Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Who wants camping back?

1235718

Comments

  • alakramalakram malagaPosts: 2,225Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Chieftan

    I thought about the mechanics of spawn camping vs dungeoning on my feet for the past oh, about 10 years now, I'm kinda ready to just chill at a camp again.

     

    Think about it: you go to an area, group up, pick a campsite and just chill there pulling mobs to your spot. 

     

    Maybe change things up a little from the early days of EQ such as:

     

    1) Kill X mobs in X amount of time quests or "scalp" style turn-in quests

    2)Random boss/named spawns

    3)Random multi-mob spawns...think you've got the spawn broken?  Put in a random chance for 4 mobs to spawn where 1 normally does.

    4)Remember the cool places you used to camp in EQ?  It could be a kitchen, a throne room, a campfire, etc.  Developers could really liven it up with some visually interesting camp spots.

    5)"Hold the line" camps where you rain fire on a sea of orcs trying to cross the moat

    Honestly none of this would require a massive re-coding of any current MMO.  Pump up the spawns in a given area and let people have at it.  Unlike the days of EQ you could still have the normal quest-quest-quest for exp path of current MMOs; this would just give players another alternate way of gaining levels.

    It sounds to me like a new kind of OpenQuest or whatever it is called. The same that Warhammer did, the same that rift did, and it sounds good enought.

    -=AlaKraM=-
    Don't fight against poverty, fight against greed.
    My Lord of the Rings Gallery

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by sirphobos
    Given the choice of camping or quest hub grinding, I'd take camping any day.

    I'd take a dynamic world with events that happen everywhere without having to talk to a NPC with a "!" over his head.

         True.. BUT..   In an earlier post you mention about people "getting a life".. And I'm unsure how camping as it was in EQ1 is relevant to time spent playing..  Anyways, I agree with the above that I'd rather have dynamic events  instead of NPC ? hubs, but.. and this is a HUGE but.. What GW2 does is only a slight difference then quest hubs.. The so called heart quest unlocks the NPC that you can spend rewards on..  You still have to follow the breadcrumbs and do the "kill 10 rats" to unlock him as a vendor..  So what GW2 did was only slightly upgrade the annoying quest hub formula, but it's only dressed differently.. 

         What I would of love to see is allow people to BUY any of the items from a smaller number of NPC without ever being forced to do a "kill 10 rants" task to unlock them..  As for the time issue.. I find it more annoying  and wasteful running around looking for events, then camping..... So technically wouldn't it be more productive time wise to sit and camp, then run and gun?

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    nah .. i am glad those days are over.

    Camping is boring to me. I play a game for gameplay, not for waiting around doing nothing or chatting.

     

    If all you did was wait around and chat, that sounds like a personal problem...... I never had any problem finding a group or camp to enjoy.. and the PULLS were coming faster then we could kill em.... So many times we had to tell our puller to STOP because we needed some free time to rest.. LOL 

    You have never taken a number, and camp a boss with multiple groups?

    Nope, because I didn't play poorly designed games. I played DAoC.

     

    I agree EQ is very poorly designed.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Chieftan

    We all know the easy-solo-quest formula has just about been beat into the ground.  Whether its camping or something else, developers better start coming up with some new ideas.

    They already did. Online ARPG with some MMO features, MOBAs, instanced pvp games, shared world shooters like Destiny.

    There is no reason to go back to a try and failed idea. There are plenty of new ideas .. just that some may not be traditional MMOs. Personally i really don't care about a definition if the game is fun.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by KBishop
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Fendel84M

    EQ and FFXI are still there actually. You can camp all you want, for the record :-p.

    Ah, the dumbest argument in the book...

     

    No, the games as we knew and loved them have long ago been patched away.

    For good reason. Have you actually played that game Pre WoTG?

    The OP is not talking about sitting and waiting for rare spawns, they're talking about sitting in a room with respawning mobs and pulling them over and over.

    I played DAoC where there was no silly waiting for boss mobs.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Rydeson
      Now as for your response that instancing takes off the population pressure of having hundreds if not thousands of characters in the same zone...... OMFGGGGGGGGGG What game are you playing that ever came close to that?  I have never seen Rift, TOR and GW2 end zones or any zone have hundreds to thousands of people IN that zone fighting.. And don't even dare to tell me it's because they are all busy instancing..

    9 years ago (and before that), instancing was indeed a good way to let players enjoy content without lagging their socks off. I'm surprised it's hard to comprehend.....

    Except thats not true... There was zero lag in noninstanced dungeons in DAoC.

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard La BarrePosts: 3,549Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Rydeson
      Now as for your response that instancing takes off the population pressure of having hundreds if not thousands of characters in the same zone...... OMFGGGGGGGGGG What game are you playing that ever came close to that?  I have never seen Rift, TOR and GW2 end zones or any zone have hundreds to thousands of people IN that zone fighting.. And don't even dare to tell me it's because they are all busy instancing..

    9 years ago (and before that), instancing was indeed a good way to let players enjoy content without lagging their socks off. I'm surprised it's hard to comprehend.....

    Except thats not true... There was zero lag in noninstanced dungeons in DAoC.

    You can't be serious.

    Playing now: WoW, Landmark, GW2, The Crew, SotA

    Top 3 MMORPGs played: UO, AC1 and WoW

    Honorable mentions: AO, LotRO, SW:TOR and GW2.

    ----------------

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Rydeson
      Now as for your response that instancing takes off the population pressure of having hundreds if not thousands of characters in the same zone...... OMFGGGGGGGGGG What game are you playing that ever came close to that?  I have never seen Rift, TOR and GW2 end zones or any zone have hundreds to thousands of people IN that zone fighting.. And don't even dare to tell me it's because they are all busy instancing..

    9 years ago (and before that), instancing was indeed a good way to let players enjoy content without lagging their socks off. I'm surprised it's hard to comprehend.....

    Except thats not true... There was zero lag in noninstanced dungeons in DAoC.

    You can't be serious.

    I am totally serious. DAoC didn't start to lag until you got about 200 people on creen at once.

    Instancing has never, EVER been about technical limitations. Especially not now. PS2 and Darkfall prove instancing is not needed for performance.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    The OP is not talking about sitting and waiting for rare spawns, they're talking about sitting in a room with respawning mobs and pulling them over and over.

    I played DAoC where there was no silly waiting for boss mobs.

    To be honest, when i first read this .. the impression is EQ camping, where waiting in queue is a large part of. That certainly turns me off.

    However, if you are talking about not moving, and just kill, kill, and kill, then it *may* work for me, as long as the combat is fun.

    The EQ model certainly will NOT work since you are fighting one-ies and two-ies and there is little tactical variations.

    Lastly, the down-side of this type of camping is the static nature of terrain. I would probably like a dungeon crawl better just because the terrain (or layout) is changing and if combat takes that into account, it is more fun.

     

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    The OP is not talking about sitting and waiting for rare spawns, they're talking about sitting in a room with respawning mobs and pulling them over and over.

    I played DAoC where there was no silly waiting for boss mobs.

    To be honest, when i first read this .. the impression is EQ camping, where waiting in queue is a large part of. That certainly turns me off.

    However, if you are talking about not moving, and just kill, kill, and kill, then it *may* work for me, as long as the combat is fun.

    The EQ model certainly will NOT work since you are fighting one-ies and two-ies and there is little tactical variations.

    Lastly, the down-side of this type of camping is the static nature of terrain. I would probably like a dungeon crawl better just because the terrain (or layout) is changing and if combat takes that into account, it is more fun.

     

    That's why I liked how DAoC encouraged you to move around. The longer a specific area had gone without anyone pulling from it, the more camp bonus xp it gave you.

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard La BarrePosts: 3,549Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Rydeson
      Now as for your response that instancing takes off the population pressure of having hundreds if not thousands of characters in the same zone...... OMFGGGGGGGGGG What game are you playing that ever came close to that?  I have never seen Rift, TOR and GW2 end zones or any zone have hundreds to thousands of people IN that zone fighting.. And don't even dare to tell me it's because they are all busy instancing..

    9 years ago (and before that), instancing was indeed a good way to let players enjoy content without lagging their socks off. I'm surprised it's hard to comprehend.....

    Except thats not true... There was zero lag in noninstanced dungeons in DAoC.

    You can't be serious.

    I am totally serious. DAoC didn't start to lag until you got about 200 people on creen at once.

    Instancing has never, EVER been about technical limitations. Especially not now. PS2 and Darkfall prove instancing is not needed for performance.

    I always had a top notch computer because I'm working in computer graphics development. Back when I bought DAoC, I had the "cream of the crop" computer. NO WAY DAoC was managing 200 people on screen without lag, not even 50 people.

    DAoC fans tend to exagerate that "feature" (they actually make it up). I've been there, done that.

    And Darkfall... please don't make me laugh. The performance of that game is abyssal as soon as you have more than 20 people on screen.

    Playing now: WoW, Landmark, GW2, The Crew, SotA

    Top 3 MMORPGs played: UO, AC1 and WoW

    Honorable mentions: AO, LotRO, SW:TOR and GW2.

    ----------------

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.

  • kjempffkjempff AarhusPosts: 883Member Uncommon

    Camping worked well with eq because eq's grind was xp grind combined with named grind for drops. Other mmorpgs are not build on xp grind, but other grinds (grind points, grind dungeons, grind dailys, grind dynamic events, grind pvp points, continue on your own).

    I enjoyed camping very much when I was at one, and I hated it when I spend 30 minutes to run to a zone just to hear "Hand/Warlord is camped". I loved a good camp grind after a day at work, talking with the group while killing stuff, spiced with moments of adrenaline rush from overpulling.

    Camping for a quest item was a good way of taking in and really experience the world, and giving the brain some rest once inawhile builds immersion and also allows You to plan things, learn tactics, talk to people. At times it would be boring, but even the worst 20 hour grinds for an epic drop would be all worth it when I finally got the drop (feeling of accomplishment)... I can't explain it, but occasionally beeing bored is good.

     

    Anyways, camping is tied to special game mechanics, so do I want it back ? I think the question is more, will we ever see those game mechanics again. The last mmorpg I did just a little amount of camping in was WoW where I camped for a special hunter pet (back when it mattered). 

  • WereLlamaWereLlama Lubbock, TXPosts: 243Member

    Camping mobs can work if it rewards one of the following play styles:

    1. Socialize - If it facilitates players to talk with each other and share, while waiting for a mob to spawn 

    2. Killer- Waiting in one spot allows for more opportunity to kill bigger and more interesting stuff

    3. Achiever- Waiting in one spot allows the player to achieve something that most, less patient players, can achieve.

    4. Explorer- Waiting in one spot long enough might reveal a clue or open up a new area seen by very few

    Otherwise, it will fail.

    Personally, while camping in EQ for years, I found it to be quite social-able until everyone figured out the exact/precise perfect way to kill stuff , and it became less of a social occasion.

    Maybe the key is providing a truly random reward for campin an area, but only allow you to camp something once a day, so its special.

    -WL

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    The OP is not talking about sitting and waiting for rare spawns, they're talking about sitting in a room with respawning mobs and pulling them over and over.

    I played DAoC where there was no silly waiting for boss mobs.

    To be honest, when i first read this .. the impression is EQ camping, where waiting in queue is a large part of. That certainly turns me off.

    However, if you are talking about not moving, and just kill, kill, and kill, then it *may* work for me, as long as the combat is fun.

    The EQ model certainly will NOT work since you are fighting one-ies and two-ies and there is little tactical variations.

    Lastly, the down-side of this type of camping is the static nature of terrain. I would probably like a dungeon crawl better just because the terrain (or layout) is changing and if combat takes that into account, it is more fun.

     

    That's why I liked how DAoC encouraged you to move around. The longer a specific area had gone without anyone pulling from it, the more camp bonus xp it gave you.

    The question, of course, is whether there are too many people to crowd the camp spot.

    There is no reason this has to be done in an open world. If you just want to wait for spawn and kill, doing it in a group in an instance is the same. Even better, because there is zero chance of the need to share with anyone.

    And of course the question is why waiting for respawn (assuming that it is fast and no dead time) is more fun than running from the beginning to the end of a dungeon, where you can also kill hordes of stuff?

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by WereLlama

    Camping mobs can work if it rewards one of the following play styles:

    1. Socialize - If it facilitates players to talk with each other and share, while waiting for a mob to spawn 

    I don't play games to social. If i want to talk, i go to a chat room.

    2. Killer- Waiting in one spot allows for more opportunity to kill bigger and more interesting stuff

    Why wait? Just give me the bigger and interesting stuff in an instance, and let me kill it.

    3. Achiever- Waiting in one spot allows the player to achieve something that most, less patient players, can achieve.

    I don't want a "patience" achievement. I want one that says i down challenging mobs (one boss, or a hordes of lesser monsters).

    4. Explorer- Waiting in one spot long enough might reveal a clue or open up a new area seen by very few

    LOL .. camping, by definition, is the OPPOSITE of exploring. You stay in one place.

     

     

  • TrykenTryken Ultima Online Correspondent Orlando, FLPosts: 63Member

    Somebody else said it, and I want to reiterate my approval: Mobs need to start dropping loot specific to that mob.

     

    Take Guild Wars 2. Aside from getting the dungeon-completion bonus to spend on getting that dungeon's armor after so many runs, what's the point of doing one dungeon over another? Gold gain. And why go to any dungeon that isn't CoF? Well, if you've already gotten the armor-look you want, there isn't. You can get an exotic from any chest in any dungeon. So you'll always go to the fastest one.

    That's why dungeons and rare mobs need specific loot. It acts as incentive. Why go to a nightmarish dungeon? Because you have a chance of getting a very rare and expensive item that's only available at that dungeon.

    It's a way to make mobs valuable again, and to encourage players not to take the path of least resistance all the time.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,674Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Rydeson
      Now as for your response that instancing takes off the population pressure of having hundreds if not thousands of characters in the same zone...... OMFGGGGGGGGGG What game are you playing that ever came close to that?  I have never seen Rift, TOR and GW2 end zones or any zone have hundreds to thousands of people IN that zone fighting.. And don't even dare to tell me it's because they are all busy instancing..

    9 years ago (and before that), instancing was indeed a good way to let players enjoy content without lagging their socks off. I'm surprised it's hard to comprehend.....

    Except thats not true... There was zero lag in noninstanced dungeons in DAoC.

    You can't be serious.

    I am totally serious. DAoC didn't start to lag until you got about 200 people on creen at once.

    Instancing has never, EVER been about technical limitations. Especially not now. PS2 and Darkfall prove instancing is not needed for performance.

    I don't doubt that you genuinely believe that. I also don't doubt that you feel that way because you really aren't familiar with how instancing has been used outside of dungeons. Here are a few:

    • AION, TERA and many other modern MMOs instance entire zones to create channels to boost performance in crowded areas.
    • Guild Wars instances the public town area, to limit it to 100 players in an instance.
    • Earth and Beyond instanced the new player zones to reduce the load at release.

     

     

    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

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Rydeson
      Now as for your response that instancing takes off the population pressure of having hundreds if not thousands of characters in the same zone...... OMFGGGGGGGGGG What game are you playing that ever came close to that?  I have never seen Rift, TOR and GW2 end zones or any zone have hundreds to thousands of people IN that zone fighting.. And don't even dare to tell me it's because they are all busy instancing..

    9 years ago (and before that), instancing was indeed a good way to let players enjoy content without lagging their socks off. I'm surprised it's hard to comprehend.....

    Except thats not true... There was zero lag in noninstanced dungeons in DAoC.

    You can't be serious.

    I am totally serious. DAoC didn't start to lag until you got about 200 people on creen at once.

    Instancing has never, EVER been about technical limitations. Especially not now. PS2 and Darkfall prove instancing is not needed for performance.

    I don't doubt that you genuinely believe that. I also don't doubt that you feel that way because you really aren't familiar with how instancing has been used outside of dungeons. Here are a few:

    • AION, TERA and many other modern MMOs instance entire zones to create channels to boost performance in crowded areas.
    • Guild Wars instances the public town area, to limit it to 100 players in an instance.
    • Earth and Beyond instanced the new player zones to reduce the load at release.

     

     

    Yeh. Marvel Heroes has serious performance issues in public zones, particularly when all the players are fighting a single world boss.

    There is no reason not to use instances.

  • AeliousAelious Portland, ORPosts: 2,854Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Rydeson
      Now as for your response that instancing takes off the population pressure of having hundreds if not thousands of characters in the same zone...... OMFGGGGGGGGGG What game are you playing that ever came close to that?  I have never seen Rift, TOR and GW2 end zones or any zone have hundreds to thousands of people IN that zone fighting.. And don't even dare to tell me it's because they are all busy instancing..

    9 years ago (and before that), instancing was indeed a good way to let players enjoy content without lagging their socks off. I'm surprised it's hard to comprehend.....

    Except thats not true... There was zero lag in noninstanced dungeons in DAoC.

    You can't be serious.

    I am totally serious. DAoC didn't start to lag until you got about 200 people on creen at once.

    Instancing has never, EVER been about technical limitations. Especially not now. PS2 and Darkfall prove instancing is not needed for performance.

    I don't doubt that you genuinely believe that. I also don't doubt that you feel that way because you really aren't familiar with how instancing has been used outside of dungeons. Here are a few:

    • AION, TERA and many other modern MMOs instance entire zones to create channels to boost performance in crowded areas.
    • Guild Wars instances the public town area, to limit it to 100 players in an instance.
    • Earth and Beyond instanced the new player zones to reduce the load at release.

    Yeh. Marvel Heroes has serious performance issues in public zones, particularly when all the players are fighting a single world boss.

    There is no reason not to use instances.

     

    If you mean channels of zones I agree, bad performance is annoying and not every engine is created equal.

     

    If you mean private instancing then all the players wouldn't be able to attack a world boss, which if there were so many there to cause lag insinuates they liked it.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    Originally posted by Rydeson
      Now as for your response that instancing takes off the population pressure of having hundreds if not thousands of characters in the same zone...... OMFGGGGGGGGGG What game are you playing that ever came close to that?  I have never seen Rift, TOR and GW2 end zones or any zone have hundreds to thousands of people IN that zone fighting.. And don't even dare to tell me it's because they are all busy instancing..

    9 years ago (and before that), instancing was indeed a good way to let players enjoy content without lagging their socks off. I'm surprised it's hard to comprehend.....

    Except thats not true... There was zero lag in noninstanced dungeons in DAoC.

    You can't be serious.

    I am totally serious. DAoC didn't start to lag until you got about 200 people on creen at once.

    Instancing has never, EVER been about technical limitations. Especially not now. PS2 and Darkfall prove instancing is not needed for performance.

    And Darkfall... please don't make me laugh. The performance of that game is abyssal as soon as you have more than 20 people on screen.

    And you conveniently fail to mention Planetside.

     

    Also, you must have never ever played Darkfall.

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,915Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Masterfuzzfuzz
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by StonesDK
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by StonesDK
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

    Um. Whats stopping you from doing that now?

    I've done camping when I felt like it in every game I've ever played, including WoW.

    Nobody want to gimp their progress just to bring back old memories. I'm sure what's being discussed is a game where it's the best viable way to progress for everyone.

    I wasn't gimping my progress.  I was actually doing it for better gear, which is what someone in this thread asked for.

    We'll use WoW because it is one most people feel it is useless to mob camp on.  Xp was decent, not as good as quests but still good, coin was decent, and they were named boss mobs that have higher chances of a rare loot which is why I was camping them.

     

    You are if doing quests is a faster way to progress regardless if you liked what you were doing better

     

    To the OP: I'm not sure I could handle being stationary again but I sure do miss spending a lot of time in one dungeon running into other people not in my group

    So unless I am doing the fastest most efficient method of leveling I am gimping my progress?

    By definition, yes

    Truly gimping yourself, would be rushing through the content that is there.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member
    Originally posted by craftseeker
    Originally posted by Cephus404
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Fendel84M

    EQ and FFXI are still there actually. You can camp all you want, for the record :-p.

    Ah, the dumbest argument in the book...

    No, the games as we knew and loved them have long ago been patched away.

    They've been patched away because the majority of players didn't like them like that.  Why is that so hard for you people to understand?

    Oh we understand it all right, we just do not like it and are still disappointed by the shortsightedness of the developers. I could make a personal attack here but I will leave that to you.

    It wasn't shortsighted, catering to the majority of players is what allowed MMOs to go from a tiny niche genre to a massive mainstream one.  It made developers billions.  What they did was by no means wrong and if you feel you have to resort to personal insults, that means you've got nothing.

    No surprise there.

    Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
    Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
    Now Playing: None
    Hope: None

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member
    Originally posted by Aelious
    Originally posted by Cephus404
    Originally posted by Jairoe03

    I think this thread does a good job pointing out how MMO's focal point is in the social aspect of the game. The somewhat casualness of camping is something I somewhat miss, despite the disadvantages, it was still fun hanging out with people you enjoy socializing with and I think this is something that is terribly missed today.

    But this is something you can still do today without camping.  You could always do it.  You don't have to have mandated down-time to talk to people you enjoy being around.  I fail to see why so many people think that this bad mechanic is the only way to get a favorable social result.

    Aside from the few people that "camp" general chat most people want to be doing something while they socialize.  MMOs do a great job of this, too good a job.  Now the doing something involves just me, myself and I because I can progress just as easily without the hassle.  No one said it was the only way, just the only one so far to get results.

    Yet back when I used to play, I could solo and chat at the same time and I often did.  Today, people can multitask in games and be social somewhere outside of the game, nobody ever considers that.

    Many players are too focused on their own progress and generally won't do anything for the sake of actually doing it. Every second spent has to have some reward and I sadly think previous MMO's has trivialized the whole experience down to that.

    Yet isn't that the choice of the individual?  If that's what other people want to do, what business is it of yours?  You can stop and shoot the breeze any time you want to, it's your choice.  You have no right to force your choices on anyone else.

    Again, socializing within playing the game.  Sure, no one should force another to participate but the common gameplay mechanics actually discourage interaction.  This just doesn't make sense in an MMO setting.

    No it doesn't.  The only reason anyone ever socialized before was because it was a niche genre that drew in a specific type of person and when people have something in common, they tend to talk about it.  That's not the case today, MMOs are mainstream and draw in many different kinds of people.  Most of the time, the people sitting next to you have nothing whatsoever in common, therefore they don't talk.  The only way to go back to the old way is to actively discriminate against the majority of people playing MMOs, which is a non-starter.

    Now I don't mean to be grim but my favorite MMO's of all time to this day is still Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies because of how well you can casually play the game and socialize with others. Not many other MMO's since then allowed you to organize and build your own towns and cities or provide that degree of freedom within the environment.

    You can casually play the game and socialize with anyone you want to in any game out there, what are you talking about?

    He's talking about actually building a community with structures and player organization, not just hanging out at the auction house.

    He can talk about anything he wants, there's still no evidence that  you'd get any better community with the kind of player base that we have in MMOs today.  That's the problem that you people don't seem to understand, these are not the old school MMOs, they have fundamentally changed, not because of the developers, but because they are mainstream and appeal to an entirely different audience.  You simply cannot put the genie back in the bottle and the sooner you people realize that, the better.  Deal with the reality of what is, not the fantasy of what you want to be.

    Now its all about combat and combat mechanics and everything else is just lost or trivialized. What I believe separates great MMO's from the good ones today is which ones provides the best social tools and group activities IMO.

    It just appears that too many MMO's are trying to cater to as many people as possible rather than trying to focus their game onto a target audience.

    That's always been the way it's worked, sorry.  Businesses are in business to make money and they do that by appealing to the largest audience possible.  It's just that there is a larger audience available since MMOs went mainstream.

    True, there are more players and if you consider the tenure of the online populace in general you can see why MMOs can suffer social wise.  Companies are in it to make money but they have tried by copying the MMO with the largest audiance possible, which itself lost 12% of it's paying base this year.  I have no seeing eye but I have a feeling that things are shifting.  Making money for an MMO means keeping people playing it.  When players feel more invested in an MMO they stay and the best way to accomplish that, minus good gameplay of course, is other people.

    Sure, WoW eventually lost players after having more players for nearly 10 years than every other MMO on the planet combined.  The fact that development on any MMO that came out this year started 5 years ago when they were still an unstoppable force seems to be lost on you.  Things are not shifting, people are still going to be people and when WoW finally falls, there just will be no big dog, there will be hundreds of smaller MMOs.  You might get more variation then, but the overwhelming majority will still be making WoW-like games because they demonstrably work and make money.  Most developers don't care if their game folds after 6 months, they've already made back all of their money and a healthy profit and they're using it as seed money for their next project.  If the game lasts a year, that's a bonus, but it's not necessary, none of these developers are going hungry, they're making a boatload of money while the game is open and are working on the next one.  If they didn't like the profits, they'd stop making games, wouldn't they?

     

     

    Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
    Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
    Now Playing: None
    Hope: None

  • KBishopKBishop tracy, CAPosts: 205Member
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by KBishop

    What, in your opinion, would be a good design for a rare spawn?

    - Not always spawning at the same place, but rather a rare occurrence of a type of mob that can spawn anywhere in the world where such mobs are present.

    - The mob wanders randomly, and not following a specific path, and also not restricted to a specific area.

    - A "tracking" skill which would warn you when such a mob is near, and then allow you to track it and find it, a bit like archeology works in WoW.

    - Unique abilities that makes it challenging and fun to fight.

    Basically, a challenging and rare mob you find while you're playing outdoors, rather than a mob you camp waiting for it to magically appear at a predefined place. A mob you hunt instead of camping it.

    Well, I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I don't really know if that would address a ton of the issues.

    Not always spawning in the same place is nice and all, but I can see how a lot of people would find this annoying if they are heavily camping it (imagine you are camping a mob every day and it spawns randomly. That can get very annoying quickly)

    I think the wandering randomly is pretty cool, but again the same issues persist as the last point.

    Of course, the tracking would realistically make those previous points a non-issue, so I could definitely get behind this concept and the previous two.

    Unique abilities should be in every boss fight, so I'm in complete agreement.

    The real question is more in terms of like; what should the spawn time be, what should the drops be like, what are the respawns rate be like etc.

    Most of your ideas though are pretty good when added in all together

  • KaledrenKaledren , NYPosts: 310Member Uncommon

    I see no reason camping cannot work. Nothing saying it has to be the only means of advancement.

    Could still have the soloability and fast paced features for those that crave it.......and just as easily have campable points throughout the world that perhaps have mobs that give better than average experience, various difficulties within the same camp point, and'/or rare spawns that could possibly spawn with their own varying timers so they aren't so predictable.

     

    And please don't try to bring the argument of "Well if players can do things faster and easier, no one will do the camps because it would hinder their progression". There are players who enjoy a bit of a slow down and prefer to not always be in the rat race to get to cap to grind end game for gear that has no purpose beyond waiting for it to be obsolete the next expansion or simply to be "look at me" pieces.

    Believe it or not...some people enjoy camping. And believe it or not...if you don't like camping, that is fine, just don't do it and do what you enjoy instead. Simple solution isn't it.

     

    Don't deny others options they find enjoyable just because you don't enjoy them. And dev's CAN have multiple options like this that are viable and pull in other crowds ...in the same game. They just need to grow a pair and do it and stop being lazy and making the same game over and over with different titles to turn a quick buck off of the lemmings (Meaning game jumpers that lunge for the newest title on the market with little research or thought...then complain about it). There are many I see on this site and others clamoring for such things...so not like it wouldn't be used.

Sign In or Register to comment.