If you have a heavy preference to one style or the other for MMORPG's you play; And why? Also is this a general preference (if you do have one) or conditional on what you feel like doing at the time?
If either of these is a turn-off for playing a prospective MMORPG for you; And why?
If you can think of any exemplary games that employ either style (either well done or poorly implemented); And, describe how they went about it, towards the end's of where it set them apart in this respect.
To start this off right, I am going to give some very clear definitions of what I am referring to in the title:
Free-Roaming.
You can go most any where you see. While there may be some limitations they are largely reasonable within the context of what you are capable of (such as the physics of a game not letting you climb more then so high up on a mountain, because it simply becomes too steep. Or not being able to get on a building rooftop, only because you can find a group of items that are correctly sized and heighted to allow you to jump up). When moving between areas, the transition is virtually seamless. Often even having an intergradation area between biomes for the flora and terrain present in either adjacent area. Though mostly very open there are still often some areas (such as buildings in a town, or dungeons) that may present a loading screen.
Linear.
Movement is generally free within set boundaries. You can see plenty of places in the distance. But, it is likely a backdrop that you cannot reach or a visual representation of an area you will be able to load eventually. There is a high degree of polish to objects which makes them difficult to interact with in any other way then was strictly intended (characters auto-running or glitching through a fence when you try to ranged attack something in a way that attempts to use the fence as a shield for instance). There are often many invisible barriers preventing you from going to undeveloped places or simply beyond the reveal. Movement between areas often involves loading screens, and adjacent areas tend to look very different from each other.
...So, thoughts on this?
I don't think either ultimately matters to me. I hear your question as if it were "is a book you are reading better with a blue cover or a red cover?". There is fun in both. You can explore in both. The real issue is other issues in the game such as game mechanics.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.
...can't win
Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol
I'm definitely the explorer so I like the freedom to go where I please. So open ended level design suits me better. I still can enjoy more linear levels but the story has to be amazing as well as everything else to make up for it(thinking SP games here).
Most MMOs aren't so linear by level design though because the environment you play in is rather large and you usually have several options of what to do or where to go. It is more about how the quests are laid out and the developer's intent for you to follow that trail of quests. It more noticeably feels linear when everyone starts in the same spot and everyone follows the same trail of quests to get out of the starter area and the same trail for each new zone.
What I'd like to be able to do is just wander around the world and stumble upon a quest. At least that way I feel satisfied to have found it and completed it. Sure, Developers get more "use" out of feeding us quests from hub to hub but the entire experience feels underwhelming. I'm certainly no feeling like an adventurer at that point.
Linear and poor replayabilty: Aion, WAR, SWTOR, etc
Non linear quest hub branching and many starting locations, good replayability: Vanguard, EQ2
ArenaNET gave the players a 100% free roaming game with GW2, but during the beta, many players were confused, lost, unable to think on their own and take initiative, so they had to patch in "hearts" to please those who have never known anything other than WoW clones with linear questing.
Some people just completely lack imagination and initiative. They want to be on rails, grinding like lobotomized hamsters.
Rather harsh, isn't it?
Maybe not harsh enough, since it's a true story. Today's players totally lack initiative and the ability to make their own decisions compared to players back when UO, EQ and AC1 were the 3 top contenders. Hell, even WoW during Vanilla times had a decent amount of free roaming, where players had to decide where to go next and were not force feed by the game.
Exploration, figuring out what to do next, using the brain and the imagination... nah. Everything has to be obvious for even the most stupid of players, god forbid if they had to think for a minute before moving to the next content of their choice.
I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.
...can't win
I pulled a win out of the thread. It provided a bump to get me thinking about how much or how little world design relates to content gating and progression.
The concept that I've been banging on for a while is how far can typical MMORPG mechanics be stripped down and still be an MMORPG. I've already eliminated XP entirely, driving levels based on skill training. I'd like to see if I can remove levels completely and gate content solely on the individual's preference for easy or difficult gameplay.
I'm thinking linear world layout might provide structure to make this possible, as opposed to free-roaming which would appear to the player as more chaotic.
Sorry you can't win, but thanks for helping me.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.
...can't win
Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol
Your just jealous because your text is tiny and uncolored. And, it's to late to change that now and have people buy it. Because, you have established a norm...btw, it's light salmon and pale turquoise.
...If your gana rip on my swag at least get it right.
Originally posted by ZombieKen
I pulled a win out of the thread. It provided a bump to get me thinking about how much or how little world design relates to content gating and progression.
The concept that I've been banging on for a while is how far can typical MMORPG mechanics be stripped down and still be an MMORPG. I've already eliminated XP entirely, driving levels based on skill training. I'd like to see if I can remove levels completely and gate content solely on the individual's preference for easy or difficult gameplay.
I'm thinking linear world layout might provide structure to make this possible, as opposed to free-roaming which would appear to the player as more chaotic.
I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.
...can't win
Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol
The formatting does definitely get in the way of reading it.
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
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.
...can't win
Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol
The formatting does definitely get in the way of reading it.
Pastels in a slightly larger font is harder to read on a dark background? Are you legally blind? Color theory would hold that it should be in-fact easier on the eyes.
I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.
...can't win
Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol
Your just jealous because your text is tiny and uncolored. And, it's to late to change that now and have people buy it. Because, you have established a norm...btw, it's light salmon and pale turquoise.
...If your gana rip on my swag at least get it right.
You already took my orange type, that's why (orange is my guild color and deck all my pics with)!
The interface won't even apply text color (seriously this site needs a new forum. It was new in 2008, now it's old old).
I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.
...can't win
Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol
Your just jealous because your text is tiny and uncolored. And, it's to late to change that now and have people buy it. Because, you have established a norm...btw, it's light salmon and pale turquoise.
...If your gana rip on my swag at least get it right.
You already took my orange type, that's why (orange is my guild color and deck all my pics with)!
The interface won't even apply text color (seriously this site needs a new forum. It was new in 2008, now it's old old).
Did you try clicking more colors (the option isn't really that noticeable)? Granted their are not much more when you click it...But, there are a few more.
As far as the site goes, I would settle for right click copy pasting and right click spelling corrections (so I don't have to keep google open in another tab).
This is a big topic but i will try keep it shortish.
There are a LOT of factors when thinking or looking at it and i cannot start listing them all.Every single game has a boundary,there is no infinite space on maps.
Just because some game allows you to go everywhere,does not mean anything to me.The reason is as i said MANY reasons.If for example i am making a game with real good combat and do not want players to find exploiting areas that they might be able to jump or climb to,i won't allow them to target those areas.
Then you have games that just add a ton of 2d fake buildings so that you can't see any further,ok so they allow you to go right to that building,but whippty doo,not like i can even enter that building anyhow.So you see one does not allow yo u to walk to the last visible pixel and one does but the one that does,might have well not bothered,if you can understand my point?
Here is another way to look at it as well,ok so i can walk right to that building ,the last visible pixel,what is on the other side of that building?Your hiding that from me,so again,i rather have the nice visible shoreline and water than some fake scenario.A lot of games will also just make a mountain side straight up so no way you can scale it.So that is no different than the game showing me this nice backdrop.
Point is EVERY single game is hiding something from you in the background,there is no such thing as real space like we know it,they are just maps in a game engine.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard Just a hint... people who write popular books or even just articles don't need fancy colors, it's their writing which is good. Using colors and fancy formatting just looks like artificial means to hide the poor writing to many of us.
So, it's not that black ink on white paper is the cheapest way to print books and articles. It's the publishers honoring the good work of such prestigious figures by not muddying it up with, god forbid, a little color....Am I getting this right?
You just jumped in the plywood box of someone who was picking on method because they had nothing better to say. Keep pushing this fail button. It has not worked out so far but I am sure good ole' Skinner will pay out eventually.
Originally posted by Wizardry
This is a big topic but i will try keep it shortish.
There are a LOT of factors when thinking or looking at it and i cannot start listing them all.Every single game has a boundary,there is no infinite space on maps.
Just because some game allows you to go everywhere,does not mean anything to me.The reason is as i said MANY reasons.If for example i am making a game with real good combat and do not want players to find exploiting areas that they might be able to jump or climb to,i won't allow them to target those areas.
Then you have games that just add a ton of 2d fake buildings so that you can't see any further,ok so they allow you to go right to that building,but whippty doo,not like i can even enter that building anyhow.So you see one does not allow yo u to walk to the last visible pixel and one does but the one that does,might have well not bothered,if you can understand my point?
Here is another way to look at it as well,ok so i can walk right to that building ,the last visible pixel,what is on the other side of that building?Your hiding that from me,so again,i rather have the nice visible shoreline and water than some fake scenario.A lot of games will also just make a mountain side straight up so no way you can scale it.So that is no different than the game showing me this nice backdrop.
Point is EVERY single game is hiding something from you in the background,there is no such thing as real space like we know it,they are just maps in a game engine.
Make an Active Worlds account and fly around alphaworld or awteen at full speed. After 5 hours of still loading content built as far back 1995 by users, tell me again there is no such thing as infinite
Server side maybe...but older client sides are an entirely different realm. But, I can see the point. Sometimes you would rather be restricted and tantalized by machinations of the possibilities off in the the supposed distance, then to actually go there and be let down. Makes sense.
The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.
I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.
I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...
The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.
I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.
I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...
This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.
Like with many things, people like the idea of free-roaming, but not necessarily when its in their game. That is why you can't poll these things.
Some time ago, EA asked what the community would think about Battlefield Heroes having a cash shop. The general feedback was negative, but when they implemented it, virtually nothing changed. Those who had voiced the strongest opinions against the changes were also still playing the game.
What people say and what people do/want are two different things.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.
I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.
I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...
This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.
If that goes through your head while playing WoT, you're just plain playing wrong.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.
...can't win
Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol
The formatting does definitely get in the way of reading it.
Pastels in a slightly larger font is harder to read on a dark background? Are you legally blind? Color theory would hold that it should be in-fact easier on the eyes.
I was referring to the alternating colors, underlining (on a web site) and bold in odd places, and the multiple font sizes, but you feel free to continue the insults if you feel it's necessary. If nothing else it's a great example of the biggest mistake that many hobbyist devs make - mistake their memorization of theory for an understanding of application or effective execution.
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
The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.
I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.
I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...
This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.
If that goes through your head while playing WoT, you're just plain playing wrong.
WOW seemed to me to do a good job with the zone boundaries. I never felt "penned in" despite there only being a handful of ways in and out of each area. Searching for that experience in a lobby game like WoT, though. That's odd.
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
The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.
I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.
I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...
This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.
If that goes through your head while playing WoT, you're just plain playing wrong.
I'm in a Dicker Max (the first TD I have been in where heavy tanks actually panic at my approach and make bad mistakes)...I can afford to lay down dmg's as I wonder about the universe i'm in.
Nicely written post, OP. Free-roaming ftw. I'll quit a game that makes me feel boxed in. I thought of RIFT as mostly free roaming and have lots of screen shots in places no one would bother going because there were no quests there. I'm one of those players looking for the glitch where you can fall off the map. Btw, I want on top of that mountain anyway. No limits.
Originally posted by Jemcrystal Nicely written post, OP. Free-roaming ftw. I'll quit a game that makes me feel boxed in. I thought of RIFT as mostly free roaming and have lots of screen shots in places no one would bother going because there were no quests there. I'm one of those players looking for the glitch where you can fall off the map. Btw, I want on top of that mountain anyway. No limits.
I find it fun if I locate a spot where if i step a certain direction from just the right angle I glitch to way outside the map (and taking another step in any direction glitches me back) on free-roaming games, like...
[Aika Online]
But there is a breaking point where I am just like "Oh c'mon!" *rage quit*
I think the last one I played that was like that was Aerreven. If I recall correctly the last time I saw my orc, he was moon walking into the infinite void after falling through a building and out of the map. I must have fallen out of or off of the map a good 10 times inside an hour of play. Relogs fixed most of them but the last one (which I never got a response about from the devs).
Actually... stay away from that game. It's not just falling out of the map constantly without even trying to. Many doorways won't fit tall characters. You can take falling damage walking down stairs. Enemies can agro you from much further away then you can target them. Your view will be constantly bumped by so much stuff it's insane. As I recall it...that was one of the more horrible MMORPG experiences I have had. One of those very few games that I would confidently call un-playable.
The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.
I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.
I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...
This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.
If that goes through your head while playing WoT, you're just plain playing wrong.
Why? WoT is a free entertainment product. I don't see why a reason why he can't play it anyway he wants, as long as he is having fun. Certainly it is a weird way, different from most. But there is no "wrong" way to enjoy a game. Just different ways.
Just like i play many MMOs as single player games. I don't see a reason why i should not enjoy entertainment products as i see fit.
Comments
I don't think either ultimately matters to me. I hear your question as if it were "is a book you are reading better with a blue cover or a red cover?". There is fun in both. You can explore in both. The real issue is other issues in the game such as game mechanics.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
I'm definitely the explorer so I like the freedom to go where I please. So open ended level design suits me better. I still can enjoy more linear levels but the story has to be amazing as well as everything else to make up for it(thinking SP games here).
Most MMOs aren't so linear by level design though because the environment you play in is rather large and you usually have several options of what to do or where to go. It is more about how the quests are laid out and the developer's intent for you to follow that trail of quests. It more noticeably feels linear when everyone starts in the same spot and everyone follows the same trail of quests to get out of the starter area and the same trail for each new zone.
What I'd like to be able to do is just wander around the world and stumble upon a quest. At least that way I feel satisfied to have found it and completed it. Sure, Developers get more "use" out of feeding us quests from hub to hub but the entire experience feels underwhelming. I'm certainly no feeling like an adventurer at that point.
Linear and poor replayabilty: Aion, WAR, SWTOR, etc
Non linear quest hub branching and many starting locations, good replayability: Vanguard, EQ2
+1 for the cartoon.
I pulled a win out of the thread. It provided a bump to get me thinking about how much or how little world design relates to content gating and progression.
The concept that I've been banging on for a while is how far can typical MMORPG mechanics be stripped down and still be an MMORPG. I've already eliminated XP entirely, driving levels based on skill training. I'd like to see if I can remove levels completely and gate content solely on the individual's preference for easy or difficult gameplay.
I'm thinking linear world layout might provide structure to make this possible, as opposed to free-roaming which would appear to the player as more chaotic.
Sorry you can't win, but thanks for helping me.
Your just jealous because your text is tiny and uncolored. And, it's to late to change that now and have people buy it. Because, you have established a norm...btw, it's light salmon and pale turquoise.
...If your gana rip on my swag at least get it right.
Well, at least I didn't make it poll, huh.
The formatting does definitely get in the way of reading it.
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
1. Free-Roaming - 97%
2. Linear - 0%
3. WTF is the OP asking? - 3%
*grin*
Pastels in a slightly larger font is harder to read on a dark background? Are you legally blind? Color theory would hold that it should be in-fact easier on the eyes.
+1
You already took my orange type, that's why (orange is my guild color and deck all my pics with)!
The interface won't even apply text color (seriously this site needs a new forum. It was new in 2008, now it's old old).
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
Did you try clicking more colors (the option isn't really that noticeable)? Granted their are not much more when you click it...But, there are a few more.
As far as the site goes, I would settle for right click copy pasting and right click spelling corrections (so I don't have to keep google open in another tab).
This is a big topic but i will try keep it shortish.
There are a LOT of factors when thinking or looking at it and i cannot start listing them all.Every single game has a boundary,there is no infinite space on maps.
Just because some game allows you to go everywhere,does not mean anything to me.The reason is as i said MANY reasons.If for example i am making a game with real good combat and do not want players to find exploiting areas that they might be able to jump or climb to,i won't allow them to target those areas.
Then you have games that just add a ton of 2d fake buildings so that you can't see any further,ok so they allow you to go right to that building,but whippty doo,not like i can even enter that building anyhow.So you see one does not allow yo u to walk to the last visible pixel and one does but the one that does,might have well not bothered,if you can understand my point?
Here is another way to look at it as well,ok so i can walk right to that building ,the last visible pixel,what is on the other side of that building?Your hiding that from me,so again,i rather have the nice visible shoreline and water than some fake scenario.A lot of games will also just make a mountain side straight up so no way you can scale it.So that is no different than the game showing me this nice backdrop.
Point is EVERY single game is hiding something from you in the background,there is no such thing as real space like we know it,they are just maps in a game engine.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
So, it's not that black ink on white paper is the cheapest way to print books and articles. It's the publishers honoring the good work of such prestigious figures by not muddying it up with, god forbid, a little color....Am I getting this right?
You just jumped in the plywood box of someone who was picking on method because they had nothing better to say. Keep pushing this fail button. It has not worked out so far but I am sure good ole' Skinner will pay out eventually.
Make an Active Worlds account and fly around alphaworld or awteen at full speed. After 5 hours of still loading content built as far back 1995 by users, tell me again there is no such thing as infinite
Server side maybe...but older client sides are an entirely different realm. But, I can see the point. Sometimes you would rather be restricted and tantalized by machinations of the possibilities off in the the supposed distance, then to actually go there and be let down. Makes sense.
The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.
I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.
I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...
This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.
Like with many things, people like the idea of free-roaming, but not necessarily when its in their game. That is why you can't poll these things.
Some time ago, EA asked what the community would think about Battlefield Heroes having a cash shop. The general feedback was negative, but when they implemented it, virtually nothing changed. Those who had voiced the strongest opinions against the changes were also still playing the game.
What people say and what people do/want are two different things.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
If that goes through your head while playing WoT, you're just plain playing wrong.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I was referring to the alternating colors, underlining (on a web site) and bold in odd places, and the multiple font sizes, but you feel free to continue the insults if you feel it's necessary. If nothing else it's a great example of the biggest mistake that many hobbyist devs make - mistake their memorization of theory for an understanding of application or effective execution.
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
WOW seemed to me to do a good job with the zone boundaries. I never felt "penned in" despite there only being a handful of ways in and out of each area. Searching for that experience in a lobby game like WoT, though. That's odd.
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
I'm in a Dicker Max (the first TD I have been in where heavy tanks actually panic at my approach and make bad mistakes)...I can afford to lay down dmg's as I wonder about the universe i'm in.
Sure, why not.
I find it fun if I locate a spot where if i step a certain direction from just the right angle I glitch to way outside the map (and taking another step in any direction glitches me back) on free-roaming games, like...
[Aika Online]
But there is a breaking point where I am just like "Oh c'mon!" *rage quit*
I think the last one I played that was like that was Aerreven. If I recall correctly the last time I saw my orc, he was moon walking into the infinite void after falling through a building and out of the map. I must have fallen out of or off of the map a good 10 times inside an hour of play. Relogs fixed most of them but the last one (which I never got a response about from the devs).
Actually... stay away from that game. It's not just falling out of the map constantly without even trying to. Many doorways won't fit tall characters. You can take falling damage walking down stairs. Enemies can agro you from much further away then you can target them. Your view will be constantly bumped by so much stuff it's insane. As I recall it...that was one of the more horrible MMORPG experiences I have had. One of those very few games that I would confidently call un-playable.
Why? WoT is a free entertainment product. I don't see why a reason why he can't play it anyway he wants, as long as he is having fun. Certainly it is a weird way, different from most. But there is no "wrong" way to enjoy a game. Just different ways.
Just like i play many MMOs as single player games. I don't see a reason why i should not enjoy entertainment products as i see fit.