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!

Allowing or stopping multiboxing.

12346»

Comments

  • Keldor837Keldor837 Syracuse, NYPosts: 148Member Uncommon

    My issue isn't with multiboxing in and of itself (yes it can impact the game/market depending on the game and individual). My issue is with the people who primarily multibox in large numbers. These are people with a lot of time, money, and knowledge on their side. Allow me to give you an example.

    Back during the wotlk expansion for WoW, there was a very prevelent multi-boxer on my server. This guy would roll around with 21 shamans in the world PvP zones which were impactful to a factions levelling and ability to raid the bosses within. (forgive me as I don't remember what it's called). The problem is, the other faction got to the point where if he was online (and they'd hop on alts to check if he was in Orgrimmar before the event started) then they wouldn't get on. If they didn't get on then everyone else wouldn't get to enjoy some fun world PvP. One night i'd grown tired of it and called him out for creating an imbalance on the server and for Blizzard not taking action. His only comment on the matter was an "Lol, you won't need to worry about it soon." He stopped responding in-game and didn't participate in the next PvP event according to a friend of mine. I went to bed so I could wake up early for college classes. Low and behold after I got home the next day I couldn't even use my computer, my account was hacked and stripped of all items, and was permanently banned by Blizzard for being a gold mule and trafficking gold. Now before some of you say I must have bought gold and later was hacked by said people. Understand I hate the act of buying gold with real life currency, and was a broke college student. I had bills and books to pay for and only played WoW to avoid spending money on partying and other distractions. I chalked this up to coincidence that it happened but my room mate wasn't as relaxed about it. A week later he did the same thing as myself and called out the multi-boxer for ruining the servers world PvP. SAME EXACT THING HAPPENED TO HIM! When you have the resources and know-how to build multiple computers and hardware for 21 accounts and have the money to buy WoW and all it's expansions and pay the sub for 21 accounts...that's a person with too much money and time on their hands. Such a person is capable of doing a lot of harm on the internet.

    Needless to say, I quit playing the game since Blizzard's response to my inquiry about multi-boxing was they didn't mind since he was paying them. That and it cost way to much money to rebuy the game from classic to wotlk at that point in time.

  • karat76karat76 Wellston, OHPosts: 1,000Member Uncommon
    I voted stop it multiboxers and botters alike are scourge to a community they were a disturbance in WoW and DAoC.  However unless someone can come up with a game design to not make it worth their time then we will have to  deal with them.
  • sketocafesketocafe StoupaPosts: 801Member Uncommon

    Part of the reason you get a lot of multiboxing in EVE is because some useful roles like flying link ships which give buffs are so freaking boring you won't find people who want to give up actually participating in the fights to give links. Then you have activities like mining which are so safe and brain dead you can control as many characters as you like with no troubles. The presence of multiboxing is often a failure of design on the part of the developers. Falcon alts can fuck right off though.

    I don't see much of a problem with the practice itself, I just think it's a problem if people feel forced to do it. I'd be happier if multiboxing didn't need to exist though. 

    Originally posted by Zakane

    I don't think they will stopped it since its more money for them.

    Yet the other day I was playing WoW and friend and I did a dungeon to only find the three other people in our random were a multiboxer.

    Now IMO that is just plain annoying/rude ect, you could tell because they all followed one person and didn't all attack at the same time and reacted slowly.

     

    There are other reasons to hate multiboxing, but who is going to listen? 

    I saw this kind of stuff too, and figured it was just lazy fuckasses putting someone on follow and autoattacking or simple bots which would do the same thing, as opposed to multiboxing.  This is another failure of design in that it's possible now to get away with. No way in hell this could have happened in heroics in early to mid burning crusade.  Speaking of failures this quoting and editing i'm trying is going to be strange, I think.

     

     

  • Keldor837Keldor837 Syracuse, NYPosts: 148Member Uncommon
    FFXIV's mechanics require a lot of moment and such so that you can't multibox end-game. Since there's no world PvP that limits someone to just do the new arena PvP. That requires you to play several different classes, so I'm not sure it's even possible to multibox outside of leveling.
  • moonrunnermoonrunner Olympia, WAPosts: 21Member
    The only multiboxing I ever ran into was mostly in DOAC and it was usually people playing there primary toon and boxing a much needed healer class as there where never enough healers around to make a proper group. every one knew it and everone was glad to have em or it would of been "fail team" time.
  • azarhalazarhal Somewhere, BCPosts: 760Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by moonrunner
    The only multiboxing I ever ran into was mostly in DOAC and it was usually people playing there primary toon and boxing a much needed healer class as there where never enough healers around to make a proper group. every one knew it and everone was glad to have em or it would of been "fail team" time.

    So you are telling me that people multiboxed to have "companions/mercenaries" in their teams. In other word, the issue would have been fixed if the game allow players to use companions/mercenaries like a few games (Neverwinter, SWTOR, etc) are currently doing...

  • RattenmannRattenmann ReitmehringPosts: 510Member Uncommon

    The "issue" would be solved if todays games would stop being dumbed down to a point of pure boredom.

     

    Multiboxing is a way to fight the boredom coming from content that is designed to be facerolled while being drunk, afk AND asleap at the same time. For me anyways.
    So bring back challenge, bring back mechanics that keep me on my toes and bring back the feeling that i need 100% of my skill to play ONE toon. Then and only then will i stop multiboxing.

     

    Then again... releasing dumbed down content is cheaper and having me pay 2+ subscriptions is more income. So i guess ill keep boxing to get some enjoyment out of current gen games of mass appeal.

    MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.

    Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?

  • Keldor837Keldor837 Syracuse, NYPosts: 148Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Zaradoom

    The "issue" would be solved if todays games would stop being dumbed down to a point of pure boredom.

     

    Multiboxing is a way to fight the boredom coming from content that is designed to be facerolled while being drunk, afk AND asleap at the same time. For me anyways.
    So bring back challenge, bring back mechanics that keep me on my toes and bring back the feeling that i need 100% of my skill to play ONE toon. Then and only then will i stop multiboxing.

     

    Then again... releasing dumbed down content is cheaper and having me pay 2+ subscriptions is more income. So i guess ill keep boxing to get some enjoyment out of current gen games of mass appeal.

    Try Final Fantasy XIV end game, you cannot multibox it and live.

  • RattenmannRattenmann ReitmehringPosts: 510Member Uncommon
    The game also needs to be fun in the first place tho... something FF14 lacks sadly ;)

    MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.

    Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?

  • PhoenixC13PhoenixC13 Sonoma, CAPosts: 122Member Uncommon
    I think that you should be able to do it if you want but I would like to see a game designed were people wouldn't feel they needed to multi box ever.  I am sure it will be allowed more accounts = more money, at the end of the day that's what the gaming company's want.

    image
  • KiyorisKiyoris BejingPosts: 965Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Zaradoom
    The game also needs to be fun in the first place tho... something FF14 lacks sadly ;)

    Is FF14 popular now?

    ]

  • Kevyne-ShandrisKevyne-Shandris Hephzibah, GAPosts: 1,946Member
    Originally posted by Stromm

    I played WoW from 2004 to 2013, multiboxing had exacly zero impact on the game for me.

    Maybe not to you, but to others they may question this practice...

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amDdn8Iiqc0

     

    Now I wasted his ego time with an 1hr 30mins AV before, by letting him essentially preen himself camping one area (as seen in the video...and you won't see that video where I led our team on his channel, either), as despite I have multiple clients and can multibox with them, I don't appreciate 30 toons from one account allowed to play. That robs players of slots forcing them to wait longer in instances, and it's incredibly difficult to kill a player who can 1 shot players as fast as s/he can target. It can be done, but very difficult especially in PuGs.

     

    Now Blizzard later broke the ability to have 30 toons from one account log into an instance, but not before seeing that mess. He's still allowed to multibox to that extreme in world content, and that's the stuff that needs to go. WoW raids are limited to 40 players per team. 30 is essentially all the team, with 1 player controlling it all.

     

    It's wrong.

  • zevianzevian toledo, OHPosts: 401Member Uncommon

    I personally dont care about multiboxing, unless its used as a tool to grief or disrupt the economy.  I do mind say a guy dragging his other character around without it contributing to a group. 

     

    The poster above posted a link for PreparedWoW  he is getting up to 60 characters and he uses it to cause major disruptions to other people.   I feel players like that have no place in the game.   I did enjoy some of his exploits at first but after a while it just gets old and repetitive.

  • PreparedPrepared Irvine, CAPosts: 95Member

    Looks like a win for multiboxers of Everquest Next!  See you all in game, Sony Online Entertainment will now make a huge profit and will have a fun gaming experience for everyone!  Glad to see the right decision was made!  I will multibox 40 accounts and will pay the subscription for All Access Pass so that I can also multibox Everquest and Everquest II!

     

  • redgang1redgang1 Boise, IDPosts: 35Member

    You're kidding yourself if you think EQN will end up group centered like they claim it will.

     

    There will be no need to box in yet another mostly solo MMO.

  • AlleinAllein San Diego, CAPosts: 1,656Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by redgang1

    You're kidding yourself if you think EQN will end up group centered like they claim it will.

    There will be no need to box in yet another mostly solo MMO.

    I know right, all devs are liars and everything they say never happens. Can't believe they even try to fool us, haha they are so silly. I doubt it will have combat, or mobs, or trees or anything. Probably just going to be a black screen that makes my computer crash. Dam devs!

    Random player's opinion based on.... > dev statements always and forever. 

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,447Member Uncommon
    As long as they dont bot them. If a player is controling them I am fine with it. I used to run 3 accounts in EQ1 myself and sometimes a 4th when my friend was not home lol


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by redgang1

    You're kidding yourself if you think EQN will end up group centered like they claim it will.

     

    There will be no need to box in yet another mostly solo MMO.

    They don't have to make the game "Group centered".  This is a sort of strange false dichotomy that many players make, and many MMOs fail to understand while they're being developed.  That a game is either solo focused or group focused and that there's no middle ground.

    The only thing EQN really has to deliver is choice.  Take ESO for example. There is no choice.  You have to do the solo content in order to progress your character.  Group content is barely an after-thought and even if you were content running the small amount of group based content that you have available over and over, you'd still hit a point where you have to go back and do solo-type content to progress.  Even worst is that the solo content is a much faster way to level than the group content.  So not only are you forced to do solo content, you're basically penalized for choosing to do group content.

    EQN simply needs to stick with horizontal progression system they have talked about, which makes the entire world viable content regardless of how long you've played, then divide it up into solo, group and raid type content.  Then never require that any one of those types are needed to progress your character.

    If I want to log in every day and do group content with my friends, I should always be able to do so.  If I want to play solo content, I should have access to it.  If I want to raid to get cool new gear, I should be able to do so, or alternatively be able to solo grind a lot of cash and coin to buy raid dropped gear from other players.

    If they can provide anywhere near this level of freedom, they will have a real winner on their hands.

     

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,447Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by redgang1

    You're kidding yourself if you think EQN will end up group centered like they claim it will.

     

    There will be no need to box in yet another mostly solo MMO.

    They don't have to make the game "Group centered".  This is a sort of strange false dichotomy that many players make, and many MMOs fail to understand while they're being developed.  That a game is either solo focused or group focused and that there's no middle ground.

    The only thing EQN really has to deliver is choice.  Take ESO for example. There is no choice.  You have to do the solo content in order to progress your character.  Group content is barely an after-thought and even if you were content running the small amount of group based content that you have available over and over, you'd still hit a point where you have to go back and do solo-type content to progress.  Even worst is that the solo content is a much faster way to level than the group content.  So not only are you forced to do solo content, you're basically penalized for choosing to do group content.

    EQN simply needs to stick with horizontal progression system they have talked about, which makes the entire world viable content regardless of how long you've played, then divide it up into solo, group and raid type content.  Then never require that any one of those types are needed to progress your character.

    If I want to log in every day and do group content with my friends, I should always be able to do so.  If I want to play solo content, I should have access to it.  If I want to raid to get cool new gear, I should be able to do so, or alternatively be able to solo grind a lot of cash and coin to buy raid dropped gear from other players.

    If they can provide anywhere near this level of freedom, they will have a real winner on their hands.

     

    I think a good MMO has group and solo content but IMO where ESO failed is that solo content forces you to do it solo. SWToR did a great job of letting you team in your solo story. So it come down to forcing players to play solo. There should always be the option and thats where EQN can win. Taking away options for group play in a MMO is a fail.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • FoobarxFoobarx Poway, CAPosts: 451Member

    Multi-boxing only becomes an issue in PVP.  

    As far as PVE goes, these people would never have grouped with you anyways. 

    First step in quashing multi-boxing is to remove any follow mechanics from the game.  Everyone gets to steer their own character instead of following other characters.  It's player laziness that gave them the mechanic to multi-box in the first place.

  • Superman0XSuperman0X San Jose, CAPosts: 1,577Member Uncommon

    Instance or phased content can scale dependant on the size (solo or group). Open world content has to either be balanced for solo or group, as it can not change on the fly. Sure, there can be some content that is solo friendly, but that doesnt stop a group from doing it (and it being too easy). The real issue is whether they have chosen a combat model that is solo or group friendly.

    EQ1 had an open world group combat model. The way that the aggro worked, the way the mobs were laid out, and the zone setup was all there to encourage grouping. It did allow for some solo'ing, but it strongly rewarded grouping, even if just a duo. There was a lot of open world content that you just could not experience without a group.

    WoW had an open world solo combat model. The open world content is designed in such a way to make it solo friendly. This meant that people did not feel 'forced' to group to experience the content.

    Based on the comments made about the trinity, and how they are trying to avoid it using the GW2 model vs the EQ1 model, I would suspect that they are going to make open world solo friendly. They can then put the group content in instanced or phased locations.

    However, it is a bit early to speculate. They are currently working out the engine mechanics via Landmark. I would expect to hear some solid information about how they expect EQN to play in the fall.

  • LyrianLyrian Posts: 292Member Uncommon
    My perspective on this is that the game should never be simple enough that you can multibox it. It should be complicated and dynamic enough that mirrioring commands and positioning would never work, or become out of sync extremely fast.
  • PreparedPrepared Irvine, CAPosts: 95Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    As long as they dont bot them. If a player is controling them I am fine with it. I used to run 3 accounts in EQ1 myself and sometimes a 4th when my friend was not home lol

     

    No MMORPG today allows for players to bot any characters.  Botting is against the rules of all MMORPGs and anyone that does that will be banned from the game.  All multiboxers control all of their characters.  If the characters are not in control of the multiboxer, then it's not multiboxing.  It's very simple, if there is a player in control of more than one character, it's multiboxing.  If there is no player at the keyboard controlling the character(s), then it's botting.  It's never both.  So your statement doesn't really make sense.  You're stating "as long as they dont bot them" you're fine with it.  Well that applies to everyone that plays or will ever play or has ever played MMOs.  It goes without stating it.  The player doesn't like bots, doesn't want them in any MMO.  Bots don't have a player behind them controlling them.  All multiboxers are players controlling all of their characters.  It's the same as a player playing one character.  The multiboxer is never a botter.  The botter is never a multiboxer.  The two are completely separate and mentioning a bot in the discussion of multiboxing is the same as mentioning a bot to a normal player.  It just doesn't apply.

     

  • AlleinAllein San Diego, CAPosts: 1,656Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Superman0X

    Instance or phased content can scale dependant on the size (solo or group). Open world content has to either be balanced for solo or group, as it can not change on the fly. Sure, there can be some content that is solo friendly, but that doesnt stop a group from doing it (and it being too easy). The real issue is whether they have chosen a combat model that is solo or group friendly.

    EQ1 had an open world group combat model. The way that the aggro worked, the way the mobs were laid out, and the zone setup was all there to encourage grouping. It did allow for some solo'ing, but it strongly rewarded grouping, even if just a duo. There was a lot of open world content that you just could not experience without a group.

    WoW had an open world solo combat model. The open world content is designed in such a way to make it solo friendly. This meant that people did not feel 'forced' to group to experience the content.

    Based on the comments made about the trinity, and how they are trying to avoid it using the GW2 model vs the EQ1 model, I would suspect that they are going to make open world solo friendly. They can then put the group content in instanced or phased locations.

    However, it is a bit early to speculate. They are currently working out the engine mechanics via Landmark. I would expect to hear some solid information about how they expect EQN to play in the fall.

    I don't see them using the GW2 model at all, unless there is only one way to do combat without the trinity. GW2 classes were designed (intentional or not) with 1 vs 1 PVP in mind. Every class can tank/dps/cc/self heal/self-rez, etc. Obviously playing with others helps, but without any buffing or "need" for others, it isn't essential. WvWvW and arenas (esport) were the original "end game" but I believe PVE has improved since I quit.

    EQN on the other hand will have classes with 8 out of 12 skills locked to a class's theme/role. So it makes it hard for a Warrior to become a "healer" if they only have 4 skills to mix and then assuming that there are "healing" skills on the secondary bar.

    They've made it a point to mention GW2's system and faults and that EQN will be a social game. Multiple times have said that players aren't the hero and will need others to do content that most of us would consider "group" content.

    Classes will still have roles, while flexible to a point, but unlikely it will be anything like GW2's solo machine classes.

    At least that's my take.

    With at least 5 tiers to the world, there is no reason they can't fit in enough content for the soloer up to 100+ "raids". Just because 100 people can kill a single Orc, doesn't mean solo content shouldn't exist. As the world will be dynamic/procedurally generated, won't be anything like GW2 where you can just run around on a timed PVE spawn loop and chain kill everything.

    Then again, they could just make it like every other game, but seems like a huge waste of time/money to restart a game multiple times to do so.

12346»
Sign In or Register to comment.