Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by Foomerang
LFD tools are a themepark staple whether I like it or not haha. But yeah, people want that intangible feeling of being in a world. The best fantasy movies achieve that. And its not because they have the best action sequences. Its the attention to detail and the ability to create a believable environment.Again, i am not disputing some immersion adds to enjoyment. However, i am also saying it is not that important in relative to other aspect of the game.
The LFD example is a primary example of convenience is more important than immersion.
I have no issue (and actually would welcome it) if devs put lots of details, and atmosphere in my game. I have a problem if they make the game unfun (to me) in the name of realism (like requiers me to walk 20 min before fighting anything).
I can see that. On the flip side, I remember running on foot across Corellia in SWG (pre-cu) and after about 15 minutes of just wilderness, I got this very surreal feeling of being lost out in the middle of nowhere. It was one of the more profound mmo moments Ive had. I realize the majority probably doesnt like that type of stuff in their mmos, but its things like that that are the reason I still have faith in the genre.
for me both Vanguard and Ryzom feel very "virtual world".
I love how in vanguard I can travel and not see anything and then suddenly have a point of interest in the distance.
In Ryzom you hear the wind, see groups of beasts roaming around, some coming up to you and just checking you out, very few qusets you just "find things to do".
When you are out in the wilderness you feel out in the wilderness.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I can see that. On the flip side, I remember running on foot across Corellia in SWG (pre-cu) and after about 15 minutes of just wilderness, I got this very surreal feeling of being lost out in the middle of nowhere. It was one of the more profound mmo moments Ive had. I realize the majority probably doesnt like that type of stuff in their mmos, but its things like that that are the reason I still have faith in the genre.
I don't like that in my games (MMO or not). Getting lost is not my idea of fun. Why? Because the solution is a chore and not challenging.
I think it is also hopeless romantic to have "faith" in a collection of 'games".
I have no faith entertainment. I don't need to. I will play a game AFTER i determine if it is fun. I don't need faith.
And genre boundaries are just limiting. So what if a game is a MMO or not. If it is fun (to me), i will play it. If not, i won't. I won't care what genre it belongs to.
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Actually to me the orriginal EQ felt very much like a virtual world and less like a game... Problem for me is i have a very hard time for myself to indentify what exactly gives me that virtuall world feeling, i however realise that games like GW2 really feel like games and not like worlds .
Yes, anything which makes a player feel disconnected from the game world breaks immersion:
1. Instant travel (other than that provided by a player)
2. Minimaps and compass indicators. These days players spend most travel time looking at minimaps or compass-indicators, instead of the world in front of them.
3. Brokers: Buy/sell goods through one NPC who is not even standing in a shop.
4. Very little npc interaction. EQ felt alive with all its npc interaction.
5. Flying numbers. In Vanguard, the flying numbers were 100% meaningless.
6. Monty Haul (big) numbers. a. mob hit points b. damage dealt c. gear stats
At level 15 in Vanguard, I saw 1,500 damage routinely. This is way bigger than the highest damage spell in old EQ (Ice Comet), which took wizards perhaps a year to get. In Vanguard all equipment had a dozen stats. When it comes to numbers, less is certainly more.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Speaking as someone who operated a SWG Master Musician / Master Doctor after the CU/NGE, people hated the support buffer classes. They hated queueing up and spending 10k-300k for doctor buffs. They hated even more spending 1k-60k for entertainer buffs. I had a blast in SWG, I maintained 6 accounts for 3.5 years.
Don’t get me started on UO, or Exploit Online as it should have been called. I only played UO for 1 or 2 months, and I played maybe 2-6 hours a week on dial up. Not the 20-30+ hours per week I played PS / SWG on DSL. But even back then I was reading news on games, and UO was all about the player exploits. Origin was not happy with the emergent user play style. People were not playing UO as Origin intended. Just take a look at Criticism of Ultima Online, for an example of the found exploits. Trammel was asked for, they didn’t come up with it from thin air.
Believe it or not I am a fan of sandbox, what I HATE about today's proponents of sandbox is their belief that sandbox = exploit cornucopia. But here is the thing, modern developers have lessons learned to start with when making a modern sandbox. I would hope we wouldn’t see the same exploits of 20 years ago, as so many sandbox fanbois secretly hope for. BTW the term Train was first coined in UO.
The only true answer to the OP’s question. “What MMo feels most like a virtual world and least like a game, and why do you think so?” Any game that has exploits, and allows exploits. Why does a sandbox game fail? It doesn’t allow exploits.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
(Currently playing the secret world) I don't know later on for tsw but on the zombie island you can literally feel the horror.the black house if any saw that movie they all be shilled .the effect is engrossing.hopefully the whole game is this well made.but I doubt it.it is hard to give player the mood of the moment.horror is relatively easy but other emotion are harder to convey .like the mood for detective .or other .wow had it till they instanced .then they baSicly killed emotion in wow.I recall when people would try to sneak by as and there would always be rogue around. Etc etc.its very hard to bring emotion to mmo
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus What MMo feels most like a virtual world and least like a game, and why do you think so?
Early U.O. and early EQ. The reason being that these games did not micromanage the players' paths and allowed them to set out and explore freely (within their abilities) a mysterious world. There was no instancing (in the true sense) and the world environment was shared with players who fought, traveled, crafted, bartered and sold, and socialized; all giving the feeling of a medieval community. Your character LIVED in the game world.
No single player design will ever match that. Oh, it might give you an interesting once-through experience, but there is minimal cooperation/interaction with other players, minimal choices (you are on a path), and such a world feels like a collection of stage backdrops.
U4 .. U6 .. or may be even U7.
At least in those SP games, i don't have gankers camping newbie spawn spot, and use l33t speak to insult you after they kill and loot you.
I would much rather play U6 than UO.
Fine, but for long-term MMO play and community and all that, the single player games don't cut it. Closest was Diablo I or II with their randomly generated maps, but even those got old after. I'm talking long-term gameplay (like 5 to 8 years). MMO's do that best, when designed correctly.
Personally i won't play any game for that long. Anything is boring after a while. Don't tell me the population of any long term MMO (heck wow is 9 years old) is the same today, as in the beginning.
D1 & 2 are great games but i didn't play them for that many years. Not even close.
So that kind of longevity is irrelevant to me. There are so many new games that it is unlikely i will play something that is that old.
Heck, even D3 which i love, will probably not last 2 years for me .. and that is NOT playing it exclusively so that i don't get sick of it fast.
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus What MMo feels most like a virtual world and least like a game, and why do you think so?
Early U.O. and early EQ. The reason being that these games did not micromanage the players' paths and allowed them to set out and explore freely (within their abilities) a mysterious world. There was no instancing (in the true sense) and the world environment was shared with players who fought, traveled, crafted, bartered and sold, and socialized; all giving the feeling of a medieval community. Your character LIVED in the game world.
No single player design will ever match that. Oh, it might give you an interesting once-through experience, but there is minimal cooperation/interaction with other players, minimal choices (you are on a path), and such a world feels like a collection of stage backdrops.
U4 .. U6 .. or may be even U7.
At least in those SP games, i don't have gankers camping newbie spawn spot, and use l33t speak to insult you after they kill and loot you.
I would much rather play U6 than UO.
Fine, but for long-term MMO play and community and all that, the single player games don't cut it. Closest was Diablo I or II with their randomly generated maps, but even those got old after. I'm talking long-term gameplay (like 5 to 8 years). MMO's do that best, when designed correctly.
Personally i won't play any game for that long. Anything is boring after a while. Don't tell me the population of any long term MMO (heck wow is 9 years old) is the same today, as in the beginning.
D1 & 2 are great games but i didn't play them for that many years. Not even close.
So that kind of longevity is irrelevant to me. There are so many new games that it is unlikely i will play something that is that old.
Heck, even D3 which i love, will probably not last 2 years for me .. and that is NOT playing it exclusively so that i don't get sick of it fast.
Sounds like your not a true fan of the MMO genre because MMO's and there persistent worlds are meant to be a virtual reality meant to be played for years at a time. Your line of thinking is what I would expect from the console crowd and is primarily one of the reasons I feel MMO do not belong on the console.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Sad thing, but the mentioned SWG pre CU does no longer excist.
LIES! Teh SWGEMU lives forever!!!! Been a hell of a long time getting it to where it is though, and it's still not quite fully functional... but for like 5 people rebuilding a game that took a whole company and a ton of money to do, I'll be playing it the day CH's are working again XD
for me both Vanguard and Ryzom feel very "virtual world".
I love how in vanguard I can travel and not see anything and then suddenly have a point of interest in the distance.
In Ryzom you hear the wind, see groups of beasts roaming around, some coming up to you and just checking you out, very few qusets you just "find things to do".
When you are out in the wilderness you feel out in the wilderness.
I agree on both games plus i would throw WurmOnline into the mix and even Darkfall, EQ and Age Of Wulin.
But the winner is Atys(Ryzom) by a long mile, the game has changing seasons and weather. Weather effects include rain, snow, and wind. Tied to the season and weather changes are the movements of animals and availability of harvestable materials.
Animal migration are also second to none.
For example, a certain type of sap may only be harvested during spring rains and be unattainable during other seasons or weather conditions. Weather conditions can change minute by minute. Each game season (spring, summer, fall, and winter) lasts four real time days.
Come on, what MMO can even come close to Ryzoms dynamic world.
That sounds very cool. Maybe I'll check Ryzom out.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Originally posted by BadSpockI think for a game to really have that virtual world feeling it really only needs two major systems in place:1. Housing2. Non-combat classes/professionsAnother big one that is important to many is:3. Territorial control PvP (be it faction, guild, RvR, etc.)These very simple criteria put games like UO, SWG, and EvE in their proper place as true "virtual worlds" - though the housing aspect of EvE is a bit... odd? Non-standard compared to say UO/SWG.
Actually to me the orriginal EQ felt very much like a virtual world and less like a game, and they didn´t have any of those
Problem for me is i have a very hard time for myself to indentify what exactly gives me that virtuall world feeling, i however realise that games like GW2 really feel like games and not like worlds .
Perhaps its the trend to have every aspect of a game itemized, tracked, displayed by a numerical value, and put into an achievement system. You cant escape the "game" so to speak. You cant explore over that hill without a message popping up on the screen saying "DISCOVERED THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT HILL! +10 exploration points. Cash in your exploration points for exciting rewards!"
things like that run rampant in games these days, so trying to make it feel more organic is difficult with so many artificially imposed reward systems.
Lolz. And I was so proud that I found the other side of the hill too! What pisses me off is if you are going to bother to ding-dong my redundant "achievements" you better give me something kick ass for that interruption into my immersion. Like say a free lolly at 7-Eleven. Then I'd be even more proud of my ding-dong.
To answer the OP's thread - nothing. I role play in the games using a shiz load of my imagination to the point where it hurts. But I have never been in a game that let me forget it was a game. Rabbits should not fight back and drop coins and heavy armor. Devs are money making retards.
Sounds like your not a true fan of the MMO genre because MMO's and there persistent worlds are meant to be a virtual reality meant to be played for years at a time. Your line of thinking is what I would expect from the console crowd and is primarily one of the reasons I feel MMO do not belong on the console.
"True" fan? I am not a true fan of any entertainment products. I use them for fun, not just because i have to be a "fan".
MMOs are not "meant" for anything. They are just entertainment products grouped by some common features. The definition and the grouping will change because of the market.
Whatever you believe is pretty much irrelevant to the market. If a big enough audience want a "console" MMO, it will happen. Heck, it is happening.
In fact, many console games (like DIshonor, or Bioshock, although i play them mostly on PC) are more fun to me than any MMOs.
Originally posted by BadSpockI think for a game to really have that virtual world feeling it really only needs two major systems in place:1. Housing2. Non-combat classes/professionsAnother big one that is important to many is:3. Territorial control PvP (be it faction, guild, RvR, etc.)These very simple criteria put games like UO, SWG, and EvE in their proper place as true "virtual worlds" - though the housing aspect of EvE is a bit... odd? Non-standard compared to say UO/SWG.
Actually to me the orriginal EQ felt very much like a virtual world and less like a game, and they didn´t have any of those
Problem for me is i have a very hard time for myself to indentify what exactly gives me that virtuall world feeling, i however realise that games like GW2 really feel like games and not like worlds .
Perhaps its the trend to have every aspect of a game itemized, tracked, displayed by a numerical value, and put into an achievement system. You cant escape the "game" so to speak. You cant explore over that hill without a message popping up on the screen saying "DISCOVERED THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT HILL! +10 exploration points. Cash in your exploration points for exciting rewards!"
things like that run rampant in games these days, so trying to make it feel more organic is difficult with so many artificially imposed reward systems.
I have wanted to bring this up before. Does the game ruin the virtual world. Mobs standing around, quests, magic items stats listed, your exploration bonus +10 and all the combat numbers. They make you notice the game and therefore take away from the virtual world. However, these are games so will removing those ruin the game?
Back in the day, we played a ton of dnd. When you discovered a magic item, it didn't have stats or powers listed on it. You had to cast an identify spell OR play around with it. You could get a +1 sword, not have it identified then use it to full effect. A wand of fireballs, not so much, unless the DM just let you use it.
When wow added sparkly effects to plants you could gather, it really detracted from the world experience for me.
I would like to see a game hide all the numbers. Let players experiment like the days of old. They might find some fun in it.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
I would like to see a game hide all the numbers. Let players experiment like the days of old. They might find some fun in it.
If that is fun, they won't be downing an add-on for wow en mass and let the add-on do it for them. They would have been doing the experiments themselves.
It is pretty obvious that most want the results, not the fun of the research.
This is going to be my first post on MMORPG.com, even though I created the account back in 2004 .
To me it's a combination of two. When the world is consistent (art, style, quests, [what have you], ... ) and where there's rules not paths. By that I mean, I like it when I get to decide how I want to play the game myself.
I had an epic time playing Neocron 1.0. I was a crafter. Standing in my dark alley and crafting my ass off, getting money and recognition.
Virtual world is very subjective.. IMO any game mechanic that brings about a physical or emotional response on my end meets that qualification.. The game world needs to mean something to that individual.. Normally I like the change in climate, sounds and mobs to start with..
I would like to see a game hide all the numbers. Let players experiment like the days of old. They might find some fun in it.
If that is fun, they won't be downing an add-on for wow en mass and let the add-on do it for them. They would have been doing the experiments themselves.
It is pretty obvious that most want the results, not the fun of the research.
Let me tell you this, when i first played EQ, i hated the deathpennalties and not being able to do anything solo, or how harsh the game was when you made a single mistake.
Now many years later i have come to realise that exactly these things, the challenge, the excitement and the fear of dieing made the experience so good... Surviving an adventure was a reward by itselves.
the people that play current day mmo,s like a cleric works his spreadsheats are the same people comlaining that mmos are so boring these days, well obviously because they are playing with spreadsheats instead of having fun adventures in an immersive world.
now, i realise that people love min maxing, but if you give the a single character sheat and hundreds of abbilities to choose from, you replace the boring numbers with things much more challenging like planning strategies and having tactics based on abbilities and not on numbers.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Community to me makes it feel like a "virtual world" and not just a game. You get to know others, you form relationships and that is sooooooooooo much more immersive to me than simply "oh I'm going to my house now, that I built, and I can chop down this tree".
I mean those things are nice, I like housing and crafting (or at least the existence of crafting jobs I don't always like to do them myself). But what really draws me in (or doesn't) is feeling like I know most of my server. Nothing beats that.
I also like to play with the UI turned off at times which if the game has a nice world/graphics/etc. is a completely new experience, but I can usually only manage this once I have been playing a title for a year or two and can pretty much "play by feel" or am just messing around.
Originally posted by Rydeson Virtual world is very subjective.. IMO any game mechanic that brings about a physical or emotional response on my end meets that qualification.. The game world needs to mean something to that individual.. Normally I like the change in climate, sounds and mobs to start with..
Another question, what more or less typical themepark things would not disturb the virtual world feeling?
first of, a virtual world for me i realise by now that it is all about immersion for me
- quests if done smart can be part of an immersive world, no more questionmark, but good directions ( but no marks on a minimap) and NPC stepping up to you or waving at you works great for immersion. Works great as long as questchains and stories are not straight and linear. And choice really influences the world around you, if you do act A some people and clans will love you for that, others will dislike or even hate you for it. Allow those choices to add to your factions.
-instances in general dont help immersion unless done smart, instances do really allow for good story telling and depth in a world, and they can when done right add to a worlds immersiveness. Instances however are not a solution but only a tool for immesiveness. Because to much instancing kills immersion. Open world dungeons are way more fun then instanced dungeons espescially if they work dynamic and change based uppon the numbers of players walking around.
- dynamic events are in my opinion even more suited for a sandboxy world then for a themepark, if only the dynamics would react based on players actions.. For example zerging a certain camp to attain a scroll might end in defeat while a single thief sneaking in to steal it might be an easy task. Anyway, the problem with current dynamic events is that they keep repeating in exactly the same order, having some randomness in them that makes them feel different each time and much less scripted would save the feature for an immersive open world, because to be immersive and feel real the world needs to live and be dynamic and react to the actions players take. And they should really consider making pvp part of this based on players choice
so what more themeparky features do you think would still hold their own in a virtual world? Do strict PvE zones work for you?
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus - dynamic events are in my opinion even more suited for a sandboxy world then for a themepark, if only the dynamics would react based on players actions.. For example zerging a certain camp to attain a scroll might end in defeat while a single thief sneaking in to steal it might be an easy task. Anyway, the problem with current dynamic events is that they keep repeating in exactly the same order, having some randomness in them that makes them feel different each time and much less scripted would save the feature for an immersive open world, because to be immersive and feel real the world needs to live and be dynamic and react to the actions players take. And they should really consider making pvp part of this based on players choice
This got me to thinking. Having multiple ways to accomplish a task, mission, quest goes a long way to create a virtual world.
People should be able to pick open a locked chest or door, bash open a locked chest or door, pickpocket a key for the locked chest or door, or use technology/magic to open a locked chest or door.
For the "save my <insert NPC>" tasks, there should multiple ways to accomplish this, too. Call in friends and zerg the hell out of the enemy. Sneak in, free the NPC, and try to find a quicker way out. Use magic/technology to fool the opponents, destroy the opponents, or pop in and out with the saved NPC.
As it stands now, there is usually one way to accomplish a task in MMOs - fight.
- 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
Comments
Again, i am not disputing some immersion adds to enjoyment. However, i am also saying it is not that important in relative to other aspect of the game.
The LFD example is a primary example of convenience is more important than immersion.
I have no issue (and actually would welcome it) if devs put lots of details, and atmosphere in my game. I have a problem if they make the game unfun (to me) in the name of realism (like requiers me to walk 20 min before fighting anything).
I can see that. On the flip side, I remember running on foot across Corellia in SWG (pre-cu) and after about 15 minutes of just wilderness, I got this very surreal feeling of being lost out in the middle of nowhere. It was one of the more profound mmo moments Ive had. I realize the majority probably doesnt like that type of stuff in their mmos, but its things like that that are the reason I still have faith in the genre.
for me both Vanguard and Ryzom feel very "virtual world".
I love how in vanguard I can travel and not see anything and then suddenly have a point of interest in the distance.
In Ryzom you hear the wind, see groups of beasts roaming around, some coming up to you and just checking you out, very few qusets you just "find things to do".
When you are out in the wilderness you feel out in the wilderness.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I don't like that in my games (MMO or not). Getting lost is not my idea of fun. Why? Because the solution is a chore and not challenging.
I think it is also hopeless romantic to have "faith" in a collection of 'games".
I have no faith entertainment. I don't need to. I will play a game AFTER i determine if it is fun. I don't need faith.
And genre boundaries are just limiting. So what if a game is a MMO or not. If it is fun (to me), i will play it. If not, i won't. I won't care what genre it belongs to.
Yes, anything which makes a player feel disconnected from the game world breaks immersion:
1. Instant travel (other than that provided by a player)
2. Minimaps and compass indicators. These days players spend most travel time looking at minimaps or compass-indicators, instead of the world in front of them.
3. Brokers: Buy/sell goods through one NPC who is not even standing in a shop.
4. Very little npc interaction. EQ felt alive with all its npc interaction.
5. Flying numbers. In Vanguard, the flying numbers were 100% meaningless.
6. Monty Haul (big) numbers.
a. mob hit points
b. damage dealt
c. gear stats
At level 15 in Vanguard, I saw 1,500 damage routinely. This is way bigger than the highest damage spell in old EQ (Ice Comet), which took wizards perhaps a year to get. In Vanguard all equipment had a dozen stats. When it comes to numbers, less is certainly more.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Speaking as someone who operated a SWG Master Musician / Master Doctor after the CU/NGE, people hated the support buffer classes. They hated queueing up and spending 10k-300k for doctor buffs. They hated even more spending 1k-60k for entertainer buffs. I had a blast in SWG, I maintained 6 accounts for 3.5 years.
Don’t get me started on UO, or Exploit Online as it should have been called. I only played UO for 1 or 2 months, and I played maybe 2-6 hours a week on dial up. Not the 20-30+ hours per week I played PS / SWG on DSL. But even back then I was reading news on games, and UO was all about the player exploits. Origin was not happy with the emergent user play style. People were not playing UO as Origin intended. Just take a look at Criticism of Ultima Online, for an example of the found exploits. Trammel was asked for, they didn’t come up with it from thin air.
Believe it or not I am a fan of sandbox, what I HATE about today's proponents of sandbox is their belief that sandbox = exploit cornucopia. But here is the thing, modern developers have lessons learned to start with when making a modern sandbox. I would hope we wouldn’t see the same exploits of 20 years ago, as so many sandbox fanbois secretly hope for. BTW the term Train was first coined in UO.
The only true answer to the OP’s question. “What MMo feels most like a virtual world and least like a game, and why do you think so?” Any game that has exploits, and allows exploits. Why does a sandbox game fail? It doesn’t allow exploits.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
The secret world
(Currently playing the secret world)
I don't know later on for tsw but on the zombie island you can literally feel the horror.the black house if any saw that movie they all be shilled .the effect is engrossing.hopefully the whole game is this well made.but I doubt it.it is hard to give player the mood of the moment.horror is relatively easy but other emotion are harder to convey .like the mood for detective .or other .wow had it till they instanced .then they baSicly killed emotion in wow.I recall when people would try to sneak by as and there would always be rogue around. Etc etc.its very hard to bring emotion to mmo
Personally i won't play any game for that long. Anything is boring after a while. Don't tell me the population of any long term MMO (heck wow is 9 years old) is the same today, as in the beginning.
D1 & 2 are great games but i didn't play them for that many years. Not even close.
So that kind of longevity is irrelevant to me. There are so many new games that it is unlikely i will play something that is that old.
Heck, even D3 which i love, will probably not last 2 years for me .. and that is NOT playing it exclusively so that i don't get sick of it fast.
Asheron's Call feels most like a world for me because it offers:
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Sounds like your not a true fan of the MMO genre because MMO's and there persistent worlds are meant to be a virtual reality meant to be played for years at a time. Your line of thinking is what I would expect from the console crowd and is primarily one of the reasons I feel MMO do not belong on the console.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
LIES! Teh SWGEMU lives forever!!!! Been a hell of a long time getting it to where it is though, and it's still not quite fully functional... but for like 5 people rebuilding a game that took a whole company and a ton of money to do, I'll be playing it the day CH's are working again XD
Surprised myself thinking it but TSW gave me that feeling more than any other mmo I've played.
I agree on both games plus i would throw WurmOnline into the mix and even Darkfall, EQ and Age Of Wulin.
But the winner is Atys(Ryzom) by a long mile, the game has changing seasons and weather. Weather effects include rain, snow, and wind. Tied to the season and weather changes are the movements of animals and availability of harvestable materials.
Animal migration are also second to none.
For example, a certain type of sap may only be harvested during spring rains and be unattainable during other seasons or weather conditions. Weather conditions can change minute by minute. Each game season (spring, summer, fall, and winter) lasts four real time days.
Come on, what MMO can even come close to Ryzoms dynamic world.
That sounds very cool. Maybe I'll check Ryzom out.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Lolz. And I was so proud that I found the other side of the hill too! What pisses me off is if you are going to bother to ding-dong my redundant "achievements" you better give me something kick ass for that interruption into my immersion. Like say a free lolly at 7-Eleven. Then I'd be even more proud of my ding-dong.
To answer the OP's thread - nothing. I role play in the games using a shiz load of my imagination to the point where it hurts. But I have never been in a game that let me forget it was a game. Rabbits should not fight back and drop coins and heavy armor. Devs are money making retards.
"True" fan? I am not a true fan of any entertainment products. I use them for fun, not just because i have to be a "fan".
MMOs are not "meant" for anything. They are just entertainment products grouped by some common features. The definition and the grouping will change because of the market.
Whatever you believe is pretty much irrelevant to the market. If a big enough audience want a "console" MMO, it will happen. Heck, it is happening.
In fact, many console games (like DIshonor, or Bioshock, although i play them mostly on PC) are more fun to me than any MMOs.
I have wanted to bring this up before. Does the game ruin the virtual world. Mobs standing around, quests, magic items stats listed, your exploration bonus +10 and all the combat numbers. They make you notice the game and therefore take away from the virtual world. However, these are games so will removing those ruin the game?
Back in the day, we played a ton of dnd. When you discovered a magic item, it didn't have stats or powers listed on it. You had to cast an identify spell OR play around with it. You could get a +1 sword, not have it identified then use it to full effect. A wand of fireballs, not so much, unless the DM just let you use it.
When wow added sparkly effects to plants you could gather, it really detracted from the world experience for me.
I would like to see a game hide all the numbers. Let players experiment like the days of old. They might find some fun in it.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
If that is fun, they won't be downing an add-on for wow en mass and let the add-on do it for them. They would have been doing the experiments themselves.
It is pretty obvious that most want the results, not the fun of the research.
EQ and believe it or not Darkfall UW. Vanguard has the best world but the rest of the game is so piss poor I can't count it.
Edit: Nari... why do you even come to this website?
This is going to be my first post on MMORPG.com, even though I created the account back in 2004
.
To me it's a combination of two. When the world is consistent (art, style, quests, [what have you], ... ) and where there's rules not paths. By that I mean, I like it when I get to decide how I want to play the game myself.
I had an epic time playing Neocron 1.0. I was a crafter. Standing in my dark alley and crafting my ass off, getting money and recognition.
Let me tell you this, when i first played EQ, i hated the deathpennalties and not being able to do anything solo, or how harsh the game was when you made a single mistake.
Now many years later i have come to realise that exactly these things, the challenge, the excitement and the fear of dieing made the experience so good... Surviving an adventure was a reward by itselves.
the people that play current day mmo,s like a cleric works his spreadsheats are the same people comlaining that mmos are so boring these days, well obviously because they are playing with spreadsheats instead of having fun adventures in an immersive world.
now, i realise that people love min maxing, but if you give the a single character sheat and hundreds of abbilities to choose from, you replace the boring numbers with things much more challenging like planning strategies and having tactics based on abbilities and not on numbers.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Community to me makes it feel like a "virtual world" and not just a game. You get to know others, you form relationships and that is sooooooooooo much more immersive to me than simply "oh I'm going to my house now, that I built, and I can chop down this tree".
I mean those things are nice, I like housing and crafting (or at least the existence of crafting jobs I don't always like to do them myself). But what really draws me in (or doesn't) is feeling like I know most of my server. Nothing beats that.
I also like to play with the UI turned off at times which if the game has a nice world/graphics/etc. is a completely new experience, but I can usually only manage this once I have been playing a title for a year or two and can pretty much "play by feel" or am just messing around.
http://xivpads.com/?1595680
http://guildwork.com/users/murugan
That's why Ryzom wins hands down.
Another question, what more or less typical themepark things would not disturb the virtual world feeling?
first of, a virtual world for me i realise by now that it is all about immersion for me
- quests if done smart can be part of an immersive world, no more questionmark, but good directions ( but no marks on a minimap) and NPC stepping up to you or waving at you works great for immersion. Works great as long as questchains and stories are not straight and linear. And choice really influences the world around you, if you do act A some people and clans will love you for that, others will dislike or even hate you for it. Allow those choices to add to your factions.
-instances in general dont help immersion unless done smart, instances do really allow for good story telling and depth in a world, and they can when done right add to a worlds immersiveness. Instances however are not a solution but only a tool for immesiveness. Because to much instancing kills immersion. Open world dungeons are way more fun then instanced dungeons espescially if they work dynamic and change based uppon the numbers of players walking around.
- dynamic events are in my opinion even more suited for a sandboxy world then for a themepark, if only the dynamics would react based on players actions.. For example zerging a certain camp to attain a scroll might end in defeat while a single thief sneaking in to steal it might be an easy task. Anyway, the problem with current dynamic events is that they keep repeating in exactly the same order, having some randomness in them that makes them feel different each time and much less scripted would save the feature for an immersive open world, because to be immersive and feel real the world needs to live and be dynamic and react to the actions players take. And they should really consider making pvp part of this based on players choice
so what more themeparky features do you think would still hold their own in a virtual world? Do strict PvE zones work for you?
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
People should be able to pick open a locked chest or door, bash open a locked chest or door, pickpocket a key for the locked chest or door, or use technology/magic to open a locked chest or door.
For the "save my <insert NPC>" tasks, there should multiple ways to accomplish this, too. Call in friends and zerg the hell out of the enemy. Sneak in, free the NPC, and try to find a quicker way out. Use magic/technology to fool the opponents, destroy the opponents, or pop in and out with the saved NPC.
As it stands now, there is usually one way to accomplish a task in MMOs - fight.
- 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