Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
what mmo can learn from Hearthstone: "good" vs "bad" freedom
nariusseldon
Member EpicPosts: 27,775
now obviously "good" or "bad" is subjective. So I am merely talking about what I like (and you can debate if the masses have the same preferences).
Good freedom to me:
- individual freedom, free to attack the game in different ways. Some examples. D3 skills & builds (lots of options to kill). Stealth game that let you just fight, stealth kill, or no kill, and hacking. Different route to the objective. Different combat mechanics.
Bad freedom to me:
- freedom for others to affect me (or me to affect others which i care less). I don't want others to be able to pick up my loot (hence LFR and Diablo drop your own loot). I don't want others to pvp me when i don't want to (hence, arena/instanced pvp). I don't want other to be able to train me.
In fact, Hearthstone takes this to a new height. There are only limited number of pre-determined messages you can send to the other player, and you can even turn that off, and treat the other guy as AI (with no communication at all except playing the game). I like that. No more suffering from chats if i don't want to. No more toxic taunting.
I think at least some games are going towards this limited interaction model. You can co-op and fight monster, but only that. You can pvp in an instance but only that. That eliminates all the undesirable behavior, and players don't have to tolerate others much anymore.
Comments
Yeah you can go life and gaming walling off all of the unpleasant things or you can accept the challenge to overcome them, both externally and internally.
Keep living in your isolation cell, I'll take the world, warts and all.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
hmm .. i don't. Tell me which game i am playing that i don't like?
All the MMOs i am playing right now can be enjoyed as a SP game treating other players as bots.
hmm... we are talking about entertainment products here, not life. Surely, life you have to trade-off.
In entertainment products, i don't have to tolerate anything. There are always other options if one game irk me even a little.
hmm .. what positive impact? I like games that limits how others can impact me. For example, i hate loot dramas, and i prefer games that drop my own loot.
There is no positive aspects (for me) if i have to roll loot with others.
I don’t get it. Why are you playing mmos at all? If you don’t want to interact with other players you should play single player rpgs, because they are optimized to be played that way. You are going to have a far better experience. Skyrim has all the features you ask for.
Games that allow interaction between players should allow the player to dictate the amount of social interaction they have with others, "unless" the game intentionally forces this interaction. An example of a game that would force this interaction is an sandbox type of game, because that's kind of the point, spontaneous interaction without constraints.
The problem is that games do not represent real life, whatsoever, and when they do it is only in the most facile of ways. I am all for having the ability to mute people. Games that have social characteristics cause and allow behavior that is unacceptable in the real world. There is alot of behavior that goes on in games that would get a person assaulted and potentially battered in real life. This is not realistic, and this is why games, unless specifically addressed in their mission statement, should allow individual players a certain level of control when it comes to how they want to interact with other players.
Hehe, I picture someone having the ability to phase another character right into another instance of the zone. You don't interact with them, see them, or hear them. It's like they magically logged off or transferred to another server.
Instead of buying bag space, you'll be buying blacklist space, LOL.
The reward is ii've met many good people that gave me the loot they won anyway because it would benefited me more. made friends, some people i still play with, from aion. but your not looking for anyone to play with just people to entertain you without interaction
Your ability to tolerate and overcome obstacles is a measure of you in life as well in games.
Not everyone is able to succeed at both. (or either for that matter)
Do you even lift, bro?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I will likely never play an MMO that limits the amount I can interact with others `for my own good`I`m for things which discourage griefing and ninjaing but that's as far as it should go in my opinion. I mean in a card game I don`t need to say much to other players but in an MMO I definitely want to be able to.
Exactly. I have people giving me loot before too ... so? I have enough rl friends, and I don't need more online ones. And for everyone that is nice, there are 100 who are not ... so i prefer not to bother.
They may expect you to actually chat with them, you know.
You are mixing up real life and video games.
There is no reason why i need to tolerate anything in video games, unlike real life.
"discourage griefing and ninjaing"? I prefer to eliminate the possibility of both.
I can hear you on the chat part. I like the pre-selected phrases, or even better emotes, like Planetside2. Make the system robust and easy to use.
As far as your views on gameplay, I disagree with just about all of it.
I hardly think that's true. If, by not nice, you mean anything other than your RL friends.. Sure. But otherwise, it's been my experience right the opposite.
Saying 1 in 100 are nice just makes you sound incredibly emo in the most stereotypical sense of the word.
well .. people have different preferences on gameplay. I don't expect everyone to agree with me.
but ... there are always overlap .. like on the chat part.
by "not nice", i mean "no chatting", "no offering others stuff". And since none of us have statistics, it is just a case of you say so vs i say so.
So let me make the other point ... even if there are some nice people (and my take is that they are rare but that is besides the point), they don't really add much to the game for me. So i have no problem taking all the interactions out and make them more like NPCs. Heck, i don't even have to spend the effort to be nice to them.
The lack of in ANY Blizzard game has no deep thought behind it but is merely a cost saving structure either long term or too cheap to incorporate it up front,example lack of chat in HS and no housing in Wow.Even the AA structure in Wow was an AFTER the fact idea copied from EQ2.
That is what Blizzard does,they copy ideas and no they don't do it better,they do it better for THEM..aka cheaper.
HS lack of chat is just a lack of design,HS was a small team and lack of effort and still shows me a lack of effort and is why i stopped playing a month ago.Blizzard still lacks housing in WOW lmao.they are just a cheap developer.
Any attempt to limit player interaction is lame,the whole purpose of FRIENDS and ONLINE is to have interaction.I saw excuses like Wiz 101 claiming safety for the kids but all i saw were kids getting around the system EASILY so it accomplished nothing except remove interaction and make it tougher to communicate because of it.
I don't think the year or era matters at all,communication and interaction should always be accepted and part of game design,especially online gaming.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Phantom dust can learn a few things from it and I think it will it's not a MMO pre-say but it's one of the most innovative and unqiue takes on card games infused with live action, when it does return it'll probably be a gigantic success.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWa9t0Sqt6Q
all you need to watch to understand the greatness of the game
Blizzard has always been good in adding features that appeal to large audiences, and as far as I can tell, Hearthstone appears to be becoming another success on their list.
From what Narius said, it sounds like they tried to eliminate the "immature douchebag" factor from the game, giving those who don't want to deal with that a chance to play it in peace. Nothing wrong with that.
It's just like what they're doing with Heroes of the Storm, eliminating the whole "killsteal" BS that's so common among the ten year olds that play LOL and making it more of a team effort, with classes that aren't perfectly balanced for 1v1 ego tripping, but are based on supporting the team.
For those that like to mock them for those features. By all means, knock yourselves out. I doubt Blizzard will care while they're rolling in dough.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
Pretty much this.
Blizz understands focus and limits (for example, the first Diablo eliminates lots of common RPG trappings, focus on combat + loot, and a new sub-genre is born).
Their games are fun (at least to me) because they know they are building games, not worlds, and limiting what players can do is a large part of it. Hearthstone is indeed doing quite well (said so in their quarterly report) and it is a very fun (to me) game.
It is interesting game. I totally missed this game because i never owned a xbox. It is dated by now, but something like this in modern tech would be great. Another similar game (though with explicit cards and turn based instead of action) is Metal Gear Acid, which will make a great online 1v1 battle game.
That's a very shallow way to look at things.
My best experiences playing MMORPGs come from maximizing the positive impact I have on other players in games where negative impacts are eliminated or minimized. In fact I would say that adding negative impacts dulls the effect of the positive ones and makes them meaningless.
Frankly, I pity people who need bad things to happen to them in order to appreciate the good ones.