Originally posted by Deli I respectfully disagree with Riolgirl when she says that a person should not play a MMORPG if they cannot devote time to the community. If a game attracts a good population of casual gamers then they will play together and grow together in the game. I also think that a casual gamer can join a guild, make friends, and meet new people in pick-up groups. A casual gamer may not have a core group of friends which they play will the time, but they still meet other players and have fun in the game. Also, I think MMORPGs are not the same as single-player boxed games. Single-player boxed games have a shorter playing time compared to a MMORPG and this has a lot of appeal to a person, for me anyways. I found I prefer playing one MMORPG then several single-player boxed games over the course of a year (it is also cheaper). If a game can cater to casual players, then these types of players will end-up finding each other, making friends and can enjoy playing the game, they just cannot compete with the hard core gamers head to head. Unless someone comes up with a fair handicap system, a class distinction will exist.
All this I agree with. Just because a "casual" gamer doesn't spend 12 hours a day in Teamspeak doesn't mean they aren't interacting with the rest of the community. Hell I play at least around 50% of the time soloing, but that doesn't mean I have zero interaction with the rest of the community. My RL friends and I play together when we can, I solo fairly often, do pickup groups, and even join guilds. It about time mmorpg's (and the community) gave up on the idea that People must zerg together into mega guilds and group 100% of the time, or they aren't being social.
Simply put, people play the game the way they want to play it. MMORPGs enable the player to play both casually and hardcore. That's one of the great things about them.
-------------------- Alex "Maximane" De Line [email protected] - MMORPG.COM Staff -
ok and finally, mmorpg's as a hobby (as opposed tooo?)
Well yes, mmorpg's are a hobby (computer games in general, of which mmorpg's get the most time).
But it is possible to have more then one hobby, and it is possible to have a hobby not take up ALL your social time.
Power gamers (85% of whom are either in school or unemployed) are not exactly the market you want to limit your game to, and unfortuantely it's the one a lot of mmorpg's have picked out. I think finally some of the new titles understand they'll make more money be providing a game that people are willing to spend the monthly fee on, even if they can only play it a few hours a month. (Guild Wars!!!)
So let's do the analogy thing again.
Executive: "Johnson, our company wants to develop a new alcohalic beverage. Who drink the most?"
Johnson, "Sire, achohol is most popular with people who drink too much and are alcoholics! They drink WAY more then anyone else."
Exectutive, "Outstanding, let's make a drink that is only for serious alcoholics. We won't even try to sell to anyone else, in fact we'll actively discourage them from buying it. They just won't be able to keep up the consumption rate of the alcoholics and we'll need all our supply for them."
Johnson, "This will be great! We'll sure sell more alcohol then those idiots making it for the casual drinker..."
Not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic. Not everyone who plays mmorpg's has unlimited time to spend playing them. Catering to only those who abuse and over do it is not a winning financial strategy in the long run.
Originally posted by Lotarious hmmm where to begin, let's start here... I would agree that Clever_Gloves was correct with the analogy to golf. I can never compete with a professional (unless we use a handicap system) and I don?t want too, it is waste of my time and his. However, I still can and like to play golf and know what my expectations are. I think the analogy is prefect for a MMORPG (although the scores are extreme).
In a MMORPG like in life, and golf, we all start with the same potential. The difference is where we spend our time credits. Are you honestly trying to say, that "standing around a golf course all day long practicing" doesn't make you better at golf? No what your natural abilities might be, the person that plays regularly will be better than one doesn't. Do you think that playing a MMORPG doesn't make you better at playing it? An easy example: How long did it take you to get your second character to the same level as your first? Allot less time I bet... why do you suppose that is? I sit because you didn't get better at playing? Ever play with a fresh ebayed character? I bet you noticed the lack of playing abilities. Your character gains skill by time invested, but it's only as good as you are. Your only as good as the time you invest. In this aspect the game reflects life and life he game. Perhaps your trying to say that some MMORPG reward people unfairly with advancement beyond the level their abilities? In short, MMORPG's are hobbies. Just like any other hobby you will either invest the time to become good, you'll accept you will never be a "pro" but that doesn't mean you can't enjoy yourself, or you'll do something else instead.
-=-=-=-=- Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Lotarious - I agree that your version of the golf analogy is how the games and some gamers think the game should be played. However, the handicap system in golf would work if a person and gamers would agree to them. To even out the match in golf a weaker player gets a stroke advantage to even out the skill of the better player, without it, no-one of different skills would play each other.
I like the golf analogy because everyone can play golf but those that practice are likely better. Golf also has a handicap system which is something a computer game might replicate. I also agree a major attitude adjustment would be needed to have it work.
I also agree on you market share comment. Game companies are missing the boat not catering to casual gamers more.
Game companies will do what makes them the most money. Let's consider a few things: What is a casual gamer? No one can answer this, generally the people that say it feel cheated because they didn't get to kill the uber_dragon01, or feel that for whatever reason they don't have a sword of uberness is because they haven't played enough. This assumption is in fact, false. http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/archives/000758.php
Most people play 0-30 hours a week. Of those, Social motivation is a difference of about 8.5 hours played per week (from 17.1 to 25.5 hours). So those that want to sit and chat with friends make up the highest end of this spectrum.
Most so called "hard core gamers" aka "those that achieve results quickly" only play 17-20 hours a week on average.
Players under the age of 23 tend to play about 2 hours more each week than players over 22. (this shots the whole kids play more than adults thoery)
So if time played doesn't mean greater results, then what is a casual player? Someone that wants results without taking the time to gain the abilities to achieve the results.
What would a game be that doesn't have some abilities requirement? One that had no goals at all, or one that had goals so easy that anyone could gain them without a challenge. A game few would play, and none for very long.
Play smarter, not longer.
-=-=-=-=- Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Spending more time and being better at playing the game because you practice and are good is the wonderful and good.
However, just because you spend more time playing doesn't mean you should gain a huge advantage just for having spent the time. that's the problem.
I agree completely that game companies will do what makes them the most money, and yet you seem to suggest their marketing campaign be:
"Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one"
I sincerely doubt that's a marketing strategy for success.
btw...
a study of people who do currently play mmorpgs, don't really tell us anything about who might if the perception wasn't that the whole point of playing was how much time you spent.
I too would like to play a casual game where you dont have to spend huge amounts of time doing repetitive tasks. I have a child with another on the way and would like to be able to play something that I dont have to spend alot of time at once. It would be nice to be able to stop a quest mid stream or fight a battle with a named mob without clearing "trash" mobs for hours before the big mega fight. I too played EQ and level my wizard all the way up to 65 with a huge amount of AA's. I stopped playing after my guild was in the higher end planes due to the fact that we spent 3 to 4 hrs clearing trash mobs that gave crap experience and no loot. After doing this for about 8 weeks I grew bored and distraught of the way EQ was set up. I am sure alot of you can relate to the Plane of Growth and having to clear the entire plane before killing Tunare <about 10hrs of clearing>. I would love a MMORPG that would only involve about 2 to 3 hrs at a time to finish a named battle and/or stop a quest and be able to finish it at a later time. I dont think that the hard core gamers would have to be disrupted. Longer quests should be available with bigger rewards, but without sarcifing people with limited play time. The easier quests should be limited as far as how many times they could be completed by one character to minimize the "farming" that goes on and I feel contributes to the damaging of the online game economy.
Originally posted by Lotarious grrrrr... had a longer message and it didn't post ok short version... Clever - Spending more time and being better at playing the game because you practice and are good is the wonderful and good. However, just because you spend more time playing doesn't mean you should gain a huge advantage just for having spent the time. that's the problem. I agree completely that game companies will do what makes them the most money, and yet you seem to suggest their marketing campaign be: "Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one" I sincerely doubt that's a marketing strategy for success.
btw... a study of people who do currently play mmorpgs, don't really tell us anything about who might if the perception wasn't that the whole point of playing was how much time you spent.
There is no huge advantage to people that play more. I can go one endless proving this. The people that play most are people wishing to spend time talking with other players. Other than the intrinsic advantage of friendship, they gain nothing for this time spent in game.
The problem is there is no problem.
There is no "casual" there is no "hardcore" there are people that take the time to learn and get good, and people that do not take the time to gain the needed abilities to play well. The amount of time it takes for one person to achieve a goal is not the time it will take another.
The players that play well, not more often, do the best. Just like in every other area of life.
I'm not suggesting any company market their games in any way. I speak for myself, my sig is my opinion. Not a marketing ploy.
btw....
You seem to think there is some magical demographic that would play a MMORPG, if they could play less and have the same return as someone that plays more. This would create a game that was shallow and void of real content and strategy. No one would play such a game. You would play a board game where experience had no advantage? How much would a play sport be where it was impossible to be good no matter how much time you played.
The people that do not wish to spend time playing a MMORPG aren't going to be won over with washed down version of one, by definition they are not interested in playing.
The only market you can sell to are the people willing to buy your product. Those that marketed into playing a MMORPG, often get frustrated due to learning it's a hobby and not like a single player PC game, and post messages about the inequity of young adults with other comments. (even thought they are less than 10% of all MMORPG players, and only averagely play 2 more hours a week).
MMORPG are hobbies, they require time to gain skill just like any other hobby. If you do not wish to spend the time required to gain the ability, you must accept you will not be the next Tiger Woods but can enjoy your time spent, or you will do something else.
I suggest a number of PS2 or GameCube games.
CaptKlutz,
The enter key is located above the right shift key. You really need to push that once in awhile.
EQ is a old MMORPG. It's based on the sad ideals of Brad McQuaid. EQ was once a good game, but it just doesn't hold up to todays gaming standards. No longer will gamers (of any "XXXX-core" type) participate in 14 hour events. Play something new, you won't regret it. I'm hoping in a few years EQ will be nothing more than a bad memory of a blemish on what will be the major form of household entertament.
EQ != hundreds of other MMORPG's. Do not juge the entire market based on MMORPG.
-=-=-=-=- Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
I don't know how many more ways to say: the advantage of getting better because you practice is NOT what we are talking about. Spending time practicing to get better is good and the way it should be.
However, you will need to go on endlessly proving there is no 'time advantage' for people who play more. It is a fact of most games. AND most importantly there is clearly a perception about mmorpg's that if you can't play 6 hours a day you might as well not bother. You elude to it yourself - in fact you help spread the perction with your sig. EQ has 14 hours events. Hell even Shadowbane (which is farily good about minimizing the 'time spent' advantage) had runes that only spawned once every 4-8 hours. Most games out there have 'rare' loot which require large amounts of time camping in order to get. Yes I agree gamers (and by extention mmorpg's) are less and less willing to put up with that kind of thing. That's the whole point of these posts, games shouldn't be about how long you can make someone camp a mob spawn.
Also, it might be good to clarify something. When we say "spend less time" I think it is more relevent to talk about the amount of time "in one session". Often people are able to play a similar amount of time over the course of a week, but not as much all at once. If it takes the first hour you log on to find a group and get going, that hurts a guy who's only got 2 hours to play a lot more then the guy who's able to play for 4-5 hours a shot.
Yes there is a magic demographic that will play mmorpg's if the perception of mmorpg's is changed from "14 hour events", to something you can do and have fun with even if you only have a couple hours to play on any given night. People with families and jobs. See, not a lot of people are going to feel like playing mmorpgs if they keep getting told, "if you have a job you'll need to give up tv". People with jobs, who don't feel like giving up TV would be part of my Magic Demographic.
You seem to think that the people who currently play mmorpg's are a magic demographic that will never change or grow, and that they are competely happy with the time sinks that mmorpgs present today. Viva la Status Quo!
You also seem think that 14 hour events equal content - and I guess I'd have to disagree. You believe that any game which doesn't require you to participate in 14 hour events is shallow and lacks content and strategy? Again I guess I'd have to disagree. How about switching the mmorpg paradigm to mission/quest/obective based gaming instead of time sink mob/loot camping.
I understand that people feel threatened when anyone dares to question the Status Quo of their favorite hobby. (and btw... don't people often manage to have more then one hobby and still find time for TV too? I know I do ). People who are able to spend the time for the 14 hour events always talk about "how they earned it", how they "worked" for it. Not that they are better players for the practice, just that they managed to stay in front of the computer for the whole 14 hour event and came away with the Uber loot. Guess that's what you'd call "putting in the time to get the ability".
hmmm, I think I'll go play a game of chess. Unfortunately since I can play a game in under 4 hours it's most likely a little shallow and lacking strategy. (but hey maybe if I can play for 14 hours straight I'll get to loot an extra Queen for my next game, I'll have earned it by putting in the time!)
edit for typos and...
PS: I find it pretty funny that you post to a topic where people are asking about the availablity of games which are more 'casual player friendly' trying to convince people that there is no demographic for that type of mmorpg.
Yes there is a magic demographic that will play mmorpg's if the perception of mmorpg's is changed from "14 hour events", to something you can do and have fun with even if you only have a couple hours to play on any given night. People with families and jobs. See, not a lot of people are going to feel like playing mmorpgs if they keep getting told, "if you have a job you'll need to give up tv". People with jobs, who don't feel like giving up TV would be part of my Magic Demographic.
1st why do you keep mixing my Sig into this. You reading far, far to much into that. The sig is a simple of explaining if you stop wasting so much time watching "friends" and "survivor" you could have all the time anyone would ever need to to play a MMORPG.
frankly I'm pointing out that MMORPG"s are replacing TV as the most common form of household entertainment. And they are, TV ratings are a all time low since the 70's. While most people are probably surfing the net (not actually playing MMORPG's) they gain more "new" members all the time.
Let me rephrase the sig for you, "MMORPG's are better your mind than getting loaded and watching Football for 12 hours a evening, or even more mindless programs like friends and survivor"
If you "don't feel" like playing a MMORPG, then you will not. Making a game that you can archive greater things in less time will not make people play.
Need Proof? Find a ad for a MMORPG that claims what you said. Can't? Well I guess the millions Sony spends in marketing research can't find that audience either.
Like it or not content takes time, missions / quests / shop ownership...ect. You will have to spend time playing in order to do anything. People that play more, will logically complete more things. However, playing more doesn't always mean achieving more. As proven by Nick Yee, the people that play the most are doing so to chat with friends.
The "hard core" gamers you speak of, are playing 17-20 hours a week. Few poeple would consider that "hard core".
There is no "hard core" or "cuasual" player, there is only the amount of time you play.
Part 2.
EQ is one of the WORST MMORPG's to day. I feel that it has hurt the genre far more than it has helped. Brad McQaud's idea of making games fun was by forcing you stay logged in.
Yes, Shadow bane has a 2-4 hour spawn time. Something anyone EQ player should be able to do standing on their heads. But the part you missing is:
2-4 hours + non-no-drop = You never need to camp anything, you can buy it.
Go out have fun do the thing you want to do, and pick it from some other sucker than stared and a spawn point. You can't say the same thing about high end in EQ can you?
I think you are mixing in your problems with into into the whole MMORPG genre. This would be a bad idea, since very few of them wish to waste your time the way EQ did, and are based on such poorly conceived game philosophies.
Had you said: "I think games requiring marathon sessions are a bad idea", this would have been a different conversation. But you did you not, you said playing a MMORPG doesn't make you any better at it, there is no skill, and it's collage age children that game markers are focusing on while neglecting the adult community. (witch is a completely false statement)
You seem to think that the people who currently play mmorpg's are a magic demographic that will never change or grow, and that they are completely happy with the time sinks that mmorpgs present today. Viva la Status Quo!
I don't recall saying that. In fact I'm pretty sure I said people will no longer tolerate a game that has so little respect your person they take bets on what the longest raid that can possibly be made and still have dolts lining up to pay 12 bucks to do them.
EQ is about the game like this.
You switched the conversation from more game time make you a better player, to Marathon sessions are bad.
You also seem think that 14 hour events equal content - and I guess I'd have to disagree. You believe that any game which doesn't require you to participate in 14 hour events is shallow and lacks content and strategy? Again I guess I'd have to disagree. How about switching the mmorpg paradigm to mission/quest/objective based gaming instead of time sink mob/loot camping.
I defiantly do not. Once again, you've switched the topic.
I understand that people feel threatened when anyone dares to question the Status Quo of their favorite hobby. (and btw... don't people often manage to have more then one hobby and still find time for TV too? I know I do ).
/yawn. What a piece of mouth droppings that statement was.
Your free to spend you time as you please, I'm not one to tell people how to live there life.
People who are able to spend the time for the 14 hour events always talk about "how they earned it", how they "worked" for it. Not that they are better players for the practice, just that they managed to stay in front of the computer for the whole 14 hour event and came away with the Uber loot. Guess that's what you'd call "putting in the time to get the ability".
Once again you've switched the topic. Practice does make you better. What your talking is the sorry excuse for a MMORPG called EQ. EQ will leave a scare that will take a long time for genre to recover from.
hmmm, I think I'll go play a game of chess. Unfortunately since I can play a game in under 4 hours it's most likely a little shallow and lacking strategy. (but hey maybe if I can play for 14 hours straight I'll get to loot an extra Queen for my next game, I'll have earned it by putting in the time!)
I think your trying to take a stab at me. But this is a pretty lame, since you switched the topic to one we agree one from one we did not.
edit for typos and...
PS: I find it pretty funny that you post to a topic where people are asking about the availability of games which are more 'casual player friendly' trying to convince people that there is no demographic for that type of mmorpg.
Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool that follows?
-=-=-=-=- Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Ok seems we don't really disagree much at all, perhaps just coming at it from a different focus.
lol, I'll try and cut it all down a little
1st why do you keep mixing my Sig into this. You reading far, far to much into that. The sig is a simple of explaining if you stop wasting so much time watching "friends" and "survivor" you could have all the time anyone would ever need to to play a MMORPG.
OK I agree with that, however what your sig says is that you'll *need* to give up TV (ie you *must* give up tv in order to have sufficient time). big difference. btw... yes I do agree they'd be better off
Let me rephrase the sig for you, "MMORPG's are better your mind than getting loaded and watching Football for 12 hours a evening..."
Hey now let's not go crazy
Like it or not content takes time, missions / quests / shop ownership...ect. You will have to spend time playing in order to do anything. People that play more, will logically complete more things. However, playing more doesn't always mean achieving more.
Sure content takes time, the question is how much, and in what doses, and what does it get you...
There is no "hard core" or "cuasual" player, there is only the amount of time you play.
lol, I'm not going to argue this point with you. we disagree but it irrelevent to the discussion at this point.
EQ is one of the WORST MMORPG's to day. I feel that it has hurt the genre far more than it has helped. Brad McQaud's idea of making games fun was by forcing you stay logged in.
Agreed, and look the whole point is that's the common perception of mmorpgs - and it's wrong!
I think you are mixing in your problems with into into the whole MMORPG genre. This would be a bad idea, since very few of them wish to waste your time the way EQ did, and are based on such poorly conceived game philosophies.
Ok this may be the heart of where we disagree. I do think EQ set the standard and most games are still using "fun by forcing you to stay logged in" model.
Had you said: "I think games requiring marathon sessions are a bad idea", this would have been a different conversation. But you did you not, you said playing a MMORPG doesn't make you any better at it, there is no skill, and it's collage age children that game markers are focusing on while neglecting the adult community. (witch is a completely false statement)
Actually I didn't say any of that...
What I said was that people expect to *be better* just because thier logged in all the time, instead of actually having to *play* better. Uber loot is an easy example of this. It's not that you're more skilled and are the Tiger Woods of mmorpgs, it's that you get an unfair advantage (your Uber Runesword of instant death), *in addition* to the fact that you play and practice more. Tiger Woods doens't insist that other golfers use inferior clubs before he'd agree to play against them. Like you said, just because your logged in more doesn't mean you *automatically* should expect to achieve results (or simply *be better*)
In fact I'm pretty sure I said people will no longer tolerate a game that has so little respect your person they take bets on what the longest raid that can possibly be made and still have dolts lining up to pay 12 bucks to do them. EQ is about the game like this.
ok we are in agreement here.
You switched the conversation from more game time make you a better player, to Marathon sessions are bad.
Nope I've very consistantly said: More game time to practice and be better = Good. Requiring huge amounts of play time (marathon sessions) or games which allow for translating your massive amounts of game time into an *unfair* advantage (ie other then the value of practice) = Bad.
I understand that people feel threatened when anyone dares to question the Status Quo of their favorite hobby. (and btw... don't people often manage to have more then one hobby and still find time for TV too? I know I do ).
/yawn. What a piece of mouth droppings that statement was.
not any more so then your suggesting people who disagree with your position should go play PS2 or Game Cube.
Once again you've switched the topic. Practice does make you better. What your talking is the sorry excuse for a MMORPG called EQ. EQ will leave a scare that will take a long time for genre to recover from.
I swear I don't know how many time I have to say YES PRACTICE MAKES YOU BETTER! But once again, that's not the point. There is only so much 'practice' you need at the freaking mmorpg. Game which demand 10000000000 hours of 'practice' sux. That ain't practice, that's the fun = forcing you to stay logged in model. Ultimately games need to stop making you 'practice' and the damn time and base their game on having fun things to do regardless of how much 'practice' you've had.
"hmmm, I think I'll go play a game of chess. Unfortunately since I can play a game in under 4 hours it's most likely a little shallow and lacking strategy. (but hey maybe if I can play for 14 hours straight I'll get to loot an extra Queen for my next game, I'll have earned it by putting in the time!)"
I think your trying to take a stab at me. But this is a pretty lame, since you switched the topic to one we agree one from one we did not.
Yes I was definately taking a stab at your statements that any game which did not require huge amount of time investment would be shallow and lacking in both content and strategy. I'm go dig up the quote if you want. You seemed to be restating the whole fun = forcing to you stay logged on argument as Strategy/Content/Depth = forcing you to stay logged on.
Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool that follows?
well you got me there
Going to borrow a couple great quotes form elsewhere on the board and call it for now:
"Domelite -
The devs would have to take the focus of the gameplay away from the level grind and put it somewhere else like quests and boss hunting. It should require alot less time to gain levels and there should be alot more quests and bosses and items to hunt for along the way, and make it so doing these other things dont halt your xp gain."
"Xaldor -
I just think that the reason a lot of people play games is for a challenge...and right now there is not much of a challenge in mmorpg's, except the challenge of sitting in front of your pc for as long as possible in order to gain xp...Xaldor"
That's what most people are talking about when they say, need to be more casual gamer friendly.
I'm kinda beating a dead horse, but these sorts of conversations are a bit obsoleete since they are inresponce to 1st Gen MMORPG's. Current games do not have the time investment modles of games of old, such as EQ. (except maybe EQ2 and Sigil games, only time will tell).
While newer games have lower "time investments" they do still require a certain amount of time. This has a side effect of making games easier for people that do not wish to play in large blocks.
Saddly if you look at the numbers of games subsribers you'll see a trend. The greater the time investment, the greater the number of players. (except maybe lineage1. I've not played it to know it's time investment factor). This means there will always be large "time investment" games on the market.
The good news the market is no longer a handfull of games, it's grown, if one game is doing something you don't like, can like day old spam and play something new.
Don't be afraid of change.
-=-=-=-=- Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Comments
All this I agree with. Just because a "casual" gamer doesn't spend 12 hours a day in Teamspeak doesn't mean they aren't interacting with the rest of the community. Hell I play at least around 50% of the time soloing, but that doesn't mean I have zero interaction with the rest of the community. My RL friends and I play together when we can, I solo fairly often, do pickup groups, and even join guilds. It about time mmorpg's (and the community) gave up on the idea that People must zerg together into mega guilds and group 100% of the time, or they aren't being social.
---------------------------------
Killer 80%|Achiever 53%|Socializer 46%|Explorer 20%
Simply put, people play the game the way they want to play it. MMORPGs enable the player to play both casually and hardcore. That's one of the great things about them.
--------------------
Alex "Maximane" De Line
[email protected]
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
ok and finally, mmorpg's as a hobby (as opposed tooo?)
Well yes, mmorpg's are a hobby (computer games in general, of which mmorpg's get the most time).
But it is possible to have more then one hobby, and it is possible to have a hobby not take up ALL your social time.
Power gamers (85% of whom are either in school or unemployed) are not exactly the market you want to limit your game to, and unfortuantely it's the one a lot of mmorpg's have picked out. I think finally some of the new titles understand they'll make more money be providing a game that people are willing to spend the monthly fee on, even if they can only play it a few hours a month. (Guild Wars!!!)
So let's do the analogy thing again.
Executive: "Johnson, our company wants to develop a new alcohalic beverage. Who drink the most?"
Johnson, "Sire, achohol is most popular with people who drink too much and are alcoholics! They drink WAY more then anyone else."
Exectutive, "Outstanding, let's make a drink that is only for serious alcoholics. We won't even try to sell to anyone else, in fact we'll actively discourage them from buying it. They just won't be able to keep up the consumption rate of the alcoholics and we'll need all our supply for them."
Johnson, "This will be great! We'll sure sell more alcohol then those idiots making it for the casual drinker..."
Not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic. Not everyone who plays mmorpg's has unlimited time to spend playing them. Catering to only those who abuse and over do it is not a winning financial strategy in the long run.
---------------------------------
Killer 80%|Achiever 53%|Socializer 46%|Explorer 20%
In a MMORPG like in life, and golf, we all start with the same potential. The difference is where we spend our time credits. Are you honestly trying to say, that "standing around a golf course all day long practicing" doesn't make you better at golf? No what your natural abilities might be, the person that plays regularly will be better than one doesn't.
Do you think that playing a MMORPG doesn't make you better at playing it? An easy example: How long did it take you to get your second character to the same level as your first? Allot less time I bet... why do you suppose that is? I sit because you didn't get better at playing? Ever play with a fresh ebayed character? I bet you noticed the lack of playing abilities.
Your character gains skill by time invested, but it's only as good as you are. Your only as good as the time you invest. In this aspect the game reflects life and life he game.
Perhaps your trying to say that some MMORPG reward people unfairly with advancement beyond the level their abilities?
In short, MMORPG's are hobbies. Just like any other hobby you will either invest the time to become good, you'll accept you will never be a "pro" but that doesn't mean you can't enjoy yourself, or you'll do something else instead.
-=-=-=-=-
Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Lotarious - I agree that your version of the golf analogy is how the games and some gamers think the game should be played. However, the handicap system in golf would work if a person and gamers would agree to them. To even out the match in golf a weaker player gets a stroke advantage to even out the skill of the better player, without it, no-one of different skills would play each other.
I like the golf analogy because everyone can play golf but those that practice are likely better. Golf also has a handicap system which is something a computer game might replicate. I also agree a major attitude adjustment would be needed to have it work.
I also agree on you market share comment. Game companies are missing the boat not catering to casual gamers more.
Game companies will do what makes them the most money.
Let's consider a few things:
What is a casual gamer? No one can answer this, generally the people that say it feel cheated because they didn't get to kill the uber_dragon01, or feel that for whatever reason they don't have a sword of uberness is because they haven't played enough.
This assumption is in fact, false.
http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/archives/000758.php
Most people play 0-30 hours a week. Of those, Social motivation is a difference of about 8.5 hours played per week (from 17.1 to 25.5 hours). So those that want to sit and chat with friends make up the highest end of this spectrum.
Most so called "hard core gamers" aka "those that achieve results quickly" only play 17-20 hours a week on average.
Players under the age of 23 tend to play about 2 hours more each week than players over 22. (this shots the whole kids play more than adults thoery)
So if time played doesn't mean greater results, then what is a casual player? Someone that wants results without taking the time to gain the abilities to achieve the results.
What would a game be that doesn't have some abilities requirement? One that had no goals at all, or one that had goals so easy that anyone could gain them without a challenge. A game few would play, and none for very long.
Play smarter, not longer.
-=-=-=-=-
Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
grrrrr... had a longer message and it didn't post
ok short version...
Clever -
Spending more time and being better at playing the game because you practice and are good is the wonderful and good.
However, just because you spend more time playing doesn't mean you should gain a huge advantage just for having spent the time. that's the problem.
I agree completely that game companies will do what makes them the most money, and yet you seem to suggest their marketing campaign be:
"Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one"
I sincerely doubt that's a marketing strategy for success.
btw...
a study of people who do currently play mmorpgs, don't really tell us anything about who might if the perception wasn't that the whole point of playing was how much time you spent.
---------------------------------
Killer 80%|Achiever 53%|Socializer 46%|Explorer 20%
There is no huge advantage to people that play more. I can go one endless proving this. The people that play most are people wishing to spend time talking with other players. Other than the intrinsic advantage of friendship, they gain nothing for this time spent in game.
The problem is there is no problem.
There is no "casual" there is no "hardcore" there are people that take the time to learn and get good, and people that do not take the time to gain the needed abilities to play well. The amount of time it takes for one person to achieve a goal is not the time it will take another.
The players that play well, not more often, do the best. Just like in every other area of life.
I'm not suggesting any company market their games in any way. I speak for myself, my sig is my opinion. Not a marketing ploy.
btw....
You seem to think there is some magical demographic that would play a MMORPG, if they could play less and have the same return as someone that plays more. This would create a game that was shallow and void of real content and strategy. No one would play such a game. You would play a board game where experience had no advantage? How much would a play sport be where it was impossible to be good no matter how much time you played.
The people that do not wish to spend time playing a MMORPG aren't going to be won over with washed down version of one, by definition they are not interested in playing.
The only market you can sell to are the people willing to buy your product. Those that marketed into playing a MMORPG, often get frustrated due to learning it's a hobby and not like a single player PC game, and post messages about the inequity of young adults with other comments. (even thought they are less than 10% of all MMORPG players, and only averagely play 2 more hours a week).
MMORPG are hobbies, they require time to gain skill just like any other hobby. If you do not wish to spend the time required to gain the ability, you must accept you will not be the next Tiger Woods but can enjoy your time spent, or you will do something else.
I suggest a number of PS2 or GameCube games.
CaptKlutz,
The enter key is located above the right shift key. You really need to push that once in awhile.
EQ is a old MMORPG. It's based on the sad ideals of Brad McQuaid. EQ was once a good game, but it just doesn't hold up to todays gaming standards. No longer will gamers (of any "XXXX-core" type) participate in 14 hour events. Play something new, you won't regret it. I'm hoping in a few years EQ will be nothing more than a bad memory of a blemish on what will be the major form of household entertament.
EQ != hundreds of other MMORPG's. Do not juge the entire market based on MMORPG.
-=-=-=-=-
Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Clever -
I don't know how many more ways to say: the advantage of getting better because you practice is NOT what we are talking about. Spending time practicing to get better is good and the way it should be.
However, you will need to go on endlessly proving there is no 'time advantage' for people who play more. It is a fact of most games. AND most importantly there is clearly a perception about mmorpg's that if you can't play 6 hours a day you might as well not bother. You elude to it yourself - in fact you help spread the perction with your sig. EQ has 14 hours events. Hell even Shadowbane (which is farily good about minimizing the 'time spent' advantage) had runes that only spawned once every 4-8 hours. Most games out there have 'rare' loot which require large amounts of time camping in order to get. Yes I agree gamers (and by extention mmorpg's) are less and less willing to put up with that kind of thing. That's the whole point of these posts, games shouldn't be about how long you can make someone camp a mob spawn.
Also, it might be good to clarify something. When we say "spend less time" I think it is more relevent to talk about the amount of time "in one session". Often people are able to play a similar amount of time over the course of a week, but not as much all at once. If it takes the first hour you log on to find a group and get going, that hurts a guy who's only got 2 hours to play a lot more then the guy who's able to play for 4-5 hours a shot.
Yes there is a magic demographic that will play mmorpg's if the perception of mmorpg's is changed from "14 hour events", to something you can do and have fun with even if you only have a couple hours to play on any given night. People with families and jobs. See, not a lot of people are going to feel like playing mmorpgs if they keep getting told, "if you have a job you'll need to give up tv". People with jobs, who don't feel like giving up TV would be part of my Magic Demographic.
You seem to think that the people who currently play mmorpg's are a magic demographic that will never change or grow, and that they are competely happy with the time sinks that mmorpgs present today. Viva la Status Quo!
You also seem think that 14 hour events equal content - and I guess I'd have to disagree. You believe that any game which doesn't require you to participate in 14 hour events is shallow and lacks content and strategy? Again I guess I'd have to disagree. How about switching the mmorpg paradigm to mission/quest/obective based gaming instead of time sink mob/loot camping.
I understand that people feel threatened when anyone dares to question the Status Quo of their favorite hobby. (and btw... don't people often manage to have more then one hobby and still find time for TV too? I know I do
). People who are able to spend the time for the 14 hour events always talk about "how they earned it", how they "worked" for it. Not that they are better players for the practice, just that they managed to stay in front of the computer for the whole 14 hour event and came away with the Uber loot. Guess that's what you'd call "putting in the time to get the ability".
hmmm, I think I'll go play a game of chess. Unfortunately since I can play a game in under 4 hours it's most likely a little shallow and lacking strategy. (but hey maybe if I can play for 14 hours straight I'll get to loot an extra Queen for my next game, I'll have earned it by putting in the time!)
edit for typos and...
PS: I find it pretty funny that you post to a topic where people are asking about the availablity of games which are more 'casual player friendly' trying to convince people that there is no demographic for that type of mmorpg.
---------------------------------
Killer 80%|Achiever 53%|Socializer 46%|Explorer 20%
Yes there is a magic demographic that will play mmorpg's if the perception of mmorpg's is changed from "14 hour events", to something you can do and have fun with even if you only have a couple hours to play on any given night. People with families and jobs. See, not a lot of people are going to feel like playing mmorpgs if they keep getting told, "if you have a job you'll need to give up tv". People with jobs, who don't feel like giving up TV would be part of my Magic Demographic.
1st why do you keep mixing my Sig into this. You reading far, far to much into that. The sig is a simple of explaining if you stop wasting so much time watching "friends" and "survivor" you could have all the time anyone would ever need to to play a MMORPG.
frankly I'm pointing out that MMORPG"s are replacing TV as the most common form of household entertainment. And they are, TV ratings are a all time low since the 70's. While most people are probably surfing the net (not actually playing MMORPG's) they gain more "new" members all the time.
Let me rephrase the sig for you, "MMORPG's are better your mind than getting loaded and watching Football for 12 hours a evening, or even more mindless programs like friends and survivor"
If you "don't feel" like playing a MMORPG, then you will not. Making a game that you can archive greater things in less time will not make people play.
Need Proof? Find a ad for a MMORPG that claims what you said. Can't? Well I guess the millions Sony spends in marketing research can't find that audience either.
Like it or not content takes time, missions / quests / shop ownership...ect. You will have to spend time playing in order to do anything. People that play more, will logically complete more things. However, playing more doesn't always mean achieving more. As proven by Nick Yee, the people that play the most are doing so to chat with friends.
The "hard core" gamers you speak of, are playing 17-20 hours a week. Few poeple would consider that "hard core".
There is no "hard core" or "cuasual" player, there is only the amount of time you play.
Part 2.
EQ is one of the WORST MMORPG's to day. I feel that it has hurt the genre far more than it has helped. Brad McQaud's idea of making games fun was by forcing you stay logged in.
Yes, Shadow bane has a 2-4 hour spawn time. Something anyone EQ player should be able to do standing on their heads. But the part you missing is:
2-4 hours + non-no-drop = You never need to camp anything, you can buy it.
Go out have fun do the thing you want to do, and pick it from some other sucker than stared and a spawn point. You can't say the same thing about high end in EQ can you?
I think you are mixing in your problems with into into the whole MMORPG genre. This would be a bad idea, since very few of them wish to waste your time the way EQ did, and are based on such poorly conceived game philosophies.
Had you said: "I think games requiring marathon sessions are a bad idea", this would have been a different conversation. But you did you not, you said playing a MMORPG doesn't make you any better at it, there is no skill, and it's collage age children that game markers are focusing on while neglecting the adult community. (witch is a completely false statement)
You seem to think that the people who currently play mmorpg's are a magic demographic that will never change or grow, and that they are completely happy with the time sinks that mmorpgs present today. Viva la Status Quo!
I don't recall saying that. In fact I'm pretty sure I said people will no longer tolerate a game that has so little respect your person they take bets on what the longest raid that can possibly be made and still have dolts lining up to pay 12 bucks to do them.
EQ is about the game like this.
You switched the conversation from more game time make you a better player, to Marathon sessions are bad.
You also seem think that 14 hour events equal content - and I guess I'd have to disagree. You believe that any game which doesn't require you to participate in 14 hour events is shallow and lacks content and strategy? Again I guess I'd have to disagree. How about switching the mmorpg paradigm to mission/quest/objective based gaming instead of time sink mob/loot camping.
I defiantly do not. Once again, you've switched the topic.
I understand that people feel threatened when anyone dares to question the Status Quo of their favorite hobby. (and btw... don't people often manage to have more then one hobby and still find time for TV too? I know I do
).
/yawn. What a piece of mouth droppings that statement was.
Your free to spend you time as you please, I'm not one to tell people how to live there life.
People who are able to spend the time for the 14 hour events always talk about "how they earned it", how they "worked" for it. Not that they are better players for the practice, just that they managed to stay in front of the computer for the whole 14 hour event and came away with the Uber loot. Guess that's what you'd call "putting in the time to get the ability".
Once again you've switched the topic. Practice does make you better. What your talking is the sorry excuse for a MMORPG called EQ. EQ will leave a scare that will take a long time for genre to recover from.
hmmm, I think I'll go play a game of chess. Unfortunately since I can play a game in under 4 hours it's most likely a little shallow and lacking strategy. (but hey maybe if I can play for 14 hours straight I'll get to loot an extra Queen for my next game, I'll have earned it by putting in the time!)
I think your trying to take a stab at me. But this is a pretty lame, since you switched the topic to one we agree one from one we did not.
edit for typos and...
PS: I find it pretty funny that you post to a topic where people are asking about the availability of games which are more 'casual player friendly' trying to convince people that there is no demographic for that type of mmorpg.
Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool that follows?
-=-=-=-=-
Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Ok seems we don't really disagree much at all, perhaps just coming at it from a different focus.
lol, I'll try and cut it all down a little
1st why do you keep mixing my Sig into this. You reading far, far to much into that. The sig is a simple of explaining if you stop wasting so much time watching "friends" and "survivor" you could have all the time anyone would ever need to to play a MMORPG.
OK I agree with that, however what your sig says is that you'll *need* to give up TV (ie you *must* give up tv in order to have sufficient time). big difference. btw... yes I do agree they'd be better off
Let me rephrase the sig for you, "MMORPG's are better your mind than getting loaded and watching Football for 12 hours a evening..."
Hey now let's not go crazy
Like it or not content takes time, missions / quests / shop ownership...ect. You will have to spend time playing in order to do anything. People that play more, will logically complete more things. However, playing more doesn't always mean achieving more.
Sure content takes time, the question is how much, and in what doses, and what does it get you...
There is no "hard core" or "cuasual" player, there is only the amount of time you play.
lol, I'm not going to argue this point with you. we disagree but it irrelevent to the discussion at this point.
EQ is one of the WORST MMORPG's to day. I feel that it has hurt the genre far more than it has helped. Brad McQaud's idea of making games fun was by forcing you stay logged in.
Agreed, and look the whole point is that's the common perception of mmorpgs - and it's wrong!
I think you are mixing in your problems with into into the whole MMORPG genre. This would be a bad idea, since very few of them wish to waste your time the way EQ did, and are based on such poorly conceived game philosophies.
Ok this may be the heart of where we disagree. I do think EQ set the standard and most games are still using "fun by forcing you to stay logged in" model.
Had you said: "I think games requiring marathon sessions are a bad idea", this would have been a different conversation. But you did you not, you said playing a MMORPG doesn't make you any better at it, there is no skill, and it's collage age children that game markers are focusing on while neglecting the adult community. (witch is a completely false statement)
Actually I didn't say any of that...
What I said was that people expect to *be better* just because thier logged in all the time, instead of actually having to *play* better. Uber loot is an easy example of this. It's not that you're more skilled and are the Tiger Woods of mmorpgs, it's that you get an unfair advantage (your Uber Runesword of instant death), *in addition* to the fact that you play and practice more. Tiger Woods doens't insist that other golfers use inferior clubs before he'd agree to play against them. Like you said, just because your logged in more doesn't mean you *automatically* should expect to achieve results (or simply *be better*)
In fact I'm pretty sure I said people will no longer tolerate a game that has so little respect your person they take bets on what the longest raid that can possibly be made and still have dolts lining up to pay 12 bucks to do them. EQ is about the game like this.
ok we are in agreement here.
You switched the conversation from more game time make you a better player, to Marathon sessions are bad.
Nope I've very consistantly said: More game time to practice and be better = Good. Requiring huge amounts of play time (marathon sessions) or games which allow for translating your massive amounts of game time into an *unfair* advantage (ie other then the value of practice) = Bad.
I understand that people feel threatened when anyone dares to question the Status Quo of their favorite hobby. (and btw... don't people often manage to have more then one hobby and still find time for TV too? I know I do ).
/yawn. What a piece of mouth droppings that statement was.
not any more so then your suggesting people who disagree with your position should go play PS2 or Game Cube.
Once again you've switched the topic. Practice does make you better. What your talking is the sorry excuse for a MMORPG called EQ. EQ will leave a scare that will take a long time for genre to recover from.
I swear I don't know how many time I have to say YES PRACTICE MAKES YOU BETTER! But once again, that's not the point. There is only so much 'practice' you need at the freaking mmorpg. Game which demand 10000000000 hours of 'practice' sux. That ain't practice, that's the fun = forcing you to stay logged in model. Ultimately games need to stop making you 'practice' and the damn time and base their game on having fun things to do regardless of how much 'practice' you've had.
"hmmm, I think I'll go play a game of chess. Unfortunately since I can play a game in under 4 hours it's most likely a little shallow and lacking strategy. (but hey maybe if I can play for 14 hours straight I'll get to loot an extra Queen for my next game, I'll have earned it by putting in the time!)"
I think your trying to take a stab at me. But this is a pretty lame, since you switched the topic to one we agree one from one we did not.
Yes I was definately taking a stab at your statements that any game which did not require huge amount of time investment would be shallow and lacking in both content and strategy. I'm go dig up the quote if you want. You seemed to be restating the whole fun = forcing to you stay logged on argument as Strategy/Content/Depth = forcing you to stay logged on.
Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool that follows?
well you got me there
Going to borrow a couple great quotes form elsewhere on the board and call it for now:
"Domelite -
The devs would have to take the focus of the gameplay away from the level grind and put it somewhere else like quests and boss hunting. It should require alot less time to gain levels and there should be alot more quests and bosses and items to hunt for along the way, and make it so doing these other things dont halt your xp gain."
"Xaldor -
I just think that the reason a lot of people play games is for a challenge...and right now there is not much of a challenge in mmorpg's, except the challenge of sitting in front of your pc for as long as possible in order to gain xp...Xaldor"
That's what most people are talking about when they say, need to be more casual gamer friendly.
---------------------------------
Killer 80%|Achiever 53%|Socializer 46%|Explorer 20%
I'm kinda beating a dead horse, but these sorts of conversations are a bit obsoleete since they are inresponce to 1st Gen MMORPG's. Current games do not have the time investment modles of games of old, such as EQ. (except maybe EQ2 and Sigil games, only time will tell).
While newer games have lower "time investments" they do still require a certain amount of time. This has a side effect of making games easier for people that do not wish to play in large blocks.
Saddly if you look at the numbers of games subsribers you'll see a trend. The greater the time investment, the greater the number of players. (except maybe lineage1. I've not played it to know it's time investment factor). This means there will always be large "time investment" games on the market.
The good news the market is no longer a handfull of games, it's grown, if one game is doing something you don't like, can like day old spam and play something new.
Don't be afraid of change.
-=-=-=-=-
Make no mistake, MMORPG's are not games, they are hobbies. If you have a job, you'll need to give up watching TV in order to play one. You'll be better off for it.
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Gar
Gar