Howdy, Stranger!

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

Space and Time in MMOs

1222324252628»

Comments

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,149
    edited April 2016
    Axehilt said:
    Deny, ignore and reframe the discussion into a strawman argument based on non objective opinion nobody is talking about. That is all he can do because there really is not argument to be made directly to the point. 

    Travel is travel.  Everything else is a subjective adjective added.  He attempts to taint travel as boring, slow and tedious to reframe the argument from a point of a negative.  To concede anything his argument falls apart.  Thus he must deny,ignore and push a strawman.

    Its like saying MMORPG has slow unresponsive combat compared to other genres.  Keep repeating it no matter what when debating if combat in MMORPGs can be enjoyable.  Ignore any evidence and keep asking for evidence to the point nobody is going to repeat the same thing over and over.

    This is an interesting experiment though. I wonder if some posters serve some purpose here.


    Put forth a real argument then. You strongly disagree with me with no opinion of your own, so I assume you're just taking up the opposite side of the discussion.

    Throwing up your hands and implying we can't know the depth of travel (because "everything else is subjective") is nonsense.  The objective measure of depth is a combination of the size of the decision set of a game, and the number of viable strategies within that set (and how frequently those viable decisions change due to dynamic factors.)

    If you're not willing to put forth a little effort to understand these concepts, why bother posting on the topic at all?  To discuss things in an intelligent manner requires a certain level of knowledge on the topic, or at least a willingness to learn.

    Meanwhile the reality is that travel in MMORPGs is inarguably shallow. Are you really suggesting that a discussion on travel in MMORPGs should ignore the current reality of travel in MMORPGs?

    It would move conversation forward for you to simply admit the obvious objective truth that travel is shallow in all MMORPGs.  A recognition of the most obvious traits of travel would allow conversation to move into addressing or avoiding the problem of shallow travel.

    I mean it's not like that's something you can disagree with, right?  The decision set and difficulty of mastering travel in MMORPGs has never been even remotely deep.  You have never called someone "skilled" at travel in MMORPGs, nor have you heard anyone else ever say that.

    Also what's that nonsense about "unresponsive" combat in MMORPGs?  The better MMORPGs have combat which is plenty responsive.  It's slower paced, but pacing doesn't inhibit depth if the right game mechanics are employed (though sure you have to employ crisper, tighter game mechanics as you distance yourself from real-time combat, because real-time decision-making is inherently harder to master than slow turn-based decision-making.)  In MMORPGs where combat actually is less responsive, that's not a depth thing so much as it's an awful controls implementation that will cause the game to be less fun to play.  But several games have WOW-quality responsiveness, so this isn't really a modern problem in MMORPGs.
    "If you're not willing to put forth a little effort to understand these concepts, why bother posting on the topic at all?  To discuss things in an intelligent manner requires a certain level of knowledge on the topic, or at least a willingness to learn." Are you arguing with yourself? 

    I think everyone has acknowledged that in the Themepark era travel is shallow or even most MMORPG in general.  You have yet to acknowledge that other games have meaningful, fun travel or the possibility of it in MMORPG.  I would say that Archeage for one has fun travel with gliders and boats in the open seas. You have yet to even admit that nobody is even arguing that current MMORPG has shallow travel.  Its your strawman

    "A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent."    Current MMORPG do not have shallow travel = argument not advanced by anyone in this thread.  You bring up and we don't care because we never mentioned it.  

    And yes, MMORPG combat is slow shallow and unresponsive.  You can look at Destiny selling 500 million in one day.  The Division also sold millions.  Both of these games have fluid combat.  Obviously I observed this and it must be true because I say so.
    Post edited by Vermillion_Raventhal on
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,149

    Deivos said:
    Axehilt said:
    Deny, ignore and reframe the discussion into a strawman argument based on non objective opinion nobody is talking about. That is all he can do because there really is not argument to be made directly to the point. 

    Travel is travel.  Everything else is a subjective adjective added.  He attempts to taint travel as boring, slow and tedious to reframe the argument from a point of a negative.  To concede anything his argument falls apart.  Thus he must deny,ignore and push a strawman.

    Its like saying MMORPG has slow unresponsive combat compared to other genres.  Keep repeating it no matter what when debating if combat in MMORPGs can be enjoyable.  Ignore any evidence and keep asking for evidence to the point nobody is going to repeat the same thing over and over.

    This is an interesting experiment though. I wonder if some posters serve some purpose here.


    Put forth a real argument then. You strongly disagree with me with no opinion of your own, so I assume you're just taking up the opposite side of the discussion.

    Throwing up your hands and implying we can't know the depth of travel (because "everything else is subjective") is nonsense.  The objective measure of depth is a combination of the size of the decision set of a game, and the number of viable strategies within that set (and how frequently those viable decisions change due to dynamic factors.)

    If you're not willing to put forth a little effort to understand these concepts, why bother posting on the topic at all?  To discuss things in an intelligent manner requires a certain level of knowledge on the topic, or at least a willingness to learn.

    Meanwhile the reality is that travel in MMORPGs is inarguably shallow. Are you really suggesting that a discussion on travel in MMORPGs should ignore the current reality of travel in MMORPGs?

    It would move conversation forward for you to simply admit the obvious objective truth that travel is shallow in all MMORPGs.  A recognition of the most obvious traits of travel would allow conversation to move into addressing or avoiding the problem of shallow travel.

    I mean it's not like that's something you can disagree with, right?  The decision set and difficulty of mastering travel in MMORPGs has never been even remotely deep.  You have never called someone "skilled" at travel in MMORPGs, nor have you heard anyone else ever say that.

    Also what's that nonsense about "unresponsive" combat in MMORPGs?  The better MMORPGs have combat which is plenty responsive.  It's slower paced, but pacing doesn't inhibit depth if the right game mechanics are employed (though sure you have to employ crisper, tighter game mechanics as you distance yourself from real-time combat, because real-time decision-making is inherently harder to master than slow turn-based decision-making.)  In MMORPGs where combat actually is less responsive, that's not a depth thing so much as it's an awful controls implementation that will cause the game to be less fun to play.  But several games have WOW-quality responsiveness, so this isn't really a modern problem in MMORPGs.
    Well at least axe isn't denying that his argument is a logical fallacy, now he's just attacking you. XD

    So to correct a couple points axe made...

    1. MMOs were offered by-name which have more involved travel mechanics than A to B movement. You having not played them does not make them not exist.
    2. "Mastering travel" only applies when the user experience has travel to master. In titles like WoW of course that will be lacking. However, good pilots in Planetside, good mounted technique in BDO, good gliding skills in AA, good driving skills in APB or GTA, good tracking/hunting skills in Ryzom or survival games, etc are all mechanics driven by travel which players can in fact be noted as skilled with.
    The rest of the dialogue is either tangential or insults.

    Like the ramble he runs off on combat after Ver uses is simply as an example of how one can assert a statement and blind out any counterpoints or refutations. Somehow axe completely missed the obvious there and instead took it as another opportunity to attempt to look smart. I guess it's good for a lark though.

    Seriously, if your only capabilities is stating the obvious and then bullshitting for days, you're not helping anyone. Take your own advice axe;

    "If you're not willing to put forth a little effort to understand these concepts, why bother posting on the topic at all?  To discuss things in an intelligent manner requires a certain level of knowledge on the topic, or at least a willingness to learn."

    You proved you're unwilling to learn, you proved you don't even vet your own sources since we can quote them against you, you proved your "objective observations" are merely anecdotal opinions of a sliver of the market, and you proved your entire premise of argumentation is built on logical fallacies.

    This is far removed from a rational manner of discussion. Time and travel were already shown to be fundamental components of gameplay, they were shown how they can be integrated with many other mechanics to create game depth, they were given examples of actual MMOs which do such things, and there were quotations and links in support of the points made. Everyone can see this as everyone can click about to pages like 4 where the games were first mentioned, or 18 which has a bundle of links, or many of these pages with the quotations. 

    You have to deny a very clear and apparent reality to make any claim of yours at this point.
    Its hard to imagine he's blind to it.  Apparently he's either trying to save face or a plant or just trolling. 

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    "If you're not willing to put forth a little effort to understand these concepts, why bother posting on the topic at all?  To discuss things in an intelligent manner requires a certain level of knowledge on the topic, or at least a willingness to learn." Are you arguing with yourself? 

    I think everyone has acknowledged that in the Themepark era travel is shallow or even most MMORPG in general.  You have yet to acknowledge that other games have meaningful, fun travel or the possibility of it in MMORPG.  I would say that Archeage for one has fun travel with gliders and boats in the open seas. You have yet to even admit that nobody is even arguing that current MMORPG has shallow travel.  Its your strawman

    "A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent."    Current MMORPG do not have shallow travel = argument not advanced by anyone in this thread.  You bring up and we don't care because we never mentioned it.  

    And yes, MMORPG combat is slow shallow and unresponsive.  You can look at Destiny selling 500 million in one day.  The Division also sold millions.  Both of these games have fluid combat.  Obviously I observed this and it must be true because I say so.
    From page 1 where I describe other genres using deep travel: "There are genres of games where location [travel] is the point.  We call them racing games.  The reason the best racing games are enjoyable is travel is interesting gameplay in them. (Though notably they don't make you drive the semi to haul your car to the next race location. They skip to the races.) In typical MMORPGs, travel is not interesting gameplay."

    Everyone is blindly disagreeing with me without consistently describing their ideal travel.  Given that players almost never creatively imagine better versions of things, it's definitely a safe assumption that if someone is in favor of slow travel in MMORPGs, they're in favor of the status quo type of slow travel.

    These players aren't imagining turning MMORPG travel into racing game-tier depth and quality.  They're imagining shallow travel like they've seen in MMORPGs before, including Archeage.  AA having variety to its travel doesn't provide enough depth to its travel to keep it from being boring.  Game depth is related to decisions and skill.  Having different speed attributes to mounts doesn't change the decisions made in travel. The mount ability provides a teeny little increase to depth, but not enough (travel is still overwhelmingly shallow.)

    Earlier in the thread where I did coax someone into basically saying 'yeah, let's do travel in MMORPGs to the same depth that combat is, or that travel is in a racing game!' that just turns conversation into how impossible it would be to achieve that in a MMORPG (the act of spending enough time to make travel that deep would cause the other aspects of the game to be much shallower, and now you have a game which is mostly about travel, and as a result isn't considered a MMORPG because it's nothing like any existing RPGs.)  I pointed out it'd be fine for a game to try that out (basically some variation on an MMO Racing game) since it's fine for a game not to be a MMORPG, but you couldn't actually create an MMORPG that way since the very act of trying to do that would cause the game to no longer be recognizable as an MMORPG.

    "Unresponsive" is a word with meaning.  When you hit a button in WOW to execute an ability, the ability comes out immediately and does its thing, and the responsiveness of WOW (and most MMORPGs nowadays) is at the same level as Destiny.  Pretending WOW is less responsive is just wrong.

    Destiny has about 2.1 million players who've played recently on Xbox and Playstation combined.  WOW has about 5.5 million.   The "500 million" number was dollars, not players.  The latest install number mentioned is 25 million Destiny accounts (compared with 100 million WOW accounts in 2014)

    FPSes do tend to automatically inherit a great amount of depth just from the basic aiming mechanics (especially in games without insta-hit hitscan weapons), but this doesn't speak to the overall depth of play as turn-based games can definitely still be deeper than FPSes.  Fully mastering a rotation under all conditions in WOW definitely causes WOW to be one of the deeper games out on the market, but I haven't played Destiny to know if there is anything close to the same amount of depth.

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

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    edited April 2016

    Its hard to imagine he's blind to it.  Apparently he's either trying to save face or a plant or just trolling. 

    The "address these named MMORPGs with marginally better travel" argument was invalidated long ago.  It wasn't really a viable argument.
    • Take an arbitrary scale of game depth from 0 (completely shallow) to 10 (extreme depth.)
    • Basic MMORPG travel is perhaps a 2.  There's a set of infrequent shallow decisions involved in navigating terrain and avoiding mobs, but it's overwhelmingly shallow.
    • Archeage (one of the named games) is like a 2.5.  It only adds "press this turbo button every time the cooldown is read" cooldown abilities.
    • First off, great job! That's a step forward.
    • Second, it's still staggeringly shallow.  So it hasn't made any relevant point.  For travel to be enjoyable to players it has to be more in the 5+ range (the same general depth as the deeper mechanics a game offers, like combat.)
    It's like we're discussing aircraft design and I'm telling you prop-driven aircraft are a bad design and mentioning jets going 2193mph, and you guys are like "oh yeah, well the Tupoplev is a really fast prop plane!" and I'm like "It goes 540mph, why are you even bringing it up?" and then several pages later in the thread you make some random claim that I never addressed that plane you named by name.

    Deivos' second point just sounds totally irrelevant.  When travel is unavoidable required in a game, if it's shallow then it makes the game shallower, because it becomes an unavoidable part of the experience of playing the game.  So if travel is unavoidable then deep travel becomes important (travel deep enough for the player to work towards mastery of it.)
    Post edited by Axehilt on

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

  • DeivosDeivos Member EpicPosts: 3,692
    Axehilt said:

    Its hard to imagine he's blind to it.  Apparently he's either trying to save face or a plant or just trolling. 

    The "address these named MMORPGs with marginally better travel" argument was invalidated long ago.  It wasn't really a viable argument.
    • Take an arbitrary scale of game depth from 0 (completely shallow) to 10 (extreme depth.)
    • Basic MMORPG travel is perhaps a 2.  There's a set of infrequent shallow decisions involved in navigating terrain and avoiding mobs, but it's overwhelmingly shallow.
    • Archeage (one of the named games) is like a 2.5.  It only adds "press this turbo button every time the cooldown is read" cooldown abilities.
    • First off, great job! That's a step forward.
    • Second, it's still staggeringly shallow.  So it hasn't made any relevant point.  For travel to be enjoyable to players it has to be more in the 5+ range (the same general depth as the deeper mechanics a game offers, like combat.)
    It's like we're discussing aircraft design and I'm telling you prop-driven aircraft are a bad design and mentioning jets going 2193mph, and you guys are like "oh yeah, well the Tupoplev is a really fast prop plane!" and I'm like "It goes 540mph, why are you even bringing it up?" and then several pages later in the thread you make some random claim that I never addressed that plane you named by name.

    Deivos' second point just sounds totally irrelevant.  When travel is unavoidable required in a game, if it's shallow then it makes the game shallower, because it becomes an unavoidable part of the experience of playing the game.  So if travel is unavoidable then deep travel becomes important (travel deep enough for the player to work towards mastery of it.)
    And you managed to ignore a good chunk of what was said in order to make these claims again.

    Your bullet points amount to your opinion on the circumstance and you have naught but one comment to chare on any of the referenced content, stating only your opinion on the state of AAs mechanics (and the assessment being remarkably poor for only looking at one aspect of travel in the riding a mount from A to B scenario where there are plenty of others utilizing travel and mounts of many sorts such as the gliders I mentioned).

    "Basic MMORPG" is already the start of a false argument. IT's been clearly established that the type of game you are referring to is the western themepark style MMO with heavily scripted content, not the (technically more common) iterations of MMORPG titles we see from Korea and the likes, and which I mentioned several of that do exactly what you've deigned to claim MMORPGs can't because it doesn't fit with your type of game experience.

    Your analogy is, as a result, an amazingly pointless tangent that doesn't even hit the mark. Before you try to make any analogy pause and try to figure out the argument first.

    The second point I made was a direct refutation of a claim you prior made. If you claim it's irrelevance you are only claiming your own irrelevance on the matter. You have now once again presented the false argument of "a mechanic is isolation is boring" where the statement I made clearly was on it being a mechanic integrated with the rest of the tools to develop depth.

    Besides which I can quote Cadwell on the matter of limiting player tools again;
    "Tools need to be limited in some way, it could be that they are inconsistently available. It could be that you have options A, B, and C and all of them have different uses or importance. It could be that there's a lot of cool-downs. It could be that they're just not provided to you when you need them by some mechanic. I think that's really really important, it can force players (if it's done in a way that doesn't feel arbitrary and lame, it feel's natural to the game) players naturally get into this "making do" and creativity mode."

    So this would be yet another straw-man you have tried to create.

    You have no argument, you have only apparently resolved to repeat the same flawed logic over and over no matter how many times it's corrected until everyone gives up. That is not the act of an intelligent or sane person.

    "The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay

    "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin

Sign In or Register to comment.