Today's MMO has scripted stories, instanced boss fight, lobby like matching features ... has evolved beyond virtual worlds for a long long time. You are stuck in the past.
They haven't evolved beyond vitrual worlds at all. They haven't streamlined, improved upon and evolved from that. Instead many AAA titles have simply tried to drop the whole virtual world thing and instead replace it with an devolution of the mechanics found in other genres of games. Hoping to tap into the larger, instant access crowd.
That is just semantics. Like you said, they incorporate other mechanics. And there is nothing wrong with it. If an idea is good, why not use it in MMO .. even if it changes the nature of the mechanics.
For example, FPS is about fast action. Borderland added in RPG elements, slow down some combat (particularly boss fights) and still make a great game.
Which is why they have fk all longevity for the main part and also why they are finding it increasingly hard to charge sub fees.
Longevity is not important to me. There are so many games, why should i play one forever? In fact, if you look at game community (like my wow guild), people come and go all the time. The important thing is quality over quantity. A 1 week great fun game >>>> two year of somewhat fun game.
Whether that is a good or bad thing is in eye of the beholder. But trying to turn one genre into a carbon copy of other genres, as opposed to evolving the mechanics, meta game that make the genre unique. Well that seems like a loss to me.
Not carbon copy. Lobby with lots of classes, lots of dungeon scripted mechanics, AH and crafting does not exist before MMOs infused with other elements. Action RPG comes close but not quite. Even D3 has only 5 classes. WOW has 10 (or 11 if you count the monk) with race combo.
To me, it is all good. The genre is unique enough. And also, what is so great with uniqueness? If it is fun, i really don't care.
When an MMORPG becomes more "game" than "world", then it's not what I look for in an MMORPG.
mmorgGAME ... mmorpg should be a game first (to me). The goal is to entertain, not to give a second life. I have have a life.
I never looked for second life in virtual world mmoprg. It is still strictly entertaiment - just diffrent one than a pure game.
Playing a meta-game in virtual world mmoprg is a form of entertaiment and not a thing to 'replace' real life.
Well some players might try to do so, but same things happen in non-virtual world games. Like people playing FPS games for 12 hours a day.
You're making an impression of being awfully judgemental toward people that like diffrent form of video game entertaiment than yourself.
No .. i started very clearly that "mmorpg should be a game first" ... "TO ME". The post is obviously only about stating MY preference.
If you want a virtual world, be my guest. I have nothing against it. Just that i won't support/play a game not to my liking, which i suspect you do the same.
That is just semantics. Like you said, they incorporate other mechanics. And there is nothing wrong with it. If an idea is good, why not use it in MMO .. even if it changes the nature of the mechanics.
For example, FPS is about fast action. Borderland added in RPG elements, slow down some combat (particularly boss fights) and still make a great game.
I think the point was that simply removing mechanics wholesale and replacing them with something very different is not really an evolution. As you say though whether it is or not though is not massively important really. Incorporating mechanics from other genres into mmos is fine, if you think it adds something and if you think it is not destroying the mechanics which made the genre unique in the first place. Whilst you may think that's all good, others may not.
Longevity is not important to me. There are so many games, why should i play one forever? In fact, if you look at game community (like my wow guild), people come and go all the time. The important thing is quality over quantity. A 1 week great fun game >>>> two year of somewhat fun game.
I get the guild reference, but it is not exactly the same as game world longevity. For you it might not be important, for others it is. Moreover regardless as to your subjective viewpoint it IS part of what made the genre unique and some are not convinced that losing it is a good thing.
Not carbon copy. Lobby with lots of classes, lots of dungeon scripted mechanics, AH and crafting does not exist before MMOs infused with other elements. Action RPG comes close but not quite. Even D3 has only 5 classes. WOW has 10 (or 11 if you count the monk) with race combo.
To me, it is all good. The genre is unique enough. And also, what is so great with uniqueness? If it is fun, i really don't care.
Well no, not carbon copy, in my opinion it is far far worse. The mechanics simply don't work as well within this genre, and what we are losing in order to make way for them makes it even worse.
As for what is so great about uniqueness, well the point is it offers something that you cannot readily find in other genres/formats. You might not find that particular uniqueness fun, but rest assured others do. And for me losing it is not such a cool thing, especially when for the main part, what is replacing it is dumbed down version of mechanics we can find in other genres.
I would like to add i'm not arguing about what you prefer or find fun. If you find virtual worlds boring as hell and prefer modern mmos then that's your opinion. Others that don't share that view are not all just living in the past.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
When an MMORPG becomes more "game" than "world", then it's not what I look for in an MMORPG.
mmorgGAME ... mmorpg should be a game first (to me). The goal is to entertain, not to give a second life. I have have a life.
I never looked for second life in virtual world mmoprg. It is still strictly entertaiment - just diffrent one than a pure game.
Playing a meta-game in virtual world mmoprg is a form of entertaiment and not a thing to 'replace' real life.
Well some players might try to do so, but same things happen in non-virtual world games. Like people playing FPS games for 12 hours a day.
You're making an impression of being awfully judgemental toward people that like diffrent form of video game entertaiment than yourself.
No .. i started very clearly that "mmorpg should be a game first" ... "TO ME". The post is obviously only about stating MY preference.
If you want a virtual world, be my guest. I have nothing against it. Just that i won't support/play a game not to my liking, which i suspect you do the same.
True.
Though I was adressing something else - I just was answering to "the goal is to entertain, not give a second life. I have a life." - which could imply than people playing virtual world games don't have a life. If that not what you meant then sorry for budging in.
So your immersion-breaking problem is not actually instancing or multi-group dungeons but bosses and static spawns, which exist everywhere else in the game world. Mankrik and I agree that you didn't think this one through, sir.
Waiting for a boss respawn anywhere breaks immersion, dungeon or not.
Waiting for any thing in the world to "reset" after another player uses it breaks immersion. It's pretty much the #1 gameplay-harming (not just immersion-harming) trait of world gameplay.
You almost never wait for other types of static spawns (and when you do it breaks immersion; and when you don't it doesn't.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think the biggest thing for me is how lfg tools automatically teleport you to the instances now. A lfg tool is useful and takes alot of the hassle out of finding parties, it goes too far when you're automatically dumped into the instance. I like it when you queue and have to travel (or be summoned by a spell (warlocks for example)) to the location of the dungeon. Is it a hassle to travel to dungeons? Yes. Would it get rid of the popular bonus rewards for random queueing? Yes. Are MMOs supposed to be inconvenient and drawn out? Yes.
- fully automatic LFG systems = changing game into lobby
Great feature. I won't play a MP game without it. In fact, the only reason i came back to WOW is because of LFR.
Clicking a button while standing in town waiting for a queue to pop. Horrible feature that removes player interaction and socialization for convience.
For Themepark Games that focus on Vertical Progression and the main content is instance farming then you MUST include some form of LFG or Dungeon Finder or you lose subs period. Happened in ToR and is happeneing in TSW. In a themepark like GW2 you can skip it since the mnajority of the gameplay is openworld.
- cross-server tools and making world / zones channels / duplicates= no separate world feel anymore
Even better. I want to play with my friends no matter where they are. I don't care about server boundaries.
While being able to play with freinds is great sacrificing server community isn't.
Nothing wrong with zoning or sharded world, remember it limits lags, allows more players to play and doesnt sacrifice anything as long as you can interact through other means. The old school MMO's didnt have to worry about this because they had 100K subs, whereas modern MMO's cater to millions.
- cash shop or rmah = ruining immersion totally + destrying barrier between mmorpg and real world - thus making it feel like strictly a game and not mmorpg. Worst offender.
Selling stuff for RM is fun. mmorpG .. the G stands for GAME. It should be a game first.
Cash shops and RMAH are horrible for the game economy, immersion, and promote pay to win.
And Chinese gold farmers are GREAT for the economy? Yea thought so, face it gold spam is inevitable in any MMO and destroys economies faster then any RMAH
- single player instances and overall too much instancing = the more things like that the more game feel like single player or co-op game.
MOre the better. A controlled scripted 5 man dungeon is much better than a 100 zerg dungeon. Take the good part of SP games and put them in MMOs.
Yes let's make a MMO so everyone can have their own little instance. We have the systems to prevent kill stealing and ninja looting in public dungeons and open world areas.
I agree here, Instancing has been the death of MMO communities. WoW a game with "supposedly" 10 million gamers and you can go hours in certain zones (non-leveling or non-daily quest) and not see a soul whereas a game like Asherons Call (which is 100% open world) I can run to any corner of the map (which is 3-4 times the size of WoW's) and see people hunting and playing.....and get this, AC has a peak population of about 6k people.
- Auction Houses like ebay - tunneling whole trade into one centralized person-less banalized experience. Sure more conveniant, but tbh more system like that = less mmo feel for me (very subjective I know).
Won't play a MMO without a AH. It is just no worth the while to do trading any other way.
SWG galactic market with bazzar terminals beats any AH.
Did not play SWG but I did play AC for 12+ years, prior to WoW (and my not knowing anything about AH's) I would of agreed with you, but you cant beat the gratification and ease of having an AH in game...this was one of the main reasons why I quit AC when I returned last year. AH's, especially ones like GW2's soon to be released is jsut head and shoulders the best and most user friendly way to do transactions.
- teleporting without limits or with very small limits - making open world and travelling pointless. Teleporting is needed but it need to have quite a bit of limits, otherwise it banalize experience.
Nah ... in fact, I won't mind getting rid of the world and run instanced missions. Traveling to a place the first time may be fun, it becomes a chore by the 3rd time.
Get rid of the world? WTF might as well all hail the lobby MMO where you stand in town and wait for your instance que to pop /sarcasm.
Having forms of fast travel is not a big deal when your world is worth exploring and large enough to have plenty of options. Again I'll use AC as an example, hands down my best MMO ive played and you had limited forms of fast travels through portal teleportation. Basically its similar enough to GW2's in that you first must unlock the area (in GW2's example) or discover and tie (AC's) to the portal. In AC's example you were limited by only beinbg able to tie to 2 portals and 2 lifestones at a time and in GW's your limited by gold cost. Both have their pros and cons but are infinetly better then any other MMO that requires you to ride for 10-20 mins like in WoW or Aion or running. Make the world fun and explorable rewarding and you can kiss this problem goodbye even with fast travel.
UO and SWG did it best. They haven't really forced you into grouping to progress, but there were quite a bit of group only or group preferred content. Dynamic scaling NOT solve it completly. It makes it bit better, but not solve a problem.
UO has uninteresting combat mecahnics, and too much ganging pvp. Won't play a game like that again. Forced grouping like EQ or DAoC is bad and niche indusive as you can get. Theres nothing wrong with having groups and in facts I prefer to have some group missions/quests/areas intermingled within the solo world but the game must foster grouping and have worthwhile reasons to do so i.e. better exp in a group (but not to much) plus greater chance at better loot.
- end game focused in 95% at instances / arenas - speak for itself - when you couple it with cross server automatic LFG systems then playing end-game in mmorpg's is really NO DIFFRENT than playing any lobby-like games like FPS, MOBA or RTS games like CoD, LoL or Starcraft.
Yeh ... focus on the combat, co-op group mechanics. That is the way to go. It works for FPS, MOBA and ... , and no reason why this model does not work for the new MMORPG.
I wouldn't call a lobby based, instance saturated, cash shop/RMAH infested game that has a world you might as well get rid of a MMORPG.
I wouldnt either but then again I wouldnt call a "player crafting slave" crafters paradise with full scale ganking and looting an MMO either. Combat and Exploration in my opinion are the 2 most important pillars for making a good MMO.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Maybe a lot of discussions could be avoided if devs branded their games accordingly and correctly.
Except for some RPG combat rules and some character archetypes the RPG element was toned down. You'll still stumble upon it occasionally on a dedicated RP server. So maybe it's best to not call these games RPG.
Maybe it would be better to call them coop arcade games with cutscenes and arena PvP. Calling it by its true name will cause less confusion.
So your immersion-breaking problem is not actually instancing or multi-group dungeons but bosses and static spawns, which exist everywhere else in the game world. Mankrik and I agree that you didn't think this one through, sir.
Waiting for a boss respawn anywhere breaks immersion, dungeon or not.
Waiting for any thing in the world to "reset" after another player uses it breaks immersion. It's pretty much the #1 gameplay-harming (not just immersion-harming) trait of world gameplay.
You almost never wait for other types of static spawns (and when you do it breaks immersion; and when you don't it doesn't.)
I don' think I've ever waited for a spawn in UO or AC, and they have public dungeons. Are you sure you're not just basing this on a particular way to create public dungeons?
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
Maybe a lot of discussions could be avoided if devs branded their games accordingly and correctly.
Except for some RPG combat rules and some character archetypes the RPG element was toned down. You'll still stumble upon it occasionally on a dedicated RP server. So maybe it's best to not call these games RPG.
Maybe it would be better to call them coop arcade games with cutscenes and arena PvP. Calling it by its true name will cause less confusion.
No themeparks claimed mmorpg, and they can have it. It's like the crown for the king of mmo gameplay.
So your immersion-breaking problem is not actually instancing or multi-group dungeons but bosses and static spawns, which exist everywhere else in the game world. Mankrik and I agree that you didn't think this one through, sir.
Waiting for a boss respawn anywhere breaks immersion, dungeon or not.
Waiting for any thing in the world to "reset" after another player uses it breaks immersion. It's pretty much the #1 gameplay-harming (not just immersion-harming) trait of world gameplay.
You almost never wait for other types of static spawns (and when you do it breaks immersion; and when you don't it doesn't.)
I don' think I've ever waited for a spawn in UO or AC, and they have public dungeons. Are you sure you're not just basing this one a particular way to create public dungeons?
Maybe UO and AC weren't as popular as you think? I waited for spawns and mobs respawned on me even in Vanguard. -And the game is almost empty! It is a very common problem for open content.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by Garvon3 Originally posted by azmundaihonestly .. this post just falls on def ears.in truth there is nothing wrong with the kinds of MMOs they are creating. They are making money. They are serving an audience.
The problem is that they're branding them as MMOs, which they aren't. And they aren't making much money. And they're only making games for ONE segment of a massive user base.
I agree, but that ship has sailed. mmo means it has a chatbox now whether I want it to or not ... whether you want it to or no. Lets hope someone like repop creates a new moniker for us .. until then .. on to the next lobby.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity. I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
Convenience vs. Inconvenience. Play vs. Work. Fun vs. Serious. This is the discussion so far as I can tell. The genre has various groups within it that look for a change to the games we play based on these sets of criteria. Unfortunately, for those that take the 'hard road' (Inconvenience, work, seriousness) they are the minority. Devs and publishing companies are realizing this fact and are creating games for the other 95%+ players in the country (i.e. those that want their gameplay to be convenient, playful, and fun). The powers that be have realized rather than the 'elite' in a game pulling all their friends into a game, it's more profitable to bring in the 95% and force the top 5% to purchase to be with friends. If they refuse to pay...it's not a big deal since the top 5% tend to be the most expensive players to deal with any way.
I understand that there are many who take the 'hard road' because it's more rewarding/fun for them. However, unless you guys can provide the same amount of $$$ to the developers that the vast numbers of 'others', you will be left out in the cold.
So your immersion-breaking problem is not actually instancing or multi-group dungeons but bosses and static spawns, which exist everywhere else in the game world. Mankrik and I agree that you didn't think this one through, sir.
Waiting for a boss respawn anywhere breaks immersion, dungeon or not.
Waiting for any thing in the world to "reset" after another player uses it breaks immersion. It's pretty much the #1 gameplay-harming (not just immersion-harming) trait of world gameplay.
You almost never wait for other types of static spawns (and when you do it breaks immersion; and when you don't it doesn't.)
I don' think I've ever waited for a spawn in UO or AC, and they have public dungeons. Are you sure you're not just basing this one a particular way to create public dungeons?
Maybe UO and AC weren't as popular as you think? I waited for spawns and mobs respawned on me even in Vanguard. -And the game is almost empty! It is a very common problem for open content.
I said nothing about the popularity of them at all, so I'm not sure why you even brought that up. However, in both games, you could easily have multiple groups of adventurers in most dungeons and, unless you were vastly over level and nuking the place, you weren't waiting for things to 'pop'. Their dungeons are designed differently than mainstream MMO dungeons are, though.
In most mainstream MMOs, the dungeons are designed to push you foward to the end to get your foo, kill the boss and complete the mission. That is why the respawn is so low - they want you to get done and get out. They are often not designed to be played more than once and, if repeatable, they are usually on a timer and instanced.
In UO and AC, most dungeons are designed so that players can pick the area of content they enjoy and engage in combat (PvP or PVE). The respawn rates are much faster because they serve a different purpose than dungeons in mainstream MMOs.
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. Breaking/Dividing the world up into more versions of the same piece of land/terrain ie. Excessive instancing
2. Shrinking the size of the virtual world by use of teleportation devices or skills ie. Excessive transportation
3. Limiting the possibilities of the formation of friendships and communites by the implementation of artificial tools ie. DF/RF
4. Eradication of the 'player driven economy' by binding items to the looter and reducing the effectiveness of crafting.
5. Extensions of the game world to incorporate 'mini-games' which do not have any ramifications nor influence ie. BG/WZ
6. Segregating communities by isolating the 'PvP Player' from the 'PvE Player' and designing content which is mutually exclusive.
It's somewhat troubling to hear people attempt to classify anybody who despises the current MMO model(if you can call it that) as the 'older generation player'. Personally I know loads of people, old and young, that are despondent over the lack of imagination and innovation in the MMO industry currently. People who would rather watch some lame series rather than subscribe to any of the dross on offer at the moment aimed at our self-entitled society.
I'm part of a minority? Perhaps. But a minority of 3+ mil loyal subscribers sounds like a good developer prospect to me for anyone willing to actually... you know.. make a game that has credibility and merit within the genre as opposed to laughing all the way to the bank as they cash in on another 2month hype-fest.
Convenience vs. Inconvenience. Play vs. Work. Fun vs. Serious.
Er no, this is a thread about what features contribute to games not being like MMOs, such as features that remove multiplayer emphasis. It's pretty clear.
And to the nay sayers, I never waited for a camp to open up or a raid boss to spawn in DAoC.
Maybe a lot of discussions could be avoided if devs branded their games accordingly and correctly.
Except for some RPG combat rules and some character archetypes the RPG element was toned down. You'll still stumble upon it occasionally on a dedicated RP server. So maybe it's best to not call these games RPG.
Maybe it would be better to call them coop arcade games with cutscenes and arena PvP. Calling it by its true name will cause less confusion.
That WOULD solve a lot of problems. Sadly, now its just a word devs stick on to a product at the last minute to try to get away with a monthly fee.
Maybe a lot of discussions could be avoided if devs branded their games accordingly and correctly.
Except for some RPG combat rules and some character archetypes the RPG element was toned down. You'll still stumble upon it occasionally on a dedicated RP server. So maybe it's best to not call these games RPG.
Maybe it would be better to call them coop arcade games with cutscenes and arena PvP. Calling it by its true name will cause less confusion.
That WOULD solve a lot of problems. Sadly, now its just a word devs stick on to a product at the last minute to try to get away with a monthly fee.
Exactly, in the MMORPG genre its acceptable to charge a monthly fee, based on the past sucess of games like UO, EQ, XI, WoW. Now devs think they can make a cheesy online RPG game and lump it in the MMORPG genre and get away with charging a sub, and they do get away with it. Hell I dont blame them I would do the same thing. I dont have a problem paying a sub for an MMORPG. I have a serious problem paying a sub for an Co-opOnlineRPG.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
4. Eradication of the 'player driven economy' by binding items to the looter and reducing the effectiveness of crafting.
5. Extensions of the game world to incorporate 'mini-games' which do not have any ramifications nor influence ie. BG/WZ
6. Segregating communities by isolating the 'PvP Player' from the 'PvE Player' and designing content which is mutually exclusive.
These were three I missed in my list, you can see here clearly how the multiplayer experiance is being impacted. I don't mind mini games if they are multiplayer, balanced and make sense within the MMO as a whole. But not sure I have ever played one that really ticked those three boxes.
Convenience vs. Inconvenience. Play vs. Work. Fun vs. Serious.
Er no, this is a thread about what features contribute to games not being like MMOs, such as features that remove multiplayer emphasis. It's pretty clear.
It is not clear at all. The definition of MMOs have changed over the years.
And if you are talking about MULTIPLAYER features, i would say LFD is a great help to form GROUPS, and it helps the multiplayer aspect of the game.
In fact, it is credited to move WOW's leveling from mainly SP questing to running old dungeons. In fact, Blizz revamped many old dungeons because of this.
There is no RP elements in most computer RPG anyway. The meaning of RPG has changed to power up, progression based combat mechanics almost from the gold box games.
Essentially you get "power ups" with a scripted story in most computer SP RPGs.
That is just semantics. Like you said, they incorporate other mechanics. And there is nothing wrong with it. If an idea is good, why not use it in MMO .. even if it changes the nature of the mechanics.
For example, FPS is about fast action. Borderland added in RPG elements, slow down some combat (particularly boss fights) and still make a great game.
I think the point was that simply removing mechanics wholesale and replacing them with something very different is not really an evolution. As you say though whether it is or not though is not massively important really. Incorporating mechanics from other genres into mmos is fine, if you think it adds something and if you think it is not destroying the mechanics which made the genre unique in the first place. Whilst you may think that's all good, others may not.
I am not too concerned about if the new mechanics "destory" any of the old ones. If the change make the game more fun, I am in. Obviously whether a mechanic is fun or not, is subjective.
Longevity is not important to me. There are so many games, why should i play one forever? In fact, if you look at game community (like my wow guild), people come and go all the time. The important thing is quality over quantity. A 1 week great fun game >>>> two year of somewhat fun game.
I get the guild reference, but it is not exactly the same as game world longevity. For you it might not be important, for others it is. Moreover regardless as to your subjective viewpoint it IS part of what made the genre unique and some are not convinced that losing it is a good thing.
Two more points. First, there is no true world longevity. You play a game on the same server for years, many don't. People come and go. The community on a server is highly dynamic. Secondly, like i said before, i really don't care about people i don't know ANYWAY. Whether they are on the server for 10 years, or a month, is quite irrelevant to me.
Oh one more point. What about the larger community? With X-realm tools, and matching system like D3, you can play with ANYONE on earth. Wouldn't that even be better? No more artificial boundaries.
Not carbon copy. Lobby with lots of classes, lots of dungeon scripted mechanics, AH and crafting does not exist before MMOs infused with other elements. Action RPG comes close but not quite. Even D3 has only 5 classes. WOW has 10 (or 11 if you count the monk) with race combo.
To me, it is all good. The genre is unique enough. And also, what is so great with uniqueness? If it is fun, i really don't care.
Well no, not carbon copy, in my opinion it is far far worse. The mechanics simply don't work as well within this genre, and what we are losing in order to make way for them makes it even worse.
What do you mean? Tactical combat with complicated mechanics work EXTREMELY well in this genre.
As for what is so great about uniqueness, well the point is it offers something that you cannot readily find in other genres/formats. You might not find that particular uniqueness fun, but rest assured others do. And for me losing it is not such a cool thing, especially when for the main part, what is replacing it is dumbed down version of mechanics we can find in other genres.
No. Take WOW as an example. I play mostly wizard types in both SP & MMOs. Its mage mechanics is MUCH better than those in, for example, SKYRIM. You have CDs & procs to manage. There is mana management with arcance mage. SKYRIM mage is mostly shooting fireballs until your mana is out.
I would like to add i'm not arguing about what you prefer or find fun. If you find virtual worlds boring as hell and prefer modern mmos then that's your opinion. Others that don't share that view are not all just living in the past.
They sound as if they do .. all clamouring the return to UO or EQ ... more than a decade old games.
Convenience vs. Inconvenience. Play vs. Work. Fun vs. Serious. This is the discussion so far as I can tell. The genre has various groups within it that look for a change to the games we play based on these sets of criteria. Unfortunately, for those that take the 'hard road' (Inconvenience, work, seriousness) they are the minority. Devs and publishing companies are realizing this fact and are creating games for the other 95%+ players in the country (i.e. those that want their gameplay to be convenient, playful, and fun). The powers that be have realized rather than the 'elite' in a game pulling all their friends into a game, it's more profitable to bring in the 95% and force the top 5% to purchase to be with friends. If they refuse to pay...it's not a big deal since the top 5% tend to be the most expensive players to deal with any way.
I understand that there are many who take the 'hard road' because it's more rewarding/fun for them. However, unless you guys can provide the same amount of $$$ to the developers that the vast numbers of 'others', you will be left out in the cold.
Very true. Personally i think entertainment should be convenient, play-focus and fun. More over, we should also consider variety vs longevity. To be honest, i would much rather play 10 games in 1 year, than 1 game in 10. Humans are "variety-seeking" as scientific literature has demonstrated (you can find a review of the literature here.
Comments
I never looked for second life in virtual world mmoprg. It is still strictly entertaiment - just diffrent one than a pure game.
Playing a meta-game in virtual world mmoprg is a form of entertaiment and not a thing to 'replace' real life.
Well some players might try to do so, but same things happen in non-virtual world games. Like people playing FPS games for 12 hours a day.
You're making an impression of being awfully judgemental toward people that like diffrent form of video game entertaiment than yourself.
No .. i started very clearly that "mmorpg should be a game first" ... "TO ME". The post is obviously only about stating MY preference.
If you want a virtual world, be my guest. I have nothing against it. Just that i won't support/play a game not to my liking, which i suspect you do the same.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
True.
Though I was adressing something else - I just was answering to "the goal is to entertain, not give a second life. I have a life." - which could imply than people playing virtual world games don't have a life. If that not what you meant then sorry for budging in.
Waiting for a boss respawn anywhere breaks immersion, dungeon or not.
Waiting for any thing in the world to "reset" after another player uses it breaks immersion. It's pretty much the #1 gameplay-harming (not just immersion-harming) trait of world gameplay.
You almost never wait for other types of static spawns (and when you do it breaks immersion; and when you don't it doesn't.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think the biggest thing for me is how lfg tools automatically teleport you to the instances now. A lfg tool is useful and takes alot of the hassle out of finding parties, it goes too far when you're automatically dumped into the instance. I like it when you queue and have to travel (or be summoned by a spell (warlocks for example)) to the location of the dungeon. Is it a hassle to travel to dungeons? Yes. Would it get rid of the popular bonus rewards for random queueing? Yes. Are MMOs supposed to be inconvenient and drawn out? Yes.
My remarks in baby blue
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Maybe a lot of discussions could be avoided if devs branded their games accordingly and correctly.
Except for some RPG combat rules and some character archetypes the RPG element was toned down. You'll still stumble upon it occasionally on a dedicated RP server. So maybe it's best to not call these games RPG.
Maybe it would be better to call them coop arcade games with cutscenes and arena PvP. Calling it by its true name will cause less confusion.
I don' think I've ever waited for a spawn in UO or AC, and they have public dungeons. Are you sure you're not just basing this on a particular way to create public dungeons?
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
Waiting for something to respawn is a problem with questing and loot. Not the open world. Sorry.
No themeparks claimed mmorpg, and they can have it. It's like the crown for the king of mmo gameplay.
Maybe UO and AC weren't as popular as you think? I waited for spawns and mobs respawned on me even in Vanguard. -And the game is almost empty! It is a very common problem for open content.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I agree, but that ship has sailed. mmo means it has a chatbox now whether I want it to or not ... whether you want it to or no. Lets hope someone like repop creates a new moniker for us .. until then .. on to the next lobby.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
Convenience vs. Inconvenience. Play vs. Work. Fun vs. Serious. This is the discussion so far as I can tell. The genre has various groups within it that look for a change to the games we play based on these sets of criteria. Unfortunately, for those that take the 'hard road' (Inconvenience, work, seriousness) they are the minority. Devs and publishing companies are realizing this fact and are creating games for the other 95%+ players in the country (i.e. those that want their gameplay to be convenient, playful, and fun). The powers that be have realized rather than the 'elite' in a game pulling all their friends into a game, it's more profitable to bring in the 95% and force the top 5% to purchase to be with friends. If they refuse to pay...it's not a big deal since the top 5% tend to be the most expensive players to deal with any way.
I understand that there are many who take the 'hard road' because it's more rewarding/fun for them. However, unless you guys can provide the same amount of $$$ to the developers that the vast numbers of 'others', you will be left out in the cold.
I said nothing about the popularity of them at all, so I'm not sure why you even brought that up. However, in both games, you could easily have multiple groups of adventurers in most dungeons and, unless you were vastly over level and nuking the place, you weren't waiting for things to 'pop'. Their dungeons are designed differently than mainstream MMO dungeons are, though.
In most mainstream MMOs, the dungeons are designed to push you foward to the end to get your foo, kill the boss and complete the mission. That is why the respawn is so low - they want you to get done and get out. They are often not designed to be played more than once and, if repeatable, they are usually on a timer and instanced.
In UO and AC, most dungeons are designed so that players can pick the area of content they enjoy and engage in combat (PvP or PVE). The respawn rates are much faster because they serve a different purpose than dungeons in mainstream MMOs.
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. Breaking/Dividing the world up into more versions of the same piece of land/terrain ie. Excessive instancing
2. Shrinking the size of the virtual world by use of teleportation devices or skills ie. Excessive transportation
3. Limiting the possibilities of the formation of friendships and communites by the implementation of artificial tools ie. DF/RF
4. Eradication of the 'player driven economy' by binding items to the looter and reducing the effectiveness of crafting.
5. Extensions of the game world to incorporate 'mini-games' which do not have any ramifications nor influence ie. BG/WZ
6. Segregating communities by isolating the 'PvP Player' from the 'PvE Player' and designing content which is mutually exclusive.
It's somewhat troubling to hear people attempt to classify anybody who despises the current MMO model(if you can call it that) as the 'older generation player'. Personally I know loads of people, old and young, that are despondent over the lack of imagination and innovation in the MMO industry currently. People who would rather watch some lame series rather than subscribe to any of the dross on offer at the moment aimed at our self-entitled society.
I'm part of a minority? Perhaps. But a minority of 3+ mil loyal subscribers sounds like a good developer prospect to me for anyone willing to actually... you know.. make a game that has credibility and merit within the genre as opposed to laughing all the way to the bank as they cash in on another 2month hype-fest.
My two cents.
Er no, this is a thread about what features contribute to games not being like MMOs, such as features that remove multiplayer emphasis. It's pretty clear.
And to the nay sayers, I never waited for a camp to open up or a raid boss to spawn in DAoC.
That WOULD solve a lot of problems. Sadly, now its just a word devs stick on to a product at the last minute to try to get away with a monthly fee.
Exactly, in the MMORPG genre its acceptable to charge a monthly fee, based on the past sucess of games like UO, EQ, XI, WoW. Now devs think they can make a cheesy online RPG game and lump it in the MMORPG genre and get away with charging a sub, and they do get away with it. Hell I dont blame them I would do the same thing. I dont have a problem paying a sub for an MMORPG. I have a serious problem paying a sub for an Co-opOnlineRPG.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
from Recidivism:
4. Eradication of the 'player driven economy' by binding items to the looter and reducing the effectiveness of crafting.
5. Extensions of the game world to incorporate 'mini-games' which do not have any ramifications nor influence ie. BG/WZ
6. Segregating communities by isolating the 'PvP Player' from the 'PvE Player' and designing content which is mutually exclusive.
These were three I missed in my list, you can see here clearly how the multiplayer experiance is being impacted. I don't mind mini games if they are multiplayer, balanced and make sense within the MMO as a whole. But not sure I have ever played one that really ticked those three boxes.
It is not clear at all. The definition of MMOs have changed over the years.
And if you are talking about MULTIPLAYER features, i would say LFD is a great help to form GROUPS, and it helps the multiplayer aspect of the game.
In fact, it is credited to move WOW's leveling from mainly SP questing to running old dungeons. In fact, Blizz revamped many old dungeons because of this.
There is no RP elements in most computer RPG anyway. The meaning of RPG has changed to power up, progression based combat mechanics almost from the gold box games.
Essentially you get "power ups" with a scripted story in most computer SP RPGs.
Very true. Personally i think entertainment should be convenient, play-focus and fun. More over, we should also consider variety vs longevity. To be honest, i would much rather play 10 games in 1 year, than 1 game in 10. Humans are "variety-seeking" as scientific literature has demonstrated (you can find a review of the literature here.
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2488626?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21100951694553
This discussion obvious applies to MMOs, since they are games .. entertainment products.