POLL for Casuals

SomeOldBloke

Would you play the type of game suggested by Meleager in this thread. 

I would not, I see no point to it.

 

Kyrodin

What's interesting about the game he/she proposed is that where is the challenge?

I would personally like to be the top dog in whatever MMO I decide to play, but with no time or dedication on my part then where is the reward? As a casual player, I have to put gaming at the bottom of my priorities, focusing instead on work, girlfriend, house, family, and friends. When I get the time/chance to play I want to think it challenges my mind.

I would like to see some MMOs that lean towards a solo-style player, but that can be achieved in the "sandbox" style game.

Venger

Sure I don't see the issue if player X can get item A in a month while player Y takes several months to get a equal item A.

Of course if mmo were designed around character developement instead of loot whoring PoS I guess we wouldn't really need to have this debate.

Sovrath

well, I say "yes" but with an explanation.

It would have to be a good game.

I don't play video games to challenge my mind though if they do then that's great. If I want a game to challenge my mind I play chess.

I don't exactly believe in solo players getting the same rewards as raiders/groupers (and I'm mostly a solo player) but I do believe that different/comparable rewards should be offered.

Otherwise that is like saying that you an play solo but in the end there is no point because you are in essence nerfed before you even begin. This is sort of happening on the LOTRO boards. Before Mines of Moria, one could get good gear in certain areas but one could buy crafted gear that was still pretty good and you could still function in the game and with a group if you wanted. Now they have the radiance gear and though some pieces aren't as decent as some non-radiance pieces, there seems to be a mindset that has players requiring group members to have radiance pieces.

Of course one can't do a raid that requires radiance but to ask players to have it so that they can do runs that have been made to acquire radiance pieces is ridiculous.

Not all games have to require solo play, I truly believe that. But if a game has solo play then the solo player must be able to fit into some part of the end game and do it well.

Therefore, alternate advancement is fine. I'm not quite sold on the offline advancement but can see why a game would have it. Eve has it and it seems to work well enough.

Personally I enjoy advancing my character myself and acquiring my bits and pieces and skills. But if the core of the gameplay was good then that might not matter.

In Guild Wars you really don't need a whole lot of money and gear is easy to get. For the player who wants the best gear with the best stats they would be unhappy because Guild Wars is about the gameplay a bit more than acquiring gear or lvls.

Therefore, if the gameplay is good I could play a game that was less gear and level oriented.

paulscott

I have no issues with the mechanic since it's still only a game.   So I'd give it as much of a chance as anything else.

Aladyleyna

I am going to have to say... no, I don't think I would be using such a system. I'm the kind of person who wants to play though the content, and I actually find it fun to do so. That is where I get my sense of achievement from. What is the use of me getting to such a high level in a game when I barely even played a game. Where is the sense of achivement in that, if it is your computer that does all the work, not you?

Then again, if I really did like what I hear about the game other than the system, I would probably play it too. I just won't use the system.

Axehilt

I'm not even technically a Casual, but I played D&D Tiny Adventures (facebook) a relatively lengthy amount of time.

You basically log on, decide which adventure to go on after stocking up in the store, make a few pre-emptive decisions on when your character will use items, and let it rip. Your character then automatically proceeds through the dungeon based on your choice and you have little input beyond that point, so it's a game you put very little time into to keep your character running.

MMORPG.com's players aren't really chasing that type of gameplay, but there is actually a pretty damn huge market for people who want to log into an interesting game for a very short period of time, make some decisions, and know that things are happening elsewhere while they continue with their life.

I don't think Tiny Adventures is a shining example of gameplay, because your decisions really aren't very interesting (although after you get your special abilities, they're at least a little improved.) But I think future offerings along the same line will improve the formula to create more interesting gameplay, and prove to be very addictive.

angus858

I voted "yes".  When I want a challenge I will go do something worthwhile in the real world.  When I do something good in the real world I get a sense of achievement.  That just does not happen for me in any computer game no matter how many levels or credits I "gain". 

I play a mmorpg when I want to pretend I'm a warrior, hang out with on-line friends, explore a virtual world, or smack ugly things with a sword.  It's just for fun.

BadSpock

"Being the best" means you have to have people that are worse then you.

It's a "big-dog" bully type of mentality that frankly, disgusts me.

Why? I found myself doing it. Being a top-dog raider with all the best stuff, I found myself looking down on other people and on their guilds and thought I was better... I called them scrubs and laughed at them...

No wonder people want more casual MMOs and want more solo friendly content, because at "end game" people like me are assholes.

Competition is healthy and competition is good, but in real life most people have a sense of fair play and honesty and sportsmanship because you have to look the other person in the eye, you are in front of a crowd, there are set rules and expectations... etc. Someone is out of place I'll be the first one to step up and give 'em the shot to the jaw they deserve.

In the online world, none of those "safeguards" exist. It's far too easy to forget that there is another living, breathing, feeling person on the other end of the screen. You have no way to retaliate, no moderation, nothing but a loose set of rules defined by code and scripts telling you what you can and cannot do.

And that "noob" you just trash talked and corpse camped etc. is another person.

If you find pleasure in doing that to other people in on-line games, you are a sick fuck and I feel sorry for you. I hope you never have children.

THIS is why the MMO genre is moving in the more casual friendly, solo direction. Because of assholes like me, and assholes like you that have to be the best at all costs and will step on anyone who gets in your way or who you feel is unworthy.

What ever happened to just enjoying the game and "to each their own" attitudes? 

altairzq

Never, ever.

Mikeha

ddfdf

LynxJSA

ddfdf

arctarus

You should include a poll that say 50% agree.

I vote No for the part of letting the game play by itself, whats the point in it? You buy a game, and in the end you didnt experiance much of the content and it ended???

But i would like to vote YES for the other half, that all players, in regardless of your p[laystyle, will ultimately reach the same "end" be it acquire of loot, experiance of content etc... It may take a person of solo playstyle longer to reach the goal, but i believe they would not mind...

And that's also the problem with the current mmos, they cant cater for all during end-game.

 

 

Turel_Azure

I wouldn't play a game that did all the work for me.  I just don't see the point in that, and the people who actually put more effort in have nothing to show for it.

 

However, I AM a casual, but a former hard-core raider, and one thing I wish developers did was design their games with a question in mind:

How long will the player be spending on this aspect per day?

 

Should raids take 8 hours?  I say no.  I think that any big group task should max out at 3 hours, INCLUDING the time to get everyone grouped and there (but only compensating for a few wipes).  Warcraft gets kudos for doing all it can to make the group-up process as fast as possible, but their dungeons with 16 bosses just wear me down.  Because come on, you know people don't want to split up their raiding time.  Why go on two nights?  Even if you don't mind splitting it up, that doesn't mean everyone else wants to stop.

And yeah, I've been on faster dungeon runs in Warcraft, but they still take time.

 

MMOs should reward skilled play and intelligent use of time, but not outright time spent in game.  I'm not saying that everything should be trivialized, but I'm saying that you should have things that have a design time-limit.

Quests: 5 minutes to 90 minutes, with exceptions for large scale ones.

Crafting: 20 minutes to 2 hours, with exceptions for large scale items (houses, siege weapons, etc)

Dungeons: 45 minutes to 2 hours, compenstating for a few wipes AND for group up and travel time

Raids: 45 minutes to 3 hours, compensating for same as above.

If you're hard core, you can just go to two raids.  Casuals to one.  Casuals that can't make that commitment well...just find some crafting or quests to do.  There are limits to making a game that's decent, and one of those limits is that you can't make it play for you, as no challenge = no interest.

Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by mbd1968

I see no point to it.

When you're a casual, a game doesn't have to have "a point".

It just has to be fun.

Yes, I'd play a game like that described in the linked thread; I have first-hand knowledge that raid encounters are no more challenging than a well-crafted solo encounter; they're just typically based on "quicktime-event" style insta-wipe possibilities and random chance designed to artificially prolong the experience.

I don't have a strong dislike for the levelling process though, as long as it's not dependant on mob-grinding.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Hammertime1

Originally posted by angus858


I voted "yes".  When I want a challenge I will go do something worthwhile in the real world.  When I do something good in the real world I get a sense of achievement.  That just does not happen for me in any computer game no matter how many levels or credits I "gain". 
I play a mmorpg when I want to pretend I'm a warrior, hang out with on-line friends, explore a virtual world, or smack ugly things with a sword.  It's just for fun.

 

I was going to add my own comment, but this is the comment that I would have made, so...

Godliest

If the rest of the game was good yes. The two aspects he present I find to be rather insignificant if the rest of the game was good enough to compensate for it.