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!

Why do carebears claim EVERY game as their own?

ORIGINALPKORIGINALPK Brit GYPosts: 6Member

Hi!

 

First of all, I apologize for the provocative thread title and the username. They're for attention reasons only. 

 

I'm doing a small academic research on MMORPG gamer behaviour. The research topic plays largely around the "sandbox vs themepark" subject (even though I personally do not like those terms, about some damn time for the genre to move on!).

 

Now, putting aside all the prevailing MMORPG market conditions (larger companies are too afraid to produce a big budget sandbox game since themepark is cashcow). What I nor my colleagues have not figured out is: why the "themepark" oriented crowd seem to proclaim every game in this genre to suit their needs? I.e. when publishers are talking about releasing sandbox/RvR/PvP-heavy games I can see tons of articles, forum posts and even people come to me in person saying "Hey, did you hear about this new game X? It sounds awesome, I just hope there isn't any open world PvP in it! I hope the PvP crowd would go play Darkfall/Mortal Online/Eve/Insert some low budget game here."

 

This brings me to question the typical themepark crowd's true motivations of gaming, are they just hopping from one game to another? There are so many options to choose from in the market for players who prefer themepark games. Why should Archeage/Everquest Next/Black Desert and so many others cater just their needs?

 

Please bear in mind, my research is 100% neutral and I have studied this solely based on my observations on themepark crowd behaviour (I can't see sandbox fans urging publishers to add open world PvP or other elements to pure themepark games such as WoW etc). I myself, I like a good game, no matter if it's called themepark or sandbox. :) 

Also, please keep in mind: this is not a "sandbox vs themepark" discussion (even though my research subject largely is), but a direct question to themepark fans why every other game should be a themepark game too.

 

TL;DR: There are tons of themepark games for themepark fans to choose from. Why do they want every sandbox game to mold into a themepark too?

«1345

Comments

  • TarbloodTarblood Kirkland, WAPosts: 62Member

    Because I want the cake. If you have the cake, then the cake is a lie.

    Edit on a serious note, only because I respect the question, the above is a metaphor for my actual answer:

    Honestly, I am for a sandpark game with some open PvP elements. They want what they want. Dungeon finders, raid finders, gear grind. People don't like being ganked. People don't like wasting time in a time-waster to have the time actually wasted. I.E. I just made my super armor of heaven and you ganked me and took it. Screw this game.

    That is about the only feature in "sandbox" MMORPG's that most "carebears" want removed. The cake is comfort. If you have my comfort, comfort is a lie and I don't want to play this stupid hardcore game anymore.

    image

  • JuJutsuJuJutsu Toronto, ONPosts: 331Member
    All your games are belong to us!
  • PanzerbasePanzerbase Chicago, ILPosts: 423Member
    It's not that hey are taking over every game to hit the market, it's more so the game companies want their business. Why? Simple their money is just as good as a hardcore players and there are many more of them. Also, who would you rather design and develop content for? Some small crowd of nerds going nuts over the smallest change or the masses much more likely to take it on the chin when something goes wrong?
  • elegoselegos Easley, SCPosts: 2Member

    I'm trying to figure out a few things too:

    Do you really expect us to believe your research is "100% unbiased" after reading this?

    Do you really believe not having pvp in a "sandbox" will some how turn it into a "themepark"? Do you even know what these buzz words mean?

    Do you realize that sandbox pvpers don't ask to have pvp added to most themepark games because most of them Already Have PVP in some form? The one you mentioned, WoW, has had open world pvp for years. Why would any one need to urge them to add it?

    Do you really expect us to believe this is an "academic" research project?

     

    It would be nice if people like you would convince the industry to make some games where 85% of the content is pvp. That way you'd stop playing my "carebear" games where 85% or more of the content is pve. It'd be awesome to have some good games with zero pvp, so me and my carebear friends can just kill dragons without our skills getting all screwed up by "pvp balance" adjustments.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,998Member Uncommon
    Because without us, you don't have any victims to prey on. Be honest, you are not looking for a fair fight, so you'd better give me a better than even chance to avoid or flee a conflict or I won't play.

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • Agent_JosephAgent_Joseph SarajevoPosts: 1,070Member Uncommon

    no idea why not? 

    if every player can play in your self way it is good game

    brw. what is carebears? I know what it mean in EVE but cant linked what is that in any other game

    only EVE is real MMO...but I am impressive with TSW

  • samanthaksamanthak berlinPosts: 5Member Common

    its not the open world pvp that bothers most carebears, nor it specifically a themepark crowd, the main issue here is griefing, people dont like people who grief, who take sheer enjoyment in other peoples misery, who like abuse other players. its pure psychological abuse, do these griefers treat their families this way as well?

    and the reason these griefers want an all griefing game with no other server options is to continue griefing to rpay on the weak.

     

    also currently how many sandbox games that are release for people to play that cater to the sandbox crowd? its not that carebears want everygame to be carebear friendly is the fact that there is no sandbox that caters to the carebear crowd

  • udonudon Durham, NCPosts: 1,767Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ORIGINALPK

    Please bear in mind, my research is 100% neutral and I have studied this solely based on my observations on themepark crowd behaviour (I can't see sandbox fans urging publishers to add open world PvP or other elements to pure themepark games such as WoW etc). I myself, I like a good game, no matter if it's called themepark or sandbox. :) 

    I'm not sure you know what the term "neutral" means given you used a derogatory term to describe the side you didn't like.  And what was this research methods you did because I can tell you are way off base here.  PVP players demand more PVP in every theme park game created rather it fits or not.  

    Personally I think game developers should focus on doing one thing really well and not chase after both audiences.  I'm not anti PVE or PVP as both types of games have earned place on my hard drive but what I don't like is when PVP is forced onto a PVE experience or vise versa. 

  • sschruppsschrupp Cedar Rapids, IAPosts: 386Member Uncommon

    Don't forget there are 3 types of gamers. "Hardcore" PvP only players that call anyone else in the world "Carebear". "Carebear" players that avoid all forms of PvP. And then the average gamers that like both PvP and PvE content.

    "Hardcore" PvP players tend to think they're better than everyone else.

    "Carebear" players and average gamers both usually think of "Hardcore" players as "<bleep>hats" because of their L2PNeWb tendencies.

    I've known WAY more average gamers than I've known "<bleep>hats" or "Carebears". The only place I seem to see one extreme or the other is in forums. Imagine that. People very passionate one way or another are more likely to share their opinion than people that don't care either way and are probably spending their time in the game having fun rather than complaining about one extreme or another on a forum. Maybe that's why most games end up PvE heavy with optional PvP. Game designers have access to much more data than forum dwellers spouting theories.

    Personally I like both PvP and PvE content. My favorite style is when there is "safe" PvE areas and then PvP areas that have PvE elements in them. Sometimes I just want to relax and have fun which is when "Safe" PvE is great. Fighting players in PvP gets boring to me after a while because to me it feels like the same thing over and over. PvE content lets me see more locations, follow stories etc. What's real exciting for me though is doing PvE with the DANGER of unexpected PvP.

    In full PvP areas you know what to expect. Zergzergzerg. In PvE content where PvP is possible you know it could happen, but you don't know where or when. So you might be chilling taking out some Ogres for some dude that got molested by them and asked for your help and in the middle of your epic battle *WHABAM* you get jumped by somebody and now things just got interesting. Now THAT's fun in my opinion.

    I'd also like to point out that the OP could be stated the exact opposite. Why do "hardcore" pvpers claim EVERY game as their own? I see just as much complaining on forums by "hardcore" pvpers about developers putting PvE content in the MMO they're designing to make money for them than I do "carebears" complaining that a small portion of the game will have optional PvP.

    Insert random misqoute here

  • k61977k61977 Pendleton, SCPosts: 145Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ORIGINALPK

    Hi!

     

    First of all, I apologize for the provocative thread title and the username. They're for attention reasons only. 

     

    I'm doing a small academic research on MMORPG gamer behaviour. The research topic plays largely around the "sandbox vs themepark" subject (even though I personally do not like those terms, about some damn time for the genre to move on!).

     

    Now, putting aside all the prevailing MMORPG market conditions (larger companies are too afraid to produce a big budget sandbox game since themepark is cashcow). What I nor my colleagues have not figured out is: why the "themepark" oriented crowd seem to proclaim every game in this genre to suit their needs? I.e. when publishers are talking about releasing sandbox/RvR/PvP-heavy games I can see tons of articles, forum posts and even people come to me in person saying "Hey, did you hear about this new game X? It sounds awesome, I just hope there isn't any open world PvP in it! I hope the PvP crowd would go play Darkfall/Mortal Online/Eve/Insert some low budget game here."

     

    This brings me to question the typical themepark crowd's true motivations of gaming, are they just hopping from one game to another? There are so many options to choose from in the market for players who prefer themepark games. Why should Archeage/Everquest Next/Black Desert and so many others cater just their needs?

     

    Please bear in mind, my research is 100% neutral and I have studied this solely based on my observations on themepark crowd behaviour (I can't see sandbox fans urging publishers to add open world PvP or other elements to pure themepark games such as WoW etc). I myself, I like a good game, no matter if it's called themepark or sandbox. :) 

    Also, please keep in mind: this is not a "sandbox vs themepark" discussion (even though my research subject largely is), but a direct question to themepark fans why every other game should be a themepark game too.

     

    TL;DR: There are tons of themepark games for themepark fans to choose from. Why do they want every sandbox game to mold into a themepark too?

    First and foremost I am neither carebear or hardcore.  I just like to play games myself I don't really care what they are.  I have been playing games since pong and threads like this make me cringe.

    You ask why should etc.... cater just their needs?  Well because the number of what you would call carebear outnumber hardcore gamers ten fold.  So just stop and think about this developers are not making games for you to play, they are making games to make money.  So if that is the case wouldn't  you market your game to the majority of players. 

    Today's younger players tend to only want to get to max level and then move on.  That should be your real question.  The term max level should have never entered into MMO's.  They are suppose to be about the journey not some random number that says hey I am better than you I can get here in 1 day.

    Anyway I believe the true answer to your question is exactly what I have stated.  As developers you follow the trend and go where the money trail leads.  You don't try and create something new or inventive, because you would probably lose your ass off because it doesn't fit the model people are already use to.  Gone are the days of the so called hard core games because in today's world not many would except it. 

    image

  • syriinxsyriinx New York, NYPosts: 1,063Member Uncommon

    The better question is why do PvPers think sandbox = PvP?

    PvPers actually have sandbox options.  PvErs really do not.

     

  • Carl132pCarl132p Columbus, INPosts: 535Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ORIGINALPK

    Hi!

     

    First of all, I apologize for the provocative thread title and the username. They're for attention reasons only. 

     

    I'm doing a small academic research on MMORPG gamer behaviour. The research topic plays largely around the "sandbox vs themepark" subject (even though I personally do not like those terms, about some damn time for the genre to move on!).

     

    Now, putting aside all the prevailing MMORPG market conditions (larger companies are too afraid to produce a big budget sandbox game since themepark is cashcow). What I nor my colleagues have not figured out is: why the "themepark" oriented crowd seem to proclaim every game in this genre to suit their needs? I.e. when publishers are talking about releasing sandbox/RvR/PvP-heavy games I can see tons of articles, forum posts and even people come to me in person saying "Hey, did you hear about this new game X? It sounds awesome, I just hope there isn't any open world PvP in it! I hope the PvP crowd would go play Darkfall/Mortal Online/Eve/Insert some low budget game here."

     

    This brings me to question the typical themepark crowd's true motivations of gaming, are they just hopping from one game to another? There are so many options to choose from in the market for players who prefer themepark games. Why should Archeage/Everquest Next/Black Desert and so many others cater just their needs?

     

    Please bear in mind, my research is 100% neutral and I have studied this solely based on my observations on themepark crowd behaviour (I can't see sandbox fans urging publishers to add open world PvP or other elements to pure themepark games such as WoW etc). I myself, I like a good game, no matter if it's called themepark or sandbox. :) 

    Also, please keep in mind: this is not a "sandbox vs themepark" discussion (even though my research subject largely is), but a direct question to themepark fans why every other game should be a themepark game too.

     

    TL;DR: There are tons of themepark games for themepark fans to choose from. Why do they want every sandbox game to mold into a themepark too?

    Your research isn't neutral if your thread post starts off by labeling people who like a certain game type with a derogatory term. That's point one, point two is you aren't doing research at all, you don't have 'colleagues" and no one comes up to you to say the things you claim they say. This is just pot stirring bullshit as per the usual pvp poster.

  • General-ZodGeneral-Zod Zod, CAPosts: 743Member Uncommon

    Why are there so many of these PvP vs PvE threads? Can't we all get along?

    I'm sure there will be some PvE Sandboxes that will erect. Remember everybody was out developing "themeparks" it's going to take a little time for developers to get wind that you guys just want a sandbox to play in too. (Absent of PvP of course)

     

    image
  • NecropsieNecropsie BursaPosts: 142Member Uncommon

    Actually, there is a simple answer for this: Without "carebears", "griefers" mean nothing.

    Open world PvP means one thing and one thing only: Ganking new players. Nothing else. So if someone says something like "i want open world pvp", it actually means "i want to kill newbies constantly, make sure their game experience ruined, because i am a.. (insert any nasty word here)".

    Now, we all know "griefer vs. griefer" games are not succesful. They will never be. No sane person will pay for a game just to be killed by (insert nasty word here).

    Sorry, but a game with "griefers vs. carebears" game will never exist. Open world PvP will always get abused.

    That is why we, the majority, doesn't want open world pvp games. We will never play them. If we like the idea, we will try to change them. If we manage to do that, we will get rid of (insert nasty word here). If we cannot, we will just leave. Simple as that.

    Stages of a new mmo: 1) It's just beta. It still has plenty of time before release. 2) It just launched. Give it time. WoW wasn't built in a day. 3) We don't need you anyway. 4) F2P announced. 5)Huge influx of players. 6) Look how much has changed. 7) Cash shop is the only thing developed lately. 8) It has been a long journey and we thank everyone who was part of it. Shutting down in 3 months. (Courtesy of Robokapp.)

  • LiquidElectronLiquidElectron Charles City, IAPosts: 17Member

    I'm starting to get sick of the notion that a sandbox means FFA or Open World PvP.  Did no one besides me play SWG?  Sandbox and optional PvP...imagine that.  It is not suddenly a themepark if I don't want to go beat up other players and instead want to build an impressive structure or craft some handy items for myself and others. 

    Besides that, the people you so happily refer to as 'carebears' have likely had enough PvP shoved in their faces by multiple games that they're just sick of it.  Maybe they want to relax and not have to 'hardcore roflstomp' for a while.  Not to mention they are clearly the majority of MMO players now, so obviously developers/publishers are going to 'cater' to them.  That's where the money is...follow the money.

  • ORIGINALPKORIGINALPK Brit GYPosts: 6Member
    Originally posted by elegos

    I'm trying to figure out a few things too:

    Do you really expect us to believe your research is "100% unbiased" after reading this?

    Do you really believe not having pvp in a "sandbox" will some how turn it into a "themepark"? Do you even know what these buzz words mean?

    Do you realize that sandbox pvpers don't ask to have pvp added to most themepark games because most of them Already Have PVP in some form? The one you mentioned, WoW, has had open world pvp for years. Why would any one need to urge them to add it?

    Do you really expect us to believe this is an "academic" research project?

     

    Hi Elegos!

    If you would please re-read the first post and then reply if you still find the reason for it! Just a tip, I merely used PvP as an example of a somewhat traditional "sandboxy" feature (I.e. when publishers are talking about releasing sandbox/RvR/PvP-heavy games...).

    I have spent some time debating what is sandbox and what is themepark too (even though, once again I don't like those terms to determine a game!!), believe me. ;) 

    This topic nor any of the content in it are indeed not a part of my research, you got that right!!! Like I said, I just don't understand the reason for this kind of behaviour.

  • GadarethGadareth Westcliff-on-SeaPosts: 313Member

    Seriously ???

    Firstly Carebear vs Hardcore, Themepark vs Open World, PvP vs PvE are actually three separate debates. If you cannot understand this basic point forget doing a study on this and find something about which you actually have a clue.

    The Carebear vs Hardcore debate is mostly focused on how much time and effort is needed to succeed in a particular activity. This often focuses on how long it takes to complete quests and the complexity.

    Thempark vs Open World, focuses on freedom of the player vs the restictions of more organized heavily directed and scripted world models.

    PvP vs PvE focues on how players interact. the PvE believes that the primary focus should be the players vs the world, PvP believes that players should be able to add other players to the equation.

     

    Now for all these the truth is every person has  stance on all three of these.

    The Open World free for all PvPer who wants everyone to start on equal footing with no levels just player skill is a  Care bear - Open World - PVPer

    The Open world with heavy crafting focus and player driven market and city building - who wants heavy raids and the need to hunt epic monsters for rare components - requiring group co-operation is a Open World - Hard Core - PVEer.

     

    Just my 2 cents

    Gadareth

  • ORIGINALPKORIGINALPK Brit GYPosts: 6Member

    Thanks everyone else too for their replies. This is good stuff, but I would like to remind you that this question nor any content in this thread are not directly part of my research! Just something I have tried to figure out on the way. Good points made here. I think too many people got caught on the PvP side of the story though. Let's try something else:

    One prime example of sandbox game turning into a more themepark game on (popular?) demand prior to release is Black Desert Online. Black Desert Online was advertised for a long time to have non-instanced player housing, which would eventually mean the scarcity of housing plots. Recently they have changed housing to instanced form which is largely used in more themeparky games. What do you people make of this?

     

    Ps. Like I said in the first post, the term carebear was just to drag people in for a chat. So sorry if someone took offence. 

     

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member
    Because there are so many of them that developers cater to them?  They make up the overwhelming majority of MMO players. It's the hardcore whiners who represent essentially none of the marketplace who run around and cry that people aren't making games for them.  Sure, it's because they're financially worthless in the marketplace and refuse to accept reality.

    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

  • NeherunNeherun St. MichelPosts: 278Member
    Originally posted by Necropsie

    Actually, there is a simple answer for this: Without "carebears", "griefers" mean nothing.

    Open world PvP means one thing and one thing only: Ganking new players. Nothing else. So if someone says something like "i want open world pvp", it actually means "i want to kill newbies constantly, make sure their game experience ruined, because i am a.. (insert any nasty word here)".

    Now, we all know "griefer vs. griefer" games are not succesful. They will never be. No sane person will pay for a game just to be killed by (insert nasty word here).

    Sorry, but a game with "griefers vs. carebears" game will never exist. Open world PvP will always get abused.

    That is why we, the majority, doesn't want open world pvp games. We will never play them. If we like the idea, we will try to change them. If we manage to do that, we will get rid of (insert nasty word here). If we cannot, we will just leave. Simple as that.

    This actually reminds me of the idiots swarming to Darkfalls pre-beta forums demanding the game to have optional PvP.

    Don't you think your a little bit too ignorant? Your definition of open world PvP makes me weep how pathetic todays players are. They want everything now, easy progression with zero set backs. You couldn't possibly imagine how many times I've been ran down by players far above the progression than I am. Have I ever quit those games because of that? No, I haven't. I don't demand all games to be smooth sailing without any set backs, I don't need that. Even life isn't that, and if a person cannot handle getting beat in a computer game, I've got bad news for you what happens when the shit hits the fan for the first time in real life. Todays generations (Those born from '90s and up) are so annoying, demanding selfish brats I'd just feel like wiping them from the face of the earth.

    I aren't marching to your themeparks to demand perma-death, I just skip the game, as it obviously isn't for me. All you want is your re-skinned themepark adventure you can repeat and notice the pattern, get bored and hop into another cartwheel. Can't you admit you're only escaping something, and not really looking for an MMO experience, but rather something drastically different? MMORPGs used to be about player interraction, freedom and consequences, you've turned them into hamster wheels you want to grind through till the said feels falls off, only to be replaced with exactly the same one.

     

     

     

    image

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,211Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ORIGINALPK

    Thanks everyone else too for their replies. This is good stuff, but I would like to remind you that this question nor any content in this thread are not directly part of my research! Just something I have tried to figure out on the way. Good points made here. I think too many people got caught on the PvP side of the story though. Let's try something else:

    One prime example of sandbox game turning into a more themepark game on (popular?) demand prior to release is Black Desert Online. Black Desert Online was advertised for a long time to have non-instanced player housing, which would eventually mean the scarcity of housing plots. Recently they have changed housing to instanced form which is largely used in more themeparky games. What do you people make of this?

     

    Ps. Like I said in the first post, the term carebear was just to drag people in for a chat. So sorry if someone took offence. 

     

    People are focused on the pvp aspect because you specifically used the term CareBear which is a pvp only term.

    You're over thinking the entire issue. Companies make products and services for consumers with money to buy them. If games aren't being made for a demographic it is likely because that demographic doesn't have or isn't perceived to have money.

    If you want games made for the demographic you perceive to be marginalized then they need to show them the money.

  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Algo Star SystemPosts: 651Member Uncommon
    Why do people who use the word "carebears" behave like they're some special cut of gamer.  Are people like this apart of the competitive gaming scene in any shape or form (FPS, MOBA, FG, Sports)?  Or are they simply tab target dice roll gangsters who live vicariously through their in game avatars? Explain please.
  • HorusraHorusra maryland, MDPosts: 2,581Member Uncommon
    Why are pvp'ers crawling all over ESO demanding OW PVP.
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    In spite of the language used, I find it hard to believe that this is a research paper based in an educational or clinical setting.  Mostly it's the default stance taken when asking the questions.

     

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

  • tawesstawess LkpgPosts: 2,535Member Uncommon

    Bacause carebears are a larger mass. Thus they get more attention and generates more money. So the publishers and investors follow what the carebears like. And since they are a larger mass they seem to be "everywhere"

     

    It is ofc not exactly that simple but in a short and rounded off kind of way that is how it is.

«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.