Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

What ever happend to camping for xp?

1121315171820

Comments

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 5,428


    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Originally posted by djcincy
    Here is another thread of misconceptions and misinformation.A lot of people spouting off about how you can grind in any game and that's not really what the OP is talking about.  He's saying what happened to group content.  I'm not talking about queuing up to an instance with 1 big pull and no challenge.  Instance dungeons disconnect players from the world and provide an enviorment where 5 players play a solo game together.What you need is a game that is designed from the group up to be designed around group content.  Challenging mobs both in open world and in dungeons that make solo'ing extremely challenging for same level and above content.  These games were the foundation of what the MMO genre was built  and what the genre will eventually return to.Games like Skyforge make me absolutely wanna vomit.  I watch these games that have no soul and are all about  the sales pitch.  Thank god pantheon is actually being made.
    Anyone who's studied game design or even just ran informal polls about players' playing preferences understands that soloing is more popular than grouping.  It's what players choose.  So don't word your post in a way that implies you're fighting misconceptions, if you're spreading them by saying MMORPGs need to be group-centric.  They don't. If you want to fight against misconceptions and misinformation, the best way to do that is to learn more about the games you're discussing so you don't make posts like these anymore.
    This is the attitude that gets me... So, ONLY games that are popular should be made? There is ONE right way to make a game? I mean, why else create one, according to your wisdom?

    I agree with you that MMORPGs do not have to be group centric. This is very different from you saying NO MMORPG should be because it is not "popular." That is bullcrap and I think you know it.

    - 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


    (And now Burger King has MEATLESS burgers!)

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,543
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Fish change locations in real life too :)

    While true, I think I have yet to see a fish going from fresh water to salt water :) (Do some salmon do this?)

     

    The point being, when I fish in real life, I go to the place they are known to be, be it a lake (no migration here) or a river. Once I find a spot they are biting at (or not, depending on how I feel), I stay there. I do not move my "camp" to another lake or river.

    Is this some form or MMO "Department of Natural Resources" enforcement? lol

    Of course, this is quite different from camping mobs at one spot where no real life instances equate to this activity, but the idea is still there :)

    Actually I was thinking about fish in any any lake or stream.  Fish are often in one area in a lake, then when fished out or temperature changes or whatever will move to another area of the lake.

    Oh. Yes all salmon spawn in streams, travel to the ocean, then back to the streams. 

    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    This is the attitude that gets me... So, ONLY games that are popular should be made? There is ONE right way to make a game? I mean, why else create one, according to your wisdom?

    I agree with you that MMORPGs do not have to be group centric. This is very different from you saying NO MMORPG should be because it is not "popular." That is bullcrap and I think you know it.

    • djcincy: MMORPGs need to be designed from the ground up to be designed around group play.
    • Me: No, they don't.
    • You: Why are you saying only one type of MMORPG should be made?
    Notice the part where I never said that?

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Fish change locations in real life too :)

    While true, I think I have yet to see a fish going from fresh water to salt water :) (Do some salmon do this?)

     

    The point being, when I fish in real life, I go to the place they are known to be, be it a lake (no migration here) or a river. Once I find a spot they are biting at (or not, depending on how I feel), I stay there. I do not move my "camp" to another lake or river.

    Is this some form or MMO "Department of Natural Resources" enforcement? lol

    Of course, this is quite different from camping mobs at one spot where no real life instances equate to this activity, but the idea is still there :)

    TY.. I was starting to think my simple little analogy was too vague or misleading.. I'm glad that someone understand what I was saying..

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky


    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Originally posted by djcincy
    Here is another thread of misconceptions and misinformation.

     

    A lot of people spouting off about how you can grind in any game and that's not really what the OP is talking about.  He's saying what happened to group content.  I'm not talking about queuing up to an instance with 1 big pull and no challenge.  Instance dungeons disconnect players from the world and provide an enviorment where 5 players play a solo game together.

    What you need is a game that is designed from the group up to be designed around group content.  Challenging mobs both in open world and in dungeons that make solo'ing extremely challenging for same level and above content.  These games were the foundation of what the MMO genre was built  and what the genre will eventually return to.

    Games like Skyforge make me absolutely wanna vomit.  I watch these games that have no soul and are all about  the sales pitch.  Thank god pantheon is actually being made.


    Anyone who's studied game design or even just ran informal polls about players' playing preferences understands that soloing is more popular than grouping.  It's what players choose.  

    So don't word your post in a way that implies you're fighting misconceptions, if you're spreading them by saying MMORPGs need to be group-centric.  They don't. 

    If you want to fight against misconceptions and misinformation, the best way to do that is to learn more about the games you're discussing so you don't make posts like these anymore.


    This is the attitude that gets me... So, ONLY games that are popular should be made? There is ONE right way to make a game? I mean, why else create one, according to your wisdom?

     

    I agree with you that MMORPGs do not have to be group centric. This is very different from you saying NO MMORPG should be because it is not "popular." That is bullcrap and I think you know it.

    I've read many of his post and his position has always been "majority rules"..  Which it appears he loves endorsing because he is part of the mass market majority, but one day I'm sure things will change, and at that time he'll sing a new tune, like most..  I almost get the feeling that so many posters want 100% of the games on the market to be "their" game, with no consideration allowing the minority to have theirs..   Please tell me I'm wrong Axe.. When did you ever argue FOR the little man?

    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Fish change locations in real life too :)

    While true, I think I have yet to see a fish going from fresh water to salt water :) (Do some salmon do this?)

     

    The point being, when I fish in real life, I go to the place they are known to be, be it a lake (no migration here) or a river. Once I find a spot they are biting at (or not, depending on how I feel), I stay there. I do not move my "camp" to another lake or river.

    Is this some form or MMO "Department of Natural Resources" enforcement? lol

    Of course, this is quite different from camping mobs at one spot where no real life instances equate to this activity, but the idea is still there :)

    Actually I was thinking about fish in any any lake or stream.  Fish are often in one area in a lake, then when fished out or temperature changes or whatever will move to another area of the lake.

    Oh. Yes all salmon spawn in streams, travel to the ocean, then back to the streams. 

    But you miss one VITAL part..  You are taking the stance that my (target) has changed or moved.. Well, duh.. of course if the fish migrate to a new area of the lake or river I have to move with it, but if they don't.. I have NO REASON to move..  Now what you should be debating about then is that "camps" have to migrate to new areas of the zone maybe every so many hours.. Or the respawns of a certain area are reduced to discourage camping beyond 12 hours shifts.. LOL   Anyways, I hope you get the drift. But don't get me wrong, the camping still exist, it just has to move from time to time..  This sorta reminds me of EQ's day/night change in mobs in many zones.. So sad to see that mechanic be removed from the game.. But just another example just how lazy the devs have gotten in programming their zones..

     

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 5,428


    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky
    This is the attitude that gets me... So, ONLY games that are popular should be made? There is ONE right way to make a game? I mean, why else create one, according to your wisdom?

    I agree with you that MMORPGs do not have to be group centric. This is very different from you saying NO MMORPG should be because it is not "popular." That is bullcrap and I think you know it.


    • djcincy: MMORPGs need to be designed from the ground up to be designed around group play.
    • Me: No, they don't. You: Why are you saying only one type of MMORPG should be made?
    Notice the part where I never said that?
    I also noticed that you did NOT say what you just said you did. Not a simple "no they don't." You expounded quite nicely on those 3 words.

    You said, as you do in EVERY "old school game" thread, popular ONLY needs to be made.

    Do you disagree that an MMO built for group play needs to be built "from the ground up" around group play?

    Pertinent paragraph you "conveniently" cut out of your response:
    "What you need is a game that is designed from the group up to be designed around group content. Challenging mobs both in open world and in dungeons that make solo'ing extremely challenging for same level and above content. These games were the foundation of what the MMO genre was built and what the genre will eventually return to."

    Notice how djcincy did NOT say, imply, or anything like that "ALL MMOs NEED TO BE MADE FOR GROUPING." You, Axehilt, said that, not djcincy.

    - 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


    (And now Burger King has MEATLESS burgers!)

  • MaquiameMaquiame Member UncommonPosts: 1,073
    Originally posted by Tamanous
    Originally posted by fistorm

    What I miss the most in mmorpg's is the ability to sit for hours with three other people and camp xp mobs.   Where is the new games with this in it? 

     

    Is this a thing of the past and never to be found again?

    This is called hunting. For those clueless to it's appeal: it is something humans have been doing for tens of thousands of years. You also stand still doing fishing and then reveal you enjoy the peacefulness of it. Hunting is the same thing. You focus on one event that may take you days to accomplish. You may have a very few people with you and conversation fills the down times.

     

    This has massive appeal in mmos and always will. Old large mmos offered this because the scope of the world was so massive that rare and hidden areas existed. There was a shit ton of other activities to do for those not into such game play. Sure the actual mechanics of camping were sometimes faulty but that does not take away from the essence of the act.

     

    Humans are hunters and hunting is the act of the pursuit ... it is NOT the act of killing. That would be the kill, not the hunt. Mmos of recent years completely removed the hunt and left us only with mass slaughter. This is what some players miss. Old school mmos are a slower and more realistic world to play in. It offered better simulation for real world activities whereas newer mmos are more like arcade games that stepped outside of side scrolling to the extreme. It is a very different experience and this is what people are trying to convey.

     

    Old school mmos are like Canada ... a place where tons of Americans go to hunt because their country lacks the space and freedom to do so anymore. Mmo players simply want that freedom back. This is rather the fucking point of fantasy games: to return to more simple times where the thrill of the unknown still exists. The freedom to explore still exists. Many players today lack this allurement because they lack any form of it in real life awash in information granting illusion of actual understanding. This does not mean to debate old mechanics that can be updated. It is the understanding that styles of game play were wiped out because the of the constricted nature of the ever shrinking and linear based conversion of the mmo in modern times.

     

    It doesn't matter that you may not like to hunt of camp. An mmo should still be large enough to allow it for those that do. It doesn't matter that old mmos has a plethora of limitations and faults. Modern design can resolve these. The point is that this game play was not allowed to evolve and was thrown aside by large developers to be scraps for indie companies (until recently). Many of you are not debating the point the OP makes because you do not identify nor likely relate to what those games offered that no longer exists in nearly all of todays mmos: freedom.

    "Freedom" and this is what it is point blank period, these new school guys don't get it.

    image

    Any mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!

  • KabonKabon Member UncommonPosts: 76
    Originally posted by Maquiame
    Originally posted by Tamanous
    Originally posted by fistorm

    What I miss the most in mmorpg's is the ability to sit for hours with three other people and camp xp mobs.   Where is the new games with this in it? 

     

    Is this a thing of the past and never to be found again?

    This is called hunting. For those clueless to it's appeal: it is something humans have been doing for tens of thousands of years. You also stand still doing fishing and then reveal you enjoy the peacefulness of it. Hunting is the same thing. You focus on one event that may take you days to accomplish. You may have a very few people with you and conversation fills the down times.

     

    This has massive appeal in mmos and always will. Old large mmos offered this because the scope of the world was so massive that rare and hidden areas existed. There was a shit ton of other activities to do for those not into such game play. Sure the actual mechanics of camping were sometimes faulty but that does not take away from the essence of the act.

     

    Humans are hunters and hunting is the act of the pursuit ... it is NOT the act of killing. That would be the kill, not the hunt. Mmos of recent years completely removed the hunt and left us only with mass slaughter. This is what some players miss. Old school mmos are a slower and more realistic world to play in. It offered better simulation for real world activities whereas newer mmos are more like arcade games that stepped outside of side scrolling to the extreme. It is a very different experience and this is what people are trying to convey.

     

    Old school mmos are like Canada ... a place where tons of Americans go to hunt because their country lacks the space and freedom to do so anymore. Mmo players simply want that freedom back. This is rather the fucking point of fantasy games: to return to more simple times where the thrill of the unknown still exists. The freedom to explore still exists. Many players today lack this allurement because they lack any form of it in real life awash in information granting illusion of actual understanding. This does not mean to debate old mechanics that can be updated. It is the understanding that styles of game play were wiped out because the of the constricted nature of the ever shrinking and linear based conversion of the mmo in modern times.

     

    It doesn't matter that you may not like to hunt of camp. An mmo should still be large enough to allow it for those that do. It doesn't matter that old mmos has a plethora of limitations and faults. Modern design can resolve these. The point is that this game play was not allowed to evolve and was thrown aside by large developers to be scraps for indie companies (until recently). Many of you are not debating the point the OP makes because you do not identify nor likely relate to what those games offered that no longer exists in nearly all of todays mmos: freedom.

    "Freedom" and this is what it is point blank period, these new school guys don't get it.

    Freedom, Mystery, the Unknown, Feeling Special, being able to play like you want to and stay competitive. But i agree to the above

  • RobsolfRobsolf Member RarePosts: 4,596

    Whatever happened to camping for XP?

    The Milkman, the Paperboy, evening TV?

  • zekeofevzekeofev Member UncommonPosts: 240

    Camps were replaced by dungeons. Some dungeons you level in, some dungeons you get loot from. Camps were also true as sometimes a place was camped for a rare loot to drop instead of just xp.

     

    What I really miss though is downtime. Classes used to be balanced based on some classes having to wait between monster pulls. Even WoW was far more reliant on eating and drinking between fights. Now days base regen is so high that you just chain pull and are always fighting. This leaves a lot less time for talking to group members.

     

    Now days people just play looking for group public groups and do not talk. I might as well be playing with bots.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Robsolf

    Whatever happened to camping for XP?

    The Milkman, the Paperboy, evening TV?

    Saturday morning cartoons, even? 

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • TorikTorik Member UncommonPosts: 2,342
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Robsolf

    Whatever happened to camping for XP?

    The Milkman, the Paperboy, evening TV?

    Saturday morning cartoons, even? 

    Communism?

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    I've read many of his post and his position has always been "majority rules"..  Which it appears he loves endorsing because he is part of the mass market majority, but one day I'm sure things will change, and at that time he'll sing a new tune, like most..  I almost get the feeling that so many posters want 100% of the games on the market to be "their" game, with no consideration allowing the minority to have theirs..   Please tell me I'm wrong Axe.. When did you ever argue FOR the little man?  

    It's actually somewhat rare for me to argue any personal agenda or opinion.  Mostly I relate confirmable, objective observations of which types of game designs have performed well over the years.

    The times I come down hardest are when the minority insists 100% of the games on the market have to be their game, as someone did in this thread when they said MMORPGs needed to be group-centric.  But in that case as in most cases, I related confirmable, objective observational evidence that the biggest MMORPG ever wasn't group-centric and so obviously they don't need to be group-centric.

    But mostly I'm just relating to players what has and hasn't worked in the past.  History has a lot to teach us, but only if we open our eyes to actually observe the patterns and trends, including understanding the underlying patterns of how players are entertained by games, so that we know what currently-unrealized opportunities have merit.

    So I'm not really fighting for anyone, majority or otherwise, I'm simply relaying the realities of the industry.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Torik
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Robsolf

    Whatever happened to camping for XP?

    The Milkman, the Paperboy, evening TV?

    Saturday morning cartoons, even? 

    Communism?

    I didn't get that memo. 

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    I also noticed that you did NOT say what you just said you did. Not a simple "no they don't." You expounded quite nicely on those 3 words.

    You said, as you do in EVERY "old school game" thread, popular ONLY needs to be made.

    Do you disagree that an MMO built for group play needs to be built "from the ground up" around group play?

    Pertinent paragraph you "conveniently" cut out of your response:
    "What you need is a game that is designed from the group up to be designed around group content. Challenging mobs both in open world and in dungeons that make solo'ing extremely challenging for same level and above content. These games were the foundation of what the MMO genre was built and what the genre will eventually return to."

    Notice how djcincy did NOT say, imply, or anything like that "ALL MMOs NEED TO BE MADE FOR GROUPING." You, Axehilt, said that, not djcincy.

    "All" is your word, not mine.

    The notion that any MMORPG needs to be about grouping is what's wrong.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • fivorothfivoroth Member UncommonPosts: 3,916
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by fivoroth
     

    If only you would stop throwing the fast food bullshit in there that would be great. That analogy is complet wrong. Fast food is unhealthy, whereas those MMOs you are criticising are not. If anything your oldshool MMOs are the fast food as playing tons of hours a day is definitely unhealthy for you. I really don't miss having MMOs cater to no lifers who can play 5-6+ hours a day.

    TY for your opinion.. 

         Just to let you know, since obviously you never played EQ.. I played a half elf druid, and hardly ever payed that amount of hours..  I had no difficulty finding a group for an hour or two, or just solo kite mobs for 30 minutes..  And furthermore, you do realize that WoW has a ton of players that play for 4-6 hours a day..  SHIT.. I remember the day that raid lockouts reset and guilds would summon their primary raid team and start that raid grind shit all over again..  I did a few Kara runs back in my day, and that took hours..  And yes, games today I view as fast food content.. Quickly made, Quickly consumed and little to show for it..  But that is my opinion as well..  :)

    You are comparing levelling in EQ to raiding in wow. Raiding in EQ is even more hardcore than vanilla wow. I could level up in wow for 10 min and log off. Wow was way more accessible to people with limited playtime. Raiding after classic and tbc became a lot more accessible. 

    There were tons of casuals in wow not so much the case in EQ. Both games had no lifers but EQ made it quite difficult to play for less than 1-3 hours as you needed to get a group. And yeah there were tons of EQ people playing 10-12 hours a day. 

    Also play EQ for 2 hours a day and you will see barely any progress.

    Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.

  • ArazaleArazale Member Posts: 348
    It's funny how derailed this thread has become. I ended this thread days ago when i proved you can still camp for exp in todays mmorpgs. Be it in the open world areas in an area with dense enough mobs(granted not with a full group but with 1-3 people depending on the area) or simply running dungeons themselves, as they serve the exact same purpose that dungeons like Blackburrow or Unrest from EQ served.
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 5,428


    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky
    I also noticed that you did NOT say what you just said you did. Not a simple "no they don't." You expounded quite nicely on those 3 words.You said, as you do in EVERY "old school game" thread, popular ONLY needs to be made.Do you disagree that an MMO built for group play needs to be built "from the ground up" around group play?Pertinent paragraph you "conveniently" cut out of your response:
    "What you need is a game that is designed from the group up to be designed around group content. Challenging mobs both in open world and in dungeons that make solo'ing extremely challenging for same level and above content. These games were the foundation of what the MMO genre was built and what the genre will eventually return to."Notice how djcincy did NOT say, imply, or anything like that "ALL MMOs NEED TO BE MADE FOR GROUPING." You, Axehilt, said that, not djcincy.

    "All" is your word, not mine.The notion that any MMORPG needs to be about grouping is what's wrong.
    No, "all" is your word, just like your closing sentence. If an MMORPG centered around grouping does NOT "need" to be made, then by default, *you* believe that NO MMORPG needs to.

    According to you, "mild hot sauce" does not "need" to be made, for it sells less then "regular hot sauce", and maybe you do not like it. If enough players want a group oriented MMORPG, then there IS a "need" for it. Not according to you,. though.

    Are you seeing the fallacy of your "opinion" yet?

    Now, if you want to say instead, "A group oriented MMORPG will do poorly." I have no qualms. It may or not do poorly. Only if one ever gets made will we truly ever know. The rest is speculation, conjecture, and most importantly opinion, not fact, as you consistently try to state it.

    - 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


    (And now Burger King has MEATLESS burgers!)

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    No, "all" is your word, just like your closing sentence. If an MMORPG centered around grouping does NOT "need" to be made, then by default, *you* believe that NO MMORPG needs to.

    According to you, "mild hot sauce" does not "need" to be made, for it sells less then "regular hot sauce", and maybe you do not like it. If enough players want a group oriented MMORPG, then there IS a "need" for it. Not according to you,. though.

    Are you seeing the fallacy of your "opinion" yet?

    Now, if you want to say instead, "A group oriented MMORPG will do poorly." I have no qualms. It may or not do poorly. Only if one ever gets made will we truly ever know. The rest is speculation, conjecture, and most importantly opinion, not fact, as you consistently try to state it.

    Demand isn't need.

    Demand is want.

    You don't need mild hot sauce or Ferraris or sonic toothbrushes.  MMORPGs don't need to be designed group-centric.

    This isn't opinion.  This is what these words mean. Is hyperbole so commonplace nowadays that people don't bother to distinguish want vs. need?

     

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • BladestromBladestrom Member UncommonPosts: 5,001
    If mmorpg's are not designed to be group centric it's not a mmorpg it's a coorpg or a single player game. If you want an apple, don't buy an orange. People who WANT to play MMORPG WANT grouping be it pvp, pve instances, guild chat etc, I.e Massively multiplayer online role playing game.

    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

  • FdzzaiglFdzzaigl Member UncommonPosts: 2,433

    I've done this most recently in SW:TOR and RIFT. I'm sure there are other games out there that also still have it.

    So there you go.

    Sure, might not be the most effective way to level up, but there are other perks, like loot drops.

    Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,543
    Originally posted by Bladestrom
    If mmorpg's are not designed to be group centric it's not a mmorpg it's a coorpg or a single player game. If you want an apple, don't buy an orange. People who WANT to play MMORPG WANT grouping be it pvp, pve instances, guild chat etc, I.e Massively multiplayer online role playing game.

    Well I guess UO, SWG and most of the early mmorpg's games were not really mmorpg's since most of them had soloing as a legitimate and viable option. 

    MMORPG has by and large NEVER been designed around grouping, it was always just an option that you could do.  Yes there may be activities that required a group but in games by and large most of them were NEVER group centric.

    The few games that were group centric were the outliers.

    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,938
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    I've read many of his post and his position has always been "majority rules"..  Which it appears he loves endorsing because he is part of the mass market majority, but one day I'm sure things will change, and at that time he'll sing a new tune, like most..  I almost get the feeling that so many posters want 100% of the games on the market to be "their" game, with no consideration allowing the minority to have theirs..   Please tell me I'm wrong Axe.. When did you ever argue FOR the little man?  

    It's actually somewhat rare for me to argue any personal agenda or opinion.  Mostly I relate confirmable, objective observations of which types of game designs have performed well over the years.

    The times I come down hardest are when the minority insists 100% of the games on the market have to be their game, as someone did in this thread when they said MMORPGs needed to be group-centric.  But in that case as in most cases, I related confirmable, objective observational evidence that the biggest MMORPG ever wasn't group-centric and so obviously they don't need to be group-centric.

    But mostly I'm just relating to players what has and hasn't worked in the past.  History has a lot to teach us, but only if we open our eyes to actually observe the patterns and trends, including understanding the underlying patterns of how players are entertained by games, so that we know what currently-unrealized opportunities have merit.

    So I'm not really fighting for anyone, majority or otherwise, I'm simply relaying the realities of the industry.

     

    No, all of the minority want  100% of all games to be group centric.  People want a few games to be group centric at least to have a chance to play variety.  I see more people come along and tell people they're out of touch and every game needs to be WoW like.  Besides  WoW was very much group centric and still is end game.  And what you mean by group centric is more likely combat grouping which is only a branch of interdepency.  Because us UO/SWG lovers know you don't need forced group combat to have interdepency.

     

    History of MMORPG's is that an anomaly World of Warcraft shaped the design decisions of the genre for two cycles of  MMORPG devolopment.  The reality is majority of MMORPGs have held to the same 250-500k players that the top tier older games had.  And that's not even subs that's free to play players since many of those games held to old standards would have died.

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,516
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky
    I also noticed that you did NOT say what you just said you did. Not a simple "no they don't." You expounded quite nicely on those 3 words.

     

    You said, as you do in EVERY "old school game" thread, popular ONLY needs to be made.

    Do you disagree that an MMO built for group play needs to be built "from the ground up" around group play?

    Pertinent paragraph you "conveniently" cut out of your response:
    "What you need is a game that is designed from the group up to be designed around group content. Challenging mobs both in open world and in dungeons that make solo'ing extremely challenging for same level and above content. These games were the foundation of what the MMO genre was built and what the genre will eventually return to."

    Notice how djcincy did NOT say, imply, or anything like that "ALL MMOs NEED TO BE MADE FOR GROUPING." You, Axehilt, said that, not djcincy.


    "All" is your word, not mine.

     

    The notion that any MMORPG needs to be about grouping is what's wrong.


    No, "all" is your word, just like your closing sentence. If an MMORPG centered around grouping does NOT "need" to be made, then by default, *you* believe that NO MMORPG needs to.

     

    According to you, "mild hot sauce" does not "need" to be made, for it sells less then "regular hot sauce", and maybe you do not like it. If enough players want a group oriented MMORPG, then there IS a "need" for it. Not according to you,. though.

    Are you seeing the fallacy of your "opinion" yet?

    Now, if you want to say instead, "A group oriented MMORPG will do poorly." I have no qualms. It may or not do poorly. Only if one ever gets made will we truly ever know. The rest is speculation, conjecture, and most importantly opinion, not fact, as you consistently try to state it.

    I applaud you on your patience and willingness to continually educate those who need it.  I get tired after schooling them 2 or 3 times just for them to bring the same tired, defeated logic back in another thread almost verbatim.  I am afraid your words fall on deaf ears though.  Hopefully if there happens to be some young impressionable readers about, they will see the fallacies which you continue expose.


  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal 

    No, all of the minority want  100% of all games to be group centric.  People want a few games to be group centric at least to have a chance to play variety.  I see more people come along and tell people they're out of touch and every game needs to be WoW like.  Besides  WoW was very much group centric and still is end game.  And what you mean by group centric is more likely combat grouping which is only a branch of interdepency.  Because us UO/SWG lovers know you don't need forced group combat to have interdepency. 

    History of MMORPG's is that an anomaly World of Warcraft shaped the design decisions of the genre for two cycles of  MMORPG devolopment.  The reality is majority of MMORPGs have held to the same 250-500k players that the top tier older games had.  And that's not even subs that's free to play players since many of those games held to old standards would have died.

    It's completely fine to want group-centric games.  It's just wrong to claim they need to be group-centric.

    Personally I prefer (want) small-group instances.  But I'm not arguing personal preference in these forums.  I'm mostly just talking about the realities of the industry, and we know from many sources that players generally prefer solo games.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    No, "all" is your word, just like your closing sentence. If an MMORPG centered around grouping does NOT "need" to be made, then by default, *you* believe that NO MMORPG needs to.

    According to you, "mild hot sauce" does not "need" to be made, for it sells less then "regular hot sauce", and maybe you do not like it. If enough players want a group oriented MMORPG, then there IS a "need" for it. Not according to you,. though.

    Are you seeing the fallacy of your "opinion" yet?

    Now, if you want to say instead, "A group oriented MMORPG will do poorly." I have no qualms. It may or not do poorly. Only if one ever gets made will we truly ever know. The rest is speculation, conjecture, and most importantly opinion, not fact, as you consistently try to state it.

    Demand isn't need.

    Demand is want.

    You don't need mild hot sauce or Ferraris or sonic toothbrushes.  MMORPGs don't need to be designed group-centric.

    This isn't opinion.  This is what these words mean. Is hyperbole so commonplace nowadays that people don't bother to distinguish want vs. need?

     

    Axehilt, keep in mind that you're posting on a forum where some can't separate fact from opinion. With that in mind, confusion over or, worse, lack of acceptance of the difference between 'want and need' isn't surprising, especially when acknowledging it creates an uncomfortable dichotomy.

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

This discussion has been closed.