True, but the real cut off was small group (2-10) vs big raid group (20-60). They may have said 5 but you should have know they implied small groups like EQ2’s. Simply because you felt something was wrong with the question as written. This is a case of “do as I mean and not as I say.”
Ehm. I realy don't see it that way. Most games have THREE distinct types of content - full group, multi-group and "less-than full group". There is a huge difference between spending 90% of your time in full-group content (i.e. 6-man full group instances) or spending 90% of your time duoing with a friend (i.e. 2 person group mostly doing solo content together). To split 3 distinct types of content into 2 possible choices and try to make any kind of conclusion based on that is bad.
I answered on the assumption of "5 or less" meaning below full group stuff and "5 or more" meaning full groups + raids. Only because in most games i've played a full group has been 6 players. My guess is that different people will interpret this different ways, which is the worst thing for a survey.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
Some feedback: given how critically important the question of grouping is, i think choosing a random number like "more or less than 5 people" was a big mistake. I mean, if the game's group size is 6 (EQ2, etc.), i'll spend a lot less time in groups of 5 or less. If the game's group size is 4 (ESO, etc.), i'll spend a lot more time in groups of 5 or less. To answer this question properly a person needs to know what the game's "default" group size is. Othewise, you should have used terms like "single group", "multiple group" and "solo/duo".
Actually the problem is that I failed to explain that I wanted everyone to imagine their hypothetical ideal game, including making the typical group size whatever they thought was ideal. I did want to put the break between solo/small casual group and medium/large non-casual group.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
Originally posted by waynejr2 I started the survey but abandoned it. The percentage system presentation was offputting. I didn't expect so many different ways to slice up 100% and no way to make it quick to reference and too much moving up and down to change values to add up.
I was a bit limited by the survey maker software. There wasn't any way to force people to make their answers add up to 100%, which is what I really wanted to do, although I wanted to allow a write in to be associated with a percentage. Also people are telling me I actually needed one more category, exploring/wandering.
If you want to make it simple, I suggest this:
1. Imagine your ideal MMO.
2. Take your 100% of time you would spend playing that ideal MMO and break it into what you would be doing.
3. Now go to the survey and plug your own numbers into the most appropriate places, just put 0 for everything else.
You would have to normalize their answer by hand or spreadsheet if the total was over 100%. The math would be:
X% = (Answer% / Total%) * 100%
If their total was 180%, and they liked to spend time doing RTS or tower defense activities against AI opponents was 45%.
X% = (45 / 180) * 100% = 25%
Yes, I will definitely have to use math to normalize things by hand in some cases. Or if I was lazy I could normalize the averages to add up to 100%. Probably I'll do both to compare the results.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
Originally posted by KonfessWhen you read this kind of post to you get the feeling that they would prefer a FPS? To me: [*] Do you prefer PvP where everybody is equal (lvl and gear does not matter). [*] Does an MMO have to be gear-oriented.Do you prefer a combat system that is more action-oriented with fewer skills and things like parry or dodge. Should time invested into the game be the most important factor. This is the definition of FPS. I know some FPS now allow gear to be modified and enhanced, this is the reason so many fans of FPS have left those game, and now cry WoW clone. When they say dodge, think cover. They want two skills shoot & cover. These players look back at doom death match with fondness.
I love MMORPGs, I just like my progression horizontal, and I would have no issue with it being completely horizontal. I think stats on gear are stupid too. When I hear action combat I hear "actual skill, as in player skill, based combat" instead of the slow, waltz like, tedious, boring combat that WoW helped define as an industry standard, which require nothing but memorizing a chain and watching cool downs. I grew up on Diablo 2, Team Fortress, and Guild Wars. They all influenced what I want out of my games, regardless of genre. I think implying that I'd "prefer a FPS" because some of those preferences don't line up with yours is condescending and insulting.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
Originally posted by sunandshadow Player shops are slightly more popular than marketplaces/auctionhouses. (Which irks me, but that's the data, I knew my opinions weren't going to win them all, lol). People who want player shops tend to also want in-person trading between online players only, while people who want marketplaces/auctionhouses tend to also want long-distance trading between both online and offline players and have no objection to searchable barter lots. So there are 2 clear archetypes there.
For this one, I answered "Auction House" type. While I like player interaction, what sticks in my craw about player shops and sellers is that if I want to participate, I have to do ONLY that, or get another account to create a "shop character" and duel box.
Also, standing in one spot the whole time I am logged in, hoping players stop by, is not my idea of "fun."
I hope that made some sense
- 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
Originally posted by centkin Okay -- I answered it. You forgot crafting, harvesting, and shinies.
Good crafting and harvesting are usually in the sim activities gameplay category, but yeah I forgot treasure-hunting and also exploring.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
95 responses! I'm going to wait another day or until it hits a nice even 100, whichever comes first, then do the final data export and analysis.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
Open world objective based PvP with persistency and player ownership of resources.
I see this as a type of team PvP. A faction or guild or whatever organization is fighting for control of territory is a team. This kind of PvP does have many things in common with arena team pvp matches that only last a few minutes, but they aren't all that similar at first glance.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
Thank you, that worked just fine. Not sure what the problem was.
Anyways, taken and submitted. Good quiz, although you might warn people just how many %-style questions there are. Trying to break those down into %'s was rough, but admittedly thought-provoking.
Edit: Quiz is probably a bad choice of words, but that's how it came across to me trying to get my balance of %'s right. In a good way.
Thank you, that worked just fine. Not sure what the problem was.
Anyways, taken and submitted. Good quiz, although you might warn people just how many %-style questions there are. Trying to break those down into %'s was rough, but admittedly thought-provoking.
Edit: Quiz is probably a bad choice of words, but that's how it came across to me trying to get my balance of %'s right. In a good way.
Glad you were able to get a response in before the surveying period ends today. ^_^ I ended up with over 100 responses and I am putting together the final data now. I guess I'll put that in it's own thread rather than stick it one the end of this one, but I'll link to it here.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
Comments
Ehm. I realy don't see it that way. Most games have THREE distinct types of content - full group, multi-group and "less-than full group". There is a huge difference between spending 90% of your time in full-group content (i.e. 6-man full group instances) or spending 90% of your time duoing with a friend (i.e. 2 person group mostly doing solo content together). To split 3 distinct types of content into 2 possible choices and try to make any kind of conclusion based on that is bad.
I answered on the assumption of "5 or less" meaning below full group stuff and "5 or more" meaning full groups + raids. Only because in most games i've played a full group has been 6 players. My guess is that different people will interpret this different ways, which is the worst thing for a survey.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
Actually the problem is that I failed to explain that I wanted everyone to imagine their hypothetical ideal game, including making the typical group size whatever they thought was ideal. I did want to put the break between solo/small casual group and medium/large non-casual group.
Yes, I will definitely have to use math to normalize things by hand in some cases. Or if I was lazy I could normalize the averages to add up to 100%. Probably I'll do both to compare the results.
I love MMORPGs, I just like my progression horizontal, and I would have no issue with it being completely horizontal. I think stats on gear are stupid too. When I hear action combat I hear "actual skill, as in player skill, based combat" instead of the slow, waltz like, tedious, boring combat that WoW helped define as an industry standard, which require nothing but memorizing a chain and watching cool downs. I grew up on Diablo 2, Team Fortress, and Guild Wars. They all influenced what I want out of my games, regardless of genre. I think implying that I'd "prefer a FPS" because some of those preferences don't line up with yours is condescending and insulting.
Huh. Well, try this one, copy it by hand and paste it into the url bar:
https://www.surveyplanet.com/survey/8716d5c92fd1c91282ab17d2919283e1
Also, standing in one spot the whole time I am logged in, hoping players stop by, is not my idea of "fun."
I hope that made some sense
- 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
Good crafting and harvesting are usually in the sim activities gameplay category, but yeah I forgot treasure-hunting and also exploring.
You were missing a very big type of PvP.
Open world objective based PvP with persistency and player ownership of resources.
I see this as a type of team PvP. A faction or guild or whatever organization is fighting for control of territory is a team. This kind of PvP does have many things in common with arena team pvp matches that only last a few minutes, but they aren't all that similar at first glance.
Thank you, that worked just fine. Not sure what the problem was.
Anyways, taken and submitted. Good quiz, although you might warn people just how many %-style questions there are. Trying to break those down into %'s was rough, but admittedly thought-provoking.
Edit: Quiz is probably a bad choice of words, but that's how it came across to me trying to get my balance of %'s right. In a good way.
Glad you were able to get a response in before the surveying period ends today. ^_^ I ended up with over 100 responses and I am putting together the final data now. I guess I'll put that in it's own thread rather than stick it one the end of this one, but I'll link to it here.