I really do not like how many new games are either "raid" focused or "solo" focused. Not many of the new ones are BALANCED.
I hate to bring up an old dog, but Asheron's Call has a very good mix of content. At any level there where quest to do that one could "solo" or needed a group. In some cases you needed to get a few groups. (although there was no "official" raiding in AC) L2 offers a similar environment, a wide open world. The weakness of L2 is the focus on "leveling" rather then a rich environment.
I really do not like how in WoW you can race to cap solo (doing some kill task on the way to speed it up even more) but then find yourself pinned into either "raiding" or "PvP" with no other real options other then farm for cash for more uber gear or re-roll. It gives the game a very scripted and artifial feel. Especially since nothing has an impact on the game world. (WoW has a very "gamey" "arcade" feel)
In the end, as long as there is balance and options for different play styles. Grouping has its place as does soloing. A strict focus on either / or is a recipe for failure.
Originally posted by Torak Sounds good to me. I really do not like how many new games are either "raid" focused or "solo" focused. Not many of the new ones are BALANCED. I hate to bring up an old dog, but Asheron's Call has a very good mix of content. At any level there where quest to do that one could "solo" or needed a group. In some cases you needed to get a few groups. (although there was no "official" raiding in AC) L2 offers a similar environment, a wide open world. The weakness of L2 is the focus on "leveling" rather then a rich environment. I really do not like how in WoW you can race to cap solo (doing some kill task on the way to speed it up even more) but then find yourself pinned into either "raiding" or "PvP" with no other real options other then farm for cash for more uber gear or re-roll. It gives the game a very scripted and artifial feel. Especially since nothing has an impact on the game world. (WoW has a very "gamey" "arcade" feel) In the end, as long as there is balance and options for different play styles. Grouping has its place as does soloing. A strict focus on either / or is a recipe for failure.
Im not sure where the quote is, but Sigil has already said they wanted to appeal to only one group of players, and that not enough MMO's are doing that. Most of them try to appeal to everyone and the game gets all screwed up. And i dont think its failure to focus on ONE group of players, I honestly think not enough MMO's foucus enough to one group. I give Sigil big props for taking a dive and creating a game they want
I don't know about them getting all messed up because of that.
If you look at the direction current games are going, the scope of play is narrowing. WoW has soloing, raiding and PvP all in nice neet little compartments. Not in a virtual world fashion.
D&DO, well look at its reception by MMORPGers. The scope of this game is sooo limited its hardly even an MMORPG in the traditional sense.
Game worlds like Asheron's Call or Lineage 2, SWG (at some point the game was sort of working I think) even DAoC are actual complete worlds with all aspects meshed into them. The newer games for the most part are not doing this.
I think the devs are getting to hung up on creating specific compartments of gameplay and not creating virual worlds.
IMHO playing 4 hours per day isn't really casual, most of the time thats what i usually play........playing 10 hours per week or less is casual in my opinion, and not really sure how vanguard would work out for you playing only an hour or two per day. but from what i can see they are addressing the casual content and making it a bit more casual friendly.
I can see why some casual gamers worry, but it will depend on a couple factors. 1st of all, if the process of grouping is slow, classes arent well balanced (meaning some will have more trouble getting groups to go xp), and the areas where to xp are far from usual rendez-vous points, then Vanguard will be a time sink and casual gamers will fall behind rapidly. It also depends on what kind casual gamer the person is. Some used to be hardcore ones and used to play a couple of mmos (not Wow cause wow is too easy and you dont learn much from it, even though its very fun), so they won't be affected too much if now, they can only casual-play (family, kids, jobs etc.), since, want it or not, the basic logic behind these games remain the same: grind, be skilled, understand the basics of xp groups etc. If someone knows all this well, he/she won't suffer much from playing less.... except if Vanguard reveals itself to be the biggest grind ever made. Also, once you reach end game, events are usualy planned beforehand and even if you're casual, you can work it out somehow by optimizing your life schedule.
I like what I hear on this thread... Especially the travel/exploration aspect. In fact, I dont think any game has strong exploration element, huge worlds perhaps, but not exploration per se, running around the land mass just looking at it doesnt really count as exploration.
The grouped aspect may worry me and other casuals and soloers, but it can be so easily overcompensated by other aspects of the game. I know it is tempting to go the "please everyone" way, but it may just work! Look at the WoW, a game that did just that, pleased a LOT more people then any mmorpg. But, as a true "first-born" of its sub-genre, its missing a lot of pieces, and no doubt each and every other game that follows in WoW footsteps will not be "perfect". But they will be better. I think if a game were to successfully combine Grouping, combat, tradeskills, exploration, skills, spells, classes, races, low/med/high end content, raiding, guilds, PvP, economy, player content... and other things, then there would be no other game on market but this one.. a "perfect" game.
So far MMORPG market is fairly specific, there arent realy many games on the market, and there are even less number of "unique" styles. There is the asian style - with lots of grinding, little content, but often great PvP(L2 is a great example) , theres the "hardcore" style, often uses a lot of grind too, lots of content in one aspect but very little in others (Horizons is great at tradeskills, but sux at questing and gameplay), and now several MMORPGs are begining to lean more into the 3rd style, casual one. I think DAOC was the first to begin leaning more over to the casual side. there are of course some games that dont fall under any of those (like Planetside), but those are very few in numbers.
With sucess of games like WoW, companies will realize where the true market is. After all, if all you make is luxury car, your sales will be.. rather limited. The need by masses will make some company rich, but it may alsobump down the enthusiasm of potential game developers becuase as they start pumping out "casual" MMOs, they will tend to be crappy, limited and will not last long. Just like what happend with all the DOT COM boom. Once that development frenzy ends, the market should stabilize and new quality games should pop up.
I only hope games like Vanguard, Conan and others in development will not be one of those cheap games that was made for quick profit *cough* Dark and Light *cough* and will become quality games that would fit alot of people, and not just the few select.
I hold high hopes for Vanguard and Conan, but after DnL, im leaning more on the caution side. I will watch and wait... impatiently.
PS: someone said that why would a casual player be pressured to follow hardcore players and worry about falling behind? Well, this game is about competition and accomplishments. If u do no leveling but play an explorer or just gamble your virtual money in a local bar, then you wont go far in this game, you wont be able to reach out and touch that content out there. And if u do fall far beind your friends, what would you do if u cant solo? you are limiting yourself to less and less content becuase suddenly none of the group content is available to you, because you cant find a group, and a lot of other content will not be available to you because u r too low level to solo it. Thats the whole point of MMORPG, to move forward, always. If you can move sideways, thats great, but you still have to move forward, even if very slowly. I think the offline experience would work great if properly tested and balanced. I could see myself making a fellowship with a friend of mine, whos a good grinder, and while he grinds exp for both of us, I craft armor, weapons, gamble, trade, steal and haggle for profit like the last ferengi. Its a great deal IMO.
Originally posted by Zippy Originally posted by GluexXxEater Everyone's toting this game as "hardcore", and for "serious gamers only". I don't play 10 hours a day, I play about 4. With a game like WoW that was never really a worry. There were always people who played about the same. I'm worried that if I don't play 6+ hours a day i will be too far behind to do anything. Thoughts on this?
I would not worry. Casual players that play only 30-50 hours in a week will most likely make up the majority of Vanguard players.
50 hours a week is "Causual"?! Playing 5 days a week, 10 hours a day is certainly NOT casual. Try 3-5 hours a day. Casual players tend to have things called "jobs' and "a life".
Comments
Sounds good to me.
I really do not like how many new games are either "raid" focused or "solo" focused. Not many of the new ones are BALANCED.
I hate to bring up an old dog, but Asheron's Call has a very good mix of content. At any level there where quest to do that one could "solo" or needed a group. In some cases you needed to get a few groups. (although there was no "official" raiding in AC) L2 offers a similar environment, a wide open world. The weakness of L2 is the focus on "leveling" rather then a rich environment.
I really do not like how in WoW you can race to cap solo (doing some kill task on the way to speed it up even more) but then find yourself pinned into either "raiding" or "PvP" with no other real options other then farm for cash for more uber gear or re-roll. It gives the game a very scripted and artifial feel. Especially since nothing has an impact on the game world. (WoW has a very "gamey" "arcade" feel)
In the end, as long as there is balance and options for different play styles. Grouping has its place as does soloing. A strict focus on either / or is a recipe for failure.
I don't know about them getting all messed up because of that.
If you look at the direction current games are going, the scope of play is narrowing. WoW has soloing, raiding and PvP all in nice neet little compartments. Not in a virtual world fashion.
D&DO, well look at its reception by MMORPGers. The scope of this game is sooo limited its hardly even an MMORPG in the traditional sense.
Game worlds like Asheron's Call or Lineage 2, SWG (at some point the game was sort of working I think) even DAoC are actual complete worlds with all aspects meshed into them. The newer games for the most part are not doing this.
I think the devs are getting to hung up on creating specific compartments of gameplay and not creating virual worlds.
IMHO playing 4 hours per day isn't really casual, most of the time thats what i usually play........playing 10 hours per week or less is casual in my opinion, and not really sure how vanguard would work out for you playing only an hour or two per day. but from what i can see they are addressing the casual content and making it a bit more casual friendly.
read this http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1044304#post1044304 then come back and talk to me about the vanguard/soe fiasco.....
The grouped aspect may worry me and other casuals and soloers, but it can be so easily overcompensated by other aspects of the game. I know it is tempting to go the "please everyone" way, but it may just work! Look at the WoW, a game that did just that, pleased a LOT more people then any mmorpg. But, as a true "first-born" of its sub-genre, its missing a lot of pieces, and no doubt each and every other game that follows in WoW footsteps will not be "perfect". But they will be better. I think if a game were to successfully combine Grouping, combat, tradeskills, exploration, skills, spells, classes, races, low/med/high end content, raiding, guilds, PvP, economy, player content... and other things, then there would be no other game on market but this one.. a "perfect" game.
So far MMORPG market is fairly specific, there arent realy many games on the market, and there are even less number of "unique" styles. There is the asian style - with lots of grinding, little content, but often great PvP(L2 is a great example) , theres the "hardcore" style, often uses a lot of grind too, lots of content in one aspect but very little in others (Horizons is great at tradeskills, but sux at questing and gameplay), and now several MMORPGs are begining to lean more into the 3rd style, casual one. I think DAOC was the first to begin leaning more over to the casual side. there are of course some games that dont fall under any of those (like Planetside), but those are very few in numbers.
With sucess of games like WoW, companies will realize where the true market is. After all, if all you make is luxury car, your sales will be.. rather limited. The need by masses will make some company rich, but it may alsobump down the enthusiasm of potential game developers becuase as they start pumping out "casual" MMOs, they will tend to be crappy, limited and will not last long. Just like what happend with all the DOT COM boom. Once that development frenzy ends, the market should stabilize and new quality games should pop up.
I only hope games like Vanguard, Conan and others in development will not be one of those cheap games that was made for quick profit *cough* Dark and Light *cough* and will become quality games that would fit alot of people, and not just the few select.
I hold high hopes for Vanguard and Conan, but after DnL, im leaning more on the caution side. I will watch and wait... impatiently.
PS: someone said that why would a casual player be pressured to follow hardcore players and worry about falling behind? Well, this game is about competition and accomplishments. If u do no leveling but play an explorer or just gamble your virtual money in a local bar, then you wont go far in this game, you wont be able to reach out and touch that content out there. And if u do fall far beind your friends, what would you do if u cant solo? you are limiting yourself to less and less content becuase suddenly none of the group content is available to you, because you cant find a group, and a lot of other content will not be available to you because u r too low level to solo it. Thats the whole point of MMORPG, to move forward, always. If you can move sideways, thats great, but you still have to move forward, even if very slowly.
I think the offline experience would work great if properly tested and balanced. I could see myself making a fellowship with a friend of mine, whos a good grinder, and while he grinds exp for both of us, I craft armor, weapons, gamble, trade, steal and haggle for profit like the last ferengi. Its a great deal IMO.
I am the type of player where I like to do everything and anything from time to time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor - pre-WW2 genocide.
I would not worry. Casual players that play only 30-50 hours in a week will most likely make up the majority of Vanguard players.
50 hours a week is "Causual"?! Playing 5 days a week, 10 hours a day is certainly NOT casual. Try 3-5 hours a day. Casual players tend to have things called "jobs' and "a life".