And here I thought this thread was going to be about DDO and convincing people to at least give it a 10-day free trial because it's so awesome I bet even Michael Bay plays it.
One of my PnP DMs plays "internet PnP" and apparently likes it. About the only thing missing doing it that way is sharing bags of Doritos.
MMOs and PnP clearly aren't the same thing. One is scripted, the other is scripted but can be changed on-the-fly. I've never played an MMO where the DM rolls his eyes while giving a 1% chance to summon Thor, and then rolls 1% and is forced to go with it.
The mention of DnD 4.0 "virtual" is amusing. Are they really touting virtual miniatures? Everyone already uses real miniatures and battle maps, so who cares. About the only thing missing with real miniatures is mood music, although one person last week did bring his Zune to play his character's theme music. But, alas, his battery was dead and never got that far.
LOL, I still have my original D&D brown cover 1973 Gary Gygax original books around somewhere.
I've still got my original Chainmail booklets stored away somewhere, I know where you're coming from. Unfortunately, it isn't so much that online gaming is more convenient, it's that the pencil & paper roleplaying industry has pretty well died and has hemoraghed massive numbers of players thanks to the coming of the MMO. If I could find a good group to sit around a table with every week, I'd be doing that, but alas, I've been unable to find one and there aren't even any gaming stores within 50 miles of me, now that the oldest existing game store around went out of business.
So for people who want to roleplay, that really only leaves online and the MMO marketplace has poorly served people who are really interested in intelligent, mature roleplaying. That's mostly because it takes actual work to produce a good setting and keeping it from going to hell like places like Second Life have done. It's much easier to produce a grind-fest PvP hell and they know that people will flock to it.
LOL, I still have my original D&D brown cover 1973 Gary Gygax original books around somewhere.
I've still got my original Chainmail booklets stored away somewhere, I know where you're coming from. Unfortunately, it isn't so much that online gaming is more convenient, it's that the pencil & paper roleplaying industry has pretty well died and has hemoraghed massive numbers of players thanks to the coming of the MMO. If I could find a good group to sit around a table with every week, I'd be doing that, but alas, I've been unable to find one and there aren't even any gaming stores within 50 miles of me, now that the oldest existing game store around went out of business.
So for people who want to roleplay, that really only leaves online and the MMO marketplace has poorly served people who are really interested in intelligent, mature roleplaying. That's mostly because it takes actual work to produce a good setting and keeping it from going to hell like places like Second Life have done. It's much easier to produce a grind-fest PvP hell and they know that people will flock to it.
I still have my pre-tsr guidon games version of chainmail!
Now how is the imagination of ONE person be superior to imagination of a large team? Granted you are asked to do repetitive things. That is purely because developers want to stretch their resources. However, if you just do each thing ONCE, a MMORPG has much more content than a whole year of D&D campaign.
Not really. With a good game, the GM sets up the situation and the players are free to do what they want and go where they want, even if they veer wildly off the plan the GM might have set up. Unfortunately, online games have adopted the Final Fantasy model where they have a story that's set in stone and the only way to avoid going along with the story is to turn the game off. There's no option for going left when you're supposed to go right, there's no option for not fighting the bad guys when you're supposed to, you're just dragged around by the nose through a story that you have no control over. That's not roleplaying, that's being pushed through a barely interactive book. You want to write a book? Cool, write the book and let me read it. I'm here to play a game though and I want actual control over my character. It's not like there haven't been some really good, very open-ended games, but that's not what we see in the MMO market and that's what really pisses a lot of people off.
Any traditional Pen and Paper RPGs like D&D, is and will always be superior to MMORPGS. Why? In a traditional RPG like D&D, your only limit is your imagination. In a computer game you are limited to budgets, what the programmers and designers have created for you, and what is technilogically available at the time.
Has GMing and storytelling in games become a lost art? In so many 'modern' games these days I do not feel the sense of wonderment or being transported and immersed into another living, breathing world like I once did. Not like I do with a good book, film, or a good GM/storyteller. To me, it seems as games have evolved and have technilogically advanced from bits to gigabytes, something got lost in the process. Game worlds these days seem to have forgotten about good stories and the art of transporting you to another place and time, and instead are more focused on how many FPS you will get, or how cool the graphics will look, or how awesome this weapon will be when I obliterate enemies with it. To me, its all meaningless with no substance behind it all, doing things for the sake of doing. It all gets dull and boring and drab after you've killed the 1,000,000th bad guy in the same generic shooter, rts, rpg you've played 100 times before.
There are some exceptions but they are very few and rare. The Legend of Zelda games always give me that sense of wonderment, on the other hand its a successful formula that has been mastered over time and it is nearly the same forumla in every Zelda game. Then there is Shadow of the Collusus, which is done masterfully as well. Even in a totally empty world where only godly voices and massive creatures reside, and your horse is your only friend I feel completely immerssed and transported to another world. The landscapes speak to you and the world itself is like a character in the game. You feel like you are in a living breathing world. I belive one of the biggest reasons Dragon Quest VIII is so successful is because of the beautiful story behind the game.
In every MMORPG I have played, in every single one, I feel they have missed the mark when it comes to this (SWG got close). And by far it is the most important part.
I tend to agree with the OP alot ,however it's not just the games fault ,the majority of blame goes to the players.You see the majority of players i see ,day in and day out,are ignoring the whole content of games anyhow.They all seem to be playing with the exact same goal in mind>>>how fast can i level,and man i want that cool weapon or armour piece.They couldn't care less about content or story line,so it's the players who have become very superficial and not the games.
I also agree with dragon quest and the Final Fantasy series of games based there's off of DQ.They actually have a more emersive feeling in there games.The story lines in final fantasy games are also second to none.
However ,i am not sure how you figure DnD is an emmersive game?IMO it isn't even close,and feels more like a generic 30x30 boxed map with some figurines in it.So although i agree with your thoughts DND does nothing to back them up.I guess maybe it may seem like it does if you have played alot of the junk that is out there.You did however mention DQ,i agree with that,.....ZELDA ?? hmm ,i think it's more of a case like the FFVII fanatics.There wasn't much in the way of gaming back then ,albeit ultima was pretty darn good,but really those old games had a feel to them because gaming was just coming into it's own,but by today's standards,there nothing at all because they just didn't have the engines/tools to give there games that feeling.Distorted pixels/minimal surroundings/poor animations/synthetic poor sounds and music,i mean there really was nothing back then to give a game the feeling of immersion.
I think that immersive sort of feeling is different in each of us ,i'll tell you why.You have to put aside your own basic thought's and realize how others think.You see i can fully understand and grasp how a good book is better than a movie to SOME,but for myself it just doesn't come even close.The same goes for a pen and paper game.I can again see how to some it might give a whole new feeling to the game,but once again,i don't get that feeling at all.So you just have to realize ,not everyone thinks the same.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
<blockquote><i>Originally posted by Cephus404</i> <p>Not really. With a good game, the GM sets up the situation and the players are free to do what they want and go where they want, even if they veer wildly off the plan the GM might have set up. </p></b></blockquote> <br>
But they're rarely free. I see people bash DDO all the time as if they see PnP through rose-colored glasses. A DM has to be very good to go in a complete 180 of what he intended for the day. And if the group is running RPGA-sanctioned campaigns, forget it, you run the module that's in front of you or you don't do the module.
I'm really surprised at how often DDO/MMOs get compared to "home rules" PnP games and not to RPGA-sanctioned PnP games/conventions. They are a different animal. ...especially the people who go on about "travel time." In PnP, there is as much or as little travel time as someone wants to roleplay, rarely more, rarely less. Exploring a great, big world while simply traveling around? Doesn't happen in PnP.
I agree with the OP but do also agree that it is difficult to compare the two. You would need a highly well programmed AI to be able to compare with human GM.
But I do believe that we have removed the RPG from the Genre. It is now a set recipe that they use as it has worked in other games and they need to make their money back. This is one thing that dissapoints me. They have dumbed down the games and made them so linear that you as a player have almost ZERO control. "Why can I not use a Bow if I am a Warrior?!?! "
I think the problem is lack of Sandbox games. I tend to play EvE more than any other not because it is the best game or has the best graphics but because of the sandbox aspect to the game. What people do can make an impact on the game and they have taken away the grinding for Levels by making skills based on Real Time (if you are logged in or not). I enjoy being able to do what ever I want and taking my character in which ever direction I chose and not having the game tell me what to do. Now if DnD would take the EvE Recipe and use it in a Forgotten Realms MMORPG then we are talking .
For me it is Sandbox all the way and changing the "levelling" of skills into money. Make death HURT, make characters that are well planned and well played more powerful, get rid of UBER characters, make people have to think about their play time and reward them for taking the game to another level. In other words make gaming more interactive, fun and make the players choices impact on the game even if it is only a tiny amount.
If they cannot do this at least give us a good story.
IMO, the middle-ground between MMOs and PnP games was the MUSH (Multi-User Shared Hallucination). I played on several of them, but mostly on a MUSH called AmberMUSH, which was based on the Amber series of books by the late Roger Zelazny.
A MUSH is/was a text-based game that used TELNET. It was an RP-driven environment, as opposed to a MUD which was largely combat-driven. AmberMUSH used the Amber Diceless Roleplaying System, which was created for PnP games but easily adapted to the MUSH.
In a MUSH, all actions must be typed out. If you want to cross the room, you type out that you are crossing the room. If you talk to someone, you type out what you say and how you say it. You pose your combat moves as well, and the role-play system guides (but doesn't determine) the outcome of any conflicts.
MUSHes were not really MMOs because even in their hayday, you rarely saw more than 100 people playing on any given MUSH at its peak hours, and even among those connected to the same MUSH, a MUSH had many, MANY rooms, which were seperate virtual areas your character could be in. However, MUSH RP was limited only by your imagination and ability to communicate via text. Just like an MMO, you could be playing with almost anyone from almost anywhere, and you wouldn't necessarily know anything about the Player, only the Character. This was very liberating in a way that PnP games are not, and led to much more wide-open forms of RP than you'll typically see in Face-to-face RP.
However, graphical MUDs like EQ killed MUSHes, and while there are some still left, I think they've become pretty stagnant and withered. It's too bad, but I think its day has come and gone.
There are a number of subtle differences between the two (mmorpgs and pnprpgs). As has been mentioned there is the human element. Now different mmo's I have played have had their fair share of events that were handled by people on the server end, with people playing different NPC's etc. However, these still fell short of the experiences in pnp gaming.
The most crucial and glaring difference between mmo's and pnp games is the persistence of the game world. In a PNP game, like Dungeons and Dragons, if we went through the Demonweb series of modules and killed Lloth at the end that was it. Lloth did not return in a few days. There was no farming of the Demonweb Pits for that uber epic drop etc. This has several causes. For one developers cheat their players in mmo's by not providing consistent and new content to be devoured. They rely on the replayability or the farming of instances to extend the game's shelf life ie, see wow. Secondly is the sheer number of users that are playing these games. On private shard mmo's such as UO-offline and others, the "GM's" are able to provide that content because they normally have 20-50 players inhabiting their game world. With that small of an audience it is possible to keep content coming at a more robust pace.
As far as I know Heroes Journey is attempting to marry the two. It will be interesting to see if they are successful in this endeavor.
iv never played pnp ddo, but i do play warhammer fantasy table top (dwarfs) and no warhmmer rts, rpg or mmo will beat tabletop, its just so flexible and you will never get that in a game
The most crucial and glaring difference between mmo's and pnp games is the persistence of the game world. In a PNP game, like Dungeons and Dragons, if we went through the Demonweb series of modules and killed Lloth at the end that was it. Lloth did not return in a few days. There was no farming of the Demonweb Pits for that uber epic drop etc. This has several causes. For one developers cheat their players in mmo's by not providing consistent and new content to be devoured. They rely on the replayability or the farming of instances to extend the game's shelf life ie, see wow. Secondly is the sheer number of users that are playing these games. On private shard mmo's such as UO-offline and others, the "GM's" are able to provide that content because they normally have 20-50 players inhabiting their game world. With that small of an audience it is possible to keep content coming at a more robust pace.
This is NOT true. A published module is played for lots and lots of people. At best, it is like an instance where your adventure does NOT overlap with the adventure of others. The same content is consumed again and again.
Of course in most MMO, you are allowed to go through that content AGAIN. And even that is not true for some quests on WOW. You can only go through them once. So in this perspective, there is NO difference between a PnP module that you buy and a MMO instance quest that you only go through once.
<p>Not really. With a good game, the GM sets up the situation and the players are free to do what they want and go where they want, even if they veer wildly off the plan the GM might have set up. </p></b></blockquote>
<br> But they're rarely free. I see people bash DDO all the time as if they see PnP through rose-colored glasses. A DM has to be very good to go in a complete 180 of what he intended for the day. And if the group is running RPGA-sanctioned campaigns, forget it, you run the module that's in front of you or you don't do the module. I'm really surprised at how often DDO/MMOs get compared to "home rules" PnP games and not to RPGA-sanctioned PnP games/conventions. They are a different animal. ...especially the people who go on about "travel time." In PnP, there is as much or as little travel time as someone wants to roleplay, rarely more, rarely less. Exploring a great, big world while simply traveling around? Doesn't happen in PnP.
I agree with much of what you say about RPGA events - they SUCK because they are too confining!
I disagree with your comment on Exploring - that was the most fun in the campaign that I played in, and has been the most fun for the players in my campaigns [You'll have to take my word for it, I don't know that any of them frequent any forums]. As a "Good DM", I let my characters do whatever they wanted to do...usually that meant letting them get themselves in so much trouble that'd they'd have to leave town one step ahead of the local authorities! I always did two things at the start of the campaign: 1. Give them a long range quest, usually by giving 1-2 players a "dream" or other omen, and 2. Give them many short range quests - the usual "stop these bandits", investigate those strange lights, protect this trade caravan, spy on that rival city, and collect these ingredients for a local alchemist. The players would decide which goals to pursue and which to ignore - sometimes they'd find links between them and sometimes they'd just randomly stumble onto new quests ["save the farmer's family", investigate that cave,...] They always had the freedom to do or avoid whatever they wanted. Unfortunately, no MMO can have this flexibility.
I agree with much of what you say about RPGA events - they SUCK because they are too confining!
I disagree with your comment on Exploring - that was the most fun in the campaign that I played in, and has been the most fun for the players in my campaigns [You'll have to take my word for it, I don't know that any of them frequent any forums]. As a "Good DM", I let my characters do whatever they wanted to do...usually that meant letting them get themselves in so much trouble that'd they'd have to leave town one step ahead of the local authorities! I always did two things at the start of the campaign: 1. Give them a long range quest, usually by giving 1-2 players a "dream" or other omen, and 2. Give them many short range quests - the usual "stop these bandits", investigate those strange lights, protect this trade caravan, spy on that rival city, and collect these ingredients for a local alchemist. The players would decide which goals to pursue and which to ignore - sometimes they'd find links between them and sometimes they'd just randomly stumble onto new quests ["save the farmer's family", investigate that cave,...] They always had the freedom to do or avoid whatever they wanted. Unfortunately, no MMO can have this flexibility.
Exactly. Freedom at the gaming table is essential, at least IMO, to a good gaming experience. It isn't that MMOs can't have that kind of flexibility, it's that they refuse to. They don't cater to a creative audience and therefore feel they have to spell everything out. Good roleplayers, even in the absence of a good GM, will just create their own situations spontaneously without having to have everything set up in advance.
Exactly. Freedom at the gaming table is essential, at least IMO, to a good gaming experience. It isn't that MMOs can't have that kind of flexibility, it's that they refuse to. They don't cater to a creative audience and therefore feel they have to spell everything out. Good roleplayers, even in the absence of a good GM, will just create their own situations spontaneously without having to have everything set up in advance.
Probably because most people just want some stress-free mindless entertainment. There are few who would want to exercise creativity when they get their entertainment. In fact, few people in the US even *read* for entertainment, which is a pretty relaxing activity in the first place.
You can't really blame the developers because the market is not there.
Probably because most people just want some stress-free mindless entertainment. There are few who would want to exercise creativity when they get their entertainment. In fact, few people in the US even *read* for entertainment, which is a pretty relaxing activity in the first place. You can't really blame the developers because the market is not there.
I don't agree with this completely but it was well said. The quote above does illistrate the problem. The Market is there, people do not only want / need mindless entertainment but saying that the people with the money (backing the develoment of games) know what works and know what their return will be. Stick to what works and we will make money.
It is going to take a brave company to break the mold and the norm..........they need to spend a LOT of money develop a great game as they see fit and release it. If it works then all of a sudden the games we see and play will be different. They will all start to look like the newer game. (hope that makes sense.....it made sense in my head)
We can see this trend in the Fansty Books that are being released recently. There is a glut of new talent that has "changed" the formula of Fantasy. There is now a lot more alternate History / fantasy. Jim Butcher is a good example of this.
Probably because most people just want some stress-free mindless entertainment. There are few who would want to exercise creativity when they get their entertainment. In fact, few people in the US even *read* for entertainment, which is a pretty relaxing activity in the first place. You can't really blame the developers because the market is not there.
I don't agree with this completely but it was well said. The quote above does illistrate the problem. The Market is there, people do not only want / need mindless entertainment but saying that the people with the money (backing the develoment of games) know what works and know what their return will be. Stick to what works and we will make money.
It is going to take a brave company to break the mold and the norm..........they need to spend a LOT of money develop a great game as they see fit and release it. If it works then all of a sudden the games we see and play will be different. They will all start to look like the newer game. (hope that makes sense.....it made sense in my head)
We can see this trend in the Fansty Books that are being released recently. There is a glut of new talent that has "changed" the formula of Fantasy. There is now a lot more alternate History / fantasy. Jim Butcher is a good example of this.
My 2cents anyway.
Let's expand the discussion a bit. There are two issues. First, people are not homogeneous. There are always those who are willing to do A LOT for their entertainment (Live Action RPG, Cosplay are two examples). However, they are always in the minority. Obviously a market can segment to serve both groups, with the caveat that the market for the people who are willing to do more is always small and always niche.
The second issue is whether you believe people's preference can change. Look at the success of Diablo. Is it successful because it DISCOVERED something people want? Or it is because it shows people a new way and change their minds? I believe it is more than formal than the latter. If it is the formal, then certain games, no matter how much resource you sink into it, will never be successful on a mass market basis.
The second issue is whether you believe people's preference can change. Look at the success of Diablo. Is it successful because it DISCOVERED something people want? Or it is because it shows people a new way and change their minds? I believe it is more than formal than the latter. If it is the formal, then certain games, no matter how much resource you sink into it, will never be successful on a mass market basis.
The problem is, once developers find something they think people want, they stop looking. There are many other people looking for many other things, but so long as developers have their current cash cow, they have no reason to go looking for the next big thing. They cater to the lowest common denominator while ignoring the people who are not willing to wallow in the mud.
But, to be honest, you can only PNP game so much... usually it's a 1 night a week deal where you get together with friends around the table over a few drinks and have an adventure. They tend to span weeks, if not months, just to finish a single adventure.
Now, that said, there are ways to 'speed things along' and lessen the time impact allowing folks to gather more often. For over a decade I went to 'the red dragon inn' on EFFNET IRC and got into tons of AD&D games. I eventually stopped going as fewer and fewer people went over time (as the MMO genre took over and those with less patience turned to the MMO genre) but even today I periodically hop over and see if anyone is in #AD&D or not.
At any rate, the means to play AD&D online have been around for decades now. I started playing D&D over IRC in the early '90's. I actually found that I enjoyed it MORE than playing face to face because it was easier to stay in character via the anonymity of the internet. To this day if I can find a game in #AD&D I enjoy it more than MMORPG's if a good DM is running the adventure.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
The second issue is whether you believe people's preference can change. Look at the success of Diablo. Is it successful because it DISCOVERED something people want? Or it is because it shows people a new way and change their minds? I believe it is more than formal than the latter. If it is the formal, then certain games, no matter how much resource you sink into it, will never be successful on a mass market basis.
The problem is, once developers find something they think people want, they stop looking. There are many other people looking for many other things, but so long as developers have their current cash cow, they have no reason to go looking for the next big thing. They cater to the lowest common denominator while ignoring the people who are not willing to wallow in the mud.
This is also true and commonly referred to as the "optimal search problem" in the literature. There is nothing wrong catering to the lowest common denominator. By definition, it creates the largest customer pool, which is what a business is looking for.
If you want something else, look in the niche market or create it yourself. It is just a fact that you won't find niche content from big business. They can't afford to loss their economy of scale.
Unfortunately, they don't know that they're getting the largest audience available because no one is looking at anything but the current business model. There are dozens of MMOs all fighting for the same customer base and no one is out looking for a different model to tap into. There very well may be millions more customers just waiting for a different type of online game but if there are no maverick companies out looking for that kind of system, those millions will go untapped.
That's the problem with going for the lowest common denominator, you tend to miss opportunities because you stop looking for them.
Unfortunately, they don't know that they're getting the largest audience available because no one is looking at anything but the current business model. There are dozens of MMOs all fighting for the same customer base and no one is out looking for a different model to tap into. There very well may be millions more customers just waiting for a different type of online game but if there are no maverick companies out looking for that kind of system, those millions will go untapped. That's the problem with going for the lowest common denominator, you tend to miss opportunities because you stop looking for them.
True. And in business, often the goal is NOT to maximize profit, but to hit a certain target for sure instead. In this model, catering to the KNOWN masses is a good strategy.
When I get a real firebreathing dragon walking across my table killing little people i put there for the slaughter then I will agree D&D is better than any mmorpg.
Comments
And here I thought this thread was going to be about DDO and convincing people to at least give it a 10-day free trial because it's so awesome I bet even Michael Bay plays it.
One of my PnP DMs plays "internet PnP" and apparently likes it. About the only thing missing doing it that way is sharing bags of Doritos.
MMOs and PnP clearly aren't the same thing. One is scripted, the other is scripted but can be changed on-the-fly. I've never played an MMO where the DM rolls his eyes while giving a 1% chance to summon Thor, and then rolls 1% and is forced to go with it.
The mention of DnD 4.0 "virtual" is amusing. Are they really touting virtual miniatures? Everyone already uses real miniatures and battle maps, so who cares. About the only thing missing with real miniatures is mood music, although one person last week did bring his Zune to play his character's theme music. But, alas, his battery was dead and never got that far.
So for people who want to roleplay, that really only leaves online and the MMO marketplace has poorly served people who are really interested in intelligent, mature roleplaying. That's mostly because it takes actual work to produce a good setting and keeping it from going to hell like places like Second Life have done. It's much easier to produce a grind-fest PvP hell and they know that people will flock to it.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
So for people who want to roleplay, that really only leaves online and the MMO marketplace has poorly served people who are really interested in intelligent, mature roleplaying. That's mostly because it takes actual work to produce a good setting and keeping it from going to hell like places like Second Life have done. It's much easier to produce a grind-fest PvP hell and they know that people will flock to it.
I still have my pre-tsr guidon games version of chainmail!
Not really. With a good game, the GM sets up the situation and the players are free to do what they want and go where they want, even if they veer wildly off the plan the GM might have set up. Unfortunately, online games have adopted the Final Fantasy model where they have a story that's set in stone and the only way to avoid going along with the story is to turn the game off. There's no option for going left when you're supposed to go right, there's no option for not fighting the bad guys when you're supposed to, you're just dragged around by the nose through a story that you have no control over. That's not roleplaying, that's being pushed through a barely interactive book. You want to write a book? Cool, write the book and let me read it. I'm here to play a game though and I want actual control over my character. It's not like there haven't been some really good, very open-ended games, but that's not what we see in the MMO market and that's what really pisses a lot of people off.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I also agree with dragon quest and the Final Fantasy series of games based there's off of DQ.They actually have a more emersive feeling in there games.The story lines in final fantasy games are also second to none.
However ,i am not sure how you figure DnD is an emmersive game?IMO it isn't even close,and feels more like a generic 30x30 boxed map with some figurines in it.So although i agree with your thoughts DND does nothing to back them up.I guess maybe it may seem like it does if you have played alot of the junk that is out there.You did however mention DQ,i agree with that,.....ZELDA ?? hmm ,i think it's more of a case like the FFVII fanatics.There wasn't much in the way of gaming back then ,albeit ultima was pretty darn good,but really those old games had a feel to them because gaming was just coming into it's own,but by today's standards,there nothing at all because they just didn't have the engines/tools to give there games that feeling.Distorted pixels/minimal surroundings/poor animations/synthetic poor sounds and music,i mean there really was nothing back then to give a game the feeling of immersion.
I think that immersive sort of feeling is different in each of us ,i'll tell you why.You have to put aside your own basic thought's and realize how others think.You see i can fully understand and grasp how a good book is better than a movie to SOME,but for myself it just doesn't come even close.The same goes for a pen and paper game.I can again see how to some it might give a whole new feeling to the game,but once again,i don't get that feeling at all.So you just have to realize ,not everyone thinks the same.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I thought this was a joke
<blockquote><i>Originally posted by Cephus404</i>
<p>Not really. With a good game, the GM sets up the situation and the players are free to do what they want and go where they want, even if they veer wildly off the plan the GM might have set up. </p></b></blockquote>
<br>
But they're rarely free. I see people bash DDO all the time as if they see PnP through rose-colored glasses. A DM has to be very good to go in a complete 180 of what he intended for the day. And if the group is running RPGA-sanctioned campaigns, forget it, you run the module that's in front of you or you don't do the module.
I'm really surprised at how often DDO/MMOs get compared to "home rules" PnP games and not to RPGA-sanctioned PnP games/conventions. They are a different animal. ...especially the people who go on about "travel time." In PnP, there is as much or as little travel time as someone wants to roleplay, rarely more, rarely less. Exploring a great, big world while simply traveling around? Doesn't happen in PnP.
I agree with the OP but do also agree that it is difficult to compare the two. You would need a highly well programmed AI to be able to compare with human GM.
But I do believe that we have removed the RPG from the Genre. It is now a set recipe that they use as it has worked in other games and they need to make their money back. This is one thing that dissapoints me. They have dumbed down the games and made them so linear that you as a player have almost ZERO control. "Why can I not use a Bow if I am a Warrior?!?! "
I think the problem is lack of Sandbox games. I tend to play EvE more than any other not because it is the best game or has the best graphics but because of the sandbox aspect to the game. What people do can make an impact on the game and they have taken away the grinding for Levels by making skills based on Real Time (if you are logged in or not). I enjoy being able to do what ever I want and taking my character in which ever direction I chose and not having the game tell me what to do. Now if DnD would take the EvE Recipe and use it in a Forgotten Realms MMORPG then we are talking
.
For me it is Sandbox all the way and changing the "levelling" of skills into money. Make death HURT, make characters that are well planned and well played more powerful, get rid of UBER characters, make people have to think about their play time and reward them for taking the game to another level. In other words make gaming more interactive, fun and make the players choices impact on the game even if it is only a tiny amount.
If they cannot do this at least give us a good story.
IMO, the middle-ground between MMOs and PnP games was the MUSH (Multi-User Shared Hallucination). I played on several of them, but mostly on a MUSH called AmberMUSH, which was based on the Amber series of books by the late Roger Zelazny.
A MUSH is/was a text-based game that used TELNET. It was an RP-driven environment, as opposed to a MUD which was largely combat-driven. AmberMUSH used the Amber Diceless Roleplaying System, which was created for PnP games but easily adapted to the MUSH.
In a MUSH, all actions must be typed out. If you want to cross the room, you type out that you are crossing the room. If you talk to someone, you type out what you say and how you say it. You pose your combat moves as well, and the role-play system guides (but doesn't determine) the outcome of any conflicts.
MUSHes were not really MMOs because even in their hayday, you rarely saw more than 100 people playing on any given MUSH at its peak hours, and even among those connected to the same MUSH, a MUSH had many, MANY rooms, which were seperate virtual areas your character could be in. However, MUSH RP was limited only by your imagination and ability to communicate via text. Just like an MMO, you could be playing with almost anyone from almost anywhere, and you wouldn't necessarily know anything about the Player, only the Character. This was very liberating in a way that PnP games are not, and led to much more wide-open forms of RP than you'll typically see in Face-to-face RP.
However, graphical MUDs like EQ killed MUSHes, and while there are some still left, I think they've become pretty stagnant and withered. It's too bad, but I think its day has come and gone.
There are a number of subtle differences between the two (mmorpgs and pnprpgs). As has been mentioned there is the human element. Now different mmo's I have played have had their fair share of events that were handled by people on the server end, with people playing different NPC's etc. However, these still fell short of the experiences in pnp gaming.
The most crucial and glaring difference between mmo's and pnp games is the persistence of the game world. In a PNP game, like Dungeons and Dragons, if we went through the Demonweb series of modules and killed Lloth at the end that was it. Lloth did not return in a few days. There was no farming of the Demonweb Pits for that uber epic drop etc. This has several causes. For one developers cheat their players in mmo's by not providing consistent and new content to be devoured. They rely on the replayability or the farming of instances to extend the game's shelf life ie, see wow. Secondly is the sheer number of users that are playing these games. On private shard mmo's such as UO-offline and others, the "GM's" are able to provide that content because they normally have 20-50 players inhabiting their game world. With that small of an audience it is possible to keep content coming at a more robust pace.
As far as I know Heroes Journey is attempting to marry the two. It will be interesting to see if they are successful in this endeavor.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
iv never played pnp ddo, but i do play warhammer fantasy table top (dwarfs) and no warhmmer rts, rpg or mmo will beat tabletop, its just so flexible and you will never get that in a game
Of course in most MMO, you are allowed to go through that content AGAIN. And even that is not true for some quests on WOW. You can only go through them once. So in this perspective, there is NO difference between a PnP module that you buy and a MMO instance quest that you only go through once.
I disagree with your comment on Exploring - that was the most fun in the campaign that I played in, and has been the most fun for the players in my campaigns [You'll have to take my word for it, I don't know that any of them frequent any forums]. As a "Good DM", I let my characters do whatever they wanted to do...usually that meant letting them get themselves in so much trouble that'd they'd have to leave town one step ahead of the local authorities! I always did two things at the start of the campaign: 1. Give them a long range quest, usually by giving 1-2 players a "dream" or other omen, and 2. Give them many short range quests - the usual "stop these bandits", investigate those strange lights, protect this trade caravan, spy on that rival city, and collect these ingredients for a local alchemist. The players would decide which goals to pursue and which to ignore - sometimes they'd find links between them and sometimes they'd just randomly stumble onto new quests ["save the farmer's family", investigate that cave,...] They always had the freedom to do or avoid whatever they wanted. Unfortunately, no MMO can have this flexibility.
<p align=center><a target=_blank href=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm><img border=0 src=http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/20.jpg></a></p>;
Exactly. Freedom at the gaming table is essential, at least IMO, to a good gaming experience. It isn't that MMOs can't have that kind of flexibility, it's that they refuse to. They don't cater to a creative audience and therefore feel they have to spell everything out. Good roleplayers, even in the absence of a good GM, will just create their own situations spontaneously without having to have everything set up in advance.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Probably because most people just want some stress-free mindless entertainment. There are few who would want to exercise creativity when they get their entertainment. In fact, few people in the US even *read* for entertainment, which is a pretty relaxing activity in the first place.
You can't really blame the developers because the market is not there.
It is going to take a brave company to break the mold and the norm..........they need to spend a LOT of money develop a great game as they see fit and release it. If it works then all of a sudden the games we see and play will be different. They will all start to look like the newer game. (hope that makes sense.....it made sense in my head)
We can see this trend in the Fansty Books that are being released recently. There is a glut of new talent that has "changed" the formula of Fantasy. There is now a lot more alternate History / fantasy. Jim Butcher is a good example of this.
My 2cents anyway.
This topic was started one day before Gary Gygax passed away. Holy cr*p, is that creepy.
It is going to take a brave company to break the mold and the norm..........they need to spend a LOT of money develop a great game as they see fit and release it. If it works then all of a sudden the games we see and play will be different. They will all start to look like the newer game. (hope that makes sense.....it made sense in my head)
We can see this trend in the Fansty Books that are being released recently. There is a glut of new talent that has "changed" the formula of Fantasy. There is now a lot more alternate History / fantasy. Jim Butcher is a good example of this.
My 2cents anyway.
Let's expand the discussion a bit. There are two issues. First, people are not homogeneous. There are always those who are willing to do A LOT for their entertainment (Live Action RPG, Cosplay are two examples). However, they are always in the minority. Obviously a market can segment to serve both groups, with the caveat that the market for the people who are willing to do more is always small and always niche.
The second issue is whether you believe people's preference can change. Look at the success of Diablo. Is it successful because it DISCOVERED something people want? Or it is because it shows people a new way and change their minds? I believe it is more than formal than the latter. If it is the formal, then certain games, no matter how much resource you sink into it, will never be successful on a mass market basis.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
OP has a great point.
But, to be honest, you can only PNP game so much... usually it's a 1 night a week deal where you get together with friends around the table over a few drinks and have an adventure. They tend to span weeks, if not months, just to finish a single adventure.
Now, that said, there are ways to 'speed things along' and lessen the time impact allowing folks to gather more often. For over a decade I went to 'the red dragon inn' on EFFNET IRC and got into tons of AD&D games. I eventually stopped going as fewer and fewer people went over time (as the MMO genre took over and those with less patience turned to the MMO genre) but even today I periodically hop over and see if anyone is in #AD&D or not.
At any rate, the means to play AD&D online have been around for decades now. I started playing D&D over IRC in the early '90's. I actually found that I enjoyed it MORE than playing face to face because it was easier to stay in character via the anonymity of the internet. To this day if I can find a game in #AD&D I enjoy it more than MMORPG's if a good DM is running the adventure.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
I disagree with the OP.. I think.
ComputerRPG can be very good Hack & Slash games. If all you want on your Rol is hack & slash, the computer can be a decente GM.
For almost everything else, maybe a human GM is better.
But computer shine on Hack & Slash RPG.
This is also true and commonly referred to as the "optimal search problem" in the literature. There is nothing wrong catering to the lowest common denominator. By definition, it creates the largest customer pool, which is what a business is looking for.
If you want something else, look in the niche market or create it yourself. It is just a fact that you won't find niche content from big business. They can't afford to loss their economy of scale.
Unfortunately, they don't know that they're getting the largest audience available because no one is looking at anything but the current business model. There are dozens of MMOs all fighting for the same customer base and no one is out looking for a different model to tap into. There very well may be millions more customers just waiting for a different type of online game but if there are no maverick companies out looking for that kind of system, those millions will go untapped.
That's the problem with going for the lowest common denominator, you tend to miss opportunities because you stop looking for them.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
True. And in business, often the goal is NOT to maximize profit, but to hit a certain target for sure instead. In this model, catering to the KNOWN masses is a good strategy.
When I get a real firebreathing dragon walking across my table killing little people i put there for the slaughter then I will agree D&D is better than any mmorpg.