I agree the world could use more sandboxes, but somehow they still manage to shoehorn in more themeparks despite the amazing numbers of people already playing them, so they must be doing something right.
That again, huh?
"must be doing something right..." that's a very weak arguement. The fact that there's more themeparks than sandboxes to choose from is indicative of Developers thinking they'll make more money that way.
And yes, just as you said, how do you know that a large number of those in themeparks aren't just players wishing there was more money fed into the sandbox development? You don't know. Neither do I... But I do know it's getting old that there's so little effort put into finding out. Now that we have tens of millions of people playing MMOs worldwide, I think it's a great time for some AAA investments to go towards developing and marketting some polished sandboxes.
EVE is great, but just because some people want to play sandbox MMORPGs doesn't necessarily mean they want to play in space, in a scifi setting. Having just that 1 option is good, i am thankful for CCP being the only developer with any balls or vision, but it's simply not enough to convey how many more people in the community are interested in sandboxes.
Right now, the AAA choices seem to be WoW, LoTRO, EVE, Rift, Aion, WAR, and AOC.... of all those, EVE is the only sandbox, and that means if anyone wants to play a quality sandbox, they must also want to play a spaceship sim, and that's simply not fair.
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
just because some people want to play sandbox MMORPGs
No people as such exist.
No people as such exist? As in, there is no such thing as a person that wants to play sandbox mmorpgs?
Sandbox isn't game play nor it implies one.
What in the hell do you mean by that? There's no such thing as sandbox games?
And 'must be doing something right' is actually pretty strong argument. Sole fact that it is applied across different industries proves that.
What industries? What are you talking about here? Elaborate on how it's a strong arguement. Explain how/why you think non-mmorpg sandbox games aren't doing anything right? last I checked, you're just flat out wrong.
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
Originally posted by mm0wigginsNo people as such exist? As in, there is no such thing as a person that wants to play sandbox mmorpgs? What in the hell do you mean by that? There's no such thing as sandbox games?
If there are people who play a game because it is a 'sandbox' or 'themepark':
1) there must be people who play the game despite they find the game play utterly boring and tedious
2) there must be people who do not play a game despite they find the game play fun and enjoyable.
People do not play the game because it is a 'sandbox' or 'themepark', they play it because they find it 'fun'. What people find fun or not is determined by game play - stuff you do in the game.
'Sandbox' or 'themepark' are game designs and not directly related to game play and content.
Originally posted by mm0wiggins What industries? What are you talking about here? Elaborate on how it's a strong arguement.
In every industry you copy a successful competitor. Why? Because they are doing something right.
What industries? What are you talking about here? Elaborate on how it's a strong arguement.
In every industry you copy a successful competitor. Why? Because they are doing something right.
There would be no mainstream if it didn't work.
Fine fine I get it.. business business business...
But see, if "it works for them, it should work for us" is the end-all-be-all ... why is it NOT working? Because they are copying the wrong things from the "best" ...
If they want to emulate the big hit on the world of gaming that WoW accomplished, they have to do way more than copying talent trees and quest hubs and instances and xmarksthespot quest dynamics. What about the fact that WoW launched right when Broadband internet access exploded? What about the fact that wow launched in the same time frame as custom high-powered gaming PC's and peripherals started dropping in price? What about the fact that Blizzard built up WoW's player base YEARS before WoW existed with WC, WC2, Diablo1/2, Starcraft? These are things that can't be copied and are the reason that all the attempts to generate WoW-like success are failures.
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
Originally posted by mm0wiggins But see, if "it works for them, it should work for us" is the end-all-be-all ... why is it NOT working? Because they are copying the wrong things from the "best" ...
Yes, it's business and it's about money.
Originally posted by Gdemami Statistically, my 'clone' has better chances to be successful than risky project.
Originally posted by mm0wiggins These are things that can't be copied and are the reason that all the attempts to generate WoW-like success are failures.
Is there anyone apart from you arguing 'WoW-like success'?
From your previous posts:
Originally posted by mm0wiggins All I'm saying is that too many people talk about how themepark(S) are more profitible than sandboxes in the MMORPG genre, when the only one doing far better than anything else is WoW. Outside of that one title, the rest of them, themepark or sandbox alike, are on average pretty close in subscriber numbers.
And then, by your own words:
Originally posted by mm0wiggins Right now, the AAA choices seem to be WoW, LoTRO, EVE, Rift, Aion, WAR, and AOC.... of all those, EVE is the only sandbox
LOTRO+Rift+Aion+War+AOC(+WOW) vs EVE + ???
On par, pretty close subscriber numbers? Really?
I do not think there needs to be a discussion where the money(customer interest) is...
"I like videogames. I dislike television." printed as: 'They said "I like" and "television" so they must like television!'
-
-
Moderator is right. This is going no where as long as you butcher everything I say and only see what you wish I was saying.
BACK ON TOPIC: -- So, we all seem to agree that business is business, but do we agree that the very state of that being the current approach to MMO design is a bad idea?
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
Some one will start a discussion about a feature they like in a game. Maybe it's a game that has an incentive for grouping, maybe it's an RvR game without instanced PvP, maybe it's FFA PvP, maybe it's a game with only player crafted items, or whatever.
And someone will disagree, and state why that's a bad game design. but they won't stick with that argument for very long. Pretty quickly they start with, well, that's a bad design because it will never be popular and a game company would lose money if they made it, so I'm right, and you're wrong!
The problem is, they use that argument when the debate is over the feature and whether or not it's fun, and not the profitability or business aspect of a game. And those are two different discussions.
1. Is something fun?
2. Will it make money?
But I see posts like this: That's not fun because.......................it won't make money! So I'm right!
Of course we can debate anything we like here. But I'd rather leave making money up to the developers and publishers, anbd discuss what I think would be fun, or not.
And anyway, I don't think most people know what makes money.
WoW makes money, so that's what makes money!
Well, a lot of WoW clones don't do that well.
FFA PvP can't make money, people don't like that!
Well, EVE seems to do ok.
You're just guessing whether or not something will make money, you don't really know.
But you do know, without a doubt, what you think is fun.
Yes and none of us on either side of the fence are the ones fronting millions of dollers into making AAA MMOs of any kind so our idle speculation is a moot point. Until enough people convince these guys there is a relevent customer base for a different type of game, they will stick with what works. Continuing the Hatfield and McCoyesque feud between the themepark and sandbox camps on these and other forums, gets us nowhere.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
The reason why the more "original" MMOs don't do too well compared to most "WoW clones" is because they're developed on a tighter budget, and in some cases they bite off more than they can chew, making the game unfinished on release. I've never seen anyone with the same budget as the often big western WoW-clone developers try to make any real attempt at delivering something unique. I bet that with good, unique game design and a budget equal to high profile WoW clones, you could certainly be successful.
Did you even read this thread? You literally just spewed the same crap we are talking about without any grounds.
On top of that, the "lame ass features" you speak of do quite well in games that were developed properly, with niche audience in mind, and not attempting to dethrone WoW.
You people who support developers thinking that "if it's not as profitible as wow, it's not a good idea, and therefor, not fun" are selfish, and delusional.
No game REQUIRES 10 million players for it to be considered successful. That's retarded and anti productive and the proof of that is all the crap games we have that fail because they tried too hard to make a quick buck with that approach.
but keep on supporting the business agenda. Sure, that's what we need.
As long as EVE online, DFO, and other smaller niche titles continue to be successful, there's really no arguement as to whether such features in a game could be profitible. CCP is doing JUST FINE without 10 million subs... better than fine.
As soon as other companies see this and stop trying to fast track themselves to the WoW-gravy-train, the sooner they'll realize that there's more than one single means of achieving success in a game title.
I despise the word NICHE and the way its used on these forums. If a game is fun a game is fun.
Period.
There is a magic that happens when all the creative pieces come together and form this one unique experience. And if the game is a fucking blast then what does it matter if a feature might not be the most popular.
Too much linear focus on features imo and too much bullshitting over what is niche and what is profitable. 10 years ago when developers still had balls, do you think they even used the word "niche"?
Man, where were you, and people like you when I bring this up? I've read at least 10 posts just today that bring up this topic and I'm so glad to finally see other people getting sick of the "profitibility = fun" approach. I just wish I had some backup when I bring it up. instead I only get flamed from the 'business minded' crowd on how much I'm wrong for wanting games to be fun, engaging, and not shallow forms of money making schemes. It's sad really.
Anyways, posts like this bring me hope that maybe there are more people in the community who have standards on the games they play, and aren't simply shelling out cash to any developer who offers more gear and more dungeons than the last game...
Kudos, OP. x2
The problem is, profitibility does equal fun. A game has to get players to pay for it. If they're not having fun, they won't pay. If they don't pay, the game isn't profitable. The fact that *YOU* aren't having fun only proves you're playing the wrong game, not that the game is somehow wrong. Don't like the game, don't play it. It's simple. If there are no MMOs that are fun for you, don't play MMOs.
Just throwing my 2 cents in here. I think you want more than just fun, you also want interesting. Fun is a key component that you have to have, but "interesting" adds a boatload to the fun.
But talking about key systems in a game like we do on these boards, that in itself doesn't have to be "fun". It has to add to the game to set up all the fun and interest in the game.
Man, where were you, and people like you when I bring this up? I've read at least 10 posts just today that bring up this topic and I'm so glad to finally see other people getting sick of the "profitibility = fun" approach. I just wish I had some backup when I bring it up. instead I only get flamed from the 'business minded' crowd on how much I'm wrong for wanting games to be fun, engaging, and not shallow forms of money making schemes. It's sad really.
Anyways, posts like this bring me hope that maybe there are more people in the community who have standards on the games they play, and aren't simply shelling out cash to any developer who offers more gear and more dungeons than the last game...
Kudos, OP. x2
The problem is, profitibility does equal fun. A game has to get players to pay for it. If they're not having fun, they won't pay. If they don't pay, the game isn't profitable. The fact that *YOU* aren't having fun only proves you're playing the wrong game, not that the game is somehow wrong. Don't like the game, don't play it. It's simple. If there are no MMOs that are fun for you, don't play MMOs.
Fun being equal to profitiability is sadly, only a half truth.
There are many people who choose to continue to do things they don't entirely enjoy anymore, because they're addicted to it. The most "successful" MMOs are fun at the ground level for many, but at the high end they're maticulously designed skinner boxes with intent to keep players latched onto playing through the exact same content dozens or even hundreds of times over.
WoW is a perfect example of this. It's easy to get into, gives you quick and easy rewards at the begining. The further you progress into the game, the less consistent rewards get. You end up having to run the same dungeons a few times to get upgrades... then the later dungeons dozens of times... then you have to go into raids with weekly lockout timers. A lot of people complain about endgame in WoW, yet they still put up with it because it's addictive.
Below is a link to a good article that sums up the tactics MMO developers use to keep people forking over cash, despite how not fun a game can become.
Man, where were you, and people like you when I bring this up? I've read at least 10 posts just today that bring up this topic and I'm so glad to finally see other people getting sick of the "profitibility = fun" approach. I just wish I had some backup when I bring it up. instead I only get flamed from the 'business minded' crowd on how much I'm wrong for wanting games to be fun, engaging, and not shallow forms of money making schemes. It's sad really.
Anyways, posts like this bring me hope that maybe there are more people in the community who have standards on the games they play, and aren't simply shelling out cash to any developer who offers more gear and more dungeons than the last game...
Kudos, OP. x2
The problem is, profitibility does equal fun. A game has to get players to pay for it. If they're not having fun, they won't pay. If they don't pay, the game isn't profitable. The fact that *YOU* aren't having fun only proves you're playing the wrong game, not that the game is somehow wrong. Don't like the game, don't play it. It's simple. If there are no MMOs that are fun for you, don't play MMOs.
Fun being equal to profitiability is sadly, only a half truth.
There are many people who choose to continue to do things they don't entirely enjoy anymore, because they're addicted to it. The most "successful" MMOs are fun at the ground level for many, but at the high end they're maticulously designed skinner boxes with intent to keep players latched onto playing through the exact same content dozens or even hundreds of times over.
WoW is a perfect example of this. It's easy to get into, gives you quick and easy rewards at the begining. The further you progress into the game, the less consistent rewards get. You end up having to run the same dungeons a few times to get upgrades... then the later dungeons dozens of times... then you have to go into raids with weekly lockout timers. A lot of people complain about endgame in WoW, yet they still put up with it because it's addictive.
Below is a link to a good article that sums up the tactics MMO developers use to keep people forking over cash, despite how not fun a game can become.
To argue that addiction is a significant factor is to argue that a significant number of MMO gamers are weak-willed morons who will repeatedly and voluntarily pay a monthly fee to do something they don't enjoy doing. Is that your contention?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Just throwing my 2 cents in here. I think you want more than just fun, you also want interesting. Fun is a key component that you have to have, but "interesting" adds a boatload to the fun.
But talking about key systems in a game like we do on these boards, that in itself doesn't have to be "fun". It has to add to the game to set up all the fun and interest in the game.
Personally, if something is not 'interesting' I do not to see it as 'fun'. Things that keep me interested for a long time are the most fun.
Man, where were you, and people like you when I bring this up? I've read at least 10 posts just today that bring up this topic and I'm so glad to finally see other people getting sick of the "profitibility = fun" approach. I just wish I had some backup when I bring it up. instead I only get flamed from the 'business minded' crowd on how much I'm wrong for wanting games to be fun, engaging, and not shallow forms of money making schemes. It's sad really.
Anyways, posts like this bring me hope that maybe there are more people in the community who have standards on the games they play, and aren't simply shelling out cash to any developer who offers more gear and more dungeons than the last game...
Kudos, OP. x2
The problem is, profitibility does equal fun. A game has to get players to pay for it. If they're not having fun, they won't pay. If they don't pay, the game isn't profitable. The fact that *YOU* aren't having fun only proves you're playing the wrong game, not that the game is somehow wrong. Don't like the game, don't play it. It's simple. If there are no MMOs that are fun for you, don't play MMOs.
Fun being equal to profitiability is sadly, only a half truth.
There are many people who choose to continue to do things they don't entirely enjoy anymore, because they're addicted to it. The most "successful" MMOs are fun at the ground level for many, but at the high end they're maticulously designed skinner boxes with intent to keep players latched onto playing through the exact same content dozens or even hundreds of times over.
WoW is a perfect example of this. It's easy to get into, gives you quick and easy rewards at the begining. The further you progress into the game, the less consistent rewards get. You end up having to run the same dungeons a few times to get upgrades... then the later dungeons dozens of times... then you have to go into raids with weekly lockout timers. A lot of people complain about endgame in WoW, yet they still put up with it because it's addictive.
Below is a link to a good article that sums up the tactics MMO developers use to keep people forking over cash, despite how not fun a game can become.
To argue that addiction is a significant factor is to argue that a significant number of MMO gamers are weak-willed morons who will repeatedly and voluntarily pay a monthly fee to do something they don't enjoy doing. Is that your contention?
Yes and no. it's a combination of fun and addictiveness.
If the game was fun but not addictive, people wouldn't be compelled as they are to run the same dungeon dozens of times just for a chance at a rare item drop. As such, people would be far more demanding of new content as they would otherwise quickly tire of doing the same thing over again. Turning dungeon loot into a virtual slot machine keeps people pulling the leaver as fast and as much as possible to try to get their reward, which means they keep playing, and paying.
I'm not saying that MMOs are not fun at all, simply that they're often not as fun as people think. Essentially, a lot of people aren't conscious of why they're compelled to run the same dungeon for the Nth time. In fact a lot of people complain about how "grindy" something is, yet a lot of them still do it anyways.
Yes, because everything published on internet is 100% real and true.
Did you even read the article?
It's a commentary on game design elements used in games, particularly MMOs. It's point isn't to prove that MMOs are addictive by citing references, but by presenting premises to provoke critical thought about the subject.
I SO do not agree with this. If that were true, sites like MMORPG.com wouldn't even exist. Yes, one goal of a game is to make profit or at least make out even but as I'm sure many people on these forums work in the game industry as I do, we don't make games to make money. We make'em cuz to us it's fun and we want other peeps to enjoy them as well.
Games are their to have fun! The industry of gaming just transformed itself in a very lucrative business over the past 10 years.
________________________ "If RL was an MMO, I'd probably be getting laid more often..."
Originally posted by Ceridith Did you even read the article? It's a commentary on game design elements used in games, particularly MMOs. It's point isn't to prove that MMOs are addictive by citing references, but by presenting premises to provoke critical thought about the subject.
Yep, I stopped reading right there:
"The techniques that I'll discuss in this article generally fall under the heading of behavioral psychology."
There are sometimes interesting articles but (behavioral) psychology is still a pseudoscience thus implications of such 'studies' are pretty much worthless.
It's a commentary on game design elements used in games, particularly MMOs. It's point isn't to prove that MMOs are addictive by citing references, but by presenting premises to provoke critical thought about the subject.
Yep, I stopped reading right there:
"The techniques that I'll discuss in this article generally fall under the heading of behavioral psychology."
There are sometimes interesting articles but (behavioral) psychology is still a pseudoscience thus implications of such 'studies' are pretty much worthless.
Feel free to continue to believe that if you wish. It won't stop developers from employing this type of "pseudoscience" to manipulate the weak minded.
Comments
That again, huh?
"must be doing something right..." that's a very weak arguement. The fact that there's more themeparks than sandboxes to choose from is indicative of Developers thinking they'll make more money that way.
And yes, just as you said, how do you know that a large number of those in themeparks aren't just players wishing there was more money fed into the sandbox development? You don't know. Neither do I... But I do know it's getting old that there's so little effort put into finding out. Now that we have tens of millions of people playing MMOs worldwide, I think it's a great time for some AAA investments to go towards developing and marketting some polished sandboxes.
EVE is great, but just because some people want to play sandbox MMORPGs doesn't necessarily mean they want to play in space, in a scifi setting. Having just that 1 option is good, i am thankful for CCP being the only developer with any balls or vision, but it's simply not enough to convey how many more people in the community are interested in sandboxes.
Right now, the AAA choices seem to be WoW, LoTRO, EVE, Rift, Aion, WAR, and AOC.... of all those, EVE is the only sandbox, and that means if anyone wants to play a quality sandbox, they must also want to play a spaceship sim, and that's simply not fair.
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
No people as such exist.
Sandbox isn't game play nor it implies one.
And 'must be doing something right' is actually pretty strong argument. Sole fact that it is applied across different industries proves that.
um, what?
Can you reword that or something because I'm not sure what you're saying.
Maybe elaborate a little bit?
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
Elaborate on what...?
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
If there are people who play a game because it is a 'sandbox' or 'themepark':
1) there must be people who play the game despite they find the game play utterly boring and tedious
2) there must be people who do not play a game despite they find the game play fun and enjoyable.
People do not play the game because it is a 'sandbox' or 'themepark', they play it because they find it 'fun'. What people find fun or not is determined by game play - stuff you do in the game.
'Sandbox' or 'themepark' are game designs and not directly related to game play and content.
In every industry you copy a successful competitor. Why? Because they are doing something right.
There would be no mainstream if it didn't work.
Fine fine I get it.. business business business...
But see, if "it works for them, it should work for us" is the end-all-be-all ... why is it NOT working? Because they are copying the wrong things from the "best" ...
If they want to emulate the big hit on the world of gaming that WoW accomplished, they have to do way more than copying talent trees and quest hubs and instances and xmarksthespot quest dynamics. What about the fact that WoW launched right when Broadband internet access exploded? What about the fact that wow launched in the same time frame as custom high-powered gaming PC's and peripherals started dropping in price? What about the fact that Blizzard built up WoW's player base YEARS before WoW existed with WC, WC2, Diablo1/2, Starcraft? These are things that can't be copied and are the reason that all the attempts to generate WoW-like success are failures.
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
Yes, it's business and it's about money.
Is there anyone apart from you arguing 'WoW-like success'?
From your previous posts:
And then, by your own words:
LOTRO+Rift+Aion+War+AOC(+WOW) vs EVE + ???
On par, pretty close subscriber numbers? Really?
I do not think there needs to be a discussion where the money(customer interest) is...
Lets avoid personal arguments guys. Thanks!
Typical shady media tactics.
"I like videogames. I dislike television." printed as: 'They said "I like" and "television" so they must like television!'
-
-
Moderator is right. This is going no where as long as you butcher everything I say and only see what you wish I was saying.
BACK ON TOPIC: -- So, we all seem to agree that business is business, but do we agree that the very state of that being the current approach to MMO design is a bad idea?
This is not a troll, flame, or anything else worth banning me over. It is simply my pure opinion, and I have a right to share it.
Yes and none of us on either side of the fence are the ones fronting millions of dollers into making AAA MMOs of any kind so our idle speculation is a moot point. Until enough people convince these guys there is a relevent customer base for a different type of game, they will stick with what works. Continuing the Hatfield and McCoyesque feud between the themepark and sandbox camps on these and other forums, gets us nowhere.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
The reason why the more "original" MMOs don't do too well compared to most "WoW clones" is because they're developed on a tighter budget, and in some cases they bite off more than they can chew, making the game unfinished on release. I've never seen anyone with the same budget as the often big western WoW-clone developers try to make any real attempt at delivering something unique. I bet that with good, unique game design and a budget equal to high profile WoW clones, you could certainly be successful.
I think people are just clueless when they said the majority of wow clone failed. You dont' need to make a billion $ a year to make money.
I despise the word NICHE and the way its used on these forums. If a game is fun a game is fun.
Period.
There is a magic that happens when all the creative pieces come together and form this one unique experience. And if the game is a fucking blast then what does it matter if a feature might not be the most popular.
Too much linear focus on features imo and too much bullshitting over what is niche and what is profitable. 10 years ago when developers still had balls, do you think they even used the word "niche"?
The problem is, profitibility does equal fun. A game has to get players to pay for it. If they're not having fun, they won't pay. If they don't pay, the game isn't profitable. The fact that *YOU* aren't having fun only proves you're playing the wrong game, not that the game is somehow wrong. Don't like the game, don't play it. It's simple. If there are no MMOs that are fun for you, don't play MMOs.
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
Just throwing my 2 cents in here. I think you want more than just fun, you also want interesting. Fun is a key component that you have to have, but "interesting" adds a boatload to the fun.
But talking about key systems in a game like we do on these boards, that in itself doesn't have to be "fun". It has to add to the game to set up all the fun and interest in the game.
Once upon a time....
Fun being equal to profitiability is sadly, only a half truth.
There are many people who choose to continue to do things they don't entirely enjoy anymore, because they're addicted to it. The most "successful" MMOs are fun at the ground level for many, but at the high end they're maticulously designed skinner boxes with intent to keep players latched onto playing through the exact same content dozens or even hundreds of times over.
WoW is a perfect example of this. It's easy to get into, gives you quick and easy rewards at the begining. The further you progress into the game, the less consistent rewards get. You end up having to run the same dungeons a few times to get upgrades... then the later dungeons dozens of times... then you have to go into raids with weekly lockout timers. A lot of people complain about endgame in WoW, yet they still put up with it because it's addictive.
Below is a link to a good article that sums up the tactics MMO developers use to keep people forking over cash, despite how not fun a game can become.
http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted.html
Yes, because everything published on internet is 100% real and true.
To argue that addiction is a significant factor is to argue that a significant number of MMO gamers are weak-willed morons who will repeatedly and voluntarily pay a monthly fee to do something they don't enjoy doing. Is that your contention?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Personally, if something is not 'interesting' I do not to see it as 'fun'. Things that keep me interested for a long time are the most fun.
Yes and no. it's a combination of fun and addictiveness.
If the game was fun but not addictive, people wouldn't be compelled as they are to run the same dungeon dozens of times just for a chance at a rare item drop. As such, people would be far more demanding of new content as they would otherwise quickly tire of doing the same thing over again. Turning dungeon loot into a virtual slot machine keeps people pulling the leaver as fast and as much as possible to try to get their reward, which means they keep playing, and paying.
I'm not saying that MMOs are not fun at all, simply that they're often not as fun as people think. Essentially, a lot of people aren't conscious of why they're compelled to run the same dungeon for the Nth time. In fact a lot of people complain about how "grindy" something is, yet a lot of them still do it anyways.
Did you even read the article?
It's a commentary on game design elements used in games, particularly MMOs. It's point isn't to prove that MMOs are addictive by citing references, but by presenting premises to provoke critical thought about the subject.
I SO do not agree with this. If that were true, sites like MMORPG.com wouldn't even exist. Yes, one goal of a game is to make profit or at least make out even but as I'm sure many people on these forums work in the game industry as I do, we don't make games to make money. We make'em cuz to us it's fun and we want other peeps to enjoy them as well.
Games are their to have fun! The industry of gaming just transformed itself in a very lucrative business over the past 10 years.
________________________
"If RL was an MMO, I'd probably be getting laid more often..."
Yep, I stopped reading right there:
"The techniques that I'll discuss in this article generally fall under the heading of behavioral psychology."
There are sometimes interesting articles but (behavioral) psychology is still a pseudoscience thus implications of such 'studies' are pretty much worthless.
Feel free to continue to believe that if you wish. It won't stop developers from employing this type of "pseudoscience" to manipulate the weak minded.