1) Chain Quest- THIS ISSUE IS NEVER EVER DISCUSSED. This issue kills mmo grouping to the max. Take part one to do part two. I'm now playing Rift. For now I like the game. It's ALL ABOUT CHAIN QUEST. Both my friend and I are playing together and we realized we have to match every quest one for one to play together. No one can play with us because of chain quest. We tried to play with others, and it most always fails. Many people don't like Rift, they find it boring. BUT no one ever thinks deeply as to why they don't like it......I know why !.....It's a solo game, unless you max level !
Joe is on quest 146 and Bob is on quest 151. Joe can't play with Bob. As time goes on, ten days in Bob quits because the game is boring. Never realizing why !
I hate to use Vanilla WoW as an example. It was popular because Joe and Bob can take quest a,b,c,d,e,f,g and they can play together Or take a day off and continue playing. Joe and Bob can have a meaningful Guild, and a healthy friends list.
Making a dungeon finder, Rift invasions, or PvP battle grounds DOES NOT CUT IT....They are mini games, simple as that !
2) Voice acting- This was my concern with SWTOR from the start. Yes, it makes the game personal. Many will love it. Many will not !......At first I would think, maybe it's just me, its still in pre-release. But reviews and leaks are confirming my concern.
Voice acting and personal instancing can kill an mmo. The real Star Wars fans will love it, the others will find it boring and quit. Just like Star Trek.
Your chain quest argument is simply this.. People need to stop caring only about themselves.. If people really want to play an MMO they have to be willing to take a step backwards in their quest line and help others progress.. Too many people have developed the mindset that they need to 1. race to endgame and 2. only concern themselves with their own chars progression.. If people would stop and help someone move through the quest line even if it means taking a step or two backwards to get someone else up to where you are there would be far more groups going, far more social interaction and far less boredom.. IMO
I agree. The OP starts his post saying he is all about group play but then turns around complains about having to work with people on different steps. The whole reason why my guild has sticked together and had great times thru over a decade is because of the "helping each other out" attitude we respect in our guild.
Exactly, helping each other is part and parcel with mmorgs that are deemed to be friendly. If you start complaining and being generally umpleasant or even just impatient with people you have never met before, than that is being anti-social. And to argue against extra measures to try and discourage anti social behaviour and then give examples where people annoy you in groups....
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Sorry to jump in your discussion but i was reading your post and had to intervene (didn't read the rest of the post). That's not how i see enforced grouping working at all, and this since EQ. For me enforced grouping come from the rewards, both reward for your character with gear gain, and for the player with the fun factor. That is where lie the enforcement of grouping since EQ, and its still the same today.
So its still very clearly "force" grouping, Swtor is clearly the same here, and was defended both by the dev team and the fan as one. And this even though it had a very lenghty demand on the offi forum to change that.
I think there's a misunderstanding, we're both using the term 'enforced grouping' in a different way. Where EQ differed from later themepark MMO's since WoW was that EQ had 'enforced grouping' in its leveling process, meaning that grouping was by far the easiest and quickest way to level, for some classes it even became a nigh impossible and certainly excruciating task to level in the mid to high levels.
That's what I meant with enforced grouping which (most) MMO gamers just won't accept anymore in these days. If enforced grouping, that grouping is the sole effective way of leveling, isn't an option, then grouping needs to be supported by encouraged via all kinds of means.
Originally posted by Bladestrom
Good post MMO. I agree, it is an attempt to help resolve a difficult issue and therefore has value to the player base. The motivation is certainly in a good place.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
If the olympics had to encourage competition, something is obviously wrong with it, since the olympics is all about competition.
So you're saying that if we remove all the medals, advertising deals, prize money the resident countries pay their athletes and all other forms of rewards of winning beyond having won the olympics will still be exactly the same?
Because, you know, it's all about competition and athletes certainly don't need silly things like money and recognition (MMO: gear and levels).
Still missing the point. Just as you said, all those things they get are like loot/levels in an MMO. If you enter the olympics, you arrive there with the mind-set to compete and win. Not to stross around hoping to be encouraged to even enter the 100m sprint you came there to do. Running and winning that race is your goal, and winning it means you get loot. But there's no question about if you're going to enter or not.
MMORPG's are (originally at least) designed so that people can play together. If a game designed for "group-play" needs to encourage people to do so with a "feature" or a "system", something is wrong with the core itself. Group-play should be a seamless part of the core design, not a "encouragement-feature".
Seems to me timtrack that your own analogy disproves your own point.
You seem to think that Olympians enter the olympics for the competition - and thats all thats needed. So if we take away the medals, prizes and public recognition (i.e. almost nobody watches it) and are left with just the competition, that the athletes would be queueing up. Sure, compeition is one element which draws the competitors, but you take away the incentives and the olympics falls apart.
So to bring the analogy back to MMO's.. sure players like the fact that they can group with other people.. but without the incentives, without a "tangible" reason to group, many players wont pursue it. It seems strange, but I notice it in myself. I play MMO's to group and socialise - but almost peversely I need the game to give me some gentle encouragement to actually do that because like all of us, I get focused on the stats and equipment.
If the game makes it so I can advance and gain stuff easily without grouping - then I do that. Sometimes I grind mobs to gain exp on my own in a rather anti-social way for a game that I play in order to be social.
Yes, humans are peverse like that.
Besides which... going back to the olympics analogy - does it really ruin the competetive spirit of the olympics by the fact that we give out rewards and recognition to those that win? I'd argue that it doesn't (aside from attempts at cheating) and in much the same way, what really is the PROBLEM with incentives for group play in an MMO?
Are you a solo player who really feels bad that content is not accessible to you because of a refusal to socialise? I doubt it. (and if you are.. really, you shouldn't be playing mmo's)
If the olympics had to encourage competition, something is obviously wrong with it, since the olympics is all about competition.
So you're saying that if we remove all the medals, advertising deals, prize money the resident countries pay their athletes and all other forms of rewards of winning beyond having won the olympics will still be exactly the same? Because, you know, it's all about competition and athletes certainly don't need silly things like money and recognition (MMO: gear and levels).
Still missing the point. Just as you said, all those things they get are like loot/levels in an MMO. If you enter the olympics, you arrive there with the mind-set to compete and win. Not to stross around hoping to be encouraged to even enter the 100m sprint you came there to do. Running and winning that race is your goal, and winning it means you get loot. But there's no question about if you're going to enter or not. MMORPG's are (originally at least) designed so that people can play together. If a game designed for "group-play" needs to encourage people to do so with a "feature" or a "system", something is wrong with the core itself. Group-play should be a seamless part of the core design, not a "encouragement-feature".
Seems to me timtrack that your own analogy disproves your own point. You seem to think that Olympians enter the olympics for the competition - and thats all thats needed. So if we take away the medals, prizes and public recognition (i.e. almost nobody watches it) and are left with just the competition, that the athletes would be queueing up. Sure, compeition is one element which draws the competitors, but you take away the incentives and the olympics falls apart. So to bring the analogy back to MMO's.. sure players like the fact that they can group with other people.. but without the incentives, without a "tangible" reason to group, many players wont pursue it. It seems strange, but I notice it in myself. I play MMO's to group and socialise - but almost peversely I need the game to give me some gentle encouragement to actually do that because like all of us, I get focused on the stats and equipment. If the game makes it so I can advance and gain stuff easily without grouping - then I do that. Sometimes I grind mobs to gain exp on my own in a rather anti-social way for a game that I play in order to be social. Yes, humans are peverse like that. Besides which... going back to the olympics analogy - does it really ruin the competetive spirit of the olympics by the fact that we give out rewards and recognition to those that win? I'd argue that it doesn't (aside from attempts at cheating) and in much the same way, what really is the PROBLEM with incentives for group play in an MMO? Are you a solo player who really feels bad that content is not accessible to you because of a refusal to socialise? I doubt it. (and if you are.. really, you shouldn't be playing mmo's)
I think what he's trying to say is that the "encouragement feature" (emphasis is on FEATURE, the points themselves, their only purpose being to encourage grouping) is a very inelegant way of "encouraging".
Like you put it, the encouragement in most MMOs comes from the "tangible" rewards you reap (loot, lvls, etc.)
There is marginal encouragement in achievements for example, as long as they are not "world first" or "feats of strength".
Of course this is largely subjective but as a rule of thumb I would say that dangling the carrot in form of loot/lvls/abilities in front of a player is more encouraging than "score".
I think its what he is trying to say.
The game should encourage grouping by its gameplay mechanics, not by a score-system.
Just of the top of my head, lets say there would be a mechanic by which grouped everyone in the party gains access one extra "group skill" for their class (aka what Guild Wars 2 is trying to do with combo-able abilities of different classes).
I would find this solution more elegant than a score system with "social points".
But like i said, might be largely subjective and a Kasual won't give a shit about either. However I'm leaning towards the fact that if you make playing in a group more -fun- its the biggest encouragement, even better than reward-encouragement.
I have to ask, how exactly does voice acting kill a MMO?
I've heard multiple times how voice acting is supposed to be bad but I've yet to hear about an actual reason why this is the case. Thus far it seems more like complaining that adding colour killed good movies.....
As far as I'm concerned, the moment gaming went off text-based games, gaming has died.
All those new fancy games with 256 colors and 320x200 fancy graphics never caught my interest in the same way as text-based games. Why, THOSE games were real! They were proper games, which did not neet that useless midi-music from fancy Sound-Blaster 16 to keep you submerged in a gameworld for weeks!
I totally blame todays' young people.
So why are you stitting here typing on the technology which made it possible for people to "ruin" games when you could be playing paper D&D.
While you are at it, why don't you get mad at the people who invented paper for those games because playing outside with friends was "real gaming".
Originally posted by 8BitAvatar What's next? Are we going to get XP/loot just for logging in to these games? That may sound like hyperbole right now, but just wait. Just you wait....
That's called "Rested XP" or "Bonus XP".
It's already in just about every mmo around. You get that just for logging back in the game.
Im sorry but I dont think either of your concerns are that big a deal, voice acting? I dont see how that is a problem at all, if anything it ADDS something to the game that most do not. I found voice acting quite fine in AOC.
Chain quests, again I fail to see how this matters. Pretty much all modern day MMO's have them, and if anything they provide A reason TO quest. endless, pointless quests with no great rewards would not intrest me, but a chain or even an epic chain with big rewrds at the end, these acctualy give me a reason to go through it, not only that the chain quests in SWTOR will be story intensive and make them that much more enjoyable.
The art of story telling in videogames is something that has been a little hit and miss this past decade, but bioware has time and time again done an AMAZING job at it, im quite looking forward to this game.
"Well let me just quote the late-great Colonel Sanders, who said…’I’m too drunk to taste this chicken." - Ricky Bobby
Im sorry but I dont think either of your concerns are that big a deal, voice acting? I dont see how that is a problem at all, if anything it ADDS something to the game that most do not. I found voice acting quite fine in AOC.
Chain quests, again I fail to see how this matters. Pretty much all modern day MMO's have them, and if anything they provide A reason TO quest. endless, pointless quests with no great rewards would not intrest me, but a chain or even an epic chain with big rewrds at the end, these acctualy give me a reason to go through it, not only that the chain quests in SWTOR will be story intensive and make them that much more enjoyable.
The art of story telling in videogames is something that has been a little hit and miss this past decade, but bioware has time and time again done an AMAZING job at it, im quite looking forward to this game.
I wanted to chime in a bit here on the voice acting bit, since you mention voice acting and storytelling in the same post.
Voice acting, cut scenes, storytelling... that means I'm not playing the game. I'm watching it. I'm a spectator.
If it were a case of ordinary NPCs talking to me instead of having to read it - that could be interesting, as long as it was not a cutscene. Heck, if I could talk to the NPC and the NPC talk to me... would be trippy as Hell, am I right? There is a world of difference between walking up to a NPC and them asking you what they can help you with (as opposed to reading their text) and being in a cutscene.
This also goes to storytelling. Games should have a story. It is not a story that should be told. It is a story that should be experienced. You should not watch it. You should drive it or at least participate in it...not just witness it.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Im sorry but I dont think either of your concerns are that big a deal, voice acting? I dont see how that is a problem at all, if anything it ADDS something to the game that most do not. I found voice acting quite fine in AOC.
Chain quests, again I fail to see how this matters. Pretty much all modern day MMO's have them, and if anything they provide A reason TO quest. endless, pointless quests with no great rewards would not intrest me, but a chain or even an epic chain with big rewrds at the end, these acctualy give me a reason to go through it, not only that the chain quests in SWTOR will be story intensive and make them that much more enjoyable.
The art of story telling in videogames is something that has been a little hit and miss this past decade, but bioware has time and time again done an AMAZING job at it, im quite looking forward to this game.
I wanted to chime in a bit here on the voice acting bit, since you mention voice acting and storytelling in the same post.
Voice acting, cut scenes, storytelling... that means I'm not playing the game. I'm watching it. I'm a spectator.
If it were a case of ordinary NPCs talking to me instead of having to read it - that could be interesting, as long as it was not a cutscene. Heck, if I could talk to the NPC and the NPC talk to me... would be trippy as Hell, am I right? There is a world of difference between walking up to a NPC and them asking you what they can help you with (as opposed to reading their text) and being in a cutscene.
This also goes to storytelling. Games should have a story. It is not a story that should be told. It is a story that should be experienced. You should not watch it. You should drive it or at least participate in it...not just witness it.
You probably won't enjoy this game then as much as a person who is a fan of Bioware games.
We have known that Bioware was going to make this game a cross between their usual games and an mmo for a long time.
Arguing that an apple should be an orange at this point is a complete waste of time.
Originally posted by 8BitAvatar The whole "Social Points" system in SW:TOR is really mind boggling when you think about it. Seriously, think about it for a few minutes. A MMORPG has a built-in feature to encourage group play. Let me repeat that again: A MMORPG has a built-in feature to encourage group play. One more time? A MMORPG has a built-in feature to encourage group play. The system is completely arbitrary; it's useless; it's pointless. It's nothing more than another carrot-on-a-stick grind with yet another progress bar to watch. The more I think about it, the more insulted I am. Bioware is basically saying: "Hey guys, we made this really awesome single player RPG with some multiplayer options sprinkled throughout the experience, but to be honest, it's not enough if we're going to be charging people $15 a month to play. So instead of actually designing a game that would make group play fluid and natural, we're giving you the 'Social Points' system. Every time you group up with other players and do, you know, group-y things, you'll earn social points that you can spend on vanity items." Is this really where we are with MMOs in 2012? Developers throwing shiny loot at players to try and encourage them to group up in a multiplayer game!?
lol I love this post. Its so literal, I think he went over his own head.
Do you watch TV simply because you own one? No, you watch TV because some writers and directors made a show that interests you and it motivates you to turn on your TV at certain times to watch.
Take a step back and relax for a second heh. Its gonna be ok
Originally posted by Foomerang Originally posted by 8BitAvatar The whole "Social Points" system in SW:TOR is really mind boggling when you think about it. Seriously, think about it for a few minutes. A MMORPG has a built-in feature to encourage group play. Let me repeat that again: A MMORPG has a built-in feature to encourage group play. One more time? A MMORPG has a built-in feature to encourage group play. The system is completely arbitrary; it's useless; it's pointless. It's nothing more than another carrot-on-a-stick grind with yet another progress bar to watch. The more I think about it, the more insulted I am. Bioware is basically saying: "Hey guys, we made this really awesome single player RPG with some multiplayer options sprinkled throughout the experience, but to be honest, it's not enough if we're going to be charging people $15 a month to play. So instead of actually designing a game that would make group play fluid and natural, we're giving you the 'Social Points' system. Every time you group up with other players and do, you know, group-y things, you'll earn social points that you can spend on vanity items." Is this really where we are with MMOs in 2012? Developers throwing shiny loot at players to try and encourage them to group up in a multiplayer game!?
lol I love this post. Its so literal, I think he went over his own head.
Do you watch TV simply because you own one? No, you watch TV because some writers and directors made a show that interests you and it motivates you to turn on your TV at certain times to watch.
Take a step back and relax for a second heh. Its gonna be ok
Main problem with that, TV entertainment is purely visual while video games are through interaction with gameplay mechanics. If you have to force gameplay through carrot on a stick gameplay, then something is flawed with the fun factor of said gameplay mechanics. Also, I do understand people want progression and gear but it should feel like it comes naturally throughout play.
Originally posted by 8BitAvatar *shakes head* You guys are using some of the worst analogies to get your own points across. First, the Olympics. Now, TV. I give up.
I guess I give up too then heh. I just don't understand why this bothers you so much.
Because BW thinks players all of a sudden need another progress bar to watch (and trust me, it is) where they earn "Social Points" (experience points) based on how often they group (and what they do in that group).
Are you freaking kidding me?!
Have we, as players, become so anti-social or lazy, that we need a system like this in our MMOs?
Now we get experience points and loot just for grouping up?! Because we're now incapable of doing it on our own, and naturally when the game calls for it?
Pure fluff. Pure BS fluff. That's all it is.
If it's pure fluff what does it matter, why would it enrage you so much? Calling it fluff is a contradiction to the emotion you're showing toward it.
Yes players have become anti-social if you haven't seen that A: you're not playing current MMO's or B: you didn't play older MMO's to see the stark difference.
Again though if it's just fluff what does it matter? Why would it insult you, why care?
BF3 did something similar with their new point system, does that mean the game itself isn't up to group snuff? No. What it means is they've seen tendancy and have acted accordingly.
If the game wasn't designed around group activity there would be no grouping at all, regardless of incentives being in place. Players have shown over and over they don't want to do anything unless it rewards them, from PVp to grouping "no reward, what's the point?" is the common approach. Don't blame devs for trying to cater to common player tendancies.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Im sorry but I dont think either of your concerns are that big a deal, voice acting? I dont see how that is a problem at all, if anything it ADDS something to the game that most do not. I found voice acting quite fine in AOC.
Chain quests, again I fail to see how this matters. Pretty much all modern day MMO's have them, and if anything they provide A reason TO quest. endless, pointless quests with no great rewards would not intrest me, but a chain or even an epic chain with big rewrds at the end, these acctualy give me a reason to go through it, not only that the chain quests in SWTOR will be story intensive and make them that much more enjoyable.
The art of story telling in videogames is something that has been a little hit and miss this past decade, but bioware has time and time again done an AMAZING job at it, im quite looking forward to this game.
I wanted to chime in a bit here on the voice acting bit, since you mention voice acting and storytelling in the same post.
Voice acting, cut scenes, storytelling... that means I'm not playing the game. I'm watching it. I'm a spectator.
If it were a case of ordinary NPCs talking to me instead of having to read it - that could be interesting, as long as it was not a cutscene. Heck, if I could talk to the NPC and the NPC talk to me... would be trippy as Hell, am I right? There is a world of difference between walking up to a NPC and them asking you what they can help you with (as opposed to reading their text) and being in a cutscene.
This also goes to storytelling. Games should have a story. It is not a story that should be told. It is a story that should be experienced. You should not watch it. You should drive it or at least participate in it...not just witness it.
This is the way voice acting and cut scenes will work in TOR. It is a story you experience by participation in the conversation. Yes it is a written story, you are not making it up on the fly. But you do have multiple choices to drive the quest. And you can get different results based on those choices. You kill someone or don't, then a or b happens next. You are a jerk to someone, and later in the quest chain, it comes back to bite you.
This is not words being read to you at the same time you can read them like AoC. This is NPCs acting out the words with emotions and movement. You base your choices on what you see and hear, not what you read. Like the ME games from BW.
And these are not long cut scenes or all instanced quests. It is simply at the point you take the quest or turn it in. Other games give you words to read with an accept button. This one will just act them out with you taking part with choice of dialogue. Much more like what you have said above. In between, you will be in the open world killing along side everyone else. Then, as seen in the dev walkthrough, you come to a point in your class quest that has a small instance. This is where big things happen in your story that no one else can see but you and your party. Then you are back out with everyone else once you leave the door witht he green film.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them? R.A.Salvatore
Because BW thinks players all of a sudden need another progress bar to watch (and trust me, it is) where they earn "Social Points" (experience points) based on how often they group (and what they do in that group).
Are you freaking kidding me?!
Have we, as players, become so anti-social or lazy, that we need a system like this in our MMOs?
Now we get experience points and loot just for grouping up?! Because we're now incapable of doing it on our own, and naturally when the game calls for it?
Pure fluff. Pure BS fluff. That's all it is.
If it's pure fluff what does it matter, why would it enrage you so much? Calling it fluff is a contradiction to the emotion you're showing toward it.
Yes players have become anti-social if you haven't seen that A: you're not playing current MMO's or B: you didn't play older MMO's to see the stark difference.
Again though if it's just fluff what does it matter? Why would it insult you, why care?
BF3 did something similar with their new point system, does that mean the game itself isn't up to group snuff? No. What it means is they've seen tendancy and have acted accordingly.
If the game wasn't designed around group activity there would be no grouping at all, regardless of incentives being in place. Players have shown over and over they don't want to do anything unless it rewards them, from PVp to grouping "no reward, what's the point?" is the common approach. Don't blame devs for trying to cater to common player tendancies.
First, I'm not enraged. Gaming is a hobby to me, nothing more. I sleep very well at night thank you very much.
Disappointed would be a better word to use, although I am insulted by the dumbing down of games trend.
I'm absolutely looking at this from a perspective of someone who (like many) was there at the birth of this genre. Someone who is very disappointed watching a genre he used to love being turned on its head over the past 5+ years.
A good question to ask would be, why have players become so anti-social?
Is it the games themselves, and the way they're designed/setup? The mindset they create and train?
I would say yes.
So I do blame the developers. They nurtured and fostered this whole instant gratification system, and in turn, have trained many gamers to expect that with every single activity they participate in.
The fact that there's now a (supposed) need to use incentives just to get players to group up in an MMO is very sad.
That should tell you all you need to know about the state of this genre and where its heading.
Originally posted by 8BitAvatar A good question to ask would be, why have players become so anti-social? Is it the games themselves, and the way they're designed/setup? The mindset they create and train? I would say yes. So I do blame the developers. They nurtured and fostered this whole instant gratification system, and in turn, have trained many gamers to expect that with every single activity they participate in. The fact that there's now a (supposed) need to use incentives just to get players to group up in an MMO is very sad. That should tell you all you need to know about the state of this genre and where its heading.
Disagree with almost all of this.
Players aren't more "anti-social", lol. You just have more people playing so you have a larger pool of a certain type.
Look at statitics.. spending on gaming is almost at an all-time high over the last few years overall. Gaming is much cheaper, computer prices are cheaper, RAM is cheaper, and games are more accessible than before.
With more people coming in, the types will vary so it may seem as if players are anti-social but you just have a much larger pool so you notice more of them.
It's not like people who were social all of a sudden STOPPED being social. They still are but now the numbers are balancing out a little more.
First, I'm not enraged. Gaming is a hobby to me, nothing more. I sleep very well at night thank you very much.
Disappointed would be a better word to use, although I am insulted by the dumbing down of games trend.
I'm absolutely looking at this from a perspective of someone who (like many) was there at the birth of this genre. Someone who is very disappointed watching a genre he used to love being turned on its head over the past 5+ years.
A good question to ask would be, why have players become so anti-social?
Is it the games themselves, and the way they're designed/setup? The mindset they create and train?
I would say yes.
So I do blame the developers. They nurtured and fostered this whole instant gratification system, and in turn, have trained many gamers to expect that with every single activity they participate in.
The fact that there's now a (supposed) need to use incentives just to get players to group up in an MMO is very sad.
That should tell you all you need to know about the state of this genre and where its heading.
Here's what I've seen I'll use SWG as my reference as it's the game I probably remember the most about (in terms of complaints).
Questing is pointless, where's the game?, What should I be doing? Where do I go? This games sucks!?!? HOw do I join a faction the game doesn't tell me!!!!!!
Why should we PVP ? All it is is one gank after another or one giant zerg.. Why do I have to play for 8 months to a year before I can win in PVP too? WOW is way better!, I'm going to WOW, they have direction and questing it's not a grind!!!!!!
I could go on and on here but that's enough, I'm sorry the MMO genre today is the result of all of the complaints made back then.... Last I heard the old forums are still archived go look at the general discussion forum from 2003-2004, if you doubt what i wrote above.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Im sorry but I dont think either of your concerns are that big a deal, voice acting? I dont see how that is a problem at all, if anything it ADDS something to the game that most do not. I found voice acting quite fine in AOC.
Chain quests, again I fail to see how this matters. Pretty much all modern day MMO's have them, and if anything they provide A reason TO quest. endless, pointless quests with no great rewards would not intrest me, but a chain or even an epic chain with big rewrds at the end, these acctualy give me a reason to go through it, not only that the chain quests in SWTOR will be story intensive and make them that much more enjoyable.
The art of story telling in videogames is something that has been a little hit and miss this past decade, but bioware has time and time again done an AMAZING job at it, im quite looking forward to this game.
I wanted to chime in a bit here on the voice acting bit, since you mention voice acting and storytelling in the same post.
Voice acting, cut scenes, storytelling... that means I'm not playing the game. I'm watching it. I'm a spectator.
If it were a case of ordinary NPCs talking to me instead of having to read it - that could be interesting, as long as it was not a cutscene. Heck, if I could talk to the NPC and the NPC talk to me... would be trippy as Hell, am I right? There is a world of difference between walking up to a NPC and them asking you what they can help you with (as opposed to reading their text) and being in a cutscene.
This also goes to storytelling. Games should have a story. It is not a story that should be told. It is a story that should be experienced. You should not watch it. You should drive it or at least participate in it...not just witness it.
disagree 100% the voice acting, for me adds and extra dimension. When you are watching a videogame, its kind of a broken expierience to be reading text the whole game. when we watch a film, are we forced to watch captions the whole movie? (other languages absolved) no, we get a voice to the face, it only makes sense for them to introduce voice acting to interactive story telling.
"Well let me just quote the late-great Colonel Sanders, who said…’I’m too drunk to taste this chicken." - Ricky Bobby
I'm sorry the MMO genre today is the result of all of the complaints made back then.... Last I heard the old forums are still archived go look at the general discussion forum from 2003-2004, if you doubt what i wrote above.
No, the MMO genre today is the result of developers' continued use of the DikuMUD/EQ model.
Not because people on the SWG forums failed to grasp the idea behind a sandbox game...
***
We're trained monkeys now. We push a button, and a prize falls into our hands.
If an MMO doesn't have a button to push with an instant reward, more than likely, we won't be interested.
Can you honestly sit here and tell me the games themselves haven't contributed at all to how people behave in them?
MMOs of today have become too game-y if that makes sense.
It's no longer about living in a virtual world, it's about individual accolades; progression; rewards; best scores, etc, etc.
Add in the fact that we can do most of these things on our own now just makes it worse.
I'm sorry the MMO genre today is the result of all of the complaints made back then.... Last I heard the old forums are still archived go look at the general discussion forum from 2003-2004, if you doubt what i wrote above.
No, the MMO genre today is the result of developers' continued use of the DikuMUD/EQ model.
Not because people on the SWG forums failed to grasp the idea behind a sandbox game...
***
We're trained monkeys now. We push a button, and a prize falls into our hands.
If an MMO doesn't have a button to push with an instant reward, more than likely, we won't be interested.
Can you honestly sit here and tell me the games themselves haven't contributed at all to how people behave in them?
MMOs of today have become too game-y if that makes sense.
It's no longer about living in a virtual world, it's about individual accolades; progression; rewards; best scores, etc, etc.
Add in the fact that we can do most of these things on our own now just makes it worse.
Look we agree and you obviously don't see it, but the result is not because devs are dumb and can't do any better. It's because this is what the majority asked for, they don't want to live in a virtual world, they want to play a game. SWG was a sim, WOW was a game, WOW won. That was basically all she wrote for the idea of MMO's being virtual worlds.
The average gamer doesn't know Skyrim being beaten in 3 hours is meaningless, they think it means the game is small they don't even understand the idea behind a virtual world to adventure and create your own story in. This concept is lost on them, their idea of a game is what the devs create for them, not what they create for themselves. They think the latter is doing the devs job for them.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Lots of folks lament about Ultima and it's change from an open pvp game but it was customer complaints (and dropping sales) that goaded them into changing the game to a more safe environment. (just another example of conceding to the masses to stay in business and after 15 years I guess it worked).
That being said I see no reason to have concerns over a game meant for entertainment. You either like what they've done or you don't and if you don't then you kind of have to hope enough will feel the same way. Hence the reason for threads like this to try and pressure a game company by rallying support for what you want personally. That is why gaming is the way it is.
Your chain quest argument is simply this.. People need to stop caring only about themselves.. If people really want to play an MMO they have to be willing to take a step backwards in their quest line and help others progress.. Too many people have developed the mindset that they need to 1. race to endgame and 2. only concern themselves with their own chars progression.. If people would stop and help someone move through the quest line even if it means taking a step or two backwards to get someone else up to where you are there would be far more groups going, far more social interaction and far less boredom.. IMO
I agree and feel like a dinosour because if I group I group for the fun of a group and not the reward or that certain quest chain.
The problem lies indeed with the mindset you describe and not with chainquest, so OP needs to look at his own playstyle and he might see that that's where the problem lies.
Im sorry but I dont think either of your concerns are that big a deal, voice acting? I dont see how that is a problem at all, if anything it ADDS something to the game that most do not. I found voice acting quite fine in AOC.
Chain quests, again I fail to see how this matters. Pretty much all modern day MMO's have them, and if anything they provide A reason TO quest. endless, pointless quests with no great rewards would not intrest me, but a chain or even an epic chain with big rewrds at the end, these acctualy give me a reason to go through it, not only that the chain quests in SWTOR will be story intensive and make them that much more enjoyable.
The art of story telling in videogames is something that has been a little hit and miss this past decade, but bioware has time and time again done an AMAZING job at it, im quite looking forward to this game.
I wanted to chime in a bit here on the voice acting bit, since you mention voice acting and storytelling in the same post.
Voice acting, cut scenes, storytelling... that means I'm not playing the game. I'm watching it. I'm a spectator.
If it were a case of ordinary NPCs talking to me instead of having to read it - that could be interesting, as long as it was not a cutscene. Heck, if I could talk to the NPC and the NPC talk to me... would be trippy as Hell, am I right? There is a world of difference between walking up to a NPC and them asking you what they can help you with (as opposed to reading their text) and being in a cutscene.
This also goes to storytelling. Games should have a story. It is not a story that should be told. It is a story that should be experienced. You should not watch it. You should drive it or at least participate in it...not just witness it.
disagree 100% the voice acting, for me adds and extra dimension. When you are watching a videogame, its kind of a broken expierience to be reading text the whole game. when we watch a film, are we forced to watch captions the whole movie? (other languages absolved) no, we get a voice to the face, it only makes sense for them to introduce voice acting to interactive story telling.
VO may add an extra dimension as you say but at the same time it also disconnects you as well. I kind of disagree with your movie analogy, text have captured the imagination of people for years. The point is there are good movies and there are bad movies, same goes for books & games.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Comments
Exactly, helping each other is part and parcel with mmorgs that are deemed to be friendly. If you start complaining and being generally umpleasant or even just impatient with people you have never met before, than that is being anti-social. And to argue against extra measures to try and discourage anti social behaviour and then give examples where people annoy you in groups....
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
I think there's a misunderstanding, we're both using the term 'enforced grouping' in a different way. Where EQ differed from later themepark MMO's since WoW was that EQ had 'enforced grouping' in its leveling process, meaning that grouping was by far the easiest and quickest way to level, for some classes it even became a nigh impossible and certainly excruciating task to level in the mid to high levels.
That's what I meant with enforced grouping which (most) MMO gamers just won't accept anymore in these days. If enforced grouping, that grouping is the sole effective way of leveling, isn't an option, then grouping needs to be supported by encouraged via all kinds of means.
Me too
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Seems to me timtrack that your own analogy disproves your own point.
You seem to think that Olympians enter the olympics for the competition - and thats all thats needed. So if we take away the medals, prizes and public recognition (i.e. almost nobody watches it) and are left with just the competition, that the athletes would be queueing up. Sure, compeition is one element which draws the competitors, but you take away the incentives and the olympics falls apart.
So to bring the analogy back to MMO's.. sure players like the fact that they can group with other people.. but without the incentives, without a "tangible" reason to group, many players wont pursue it. It seems strange, but I notice it in myself. I play MMO's to group and socialise - but almost peversely I need the game to give me some gentle encouragement to actually do that because like all of us, I get focused on the stats and equipment.
If the game makes it so I can advance and gain stuff easily without grouping - then I do that. Sometimes I grind mobs to gain exp on my own in a rather anti-social way for a game that I play in order to be social.
Yes, humans are peverse like that.
Besides which... going back to the olympics analogy - does it really ruin the competetive spirit of the olympics by the fact that we give out rewards and recognition to those that win? I'd argue that it doesn't (aside from attempts at cheating) and in much the same way, what really is the PROBLEM with incentives for group play in an MMO?
Are you a solo player who really feels bad that content is not accessible to you because of a refusal to socialise? I doubt it. (and if you are.. really, you shouldn't be playing mmo's)
I think what he's trying to say is that the "encouragement feature" (emphasis is on FEATURE, the points themselves, their only purpose being to encourage grouping) is a very inelegant way of "encouraging".
Like you put it, the encouragement in most MMOs comes from the "tangible" rewards you reap (loot, lvls, etc.)
There is marginal encouragement in achievements for example, as long as they are not "world first" or "feats of strength".
Of course this is largely subjective but as a rule of thumb I would say that dangling the carrot in form of loot/lvls/abilities in front of a player is more encouraging than "score".
I think its what he is trying to say.
The game should encourage grouping by its gameplay mechanics, not by a score-system.
Just of the top of my head, lets say there would be a mechanic by which grouped everyone in the party gains access one extra "group skill" for their class (aka what Guild Wars 2 is trying to do with combo-able abilities of different classes).
I would find this solution more elegant than a score system with "social points".
But like i said, might be largely subjective and a Kasual won't give a shit about either.
However I'm leaning towards the fact that if you make playing in a group more -fun- its the biggest encouragement, even better than reward-encouragement.
"The game should encourage grouping by its gameplay mechanics, not by a score-system."
And that's pretty much what I was trying to get at.
A developer has now added a progression element to the grouping dynamic. Why?
It's not needed. Players aren't clamoring for it on their MMO wish lists as far as I know.
The reason I keep asking why, by the way, is because I don't buy any of the arguments presented so far in this thread.
So, until I hear something with substance, I still stand by my statement that it's nothing more than arbitrary fluff.
Just another fake, mechanized system to remind players their character is "progressing".
What's next? Are we going to get XP/loot just for logging in to these games? That may sound like hyperbole right now, but just wait. Just you wait....
So why are you stitting here typing on the technology which made it possible for people to "ruin" games when you could be playing paper D&D.
While you are at it, why don't you get mad at the people who invented paper for those games because playing outside with friends was "real gaming".
It's already in just about every mmo around. You get that just for logging back in the game.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Im sorry but I dont think either of your concerns are that big a deal, voice acting? I dont see how that is a problem at all, if anything it ADDS something to the game that most do not. I found voice acting quite fine in AOC.
Chain quests, again I fail to see how this matters. Pretty much all modern day MMO's have them, and if anything they provide A reason TO quest. endless, pointless quests with no great rewards would not intrest me, but a chain or even an epic chain with big rewrds at the end, these acctualy give me a reason to go through it, not only that the chain quests in SWTOR will be story intensive and make them that much more enjoyable.
The art of story telling in videogames is something that has been a little hit and miss this past decade, but bioware has time and time again done an AMAZING job at it, im quite looking forward to this game.
I wanted to chime in a bit here on the voice acting bit, since you mention voice acting and storytelling in the same post.
Voice acting, cut scenes, storytelling... that means I'm not playing the game. I'm watching it. I'm a spectator.
If it were a case of ordinary NPCs talking to me instead of having to read it - that could be interesting, as long as it was not a cutscene. Heck, if I could talk to the NPC and the NPC talk to me... would be trippy as Hell, am I right? There is a world of difference between walking up to a NPC and them asking you what they can help you with (as opposed to reading their text) and being in a cutscene.
This also goes to storytelling. Games should have a story. It is not a story that should be told. It is a story that should be experienced. You should not watch it. You should drive it or at least participate in it...not just witness it.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
You probably won't enjoy this game then as much as a person who is a fan of Bioware games.
We have known that Bioware was going to make this game a cross between their usual games and an mmo for a long time.
Arguing that an apple should be an orange at this point is a complete waste of time.
lol I love this post. Its so literal, I think he went over his own head.
Do you watch TV simply because you own one? No, you watch TV because some writers and directors made a show that interests you and it motivates you to turn on your TV at certain times to watch.
Take a step back and relax for a second heh. Its gonna be ok
*shakes head*
You guys are using some of the worst analogies to get your own points across.
First, the Olympics. Now, TV.
I give up.
lol I love this post. Its so literal, I think he went over his own head.
Do you watch TV simply because you own one? No, you watch TV because some writers and directors made a show that interests you and it motivates you to turn on your TV at certain times to watch.
Take a step back and relax for a second heh. Its gonna be ok
Main problem with that, TV entertainment is purely visual while video games are through interaction with gameplay mechanics. If you have to force gameplay through carrot on a stick gameplay, then something is flawed with the fun factor of said gameplay mechanics. Also, I do understand people want progression and gear but it should feel like it comes naturally throughout play.
BOOYAKA!
I guess I give up too then heh. I just don't understand why this bothers you so much.
If it's pure fluff what does it matter, why would it enrage you so much? Calling it fluff is a contradiction to the emotion you're showing toward it.
Yes players have become anti-social if you haven't seen that A: you're not playing current MMO's or B: you didn't play older MMO's to see the stark difference.
Again though if it's just fluff what does it matter? Why would it insult you, why care?
BF3 did something similar with their new point system, does that mean the game itself isn't up to group snuff? No. What it means is they've seen tendancy and have acted accordingly.
If the game wasn't designed around group activity there would be no grouping at all, regardless of incentives being in place. Players have shown over and over they don't want to do anything unless it rewards them, from PVp to grouping "no reward, what's the point?" is the common approach. Don't blame devs for trying to cater to common player tendancies.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
This is the way voice acting and cut scenes will work in TOR. It is a story you experience by participation in the conversation. Yes it is a written story, you are not making it up on the fly. But you do have multiple choices to drive the quest. And you can get different results based on those choices. You kill someone or don't, then a or b happens next. You are a jerk to someone, and later in the quest chain, it comes back to bite you.
This is not words being read to you at the same time you can read them like AoC. This is NPCs acting out the words with emotions and movement. You base your choices on what you see and hear, not what you read. Like the ME games from BW.
And these are not long cut scenes or all instanced quests. It is simply at the point you take the quest or turn it in. Other games give you words to read with an accept button. This one will just act them out with you taking part with choice of dialogue. Much more like what you have said above. In between, you will be in the open world killing along side everyone else. Then, as seen in the dev walkthrough, you come to a point in your class quest that has a small instance. This is where big things happen in your story that no one else can see but you and your party. Then you are back out with everyone else once you leave the door witht he green film.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?
R.A.Salvatore
First, I'm not enraged. Gaming is a hobby to me, nothing more. I sleep very well at night thank you very much.
Disappointed would be a better word to use, although I am insulted by the dumbing down of games trend.
I'm absolutely looking at this from a perspective of someone who (like many) was there at the birth of this genre. Someone who is very disappointed watching a genre he used to love being turned on its head over the past 5+ years.
A good question to ask would be, why have players become so anti-social?
Is it the games themselves, and the way they're designed/setup? The mindset they create and train?
I would say yes.
So I do blame the developers. They nurtured and fostered this whole instant gratification system, and in turn, have trained many gamers to expect that with every single activity they participate in.
The fact that there's now a (supposed) need to use incentives just to get players to group up in an MMO is very sad.
That should tell you all you need to know about the state of this genre and where its heading.
Players aren't more "anti-social", lol. You just have more people playing so you have a larger pool of a certain type.
Look at statitics.. spending on gaming is almost at an all-time high over the last few years overall. Gaming is much cheaper, computer prices are cheaper, RAM is cheaper, and games are more accessible than before.
With more people coming in, the types will vary so it may seem as if players are anti-social but you just have a much larger pool so you notice more of them.
It's not like people who were social all of a sudden STOPPED being social. They still are but now the numbers are balancing out a little more.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Here's what I've seen I'll use SWG as my reference as it's the game I probably remember the most about (in terms of complaints).
Questing is pointless, where's the game?, What should I be doing? Where do I go? This games sucks!?!? HOw do I join a faction the game doesn't tell me!!!!!!
Why should we PVP ? All it is is one gank after another or one giant zerg.. Why do I have to play for 8 months to a year before I can win in PVP too? WOW is way better!, I'm going to WOW, they have direction and questing it's not a grind!!!!!!
I could go on and on here but that's enough, I'm sorry the MMO genre today is the result of all of the complaints made back then.... Last I heard the old forums are still archived go look at the general discussion forum from 2003-2004, if you doubt what i wrote above.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
disagree 100% the voice acting, for me adds and extra dimension. When you are watching a videogame, its kind of a broken expierience to be reading text the whole game. when we watch a film, are we forced to watch captions the whole movie? (other languages absolved) no, we get a voice to the face, it only makes sense for them to introduce voice acting to interactive story telling.
No, the MMO genre today is the result of developers' continued use of the DikuMUD/EQ model.
Not because people on the SWG forums failed to grasp the idea behind a sandbox game...
***
We're trained monkeys now. We push a button, and a prize falls into our hands.
If an MMO doesn't have a button to push with an instant reward, more than likely, we won't be interested.
Can you honestly sit here and tell me the games themselves haven't contributed at all to how people behave in them?
MMOs of today have become too game-y if that makes sense.
It's no longer about living in a virtual world, it's about individual accolades; progression; rewards; best scores, etc, etc.
Add in the fact that we can do most of these things on our own now just makes it worse.
Look we agree and you obviously don't see it, but the result is not because devs are dumb and can't do any better. It's because this is what the majority asked for, they don't want to live in a virtual world, they want to play a game. SWG was a sim, WOW was a game, WOW won. That was basically all she wrote for the idea of MMO's being virtual worlds.
The average gamer doesn't know Skyrim being beaten in 3 hours is meaningless, they think it means the game is small they don't even understand the idea behind a virtual world to adventure and create your own story in. This concept is lost on them, their idea of a game is what the devs create for them, not what they create for themselves. They think the latter is doing the devs job for them.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Lots of folks lament about Ultima and it's change from an open pvp game but it was customer complaints (and dropping sales) that goaded them into changing the game to a more safe environment. (just another example of conceding to the masses to stay in business and after 15 years I guess it worked).
That being said I see no reason to have concerns over a game meant for entertainment. You either like what they've done or you don't and if you don't then you kind of have to hope enough will feel the same way. Hence the reason for threads like this to try and pressure a game company by rallying support for what you want personally. That is why gaming is the way it is.
I agree and feel like a dinosour because if I group I group for the fun of a group and not the reward or that certain quest chain.
The problem lies indeed with the mindset you describe and not with chainquest, so OP needs to look at his own playstyle and he might see that that's where the problem lies.
VO may add an extra dimension as you say but at the same time it also disconnects you as well. I kind of disagree with your movie analogy, text have captured the imagination of people for years. The point is there are good movies and there are bad movies, same goes for books & games.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...