No gameplay benefit exclusively requires slow travel. So the design simply doesn't justify itself.
Your wrong.
How can you have local economies without it? What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere? How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world? How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
The closer one gets to instant travel the closer one gets to nullifying anything travel related.
How can you have local economies without it? Local economies are not that desirable for many ... otherwise AHs won't be so popular and become a standard feature.
What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere? To admire the neat animation? You don't think Blizz sold millions of spark ponies just because people want a ride, do you?
How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world? Tell me how big the world is .. don't waste 30 min showing me.
How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
Put the caravan adventure into an instance and let players choose it. Or just randomly drop players into a caravan adventure when I click the fast travel button.
If fighting bandits is fun, don't make me walk 30 min before getting to play that part.
Fun is subjective. I don't really enjoy gaining new items much when playing games anymore. Generally the new items don't matter because the game is to easy already. There is no need to get items which boost your stats or give you more damage. You could probably complete most of these games solo content with nothing but starter gear. I wonder if anyone has actually tried this before.
Traveling is a lot of fun to me. I can tell you why that is. Part of it is because there is an element of not knowing what to expect. Something dangerous might pop out and attack you. Something you might not be able to handle.
Large forests, deserts, plains, etc. are exciting to encounter when you don't know they are there. Remove your GPS and just go off in search of something and see what happens. Probe different areas and see what you can accomplish. I believe exploration has always been part of homo sapiens life. They have traveled from Africa to different continents. In America the settlers traveled from east to west of the continent. It was an Unknown and Dangerous place. People still wanted to travel because it was exciting to see the unknown and there was hope of a better life. You could say it's in most humans blood to want to explore new places.
Generally RPGs are based on adventures. I don't see how you can have an adventure if you are instantly moved to each dungeon or instantly moved to a separated PvP area. Adventure requires that you explore the unknown and face many hardships on you journey. You might get lost, get ambushed, run into some fog/weather condition, encounter dangerous creatures in the night, find something unexpected, etc.
The question I have is are people really having fun in these games. To me it's impossible to have fun when you can't really fail. If the only parts of the game that are important are the segregated PvE group/raid and the PvP esport then why bother with the single player outside world portion of the game at all? To me none of those activities are fun. Either they are about endlessly killing other player over and over again without any real purpose or grinding for loot upgrades over and over again. This defeats the purpose of the game IMO. The purpose being to go on an adventure.
The problem is any benefit to travel can be achieved other ways:
Want to be uncertain what you'll experience next? Then have gameplay like D3 where encounters are heavily randomized!
Want to explore? Then explore!
Want to socialize? Then socialize!
Want to see cool sights? Stop and look around!
Want to be immersed by manually running? Then don't take the teleport.
No gameplay benefit exclusively requires slow travel. So the design simply doesn't justify itself.
Lord of the Rings was an adventure, wasn't it? Did Tolkien detail every single second of the year-long journey? Of course not. He skipped uneventful travel which didn't serve a purpose in some way (though I feel he's a worse author than many when it comes to skipping uneventful things.) Skipping means he instantly moved you to each important scene. In that respect, good narrative design is the same as good movie design is the same as good game design.
As for your last bit, I agree that MMORPGs can do a better job of providing challenges. Challenge shouldn't only exist at endgame. It should be treated like City of Heroes treated it -- there's a giant expanse of progression to be had, and you have a difficulty slider which determines how hard the challenges are, and the higher you set that the faster you progress. You don't even technically need a difficulty slider to achieve this, since RPGs tend to have all the monsters of varying levels in-game already and you can just better support fighting monsters above your level, and ensure the rewards more than compensate for the added time it will take to kill those monsters. (If it takes 50% longer to kill a mob 5 levels above you, then you'd need to earn at least 50% more XP from killing that mob to just break even. Ideally you'd earn more like 250% more XP (which means that for facing very hard challenges consistently, you'd advance overall about 2x as fast as someone grinding easy mobs.)
But even though none of this is all that complicated to implement, City of Heroes is the only game I know of to have actually done it and made self-challenges worthwhile. Everyone else is content to let "endlessly grind these easy things to level" be the primary way to advance, which is really just outright worse (because it means the game has a fairly fixed difficulty, which means it's too easy for a lot of players.)
So I've heard you say something recently that made me reflect upon your many points that you have made. You state that by having fast travel that both set of players get to experience the same content so why not just put it in the game?
This statement is flawed on many levels because fast travel doesn't add content to game is subtracts and trivializes content. I like many others here started playing the genre when Everquest launched. One of my most memorable moments was traveling from the dwarf capital to the human capital to meet with a new friend I had met via tells. I had been inquiring about the paladin class and this higher level paladin suggested I come to this area and he would help me with some basic items. So I did some research and set out upon my journey to Qeynos. As many will tell you this trip was not an easy one and I would have to travel through several zones that were extremely punishing for someone level 10... especially at night, but 8 hours later I finally made it there. Along the way I had made new friends, learned about the world, and understood ever aspect of the game much better. If someone would have simply teleported me to his location I would have saved 8 hours, but I would have lost an experience that I remember fondly almost 20 years later.
MMORPG's are a delight because they allow you to make these connections to a fantasy world, make friends, and accomplish things outside of the daily drudgery of life. Mounts should be very limited and should always have a cost and things like portals should be expensive and rare.
Fun is subjective. I don't really enjoy gaining new items much when playing games anymore. Generally the new items don't matter because the game is to easy already. There is no need to get items which boost your stats or give you more damage. You could probably complete most of these games solo content with nothing but starter gear. I wonder if anyone has actually tried this before.
Traveling is a lot of fun to me. I can tell you why that is. Part of it is because there is an element of not knowing what to expect. Something dangerous might pop out and attack you. Something you might not be able to handle.
Large forests, deserts, plains, etc. are exciting to encounter when you don't know they are there. Remove your GPS and just go off in search of something and see what happens. Probe different areas and see what you can accomplish. I believe exploration has always been part of homo sapiens life. They have traveled from Africa to different continents. In America the settlers traveled from east to west of the continent. It was an Unknown and Dangerous place. People still wanted to travel because it was exciting to see the unknown and there was hope of a better life. You could say it's in most humans blood to want to explore new places.
Generally RPGs are based on adventures. I don't see how you can have an adventure if you are instantly moved to each dungeon or instantly moved to a separated PvP area. Adventure requires that you explore the unknown and face many hardships on you journey. You might get lost, get ambushed, run into some fog/weather condition, encounter dangerous creatures in the night, find something unexpected, etc.
The question I have is are people really having fun in these games. To me it's impossible to have fun when you can't really fail. If the only parts of the game that are important are the segregated PvE group/raid and the PvP esport then why bother with the single player outside world portion of the game at all? To me none of those activities are fun. Either they are about endlessly killing other player over and over again without any real purpose or grinding for loot upgrades over and over again. This defeats the purpose of the game IMO. The purpose being to go on an adventure.
The problem is any benefit to travel can be achieved other ways:
Want to be uncertain what you'll experience next? Then have gameplay like D3 where encounters are heavily randomized!
Want to explore? Then explore!
Want to socialize? Then socialize!
Want to see cool sights? Stop and look around!
Want to be immersed by manually running? Then don't take the teleport.
No gameplay benefit exclusively requires slow travel. So the design simply doesn't justify itself.
Lord of the Rings was an adventure, wasn't it? Did Tolkien detail every single second of the year-long journey? Of course not. He skipped uneventful travel which didn't serve a purpose in some way (though I feel he's a worse author than many when it comes to skipping uneventful things.) Skipping means he instantly moved you to each important scene. In that respect, good narrative design is the same as good movie design is the same as good game design.
As for your last bit, I agree that MMORPGs can do a better job of providing challenges. Challenge shouldn't only exist at endgame. It should be treated like City of Heroes treated it -- there's a giant expanse of progression to be had, and you have a difficulty slider which determines how hard the challenges are, and the higher you set that the faster you progress. You don't even technically need a difficulty slider to achieve this, since RPGs tend to have all the monsters of varying levels in-game already and you can just better support fighting monsters above your level, and ensure the rewards more than compensate for the added time it will take to kill those monsters. (If it takes 50% longer to kill a mob 5 levels above you, then you'd need to earn at least 50% more XP from killing that mob to just break even. Ideally you'd earn more like 250% more XP (which means that for facing very hard challenges consistently, you'd advance overall about 2x as fast as someone grinding easy mobs.)
But even though none of this is all that complicated to implement, City of Heroes is the only game I know of to have actually done it and made self-challenges worthwhile. Everyone else is content to let "endlessly grind these easy things to level" be the primary way to advance, which is really just outright worse (because it means the game has a fairly fixed difficulty, which means it's too easy for a lot of players.)
So I've heard you say something recently that made me reflect upon your many points that you have made. You state that by having fast travel that both set of players get to experience the same content so why not just put it in the game?
I'm sure his point is with fast travel, people have a choice to either fast travel or just hike it. With just slow travel you have no choice but to hike it.
Wow... so "fun" is no longer subjective? Hold the presses! Axehilt has ALL the answers, for everyone!
First off, I do not recall ANY MMORPG *I* played that had me "waiting around for an hour" with nothing to do. Even during that oh-so-dreaded "downtime" when the group is recovering from a fight, or waiting for our turn to get into a group we chatted... TALKED to each other. I swear, some players... If the game is not forcing you to constantly click buttons, you are bored.
Second, Those "boring" empty non-play areas, things can and do happen. Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. Other players inhabit these boring, non-action areas. This is where community comes in.
Next in line: Instant Gratification is a slippery slope, just like getting high from drugs. Soon, the player can not be "gratified" fast enough. What works is variety. A little instant here, a little delayed there. That way, we do not get "taught" a pattern to expect.
Travel: For YOU (and many others it seems), travel is not fun. Gratz. You have the games you desire. For those who actually enjoy the journey and not "just the end", too bad, so sad. Again, why play MMOs? MOBAs are more to your idea of fun. No "boring travel" involved there. In one aspect, *players* make the journey boring or interesting. You have no desire to make it fun, so it is not. Others try to make it fun and succeed more often then not. I totally understand why you find it boring. Do not try to belittle those who do find fun in travel.
The rest, you keep on proving that "fun" is VERY subjective. And "fun gameplay" is defined by each individual player, or do you pretend to *know* what everyone wants here, too? Majority of MMO players today? Yea, you speak for the majority. NOT everyone. Stop trying to act like you do.
If you want to argue business sense and I have no rebuttal. It would be stupid to not try to please the biggest crowd, if making money is your bottom line. I just wander what would happen if indeed, some company decided to be different. How successful would that MMORPG be? We may never know, thanks to players just like you who do NOT want worlds in which to adventure, but rather lobby based action combat games where you get to mash buttons/keys the whole time while logged in.
Thanks for ruining the genre.
First, I've stated multiple times in this thread that if you want to socialize, then socialize! In a fast-travel game nothing stops you from socializing, and it can and does happen all the time. Slow-travel isn't the only way to sociailze.
Second, sure things can happen during travel. Rarely. Mostly not. Meanwhile if you want to deliberately do nothing, then deliberately do nothing! Fast-travel games tend not to prevent slow-travel (or deliberately doing nothing.)
Third, "a little delay there" is appropriate. But slow-travel is a lot of delay. It's a 30-minute travel montage instead of a 30-second montage in a 3-hour movie.
Fourth, if you want to slow-travel, then slow-travel! Nothing stops you. That type of gamer isn't "so sad" unless what they actually want isn't slow-travel but to force their preferences on others. With fast-travel-optional I haven't forced my preference on others. With slow-travel-required games they definitely forced their preference on me.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
He's like a guy who goes to a Chinese buffet and doesn't like Chinese food or buffets but man does he like single slices of pizza and you bet everyone there is going to know how much he likes pizza and doesn't care for Chinese. On top of that he thinks single servings are buffet and pizza is Chinese.
I'll never block him because he says some of the most ridiculous, laughable things on this forum.
Great analogy .. but i think you miss the point.
It is more like Chinese buffet restaurant starts to serve pizzas, and that is why I show up. And I don't see a problem, if Chinese buffet serves pizzas, to talk about how great pizzas are.
(BTW, may be we should switch the example to a pizza place serving japanese ramen .. since i don't like pizza that much)
and you don't like pizza... Man your killing me over here. Good thing I wasn't drinking when I read this because I exploding laughing again.
Also even if a Chinese placed started serving pizza that doesn't make pizza Chinese.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
No gameplay benefit exclusively requires slow travel. So the design simply doesn't justify itself.
Your wrong.
How can you have local economies without it? What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere? How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world? How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
The closer one gets to instant travel the closer one gets to nullifying anything travel related.
How can you have local economies without it? Local economies are not that desirable for many ... otherwise AHs won't be so popular and become a standard feature.
What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere? To admire the neat animation? You don't think Blizz sold millions of spark ponies just because people want a ride, do you?
How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world? Tell me how big the world is .. don't waste 30 min showing me.
How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
Put the caravan adventure into an instance and let players choose it. Or just randomly drop players into a caravan adventure when I click the fast travel button.
If fighting bandits is fun, don't make me walk 30 min before getting to play that part.
Why even play mmorpg's ? You would have never played table top rpg's because they didn't offer enough instant gratification so why even play mmorpgs now ?
Tell me how big the world is... don't waste 30 min showing me ? Is this real life. You want developers to build a massive world, but then you don't want to interact with it outside of when you deem necessary. Then you will complain that developers don't make content fast enough for you.
Why even walk at all in a game why not just teleport to something, hit ur dps button and instantly collect/equip loot.
.....
To top this off with a perfect cherry you want players who want to experience a more realistic world.... to go on a caravan instanced mission. I could not put into words simply how disturbed I am by this statement.
So I've heard you say something recently that made me reflect upon your many points that you have made. You state that by having fast travel that both set of players get to experience the same content so why not just put it in the game?
This statement is flawed on many levels because fast travel doesn't add content to game is subtracts and trivializes content. I like many others here started playing the genre when Everquest launched. One of my most memorable moments was traveling from the dwarf capital to the human capital to meet with a new friend I had met via tells. I had been inquiring about the paladin class and this higher level paladin suggested I come to this area and he would help me with some basic items. So I did some research and set out upon my journey to Qeynos. As many will tell you this trip was not an easy one and I would have to travel through several zones that were extremely punishing for someone level 10... especially at night, but 8 hours later I finally made it there. Along the way I had made new friends, learned about the world, and understood ever aspect of the game much better. If someone would have simply teleported me to his location I would have saved 8 hours, but I would have lost an experience that I remember fondly almost 20 years later.
MMORPG's are a delight because they allow you to make these connections to a fantasy world, make friends, and accomplish things outside of the daily drudgery of life. Mounts should be very limited and should always have a cost and things like portals should be expensive and rare.
The content it subtracts is almost devoid of decision-making. You plucked the one rare form of decision-making (avoiding high level mobs) that would exist with slow-travel, without really understanding how that single example stacks up against all the other times slow-travel was just a bunch of mindless non-gameplay. In the early MMORPGs I played, I'd be lucky if one trip in 20 provided anything interesting. Mostly it was dull, monotonous non-gameplay designed to keep players subscribed longer (which of course it failed to do for me; I tried like 10 different pre-WOW MMORPGs and never subscribed past the first month because the gameplay of those early games was just awful.)
Everyone is going to have memorable experiences in a new game, especially if it provides appropriate challenges. I'm 100% in favor of games offering such challenges. But slow-travel isn't required for that. And if you're honest with yourself, you'll look back and see that for every one first-big-trip type event there were hundreds of dull trips where nothing interesting happened. Or maybe you won't...remembering particularly eventful things and forgetting dull ones is sort of how our memory works.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
No gameplay benefit exclusively requires slow travel. So the design simply doesn't justify itself.
Your wrong.
How can you have local economies without it? What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere? How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world? How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
The closer one gets to instant travel the closer one gets to nullifying anything travel related.
How can you have local economies without it? Local economies are not that desirable for many ... otherwise AHs won't be so popular and become a standard feature.
What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere? To admire the neat animation? You don't think Blizz sold millions of spark ponies just because people want a ride, do you?
How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world? Tell me how big the world is .. don't waste 30 min showing me.
How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
Put the caravan adventure into an instance and let players choose it. Or just randomly drop players into a caravan adventure when I click the fast travel button.
If fighting bandits is fun, don't make me walk 30 min before getting to play that part.
It's not about the desire, it's about the require part. Just because you don't desire local economies doesn't meet that they don't require slow travel.
I'm talking about the speed and travel viability of these which the closer to instant travel you get the closer you get to nullifying them. When was the last time someone pulled out a mount in an instance, or asked for a speed buff, or took any type of in game transportation?
The world is 20 square kilometers. Sure you don't want to see it?
Scripted instances are pretty much the exact opposite of emergent game play that could happen while walking down the road in an open world.
Heaven forbid you have to walk for 30 mins and don't get instantly teleported. What if some people do want a game with slow travel because it makes where you go in the world matter more and adds to immersion? Can't you let us play that game?
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
So I've heard you say something recently that made me reflect upon your many points that you have made. You state that by having fast travel that both set of players get to experience the same content so why not just put it in the game?
This statement is flawed on many levels because fast travel doesn't add content to game is subtracts and trivializes content. I like many others here started playing the genre when Everquest launched. One of my most memorable moments was traveling from the dwarf capital to the human capital to meet with a new friend I had met via tells. I had been inquiring about the paladin class and this higher level paladin suggested I come to this area and he would help me with some basic items. So I did some research and set out upon my journey to Qeynos. As many will tell you this trip was not an easy one and I would have to travel through several zones that were extremely punishing for someone level 10... especially at night, but 8 hours later I finally made it there. Along the way I had made new friends, learned about the world, and understood ever aspect of the game much better. If someone would have simply teleported me to his location I would have saved 8 hours, but I would have lost an experience that I remember fondly almost 20 years later.
MMORPG's are a delight because they allow you to make these connections to a fantasy world, make friends, and accomplish things outside of the daily drudgery of life. Mounts should be very limited and should always have a cost and things like portals should be expensive and rare.
The content it subtracts is almost devoid of decision-making. You plucked the one rare form of decision-making (avoiding high level mobs) that would exist with slow-travel, without really understanding how that single example stacks up against all the other times slow-travel was just a bunch of mindless non-gameplay. In the early MMORPGs I played, I'd be lucky if one trip in 20 provided anything interesting. Mostly it was dull, monotonous non-gameplay designed to keep players subscribed longer (which of course it failed to do for me; I tried like 10 different pre-WOW MMORPGs and never subscribed past the first month because the gameplay of those early games was just awful.)
Everyone is going to have memorable experiences in a new game, especially if it provides appropriate challenges. I'm 100% in favor of games offering such challenges. But slow-travel isn't required for that. And if you're honest with yourself, you'll look back and see that for every one first-big-trip type event there were hundreds of dull trips where nothing interesting happened. Or maybe you won't...remembering particularly eventful things and forgetting dull ones is sort of how our memory works.
Sure there were times when I would be impatient and want to be there instantly, because that is human nature. Everyone wants to take the shortest route to get somewhere regardless if its good for us or not. I cannot simply say remove content because I find it boring now that I have experienced it because I live in a world with other people.
So you want fast travel in the game... fair enough a world can develop it and people have mounted creatures for thousands of years so why not in a fantasy world. If that's the case lets add horses to our game, but wait they require food, lodging, and upkeep. They can only be used for limited time because they become tired and now you have to lug around this horse with you everywhere and protect him. He simply doesn't vanish when you are attacked by a mountain giant. So mounts have perma death, require financial upkeep, burden the player with responsibility, and have limited use.
Something tells me this isn't what you want. you want a button to add pixels and move fast. Creating MMORPG's should be about creating worlds and not simply giving players what they want because its inconvient or boring. Those downtime's act as contrast for the uptimes and give weight to your decisions.
Originally posted by Axehilt ]First, I've stated multiple times in this thread that if you want to socialize, then socialize! In a fast-travel game nothing stops you from socializing, and it can and does happen all the time. Slow-travel isn't the only way to sociailze.Second, sure things can happen during travel. Rarely. Mostly not. Meanwhile if you want to deliberately do nothing, then deliberately do nothing! Fast-travel games tend not to prevent slow-travel (or deliberately doing nothing.)Third, "a little delay there" is appropriate. But slow-travel is a lot of delay. It's a 30-minute travel montage instead of a 30-second montage in a 3-hour movie.Fourth, if you want to slow-travel, then slow-travel! Nothing stops you. That type of gamer isn't "so sad" unless what they actually want isn't slow-travel but to force their preferences on others. With fast-travel-optional I haven't forced my preference on others. With slow-travel-required games they definitely forced their preference on me.
Ahhh... you want separate play styles in one game. That way, fast travelers get the advantage of getting to the crafting node first, anti-social players can ignore all of the other players while social players get bogged down helping/chatting others, and the rest... Why should I purposely limit myself when others do not have to? *They* certainly will not.
It is not about "forcing others to play "*my* way", it is about having like minded players in the same game. Sorry of you feel "forced" to play in a way you do not desire. With multiple player games, equality, equal footing, and a level playing field is very important. Are you one of those players that feel every game must cater him? Would a handful (for variety) of "EQ-esque" MMOs kill you?
You're in luck. Over 600 MMOs cater to your desires. Some of the rest of us? A mere handful, if that many.
- 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
No gameplay benefit exclusively requires slow travel. So the design simply doesn't justify itself.
Your wrong.
How can you have local economies without it? What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere? How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world? How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
The closer one gets to instant travel the closer one gets to nullifying anything travel related.
Local economies might be the only thing that benefits from slow travel and mounts/vehicles are most often just money sinks since they have no function in combat (which is a shame).
And the possibility of interesting encounters while you travel is so small it is simply not worth it. Most people would choose convenience over this small chance of something happening.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by Axehilt ]First, I've stated multiple times in this thread that if you want to socialize, then socialize! In a fast-travel game nothing stops you from socializing, and it can and does happen all the time. Slow-travel isn't the only way to sociailze.
Second, sure things can happen during travel. Rarely. Mostly not. Meanwhile if you want to deliberately do nothing, then deliberately do nothing! Fast-travel games tend not to prevent slow-travel (or deliberately doing nothing.)
Third, "a little delay there" is appropriate. But slow-travel is a lot of delay. It's a 30-minute travel montage instead of a 30-second montage in a 3-hour movie.
Fourth, if you want to slow-travel, then slow-travel! Nothing stops you. That type of gamer isn't "so sad" unless what they actually want isn't slow-travel but to force their preferences on others. With fast-travel-optional I haven't forced my preference on others. With slow-travel-required games they definitely forced their preference on me.
Ahhh... you want separate play styles in one game. That way, fast travelers get the advantage of getting to the crafting node first, anti-social players can ignore all of the other players while social players get bogged down helping/chatting others, and the rest... Why should I purposely limit myself when others do not have to? *They* certainly will not.
It is not about "forcing others to play "*my* way", it is about having like minded players in the same game. Sorry of you feel "forced" to play in a way you do not desire. With multiple player games, equality, equal footing, and a level playing field is very important. Are you one of those players that feel every game must cater him? Would a handful (for variety) of "EQ-esque" MMOs kill you?
You're in luck. Over 600 MMOs cater to your desires. Some of the rest of us? A mere handful, if that many.
Oh, we are playing the victim card now? OK.
Just remember that when you play it, you don't get to bully other players who don't share your preferences or bash their games.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
2. What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere?
3. How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world?
4. How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
The closer one gets to instant travel the closer one gets to nullifying anything travel related.
1. Automated transports.
2. You can't teleport to specific coordinates. You can't teleport in combat. So movement buffs are important still.
3. Because you walked everywhere once, so you know how big the world is. The first trip is exploration, which can be fun. Subsequent trips are just repetition. (Coincidentally this means that other EQ1 player's memorable newbie journey would still have happened in a game with well-designed fast travel.)
4. Emergent gameplay doesn't rely on travel. It can happen in any type of game system when players use tactics not specifically intended with the original design.
4b. Players could still ambush automated transports, which can provide the owner with the option of taking control of whatever guards he posted.
See how all of these gameplay elements can be replicated without forcing players into repetitive non-gameplay?
(Also "you're" is especially critical in the phrase, "You're wrong.")
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Local economies might be the only thing that benefits from slow travel and mounts/vehicles are most often just money sinks since they have no function in combat (which is a shame).
And the possibility of interesting encounters while you travel is so small it is simply not worth it. Most people would choose convenience over this small chance of something happening.
DayZ sold over a million and it's entire game play mechanic is traveling around with the possibility of interesting encounters with other players. It might not be worth it to you but not everyone wants convenient instant travel.
Also you can't have an interesting encounter every 2 meters or it stops being interesting. Plus if your talking about running instances as convenience there is nothing less interesting to me than running the same dungeon over and over I would rather stand in one spot and camp mobs circa EQ 1999 and get me some Golden Efreeti Boots. It was pretty exciting to have the rare pop instead of the placeholder mob, way more exciting than a 15 min dungeon run where no one talks or even cares to.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
The biggest advantage of slow travel is immersion.
When I play modern MMOs, I always get this impression that I'm playing in a big sandbox or a big themepark where I just teleport everywhere to do the activity I want to do. I want to craft ? Hop, I can directly teleport to the crafting station of the capital. I want to start a dungeon ? Hop, I can directly teleport into it.
When it takes times to go to some place, it makes the world feel bigger. You are just a character in the big world, and not somekind of big god that goes from place to place to do some activities. This + local economy (and that's pretty much why ESO's marketplace system is flawed because of the fast-travel)
About OP, yes MMORPG have changed, unfortunately. There is probably a part of nostalgia when we remember the experiences of our old MMORPG, but nobody can deny that mechanics, publics and format of content has changed since WoW (not specifically because of WoW, but the trend started when WoW was released)
The solution to all this is easy. We play different games. One game has features that appeal to the old-school players (no instances, meaningful travel, possibly harsher death penalties) and the other game to the newer style games (quick ways to get into the action). I want Narseldon, or whatever his name is, and Axehilt to be happy and play a game they like.
We can agree to disagree on our gaming preferences. Thanks for the discussion, has been interesting.
Fun is subjective. I don't really enjoy gaining new items much when playing games anymore. Generally the new items don't matter because the game is to easy already. There is no need to get items which boost your stats or give you more damage. You could probably complete most of these games solo content with nothing but starter gear. I wonder if anyone has actually tried this before.
Traveling is a lot of fun to me. I can tell you why that is. Part of it is because there is an element of not knowing what to expect. Something dangerous might pop out and attack you. Something you might not be able to handle.
Large forests, deserts, plains, etc. are exciting to encounter when you don't know they are there. Remove your GPS and just go off in search of something and see what happens. Probe different areas and see what you can accomplish. I believe exploration has always been part of homo sapiens life. They have traveled from Africa to different continents. In America the settlers traveled from east to west of the continent. It was an Unknown and Dangerous place. People still wanted to travel because it was exciting to see the unknown and there was hope of a better life. You could say it's in most humans blood to want to explore new places.
Generally RPGs are based on adventures. I don't see how you can have an adventure if you are instantly moved to each dungeon or instantly moved to a separated PvP area. Adventure requires that you explore the unknown and face many hardships on you journey. You might get lost, get ambushed, run into some fog/weather condition, encounter dangerous creatures in the night, find something unexpected, etc.
The question I have is are people really having fun in these games. To me it's impossible to have fun when you can't really fail. If the only parts of the game that are important are the segregated PvE group/raid and the PvP esport then why bother with the single player outside world portion of the game at all? To me none of those activities are fun. Either they are about endlessly killing other player over and over again without any real purpose or grinding for loot upgrades over and over again. This defeats the purpose of the game IMO. The purpose being to go on an adventure.
The problem is any benefit to travel can be achieved other ways:
Want to be uncertain what you'll experience next? Then have gameplay like D3 where encounters are heavily randomized!
Want to explore? Then explore!
Want to socialize? Then socialize!
Want to see cool sights? Stop and look around!
Want to be immersed by manually running? Then don't take the teleport.
No gameplay benefit exclusively requires slow travel. So the design simply doesn't justify itself.
Lord of the Rings was an adventure, wasn't it? Did Tolkien detail every single second of the year-long journey? Of course not. He skipped uneventful travel which didn't serve a purpose in some way (though I feel he's a worse author than many when it comes to skipping uneventful things.) Skipping means he instantly moved you to each important scene. In that respect, good narrative design is the same as good movie design is the same as good game design.
As for your last bit, I agree that MMORPGs can do a better job of providing challenges. Challenge shouldn't only exist at endgame. It should be treated like City of Heroes treated it -- there's a giant expanse of progression to be had, and you have a difficulty slider which determines how hard the challenges are, and the higher you set that the faster you progress. You don't even technically need a difficulty slider to achieve this, since RPGs tend to have all the monsters of varying levels in-game already and you can just better support fighting monsters above your level, and ensure the rewards more than compensate for the added time it will take to kill those monsters. (If it takes 50% longer to kill a mob 5 levels above you, then you'd need to earn at least 50% more XP from killing that mob to just break even. Ideally you'd earn more like 250% more XP (which means that for facing very hard challenges consistently, you'd advance overall about 2x as fast as someone grinding easy mobs.)
But even though none of this is all that complicated to implement, City of Heroes is the only game I know of to have actually done it and made self-challenges worthwhile. Everyone else is content to let "endlessly grind these easy things to level" be the primary way to advance, which is really just outright worse (because it means the game has a fairly fixed difficulty, which means it's too easy for a lot of players.)
So I've heard you say something recently that made me reflect upon your many points that you have made. You state that by having fast travel that both set of players get to experience the same content so why not just put it in the game?
I'm sure his point is with fast travel, people have a choice to either fast travel or just hike it. With just slow travel you have no choice but to hike it.
That's akin to saying to settlers we have a train built, but you can still take the wagon across the country if you want. Some people are looking for a certain game experience that replicates a virtual world and the dangers you would face in it.
Diablo is no fun because it's randomized. It is a loot grind. There is no adventure or fun unless all you care about is getting more loot in a game. Perhaps that is the fun for you.
The Lord of the Rings is a great book and it describes the world in great detail. I don't recall anything about fast travel unless you were Gandalf the Wizard. All the adventures that were brought about came from traveling around the world. In the Hobbit there is actually a song/poem at the begging about going on an adventure instead of sitting at home in comfort.
In MMOs today you can't replicate the adventure of something like Lord of the Rings with instances to get to the best part. The problem is instances and running group content doesn't replicate the adventures at all. For that you would first need the travel and the dangers. Both of these key ingredients are missing. People only play for the loot grind or the PvP esports. They don't play for the original point of the game which is the adventure. Basically it's not possible to explore (create adventures exploring) because the world is not dangerous and the focus is entirely on loot and following a string of quests. That is not a good reason to play a game IMO. You can do what you want to though.
2. What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere?
3. How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world?
4. How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
The closer one gets to instant travel the closer one gets to nullifying anything travel related.
1. Automated transports.
2. You can't teleport to specific coordinates. You can't teleport in combat. So movement buffs are important still.
3. Because you walked everywhere once, so you know how big the world is. The first trip is exploration, which can be fun. Subsequent trips are just repetition. (Coincidentally this means that other EQ1 player's memorable newbie journey would still have happened in a game with well-designed fast travel.)
4. Emergent gameplay doesn't rely on travel. It can happen in any type of game system when players use tactics not specifically intended with the original design.
4b. Players could still ambush automated transports, which can provide the owner with the option of taking control of whatever guards he posted.
See how all of these gameplay elements can be replicated without forcing players into repetitive non-gameplay?
(Also "you're" is especially critical in the phrase, "You're wrong.")
No problem buddy I'll get it right this time! You're wrong.
1. Just like you couldn't have players mail anything to anyone from anywhere. That doesn't remove that fact that you need slow travel to have local economies and you could actually balance automated transports with a cost and slow travel time but instant travel would break local economies instantly.
2. Guild Wars 2 prefect example. Sure your right you can still have in combat movement buffs, but what I said still applies in that the closer you get to instant travel the closer you get to nullifying transportation or the need for faster than walking travel in any form.
3. Great we have a one time use world where nobody ever uses the same road to get back and forth.
4. It does if the emergent game play I'm talking about happens when you travel.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Going back to our 1st MMO experiences, many of us took a look at the possibilities that awaited the future of this genre and the almost limitless potential that was opening up.
Ahhh... you want separate play styles in one game. That way, fast travelers get the advantage of getting to the crafting node first, anti-social players can ignore all of the other players while social players get bogged down helping/chatting others, and the rest... Why should I purposely limit myself when others do not have to? *They* certainly will not.
It is not about "forcing others to play "*my* way", it is about having like minded players in the same game. Sorry of you feel "forced" to play in a way you do not desire. With multiple player games, equality, equal footing, and a level playing field is very important. Are you one of those players that feel every game must cater him? Would a handful (for variety) of "EQ-esque" MMOs kill you?
You're in luck. Over 600 MMOs cater to your desires. Some of the rest of us? A mere handful, if that many.
In a game with mandatory slow-travel, I don't feel forced to slow-travel, I am forced to slow-travel.
Why would you ask if I want every game catered to me? The crux of my argument is that fast-travel appeals to everyone. And guess which players you're going to see out there slow-traveling in the fast-travel game? That's right: like-minded players.
Of course an EQ-like game wouldn't hurt me. But the reality is this is an expensive genre to create games for and catering to a vocal, tiny niche has proven not to be very successful. People are generally happier when they understand which of their expectations are unreasonable, and so that's why I'm here.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Heaven forbid you have to walk for 30 mins and don't get instantly teleported. What if some people do want a game with slow travel because it makes where you go in the world matter more and adds to immersion? Can't you let us play that game?
Of course. It is not like i need every game in the world cater to my preferences since I don't have time for all of them anyway.
But the fact remains that what you describe is not that slow travel is fun ... but the side effect of it (meeting a caravan ... having a local economy) and all of those can be created without slow travel .. so you get the benefit without the cost (of time).
Now if you say you really enjoy walking down a desert with the same scenary for 20 min ... then I would really have no objection.
2. What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere?
3. How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world?
4. How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
The closer one gets to instant travel the closer one gets to nullifying anything travel related.
1. Automated transports.
2. You can't teleport to specific coordinates. You can't teleport in combat. So movement buffs are important still.
3. Because you walked everywhere once, so you know how big the world is. The first trip is exploration, which can be fun. Subsequent trips are just repetition. (Coincidentally this means that other EQ1 player's memorable newbie journey would still have happened in a game with well-designed fast travel.)
4. Emergent gameplay doesn't rely on travel. It can happen in any type of game system when players use tactics not specifically intended with the original design.
4b. Players could still ambush automated transports, which can provide the owner with the option of taking control of whatever guards he posted.
See how all of these gameplay elements can be replicated without forcing players into repetitive non-gameplay?
(Also "you're" is especially critical in the phrase, "You're wrong.")
No problem buddy I'll get it right this time! You're wrong.
1. Just like you couldn't have players mail anything to anyone from anywhere. That doesn't remove that fact that you need slow travel to have local economies and you could actually balance automated transports with a cost and slow travel time but instant travel would break local economies instantly.
2. Guild Wars 2 prefect example. Sure your right you can still have in combat movement buffs, but what I said still applies in that the closer you get to instant travel the closer you get to nullifying transportation or the need for faster than walking travel in any form.
3. Great we have a one time use world where nobody ever uses the same road to get back and forth.
4. It does if the emergent game play I'm talking about happens when you travel.
I am all for slow travel. I'd prefer it over instant porting. However, It has to fit. There needs to be a reason for it other than to force me to slow down and become a walking simulator. Travel time is opportunity time. Encounters and such can be inserted there and can be used to make the experience more meaningful. But if it's just a boring walk to restrict my progress, I'll see through it and it won't impress me. Instant travel give the game a more "lobby" feel.
Comments
How can you have local economies without it? Local economies are not that desirable for many ... otherwise AHs won't be so popular and become a standard feature.
What's the point in having mounts/vehicles/transportation/movement enhancing spells if you can just teleport everywhere? To admire the neat animation? You don't think Blizz sold millions of spark ponies just because people want a ride, do you?
How about a sense of distance or time relating to the size of the world? Tell me how big the world is .. don't waste 30 min showing me.
How about just the very act of walking from town to town with the possibility of emergent game play because other people have to use the roads and anything could happen from bandit ambushes to combining caravans for saftey?
Put the caravan adventure into an instance and let players choose it. Or just randomly drop players into a caravan adventure when I click the fast travel button.
If fighting bandits is fun, don't make me walk 30 min before getting to play that part.
So I've heard you say something recently that made me reflect upon your many points that you have made. You state that by having fast travel that both set of players get to experience the same content so why not just put it in the game?
This statement is flawed on many levels because fast travel doesn't add content to game is subtracts and trivializes content. I like many others here started playing the genre when Everquest launched. One of my most memorable moments was traveling from the dwarf capital to the human capital to meet with a new friend I had met via tells. I had been inquiring about the paladin class and this higher level paladin suggested I come to this area and he would help me with some basic items. So I did some research and set out upon my journey to Qeynos. As many will tell you this trip was not an easy one and I would have to travel through several zones that were extremely punishing for someone level 10... especially at night, but 8 hours later I finally made it there. Along the way I had made new friends, learned about the world, and understood ever aspect of the game much better. If someone would have simply teleported me to his location I would have saved 8 hours, but I would have lost an experience that I remember fondly almost 20 years later.
MMORPG's are a delight because they allow you to make these connections to a fantasy world, make friends, and accomplish things outside of the daily drudgery of life. Mounts should be very limited and should always have a cost and things like portals should be expensive and rare.
I'm sure his point is with fast travel, people have a choice to either fast travel or just hike it. With just slow travel you have no choice but to hike it.
First, I've stated multiple times in this thread that if you want to socialize, then socialize! In a fast-travel game nothing stops you from socializing, and it can and does happen all the time. Slow-travel isn't the only way to sociailze.
Second, sure things can happen during travel. Rarely. Mostly not. Meanwhile if you want to deliberately do nothing, then deliberately do nothing! Fast-travel games tend not to prevent slow-travel (or deliberately doing nothing.)
Third, "a little delay there" is appropriate. But slow-travel is a lot of delay. It's a 30-minute travel montage instead of a 30-second montage in a 3-hour movie.
Fourth, if you want to slow-travel, then slow-travel! Nothing stops you. That type of gamer isn't "so sad" unless what they actually want isn't slow-travel but to force their preferences on others. With fast-travel-optional I haven't forced my preference on others. With slow-travel-required games they definitely forced their preference on me.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
and you don't like pizza... Man your killing me over here. Good thing I wasn't drinking when I read this because I exploding laughing again.
Also even if a Chinese placed started serving pizza that doesn't make pizza Chinese.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Why even play mmorpg's ? You would have never played table top rpg's because they didn't offer enough instant gratification so why even play mmorpgs now ?
Tell me how big the world is... don't waste 30 min showing me ? Is this real life. You want developers to build a massive world, but then you don't want to interact with it outside of when you deem necessary. Then you will complain that developers don't make content fast enough for you.
Why even walk at all in a game why not just teleport to something, hit ur dps button and instantly collect/equip loot.
.....
To top this off with a perfect cherry you want players who want to experience a more realistic world.... to go on a caravan instanced mission. I could not put into words simply how disturbed I am by this statement.
The content it subtracts is almost devoid of decision-making. You plucked the one rare form of decision-making (avoiding high level mobs) that would exist with slow-travel, without really understanding how that single example stacks up against all the other times slow-travel was just a bunch of mindless non-gameplay. In the early MMORPGs I played, I'd be lucky if one trip in 20 provided anything interesting. Mostly it was dull, monotonous non-gameplay designed to keep players subscribed longer (which of course it failed to do for me; I tried like 10 different pre-WOW MMORPGs and never subscribed past the first month because the gameplay of those early games was just awful.)
Everyone is going to have memorable experiences in a new game, especially if it provides appropriate challenges. I'm 100% in favor of games offering such challenges. But slow-travel isn't required for that. And if you're honest with yourself, you'll look back and see that for every one first-big-trip type event there were hundreds of dull trips where nothing interesting happened. Or maybe you won't...remembering particularly eventful things and forgetting dull ones is sort of how our memory works.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
It's not about the desire, it's about the require part. Just because you don't desire local economies doesn't meet that they don't require slow travel.
I'm talking about the speed and travel viability of these which the closer to instant travel you get the closer you get to nullifying them. When was the last time someone pulled out a mount in an instance, or asked for a speed buff, or took any type of in game transportation?
The world is 20 square kilometers. Sure you don't want to see it?
Scripted instances are pretty much the exact opposite of emergent game play that could happen while walking down the road in an open world.
Heaven forbid you have to walk for 30 mins and don't get instantly teleported. What if some people do want a game with slow travel because it makes where you go in the world matter more and adds to immersion? Can't you let us play that game?
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Sure there were times when I would be impatient and want to be there instantly, because that is human nature. Everyone wants to take the shortest route to get somewhere regardless if its good for us or not. I cannot simply say remove content because I find it boring now that I have experienced it because I live in a world with other people.
So you want fast travel in the game... fair enough a world can develop it and people have mounted creatures for thousands of years so why not in a fantasy world. If that's the case lets add horses to our game, but wait they require food, lodging, and upkeep. They can only be used for limited time because they become tired and now you have to lug around this horse with you everywhere and protect him. He simply doesn't vanish when you are attacked by a mountain giant. So mounts have perma death, require financial upkeep, burden the player with responsibility, and have limited use.
Something tells me this isn't what you want. you want a button to add pixels and move fast. Creating MMORPG's should be about creating worlds and not simply giving players what they want because its inconvient or boring. Those downtime's act as contrast for the uptimes and give weight to your decisions.
It is not about "forcing others to play "*my* way", it is about having like minded players in the same game. Sorry of you feel "forced" to play in a way you do not desire. With multiple player games, equality, equal footing, and a level playing field is very important. Are you one of those players that feel every game must cater him? Would a handful (for variety) of "EQ-esque" MMOs kill you?
You're in luck. Over 600 MMOs cater to your desires. Some of the rest of us? A mere handful, if that many.
- 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
Local economies might be the only thing that benefits from slow travel and mounts/vehicles are most often just money sinks since they have no function in combat (which is a shame).
And the possibility of interesting encounters while you travel is so small it is simply not worth it. Most people would choose convenience over this small chance of something happening.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Oh, we are playing the victim card now? OK.
Just remember that when you play it, you don't get to bully other players who don't share your preferences or bash their games.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
1. Automated transports.
2. You can't teleport to specific coordinates. You can't teleport in combat. So movement buffs are important still.
3. Because you walked everywhere once, so you know how big the world is. The first trip is exploration, which can be fun. Subsequent trips are just repetition. (Coincidentally this means that other EQ1 player's memorable newbie journey would still have happened in a game with well-designed fast travel.)
4. Emergent gameplay doesn't rely on travel. It can happen in any type of game system when players use tactics not specifically intended with the original design.
4b. Players could still ambush automated transports, which can provide the owner with the option of taking control of whatever guards he posted.
See how all of these gameplay elements can be replicated without forcing players into repetitive non-gameplay?
(Also "you're" is especially critical in the phrase, "You're wrong.")
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
DayZ sold over a million and it's entire game play mechanic is traveling around with the possibility of interesting encounters with other players. It might not be worth it to you but not everyone wants convenient instant travel.
Also you can't have an interesting encounter every 2 meters or it stops being interesting. Plus if your talking about running instances as convenience there is nothing less interesting to me than running the same dungeon over and over I would rather stand in one spot and camp mobs circa EQ 1999 and get me some Golden Efreeti Boots. It was pretty exciting to have the rare pop instead of the placeholder mob, way more exciting than a 15 min dungeon run where no one talks or even cares to.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/The biggest advantage of slow travel is immersion.
When I play modern MMOs, I always get this impression that I'm playing in a big sandbox or a big themepark where I just teleport everywhere to do the activity I want to do. I want to craft ? Hop, I can directly teleport to the crafting station of the capital. I want to start a dungeon ? Hop, I can directly teleport into it.
When it takes times to go to some place, it makes the world feel bigger. You are just a character in the big world, and not somekind of big god that goes from place to place to do some activities. This + local economy (and that's pretty much why ESO's marketplace system is flawed because of the fast-travel)
About OP, yes MMORPG have changed, unfortunately. There is probably a part of nostalgia when we remember the experiences of our old MMORPG, but nobody can deny that mechanics, publics and format of content has changed since WoW (not specifically because of WoW, but the trend started when WoW was released)
The solution to all this is easy. We play different games. One game has features that appeal to the old-school players (no instances, meaningful travel, possibly harsher death penalties) and the other game to the newer style games (quick ways to get into the action). I want Narseldon, or whatever his name is, and Axehilt to be happy and play a game they like.
We can agree to disagree on our gaming preferences. Thanks for the discussion, has been interesting.
That's akin to saying to settlers we have a train built, but you can still take the wagon across the country if you want. Some people are looking for a certain game experience that replicates a virtual world and the dangers you would face in it.
Diablo is no fun because it's randomized. It is a loot grind. There is no adventure or fun unless all you care about is getting more loot in a game. Perhaps that is the fun for you.
The Lord of the Rings is a great book and it describes the world in great detail. I don't recall anything about fast travel unless you were Gandalf the Wizard. All the adventures that were brought about came from traveling around the world. In the Hobbit there is actually a song/poem at the begging about going on an adventure instead of sitting at home in comfort.
In MMOs today you can't replicate the adventure of something like Lord of the Rings with instances to get to the best part. The problem is instances and running group content doesn't replicate the adventures at all. For that you would first need the travel and the dangers. Both of these key ingredients are missing. People only play for the loot grind or the PvP esports. They don't play for the original point of the game which is the adventure. Basically it's not possible to explore (create adventures exploring) because the world is not dangerous and the focus is entirely on loot and following a string of quests. That is not a good reason to play a game IMO. You can do what you want to though.
No problem buddy I'll get it right this time! You're wrong.
1. Just like you couldn't have players mail anything to anyone from anywhere. That doesn't remove that fact that you need slow travel to have local economies and you could actually balance automated transports with a cost and slow travel time but instant travel would break local economies instantly.
2. Guild Wars 2 prefect example. Sure your right you can still have in combat movement buffs, but what I said still applies in that the closer you get to instant travel the closer you get to nullifying transportation or the need for faster than walking travel in any form.
3. Great we have a one time use world where nobody ever uses the same road to get back and forth.
4. It does if the emergent game play I'm talking about happens when you travel.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Going back to our 1st MMO experiences, many of us took a look at the possibilities that awaited the future of this genre and the almost limitless potential that was opening up.
lol
In a game with mandatory slow-travel, I don't feel forced to slow-travel, I am forced to slow-travel.
Why would you ask if I want every game catered to me? The crux of my argument is that fast-travel appeals to everyone. And guess which players you're going to see out there slow-traveling in the fast-travel game? That's right: like-minded players.
Of course an EQ-like game wouldn't hurt me. But the reality is this is an expensive genre to create games for and catering to a vocal, tiny niche has proven not to be very successful. People are generally happier when they understand which of their expectations are unreasonable, and so that's why I'm here.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Of course. It is not like i need every game in the world cater to my preferences since I don't have time for all of them anyway.
But the fact remains that what you describe is not that slow travel is fun ... but the side effect of it (meeting a caravan ... having a local economy) and all of those can be created without slow travel .. so you get the benefit without the cost (of time).
Now if you say you really enjoy walking down a desert with the same scenary for 20 min ... then I would really have no objection.
I am all for slow travel. I'd prefer it over instant porting. However, It has to fit. There needs to be a reason for it other than to force me to slow down and become a walking simulator. Travel time is opportunity time. Encounters and such can be inserted there and can be used to make the experience more meaningful. But if it's just a boring walk to restrict my progress, I'll see through it and it won't impress me. Instant travel give the game a more "lobby" feel.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Yeh .. that is why i like it. Jump in and play. No fuzz, no inconvenient.