Make public the real names, addresses and phone numbers of all players, let gamers solve their own problems.
Didn't Blizzard try.. and fail miserably.. with that idea?
Yeah, they got their panties in a twist over "legal ramifications."
Sissies.
I thought it was because one of the Dev's behind the idea gave out their personal information to show how benign it really was.. and all shit went sideways for them, and Blizzard was like "Yah.. let's not do that"
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
UO was my first MMO....It had a horrible communtiy..>The players were exactly as he described.....THen I tried EQ in 99, and it was a very friendly and helpful community with lots of roleplaying. I guess it just dpended on the game.
I'm in the boat with those that agree with the "oracle", big surprise, I'm sure.
The problem is that "roleplayers" come in many different types. They are not a "one game fits all" group. Some prefer Sci-Fi over Fantasy, or some prefer modern day or apocalyptic settings. Others roleplay to varying degrees. Some even just want to sex chat. If there was a way to get ALL the roleplayers to agree on what singular MMORPG to play, it still probably wouldn't be enough to keep a game afloat. So in come the non-roleplayers to help MMORPGs to just survive.
Are there roleplayers in MMOs? Sure. But one needs to "kiss a lot of frogs" to find them. After awhile, one just gives up, tired of the warts received.
Where you find it now is in guilds, where it was from the beginning, but I still remember that feeling of losing a online fantasy world where most people did at least a little RP, it slipped through our hands. But guilds are the only reason I play MMOs now anyway, not just for the RP, the community too.
Rob Jellinghaus wrote in article <5on2vd$8oe$1...@shell2.ba.best.com>... >I have the following gloomy hunch that I'll toss out there to see what >people think. This is not a troll, so help me it's not; this is a >genuine speculation from my current funky mood. > >I think any really large online game will within a matter of months >become overrun with jerks and anti-social behavior. > >I think most of the gamers who have the most time to play are poorly >socialized kids with no lives, who really get off on being jerks, who >haven't got enough interest in real role-playing to want to bother, >and who will happily PK or cheat or harass people as long as it Look$ K00l. > >I think the dream of an online world filled with intelligent, interesting >people, all playing richly realized characters and all acting together >to create a lovely shared universe, is a crock. There just aren't enough >good roleplayers in the world to populate such an online space. And >even if there were, there are many, many, many more punks who talk like >Beavis and Butthead and who want only to exploit the game world as much >as possible. >
> *skip*
I skipped the rest of the post to save space.
I'll stab...
How much do you NEED the MMO to realize your dreams? Is it your world? Is RL too hard or you're not adjusted well, so the MMO is your escape? Just how important an MMO is to a person, to reach their fulfillment, is probably inversely proportional to the harassment and cheating--or otherwise disrespect to the virtual world.
I would think the social awkward people, or otherwise disabled or not adjusted well IRL, might also have the most time to play. Those with problems or disabilities might tend to rely on close friends or family for real life needs. The MMO would become something very importatn to them, since RL is inaccessible, and thus harassment and cheating and disrespect would be counter to their goals.
If you don't NEED MMO's for your fulfillment then it's your inclination to trash them and enjoy the fact there're no REAL consequences to your actions. So instead of MMO's being a place to create magical, meaningful moment, they're just a experimental cesspit to wreak havoc and mayhem. In this case then they're just a toy. They're not meaningful. It's cheap entertainment, and easy come--easy go.
I suspect as we become increasingly computerized as people, we'll increasingly resemble the former, not the latter. From one standpoint, it's a very scary prospect that we all might become embedded in the virtual worlds (aka. Thomas A. Anderson), and become increasingly distant from our real world, both due to expansive virtual worlds and augmented realities encroaching on every aspect of real life.
How much do you NEED the MMO to realize your dreams? Is it your world? Is RL too hard or you're not adjusted well, so the MMO is your escape? Just how important an MMO is to a person, to reach their fulfillment, is probably inversely proportional to the harassment and cheating--or otherwise disrespect to the virtual world.
I would think the social awkward people, or otherwise disabled or not adjusted well IRL, might also have the most time to play. Those with problems or disabilities might tend to rely on close friends or family for real life needs. The MMO would become something very importatn to them, since RL is inaccessible, and thus harassment and cheating and disrespect would be counter to their goals.
If you don't NEED MMO's for your fulfillment then it's your inclination to trash them and enjoy the fact there're no REAL consequences to your actions. So instead of MMO's being a place to create magical, meaningful moment, they're just a experimental cesspit to wreak havoc and mayhem. In this case then they're just a toy. They're not meaningful. It's cheap entertainment, and easy come--easy go.
I suspect as we become increasingly computerized as people, we'll increasingly resemble the former, not the latter. From one standpoint, it's a very scary prospect that we all might become embedded in the virtual worlds (aka. Thomas A. Anderson), and become increasingly distant from our real world, both due to expansive virtual worlds and augmented realities encroaching on every aspect of real life.
You have some fair points but I am not sure you understand
what people wanted out of their fantasy gaming world back then. There was a
sense of the new, of possibilities that could make for something like a gaming
nation, one that spanned the world. Also for those wanting a virtual world we
got one, through social media, it is just not the one we wanted.
In many ways the fantasy gaming world was meant to be just the same as a solo
rpg but massively bigger. That's why MMOs seemed to be headed that way. It was
going to be somewhere you could game, socialise and roleplay, with people from
all over the world. That's not how it panned out for many reasons from theme
parks and monetising of game play, to social media nabbing the social part.
I too have concerns about virtual worlds, William Gibson was talking about
them in the 1980's, quite some time before the Matrix came out. But notice the commonality
there, we are both talking about fiction. Many years have past since the 80's
and I have come to realise that basing your concerns about the future on the
ideas of science fiction authors is rather irrational. Not that I would discount
such concerns, but the political leanings of authors and a need for drama inform
their futurology. Did you know that in one survey done the other year a
significant number of people put zombies down as a major concern about what
disasters might befall humanity in the near future. I kid you not. I have no
issues with augmentation though, only people coming to think their virtual
world is more important than the real one.
I do think we need to watch what happens as virtual worlds are
developed. Look at the negative impact social media has had, it has hardly all
been positive. We have a track record as a species of bringing in new
technology and then going “Oh that’s not what we wanted”. It is rather too late
then.
How much do you NEED the MMO to realize your dreams? Is it your world? Is RL too hard or you're not adjusted well, so the MMO is your escape? Just how important an MMO is to a person, to reach their fulfillment, is probably inversely proportional to the harassment and cheating--or otherwise disrespect to the virtual world.
I would think the social awkward people, or otherwise disabled or not adjusted well IRL, might also have the most time to play. Those with problems or disabilities might tend to rely on close friends or family for real life needs. The MMO would become something very importatn to them, since RL is inaccessible, and thus harassment and cheating and disrespect would be counter to their goals.
If you don't NEED MMO's for your fulfillment then it's your inclination to trash them and enjoy the fact there're no REAL consequences to your actions. So instead of MMO's being a place to create magical, meaningful moment, they're just a experimental cesspit to wreak havoc and mayhem. In this case then they're just a toy. They're not meaningful. It's cheap entertainment, and easy come--easy go.
I suspect as we become increasingly computerized as people, we'll increasingly resemble the former, not the latter. From one standpoint, it's a very scary prospect that we all might become embedded in the virtual worlds (aka. Thomas A. Anderson), and become increasingly distant from our real world, both due to expansive virtual worlds and augmented realities encroaching on every aspect of real life.
You have some fair points but I am not sure you understand
what people wanted out of their fantasy gaming world back then. There was a
sense of the new, of possibilities that could make for something like a gaming
nation, one that spanned the world. Also for those wanting a virtual world we
got one, through social media, it is just not the one we wanted.
In many ways the fantasy gaming world was meant to be just the same as a solo
rpg but massively bigger. That's why MMOs seemed to be headed that way. It was
going to be somewhere you could game, socialise and roleplay, with people from
all over the world. That's not how it panned out for many reasons from theme
parks and monetising of game play, to social media nabbing the social part.
I too have concerns about virtual worlds, William Gibson was talking about
them in the 1980's, quite some time before the Matrix came out. But notice the commonality
there, we are both talking about fiction. Many years have past since the 80's
and I have come to realise that basing your concerns about the future on the
ideas of science fiction authors is rather irrational. Not that I would discount
such concerns, but the political leanings of authors and a need for drama inform
their futurology. Did you know that in one survey done the other year a
significant number of people put zombies down as a major concern about what
disasters might befall humanity in the near future. I kid you not. I have no
issues with augmentation though, only people coming to think their virtual
world is more important than the real one.
I do think we need to watch what happens as virtual worlds are
developed. Look at the negative impact social media has had, it has hardly all
been positive. We have a track record as a species of bringing in new
technology and then going “Oh that’s not what we wanted”. It is rather too late
then.
I just watched "Ready Player One" and I think, if there is a "Virtual World" it would be made more along that line, that we plug in and play at our desire and because we want to, because that world is better than what we currently have, as opposed to any kind of "Matrix" like system where we are permanently entombed in a digital world.
Equally so, it's already a thing where some players have built their entire economy in a virtual world, look at games like 'second life', where people have made quite a bit of money being buying and selling digital real estate.
So, eventually some games, more along the lines of Social Games, like "Second Life" for example, bridging the gap between real-world and digital-world, where people can and will work in a digital world for real-world money advantage, is not far fetched, so much so, that it might come down to the point that what happens in "Game" is in fact more important than what you have in the real world.
It is simply a matter of time before the lines get smudged. Given the growing base of people that play games these days, thanks to Phone Games, and how people are almost already living half their life in a virtual world.
It is only a matter of time before we bridge that gap even more with integrated technology. It really comes down to how well we can build the system. We are already well under way for remote operators, where people can do things across the globe with integrated technology, We have done remote surgery, remote combat, and a slew of other things.
Imagine, the next step will be people doing their entire professions in VR worlds. Where a highly skilled surgeon could log into a VR world, and through remote technology, do operations across the globe, anywhere they are needed. They enter on one end, with a VR device, and an Automated Remote Machine on the other end, functions as their hands in the real world.
We are already at this point where we have done surgery remotely like that, at this point, it's purely advancements in technology to integrate the operator.
Imagine, one day, we will be operating heavy machinery, like doing mining operations while sitting at home, in a VR Setup, but, with a combo of remote control and integrated technology, it's now a reality. Imagine doing Deep Sea exploration the same way.
Imagine doing rescue and emergency response remotely. Where a Highly Trained firefighter can control a remote host, and fight a fire or deal with an emergency situation, while experience the situation in a VR set up.
Imagine, having a VR meeting with a client where you talk about designing a logo and are able to crate the rough image right there with them, or being able to build program code inside a VR world, where you can see the actions of the code unfold as you make it.
Imagine teaching classes to students around the world, where professors can teach courses in their chosen field in a VR classroom, where the students are from any nation or country, and all integrated.
It might sound like "Sci-Fi" but the reality is, we are almost there..
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I just watched "Ready Player One" and I think, if there is a "Virtual World" it would be made more along that line, that we plug in and play at our desire and because we want to, because that world is better than what we currently have, as opposed to any kind of "Matrix" like system where we are permanently entombed in a digital world.
Equally so, it's already a thing where some players have built their entire economy in a virtual world, look at games like 'second life', where people have made quite a bit of money being buying and selling digital real estate.
So, eventually some games, more along the lines of Social Games, like "Second Life" for example, bridging the gap between real-world and digital-world, where people can and will work in a digital world for real-world money advantage, is not far fetched, so much so, that it might come down to the point that what happens in "Game" is in fact more important than what you have in the real world.
It is simply a matter of time before the lines get smudged. Given the growing base of people that play games these days, thanks to Phone Games, and how people are almost already living half their life in a virtual world.
It is only a matter of time before we bridge that gap even more with integrated technology. It really comes down to how well we can build the system. We are already well under way for remote operators, where people can do things across the globe with integrated technology, We have done remote surgery, remote combat, and a slew of other things.
Imagine, the next step will be people doing their entire professions in VR worlds. Where a highly skilled surgeon could log into a VR world, and through remote technology, do operations across the globe, anywhere they are needed. They enter on one end, with a VR device, and an Automated Remote Machine on the other end, functions as their hands in the real world.
We are already at this point where we have done surgery remotely like that, at this point, it's purely advancements in technology to integrate the operator.
Imagine, one day, we will be operating heavy machinery, like doing mining operations while sitting at home, in a VR Setup, but, with a combo of remote control and integrated technology, it's now a reality. Imagine doing Deep Sea exploration the same way.
Imagine doing rescue and emergency response remotely. Where a Highly Trained firefighter can control a remote host, and fight a fire or deal with an emergency situation, while experience the situation in a VR set up.
Imagine, having a VR meeting with a client where you talk about designing a logo and are able to crate the rough image right there with them, or being able to build program code inside a VR world, where you can see the actions of the code unfold as you make it.
Imagine teaching classes to students around the world, where professors can teach courses in their chosen field in a VR classroom, where the students are from any nation or country, and all integrated.
It might sound like "Sci-Fi" but the reality is, we are almost there..
Don't forget the streamers who are paid to game, you can't get much more blurred than that. I think this will be the greatest create change in living and working environment since the industrial revolution. People came in from the countryside to live in cites, from cottages to street housing, from fields to factories. Now we are going to make our own environment to live and work in, I think it will have even more of an effect on human psychology than becoming a society which predominantly lives in cities and works inside buildings.
People are asses online. Been getting called nigger since the first time I made a black character on UO. After playing FPS and realizing little kids would figure me and/or my friends were black by voice and started getting racial I just cut the mic. I am to old to go back and forth with kids. People can be anonymous and will do things cowardly.
I have always rolled with the punches or just ignored people because at the end of the day it is a game. One reason I prefer solo, friend or PVP only groups for combat. People will parse your numbers, blame you for their dumbness or go over board with your mistake. People will rush you or expect you to watch videos instead of exploring the game on your own.
One reason I liked SWG model of interdependency over forced grouped combat. The interactions are normally natural and because they are largely capitalistic usually more pleasant. PVP teams usually are way more respectful to each other than PvE. At least in MMORPG.
I just watched "Ready Player One" and I think, if there is a "Virtual World" it would be made more along that line, that we plug in and play at our desire and because we want to, because that world is better than what we currently have, as opposed to any kind of "Matrix" like system where we are permanently entombed in a digital world.
Equally so, it's already a thing where some players have built their entire economy in a virtual world, look at games like 'second life', where people have made quite a bit of money being buying and selling digital real estate.
So, eventually some games, more along the lines of Social Games, like "Second Life" for example, bridging the gap between real-world and digital-world, where people can and will work in a digital world for real-world money advantage, is not far fetched, so much so, that it might come down to the point that what happens in "Game" is in fact more important than what you have in the real world.
It is simply a matter of time before the lines get smudged. Given the growing base of people that play games these days, thanks to Phone Games, and how people are almost already living half their life in a virtual world.
It is only a matter of time before we bridge that gap even more with integrated technology. It really comes down to how well we can build the system. We are already well under way for remote operators, where people can do things across the globe with integrated technology, We have done remote surgery, remote combat, and a slew of other things.
Imagine, the next step will be people doing their entire professions in VR worlds. Where a highly skilled surgeon could log into a VR world, and through remote technology, do operations across the globe, anywhere they are needed. They enter on one end, with a VR device, and an Automated Remote Machine on the other end, functions as their hands in the real world.
We are already at this point where we have done surgery remotely like that, at this point, it's purely advancements in technology to integrate the operator.
Imagine, one day, we will be operating heavy machinery, like doing mining operations while sitting at home, in a VR Setup, but, with a combo of remote control and integrated technology, it's now a reality. Imagine doing Deep Sea exploration the same way.
Imagine doing rescue and emergency response remotely. Where a Highly Trained firefighter can control a remote host, and fight a fire or deal with an emergency situation, while experience the situation in a VR set up.
Imagine, having a VR meeting with a client where you talk about designing a logo and are able to crate the rough image right there with them, or being able to build program code inside a VR world, where you can see the actions of the code unfold as you make it.
Imagine teaching classes to students around the world, where professors can teach courses in their chosen field in a VR classroom, where the students are from any nation or country, and all integrated.
It might sound like "Sci-Fi" but the reality is, we are almost there..
Don't forget the streamers who are paid to game, you can't get much more blurred than that. I think this will be the greatest create change in living and working environment since the industrial revolution. People came in from the countryside to live in cites, from cottages to street housing, from fields to factories. Now we are going to make our own environment to live and work in, I think it will have even more of an effect on human psychology than becoming a society which predominantly lives in cities and works inside buildings.
Twitch, E-Sports, Streamers, absolutely blurring the line.
While I think Pro-Sports going digital will be the last thing to happen, given how much money is invested into pro-sports, so change is not going to happen fast, The rise of E-Sports is making Gaming a more legitimate "hobby", giving a sense of realness to it. Not just some geeks, but skilled gamers, no different in their own unique skill set than baseball players or golfers.
No doubt it will affect us, both on an individual level and a global level. We will learn that we are all humans, of the same species, ther divisions of nations, land borders, even barriers like language will go away with realtime 'in-game' translators, as we interact more and more in a digital world.
Like this vast and weird place, where we transcend the limitations and confines of our mortal world.... it could really lead to a bright, amazing future.
It could also turn us into zombie slaves.. but.. meh.. what's life without risk.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
He was correct in predicting the perception that would take hold in players like him (of which I'm one).
Just one a$$hat can ruin the day of hundreds of players in an MMO. Their effect is felt far and wide, way out of proportion to their number. They are in the minority, but they're so jarring that you forget all the other players going about their business.
You may play in 50 PUG's that are "normal", but you'll remember the 51st clearly, because it was so toxic...
"There can be 100 people in a game with you, and 99 of them could be 'good' gamers, but only 1 can ruin your fun. And that 1 was you." Paraphrasing...sorry.
I believe he was wrong. The “punks” are the minority. That’s been my experience.
Edit - I just reread... Dude sounds like an extremely intolerant person. He even admitted to being “arrogant swine” that just wants things his way...
Yeah, from his perspective and those like him, what he writes is true.
Most mmorpg gamers are not intolerant arrogant swine.. He is most certainly in the minority.
While I would agree that they are a minority, they are a loud, obnoxious minority. Most reasonably well adjusted people aren't going to put up with their antics because they know they are a minority.
I sure won't. I have better things to do with my life than tolerate people whose whole goal is to ruin other people's fun. Now, I'm not talking about game mechanics that are in the game like pk'ing per se. But when players take it too far, when they are abusive, when they "get off" of messing with people I can only think that other players will just leave because "problem solved."
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I believe he was wrong. The “punks” are the minority. That’s been my experience.
Edit - I just reread... Dude sounds like an extremely intolerant person. He even admitted to being “arrogant swine” that just wants things his way...
Yeah, from his perspective and those like him, what he writes is true.
Most mmorpg gamers are not intolerant arrogant swine.. He is most certainly in the minority.
While I would agree that they are a minority, they are a loud, obnoxious minority. Most reasonably well adjusted people aren't going to put up with their antics because they know they are a minority.
I sure won't. I have better things to do with my life than tolerate people whose whole goal is to ruin other people's fun. Now, I'm not talking about game mechanics that are in the game like pk'ing per se. But when players take it too far, when they are abusive, when they "get off" of messing with people I can only think that other players will just leave because "problem solved."
And in a sense of Irony, after these problem players drive off the "reasonable" players, they leave as well, because they can't stand each other either.
Now, some of the older games did escape this circle of death, to a point. Back 20 years ago, there were less overall gamers and less overall games, so they banded together, formed guilds, and hunted down and killed these kinds of players till they got the clue they were not welcome (often locally, IE: Server/Area) to protect their game.
More modern games have a far larger demographic, and thus less coherency for the reasonable players to purge these trolls from their game, since there are also a lot more trolls, walking away, is a far more available solution to many players, to find a game where these kinds of trolls can't thrive.
As such, in the modern game set up, a game company that builds an environment where these trolls can grow and thrive, is setting themselves up for swift failure.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
What many people don't realize is that he was right. He was taking for granted then that large online RPGs would have PvP and not restrict it. The game he was speaking of, UO, was the reason PvP is now restricted in all such games. The kind of MMORPG he was speaking of never made it beyond 1998 that I know of, however there were some with a good deal of freedom but no PvP, like Everquest. Dr Bartle has written much about this too, how MMORPGs do not propagate good genes. He is right. That is why I think the golden age of MMORPGs can be conveniently encapsulated in the 90s.
Many people would extend it to as late as World of Warcraft, fine, but I am a little more discerning. I have played Final Fantasy XI, Dark Age of Camelot, World of Warcraft, and Lineage II, in my thirties. They are... less than ideal. As someone said role-playing eventually slipped away from MMORPGs in the solo games, and these were, in my opinion, the ones. I never remember anyone role-playing in World of Warcraft out of the RP server.
The biggest problems are just that the games are so divorced from traditional RPGs that they don't even make sense, nothing is designed by traditional principles, &c. Now someone might say, well why did things go bad so fast after Everquest? Well remember MMORPGs were much smaller before Everquest, the world was a fraction of the size, now I'm not knocking Everquest or saying anything is wrong with it, only saying that that happens to be the last good MMORPG of a continual golden age. Unfortunately too it is the only one we can play today in a classic form with more than a few other players. However as the MMORPGs before it were often very similar to text MUDs, and text MUDs still exist, text MUDs still remain a very good complement to these few MMORPGs that remain.
As I remember Dark Age of Camelot and Shadowbane were not too bad, but these are both certainly massively multiplayer games, without hundreds and hundreds of players they do not function properly. This is another thing going for text MUDs... they are scaled for 10, 20, &c. players, which is the most players you are going to see on multiplayer games from the 90s, with a few exceptions. One of those exceptions, Project1999, has over a thousand players online as of today!
But in conclusion he was right, what remains of the visions of virtual worlds from the 90s are just a few graphical games here and there, with small populations, and a lot of text MUDs, but these vary in principles and style, from ones like World of Warcraft, to ones that would never have been attempted in an MMORPG. My memories of posts on RPGCodex in the early 2000s are that it was generally held that MMORPGs were like chat rooms. In fact I think in South Korea that was how Lineage 2 was played...a huge field of non aggressive wolves, an Internet cafe, and a lot of conversation. MMORPGs had become a place where you socialize while killing things, it doesn't matter what things, to some people this might seem like a fine distinction, but it's not to me. Everquest was (just barely) a traditional RPG, Final Fantasy XI sadly is not, there's no way to advance in the game without killing your Tutorial Creatures, it's the kind of juvenalia I'll pass on. Remember in the field of text MUDs there are games where there are repercussions for killing anything unless it attacks first. And where when you die once, that's it... so better think twice before attacking things. Oh and they will call their friends too.
With games like that, why would I ever play Final Fantasy XI? Everquest just barely scrapes by I think, but for those willing to stick it out, it can offer an experience that no MUD could, and that no MMORPG after it ever did. Oh and one last thing, while I'm on the subject of killing innocent wildlife, it's of strange coincidence that, in the Ultima Online beta test, it was the very fact that many players slaughtered and butchered every living thing in sight, deer, etc. for no reason at all, that led the creators to abandon their vision of a 'living ecology' for the game... sad but true... and by Final Fantasy XI on the other hand in 2001, this had become the only way to advance in or even play an MMORPG....to slaughter innocent wildlife.
Not that a level based system needs even remotely implicate this kind of depravity, but there was something to the skill based system of Ultima Online indeed. However for those who doubt Mr Jellinghaus, go track down a classic Ultima Online shard, the one I found, which I think is the main one, distributes with it hacks or scripts or bots or something of the kind. An interesting anomaly indeed, once the forefront of virtual worlds, it is now just a playground for a few cheating PKs.
On the other hand, on a text MUD where the ratio of GMs to players is about 1 to 10, well good luck cheating..
Pen and Pencil offered near unlimited creative freedom. MUDs allowed a little less. Graphical mmorogs, far less. As systems were built restriction also formed due to nothing but the median. Most of what you and I know as tradition rpg game play was lost.
I believe anything that adds creative freedom is great. PvP does just that. Just like the risk reward of killing “innocent” animals was a system that governed killing, those systems must be in place to deal with PvP.
Allow me as a the player to think, consider, then act in the most reasonable way of the role I’ve created. Don’t just tell me YOU CANT DO THAT.
Pen and Pencil offered near unlimited creative freedom. MUDs allowed a little less. Graphical mmorogs, far less. As systems were built restriction also formed due to nothing but the median. Most of what you and I know as tradition rpg game play was lost.
I believe anything that adds creative freedom is great. PvP does just that. Just like the risk reward of killing “innocent” animals was a system that governed killing, those systems must be in place to deal with PvP.
Allow me as a the player to think, consider, then act in the most reasonable way of the role I’ve created. Don’t just tell me YOU CANT DO THAT.
'You can't do that' is what multiplayer games are about, building a role is not a reason for any action. I decide in my role I can fly, if the game does not allow me to fly is the game saying "you can't do that"? Likewise players set up social systems of behaviour, they may not like swearing, whatever. It the "reasonable" in your post you see, what is reasonable is giving a nod to player society not just you role as a serial killer or whatever.
Pen and Pencil offered near unlimited creative freedom. MUDs allowed a little less. Graphical mmorogs, far less. As systems were built restriction also formed due to nothing but the median. Most of what you and I know as tradition rpg game play was lost.
I believe anything that adds creative freedom is great. PvP does just that. Just like the risk reward of killing “innocent” animals was a system that governed killing, those systems must be in place to deal with PvP.
Allow me as a the player to think, consider, then act in the most reasonable way of the role I’ve created. Don’t just tell me YOU CANT DO THAT.
'You can't do that' is what multiplayer games are about, building a role is not a reason for any action. I decide in my role I can fly, if the game does not allow me to fly is the game saying "you can't do that"? Likewise players set up social systems of behaviour, they may not like swearing, whatever. It the "reasonable" in your post you see, what is reasonable is giving a nod to player society not just you role as a serial killer or whatever.
Reasonable would be defined in terms of the game world, would it not? If I was playing TMNT pen and pencil I wouldn’t demand to play a halfling thief... that would be unreasonable.
I always play a chaotic neutral ROLE (as defined by traditional pen and paper rpgs) when allowed. For example I tend to defend/avenge the helpless. I’ve also been know to go on killing sprees if I got jumped by another guild and killed. I would kill ever person I saw from their guild or alliance while yelling in world chat “I will not lose”.
I killed and helped for a reason and took the risk that came with my reward of vengeance and/or fame. In Wushu I was respected feared and loved by all. I was able to define my own role in that game world.
I'm all for The OASIS, and really bummed no one has come up with it yet.... Can't control peeps, and I don't want to be controlled, so I guess I have to put up with ignoring/putting up with the bad to enjoy the good. I wish I didn't have to, but that's the way it is...
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I like the themes in this thread - from the original, where people that don't want to roleplay are awful and ruining games, to a couple posts down where people who are not interested in lore are the jerks ruining games, etc.
So, it seems everyone agrees that their opinions are the right opinions and the way they play is the one and only correct way to play and everyone who doesn't is a jerk ruining games.
I like the themes in this thread - from the original, where people that don't want to roleplay are awful and ruining games, to a couple posts down where people who are not interested in lore are the jerks ruining games, etc.
So, it seems everyone agrees that their opinions are the right opinions and the way they play is the one and only correct way to play and everyone who doesn't is a jerk ruining games.
Well, none of that really matters, does it? The whole point is that if the game allows players to act the part of jerks, there are always those who will. On top of that, you'll also have those who will look for kinks in the code to act like jerks.
And by "jerks", I'm not talking about opinion here. I mean "jerks" in the sense of players who delight in the ruin of other players' game. Internet sociopaths, who may not be sociopaths in real life because, you know, there's consequences.
Comments
You have some fair points but I am not sure you understand what people wanted out of their fantasy gaming world back then. There was a sense of the new, of possibilities that could make for something like a gaming nation, one that spanned the world. Also for those wanting a virtual world we got one, through social media, it is just not the one we wanted.
In many ways the fantasy gaming world was meant to be just the same as a solo rpg but massively bigger. That's why MMOs seemed to be headed that way. It was going to be somewhere you could game, socialise and roleplay, with people from all over the world. That's not how it panned out for many reasons from theme parks and monetising of game play, to social media nabbing the social part.
I too have concerns about virtual worlds, William Gibson was talking about them in the 1980's, quite some time before the Matrix came out. But notice the commonality there, we are both talking about fiction. Many years have past since the 80's and I have come to realise that basing your concerns about the future on the ideas of science fiction authors is rather irrational. Not that I would discount such concerns, but the political leanings of authors and a need for drama inform their futurology. Did you know that in one survey done the other year a significant number of people put zombies down as a major concern about what disasters might befall humanity in the near future. I kid you not. I have no issues with augmentation though, only people coming to think their virtual world is more important than the real one.
I do think we need to watch what happens as virtual worlds are developed. Look at the negative impact social media has had, it has hardly all been positive. We have a track record as a species of bringing in new technology and then going “Oh that’s not what we wanted”. It is rather too late then.
Equally so, it's already a thing where some players have built their entire economy in a virtual world, look at games like 'second life', where people have made quite a bit of money being buying and selling digital real estate.
So, eventually some games, more along the lines of Social Games, like "Second Life" for example, bridging the gap between real-world and digital-world, where people can and will work in a digital world for real-world money advantage, is not far fetched, so much so, that it might come down to the point that what happens in "Game" is in fact more important than what you have in the real world.
It is simply a matter of time before the lines get smudged. Given the growing base of people that play games these days, thanks to Phone Games, and how people are almost already living half their life in a virtual world.
It is only a matter of time before we bridge that gap even more with integrated technology. It really comes down to how well we can build the system. We are already well under way for remote operators, where people can do things across the globe with integrated technology, We have done remote surgery, remote combat, and a slew of other things.
Imagine, the next step will be people doing their entire professions in VR worlds. Where a highly skilled surgeon could log into a VR world, and through remote technology, do operations across the globe, anywhere they are needed. They enter on one end, with a VR device, and an Automated Remote Machine on the other end, functions as their hands in the real world.
We are already at this point where we have done surgery remotely like that, at this point, it's purely advancements in technology to integrate the operator.
Imagine, one day, we will be operating heavy machinery, like doing mining operations while sitting at home, in a VR Setup, but, with a combo of remote control and integrated technology, it's now a reality. Imagine doing Deep Sea exploration the same way.
Imagine doing rescue and emergency response remotely. Where a Highly Trained firefighter can control a remote host, and fight a fire or deal with an emergency situation, while experience the situation in a VR set up.
Imagine, having a VR meeting with a client where you talk about designing a logo and are able to crate the rough image right there with them, or being able to build program code inside a VR world, where you can see the actions of the code unfold as you make it.
Imagine teaching classes to students around the world, where professors can teach courses in their chosen field in a VR classroom, where the students are from any nation or country, and all integrated.
It might sound like "Sci-Fi" but the reality is, we are almost there..
Don't forget the streamers who are paid to game, you can't get much more blurred than that. I think this will be the greatest create change in living and working environment since the industrial revolution. People came in from the countryside to live in cites, from cottages to street housing, from fields to factories. Now we are going to make our own environment to live and work in, I think it will have even more of an effect on human psychology than becoming a society which predominantly lives in cities and works inside buildings.
I have always rolled with the punches or just ignored people because at the end of the day it is a game. One reason I prefer solo, friend or PVP only groups for combat. People will parse your numbers, blame you for their dumbness or go over board with your mistake. People will rush you or expect you to watch videos instead of exploring the game on your own.
One reason I liked SWG model of interdependency over forced grouped combat. The interactions are normally natural and because they are largely capitalistic usually more pleasant. PVP teams usually are way more respectful to each other than PvE. At least in MMORPG.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Aloha Mr Hand !
While I think Pro-Sports going digital will be the last thing to happen, given how much money is invested into pro-sports, so change is not going to happen fast, The rise of E-Sports is making Gaming a more legitimate "hobby", giving a sense of realness to it. Not just some geeks, but skilled gamers, no different in their own unique skill set than baseball players or golfers.
No doubt it will affect us, both on an individual level and a global level. We will learn that we are all humans, of the same species, ther divisions of nations, land borders, even barriers like language will go away with realtime 'in-game' translators, as we interact more and more in a digital world.
Like this vast and weird place, where we transcend the limitations and confines of our mortal world.... it could really lead to a bright, amazing future.
It could also turn us into zombie slaves.. but.. meh.. what's life without risk.
Just one a$$hat can ruin the day of hundreds of players in an MMO. Their effect is felt far and wide, way out of proportion to their number. They are in the minority, but they're so jarring that you forget all the other players going about their business.
You may play in 50 PUG's that are "normal", but you'll remember the 51st clearly, because it was so toxic...
Gut Out!
What, me worry?
I sure won't. I have better things to do with my life than tolerate people whose whole goal is to ruin other people's fun. Now, I'm not talking about game mechanics that are in the game like pk'ing per se. But when players take it too far, when they are abusive, when they "get off" of messing with people I can only think that other players will just leave because "problem solved."
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Now, some of the older games did escape this circle of death, to a point. Back 20 years ago, there were less overall gamers and less overall games, so they banded together, formed guilds, and hunted down and killed these kinds of players till they got the clue they were not welcome (often locally, IE: Server/Area) to protect their game.
More modern games have a far larger demographic, and thus less coherency for the reasonable players to purge these trolls from their game, since there are also a lot more trolls, walking away, is a far more available solution to many players, to find a game where these kinds of trolls can't thrive.
As such, in the modern game set up, a game company that builds an environment where these trolls can grow and thrive, is setting themselves up for swift failure.
Many people would extend it to as late as World of Warcraft, fine, but I am a little more discerning. I have played Final Fantasy XI, Dark Age of Camelot, World of Warcraft, and Lineage II, in my thirties. They are... less than ideal. As someone said role-playing eventually slipped away from MMORPGs in the solo games, and these were, in my opinion, the ones. I never remember anyone role-playing in World of Warcraft out of the RP server.
The biggest problems are just that the games are so divorced from traditional RPGs that they don't even make sense, nothing is designed by traditional principles, &c. Now someone might say, well why did things go bad so fast after Everquest? Well remember MMORPGs were much smaller before Everquest, the world was a fraction of the size, now I'm not knocking Everquest or saying anything is wrong with it, only saying that that happens to be the last good MMORPG of a continual golden age. Unfortunately too it is the only one we can play today in a classic form with more than a few other players. However as the MMORPGs before it were often very similar to text MUDs, and text MUDs still exist, text MUDs still remain a very good complement to these few MMORPGs that remain.
As I remember Dark Age of Camelot and Shadowbane were not too bad, but these are both certainly massively multiplayer games, without hundreds and hundreds of players they do not function properly. This is another thing going for text MUDs... they are scaled for 10, 20, &c. players, which is the most players you are going to see on multiplayer games from the 90s, with a few exceptions. One of those exceptions, Project1999, has over a thousand players online as of today!
But in conclusion he was right, what remains of the visions of virtual worlds from the 90s are just a few graphical games here and there, with small populations, and a lot of text MUDs, but these vary in principles and style, from ones like World of Warcraft, to ones that would never have been attempted in an MMORPG. My memories of posts on RPGCodex in the early 2000s are that it was generally held that MMORPGs were like chat rooms. In fact I think in South Korea that was how Lineage 2 was played...a huge field of non aggressive wolves, an Internet cafe, and a lot of conversation. MMORPGs had become a place where you socialize while killing things, it doesn't matter what things, to some people this might seem like a fine distinction, but it's not to me. Everquest was (just barely) a traditional RPG, Final Fantasy XI sadly is not, there's no way to advance in the game without killing your Tutorial Creatures, it's the kind of juvenalia I'll pass on. Remember in the field of text MUDs there are games where there are repercussions for killing anything unless it attacks first. And where when you die once, that's it... so better think twice before attacking things. Oh and they will call their friends too.
With games like that, why would I ever play Final Fantasy XI? Everquest just barely scrapes by I think, but for those willing to stick it out, it can offer an experience that no MUD could, and that no MMORPG after it ever did. Oh and one last thing, while I'm on the subject of killing innocent wildlife, it's of strange coincidence that, in the Ultima Online beta test, it was the very fact that many players slaughtered and butchered every living thing in sight, deer, etc. for no reason at all, that led the creators to abandon their vision of a 'living ecology' for the game... sad but true... and by Final Fantasy XI on the other hand in 2001, this had become the only way to advance in or even play an MMORPG....to slaughter innocent wildlife.
Not that a level based system needs even remotely implicate this kind of depravity, but there was something to the skill based system of Ultima Online indeed. However for those who doubt Mr Jellinghaus, go track down a classic Ultima Online shard, the one I found, which I think is the main one, distributes with it hacks or scripts or bots or something of the kind. An interesting anomaly indeed, once the forefront of virtual worlds, it is now just a playground for a few cheating PKs.
On the other hand, on a text MUD where the ratio of GMs to players is about 1 to 10, well good luck cheating..
I believe anything that adds creative freedom is great. PvP does just that. Just like the risk reward of killing “innocent” animals was a system that governed killing, those systems must be in place to deal with PvP.
Allow me as a the player to think, consider, then act in the most reasonable way of the role I’ve created. Don’t just tell me YOU CANT DO THAT.
I always play a chaotic neutral ROLE (as defined by traditional pen and paper rpgs) when allowed. For example I tend to defend/avenge the helpless. I’ve also been know to go on killing sprees if I got jumped by another guild and killed. I would kill ever person I saw from their guild or alliance while yelling in world chat “I will not lose”.
I killed and helped for a reason and took the risk that came with my reward of vengeance and/or fame. In Wushu I was respected feared and loved by all. I was able to define my own role in that game world.
Gut Out!
What, me worry?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
So, it seems everyone agrees that their opinions are the right opinions and the way they play is the one and only correct way to play and everyone who doesn't is a jerk ruining games.
The whole point is that if the game allows players to act the part of jerks, there are always those who will.
On top of that, you'll also have those who will look for kinks in the code to act like jerks.
And by "jerks", I'm not talking about opinion here. I mean "jerks" in the sense of players who delight in the ruin of other players' game. Internet sociopaths, who may not be sociopaths in real life because, you know, there's consequences.
Once upon a time....