develop new activities and lore as we move forward together and those players provide more than enough profit for us?
Of course you're not the only one. Like I said in my prior post: the demographic starts small and gets even smaller due to its overlap with short-session games (which let you play exactly as long as you want, and therefore satisfy both types of players.)
Small doesn't mean nonexistant, but there's really almost no benefit to intentionally cutting off a massive amount of players. Very few types of experiences require long sessions. I've had those experiences, and honestly prefer smaller sessions (of course the overall quality of moment-to-moment gameplay, regardless of session length, is by far the most important element. But given a choice I'd choose a game which offered me more freedom over how long I can play.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Not everyone... in fact it's the minority that even subscribes to these ad infested mediums.
But at the end of the day, is it really better?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
There is only one objective measure of what the market wants and that is sales. Thats it. The number of sales of a particular product is the determination of what the market wants.
And I said the company needs to determine what their market wants. In the case of MMO's a particular company's market may not be all gamers, or wow players. Eve's market is probably different than WoW's market, although there is overlap. But the rule applies if your market changes and you don't your company will go under.
well 5 minutes is a bit short, but say 30 mins, i kinda agree with you here.
hence the emphasis on flashy cutscenes, voice over and in game graphics, even if it makes the game on the rails and instanced to fuck. this is the current trend in big budget games in general though, not just mmos. Us old farts used to PLAY games, the modern trend is to EXPERIENCE games and have a story told at you.
Sooo, if the company is still selling their product to the same people for the same amount and noone is leaving dissatisfied, then I would argue it's not the market leading the change.
Again, the premise of this argument is that the market is dissatisfied... where's the proof other than people are curious enough to check out a new game/product, heck i may even try hundreds of new products every year but I always end up going back to the ones that have earned my loyalty. I would venture a guess that's why WoW still has such a following, even with their misteps they are still better than most of what's out there.
When I read game forums there are always the same ones screaming for change, those ones are never satisfied, but the majority seem to be posts wishing for what had been before their product had been changed for the still unsatisfied screamers that have since moved on to scream about some other product that also doesn't satisfy them, and they never will.
Short duration gaming is very casual friendly. One can play for a few minutes, do all there is to do, and log out.