Well, lets see, the tech of plantsides net code empowered the innovation of its game play. The tech of Vanguard using the unreal engine (that was already developed, leaving time for things) allowed the innovation (Evolution really) of the open world and seamless dungeons, as well as its diplomacy system. The tech of AOC allowed for the ability of its creators to makes it real time combat possible. The TECH of EQ1 allowed the genre of MUDS to be brought to a 3D space. The Technology of LOTRO allowed for the innovation of its music system. The TECH of Wow allowed for its innovation of accessibility. Do you want me to go more macro with this, or are getting the gist? The TECH of City of Heroes allowed for the innovation of its Costumming system. The tech of this game, is going to allow the innovation of allwoing you to run on walls and its combat system. Remove the tech, what do you have? The scribblings of some dude on a pice of paper with no thought given to feasibility of implementation.
These are all conclusory statements. These are all (disputable and questionable) conclusions. I asked you specifically to "show" me how technology is required to "empower" 90% of innovation. Your conclusions that "TECH of Wow allowed for its innovation of accessibility" shows me nothing but tells me your opinion.
You think I am like you and trying to get you into a corner; I (honestly) want to see how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation, but we should first agree what innovation is. You are a commercialized gamer, and you revere technology; I am an immersion gamer and revere innovation. I dispute that technology "empowers" innovation 90% of the time, and I am asking you to show me that would statements of conclusion. Can you do that? You were not able to analyze the table that distinguished between immersion and commercialized gamers.
My point is that you can achieve innovation with any technological platform; and the innovation we want does not require technology nearly to the degree that you commercialized gamers revere it. But thank you for illustrating my point that you, as commercialized gamers, really do revere technology.
Do you know the difference between "show" and "tell."
I asked that you "show."
All you did was "tell" by making statements of conclusion.
Not my fault if you yourself do not consider them innovations, that's a personal failing. But i did show you.
Whats also funny, is i have a rouge like coming out next month. You guys keep taking my comments to extremes, and flaming me for it. good job.
Again, stereotype much?
Wait, you make lipstick? What?
As for taking comments to extremes, I believe it was you who initiated the tactic, not me. Somehow you took what I wrote initially and made it into an "Every MMO must consume the players sum total of free time, must take 8 hours to do anything" stance, lol. Granted, I did push your stance to an extreme in my last few posts. Now we can evenly illustrate that, in truth, but of our stances aren't extremist, I hope.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Originally posted by KhalathwyrOriginally posted by declaredemer
Is This Really an Immersion Gamer v. Commercialized Gamer Discussion?
Immersion Gamer Commercialized Gamer
"Fascinating" "Fun"
Tradition is respected Science is respected
Development is an art Development is a science
Gameplay is varied Gameplay is controlled
Individual gets credit Guild gets credit
Worlds are large and diverse Worlds are small and fixed
Innovation is revered Technology is revered
Character development and story is the goal "Ownage" and accomplishing things is the goal
Complex Simple
Again, I challenge you to quote me where I said those words. All I'm getting from you is a bunch of angry, expletive filled rants. As I said, I'm not taking up for anyone (said that specifically in my first post). There is, however, a stereotype, which you have illustrated, about gamers who prefer the more time intensive games. There is also the incorrect assumption that those games, like UO and AC, if modernized, wouldn't do well. Well, that's incorrect until proven so. No game has been made in their light by a large, respectable company since, well, the companies that made them. Those "visions" of games need to be given a serious, modern day go. That is my point. But hey, if you're to the point where all you have is to tell me to go "f" myself, well...too funny.
I still cannot get him to analyze that table, despite his description of "jaded bull shit."
He said that 90% of all innovation is "empowered" by technology. I asked for a "showing" because 90% is an authoritative, specific, and plain percentage. He provided numerous statements of conclusion, and does not appear to understand what innovation is.
Interesting, though, it did illustrate how commercialized gamers revere technology.
You are right. No where, and I mean no where, in the table is "time intensity" a factor.
He thinks "immersion" means old.
He thinks "commercialization" means new.
He constructs definitions of words far beyond their plain and clear meaning; it is weird, and I have not in my LIFE seen it on this level.
He is proving my points:
(1) There is a tension between commercialized and immersion gamers; and
I am satisfied he is proving my points, but it is not delightful satisfaction. If that makes sense.
IMPORTANT:
IMMERSION DOES NOT MEAN "OLD"
A STATEMENT OF CONCLUSION SHOWS ME NOTHING
(I asked you to "show" me how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation)
Mother of god you a diluted soul. I have explained many times in this thread, starting out nicely. you however wont come down off your sefritious hobby horse.
Why Community Matters
Lidane to ME: "drama queen," inter alia. EDIT: S/he might have called me additional names, I stopped reading at that point because it is a waste of my time.
MrBloodworth to ME: "diluted soul," inter alia.
And developers wonder why some of us stress the importance of community.
I am delighted to have conversations with online about MMORPG, but similar to the things you say to me and yourselves in the online chat channels, you will not get my money for it.
I do not take it personally, but name-calling is rarely if ever appropriate. As you think "immersion" means "old game," I will say that "diluted soul" means "wise man." Thank you. /bows.
Well, lets see, the tech of plantsides net code empowered the innovation of its game play. The tech of Vanguard using the unreal engine (that was already developed, leaving time for things) allowed the innovation (Evolution really) of the open world and seamless dungeons, as well as its diplomacy system. The tech of AOC allowed for the ability of its creators to makes it real time combat possible. The TECH of EQ1 allowed the genre of MUDS to be brought to a 3D space. The Technology of LOTRO allowed for the innovation of its music system. The TECH of Wow allowed for its innovation of accessibility. Do you want me to go more macro with this, or are getting the gist? The TECH of City of Heroes allowed for the innovation of its Costumming system. The tech of this game, is going to allow the innovation of allwoing you to run on walls and its combat system. Remove the tech, what do you have? The scribblings of some dude on a pice of paper with no thought given to feasibility of implementation.
These are all conclusory statements. These are all (disputable and questionable) conclusions. I asked you specifically to "show" me how technology is required to "empower" 90% of innovation. Your conclusions that "TECH of Wow allowed for its innovation of accessibility" shows me nothing but tells me your opinion.
You think I am like you and trying to get you into a corner; I (honestly) want to see how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation, but we should first agree what innovation is. You are a commercialized gamer, and you revere technology; I am an immersion gamer and revere innovation. I dispute that technology "empowers" innovation 90% of the time, and I am asking you to show me that would statements of conclusion. Can you do that? You were not able to analyze the table that distinguished between immersion and commercialized gamers.
My point is that you can achieve innovation with any technological platform; and the innovation we want does not require technology nearly to the degree that you commercialized gamers revere it. But thank you for illustrating my point that you, as commercialized gamers, really do revere technology.
Do you know the difference between "show" and "tell."
I asked that you "show."
All you did was "tell" by making statements of conclusion.
Not my fault if you yourself do not consider them innovations, that's a personal failing. But i did show you.
Whats also funny, is i have a rouge like coming out next month. You guys keep taking my comments to extremes, and flaming me for it. good job.
Again, stereotype much?
Wait, you make lipstick? What?
As for taking comments to extremes, I believe it was you who initiated the tactic, not me. Somehow you took what I wrote initially and made it into an "Every MMO must consume the players sum total of free time, must take 8 hours to do anything" stance, lol. Granted, I did push your stance to an extreme in my last few posts. Now we can evenly illustrate that, in truth, but of our stances aren't extremist, I hope.
Truce is granted.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
I haven't played every single MMO on the market but coming from EQ1,EQ2,DAOC,Shadowbane,Horizons,City of Heroes etc etc My experience with the genre is these games has specific designed timesinks that is aimed at people with more past time than most. 4/8/12 hours can't put a number on it but the majority certainly isn't aimed at a person only able to spend an hour and a half a day if you want to get somewhere or accomplish something worthwhile.
Originally posted by KhalathwyrOriginally posted by declaredemer
Is This Really an Immersion Gamer v. Commercialized Gamer Discussion?
Immersion Gamer Commercialized Gamer
"Fascinating" "Fun"
Tradition is respected Science is respected
Development is an art Development is a science
Gameplay is varied Gameplay is controlled
Individual gets credit Guild gets credit
Worlds are large and diverse Worlds are small and fixed
Innovation is revered Technology is revered
Character development and story is the goal "Ownage" and accomplishing things is the goal
Complex Simple
Again, I challenge you to quote me where I said those words. All I'm getting from you is a bunch of angry, expletive filled rants. As I said, I'm not taking up for anyone (said that specifically in my first post). There is, however, a stereotype, which you have illustrated, about gamers who prefer the more time intensive games. There is also the incorrect assumption that those games, like UO and AC, if modernized, wouldn't do well. Well, that's incorrect until proven so. No game has been made in their light by a large, respectable company since, well, the companies that made them. Those "visions" of games need to be given a serious, modern day go. That is my point. But hey, if you're to the point where all you have is to tell me to go "f" myself, well...too funny.
I still cannot get him to analyze that table, despite his description of "jaded bull shit."
He said that 90% of all innovation is "empowered" by technology. I asked for a "showing" because 90% is an authoritative, specific, and plain percentage. He provided numerous statements of conclusion, and does not appear to understand what innovation is.
Interesting, though, it did illustrate how commercialized gamers revere technology.
You are right. No where, and I mean no where, in the table is "time intensity" a factor.
He thinks "immersion" means old.
He thinks "commercialization" means new.
He constructs definitions of words far beyond their plain and clear meaning; it is weird, and I have not in my LIFE seen it on this level.
He is proving my points:
(1) There is a tension between commercialized and immersion gamers; and
I am satisfied he is proving my points, but it is not delightful satisfaction. If that makes sense.
IMPORTANT:
IMMERSION DOES NOT MEAN "OLD"
A STATEMENT OF CONCLUSION SHOWS ME NOTHING
(I asked you to "show" me how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation)
Mother of god you a diluted soul. I have explained many times in this thread, starting out nicely. you however wont come down off your sefritious hobby horse.
Why Community Matters
Lidane to ME: "drama queen," inter alia.
MrBloodworth to ME: "diluted soul," inter alia.
And developers wonder why some of us stress the importance of community.
I am delighted to have conversations with online about MMORPG, but similar to the things you say to me and yourselves in the online chat channels, you will not get my money for it.
I do not take it personally, but name-calling is rarely if ever appropriate. As you think "immersion" means "old game," I will say that "diluted soul" means "wise man." Thank you. /bows.
Sounding like a broken record here bub, stuck on straw man. You have not, other than post your opinionated theories, engaged in a discussion. Anything that is post, is quickly dismissed, because (as its becoming apparent to me) your limited knowledge on the subject, wont let you understand how wrong you are, or even see someone other than your self's point of view.
I didn't say immersion means old, i said your apparent definition of it, because you wont define it, most likely means "old games".
Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
Is This Really an Immersion Gamer v. Commercialized Gamer Discussion?
Immersion Gamer Commercialized Gamer
"Fascinating" "Fun"
Tradition is respected Science is respected
Development is an art Development is a science
Gameplay is varied Gameplay is controlled
Individual gets credit Guild gets credit
Worlds are large and diverse Worlds are small and fixed
Innovation is revered Technology is revered
Character development and story is the goal "Ownage" and accomplishing things is the goal
Complex Simple
I could continue. The problem for us "immersion" gamers, however, is that we are out-numbered - by far. Yet there are more of us than developers would think.
This list is a bunch of jaded bullshit. Sorry, calls it like i see it. Its funny, you guys were saying i'm crass, and that invalidates my points, take a look at this. This entire thread, and the two main (and just about oly) supporters of this completely made up term "Immersion gamer", are simply here to belittle the majority of gamers who do not want "CASASSING, LIFE SUCKING, TIME CONSUMING, I HAVE NOTHING IN MY LIFE OTHER THAN MMO's" bullshit, 10 year old game play.
Time for new socks boys.....
I'm quite sure i have you both pegged correctly, you just don't want to admit it, thankfully, you're the minority.
Keep on keeping on with the games in your head that NEVER existed.
So, I'm guessing you are pointing a finger at me? Hmm. So, where exactly did I belittle anyone or resort to using foul language in the debate?
I'm pretty sure I have you pegged in your intolerant, narrow-visioned view of what MMOs can be (there, about as close to belittling as I see need to do). I'm pretty sure UO and AC existed. The credit card records are out there somewhere to prove it. But I can see that your stance is that you don't like those type of games so noone else should have them. That's cool, to each their own. I'll stand by that games should be made in the WoW mold and the UO/AC mold to offer choice for those who want less time consuming games and those who want more.
Cheers
I'm only intolerant to those that can't see the forest from the trees. Also, your assuming, as i have spent more time in sandbox games, than theme park ones. And i enjoy both, for different reasons, and do not begrudge anyone anything, i enjoy that there are so many types.
We are in agreement on that.
But when you too coming out the box claiming that "modern MMO's are dumbed down and are for dumb people" and that your above them, you can go f*** yourselves. Most of this thread has been about...i'm not even going to repeat myself, its elitist bullshit.
Have a nice day. Cheers as well!
Again, I challenge you to quote me where I said those words. All I'm getting from you is a bunch of angry, expletive filled rants. As I said, I'm not taking up for anyone (said that specifically in my first post). There is, however, a stereotype, which you have illustrated, about gamers who prefer the more time intensive games. There is also the incorrect assumption that those games, like UO and AC, if modernized, wouldn't do well. Well, that's incorrect until proven so. No game has been made in their light by a large, respectable company since, well, the companies that made them. Those "visions" of games need to be given a serious, modern day go. That is my point.
But hey, if you're to the point where all you have is to tell me to go "f" myself, well...too funny.
Your taking my use of "you" personally, please stop.
The main point is, you guys "immersion gamers" keep saying there are no games that cater to you, when that is simply, not even true. I even tried to point you to some, that admittedly you haven't played. Yet somehow you guys are in a position to make drastic claims about an entire industry. As far as those games not doing well, its proven every day, why do you think your posting about it.
Its is a funny world.
Ok, I'll stop taking your use of the word "you" personally if you'll stop using expletives along with your use of the word and in general when trying to make your points. Deal? (BTW, I was in the Army for many years. I guarantee you I've heard and or said worse than you have. Curse words don't offend me, but they really have no place when trying to have a discussion or debate about video games)
So, am I to take it you know what's best for me. What suits my needs/taste. Cause I surly don't for anyone else but me. You tried to point to Vanguard. I gave you reasons why that doesn't work. If you don't mind giving your money to companies with the integrity, or lack thereof, that SOE has displayed, fine. Understand, though, that not everyone shares such a view. I would imagine that there is an entity or two out there that you flat out refuse giving your money to. It's the same principle.
Additionally, it was my understanding that this converation (between you and I) was about big name, top level corporation, not the indies. That's the angle I have been speaking from. Those comapnies that have the capital, and not just barely have it, to make so called AAA MMOs. Those are the ones that I would like to see put out an updated UO/AC type game as previously described.
The ones not doing well are indie developed games and Vanguard (which was in many people's view poorly conceived and delieverd into the pariah that is SOE for nurture). Have Mythic, Turbine, Bioware or any of the other reputable comapnies make a few UO/AC like games and you'd have no argument from me. The first two have at least proven they can make successful versions of those type MMOs. They certainly can produce updated versions.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Originally posted by MrbloodworthOriginally posted by declaredemer
Is This Really an Immersion Gamer v. Commercialized Gamer Discussion?
Immersion Gamer Commercialized Gamer
"Fascinating" "Fun"
Tradition is respected Science is respected
Development is an art Development is a science
Gameplay is varied Gameplay is controlled
Individual gets credit Guild gets credit
Worlds are large and diverse Worlds are small and fixed
Innovation is revered Technology is revered
Character development and story is the goal "Ownage" and accomplishing things is the goal
Complex Simple
I didn't say immersion means old, i said your apparent definition of it, because you wont define it Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot.
"You wont define it."
RESPONSE: How many times am I to return to this table where I not only define but illustrate immersion?
"Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot."
RESPONSE: You earlier called me a "diluted soul," which, by using your techniques means "wise man" to me. As to "arrogant snot," I will do what you do and say it means, "enlightened one." Please stop sending compliments my way, though, and this can distract from the discussion.
I am prepared, ready, willing, and able to have a discussion about how you (commercialized gamer) revere technology, as you illustrated. I will also discuss any points that interest you in terms of this tension between immersion gamers and commercialized gamers.
I concede commercialized gamers are the majority and winning in this struggle, similar to how the struggle has existed between science and religion.
We just do not want your features forced-fed upon on us anymore in terms of linear content, controlled gameplay, and small and fixed worlds.
We demand innovation.
We desire innovation.
We expect innovation.
We reject the copy-and-paste model, which causes creativity to be lost and blind. (I recognize what this, which is struggle between immersion gaming and commercialized gaming, and your side is winning).
So, am I to take it you know what's best for me. What suits my needs/taste.
That's where i stoped reading, becouse no, no where do i say this.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
RESPONSE: How many times am I to return to this table where I not only define but illustrate immersion?
"Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot."
RESPONSE: You earlier called me a "diluted soul," which, by using your techniques means "wise man" to me. As to "arrogant snot," I will do what you do and say it means, "enlightened one." Please stop sending compliments my way, though, and this can distract from the discussion.
I am prepared, ready, willing, and able to have a discussion about how you (commercialized gamer) revere technology, as you illustrated. I will also discuss any points that interest you in terms of this tension between immersion gamers and commercialized gamers.
I concede commercialized gamers are the majority and winning in this struggle, similar to how the struggle has existed between science and religion.
We just do not want your features forced-fed upon on us anymore in terms of linear content, controlled gameplay, and small and fixed worlds.
We demand innovation.
Still avoiding the debate.Still labeling me as something i'm not. You don't demand innovation, you ignore it, because its not the innovation you want. Pure and simple.
Games that support the game play you seem to want, exist, and are out there. They just don't fit the one in your head, so you discount them.
I have tried to find some thread of discussion with you, I don't think its going to happen. I'm not the one being closed minded here. I all ready asked you to expand on your chart, because it still remains, subjective.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
Originally posted by MrbloodworthOriginally posted by declaredemer
Is This Really an Immersion Gamer v. Commercialized Gamer Discussion?
Immersion Gamer Commercialized Gamer
"Fascinating" "Fun"
Tradition is respected Science is respected
Development is an art Development is a science
Gameplay is varied Gameplay is controlled
Individual gets credit Guild gets credit
Worlds are large and diverse Worlds are small and fixed
Innovation is revered Technology is revered
Character development and story is the goal "Ownage" and accomplishing things is the goal
Complex Simple
I didn't say immersion means old, i said your apparent definition of it, because you wont define it Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot.
"You wont define it."
RESPONSE: How many times am I to return to this table where I not only define but illustrate immersion?
"Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot."
RESPONSE: You earlier called me a "diluted soul," which, by using your techniques means "wise man" to me. As to "arrogant snot," I will do what you do and say it means, "enlightened one." Please stop sending compliments my way, though, and this can distract from the discussion.
I am prepared, ready, willing, and able to have a discussion about how you (commercialized gamer) revere technology, as you illustrated. I will also discuss any points that interest you in terms of this tension between immersion gamers and commercialized gamers.
I concede commercialized gamers are the majority and winning in this struggle, similar to how the struggle has existed between science and religion.
We just do not want your features forced-fed upon on us anymore in terms of linear content, controlled gameplay, and small and fixed worlds.
We demand innovation.
We desire innovation.
We expect innovation.
We reject the copy-and-paste model, which causes creativity to be lost and blind. (I recognize what this, which is struggle between immersion gaming and commercialized gaming, and your side is winning).
If you want to address point (1) then I would be happy to have a discussion with you.
I have said that the payment schemes are innovation, but it is not the kind of innovation immersion gamers want. It is designed to get commericalized gamers to irresponsibly spend more of their money. Immersion gamers categorically, and unambiguously, reject payment schemes (scams).
If you want to run with the big dogs, then be prepared before you leap off the porch. I am getting bored with asking you to take the leap from conclusion to analysis, from name-calling to discussion, and from constructed meaning to plain meaning.
That chart nether defines, nor illustrates anything, but your own personal views.
Keep dodging everyone's points though.
Modern MMO's offer options, and both sides of that list. We have been over this. Define your perspective and basis foe those points and maybe we have something. Burden of proof is on you, not me. If you don't want me to define things, as you are inferring, then define them.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
That chart nether defines, nor illustrates anything, but your own personal views.
I am not getting the "how" or "why" from you. EDIT 2: The above quote is yet another statement of conclusion. Honestly, have you ever made an "argument" before? I am serious. I am very serious. Ever?
This is what I got from you:
"jaded bull shit." EDIT: Where? How? Why?
"diluted soul." EDIT: "wise man."
"arrogant snot." EDIT: "enlightened one."
I KNOW you can name-call. But can you analyze and discuss?
I know you can provide STATEMENTS OF CONCLUSION, but can you "show" me how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation?
Interestingly, which I did not anticipate but was delighted to see, your statements of conclusion "showed" how you commercialized gamers revere technology. (You were probably not even aware that commercialized gamers do revere technology).
There is a tension between immersion gamers and commercialized gamers. There are other gamers: PvPers, Raiders, etc. but their models have failed.
My premise is to innovate, abandon the "copy-and-paste commercialized model."
I think i’ve suddenly realized the attraction of being an academic. You can write “from on high” about the problems inherent in a topic without feeling obligated to present detailed solutions.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
I'm going to make one final point, then recuse myself from the rest of this thread because it's obvious that the OP not only has no idea what the hell he's even talking about, but he has no clue what he really wants despite all the useless bullet points and charts. I'm also going to make this point in large type:
TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES BREED INNOVATION. THEY ALWAYS HAVE.
The technology of woodblock printing and moveable type had existed for centuries, but it wasn't until Guttenberg created the printing press that books, magazines, and newspapers began to take off in the West. Scientific innovations were made possible because people suddenly had a much easier, more convenient way of getting their data out to others so that it could be tested and reviewed. Adult literacy and reading, which had been the hallmarks of the educated elites before then, became much more common, particularly in Europe. Knowledge that had once been rare and hard to come by for the common man became much more widespread, leading to greater education among the masses.
It's the same thing with other major inventions. The automobile would never have existed without the internal combustion engine. Eli Whitney's invention of the cotton gin revolutioninzed the textile industry, allowing for the mass production of cotton. Combine harvesters saved thousands of man hours in labor to harvest grain fields.
It's the same idea, but on a much smaller scale, with video games. It is the advances in development technology that help game companies innovate and create new games. Developers might have a lot bright ideas, but without the means to bring their ideas to life, they're just ideas.
Technology and innovation are not mutually exclusive, and anyone who tries to make that argument is an idiot. One directly leads to the other. That's how the world works.
I think i’ve suddenly realized the attraction of being an academic. You can write “from on high” about the problems inherent in a topic without feeling obligated to present detailed solutions.
Even academics have to answer to their peers and have to justify their ideas.
I think the OP is best explained in a different way:
Is This Really an Immersion Gamer v. Commercialized Gamer Discussion?
Immersion Gamer Commercialized Gamer
"Fascinating" "Fun"
Tradition is respected Science is respected
Development is an art Development is a science
Gameplay is varied Gameplay is controlled
Individual gets credit Guild gets credit
Worlds are large and diverse Worlds are small and fixed
Innovation is revered Technology is revered
Character development and story is the goal "Ownage" and accomplishing things is the goal
Complex Simple
The problem is that you are reading this table as a denial of technology or its importance.
All I said is that commercialized gamers revere technology, as demonstrated by Mr.Bloodworth whose statement is that "90% of innovation is 'empowered' by technology." I asked for a showing, as 90% is not only enormous but specific, and I received additional statements of conclusion, premised on that idea that without technology, e.g., WoW could not be accessible. I do not want to affirm or deny, but ask a showing.
I have called Lidane and Mr.Bloodworth "commercialized gamers" who revere technology, and they are illustrating my point in terms a vehement defense of it. I have said that immersion gamers revere innovation. The premise, I think, is that without technology, we cannot have innovation. The innovative elements that I have described do not require more technology in the areas of world exploration, player empowerment tools, and customization (on every level and everywhere from items to weapons to buildings).
It is about redefining the MMORPG experience through the creative process; this requires innovation. We would be discussing our fascination with the features, not our reverence for the graphics, payment schemes, or anything necessarily technological.
EDIT: Actually, I think this is the problem: commercialized gamers cannot see innovation beyond better graphics.
Innovation is augmenting old ideas or creating entirely new concepts.
You can all me names from "idiot" to "diluted soul" --it is your real-life insecurities-- but I enjoy the discussion with commercialized gamers, but it is reinforcing my point.
YOUR REVERENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IS UNDERMINING INNOVATION
And it is as the cost of incremental and breakthrough innovation because you cannot "see it" or "create it" unless technology is somehow, or some way, involved.
Ex.: not sure of your background, but if you ever worked in services, you constantly need to innovate on how to better deliver services, and technology rarely has anything to do with it.
Originally posted by declaredemer YOUR REVERENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IS UNDERMINING INNOVATION
I'm still waiting for a single example of innovation in gaming -- or anything else, for that matter-- that doesn't involve technology somehow. Start there, then work towards some sort of logic. Maybe then your bullet points and charts will have some sort of coherence and rational basis.
Until then, you're just a drama queen with nothing to offer except your own over-inflated self importance as a so-called "immersion" gamer.
Originally posted by declaredemer YOUR REVERENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IS UNDERMINING INNOVATION
I'm still waiting for a single example of innovation in gaming -- or anything else, for that matter-- that doesn't involve technology somehow. Start there, then work towards some sort of logic. Maybe then your bullet points and charts will have some sort of coherence and rational basis.
Until then, you're just a drama queen with nothing to offer except your own over-inflated self importance as a so-called "immersion" gamer.
"Rational basis" is being used in your sentence in an entirely different way that I am accustomed to. You should look it up --Google it-- and then reconsider how, and when, you use it. You probably picked it up somewhere. You also said you "recused" yourself -- Google it-- and misused the word. Aside: you are inappropriately using words, and this is not an "insult" such as you calling me a "drama queen." It is genuinely confusing me. Aside: under your rational basis standard, the term you used, you are challenging the concept, and the burden would be yours to bring forth evidence. You are picking-up these terms somewhere and misusing them.
No one has said, and no one will say, that technology is not used; that is not the point - at all. It is the reverence of technology at the cost of innovation that is the problem. Commercialized/Linear gamers believe (1) technology is necessary for innovation (MrBloodworth) and (2) technology is innovation (Lidane).
My premise is that commercialized gamers revere technology:
MrBloodworth: "technology 'empowers' 90% of innovation" in MMORPGs.
The burden is on him to "show" that 90% of technology "empowers" innovation.
Lidane: "technology breeds innovation. they always have" in MMORPGs.
I am not discussing the use of technology outside of MMORPGs. If I wanted to do that, I would probably be participating in a different forum; I am discussing on your reverence for technology is undermining innovation. You showed how technology was used for inventions elsewhere, but not in MMORPGs. You must defend your premise and argument that without technology creates innovation.
Your premise is that without technology we cannot have innovation, which is why we have:
Shiny, glittery looking weapons, but not innovation in terms of players creating designing weapons;
"New" chat text boxes for "quests," but not innovative Quests designed by players using innovative player tools or Quests unique to the character based on prior choices that occur in the game;
New looking trees in a forest, but not a forest with innovative elements such as weather that impacts attributes for certain classes/races; innovative ways of interacting with the forest; a forest that changes permanently through the players' choices in it (not just killing a guy who respawns five minutes later).
Character customization windows to change face and color, but not a character customization screen that allows a player to build its uniquely designed class; history; story; and past . . . with meaningful repercussions.
The real value that I have attained from this discussion is that I believe this reverence for technology is at the heart, center, and core of the problem in MMORPGs today. Commercialized gamers believe that they cannot create or innovate without the use of technology, which is short-sighted and wrong. The use of technology that is currently available is more than enough to a new and different MMORPG experience.
It is about abandoning the copy-and-paste commercialized MMORPG model. You are asking me find evidence for you of innovation in these MMORPGs and then explain why technology is not innovative. Besides not comprehending the question and my general refusal to other people's homework, it would be contrary to very point of this entire topic: innovation is lacking or missing in today's MMORPGs, and technology (new graphics) is not the kind of innovation we want.
It is innovation that will redefine the MMORPG experience, with a respect for tradition.
Technology is not the sine qua non of innovation, although you believe so.
Let me put it this way to help:
A person does not have this "idea" in her head that would be feasible only if there was the technology to implement it.
Innovation could be breakthrough or incremental. You can have breakthrough innovations using old technology.
You can use old systems in innovative ways. We are not, none of us on the "immersion" gamer side, talking about new graphics and things of that nature. We have all the shiny and smoky graphics we need.
New tools, new ideas, new systems, new forms of Questing . . . using today's technology.
Aside
If you do not understanding what "innovation" is or "technology" or "rational basis," it makes this discussion a bit more challenging and tedious, but I still appreciate and enjoy it. Commercialized gamers revere technology, and the idea that technology is necessary to innovate is short-sighted. Use today's technology to create a new MMORPG experience, while retaining and respecting the old and traditional experiences that work.
"Rational basis" is being used in your sentence in an entirely different way that I am accustomed to. You should look it up --Google it-- and then reconsider how, and when, you use it. You probably picked it up somewhere. You also said you "recused" yourself -- Google it-- and misused the word. Aside: you are inappropriately using words, and this is not an "insult" such as you calling me a "drama queen." It is genuinely confusing me. Aside: under your rational basis standard, the term you used, you are challenging the concept, and the burden would be yours to bring forth evidence. You are picking-up these terms somewhere and misusing them.
There are various very rude terms I'd use right now, but you're not worth me getting banned. Suffice it to say, I don't like you as a poster at all.You're easily one of the worst and most tedious people I've ever had the misfortune to read. I'd rather subject myself to the Twilight books than try and make sense of your gibberish.
Yes, I planned to recuse myself, and yes, I know what the damn word means. However, I couldn't let your idiocy slide and had to mention that I am still waiting for you to provide something other than your meaningless bullshit to try and reinforce your irrational, condescending, and ultimately stupid argument. You've got a lot of bullet points and colored fonts, and a lot of centered text, but you don't say anything worthwhile at all.
There are various very rude terms I'd use right now, but you're not worth me getting banned. Suffice it to say, I don't like you as a poster at all.You're easily one of the worst and most tedious people I've ever had the misfortune to read. I'd rather subject myself to the Twilight books than try and make sense of your gibberish. Yes, I planned to recuse myself, and yes, I know what the damn word means. However, I couldn't let your idiocy slide and had to mention that I am still waiting for you to provide something other than your meaningless bullshit to try and reinforce your irrational, condescending, and ultimately stupid argument. You've got a lot of bullet points and colored fonts, and a lot of centered text, but you don't say anything worthwhile at all.
You have not only proved my point about the reverence of technology, but also something along the lines of community.
The only people who have hurled personal insults at others are the two Commercialized/Linear gamers: you and MrBloodworth, which is why the communities in "commercialized" games are so . . . hostile, crude, and unfriendly.
If you're misusing terms, and it confuses and I mention it, that does not give you a license to (a) continue to misuse at least one of the terms and (b) call me names ("I don't like you." "Worst and tedious" person. I do not take any of this personally, although I suspect you do. If you want to have an intelligent discussion about the tension that exists today between immersion gamers and commercialized/linear gamers and the lack of innovation, I welcome and invite it. If you are going to call me names, as you did earlier --"drama queen"-- you prove an important but also an unfortunate point about yourself.
Calm down. Come back. And I would be happy to have a "discussion" with you that is fair and free of name-calling. I want someone to prove me wrong. My ideas are not infallible, but I have learned a lot from this discussion. I neither like nor dislike you, but I appreciate your linear/commercialized perspective.
I neither like nor dislike you, but I appreciate your linear/commercialized perspective.
I don't have a "linear/commercialized" perspective. That's a meaningless phrase to me.
As for me, I'm not taking this personally. I just don't like you at all as a poster. You've offered nothing of substance except a bunch of circular gibberish, bullet points, centered text, charts, and whiny self-absorption about your poor, maligned "immersion gamer" (another totally meaningless phrase) life, with posts full of assumptions about people and nothing worthwhile to back any of it up.
Posting in this thread has been a total waste of my time that could have been used on something more valuable. Your entire argument is absurd on its face, lacks merit, and is ultimately meaningless.
Is This Really an Immersion Gamer v. Commercialized Gamer Discussion?
Immersion Gamer Commercialized Gamer
"Fascinating" "Fun"
Tradition is respected Science is respected
Development is an art Development is a science
Gameplay is varied Gameplay is controlled
Individual gets credit Guild gets credit
Worlds are large and diverse Worlds are small and fixed
Innovation is revered Technology is revered
Character development and story is the goal "Ownage" and accomplishing things is the goal
Complex Simple
Community
Immersion Gamer v. Linear/Commercialized Gamer
What are the goals;
Why are these two groups incompatible (or are they); and
What are the community values?
Lidane,
I created this table in response to your post that you do not care about innovation but care about "fun" and "polish." Everyone likes "fun" and "polish," but my premise was that immersion gamers desire and expect more. Fun and polish leaves an immersion gamer something to be satisfied.
It really showed me that there is a tension between immersion gamers and commercialized gamers. Would it be more accurate, or more palatable, if I replaced the word "commercialized" with "linear." Immersion Gamers v. Linear Gamers. Aside: I was also going to add "complex content" and "simple content."
I have chosen "commercialized" though because the premise of this whole topic is INNOVATION, and commercialized gamers claim that these new payment schemes are "innovative." It really is a creative crisis in MMORPGs today, and immersion gamers are losing - badly.
The only attacks on the merits of the struggle have been "jaded bullshit" and the use of technology. The use of technology is a red herring because no one disputes its importance and certainly not its use. It is the reverence of technology; the belief that without it innovation is not possible, and so forth. Commercialized gamers say that technology is innovative, and perhaps that is true for the graphics company . . . but a shiny new weapon is not exactly my idea of innovation, and it is certainly not the innovation that many of us desire. We want something more, deeper, and challenging than "fun" and "polish."
I welcome and invite, absent personal name-calling, any challenges to the idea that innovation is not missing or lacking in today's MMORPGs, and that commercialized/linear gamers do not exist.
I also need to fit in the "community" aspect of MMORPGs and what immersion and linear/commercialized gamers expectations and goals are in that respect.
It really showed me that there is a tension between immersion gamers and commercialized gamers. Would it be more accurate, or more palatable, if I replaced the word "commercialized" with "linear." Immersion Gamers v. Linear Gamers. Aside: I was also going to add "complex content" and "simple content."
Those are still just a bunch of useless catchphrases with no meaning. I don't care what words you use, the whole premise is still ridiculous.
Gamers are individuals that cannot and should not be placed into nonsense categories like "linear/commercialized" and "innovation/immersion" or whatever bullshit you're trotting out now. What draws one player to an MMO can't easily be applied across the board to another, and separating a genre filled with millions of players into two mutually exclusive categories is stupid.
You're over-generalizing and over-compartmentalizing millions of people and just so that you can whine that you're not being catered to by game developers. That's it. It's why this topic of yours has no meaning, no merit, and is ultimately useless. Your entire premise is flawed from the start.
Those are still just a bunch of useless catchphrases with no meaning. I don't care what words you use, the whole premise is still ridiculous. Gamers are individuals that cannot and should not be placed into nonsense categories like "linear/commercialized" and "innovation/immersion" or whatever bullshit you're trotting out now. What draws one player to an MMO can't easily be applied across the board to another, and separating a genre filled with millions of players into two mutually exclusive categories is stupid. You're over-generalizing and over-compartmentalizing millions of people and just so that you can whine that you're not being catered to by game developers. That's it. It's why this topic of yours has no meaning, no merit, and is ultimately useless. Your entire premise is flawed from the start.
One of the difficulties is that you said you were going to "recuse" yourself. You have also said that you do not "like" me. It is why you use language such as "bullshit" and MrBloodworth used "jaded bullshit."
The table has proven true in both of your vehement reverence of technology. I have explained why "immersion" and "linear/commercialized" gamers are useful concepts; there are other gamers such as PvPers and Raiders, among others.
Your personal dislike and bias, however, prevent you from thinking logically and having a meaningful discussion.
EDIT:
Honestly, you two are very similar as commercialized gamers, and illustrate my point:
Lindane: "bull shit"
MrBloodworth: "jaded bullshit"
Both revere, and strongly defend, technology
Both believe that innovation is technology
Both believe that innovation is not possible without technology
Both use name-calling repeatedly.
Aside: I think name-calling only hurts your argument; but since your arguments failed --"jaded bullshit" and "bullshit"-- I understand but do not respect the resort to name-calling.
I might not like or dislike you, but I do not respect you for name-calling.
Commercialized gamers, as shown by Lidane and MrBloodworth, are very similar; this is why it is difficult for me, and others, to pay 15.00 to associate with these kinds of communities.
I want to add an element to the table that includes "community," as immersion gamers and commercialized gamers have very different concepts of community and community values.
Comments
These are all conclusory statements. These are all (disputable and questionable) conclusions. I asked you specifically to "show" me how technology is required to "empower" 90% of innovation. Your conclusions that "TECH of Wow allowed for its innovation of accessibility" shows me nothing but tells me your opinion.
You think I am like you and trying to get you into a corner; I (honestly) want to see how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation, but we should first agree what innovation is. You are a commercialized gamer, and you revere technology; I am an immersion gamer and revere innovation. I dispute that technology "empowers" innovation 90% of the time, and I am asking you to show me that would statements of conclusion. Can you do that? You were not able to analyze the table that distinguished between immersion and commercialized gamers.
My point is that you can achieve innovation with any technological platform; and the innovation we want does not require technology nearly to the degree that you commercialized gamers revere it. But thank you for illustrating my point that you, as commercialized gamers, really do revere technology.
Do you know the difference between "show" and "tell."
I asked that you "show."
All you did was "tell" by making statements of conclusion.
Not my fault if you yourself do not consider them innovations, that's a personal failing. But i did show you.
Whats also funny, is i have a rouge like coming out next month. You guys keep taking my comments to extremes, and flaming me for it. good job.
Again, stereotype much?
Wait, you make lipstick? What?
As for taking comments to extremes, I believe it was you who initiated the tactic, not me. Somehow you took what I wrote initially and made it into an "Every MMO must consume the players sum total of free time, must take 8 hours to do anything" stance, lol. Granted, I did push your stance to an extreme in my last few posts. Now we can evenly illustrate that, in truth, but of our stances aren't extremist, I hope.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Again, I challenge you to quote me where I said those words. All I'm getting from you is a bunch of angry, expletive filled rants. As I said, I'm not taking up for anyone (said that specifically in my first post). There is, however, a stereotype, which you have illustrated, about gamers who prefer the more time intensive games. There is also the incorrect assumption that those games, like UO and AC, if modernized, wouldn't do well. Well, that's incorrect until proven so. No game has been made in their light by a large, respectable company since, well, the companies that made them. Those "visions" of games need to be given a serious, modern day go. That is my point.
But hey, if you're to the point where all you have is to tell me to go "f" myself, well...too funny.
He is proving my points:
(1) There is a tension between commercialized and immersion gamers; and
(2) (minor point) Commercialized gamers revere technology.
I am satisfied he is proving my points, but it is not delightful satisfaction. If that makes sense.
IMPORTANT:
IMMERSION DOES NOT MEAN "OLD"
A STATEMENT OF CONCLUSION SHOWS ME NOTHING
(I asked you to "show" me how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation)
Mother of god you a diluted soul. I have explained many times in this thread, starting out nicely. you however wont come down off your sefritious hobby horse.
Why Community Matters
And developers wonder why some of us stress the importance of community.
I am delighted to have conversations with online about MMORPG, but similar to the things you say to me and yourselves in the online chat channels, you will not get my money for it.
I do not take it personally, but name-calling is rarely if ever appropriate. As you think "immersion" means "old game," I will say that "diluted soul" means "wise man." Thank you. /bows.
These are all conclusory statements. These are all (disputable and questionable) conclusions. I asked you specifically to "show" me how technology is required to "empower" 90% of innovation. Your conclusions that "TECH of Wow allowed for its innovation of accessibility" shows me nothing but tells me your opinion.
You think I am like you and trying to get you into a corner; I (honestly) want to see how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation, but we should first agree what innovation is. You are a commercialized gamer, and you revere technology; I am an immersion gamer and revere innovation. I dispute that technology "empowers" innovation 90% of the time, and I am asking you to show me that would statements of conclusion. Can you do that? You were not able to analyze the table that distinguished between immersion and commercialized gamers.
My point is that you can achieve innovation with any technological platform; and the innovation we want does not require technology nearly to the degree that you commercialized gamers revere it. But thank you for illustrating my point that you, as commercialized gamers, really do revere technology.
Do you know the difference between "show" and "tell."
I asked that you "show."
All you did was "tell" by making statements of conclusion.
Not my fault if you yourself do not consider them innovations, that's a personal failing. But i did show you.
Whats also funny, is i have a rouge like coming out next month. You guys keep taking my comments to extremes, and flaming me for it. good job.
Again, stereotype much?
Wait, you make lipstick? What?
As for taking comments to extremes, I believe it was you who initiated the tactic, not me. Somehow you took what I wrote initially and made it into an "Every MMO must consume the players sum total of free time, must take 8 hours to do anything" stance, lol. Granted, I did push your stance to an extreme in my last few posts. Now we can evenly illustrate that, in truth, but of our stances aren't extremist, I hope.
Truce is granted.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
I haven't played every single MMO on the market but coming from EQ1,EQ2,DAOC,Shadowbane,Horizons,City of Heroes etc etc My experience with the genre is these games has specific designed timesinks that is aimed at people with more past time than most. 4/8/12 hours can't put a number on it but the majority certainly isn't aimed at a person only able to spend an hour and a half a day if you want to get somewhere or accomplish something worthwhile.
Again, I challenge you to quote me where I said those words. All I'm getting from you is a bunch of angry, expletive filled rants. As I said, I'm not taking up for anyone (said that specifically in my first post). There is, however, a stereotype, which you have illustrated, about gamers who prefer the more time intensive games. There is also the incorrect assumption that those games, like UO and AC, if modernized, wouldn't do well. Well, that's incorrect until proven so. No game has been made in their light by a large, respectable company since, well, the companies that made them. Those "visions" of games need to be given a serious, modern day go. That is my point.
But hey, if you're to the point where all you have is to tell me to go "f" myself, well...too funny.
He is proving my points:
(1) There is a tension between commercialized and immersion gamers; and
(2) (minor point) Commercialized gamers revere technology.
I am satisfied he is proving my points, but it is not delightful satisfaction. If that makes sense.
IMPORTANT:
IMMERSION DOES NOT MEAN "OLD"
A STATEMENT OF CONCLUSION SHOWS ME NOTHING
(I asked you to "show" me how technology "empowers" 90% of innovation)
Mother of god you a diluted soul. I have explained many times in this thread, starting out nicely. you however wont come down off your sefritious hobby horse.
Why Community Matters
And developers wonder why some of us stress the importance of community.
I am delighted to have conversations with online about MMORPG, but similar to the things you say to me and yourselves in the online chat channels, you will not get my money for it.
I do not take it personally, but name-calling is rarely if ever appropriate. As you think "immersion" means "old game," I will say that "diluted soul" means "wise man." Thank you. /bows.
Sounding like a broken record here bub, stuck on straw man. You have not, other than post your opinionated theories, engaged in a discussion. Anything that is post, is quickly dismissed, because (as its becoming apparent to me) your limited knowledge on the subject, wont let you understand how wrong you are, or even see someone other than your self's point of view.
I didn't say immersion means old, i said your apparent definition of it, because you wont define it, most likely means "old games".
Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
This list is a bunch of jaded bullshit. Sorry, calls it like i see it. Its funny, you guys were saying i'm crass, and that invalidates my points, take a look at this. This entire thread, and the two main (and just about oly) supporters of this completely made up term "Immersion gamer", are simply here to belittle the majority of gamers who do not want "CASASSING, LIFE SUCKING, TIME CONSUMING, I HAVE NOTHING IN MY LIFE OTHER THAN MMO's" bullshit, 10 year old game play.
Time for new socks boys.....
I'm quite sure i have you both pegged correctly, you just don't want to admit it, thankfully, you're the minority.
Keep on keeping on with the games in your head that NEVER existed.
So, I'm guessing you are pointing a finger at me? Hmm. So, where exactly did I belittle anyone or resort to using foul language in the debate?
I'm pretty sure I have you pegged in your intolerant, narrow-visioned view of what MMOs can be (there, about as close to belittling as I see need to do). I'm pretty sure UO and AC existed. The credit card records are out there somewhere to prove it. But I can see that your stance is that you don't like those type of games so noone else should have them. That's cool, to each their own. I'll stand by that games should be made in the WoW mold and the UO/AC mold to offer choice for those who want less time consuming games and those who want more.
Cheers
I'm only intolerant to those that can't see the forest from the trees. Also, your assuming, as i have spent more time in sandbox games, than theme park ones. And i enjoy both, for different reasons, and do not begrudge anyone anything, i enjoy that there are so many types.
We are in agreement on that.
But when you too coming out the box claiming that "modern MMO's are dumbed down and are for dumb people" and that your above them, you can go f*** yourselves. Most of this thread has been about...i'm not even going to repeat myself, its elitist bullshit.
Have a nice day. Cheers as well!
Again, I challenge you to quote me where I said those words. All I'm getting from you is a bunch of angry, expletive filled rants. As I said, I'm not taking up for anyone (said that specifically in my first post). There is, however, a stereotype, which you have illustrated, about gamers who prefer the more time intensive games. There is also the incorrect assumption that those games, like UO and AC, if modernized, wouldn't do well. Well, that's incorrect until proven so. No game has been made in their light by a large, respectable company since, well, the companies that made them. Those "visions" of games need to be given a serious, modern day go. That is my point.
But hey, if you're to the point where all you have is to tell me to go "f" myself, well...too funny.
Your taking my use of "you" personally, please stop.
The main point is, you guys "immersion gamers" keep saying there are no games that cater to you, when that is simply, not even true. I even tried to point you to some, that admittedly you haven't played. Yet somehow you guys are in a position to make drastic claims about an entire industry. As far as those games not doing well, its proven every day, why do you think your posting about it.
Its is a funny world.
Ok, I'll stop taking your use of the word "you" personally if you'll stop using expletives along with your use of the word and in general when trying to make your points. Deal? (BTW, I was in the Army for many years. I guarantee you I've heard and or said worse than you have. Curse words don't offend me, but they really have no place when trying to have a discussion or debate about video games)
So, am I to take it you know what's best for me. What suits my needs/taste. Cause I surly don't for anyone else but me. You tried to point to Vanguard. I gave you reasons why that doesn't work. If you don't mind giving your money to companies with the integrity, or lack thereof, that SOE has displayed, fine. Understand, though, that not everyone shares such a view. I would imagine that there is an entity or two out there that you flat out refuse giving your money to. It's the same principle.
Additionally, it was my understanding that this converation (between you and I) was about big name, top level corporation, not the indies. That's the angle I have been speaking from. Those comapnies that have the capital, and not just barely have it, to make so called AAA MMOs. Those are the ones that I would like to see put out an updated UO/AC type game as previously described.
The ones not doing well are indie developed games and Vanguard (which was in many people's view poorly conceived and delieverd into the pariah that is SOE for nurture). Have Mythic, Turbine, Bioware or any of the other reputable comapnies make a few UO/AC like games and you'd have no argument from me. The first two have at least proven they can make successful versions of those type MMOs. They certainly can produce updated versions.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
I didn't say immersion means old, i said your apparent definition of it, because you wont define it
Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot.
So, am I to take it you know what's best for me. What suits my needs/taste.
That's where i stoped reading, becouse no, no where do i say this.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Still avoiding the debate.Still labeling me as something i'm not. You don't demand innovation, you ignore it, because its not the innovation you want. Pure and simple.
Games that support the game play you seem to want, exist, and are out there. They just don't fit the one in your head, so you discount them.
I have tried to find some thread of discussion with you, I don't think its going to happen. I'm not the one being closed minded here. I all ready asked you to expand on your chart, because it still remains, subjective.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
I didn't say immersion means old, i said your apparent definition of it, because you wont define it
Your kind of a one trick pony, who is still being an arrogant snot.
If you want to address point (1) then I would be happy to have a discussion with you.
I have said that the payment schemes are innovation, but it is not the kind of innovation immersion gamers want. It is designed to get commericalized gamers to irresponsibly spend more of their money. Immersion gamers categorically, and unambiguously, reject payment schemes (scams).
If you want to run with the big dogs, then be prepared before you leap off the porch. I am getting bored with asking you to take the leap from conclusion to analysis, from name-calling to discussion, and from constructed meaning to plain meaning.
That chart nether defines, nor illustrates anything, but your own personal views.
Keep dodging everyone's points though.
Modern MMO's offer options, and both sides of that list. We have been over this. Define your perspective and basis foe those points and maybe we have something. Burden of proof is on you, not me. If you don't want me to define things, as you are inferring, then define them.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
I am not getting the "how" or "why" from you. EDIT 2: The above quote is yet another statement of conclusion. Honestly, have you ever made an "argument" before? I am serious. I am very serious. Ever?
This is what I got from you:
There is a tension between immersion gamers and commercialized gamers. There are other gamers: PvPers, Raiders, etc. but their models have failed.
My premise is to innovate, abandon the "copy-and-paste commercialized model."
I think i’ve suddenly realized the attraction of being an academic. You can write “from on high” about the problems inherent in a topic without feeling obligated to present detailed solutions.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
I'm going to make one final point, then recuse myself from the rest of this thread because it's obvious that the OP not only has no idea what the hell he's even talking about, but he has no clue what he really wants despite all the useless bullet points and charts. I'm also going to make this point in large type:
TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES BREED INNOVATION. THEY ALWAYS HAVE.
The technology of woodblock printing and moveable type had existed for centuries, but it wasn't until Guttenberg created the printing press that books, magazines, and newspapers began to take off in the West. Scientific innovations were made possible because people suddenly had a much easier, more convenient way of getting their data out to others so that it could be tested and reviewed. Adult literacy and reading, which had been the hallmarks of the educated elites before then, became much more common, particularly in Europe. Knowledge that had once been rare and hard to come by for the common man became much more widespread, leading to greater education among the masses.
It's the same thing with other major inventions. The automobile would never have existed without the internal combustion engine. Eli Whitney's invention of the cotton gin revolutioninzed the textile industry, allowing for the mass production of cotton. Combine harvesters saved thousands of man hours in labor to harvest grain fields.
It's the same idea, but on a much smaller scale, with video games. It is the advances in development technology that help game companies innovate and create new games. Developers might have a lot bright ideas, but without the means to bring their ideas to life, they're just ideas.
Technology and innovation are not mutually exclusive, and anyone who tries to make that argument is an idiot. One directly leads to the other. That's how the world works.
Even academics have to answer to their peers and have to justify their ideas.
I think the OP is best explained in a different way:
www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm
The problem is that you are reading this table as a denial of technology or its importance.
All I said is that commercialized gamers revere technology, as demonstrated by Mr.Bloodworth whose statement is that "90% of innovation is 'empowered' by technology." I asked for a showing, as 90% is not only enormous but specific, and I received additional statements of conclusion, premised on that idea that without technology, e.g., WoW could not be accessible. I do not want to affirm or deny, but ask a showing.
I have called Lidane and Mr.Bloodworth "commercialized gamers" who revere technology, and they are illustrating my point in terms a vehement defense of it. I have said that immersion gamers revere innovation. The premise, I think, is that without technology, we cannot have innovation. The innovative elements that I have described do not require more technology in the areas of world exploration, player empowerment tools, and customization (on every level and everywhere from items to weapons to buildings).
It is about redefining the MMORPG experience through the creative process; this requires innovation. We would be discussing our fascination with the features, not our reverence for the graphics, payment schemes, or anything necessarily technological.
EDIT: Actually, I think this is the problem: commercialized gamers cannot see innovation beyond better graphics.
Innovation is augmenting old ideas or creating entirely new concepts.
You can all me names from "idiot" to "diluted soul" --it is your real-life insecurities-- but I enjoy the discussion with commercialized gamers, but it is reinforcing my point.
YOUR REVERENCE OF TECHNOLOGY IS UNDERMINING INNOVATION
And it is as the cost of incremental and breakthrough innovation because you cannot "see it" or "create it" unless technology is somehow, or some way, involved.
Ex.: not sure of your background, but if you ever worked in services, you constantly need to innovate on how to better deliver services, and technology rarely has anything to do with it.
Amen OP, amen.
-------------------------------------
Before: developers loved games and made money.
Now: developers love money and make games.
I'm still waiting for a single example of innovation in gaming -- or anything else, for that matter-- that doesn't involve technology somehow. Start there, then work towards some sort of logic. Maybe then your bullet points and charts will have some sort of coherence and rational basis.
Until then, you're just a drama queen with nothing to offer except your own over-inflated self importance as a so-called "immersion" gamer.
I'm still waiting for a single example of innovation in gaming -- or anything else, for that matter-- that doesn't involve technology somehow. Start there, then work towards some sort of logic. Maybe then your bullet points and charts will have some sort of coherence and rational basis.
Until then, you're just a drama queen with nothing to offer except your own over-inflated self importance as a so-called "immersion" gamer.
"Rational basis" is being used in your sentence in an entirely different way that I am accustomed to. You should look it up --Google it-- and then reconsider how, and when, you use it. You probably picked it up somewhere. You also said you "recused" yourself -- Google it-- and misused the word. Aside: you are inappropriately using words, and this is not an "insult" such as you calling me a "drama queen." It is genuinely confusing me. Aside: under your rational basis standard, the term you used, you are challenging the concept, and the burden would be yours to bring forth evidence. You are picking-up these terms somewhere and misusing them.
No one has said, and no one will say, that technology is not used; that is not the point - at all. It is the reverence of technology at the cost of innovation that is the problem. Commercialized/Linear gamers believe (1) technology is necessary for innovation (MrBloodworth) and (2) technology is innovation (Lidane).
My premise is that commercialized gamers revere technology:
Your premise is that without technology we cannot have innovation, which is why we have:
The real value that I have attained from this discussion is that I believe this reverence for technology is at the heart, center, and core of the problem in MMORPGs today. Commercialized gamers believe that they cannot create or innovate without the use of technology, which is short-sighted and wrong. The use of technology that is currently available is more than enough to a new and different MMORPG experience.
It is about abandoning the copy-and-paste commercialized MMORPG model. You are asking me find evidence for you of innovation in these MMORPGs and then explain why technology is not innovative. Besides not comprehending the question and my general refusal to other people's homework, it would be contrary to very point of this entire topic: innovation is lacking or missing in today's MMORPGs, and technology (new graphics) is not the kind of innovation we want.
It is innovation that will redefine the MMORPG experience, with a respect for tradition.
Technology is not the sine qua non of innovation, although you believe so.
Let me put it this way to help:
A person does not have this "idea" in her head that would be feasible only if there was the technology to implement it.
Innovation could be breakthrough or incremental. You can have breakthrough innovations using old technology.
You can use old systems in innovative ways. We are not, none of us on the "immersion" gamer side, talking about new graphics and things of that nature. We have all the shiny and smoky graphics we need.
New tools, new ideas, new systems, new forms of Questing . . . using today's technology.
Aside
If you do not understanding what "innovation" is or "technology" or "rational basis," it makes this discussion a bit more challenging and tedious, but I still appreciate and enjoy it. Commercialized gamers revere technology, and the idea that technology is necessary to innovate is short-sighted. Use today's technology to create a new MMORPG experience, while retaining and respecting the old and traditional experiences that work.
There are various very rude terms I'd use right now, but you're not worth me getting banned. Suffice it to say, I don't like you as a poster at all.You're easily one of the worst and most tedious people I've ever had the misfortune to read. I'd rather subject myself to the Twilight books than try and make sense of your gibberish.
Yes, I planned to recuse myself, and yes, I know what the damn word means. However, I couldn't let your idiocy slide and had to mention that I am still waiting for you to provide something other than your meaningless bullshit to try and reinforce your irrational, condescending, and ultimately stupid argument. You've got a lot of bullet points and colored fonts, and a lot of centered text, but you don't say anything worthwhile at all.
You have not only proved my point about the reverence of technology, but also something along the lines of community.
The only people who have hurled personal insults at others are the two Commercialized/Linear gamers: you and MrBloodworth, which is why the communities in "commercialized" games are so . . . hostile, crude, and unfriendly.
If you're misusing terms, and it confuses and I mention it, that does not give you a license to (a) continue to misuse at least one of the terms and (b) call me names ("I don't like you." "Worst and tedious" person. I do not take any of this personally, although I suspect you do. If you want to have an intelligent discussion about the tension that exists today between immersion gamers and commercialized/linear gamers and the lack of innovation, I welcome and invite it. If you are going to call me names, as you did earlier --"drama queen"-- you prove an important but also an unfortunate point about yourself.
Calm down. Come back. And I would be happy to have a "discussion" with you that is fair and free of name-calling. I want someone to prove me wrong. My ideas are not infallible, but I have learned a lot from this discussion. I neither like nor dislike you, but I appreciate your linear/commercialized perspective.
I don't have a "linear/commercialized" perspective. That's a meaningless phrase to me.
As for me, I'm not taking this personally. I just don't like you at all as a poster. You've offered nothing of substance except a bunch of circular gibberish, bullet points, centered text, charts, and whiny self-absorption about your poor, maligned "immersion gamer" (another totally meaningless phrase) life, with posts full of assumptions about people and nothing worthwhile to back any of it up.
Posting in this thread has been a total waste of my time that could have been used on something more valuable. Your entire argument is absurd on its face, lacks merit, and is ultimately meaningless.
Community
Immersion Gamer v. Linear/Commercialized Gamer
Lidane,
I created this table in response to your post that you do not care about innovation but care about "fun" and "polish." Everyone likes "fun" and "polish," but my premise was that immersion gamers desire and expect more. Fun and polish leaves an immersion gamer something to be satisfied.
It really showed me that there is a tension between immersion gamers and commercialized gamers. Would it be more accurate, or more palatable, if I replaced the word "commercialized" with "linear." Immersion Gamers v. Linear Gamers. Aside: I was also going to add "complex content" and "simple content."
I have chosen "commercialized" though because the premise of this whole topic is INNOVATION, and commercialized gamers claim that these new payment schemes are "innovative." It really is a creative crisis in MMORPGs today, and immersion gamers are losing - badly.
The only attacks on the merits of the struggle have been "jaded bullshit" and the use of technology. The use of technology is a red herring because no one disputes its importance and certainly not its use. It is the reverence of technology; the belief that without it innovation is not possible, and so forth. Commercialized gamers say that technology is innovative, and perhaps that is true for the graphics company . . . but a shiny new weapon is not exactly my idea of innovation, and it is certainly not the innovation that many of us desire. We want something more, deeper, and challenging than "fun" and "polish."
I welcome and invite, absent personal name-calling, any challenges to the idea that innovation is not missing or lacking in today's MMORPGs, and that commercialized/linear gamers do not exist.
I also need to fit in the "community" aspect of MMORPGs and what immersion and linear/commercialized gamers expectations and goals are in that respect.
Those are still just a bunch of useless catchphrases with no meaning. I don't care what words you use, the whole premise is still ridiculous.
Gamers are individuals that cannot and should not be placed into nonsense categories like "linear/commercialized" and "innovation/immersion" or whatever bullshit you're trotting out now. What draws one player to an MMO can't easily be applied across the board to another, and separating a genre filled with millions of players into two mutually exclusive categories is stupid.
You're over-generalizing and over-compartmentalizing millions of people and just so that you can whine that you're not being catered to by game developers. That's it. It's why this topic of yours has no meaning, no merit, and is ultimately useless. Your entire premise is flawed from the start.
One of the difficulties is that you said you were going to "recuse" yourself. You have also said that you do not "like" me. It is why you use language such as "bullshit" and MrBloodworth used "jaded bullshit."
The table has proven true in both of your vehement reverence of technology. I have explained why "immersion" and "linear/commercialized" gamers are useful concepts; there are other gamers such as PvPers and Raiders, among others.
Your personal dislike and bias, however, prevent you from thinking logically and having a meaningful discussion.
EDIT:
Honestly, you two are very similar as commercialized gamers, and illustrate my point:
Commercialized gamers, as shown by Lidane and MrBloodworth, are very similar; this is why it is difficult for me, and others, to pay 15.00 to associate with these kinds of communities.
I want to add an element to the table that includes "community," as immersion gamers and commercialized gamers have very different concepts of community and community values.