I just wish there were more successful MMORPG games filling our needs than there seems to be. I'm too fickle to want to play one type of game with all of my 'game time' all the time.
Level gating, gear gating, vertical, horizontal, levels, no levels, gaining Experience or Knowledge, unlocking skills, earning points for a hugemongous skill tree, shallow, flashy, deep, engaging, I've enjoyed them all.
If I'm in the mood to play a game with clearly defined parameters, or no parameters except ones I create myself, then I hope there's something fun out there for me to try or go back to.
Can there be one game that encompasses all of this? Maybe, if we could use offline/online mechanics, and different media sources/streams tying one giant all-encompassing world together into one game with tons of different ways to play all the different play styles mentioned above and more.
Drop in/out gameplay for some mechanics on mobile/tablets. Deeper gameplay for other mechanics on consoles/PC's/Macs. Still more gameplay available for AR/VR. All in an effort to grow my character in all types of ways in this one world.
I got geekbumps just thinking about the possibilities...
Slow leveling.... Staying at level for a long time.... A player at level 20 can play for "weeks" with levels 17- 24. This would involve a large game, large zones, a big world..... This is Vanilla World of Warcraft !!!...... This is the reason its famous
No it isn't. 1-60 in Vanilla Wow takes less than 7 days /played if you're slow. That's 3 hours per level.
If his experience didn't revolve only around WoW we would probably be spared much. He doesn't have the scope and his inability to understand this leads to many of his threads being created to amplify this void in his gaming experience.
Slow leveling.... Staying at level for a long time.... A player at level 20 can play for "weeks" with levels 17- 24. This would involve a large game, large zones, a big world..... This is Vanilla World of Warcraft !!!...... This is the reason its famous
No it isn't. 1-60 in Vanilla Wow takes less than 7 days /played if you're slow. That's 3 hours per level.
If his experience didn't revolve only around WoW we would probably be spared much. He doesn't have the scope and his inability to understand this leads to many of his threads being created to amplify this void in his gaming experience.
And I always thought you were one of the nice ones. I guess I provoked something here.
Don't fix what's aint broken. You go play MOBA or Battle Royale, you don't have the mindset of a MMO player, which is about socialization in order to reach the collective goal of your guild in the long term. It means if you want to get level cap in 3 days by solo fest, you need to get out of the genre.
My only problem with MMO today is the business model which is P2W, 99% MMO publishers haven't figured out a way to monetize their games without involving selling op items.
It makes me worry because as I wait for Project TL, NCSoft will most likelly fill the game with P2W stuff, as someone who played Lineage 1 back when it was pure P2P, I'm sad about this P2W porn of NcSoft today, because they own my favorite MMO until today, Lineage.
Levels have nothing to socializing. You could be told to play Diablo or a looter shooter if all you care about is levels and gear.
Except such games don't offer massive open world pvp with consequences like Lineage.
Slow leveling.... Staying at level for a long time.... A player at level 20 can play for "weeks" with levels 17- 24. This would involve a large game, large zones, a big world..... This is Vanilla World of Warcraft !!!...... This is the reason its famous
No it isn't. 1-60 in Vanilla Wow takes less than 7 days /played if you're slow. That's 3 hours per level.
I would agree with this rate in WoW of today, but vanilla? I never reached level 60 in 1 week when I started seriously playing in TBC. I could be wrong, for there are always speed levelers in every MMO
I've booted up "free WoW" from time to time in the past year just for kicks and reached the max free level 20 in a matter of a couple of hours.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Don't fix what's aint broken. You go play MOBA or Battle Royale, you don't have the mindset of a MMO player, which is about socialization in order to reach the collective goal of your guild in the long term. It means if you want to get level cap in 3 days by solo fest, you need to get out of the genre.
My only problem with MMO today is the business model which is P2W, 99% MMO publishers haven't figured out a way to monetize their games without involving selling op items.
It makes me worry because as I wait for Project TL, NCSoft will most likelly fill the game with P2W stuff, as someone who played Lineage 1 back when it was pure P2P, I'm sad about this P2W porn of NcSoft today, because they own my favorite MMO until today, Lineage.
Levels have nothing to socializing. You could be told to play Diablo or a looter shooter if all you care about is levels and gear.
Except such games don't offer massive open world pvp with consequences like Lineage.
Don't fix what's aint broken. You go play MOBA or Battle Royale, you don't have the mindset of a MMO player, which is about socialization in order to reach the collective goal of your guild in the long term. It means if you want to get level cap in 3 days by solo fest, you need to get out of the genre.
My only problem with MMO today is the business model which is P2W, 99% MMO publishers haven't figured out a way to monetize their games without involving selling op items.
It makes me worry because as I wait for Project TL, NCSoft will most likelly fill the game with P2W stuff, as someone who played Lineage 1 back when it was pure P2P, I'm sad about this P2W porn of NcSoft today, because they own my favorite MMO until today, Lineage.
Levels have nothing to socializing. You could be told to play Diablo or a looter shooter if all you care about is levels and gear.
Except such games don't offer massive open world pvp with consequences like Lineage.
Which has nothing to do with leveling.
If you just want mass pvp with no character progression at all, where only skill plays the role, you better give up MMORPG and play battle royale.
Don't fix what's aint broken. You go play MOBA or Battle Royale, you don't have the mindset of a MMO player, which is about socialization in order to reach the collective goal of your guild in the long term. It means if you want to get level cap in 3 days by solo fest, you need to get out of the genre.
My only problem with MMO today is the business model which is P2W, 99% MMO publishers haven't figured out a way to monetize their games without involving selling op items.
It makes me worry because as I wait for Project TL, NCSoft will most likelly fill the game with P2W stuff, as someone who played Lineage 1 back when it was pure P2P, I'm sad about this P2W porn of NcSoft today, because they own my favorite MMO until today, Lineage.
Levels have nothing to socializing. You could be told to play Diablo or a looter shooter if all you care about is levels and gear.
Except such games don't offer massive open world pvp with consequences like Lineage.
Which has nothing to do with leveling.
If you just want mass pvp with no character progression at all, where only skill plays the role, you better give up MMORPG and play battle royale.
Irrelevant. Levels can give no power progression. Levels are not the only means of character progression.
I like slow leveling when the quests (both main and side quests) have interesting storylines. If all i'm doing is killing 10 rats for the sake of grinding levels then i don't want that.
Don't fix what's aint broken. You go play MOBA or Battle Royale, you don't have the mindset of a MMO player, which is about socialization in order to reach the collective goal of your guild in the long term. It means if you want to get level cap in 3 days by solo fest, you need to get out of the genre.
Why? Grouping in quests is a speed race. Those also tend to be boring kill quests, too. The epic quest lines are much better to enjoy solo, as the quests give you pause.
When I was going after the Ba'al pet, had to pickup Uuna. That's a really sad quest line, and gives a feel just HOW ugly the Legion are. Racing through quests like that you miss too much of the larger story. The ending was weird too (I won't spoil it, but there's too many whys left open).
Don't fix what's aint broken. You go play MOBA or Battle Royale, you don't have the mindset of a MMO player, which is about socialization in order to reach the collective goal of your guild in the long term. It means if you want to get level cap in 3 days by solo fest, you need to get out of the genre.
Why? Grouping in quests is a speed race. Those also tend to be boring kill quests, too. The epic quest lines are much better to enjoy solo, as the quests give you pause.
When I was going after the Ba'al pet, had to pickup Uuna. That's a really sad quest line, and gives a feel just HOW ugly the Legion are. Racing through quests like that you miss too much of the larger story. The ending was weird too (I won't spoil it, but there's too many whys left open).
Thing is most things MMORPG do are done better elsewhere. The unique things about MMORPG are the virtual world and spontaneity of people.
The more gamey you make the genre the worst it holds up with it's peers that are just segments of the genre.
I would rather play a game with multiplayer gameplay that doesn't have the same limitations or trappings of MMORPG. That comes to dungeon crawling, raids, questing and even sandbox.
I don't know what all this arguing is about. Levels don't ruin games. Neither does level scaling or classes or instances or grind or any of that by itself. What kills a game is lack of content, lack of challenge, lack of a compelling purpose you've either made yoruself or the game has provided.
Amd player are different. This has thrown a wrench into the whole theorycrafting thing. Lots of you are trying to theorycraft the holy grail. YOu wnat to make the perfet game. I'ts just not possible though, and why? Because players are different. You might make or play a game pefect for you, and it'll be a dream come true, but the best it can do is appeal to a lot of other gamers--just not everyone. There's no perfect game. Theorycrafting only gets you part of the way. The rest of the way--well it's neither here nor there. The rest of the time you should be playing a game you enjoy, not attempting to dictate what somebody else should or should not enjoy.
A game should not be judged on only one part or a few features. Books shouldn't be judged by their cover, and neither should games be judged so swiftly. Games have to be looked at individually, with respect to their potential audience. Universal inflexible rules should not be applied to them all. They need time. A game could go nearly forever before it finally finds someone to play it, but only one gamer is needed. We really should spend less time judging, and more time playing.
<snip> We really should spend less time judging, and more time playing.
Your whole post had some great points. This last line I'd love to abide by, if there was an MMORPG that interested me like they used to do, where I logged off and couldn't wait to log back on.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Thing is most things MMORPG do are done better elsewhere. The unique things about MMORPG are the virtual world and spontaneity of people.
The more gamey you make the genre the worst it holds up with it's peers that are just segments of the genre.
I would rather play a game with multiplayer gameplay that doesn't have the same limitations or trappings of MMORPG. That comes to dungeon crawling, raids, questing and even sandbox.
What do you mean by "better elsewhere"?
To me what other people do is their cup of tea, not mine. If they want to group up that's what they'll do. But I don't want to be FORCED to race through content because of some "meta" or group wanting to "cash in" selling runs. I do it because this or that interests me and the ADVENTURE and prize was worth the effort.
Is the state of MMORPGs stale? Yes. Does it need fresh ideas? Depends. But change always comes at a price of player satisfaction. Is it worth that adventure and prize?
Just because it can be done, doesn't mean it's worth the effort or people wanting to seek that prize, too.
THAT'S where devs err, they went on their own adventures and sought their own prizes and not giving a damn for who funded them in the first place. It's always ALL or NOTHING.
That's not fun. Video games are entertainment and meant to be fun ... not just for the loudest screamers on forums; nor clever devs seeking to milk players of more money, and driving players away.
1) Leveling is usually guided by story. I hate stories in computer games! My actions always conflict with the story. In a multiplayer environment, everyone else's actions also conflict with the story, rendering it non-sensical.
2) Leveling is usually just a number to track your vertical progression. I feel that vertical progression is one of the biggest problems in the MMO genre. By basing your game around vertical progression, you segregate the community, you make 99% of content redundant the instant you complete it, you unbalance PvP and most of the time, it's false progression - your numbers get bigger but so do the enemies, so gameplay remains stagnant.
The solution is to switch to horizontal progression.
This means that even though you are progressing, your overall power stays the same. Progress comes in other forms - unlocking skills and specialisations, progress in the meta-game (like building keeps, establishing businesses etc).
By making this switch, you make all content accessible (unless gated behind arbitrary quests or whatever) on day 1. You ensure that 100% of the community is able to join up with you, so actually teaming up in your massively-multiplayer game is much easier. Content doesnt become redundant the instant you complete it. Devs can tune content a lot easier, so instead of having to appeal to the lowest common denominator (so that no1 gets their progression blocked by hard content), devs can include a wide variety of difficulty throughout their game because if some can't complete something, they aren't blocked, they can just go somewhere else to level.
The question I usually hear regarding horizontal progression is "what's the point in progressing if I'm already as powerful as I'll ever get? Where's the motivation?"
That all depends on the implementation. I like to think that a well implemented horizontal progression system will still give you tons to work towards. The way I envisage it all comes down to specialisation. I'll try to give an example using a melee DPS class.
Level 1 - Start the game with only single target skills, doing 1000dps.
Level 10 - I've now unlocked a load of AoE skills. I can now choose to stick with single target at 1000dps, or switch to AoE, dropping to 500dps on a single target but if there are 2+ targets, I'll be better off.
Level 20 - I've now unlocked some DoTs, so I can switch between burst or DoT damage.
Level 30 - I've now unlocked some self-preservation skills (heals, power regen), so I can lower my damage in exchange for more survivability.
Level 40 - I've now unlocked some group utility skills, like aggro-buffs and run buffs. So, I can lower my dps or self-healing if I want to in order to gain utility.
Level 50 - etc etc
Essentially, with every new skill unlocked, the player is being given more options for how they want to play their class, rather than just raw power. This allows the players to really specialise and find the playstyle that is perfect for them. They can also tailor their builds/choices to the content, for example going full glass-cannon burst DPS for PvP, but perhaps going for a balanced setup for solo PvE, or utility for raiding etc.
This is the sort of progression that I crave. Personalisation / customisation is the best type of progression to me. By keeping it horizontal, I can also clearly see my own progression as a player, rather than having to wait until endgame when content finally becomes balanced and well tuned. This sort of progression also allows for "emergent gameplay" to shine, something which i am also a big fan of.
Luckily for me, Camelot Unchained is aiming to give me just this sort of progression system.
Thing is most things MMORPG do are done better elsewhere. The unique things about MMORPG are the virtual world and spontaneity of people.
The more gamey you make the genre the worst it holds up with it's peers that are just segments of the genre.
I would rather play a game with multiplayer gameplay that doesn't have the same limitations or trappings of MMORPG. That comes to dungeon crawling, raids, questing and even sandbox.
What do you mean by "better elsewhere"?
For me, "elsewhere" means "other genres." Single or two player fighting games are better with combat. Single player RPGs are better with stories. Puzzle games are better with puzzle solving games. Survival games are better at crafting. Settlement building is better in simulation games. PvP is better in first or third person shooters, even battle royale games.
What MMORPGs do best is connect massive numbers of players into one online world. They blend in all their features and aspects in OK way, but not nearly as well as what a game designed specifically for that feature or design can do. It's a natural trade-off
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Thing is most things MMORPG do are done better elsewhere. The unique things about MMORPG are the virtual world and spontaneity of people.
The more gamey you make the genre the worst it holds up with it's peers that are just segments of the genre.
I would rather play a game with multiplayer gameplay that doesn't have the same limitations or trappings of MMORPG. That comes to dungeon crawling, raids, questing and even sandbox.
What do you mean by "better elsewhere"?
For me, "elsewhere" means "other genres." Single or two player fighting games are better with combat. Single player RPGs are better with stories. Puzzle games are better with puzzle solving games. Survival games are better at crafting. Settlement building is better in simulation games. PvP is better in first or third person shooters, even battle royale games.
What MMORPGs do best is connect massive numbers of players into one online world. They blend in all their features and aspects in OK way, but not nearly as well as what a game designed specifically for that feature or design can do. It's a natural trade-off
I may be completely wrong, but I think MMO's actually do something better than all other genres gameplay wise. Specifically, the "skill rotation" of MMO's is more in depth to me compared to other genres if done correctly.
I'm speaking specifically for WoW now since that's my only real MMO experience, but I imagine it's true if not moreso for other mmos. You have (or used to have) lots of skills in your rotation in WoW. Now if you compare it with something similar (perhaps a MOBA), you find that their skill rotation is much smaller and simpler.
I greatly appreciate this "skill rotation" design that MMO's excel at. They seem to try to make them as deep as they can while other genres tend to make them more simple and straightforward for immediate engagement. These deep rotation systems emphasizes technique, planning, and awareness in a unique and engaging way if done correctly.
But honestly, there's no reason this couldn't be done for single player games. For some odd reason it's pretty much just mmo's that do this.
Slow leveling.... Staying at level for a long time.... A player at level 20 can play for "weeks" with levels 17- 24. This would involve a large game, large zones, a big world..... This is Vanilla World of Warcraft !!!...... This is the reason its famous
No it isn't. 1-60 in Vanilla Wow takes less than 7 days /played if you're slow. That's 3 hours per level.
I would agree with this rate in WoW of today, but vanilla? I never reached level 60 in 1 week when I started seriously playing in TBC. I could be wrong, for there are always speed levelers in every MMO
I've booted up "free WoW" from time to time in the past year just for kicks and reached the max free level 20 in a matter of a couple of hours.
I distinctly remember around Feb/March 2005 a guide how to max out in 2 weeks was released and I couldn't believe it. I knew there were guilds already working on Onyxia on my server but they may as well have been playing a different game.
***There is a solution*** Unfortunately it involves leveling.... The solution has been done before.
Slow leveling.... Staying at level for a long time.... A player at level 20 can play for "weeks" with levels 17- 24. This would involve a large game, large zones, a big world..... This is Vanilla World of Warcraft !!!...... This is the reason its famous
Developers refuse to acknowledge a LARGE GAME.... 30 days of content the most. The problem is at it's worst.
This was already done. In Lineage 2. Extremely slow leveling.
What happened was the competitive people hit the grinding very hard, everyone else tried to keep up and eventually quit and then some of the competitive people got burned out and quit.
I'm all for slow leveling but it's not a solution to leveling. That's ridiculous. You will just make the people who hate leveling hate it even more because they will rarely level as time goes on.
True story, in L2 i rolled a gladiator, slow leveler, i hit lvl 70. Then i realized it would take me 33 hours at a prime grinding spot to hit the next level. I was done after that. I quit right when I made that realization.
I also rolled a slow leveling class but you know.
Entropia has very slow leveling too . . . but that game is a whole different story.
Can I ask because I never played L2..... Is it an awful grind like a bad F2P's ?
A good mmorpg should have sustainable content thats enjoyable other than killing five thousand rats. I hate to keep using Vanilla WoW as an example, but the entire time is a journey.
I think my highest level character was 87 and I remember it taking me a half a year to get there. Granted, I wasn't going hardcore every day at that point.
Again, "good content" is subjective. The whole point of Lineage 2 was to become powerful for pvp. Some of "the" best game play I've ever experienced was in that game. But it wasn't a quest game and certainly not a "raid game."
Oh, there were raids and they were one way to get gear as well as a special item from the raid. But thew game was about world politics, who controlled what, getting gear and holding grinding/leveling territory.
Played on Sieghardt.
Most don't know that you could de-level in L2. Yes there were times I dinged a level only to die in a mob train and delevel. Losing a few percentage points could have taken you a day to recover at higher levels.
Even tho I played that game for years I would never want or even find the time to play a game with that slow of a leveling process.
I played WoW for 3 months during the WotLK patch. I took about 2 weeks to get lvl 80 on my first time I played. The second time, trying another class (same race - blood elves) I got lvl 80 in less than a week, 5 days to be more precisely, since I already knew all the quest route from the first char. Playing several hours a day.
If the xp rates from vanilla to woltk are the same, the idea of taking months to get lvl 60 is only valid if you play 4 or 5 hours a week.
If the xp rates from vanilla to woltk are the same...
They are not.
But I agree it doesn't take "months" to get to 60. As I said in another post, it's approx. 6 to 8 days /played.
Back in Vanilla, the record was 4 days 20 hours /played, but that was with maxing out every second in time and with the help of a premade group rushing through content.
Ahhh. I think I get your point, now. Are those 6 to 8 days 24 hour days or 8 hour days?
I'm definitely a slow player who reads everything and never really worried about other's "time to max level."
I'd be more interested in how long it took others the first time through, though
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I'd be more interested in how long it took others the first time through, though
I played WoW at launch and recall it took me about 8 weeks (maybe a shade longer) to reach 60. I was in no hurry, and I goofed around a lot. Plus I mostly soloed.
I had been playing EQ before, and to me WoW seemed stupid easy to level up in. As an example, you got bonus xp for logging out in an Inn. Bonus xp? For something that simple? In EQ, that comes under "what u talking about Willis?" I played EQ for about 1.7 years and never did reach 60 lol.
The truth is you have always been able to level quickly in WoW, unless you place some kind of arbitrary limitation on yourself like needing to hit yourself in the junk with a hammer every time you reach a level.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
1) Leveling is usually guided by story. I hate stories in computer games! My actions always conflict with the story. In a multiplayer environment, everyone else's actions also conflict with the story, rendering it non-sensical.
2) Leveling is usually just a number to track your vertical progression. I feel that vertical progression is one of the biggest problems in the MMO genre. By basing your game around vertical progression, you segregate the community, you make 99% of content redundant the instant you complete it, you unbalance PvP and most of the time, it's false progression - your numbers get bigger but so do the enemies, so gameplay remains stagnant.
The solution is to switch to horizontal progression.
This means that even though you are progressing, your overall power stays the same. Progress comes in other forms - unlocking skills and specialisations, progress in the meta-game (like building keeps, establishing businesses etc).
By making this switch, you make all content accessible (unless gated behind arbitrary quests or whatever) on day 1. You ensure that 100% of the community is able to join up with you, so actually teaming up in your massively-multiplayer game is much easier. Content doesnt become redundant the instant you complete it. Devs can tune content a lot easier, so instead of having to appeal to the lowest common denominator (so that no1 gets their progression blocked by hard content), devs can include a wide variety of difficulty throughout their game because if some can't complete something, they aren't blocked, they can just go somewhere else to level.
The question I usually hear regarding horizontal progression is "what's the point in progressing if I'm already as powerful as I'll ever get? Where's the motivation?"
That all depends on the implementation. I like to think that a well implemented horizontal progression system will still give you tons to work towards. The way I envisage it all comes down to specialisation. I'll try to give an example using a melee DPS class.
Level 1 - Start the game with only single target skills, doing 1000dps.
Level 10 - I've now unlocked a load of AoE skills. I can now choose to stick with single target at 1000dps, or switch to AoE, dropping to 500dps on a single target but if there are 2+ targets, I'll be better off.
Level 20 - I've now unlocked some DoTs, so I can switch between burst or DoT damage.
Level 30 - I've now unlocked some self-preservation skills (heals, power regen), so I can lower my damage in exchange for more survivability.
Level 40 - I've now unlocked some group utility skills, like aggro-buffs and run buffs. So, I can lower my dps or self-healing if I want to in order to gain utility.
Level 50 - etc etc
Essentially, with every new skill unlocked, the player is being given more options for how they want to play their class, rather than just raw power. This allows the players to really specialise and find the playstyle that is perfect for them. They can also tailor their builds/choices to the content, for example going full glass-cannon burst DPS for PvP, but perhaps going for a balanced setup for solo PvE, or utility for raiding etc.
This is the sort of progression that I crave. Personalisation / customisation is the best type of progression to me. By keeping it horizontal, I can also clearly see my own progression as a player, rather than having to wait until endgame when content finally becomes balanced and well tuned. This sort of progression also allows for "emergent gameplay" to shine, something which i am also a big fan of.
Luckily for me, Camelot Unchained is aiming to give me just this sort of progression system.
I really like one of the concepts you hinted at, player choice when leveling. Entirely too many MMORPGs predetermine what skills and abilities you receive at a level-up. Ideally, I feel that the player needs/should have more input into the new skills. You can improve A, or get new skill B, but not a totally free choice -- you are still restrained by the class. (So none of that TankMage stuff, where everyone ends up with the same skill sets). In EQ1, your 30th level enchanter was fundamentally the exact same as every other 30th level enchanter -- you had the same spells and skills. The developers made the decision for the player, and embedded it into the class design.
Vertical or horizontal progression could work with choice. Balance is critical in both systems. Unfortunately, there aren't enough choices of games with a well-thought out horizontal progression system for most to have a really good appreciation of this form.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Comments
Level gating, gear gating, vertical, horizontal, levels, no levels, gaining Experience or Knowledge, unlocking skills, earning points for a hugemongous skill tree, shallow, flashy, deep, engaging, I've enjoyed them all.
If I'm in the mood to play a game with clearly defined parameters, or no parameters except ones I create myself, then I hope there's something fun out there for me to try or go back to.
Can there be one game that encompasses all of this? Maybe, if we could use offline/online mechanics, and different media sources/streams tying one giant all-encompassing world together into one game with tons of different ways to play all the different play styles mentioned above and more.
Drop in/out gameplay for some mechanics on mobile/tablets. Deeper gameplay for other mechanics on consoles/PC's/Macs. Still more gameplay available for AR/VR. All in an effort to grow my character in all types of ways in this one world.
I got geekbumps just thinking about the possibilities...
Gut Out!
What, me worry?
I've booted up "free WoW" from time to time in the past year just for kicks and reached the max free level 20 in a matter of a couple of hours.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
The more gamey you make the genre the worst it holds up with it's peers that are just segments of the genre.
I would rather play a game with multiplayer gameplay that doesn't have the same limitations or trappings of MMORPG. That comes to dungeon crawling, raids, questing and even sandbox.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
What MMORPGs do best is connect massive numbers of players into one online world. They blend in all their features and aspects in OK way, but not nearly as well as what a game designed specifically for that feature or design can do. It's a natural trade-off
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
I'm speaking specifically for WoW now since that's my only real MMO experience, but I imagine it's true if not moreso for other mmos. You have (or used to have) lots of skills in your rotation in WoW. Now if you compare it with something similar (perhaps a MOBA), you find that their skill rotation is much smaller and simpler.
I greatly appreciate this "skill rotation" design that MMO's excel at. They seem to try to make them as deep as they can while other genres tend to make them more simple and straightforward for immediate engagement. These deep rotation systems emphasizes technique, planning, and awareness in a unique and engaging way if done correctly.
But honestly, there's no reason this couldn't be done for single player games. For some odd reason it's pretty much just mmo's that do this.
Mend and Defend
If the xp rates from vanilla to woltk are the same, the idea of taking months to get lvl 60 is only valid if you play 4 or 5 hours a week.
I'm definitely a slow player who reads everything and never really worried about other's "time to max level."
I'd be more interested in how long it took others the first time through, though
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
I had been playing EQ before, and to me WoW seemed stupid easy to level up in. As an example, you got bonus xp for logging out in an Inn. Bonus xp? For something that simple? In EQ, that comes under "what u talking about Willis?" I played EQ for about 1.7 years and never did reach 60 lol.
The truth is you have always been able to level quickly in WoW, unless you place some kind of arbitrary limitation on yourself like needing to hit yourself in the junk with a hammer every time you reach a level.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.