Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I am just tired of all the killing and war...
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
There was a little known game that failed pretty much before even getting out of the gate because the developers couldn't deliver. The concept was awesome, in my opinion.
It was called SEED:
Having successfully colonized the Moon and Mars, humanity was looking to spread far across the universe. The creation of ram scoop propulsion made this dream a reality.
Five seed ships were built, each a kilometer long and populated with machinery designed to terraform a suitable planet. Humans would not ride along for the journey; instead, DNA codes, sperm, and eggs were carried along in cryocoolers to be hatched by the TAU computers at the appropriate time.
The TAU computers also carried a wealth of human knowledge. This was the subject of a long and heated debate on what should be included. Finally, it was decided to make the colonies idealist societies; therefore, references to wars and violence were not included.
After searching the universe for several years, the first suitable planet was spotted near the star Beta Hydri 24.4 light years from the Sun. Probes indicated that the planet had an atmosphere, water and living micro organisms. It was to be the destination of the first seed ship.
However, something went wrong and suddenly the colony has found itself on a planet that has not been terraformed, as was the plan, and without contact to earth.
I don't know how it would have actually ended up if the developers didn't fail, but I imagined it being a survival game highlighting politics, community and interdependence. There was talk of having to explore the planet to survive, which could have led to any number of interesting game play interactions, PvE, alien technology, etc. The devs said they wanted the players to help pave the way for the future of the game by how they played it.
If someone would crowd fund a game like this, I'd be all over it. I do like to have some element of conflict in the game, especially with survival being a main theme. I don't mind combat / war in games, but it just gets old when that is all there is. Again though, we're basically talking about a theme park game where people are pretty free to play as they choose.
A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Yeah, except those other animals dont stuff, mount or make their "sport kills" into rugs and coats
Bringer of Eternal Darkness and Despair, but also a Nutritious way to start your Morning.
Games Played: Too Many
1,2,3,4, i declare a thumb war!
I think people are missing the point, we do play Sims, and we also play MMOs, and even PVP in those MMO's sometimes.
What I miss is the kind of system SWG had, where there was a real place for both within the game together.
Of course. People enjoy many ancillary activities. Some more than others (on a scale of 1-10, I would be a 1.) Still doesn't change what the typical MMORPG's core game play is. The fact that you can enjoy meta gaming, as with guild organizational activities, or you spend most of your time gathering or growing resources, crafting and selling what you crafted, doesn't elevate those activities to core status...unless it's in one of those niche MMOs where the ancillary activities are the whole point. What you're actually doing is providing support for the core strife that most are there to participate in.
Not everyone gets to ride in the corporate jet. But if you're fantasizing about a corporation why would you fantasize about working in the mail room? I guess I just don't get it.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I don't take this issue to seriously myself but still find it to be an interesting article in my experience I'm fairly certain there are some games out there that are non combat in nature unfortunately these games are more often catered to younger folk than us and let's be honest how many of us really want to play dance dance revolution online?
What I do wish for though is that mmorpg's go back to experimenting with alternative activities in game such as compelling housing again and the like.
I remember back during the days of playing COH thinking up some ultra cool ideas for features based on being able to create an alter ego for your hero.
Honestly though after watching so many devs create cookie cutter game sonly to fail and this still not spurring devs to expand I'm not hopeful.
Well, it kind of sounds to me like you miss games made by me.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
My last serious foray (GW2) ended in a zone where players had to fight every 6 feet or so whichever way they turned. It was too much for me, and I never got to the place to beat the big bad dragon at the end. Yes, the zone fit in well with the lore of the game (it was the dragon's home field), but it was just too much for me.
Skyrim (not an MMO, I know) was very similar. There is ONE way to advance or complete most quests: Kill. I tried playing a Paladin-like character in that game and could not. When the bandits cowered and "surrendered", I backed off (giving mercy), only to have them come at me again once recovered. Why? Because the only way past them was: Kill.
I, like you, have fun with combat. But there is so much more to games than kill, kill, kill, and kill some more.
Mass PvP has absolutely no draw for me. It is mass chaos (don't tell me that 100s of players are coordinating EVERYTHING they do with others). There is no real consequences taking place. A player dies and "Bang!" "Zing!", they are back in the fight as if nothing happened. What is the point? Objectives are fabricated. Does one tower help in the attack on another nearby tower? Does it interrupt supply lines? Oh, wait... there are NO supply lines. Can one force send a smaller unit to infiltrate and take out one of the opposing leaders? No. It is just a big, huge, whack-a-mole with 100s of players. Very reminiscent of FPS games, don't you think?
TES:O is the latest offender. They took a game about exploration and character development and made it into a War Game. WTF? Arena? No war. Daggerfall? No War. Morrowind? No War. Oblivion? No war. Skyrim? A Civil War that mattered not if one partook or not. Yet their idea is to take this ISP and make it ALL about war. Why? (I don't want to derail the thread, just making an example.)
I really wonder if a game released that was about character development and the world they live in, instead of yet another "Fight! Fight! Fight!" game, how well it would do. We may never know. I have a feeling many would play it. Even some "Fight! Fight! Fight!" gamers enjoy character development and world exploration, sometimes. Or did they just play Skyrim for the combat?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
On the flip-side, I don't get into "farming-like" aspects because if you do not log in every day, you lose what you tried to accomplish. Sometimes, I don't feel like logging in.
While the book thing is true, look at it from a different point of view. Are there many fantasy/sic-fi books about JUST fighting? Or do most of them delve into the character's psyches? How long would you read a book just about fighting? There is a massive war going on in A Sword of Ice and Fire (I really do like your avatar, btw) but there is so much more going on besides fighting. Matter of fact, the battles are pretty much skipped over, for the most part. Who has Cerce Lannister stabbed? Combat is ONE form of conflict. There are so many other forms.
It is the exclusion of aspects/features that fighting only games present today. And truth be told, combat in MMOs is not all that great. Would you enjoy an MMO that had multiple ways to handle quests or obstacles placed in your way? I sure would
Again, combat only MMOs have their place and many players enjoy them, but does almost EVERY MMO have to be the same?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
I'm not going to say I don't want to "kill" things, but I'm into combat, and that's what I expect out of a game. I agree though that there should be varied, interesting objectives, character progression should not revolve around killing things, I wish it involved more quests, exercise mini games, sparring and "training", and maybe one third of the progression of power be done in live combat. It's not so much that I don't like to kill foes.... but that is pretty boring by itself, and in an MMO, deep character progression comes right behind gameplay in significance. Deep character progression doesn't however mean simply giving players 20 variations on each class, having skill points to put into assets when you slay foes, and so on, it means the actual actions taken to progress your character are interesting and inviting, Character diversity and uniqueness is a nice and interesting, but that isn't supplying deep character PROGRESSION.
GW2 did a good thing with the fight to survive feature, it adds an extra layer to death so you can be taken out but not be dead forthright. Many variations of this could be considered, while they don't have to be directly linear, certain kinds of defeat can be added so you can defeat your foes without killing them. You can become injured, knocked out, bound, and more. In such a way certain fights may expect you to do certain things to your foe, killing may not be acceptable, like capturing a common thief may not intend for them to be killed, but captured, you may defeat your foes by injuring them or knocking them out and not take the time to execute them because your steeped in combat, you ally may be knocked out and reviving him isn't immediately available to your class so you have to drag him to away from the battle field and resuscitate them.
More involved defeat and death mechanics work toward other issues too, for instance, most games don't institute a serious death penalty because players don't want to stop playing... yet a death penalty is relevant to many balance and functionality issues, having a point before death where your impaired but may be recovered... without the cheap and simple magic resurrection, allows for players to be defeated without dying, and allows for actually killed players to suffer a meaningful death penalty. Slaying foes in certain places may be frowned upon and cause strife between you and authorities, slaying foes in a battle may give your opponents vengeance bonuses which make them even harder. These don't have to apply to every situation, but they could add some depth to certain parts of the game.
I can't say that coming up with alternatives for killing foes is a priority in my book, it could be better, but MMOs have failed to deliver the basics I expect so this is kind of a mute point, I can hardly bring myself to play anything these days... But here's hoping games get better :-/
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, if they get angry, they'll be a mile away... and barefoot.
??? then go play sims 3 or sports game. for online games not gonna call them mmo's but second life or IMVU name few. Not to mention some of the sports mmo's out there. There are many choices. People have different tastes you dont always have to agree on it but it's not like there is now options for the non-violent gaming type just like there are options for vegans who dont want meat.
If you play a game, you usually want some sort of challenge.
Having a challenge requires some sort of conflict, with the option to lose.
Thus all games are some sort of "war".
Thats just what life in itself is, lots of conflicts.
Definitely
Monopoly would like a word with you...
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I played THIEF, Deus EX and Morrowind like a Shooter. I killed every one I could. Even quest givers. I loved, that the Dev gave me the freedom to do so. After my killing spree, and figure out how far I could go, I restarted the game and played it as a pacifist.
What I try to say here is, the games gave me options. Radical options, so radical that you could not finish the game. But I could find out how far I could go and that is what I liked. In games like COD and GOW the options are missing and because of that the game gets boring real quick. You get forced to play a certain way, sometimes even the path is allready predetermined. No choice at all....
A very good post and I agree 100%. It's like some people here fail to realize that the OP is not saying combat should be removed and everybody be forced to do "mundane tasks" instead. All he's saying is that today's games focus too much on combat and exclude all other options because there's this widespread notion that anything but non stop slaughter is dull and boring.
I love combat in games and will not often play games that do not give me the option to kill things once in a while (horror games like Amnesia being the exception). But I also like freedom and choice; I like to try different approaches to a challenge, instead of being constantly forced to kill stuff in order to progress. Having to use violence all the time is just as boring to me as having to craft all the time, because after a while (and especially in MMOs), combat gets very repetitive and dull and there's no sense of actually achieving anything.
RPGs used to be about those options, about choices and consequences. When me and my mates played PnP RPGs in the 80s and 90s we did not just go on killing sprees and wage endless wars all the time. Sure, the violence was there but there were always multiple ways of solving most challenges (and all challenges were not about conflict). Early computer RPGs were often the same, but since then the genre has changed and "RPG" nowadays just means "action game with some char customization". I'm really hoping to see some more variety and complexity coming back to the genre with the next generation of games in the coming years.
yea yea and saying that today games focus too much on combat and need to offer more choises instead can be said quite shortly if thats the meaning behind it truly.
bringing it back to pen and paper RPGs
what was the most common adventure module setting in the 1970s and 1980s?
the dungeon crawl
slay foes - plunder their treasure
TSR modules like Ravenloft, Tomb of Horrors, The Vault of the Drow, Steading of the Hill Giant Chief, many others
EQ2 fan sites
i agree - good post
EQ2 fan sites
I do care about morals in every aspect but i don't think morals are crossed too often in games.
I don't play those games that center around my country versus your country or like Eve has it's large nationality based guilds stuff like that turns me off.
I think you need to remember what this genre is,it is Role play gaming.I would find it tough to think of someone i would like to role play that does not revolve around some form of combat.
people want to role play super heroes and that thought process starts from when you are just s a little kid in real life.Yes some kids want to be a fireman or policeman ,not sure how you could possibly make a rpg based on being a fireman.A policeman that could work but then WHY does the kid want to be a cop,to fire a gun?
What other types of RP'ing have crossed people's minds?Famous athlete of course,tons would love to be Gretzky or Crosby or a famous home run hitter or a star quarterback,but then that sort of takes you out of the RPG genre and into sport sims.You definitely couldn't make a rpg based on role playing Galilleo or Einstein but Christopher Columbus or some famous navigator works.There has been games like that example the ship sailing games.I forget the one that is a spin off of an old console game,i really liked the console version but the pc version was just too cheaply done.
So you see it ends up centered around fighting.I just prefer my combat to be focused on fighting npc's and not other players,at least not in my rpg's.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
In my group of tabletop RPG players, the character interactions were the focus. We spent a lot of time talking with NPCs and each other. I realize other players had vastly different experiences. We spent time mapping the dungeon, looking for traps and secret doors, getting great descriptions of the rooms and settings we encountered, and generally using our imaginations to picture what the gameworld was like. A lot of this is now done differently (more efficiently and visually) in computer RPGs.
All of those modules you listed had a reason for going into their depths besides monsters and treasures. They were not (usually) just plopped into a DM's world and the players "had at" them. For me, I find I need a reason to slaughter and kill besides just slaughtering and killing
That was a failing of EverQuest for me. Mob camping was not a fun activity in and of itself. The only goal of "Let's get XP and level up!" just does not do it for me. The group I was in could make all the difference for me between a fun camp and a boring camp experience. I know many players can do this, endlessly. I just am not one of them
Much of this is lost in the translation to computer games, but the spirit does not need to be sacrificed, in my opinion
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Oh, I'm sorry if my post was too lengthy for your limited attention span. I'd suggest twitter instead of forums if you can't stand more than two lines of text at any given time.
Now, did you have anything at all to add to the actual topic?