Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Why the open world is immersive?

2456

Comments

  • KareliaKarelia HeraklionPosts: 668Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by lolnik1

    I will explain it on example.

    I'm a 20 warrior in Wow. The world seems exciting, it's beauriful and has nice lore. So, why do I don't explore it? Simple, for what sake? I will don't find any open dungeon with dangerous monsters and the boss from which I can loot very rare item to become rich. All the challenge is in the instances, so even if I loot something worth it will be nothing after 3 lvls. So I stay in city and queque for instances. 

    I'm a 20 warrior in open world mmo. Now I have only a wolf to ride on. I see a big hole in the middle of mountain. I go there, enter, but the monsters are too strong, I can't cope with them. 2 more people have arrived, because there were rumours that here is a monster which drops a very unique mount (1% chance). We clear the cave. Fight with the boss, but there isn't anything worth to loot. So, we come to the nearest village. People are talking about a raid on their village. In few minutes a dragon attacks the city. Only few people have killed him, but now I have a unique mount, and can explore the world, seeking for the adventure. 

    What is better, standing in city queueing for instances and loot mounts which are useless, cuz you stay in city the whole time while not raiding/ doing instances/bg/ arenas, or the second option. I'm waiting for your opinion :).

    Standing in city queuing for instances.

    Much better, for me, than waiting for others to arrive ... have to listen to people yelping the raid, may miss the event if i wasn't there. so on and so forth.

     

    +1

    i hate waiting others to arrive in order to achieve things. the only reason anyway i want to go to open world is to pvp. i dont have any interest in any world boss drop anymore. after 1-2 times you feel its all the same. you get tired to look for a 1% chance of a rare mount drop. for me only open pvp seems to have a meaning. with full loot? even better.

    i just cant play games like gw2 where you hanging around the world, being friends with the whole server.  in such a mmo open world then once again yes, i preffer staying in city queuing for instances

  • JacxolopeJacxolope Jackson, MIPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Jacxolope
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    Yeah. If you notice, the movie does skip most of the boring traveling part, and go straight to the exciting bits. Don't ask me to walk 20 min before anything fun is happening.

    Theres something that you dont seem to understand,those exciting bits  would not happen if you go straight to Mt.Doom.

    Those exciting parts does not happen when you sit in your city and use lfd tools.

     

    You did not read carefully.

    I did not say skip to Mt Doom. I said skipped to the interesting parts, which the movie did.

    But the movie is a linear tale.

    Going from encounter to encounter to encounter means you have no choice and are being led around by the nose.

    The encounters come from choices thew fellowship made (was clear in the BOOKS- Not so sure about the movies) but there were decisions. Which path, who joins, etc- Even deciding to go see Tom Bombidile (not in the "movie") or Farmer maggot were part of the plot.

    The "Journey" is where YOU make your choices (not have them fed to you) and the encounter is the result of those choices. Absent of the choices you just have encounters with no bearing on YOU. Nothing unique.

    Choices in books and movies are planned plot written by a writer. Has nothing to do with audience choices.

    And you are right .. "nothing unique" ... every single person watching the movie, or reading the book .. see the SAME choices playing out.

    But the point is .. skip the boring traveling part. If encounter a spider monster is interesting ... skip to that. If you want some randomness  .. put that in. Don't ask me to walk 20 min on repeatable landscape before seeing the spider, or whatever random interesting stuff.

    LOL- I agree in most cases.

    But in an open world where travel and exploration is important- You might not even encounter a Spider. You might encounter the undead, or find a cave which hasnt been explored- etc... Those choices will play out giving you a unique experience.

    But yes, in most MMO's these days the walking and following breadcrumbs is just time wasting filler since there are no choices to make, since there really is no exploration nor different ways of doing things.

    BUT in an open World game every time you venture out (even on the same path) the chance of things being totally different is always there.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    I'll run with the OP title since the post didn't really grab me.

    An open world can create the feeling of immersion by giving the player a lot of context for what they are doing. I think it mostly gives you another slot machine that you walk through though. Traveling is putting the coins in the slot, and stumbling upon content that you've never seen, especially if there's a story to go with it is the jackpot. I think WoW lacks this kind of thing.

    In Fallout, you could wander off the path of the main story line and find an entire series of quests related to a story that has absolutely nothing to do with the main storyline. It has nothing to do with your character in the game, but your character being there changes everything about what's apparently happening. If you had not walked across that story or those NPCs, you would never know about that story and the world would never be changed by your involvement in that story. It's a jackpot.

    I can't think of much content like the Fallout content in games like WoW or Rift. I'm not sure about other games, but I would guess that experience is lacking in most MMOs, regardless of whether or not they are in the sandbox or theme park camps. Strangely enough, TSW has some of this, but it doesn't really have an open world.

    So, there you go.

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

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 24,774Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Manolios
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by lolnik1

    I will explain it on example.

    I'm a 20 warrior in Wow. The world seems exciting, it's beauriful and has nice lore. So, why do I don't explore it? Simple, for what sake? I will don't find any open dungeon with dangerous monsters and the boss from which I can loot very rare item to become rich. All the challenge is in the instances, so even if I loot something worth it will be nothing after 3 lvls. So I stay in city and queque for instances. 

    I'm a 20 warrior in open world mmo. Now I have only a wolf to ride on. I see a big hole in the middle of mountain. I go there, enter, but the monsters are too strong, I can't cope with them. 2 more people have arrived, because there were rumours that here is a monster which drops a very unique mount (1% chance). We clear the cave. Fight with the boss, but there isn't anything worth to loot. So, we come to the nearest village. People are talking about a raid on their village. In few minutes a dragon attacks the city. Only few people have killed him, but now I have a unique mount, and can explore the world, seeking for the adventure. 

    What is better, standing in city queueing for instances and loot mounts which are useless, cuz you stay in city the whole time while not raiding/ doing instances/bg/ arenas, or the second option. I'm waiting for your opinion :).

    Standing in city queuing for instances.

    Much better, for me, than waiting for others to arrive ... have to listen to people yelping the raid, may miss the event if i wasn't there. so on and so forth.

     

    +1

    i hate waiting others to arrive in order to achieve things. the only reason anyway i want to go to open world is to pvp. i dont have any interest in any world boss drop anymore. after 1-2 times you feel its all the same. you get tired to look for a 1% chance of a rare mount drop. for me only open pvp seems to have a meaning. with full loot? even better.

    i just cant play games like gw2 that you hanging around the world, being friends with the whole server.  in such a mmo open world then once again yes, i preffer staying in city queuing for instances

    I totally agree. I don't think an open world adds anything much to fun that a good instance cannot, except large scale pvp like that in PS2.

    Most pve content i have seen, are for limited number of players, from quests, to dungeons, to raids. You dont need an open world for any of those things.

     

  • fantasyfreak112fantasyfreak112 Orange County, CAPosts: 499Member
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    What's better, logging in to waste 50% of your gaming time traveling, or spending 100% of your time doing the interesting meaningful things?

    A game's job is to entertain: to be fun.

    When a book wants to entertain it doesn't explain literally every dull day of Frodo's journey to Mordor, it skips between the interesting parts.

    When a movie wants to entertain, it doesn't waste time filming literally every single minute of the protagonist's 2-hour-long car trip to New York.  It skips to the interesting part.

    Immersion is fun, but doesn't justify wasting the player's time with non-gameplay.  If a game deliberately wastes players' times, players move on to other games that don't waste their time.

    If you want to be the most narrow minded gamer ever maybe. Some of us realize it's better to work for a porsche then to be content with a merry-go-round.

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,772Member Uncommon

    Once again, Why do people play mmorpgs when people want small encounters, instant action and 'Levels'....

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • PAL-18PAL-18 AnachronoxPosts: 810Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    Yeah. If you notice, the movie does skip most of the boring traveling part, and go straight to the exciting bits. Don't ask me to walk 20 min before anything fun is happening.

    Theres something that you dont seem to understand,those exciting bits  would not happen if you go straight to Mt.Doom.

    Those exciting parts does not happen when you sit in your city and use lfd tools.

     

    You did not read carefully.

    I did not say skip to Mt Doom. I said skipped to the interesting parts, which the movie did.

    Welcome to the adventurers club then ,now we just need more open world games.

     

     

     

    So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.
    By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
    **On the radar:http://cyberpunk.net/**

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 24,774Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    Yeah. If you notice, the movie does skip most of the boring traveling part, and go straight to the exciting bits. Don't ask me to walk 20 min before anything fun is happening.

    Theres something that you dont seem to understand,those exciting bits  would not happen if you go straight to Mt.Doom.

    Those exciting parts does not happen when you sit in your city and use lfd tools.

     

    You did not read carefully.

    I did not say skip to Mt Doom. I said skipped to the interesting parts, which the movie did.

    Welcome to the adventurers club then ,now we just need more open world games.

     

     

     

    Open world that allows me to fast travel instantly to interesting parts, and no walking for 20 min? Sure, sounds fun. Why not? Will it also make sure the right number of players show up? I don't want 100 players show up for the encounter and destroy the challenge and fun.

     

  • PAL-18PAL-18 AnachronoxPosts: 810Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    Yeah. If you notice, the movie does skip most of the boring traveling part, and go straight to the exciting bits. Don't ask me to walk 20 min before anything fun is happening.

    Theres something that you dont seem to understand,those exciting bits  would not happen if you go straight to Mt.Doom.

    Those exciting parts does not happen when you sit in your city and use lfd tools.

     

    You did not read carefully.

    I did not say skip to Mt Doom. I said skipped to the interesting parts, which the movie did.

    Welcome to the adventurers club then ,now we just need more open world games.

     

     

     

    Open world that allows me to fast travel instantly to interesting parts, and no walking for 20 min? Sure, sounds fun. Why not? Will it also make sure the right number of players show up? I don't want 100 players show up for the encounter and destroy the challenge and fun.

     

    Like Frodo who didnt know that they get ambushed,like Boromir who did not know that they get attacked by 100 players who destroyed the challenge and fun,if your not ready for that kind of open world then we must refuse your membership,

     

    So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.
    By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
    **On the radar:http://cyberpunk.net/**

  • KareliaKarelia HeraklionPosts: 668Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    Yeah. If you notice, the movie does skip most of the boring traveling part, and go straight to the exciting bits. Don't ask me to walk 20 min before anything fun is happening.

    Theres something that you dont seem to understand,those exciting bits  would not happen if you go straight to Mt.Doom.

    Those exciting parts does not happen when you sit in your city and use lfd tools.

     

    You did not read carefully.

    I did not say skip to Mt Doom. I said skipped to the interesting parts, which the movie did.

    Welcome to the adventurers club then ,now we just need more open world games.

     

     

     

    Open world that allows me to fast travel instantly to interesting parts, and no walking for 20 min? Sure, sounds fun. Why not? Will it also make sure the right number of players show up? I don't want 100 players show up for the encounter and destroy the challenge and fun.

     

     

    Zeeerg!

    god i love gw2 :)

  • OzivoisOzivois Phoenix, AZPosts: 598Member

    It's all just a matter of taste and desire of immersion. And how the game itself is designed.

    Games these days are made with all the shortcuts built-in, but that's also because the game worlds and their content are not planned very well. 

    Rift does it very well with transports being reasonably close to instances. The queue system for group dungeons makes it absolutely easier to do that content but also absolutely ruins the immersion.

    But again, that's just an issue of preference. If it was up to me I would eliminate insta-ports for queued instances and still require players to hoof it to the dungeon entrances.

     

  • JacxolopeJacxolope Jackson, MIPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ozivois

    It's all just a matter of taste and desire of immersion. And how the game itself is designed.

    Games these days are made with all the shortcuts built-in, but that's also because the game worlds and their content are not planned very well. 

    Rift does it very well with transports being reasonably close to instances. The queue system for group dungeons makes it absolutely easier to do that content but also absolutely ruins the immersion.

    But again, that's just an issue of preference. If it was up to me I would eliminate insta-ports for queued instances and still require players to hoof it to the dungeon entrances.

     

    Games today just are not designed for an open World and only give the "illusion of being 'worlds'"

    The shortcuts are because there isnt any depth to the "world" anyhow and in most cases the games could do without the 'world' and be better with a lobby (there is a discussion about this elsewhere)

    Take WOW for instance since we have all probably played. What is the point of the "world" itself? Why do I need to travel through it when the world is static and cannot be changed or effected in any way? Mainly its only to find certain encounters for drops (which are in the same place always with the same drop rate)

    -This is part of the debate (as I see it)- Folks often think a sandbox would be just taking the quests from WOW out and grinding mobs with no direction...Or a PVP arena gankfest.

    Its going to take a game designed from the bottom up to showcase an "open World" for todays gamer to appreciate it. It will also have to let go of many archaic practices of sandbox games  (Corpse running and super harsh death penalties, unmitigated FFA PVP, etc..)- Many of those things were great back in the day but have to go- There has to be a compromise.

    Non combat activities must have the same importance and relevance as combat.

    CREATING UNIQUE things in the World and changing the World HAS to be part of the "open World" experience.

    Unless there is a way for a player to leave his "mark" and make his choices matter- The "World" is pointless/

     

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,772Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Jacxolope
    Originally posted by Ozivois It's all just a matter of taste and desire of immersion. And how the game itself is designed. Games these days are made with all the shortcuts built-in, but that's also because the game worlds and their content are not planned very well.  Rift does it very well with transports being reasonably close to instances. The queue system for group dungeons makes it absolutely easier to do that content but also absolutely ruins the immersion. But again, that's just an issue of preference. If it was up to me I would eliminate insta-ports for queued instances and still require players to hoof it to the dungeon entrances.  
    Games today just are not designed for an open World and only give the "illusion of being 'worlds'"

    The shortcuts are because there isnt any depth to the "world" anyhow and in most cases the games could do without the 'world' and be better with a lobby (there is a discussion about this elsewhere)

    Take WOW for instance since we have all probably played. What is the point of the "world" itself? Why do I need to travel through it when the world is static and cannot be changed or effected in any way? Mainly its only to find certain encounters for drops (which are in the same place always with the same drop rate)

    -This is part of the debate (as I see it)- Folks often think a sandbox would be just taking the quests from WOW out and grinding mobs with no direction...Or a PVP arena gankfest.

    Its going to take a game designed from the bottom up to showcase an "open World" for todays gamer to appreciate it. It will also have to let go of many archaic practices of sandbox games  (Corpse running and super harsh death penalties, unmitigated FFA PVP, etc..)- Many of those things were great back in the day but have to go- There has to be a compromise.

    Non combat activities must have the same importance and relevance as combat.

    CREATING UNIQUE things in the World and changing the World HAS to be part of the "open World" experience.

    Unless there is a way for a player to leave his "mark" and make his choices matter- The "World" is pointless/

     


    Nope. Pre instant teleportation wow was functional and worked.

    You could go to any zone and hang out with friends or meet new people maybe even run that zones dungeon if people were looking.

    You traveled to zones because of the overarching lore/story. for example you heard the stories about kael thus when your blood elf was lvl 1. Eventually you would travel multiple zones learning more about the lore (and getting side tracked by fun adventures) until you finally made it to the tempest keep.

    Same with the black temple, It existed in lore and through the freedom of the open world game you could travel there and see it for yourself.


    That kind of immersion and world connection is why a world is required to fully represent the scale.

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 24,774Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ozivois

    But again, that's just an issue of preference. If it was up to me I would eliminate insta-ports for queued instances and still require players to hoof it to the dungeon entrances.

     

    And i would not play a game that requires me to waste 20 min "hoofing" whenever i want to run a instanced.

    Oh, why would you want to eliminate what other likes when it does not impact you? You can always hoof to the instance if you want to. Just don't expect me to do that.

    Choices are good.

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,772Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Ozivois But again, that's just an issue of preference. If it was up to me I would eliminate insta-ports for queued instances and still require players to hoof it to the dungeon entrances.  
    And i would not play a game that requires me to waste 20 min "hoofing" whenever i want to run a instanced.

    Oh, why would you want to eliminate what other likes when it does not impact you? You can always hoof to the instance if you want to. Just don't expect me to do that.

    Choices are good.


    This argument is old, And its not true.

    Taking wow as the case study:

    1.The implementation of a dungeon finder eventually led to the redesign of instances where by they are all connected via the groupfinder though an instance server.

    No longer could you travel to your worlds instance, you traveled to the instance that resided on the server hub. If you group finder is down all your instances were down.
    So like it or not your using the system. This in itself paved the way for the game to change to a lobby game.

    2.Human interaction also changed, People chose the path of least resistance where they would sign up and not be bothered going to the instance 'doors' again.

    If i said i want to travel to an instance i would be laughed at. travel all that way to enter a door thats the same as 'enter dungeon'.

    So no. There is no choice.


    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 24,774Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Ozivois But again, that's just an issue of preference. If it was up to me I would eliminate insta-ports for queued instances and still require players to hoof it to the dungeon entrances.  
    And i would not play a game that requires me to waste 20 min "hoofing" whenever i want to run a instanced.

     

    Oh, why would you want to eliminate what other likes when it does not impact you? You can always hoof to the instance if you want to. Just don't expect me to do that.

    Choices are good.


     

    This argument is old, And its not true.

    Taking wow as the case study:

    1.The implementation of a dungeon finder eventually led to the redesign of instances where by they are all connected via the groupfinder though an instance server.

    No longer could you travel to your worlds instance, you traveled to the instance that resided on the server hub. If you group finder is down all your instances were down.
    So like it or not your using the system. This in itself paved the way for the game to change to a lobby game.

    2.Human interaction also changed, People chose the path of least resistance where they would sign up and not be bothered going to the instance 'doors' again.

    If i said i want to travel to an instance i would be laughed at. travel all that way to enter a door thats the same as 'enter dungeon'.

    So no. There is no choice.

     

    1. It does not matter, from a gaming perspective, where your instance resides. You are in it with 5 others .. that is the point. And you can still walk there, and click the entrance to go to the instance. That option is still there.

    2. If there is no one wants to walk with you, it is your problem, not theirs. You can still walk there if it is so "immersive". The fact that few wants to do that merely tell you that "walking 20 min" is not something others find fun and want to do. So if you have such a narrow, niche preference, you want to force everyone to walk with you? Thanks but no thank.

    i don't use my entertainment to satisfy someone else's fun. i do it for my own fun.

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    I agree with nari.
    Creation of cars didn't take away the option of walking. And anyone who says there is no choice going from one place to another is wrong.

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

  • SulaaSulaa nPosts: 1,198Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    What's better, logging in to waste 50% of your gaming time traveling, or spending 100% of your time doing the interesting meaningful things?

    A game's job is to entertain: to be fun.

    When a book wants to entertain it doesn't explain literally every dull day of Frodo's journey to Mordor, it skips between the interesting parts.

    When a movie wants to entertain, it doesn't waste time filming literally every single minute of the protagonist's 2-hour-long car trip to New York.  It skips to the interesting part.

    Immersion is fun, but doesn't justify wasting the player's time with non-gameplay.  If a game deliberately wastes players' times, players move on to other games that don't waste their time.

    Playing an relatively open world mmorpg's before introduction of mass teleportation LFG tools and extremly zoned worlds was more interesting experience for me.    So I would not talk in absolutes since they may not apply to everyone.

    I don't deny that people like me are in miniority though.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Ozivois But again, that's just an issue of preference. If it was up to me I would eliminate insta-ports for queued instances and still require players to hoof it to the dungeon entrances.  
    And i would not play a game that requires me to waste 20 min "hoofing" whenever i want to run a instanced.

    Oh, why would you want to eliminate what other likes when it does not impact you? You can always hoof to the instance if you want to. Just don't expect me to do that.

    Choices are good.




    I'll second the idea that needless traveling through the world should be eliminated.

    I would still not remove virtual worlds from the MMOs I've played. I might have ideas to improve the virtual worlds, or think that the MMOs should be single player games or something similar, but remove the virtual worlds themselves? No.

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

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 24,774Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones


    I would still not remove virtual worlds from the MMOs I've played. I might have ideas to improve the virtual worlds, or think that the MMOs should be single player games or something similar, but remove the virtual worlds themselves? No.

     

    Some MMOs should be online MP games with lobbies, at least for me. Virtual world does not add much fun for me, in many of these games.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 24,774Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Sulaa
    .

    Playing an relatively open world mmorpg's before introduction of mass teleportation LFG tools and extremly zoned worlds was more interesting experience for me.    So I would not talk in absolutes since they may not apply to everyone.

    I don't deny that people like me are in miniority though.

    And playing those relatively open world MMORPGs before the introduction of LFG tools was way worse gaming experience for me. I don't play games for boring (to me) experiences .. and unfortunately those games are saddled with those. Requiring walking the same route a lot is one of the worst offenders.

     

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,772Member Uncommon


    1. It does not matter, from a gaming perspective, where your instance resides. You are in it with 5 others .. that is the point. And you can still walk there, and click the entrance to go to the instance. That option is still there.

    At one stage they had both. A local instance, and a dungeon finder one.

    If ever the group finder was down, You could walk to the local instance 'the old fashoned way' and do a dungeon. And people did on this occasion. remove choice and people was choose the path of least resistance to get things done or - if there is no other choice they just do it.


    2. If there is no one wants to walk with you, it is your problem, not theirs. You can still walk there if it is so "immersive". The fact that few wants to do that merely tell you that "walking 20 min" is not something others find fun and want to do. So if you have such a narrow, niche preference, you want to force everyone to walk with you? Thanks but no thank.

    i don't use my entertainment to satisfy someone else's fun. i do it for my own fun.


    its not my problem, its a problem with the system if you give incentives to one choice and not the other.

    for example: They could of given a rewards set for 'random dungeon' and a different set for 'adventuring dungeon' which required you to make the trek there.

    I have a feeling that if the rewards for the manual walk was superior then you would have a problem with that?

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • SulaaSulaa nPosts: 1,198Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Sulaa
    .

    Playing an relatively open world mmorpg's before introduction of mass teleportation LFG tools and extremly zoned worlds was more interesting experience for me.    So I would not talk in absolutes since they may not apply to everyone.

    I don't deny that people like me are in miniority though.

    And playing those relatively open world MMORPGs before the introduction of LFG tools was way worse gaming experience for me. I don't play games for boring (to me) experiences .. and unfortunately those games are saddled with those. Requiring walking the same route a lot is one of the worst offenders.

     

    I feel the same way about highly instanced game with automatic LFG tools. I accept and even like some instanced content, but those tools and other changes that came with game concept alteration / streamlining into mmorpg's made them boring to me.

    That's is one of main reasons why I don't play mmorpg's anymore. 

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by lizardbones I would still not remove virtual worlds from the MMOs I've played. I might have ideas to improve the virtual worlds, or think that the MMOs should be single player games or something similar, but remove the virtual worlds themselves? No.  
    Some MMOs should be online MP games with lobbies, at least for me. Virtual world does not add much fun for me, in many of these games.


    Well, I actually like virtual worlds, so it's not surprising that I would not want them to go away. That doesn't mean that I think virtual worlds just existing is enough. It has to be well thought out, even for someone like me who prefers a virtual world.

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

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member
    Originally posted by ZombieKen

    When traveling is interesting and meaningful, it's not wasted time.

     

    Travel is only interesting and meaningful the first or first couple of times.

    It's the things that happen on the way from point A to B that make something fun or memorable or interesting.

    There are no movies where someone gets in a car and rides without incident for 2 and a half hours to reach point X.

    There are a plethora of movies where someone gets in a car and has all kinds of incidents for 2 and a half hours to reach point X.

    Easy to see why.

    But in a game, sometimes you just want to get from A to B as quick as possible without tripping over random adventures the whole way.

    Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

    MMO 101.

Sign In or Register to comment.