Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Story first, World first, Social first, or Gameplay first?

1235»

Comments

  • xeniarxeniar Member UncommonPosts: 805
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by xeniar

    and then we come to the same point again why an MMO is diffrent from any other game in a diffrent genre. and for that good sir i point at the other half of my post wich you totaly ignored.

     

    To me, they don't. Games are games. I don't care about genre lines. I care if a specific game is fun to me.

     

    I told you you would use the "but its fun for me Q_Q" comment, your being to predictable and aperantly you cannot find anything clever enough to counter what i said about what defines an MMO. You are you but there are countless of other players wich play MMO's because they differ from the other genre's. And current produced MMO's do not hold to those defenitions wich is why they all suck. If they would be good enough people would be laying down there money each month.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Originally posted by xeniar
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by xeniar

    MMO's don't have unique IP's i just googled Star trek games do you know how many games have been brought out?

    Not recently. I also don't play ancient old games.

    Tell me, what is the latest Star Trek RPG, based on the TNG universe, that has both ship combat and ground combat? There is no other than STO. If you can name another one, i will go play that instead.

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_(2013_video_game)

    2013 not recent enough for you?

    Il give you that there is no game with both ground and ship combat. But like i said if it truely is about IP then why did Star trek online do so rubbishly? while it has millions of fans around the world.? IP = IP your now talking about features has nothing to do with IP.

    I said TNG universe. That is the JJ abram reboot. You can't drive a galaxy class star ship in that game. Don't you think i would already have check that out?

    "rubbish"? Now you are forcing your opinion on others. If it is rubbish to me, why would i be having free fun with it?

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Originally posted by Edwardslin
     

    I refer to social than other 3 option but it seems that all people don't attach importance to community. Sigh....

    That is right. I don't play games for community nor to social.

     

  • xeniarxeniar Member UncommonPosts: 805
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by xeniar
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by xeniar

    MMO's don't have unique IP's i just googled Star trek games do you know how many games have been brought out?

    Not recently. I also don't play ancient old games.

    Tell me, what is the latest Star Trek RPG, based on the TNG universe, that has both ship combat and ground combat? There is no other than STO. If you can name another one, i will go play that instead.

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_(2013_video_game)

    2013 not recent enough for you?

    Il give you that there is no game with both ground and ship combat. But like i said if it truely is about IP then why did Star trek online do so rubbishly? while it has millions of fans around the world.? IP = IP your now talking about features has nothing to do with IP.

    I said TNG universe. That is the JJ abram reboot. You can't drive a galaxy class star ship in that game. Don't you think i would already have check that out?

    "rubbish"? Now you are forcing your opinion on others. If it is rubbish to me, why would i be having free fun with it?

     

    And again u just halfly read or not read at all the things i put down. Yes its rubbish. if it wasnt rubbish there would be millions of star trek fans paying a sub and playing it. Thats not opinion. but fact because acording to you people flock towards IP's

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by noturpal

    now that i am unbanned let me refresh and destroy. 

    You premises are flat out wrong.  Do you really thing a dev with millions of dollars and a huge team of people behind him, does not think of all.  They do, but the problem is that they..how do be nice about this(I have worked for a lot of gvt grants for historic restorations, and how you actually spend money and the way people really think you spend money is lets just say different) 

    SWTOR is the proof of that, minimal gameplay huge everything else. 

    what I am saying is everyone is wrong about how the gameplay should go, and the devs who are my age and according to mensa 90% of the people are dumber than me.  So devs are just geeks who program my games, and they better stop fucking it up or you won't get my money.

    What are you on about?

    Look, games get a finite number of dev hours.  If you spend more on world/social elements, that's less for gameplay elements.  If you know you don't have enough time to fully bake fresh gameplay, you usually opt to create tried-and-true gameplay.

    Thus, projects where world/social elements are emphasized (more hours spent) are less likely to have fresh gameplay.

    That's just how it works.  Time isn't magically created out of thin air by the Dev Hours Fairy.

    As for your final paragraph, I think "WTF?!" is the only reasonable response.

     

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • xeniarxeniar Member UncommonPosts: 805
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by noturpal

    now that i am unbanned let me refresh and destroy. 

    You premises are flat out wrong.  Do you really thing a dev with millions of dollars and a huge team of people behind him, does not think of all.  They do, but the problem is that they..how do be nice about this(I have worked for a lot of gvt grants for historic restorations, and how you actually spend money and the way people really think you spend money is lets just say different) 

    SWTOR is the proof of that, minimal gameplay huge everything else. 

    what I am saying is everyone is wrong about how the gameplay should go, and the devs who are my age and according to mensa 90% of the people are dumber than me.  So devs are just geeks who program my games, and they better stop fucking it up or you won't get my money.

    What are you on about?

    Look, games get a finite number of dev hours.  If you spend more on world/social elements, that's less for gameplay elements.  If you know you don't have enough time to fully bake fresh gameplay, you usually opt to create tried-and-true gameplay.

    Thus, projects where world/social elements are emphasized (more hours spent) are less likely to have fresh gameplay.

    That's just how it works.  Time isn't magically created out of thin air by the Dev Hours Fairy.

    As for your final paragraph, I think "WTF?!" is the only reasonable response.

     

    When was the last time an MMO had fresh gameplay for u? i can think of a couple games wich did stuff diffrently but was it fresh? Not for me. It was fresh for 2 weeks. then i started to feel that those games where the same boring questhub to questhub race to level cap. So now my fresh gameplay is gone. and there is not a world to replace it. That is why world is so important in MMORPG's. (and social being complimented trough gameplay will make you stick around)

  • apocolusterapocoluster Member UncommonPosts: 1,326
    Voted Gameplay...now If we could all just agree on what type of gameplay to play   lol

    No matter how cynical you become, its never enough to keep up - Lily Tomlin

  • TheHavokTheHavok Member UncommonPosts: 2,423

    I'll give you another example: Firefall

    Firefall has amazing gameplay.  The most fun i've had in an mmo in awhile.  It is a MMOFPS, incase you haven't heard about it.  Great controls.  Reminds me of Unreal tournament. 

    Anyways, the World sucks. I mean its there, it looks good, but its filled with redundant quest (both dynamic and standard).  It feels like a game where you are continuously doing daily quest.  Its really a grind game.  There is no real payoff to the grind except crafting better gear.  But once you have the better gear, then.....nothing.

    As a result of not much to do in the World but the same old stuff over and over again, the Social aspect is pretty bad.  Players group for higher level stuff like BWA runs and quick XP grinding, but that's it.  These two aspects can be completely ignored if you want because the rewards from BWA runs is the same as what you get from your every day missions.

    Finally, the Story is pretty bad as well.  Not much is explained.  I'm almost positive not much has even been created yet.  Plus you get these random little items you find on the ground which have voice recordings on them, that are suppose to add to the plot.  They are a really good idea and fun to find, but then you discover that they themselves don't even make much sense.

    But goddamn, that gameplay sure is fun.  I just wish I wasn't bored to tears when logging in.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Originally posted by xeniar
     

    When was the last time an MMO had fresh gameplay for u? i can think of a couple games wich did stuff diffrently but was it fresh? Not for me. It was fresh for 2 weeks.

    3-4 weeks ago?

    I played Marvel Heroes .. the story campagin is fresh enough. And i finished it (30 hours of free fun!) and moved on. I *may* get back to play another hero, but probably not soon.

     

  • xeniarxeniar Member UncommonPosts: 805
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by xeniar
     

    When was the last time an MMO had fresh gameplay for u? i can think of a couple games wich did stuff diffrently but was it fresh? Not for me. It was fresh for 2 weeks.

    3-4 weeks ago?

    I played Marvel Heroes .. the story campagin is fresh enough. And i finished it (30 hours of free fun!) and moved on. I *may* get back to play another hero, but probably not soon.

     

    So you played an MMO for 30 hours? ive played SP games for far far longer then that. Content locusts.. yuck.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Originally posted by xeniar
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by xeniar
     

    When was the last time an MMO had fresh gameplay for u? i can think of a couple games wich did stuff diffrently but was it fresh? Not for me. It was fresh for 2 weeks.

    3-4 weeks ago?

    I played Marvel Heroes .. the story campagin is fresh enough. And i finished it (30 hours of free fun!) and moved on. I *may* get back to play another hero, but probably not soon.

     

    So you played an MMO for 30 hours? ive played SP games for far far longer then that. Content locusts.. yuck.

    Yes. Is there any reason not to? I have 30 hours of free fun.

    And yes, some SP games lasted longer (for me). Not all of them though. I just finished the main campaign of Splinter Cell black list. It was less than 30 hours (took me a week) but i had a lot of fun. Very nice mechanics, good story and polish.

    OTOH, STO took a lot longer than 30 hours to finish. I probably will play that on and off for a while. The content is enjoyable too, and there is quite a bit more than Marvel Heroes.

     

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by xeniar

    When was the last time an MMO had fresh gameplay for u? i can think of a couple games wich did stuff diffrently but was it fresh? Not for me. It was fresh for 2 weeks. then i started to feel that those games where the same boring questhub to questhub race to level cap. So now my fresh gameplay is gone. and there is not a world to replace it. That is why world is so important in MMORPG's. (and social being complimented trough gameplay will make you stick around)

    Well the bigger factor there is that MMORPGs are giant projects, and thus risk-averse projects.

    Apart from that, to a degree it proves my point.  MMORPGs have sprawling feature sets, so they're exactly the sort of spread-focus game I'm describing, which limits their ability to innovate and iterate on fresh gameplay.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • maplestonemaplestone Member UncommonPosts: 3,099
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    MMORPGs have sprawling feature sets, so they're exactly the sort of spread-focus game I'm describing, which limits their ability to innovate and iterate on fresh gameplay.

    If you foresee that you will have trouble innovating and iterating individual components, it might be time to go back and consider a better foundation for the project?

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Originally posted by maplestone
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    MMORPGs have sprawling feature sets, so they're exactly the sort of spread-focus game I'm describing, which limits their ability to innovate and iterate on fresh gameplay.

    If you foresee that you will have trouble innovating and iterating individual components, it might be time to go back and consider a better foundation for the project?

     

    Why? Not all projects need innovation in every individual component.

  • sunshadow21sunshadow21 Member UncommonPosts: 356
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Look, games get a finite number of dev hours.  If you spend more on world/social elements, that's less for gameplay elements.  If you know you don't have enough time to fully bake fresh gameplay, you usually opt to create tried-and-true gameplay.

    Thus, projects where world/social elements are emphasized (more hours spent) are less likely to have fresh gameplay.

    That's just how it works.  Time isn't magically created out of thin air by the Dev Hours Fairy.

    That's why I went with gameplay and world as being the most important from a development standpoint. Social and story can, and should be, player driven with minimal dev attention, provided that the gameplay and world give the players the tools they need to create their own content/experiences. That is the big difference between MMOs and other games; a good MMO engages the player and turns them into psuedo devs as they shape their own stories and the game around them in ways that the official devs could never manage with a population of thousands of players. By having the devs focus on one or two of the elements with the idea that if done right, the players can handle the others on their own, you end up with a much better game overall. The players are more willing to make a commitment to the game because they feel like they are actually an important piece of it rather than a casual observer, and the devs can make the parts they focus on better because they don't have to spread their resources as thin.

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by maplestone
    If you foresee that you will have trouble innovating and iterating individual components, it might be time to go back and consider a better foundation for the project? 

    Why?  Did WOW require tremendous amounts of innovation to be successful?

    No, it was successful simply by greatly refining pre-existing features.

    But yeah, if innovation is the goal of the project then (a) you don't make an MMORPG because you want a smaller project where innovation is more feasible, and (b) you focus on innovating gameplay and ignore the rest of the elements.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • VyntVynt Member UncommonPosts: 753

    I said gameplay, but gameplay and world go together. For me, gameplay is how things interact in the world, by killing monsters to traveling over the land to finding hidden treasures. The gameplay is in the world, so kind of need both together. If the gameplay is structured well, with cooperative aspects, the social will grow from that.

    Story is useless (for mmorpgs that are worlds) . A good lore is needed, to build the world and people make their own stories. Sure there are a lot of little stories throughout, but always following a set story detracts from it being a world, making it merely a game.

    If you just want to play a game and go through a good story, then that is fine, but there is no longevity in that. Then you end up being called a content locust. I personally think that is a little unfair because most mmo's today are built as games to just consume the story and move on. Not their fault it is designed that way. Just need worlds developed instead of games where people build their own story. Not necessarily a sandbox either. It can have a structure to follow, but allows leeway and customization, variety. A sandpark I guess.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Originally posted by Vynt

    I said gameplay, but gameplay and world go together. For me, gameplay is how things interact in the world, by killing monsters to traveling over the land to finding hidden treasures. The gameplay is in the world, so kind of need both together. If the gameplay is structured well, with cooperative aspects, the social will grow from that.

    And that is your preference.

    To me, gameplay and world do not have to go together. Case in point, LFD and instances are fun to me. They are all gameplay and no world.

     

  • avaliceheartavaliceheart Member Posts: 24
    In an MMO I would say gameplay is the most important thing. Next up is social maybe.
Sign In or Register to comment.