Well, technically, this forum is also an MMO game, sort of. Skill based and all. There is also advancement (forum count) and veterans vs rookies (date joined). It also has a system to count active people (star system).
Only problem ... combat kind of sucks. Most posters don't have the brains for it (myself included).
Anyone can use the OP's argument against any video game because you can really simplify a lot of games. Video games in general are all about making fun out of repetitive tasks after all.
I've been playing Neverwinter Nights a bunch again, for example. The fact is though this game could really be narrowed down to me running around killing monsters and gaining levels. Of course anyone who as ever played the game can tell that certainly isn't the case and the game is actually very deep with an engaging storyline.
I'm not going to say that the MMO genre is perfect, it still has a lot of "catching up" room because it is such a young genre comparatively. At any rate though I find that PvP in an MMO is something you can't really replicate with another game (certainly not an FPS like some people would say). In reality I'm sure there are plenty of people who actually really enjoy raiding, and there is nothing out there on the market that can replicate that either.
As far as the article goes, holy hell is it stupid. In fact he mentioned his only MMORPG experience at all was with some random f2p game in which he played for a few hours. Sure, it's a "satire" piece but not only is it not funny but it's pretty damn wrong. Like I said I can reduce any genre to seem like mindless button presses if I wanted to. Afterall in Halo all you do is move your analog stick around to aim, hit "RT" to fire and hit something else to throw grenades. (I don't really play halo, but I'm also going to target the most user friendly FPS just because I can). You don't need to tell me about the inner workings of Halo, see, because I already know them!
Great, another person who can't see how bizarrely warped their own impression of MMORPGs is.
On Time Investment If the author didn't like Super Mario World, he'd have quit in the first 5 minutes. But he played the MMORPG longer than Super Mario World and Shadow of the Colossus combined. Whose to blame here?
On Game Accessibility If the guy mentions playing Super Mario World, it's hard to take him seriously when he claims "only an idiot would have a hard time" playing MMORPGs.
Because even idiots can enjoy Super Mario World!
And please name me a game whose bosses can't be summed up in FAQs.
For that matter, try to name a non-MMORPG with more boss FAQs than WOW (or similar MMORPG.) You can't. MMORPGs involve a huge amount of knowledge; quite a bit more than most genres. In fact that's part of why they're played so long -- MMORPGs are constantly twisting the existing gameplay into some slightly different variation and they do it a lot more than other genres.
On Game Quality Ginormo Sword and whatever MMORPG the author played are bad games.
So it's almost understandable that his opinion is what it is. If I played all the crappy FPSes, I'd think it was a crappy genre.
On This Thread In conclusion, yes someone "came out" and stated a generic distaste for the MMORPG genre as a whole. As rounner neatly points out, this happens daily.
Typically the daily "I'm sad that I haven't discovered MMORPGs are wrong for me" posts at least come from experienced players though, and not some random guy who put 20 hours into a bad game and judged the genre based on one game.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I remember my first online gaming done on a MUD. The novelty quickly became engaging and even though we joked that playing it was like participating in a "chatroom with a pulse" it went beyond that. Mmorpg-type games are a great stress-release for me and even more a really fun way to stay in touch with friends (and make new ones.) I'd be content playing a MUD or MOO if only to talk to friends and wind down having fun playing a game after a day at work. Being able to do both simultaneously is what sold me on this genre and the primary reason why I signed up for an account on this site.
I know it is easy to ridicule and over-simplify this genre but in the end we all have our reasons for playing and I think the majority do it for reasons similiar to me. If it works for you, great! If not, try something else. PVE/PVP, sandbox/end-product, raid/solo, backstory or a simple, non-sensical premise...does it really matter?
Anyone can use the OP's argument against any video game because you can really simplify a lot of games. Video games in general are all about making fun out of repetitive tasks after all.
So did anyone try this Ginormo Sword game that the article mentions? I'm like half done with the map, but that sorceress in the Hut of witch Bufoo is totally pwning me every time. Only managed to get her down to 75% or something like that so far. Much harder than any raid mob I've encountered in WoW. Maybe if I grind Nagas for a day or two... then I can get a sword big enough to take up most of the screen and she will be toast.... muhahaha...
I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
I can just imagine this guy sitting in a starbucks contimplating the intricies of "mathcore" over a latte with his...self. Or maybe I'm just stero-typing and since I don't know everything about "jungian philosophy" I probably shouldn't say anything about MMOs.... seriously though, this guy takes elietism to a new lvl! he must have been grinding those lvls out for weeks, probably years!
Hell, just look at all the threads on this site bemoaning how bad the genre has become. I think it's time for the more honest among you to admit that the genre was never very good to begin with.
Saddest thing is that some people want to go back to those "good ol' days" and almost everything new is met with furious hostility. Some, if not most, recent experiences have been disappointing, I admit it, but cautious optimism is still in order. It's better to take a risk and try something new than to do nothing and cry after something that is never coming back.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Hell, just look at all the threads on this site bemoaning how bad the genre has become. I think it's time for the more honest among you to admit that the genre was never very good to begin with.
Saddest thing is that some people want to go back to those "good ol' days" and almost everything new is met with furious hostility. Some, if not most, recent experiences have been disappointing, I admit it, but cautious optimism is still in order. It's better to take a risk and try something new than to do nothing and cry after something that is never coming back.
I think must of us want the "good ol' days", for the level of difficulty, not for many other reasons, well thats me atleast. From the likes of WOW onwards the games have got progressively carebear for the idiots who moan, as they want to play 5mins and get epixxxx weapons.
Great, another person who can't see how bizarrely warped their own impression of MMORPGs is. On Time Investment
If the author didn't like Super Mario World, he'd have quit in the first 5 minutes. But he played the MMORPG longer than Super Mario World and Shadow of the Colossus combined. Whose to blame here? Most of us that don't like MMORPGs feel that we have to put that much time in to give a "fair shake." The most common scenario is that our MMO addicted friend suggests a game to us and then, because our friend is so many levels above us that he can't play with us or even show us around, we play the game until we get feel for the game before announcing that it isn't our thing. It's at this point that our OCS afflicted pal goes into defensive nerd rage and tells us that we didn't spend enough time In the game to give a fair chance. What? You only played it for 200 hours? Dude, that's just the tip if of the iceburg!!!! Yeah, as if I want to sit through another 200 hours or more to get to the fun part.... On Game Accessibility
If the guy mentions playing Super Mario World, it's hard to take him seriously when he claims "only an idiot would have a hard time" playing MMORPGs. Because even idiots can enjoy Super Mario World! Yep, anyone can do this. And I Wanna Be The Guy? Brain dead!! And please name me a game whose bosses can't be summed up in FAQs. For that matter, try to name a non-MMORPG with more boss FAQs than WOW (or similar MMORPG.) You can't. MMORPGs involve a huge amount of knowledge; quite a bit more than most genres. In fact that's part of why they're played so long -- MMORPGs are constantly twisting the existing gameplay into some slightly different variation and they do it a lot more than other genres. What gameplay? It's a straight up comparison of numbers! At least with something like Super Mario Bros. or Don Pachi there's the possibility that you'll run out of lives / continues and have to start all over. With most MMORPGs, if you can't handle something, you just run off and grind up your level and gear, or get twinked by your friends, then go back and one hit your way through a quest. It's really fuckin' sad when RPGs like Angband and Shiren The Wanderer, games that are decades old and take up less than 100 megs of memory, have deeper and more challenging gameplay than the most recent AAA MMORPG. On Game Quality
Ginormo Sword and whatever MMORPG the author played are bad games. Most MMORPGs are bad games. They're bad games with chat rooms built in. So it's almost understandable that his opinion is what it is. If I played all the crappy FPSes, I'd think it was a crappy genre. I can still list more good FPS games from the last five years than you can name good MMORPGs from beginning of the genre. On This Thread
In conclusion, yes someone "came out" and stated a generic distaste for the MMORPG genre as a whole. As rounner neatly points out, this happens daily. Typically the daily "I'm sad that I haven't discovered MMORPGs are wrong for me" posts at least come from experienced players though, and not some random guy who put 20 hours into a bad game and judged the genre based on one game.
Again, how many hours do I have to play? In any other genre, including single player RPGs, I wouldn't need any more than 30 minutes tops to determine if a game was good or bad. And believe me, I've spent hundreds of hours just trying these games out. So far, the only MMORPG that i would call good is Eve Online. I would throw Guild Wars in there but I don't want retread the "it's not really an MMO" ground again.
The only two things keeping this genre afloat is the community aspect and the reward payouts. As far as community, you can get that from a chat room, a forum, or sites like Facebook and LJ. On the reward payout thing, I find it HIGHLY unethical to charge people to run around a rigged Skinner box.
All games are just a series of button clicks and mouse movements. It is easy to say that those things are easy and any simpleton can do them, especially when the person making the claims has never done them.
I'm copying and pasting this from another site. The quote is the author of an article responding to people defending a shitty game. Since the game in question is really just a parody of MMORPGs, the author is also responding to the enraged defenders of the genre. I agree with the author of the article, but I probably would have been more diplomatic... "I played an MMO for twenty hours (Runescape or something to that effect.) This twenty hours of playtime could equate to me beating both Super Mario World and Shadows of the Collossus; something I did just last weekend. Again, just because I haven't spent literal weeks of gametime in these shitty systems doesn't mean I do not comphrend them and their inner workings. Over the years my WoW friend has relayed the healer tank and DPS triumvirate, the grinding process to lvl 80, the so called intricacies of PVP, etc. Only a fucking idiot would have a problem playing this game; character creation is only simple min/max optimization, boss fights consist of a few simple steps that could be read on a readily available FAQ, and gameplay is nothing more than spamming keybinded abilities." And then he goes on to say: "I myself play beer-and-pretzel games and the occasional tabletop RPG, so I can understand playing a game for social reasons. Since my village is so isolated and small, my friend found it hard to find people to discuss Jungian psychology and mathcore, so it's natural he looked for a social outlet. However, this does not excuse Blizzard from providing a chat function in lieu of a good game." While the guy targets World of Warcraft specifically, a lot of what he's saying can be applied to the entire genre. I'm not trying to start a flame war here. But these issues have been brought up on these forums before and these games have been defended with the same empty, canned responses over and over again. Hell, just look at all the threads on this site bemoaning how bad the genre has become. I think it's time for the more honest among you to admit that the genre was never very good to begin with. You can read the whole article and comments here.
If this is how you all feel then go down to Wal-Mart and buy the latest POS stand alone and move on.
Assassin's like to do it in the dark and from behind.
I can just imagine this guy sitting in a starbucks contimplating the intricies of "mathcore" over a latte with his...self. Or maybe I'm just stero-typing and since I don't know everything about "jungian philosophy" I probably shouldn't say anything about MMOs.... seriously though, this guy takes elietism to a new lvl! he must have been grinding those lvls out for weeks, probably years!
I'd simply like to point out that there is no such thing as "Jungian Philosophy". That is becuase Carl Jung was in fact NOT a philosopher. He was a psychiatrist.
When it came to philosophy Jung was a staunch Nietzschean as is anybody else who isn't an imbecile.
I can just imagine this guy sitting in a starbucks contimplating the intricies of "mathcore" over a latte with his...self. Or maybe I'm just stero-typing and since I don't know everything about "jungian philosophy" I probably shouldn't say anything about MMOs.... seriously though, this guy takes elietism to a new lvl! he must have been grinding those lvls out for weeks, probably years!
I'd simply like to point out that there is no such thing as "Jungian Philosophy". That is becuase Carl Jung was in fact NOT a philosopher. He was a psychiatrist.
When it came to philosophy Jung was a staunch Nietzschean as is anybody else who isn't an imbecile.
Hmm, the Jungian bit is somewhat iffy... he did start out as a psychologist (pardon me psychiatrist) and then off he went into what we can term philosophy or better yet metaphysics to be more precise.. However nice to see you bring up Nietzsche to this however cursorily... tho he was a nominal philosopher his works deal in middle-class psychology more than anything else. And frustrated mid-class is what we'd call the main target audience for mmos... if we were in a cynical mood.
If anyone has an ambition to do a profitable "killer mmo" he can't go any better than jungian/nietzchean philosophy/psychology...
Yes, finally someone can out and said they didn't like World of Warcraft! No one on this website ever says that! Oh, and they bashed the genre as a whole! What leaders of a new way of thought!
The genre used to be good, at least in the SWG I stumbled into quite a few years ago, and enjoyed so much before it was stripped away. Haven't been able to find a game since then that is as good. Maybe you think the genre has never been good, but it doesn't matter. I know that it used to be better.
Originally posted by Jimmy_Scythe Most of us that don't like MMORPGs feel that we have to put that much time in to give a "fair shake." The most common scenario is that our MMO addicted friend suggests a game to us and then, because our friend is so many levels above us that he can't play with us or even show us around, we play the game until we get feel for the game before announcing that it isn't our thing. It's at this point that our OCS afflicted pal goes into defensive nerd rage and tells us that we didn't spend enough time In the game to give a fair chance. What? You only played it for 200 hours? Dude, that's just the tip if of the iceburg!!!! Yeah, as if I want to sit through another 200 hours or more to get to the fun part....
You totally missed my point. If you take longer trying out Game A than you would take trying out a normal game (like Mario), it's your own fault. You can't get mad at others about it.
Unless you're particularly vulnerable to peer pressure, the fact that your friends say it gets better 200 hours in shouldn't matter.
On Game Accessibility If the guy mentions playing Super Mario World, it's hard to take him seriously when he claims "only an idiot would have a hard time" playing MMORPGs. Because even idiots can enjoy Super Mario World! Yep, anyone can do this. And I Wanna Be The Guy? Brain dead!!
Accessibility refers to how easy it is for the average player to get in and play the game, so videos of Upper Tier gameplay are off-topic and therefore don't address my point.
What gameplay? It's a straight up comparison of numbers! At least with something like Super Mario Bros. or Don Pachi there's the possibility that you'll run out of lives / continues and have to start all over. With most MMORPGs, if you can't handle something, you just run off and grind up your level and gear, or get twinked by your friends, then go back and one hit your way through a quest.
If you take offense at progression, why are you playing videogame RPGs? Progression is what they're all about! It doesn't make them less complex/deep. (in the better games, it layers on additional depth on top of things.)
It does make them easier, but in a way which is fair. Failure in games is often a wall of the skill plateau. In most games, this wall is insurmountable - you just have to get better. RPGs are appealing because they provide a secondary method: by playing the game more, the wall shrinks in size.
An important trait of MMORPGs then becomes "keeping things challening in a world where your character constantly grows stronger".
WOW doesn't accomplish this particularly well: if you succeed at content above your level, typically you receive poor compensation for the challenge you put yourself through (and as far as gear goes, you'd get the exact same loot whether you're 5 levels below or above that dungeon boss.)
COX nails it though: the greater difficulty you tackle, the greater your rewards.
It's really fuckin' sad when RPGs like Angband and Shiren The Wanderer, games that are decades old and take up less than 100 megs of memory, have deeper and more challenging gameplay than the most recent AAA MMORPG.
Having played ~6 hours into Shiren (and 200+ hours into better roguelikes), I find it amusing that you feel it's deeper than WOW.
None of the challenge or breadth of content of Nethack.
Even though a 6-hour WOW character is shallow, you at least have decisions to make of what ability(ies) you use. 6 hours into Shiren I had perhaps 1/4th of the combat options/decisions I'd have in a 6-hour-old WOW character.
Most MMORPGs are bad games. They're bad games with chat rooms built in. So it's almost understandable that his opinion is what it is. If I played all the crappy FPSes, I'd think it was a crappy genre. I can still list more good FPS games from the last five years than you can name good MMORPGs from beginning of the genre.
And it continues to be obvious that you don't like MMORPGs. Congrats. Play different games.
The genre isn't going to magically shift into something entirely different because you complain about it.
So far, the only MMORPG that i would call good is Eve Online. I would throw Guild Wars in there but I don't want retread the "it's not really an MMO" ground again. The only two things keeping this genre afloat is the community aspect and the reward payouts.
If you dropped Community and Rewards from MMORPGs and made me a well-designed a Coop Multiplayer Role-Based Game, I would play it. It'd be pure MMORPG role-based combat, with teams taking on challenging coop levels.
That's what enjoy about MMORPGs: playing a specific role, in a group.
Particularly when there are many potential combinations of roles (such as games like COX where you can forgo tanks entirely if you have enough Controllers to disable mobs.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Step back! I'm an Electrician! There might be faulty wiring involved here, I don't want you to get hurt.
I'm not quite sure sticking your finger in the light socket counts for electrician certification.
FYI, that's 3 electrical sockets, 5 complete house wiring jobs including 2 houses worth over 7 million dollars, multiple government contracts in the past including the installation of a massive V12 Diesel Caterpillar generator. I think fixing a neon sign wired to a toggle switch shouldn't be much of a problem
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Yep, anyone can do this. And I Wanna Be The Guy? Brain dead!!
Yeah, your argument is bordering on a strawman. You're not only posting a Mario hack level (I.E not an actual product) but also an indie product. I could post the FF11 boss which took, what, 20 hours to fight and still wouldn't go down. There is plenty of challenge in the MMO genre, you just have to look for it like anything else.
When it came to philosophy Jung was a staunch Nietzschean as is anybody else who isn't an imbecile.
Convictions are greater enemies of the truth than lies. Who was it said that again? If you're into Nietzsche, I'd be careful how you through around absolutes
On the subject of social interaction in MMO's, back in the day there was more partly because there was more downtime built into the games as part of the time-sink factor. This led to more socialising because while waiting for health or mana to regen there was little else to do in games like DAoC or EQ.
These days, games are all about reducing the downtime to near zero because, lets face it, downtime is boring.
Its hard to get a decent balance between the two - when you are frantically mashing keys its hard to get good social interaction, even when you have voice comms. Ironically, I tend to find that roleplayers have better social interaction than the rest (if a bit highly strung at times), purely because these guys talk and talk and talk and talk. They are often at least as good gamers as anyone else, but their focus is unabashedly on interaction as much as the content.
This then leads to an interesting question: Is it the fault of the game that social interaction is poor, or the gamers themselves? Do the games lack mechanisms that encourage social interaction or do the players themselves have poor social skills and just want something else to blame it on.
Some gamers would have you believe that it is entirely down to the game. However, as with all things the truth is probably somewhere in between. The easier it is to have social interaction, the more likely it is to occur. Any game with mechanics that causes people to have plenty of time sitting around chatting is likely to be a game that has a lot of downtime (boring!) or a lot of reason not to be doing the stuff that is considered more fun, for example, guarding keeps or battle objectives in PvP games while waiting for attacks. Too much of this and the game will die faster than a doughnut on an island full of starving cops.
My view is I see the game itself as a springboard for social interaction and its up to the players to make it happen. The game itself is not at fault generally unless it has a very poor interface.
I like MMOs because I like the people in the communities I've played alongside now for many years. There's some real life characters with a lot of character that live halfway across the planet from me and without this medium I would never have been lucky enough to encounter them. I have been quite loud elsewhere about how MMO companies themselves need to evolve but that I believe will happen in time... with some pushing from the community.
Most of us that don't like MMORPGs feel that we have to put that much time in to give a "fair shake." The most common scenario is that our MMO addicted friend suggests a game to us and then, because our friend is so many levels above us that he can't play with us or even show us around, we play the game until we get feel for the game before announcing that it isn't our thing. It's at this point that our OCS afflicted pal goes into defensive nerd rage and tells us that we didn't spend enough time In the game to give a fair chance.
What? You only played it for 200 hours? Dude, that's just the tip if of the iceburg!!!!
Yeah, as if I want to sit through another 200 hours or more to get to the fun part....
You totally missed my point. If you take longer trying out Game A than you would take trying out a normal game (like Mario), it's your own fault. You can't get mad at others about it.
Unless you're particularly vulnerable to peer pressure, the fact that your friends say it gets better 200 hours in shouldn't matter.
And you're totally missing the point that the author of that article made a sincere effort to enjoy an MMORPG and couldn't. Most of us dig the idea of an MMORPG. Most of us really want to like MMORPGs. Unfortunately, only those with self diagnosed Asperger's Syndrom (read social retards with superiority complexs) can like MMORPGs.
On Game Accessibility
If the guy mentions playing Super Mario World, it's hard to take him seriously when he claims "only an idiot would have a hard time" playing MMORPGs.
Accessibility refers to how easy it is for the average player to get in and play the game, so videos of Upper Tier gameplay are off-topic and therefore don't address my point.
I still don't think someone would have trouble figuring out how to control Mario or the kid. Minutes to learn, lifetime to master. But there is no mastery in MMORPGs, just rote memorization devoid of soul or skill.
What gameplay? It's a straight up comparison of numbers! At least with something like Super Mario Bros. or Don Pachi there's the possibility that you'll run out of lives / continues and have to start all over. With most MMORPGs, if you can't handle something, you just run off and grind up your level and gear, or get twinked by your friends, then go back and one hit your way through a quest.
If you take offense at progression, why are you playing videogame RPGs? Progression is what they're all about! It doesn't make them less complex/deep. (in the better games, it layers on additional depth on top of things.)
Progression, by itself, does not denote a lack of depth or need for skill. having played games like the original Phantasy Star, Legend of Legia and Final Fantasy Tactics, I'm well aware that RPGs can be damn difficult. MMORPGs cut out all tactical complexity, as well as a significant amount of logistical awareness, and reduce the RPG element to requiring all the skill of Peggle. Less than that actually since you can stack the odds overwhelmingly in your favor.
It does make them easier, but in a way which is fair. Failure in games is often a wall of the skill plateau. In most games, this wall is insurmountable - you just have to get better. RPGs are appealing because they provide a secondary method: by playing the game more, the wall shrinks in size.
Which is the exact opposite of the way games should work. The idea is to make it more challenging the further you get.
An important trait of MMORPGs then becomes "keeping things challening in a world where your character constantly grows stronger".
WOW doesn't accomplish this particularly well: if you succeed at content above your level, typically you receive poor compensation for the challenge you put yourself through (and as far as gear goes, you'd get the exact same loot whether you're 5 levels below or above that dungeon boss.)
COX nails it though: the greater difficulty you tackle, the greater your rewards.
I'll agree that COX was well made in this regard. Too bad the content could be blown through in a good three months of play. Although I understand this has changed with player made content being introduced.
It's really fuckin' sad when RPGs like Angband and Shiren The Wanderer, games that are decades old and take up less than 100 megs of memory, have deeper and more challenging gameplay than the most recent AAA MMORPG.
Having played ~6 hours into Shiren (and 200+ hours into better roguelikes), I find it amusing that you feel it's deeper than WOW.
Isn't it neat how you totally ignored Angband and went straight for Shiren. No cherry picking here! Nope.
None of the challenge or breadth of content of Nethack.
And Nethack has none of the tactical finesse of Angband. And neither Nethack nor Angband have the sheer scope of Ancient Domains of Mystery. The point is, these games don't even have graphics and they kick the average triple-A MMORPG's ass.
Even though a 6-hour WOW character is shallow, you at least have decisions to make of what ability(ies) you use. 6 hours into Shiren I had perhaps 1/4th of the combat options/decisions I'd have in a 6-hour-old WOW character.
Decisions? You're kidding right?
You actually have to consider what hotkeys to press and what equipment to put on? I'll give you a hint, You press the hotkeys that cause the most damage, unless your health is at less than half then you heal, and you equip gear with higher stats than what you currently have.
Most MMORPGs are bad games. They're bad games with chat rooms built in.
So it's almost understandable that his opinion is what it is. If I played all the crappy FPSes, I'd think it was a crappy genre.
I can still list more good FPS games from the last five years than you can name good MMORPGs from beginning of the genre.
And it continues to be obvious that you don't like MMORPGs. Congrats. Play different games.
The genre isn't going to magically shift into something entirely different because you complain about it.
So far, the only MMORPG that i would call good is Eve Online. I would throw Guild Wars in there but I don't want retread the "it's not really an MMO" ground again.
The only two things keeping this genre afloat is the community aspect and the reward payouts.
If you dropped Community and Rewards from MMORPGs and made me a well-designed a Coop Multiplayer Role-Based Game, I would play it. It'd be pure MMORPG role-based combat, with teams taking on challenging coop levels.
That's what enjoy about MMORPGs: playing a specific role, in a group.
Particularly when there are many potential combinations of roles (such as games like COX where you can forgo tanks entirely if you have enough Controllers to disable mobs.)
In most MMORPGs there are not "many potential combinations of roles." In most MMORPGs, there is only the holy trinity. Tanker, healer and nuker. You can spice things up with the occasional ranged or melee DPS character, but they aren't exactly essential to the success of a group.
If I were playing Street Fighter 2, I wouldn't just spam the same attacks, in the same order, in the same rhythm throughout a game. But that is exactly what you do in most MMORPGs. It's less of an RPG and more a game of Simon.
Comments
Well, technically, this forum is also an MMO game, sort of. Skill based and all. There is also advancement (forum count) and veterans vs rookies (date joined). It also has a system to count active people (star system).
Only problem ... combat kind of sucks. Most posters don't have the brains for it (myself included).
Anyone can use the OP's argument against any video game because you can really simplify a lot of games. Video games in general are all about making fun out of repetitive tasks after all.
I've been playing Neverwinter Nights a bunch again, for example. The fact is though this game could really be narrowed down to me running around killing monsters and gaining levels. Of course anyone who as ever played the game can tell that certainly isn't the case and the game is actually very deep with an engaging storyline.
I'm not going to say that the MMO genre is perfect, it still has a lot of "catching up" room because it is such a young genre comparatively. At any rate though I find that PvP in an MMO is something you can't really replicate with another game (certainly not an FPS like some people would say). In reality I'm sure there are plenty of people who actually really enjoy raiding, and there is nothing out there on the market that can replicate that either.
As far as the article goes, holy hell is it stupid. In fact he mentioned his only MMORPG experience at all was with some random f2p game in which he played for a few hours. Sure, it's a "satire" piece but not only is it not funny but it's pretty damn wrong. Like I said I can reduce any genre to seem like mindless button presses if I wanted to. Afterall in Halo all you do is move your analog stick around to aim, hit "RT" to fire and hit something else to throw grenades. (I don't really play halo, but I'm also going to target the most user friendly FPS just because I can). You don't need to tell me about the inner workings of Halo, see, because I already know them!
What a joke.
Great, another person who can't see how bizarrely warped their own impression of MMORPGs is.
On Time Investment
If the author didn't like Super Mario World, he'd have quit in the first 5 minutes. But he played the MMORPG longer than Super Mario World and Shadow of the Colossus combined. Whose to blame here?
On Game Accessibility
If the guy mentions playing Super Mario World, it's hard to take him seriously when he claims "only an idiot would have a hard time" playing MMORPGs.
Because even idiots can enjoy Super Mario World!
And please name me a game whose bosses can't be summed up in FAQs.
For that matter, try to name a non-MMORPG with more boss FAQs than WOW (or similar MMORPG.) You can't. MMORPGs involve a huge amount of knowledge; quite a bit more than most genres. In fact that's part of why they're played so long -- MMORPGs are constantly twisting the existing gameplay into some slightly different variation and they do it a lot more than other genres.
On Game Quality
Ginormo Sword and whatever MMORPG the author played are bad games.
So it's almost understandable that his opinion is what it is. If I played all the crappy FPSes, I'd think it was a crappy genre.
On This Thread
In conclusion, yes someone "came out" and stated a generic distaste for the MMORPG genre as a whole. As rounner neatly points out, this happens daily.
Typically the daily "I'm sad that I haven't discovered MMORPGs are wrong for me" posts at least come from experienced players though, and not some random guy who put 20 hours into a bad game and judged the genre based on one game.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Another day, another "the genre is dead thread". I think most of us know that by now. A shitty article ain't going to change much.
I remember my first online gaming done on a MUD. The novelty quickly became engaging and even though we joked that playing it was like participating in a "chatroom with a pulse" it went beyond that. Mmorpg-type games are a great stress-release for me and even more a really fun way to stay in touch with friends (and make new ones.) I'd be content playing a MUD or MOO if only to talk to friends and wind down having fun playing a game after a day at work. Being able to do both simultaneously is what sold me on this genre and the primary reason why I signed up for an account on this site.
I know it is easy to ridicule and over-simplify this genre but in the end we all have our reasons for playing and I think the majority do it for reasons similiar to me. If it works for you, great! If not, try something else. PVE/PVP, sandbox/end-product, raid/solo, backstory or a simple, non-sensical premise...does it really matter?
QFT
So did anyone try this Ginormo Sword game that the article mentions? I'm like half done with the map, but that sorceress in the Hut of witch Bufoo is totally pwning me every time. Only managed to get her down to 75% or something like that so far. Much harder than any raid mob I've encountered in WoW. Maybe if I grind Nagas for a day or two... then I can get a sword big enough to take up most of the screen and she will be toast.... muhahaha...
I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
I can just imagine this guy sitting in a starbucks contimplating the intricies of "mathcore" over a latte with his...self. Or maybe I'm just stero-typing and since I don't know everything about "jungian philosophy" I probably shouldn't say anything about MMOs.... seriously though, this guy takes elietism to a new lvl! he must have been grinding those lvls out for weeks, probably years!
I have to agree that Wow is the arch villan here. Of course you have to give EQ credit too, as Wow is just an extension of that game.
The genre is sick because no one wants to risk making something too far from the Wow mold.
Saddest thing is that some people want to go back to those "good ol' days" and almost everything new is met with furious hostility. Some, if not most, recent experiences have been disappointing, I admit it, but cautious optimism is still in order. It's better to take a risk and try something new than to do nothing and cry after something that is never coming back.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Saddest thing is that some people want to go back to those "good ol' days" and almost everything new is met with furious hostility. Some, if not most, recent experiences have been disappointing, I admit it, but cautious optimism is still in order. It's better to take a risk and try something new than to do nothing and cry after something that is never coming back.
I think must of us want the "good ol' days", for the level of difficulty, not for many other reasons, well thats me atleast. From the likes of WOW onwards the games have got progressively carebear for the idiots who moan, as they want to play 5mins and get epixxxx weapons.
Again, how many hours do I have to play? In any other genre, including single player RPGs, I wouldn't need any more than 30 minutes tops to determine if a game was good or bad. And believe me, I've spent hundreds of hours just trying these games out. So far, the only MMORPG that i would call good is Eve Online. I would throw Guild Wars in there but I don't want retread the "it's not really an MMO" ground again.
The only two things keeping this genre afloat is the community aspect and the reward payouts. As far as community, you can get that from a chat room, a forum, or sites like Facebook and LJ. On the reward payout thing, I find it HIGHLY unethical to charge people to run around a rigged Skinner box.
All games are just a series of button clicks and mouse movements. It is easy to say that those things are easy and any simpleton can do them, especially when the person making the claims has never done them.
If this is how you all feel then go down to Wal-Mart and buy the latest POS stand alone and move on.
Assassin's like to do it in the dark and from behind.
I'd simply like to point out that there is no such thing as "Jungian Philosophy". That is becuase Carl Jung was in fact NOT a philosopher. He was a psychiatrist.
When it came to philosophy Jung was a staunch Nietzschean as is anybody else who isn't an imbecile.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
I'd simply like to point out that there is no such thing as "Jungian Philosophy". That is becuase Carl Jung was in fact NOT a philosopher. He was a psychiatrist.
When it came to philosophy Jung was a staunch Nietzschean as is anybody else who isn't an imbecile.
Hmm, the Jungian bit is somewhat iffy... he did start out as a psychologist (pardon me psychiatrist) and then off he went into what we can term philosophy or better yet metaphysics to be more precise.. However nice to see you bring up Nietzsche to this however cursorily... tho he was a nominal philosopher his works deal in middle-class psychology more than anything else. And frustrated mid-class is what we'd call the main target audience for mmos... if we were in a cynical mood.
If anyone has an ambition to do a profitable "killer mmo" he can't go any better than jungian/nietzchean philosophy/psychology...
Yes, finally someone can out and said they didn't like World of Warcraft! No one on this website ever says that! Oh, and they bashed the genre as a whole! What leaders of a new way of thought!
Give me a break.
Doktar - 70 Troll Priest - Perenolde
Are people having fun playing their game of choice? Check
Are they forcing you to play the game? Nope
Then what's the problem? People have a right to spend their money and time on whatever they want.
Just because YOU don't like something doesn't mean it's bad. I hate to break it to you, but your personal opinion doesn't really mean jack shit.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Fully agree here as if you read my mind.
I just tell people who defend parodies of genres and good games this. "Ya know, drugs are bad for you." I'm looking at you WorldOfWarCrack.
You totally missed my point. If you take longer trying out Game A than you would take trying out a normal game (like Mario), it's your own fault. You can't get mad at others about it.
Unless you're particularly vulnerable to peer pressure, the fact that your friends say it gets better 200 hours in shouldn't matter.
Accessibility refers to how easy it is for the average player to get in and play the game, so videos of Upper Tier gameplay are off-topic and therefore don't address my point.
If you take offense at progression, why are you playing videogame RPGs? Progression is what they're all about! It doesn't make them less complex/deep. (in the better games, it layers on additional depth on top of things.)
It does make them easier, but in a way which is fair. Failure in games is often a wall of the skill plateau. In most games, this wall is insurmountable - you just have to get better. RPGs are appealing because they provide a secondary method: by playing the game more, the wall shrinks in size.
An important trait of MMORPGs then becomes "keeping things challening in a world where your character constantly grows stronger".
WOW doesn't accomplish this particularly well: if you succeed at content above your level, typically you receive poor compensation for the challenge you put yourself through (and as far as gear goes, you'd get the exact same loot whether you're 5 levels below or above that dungeon boss.)
COX nails it though: the greater difficulty you tackle, the greater your rewards.
Having played ~6 hours into Shiren (and 200+ hours into better roguelikes), I find it amusing that you feel it's deeper than WOW.
None of the challenge or breadth of content of Nethack.
Even though a 6-hour WOW character is shallow, you at least have decisions to make of what ability(ies) you use. 6 hours into Shiren I had perhaps 1/4th of the combat options/decisions I'd have in a 6-hour-old WOW character.
And it continues to be obvious that you don't like MMORPGs. Congrats. Play different games.
The genre isn't going to magically shift into something entirely different because you complain about it.
If you dropped Community and Rewards from MMORPGs and made me a well-designed a Coop Multiplayer Role-Based Game, I would play it. It'd be pure MMORPG role-based combat, with teams taking on challenging coop levels.
That's what enjoy about MMORPGs: playing a specific role, in a group.
Particularly when there are many potential combinations of roles (such as games like COX where you can forgo tanks entirely if you have enough Controllers to disable mobs.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I'm not quite sure sticking your finger in the light socket counts for electrician certification.
FYI, that's 3 electrical sockets, 5 complete house wiring jobs including 2 houses worth over 7 million dollars, multiple government contracts in the past including the installation of a massive V12 Diesel Caterpillar generator. I think fixing a neon sign wired to a toggle switch shouldn't be much of a problem
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Yeah, your argument is bordering on a strawman. You're not only posting a Mario hack level (I.E not an actual product) but also an indie product. I could post the FF11 boss which took, what, 20 hours to fight and still wouldn't go down. There is plenty of challenge in the MMO genre, you just have to look for it like anything else.
Convictions are greater enemies of the truth than lies. Who was it said that again? If you're into Nietzsche, I'd be careful how you through around absolutes
On the subject of social interaction in MMO's, back in the day there was more partly because there was more downtime built into the games as part of the time-sink factor. This led to more socialising because while waiting for health or mana to regen there was little else to do in games like DAoC or EQ.
These days, games are all about reducing the downtime to near zero because, lets face it, downtime is boring.
Its hard to get a decent balance between the two - when you are frantically mashing keys its hard to get good social interaction, even when you have voice comms. Ironically, I tend to find that roleplayers have better social interaction than the rest (if a bit highly strung at times), purely because these guys talk and talk and talk and talk. They are often at least as good gamers as anyone else, but their focus is unabashedly on interaction as much as the content.
This then leads to an interesting question: Is it the fault of the game that social interaction is poor, or the gamers themselves? Do the games lack mechanisms that encourage social interaction or do the players themselves have poor social skills and just want something else to blame it on.
Some gamers would have you believe that it is entirely down to the game. However, as with all things the truth is probably somewhere in between. The easier it is to have social interaction, the more likely it is to occur. Any game with mechanics that causes people to have plenty of time sitting around chatting is likely to be a game that has a lot of downtime (boring!) or a lot of reason not to be doing the stuff that is considered more fun, for example, guarding keeps or battle objectives in PvP games while waiting for attacks. Too much of this and the game will die faster than a doughnut on an island full of starving cops.
My view is I see the game itself as a springboard for social interaction and its up to the players to make it happen. The game itself is not at fault generally unless it has a very poor interface.
I like MMOs because I like the people in the communities I've played alongside now for many years. There's some real life characters with a lot of character that live halfway across the planet from me and without this medium I would never have been lucky enough to encounter them. I have been quite loud elsewhere about how MMO companies themselves need to evolve but that I believe will happen in time... with some pushing from the community.
Roo Stercogburn
You totally missed my point. If you take longer trying out Game A than you would take trying out a normal game (like Mario), it's your own fault. You can't get mad at others about it.
Unless you're particularly vulnerable to peer pressure, the fact that your friends say it gets better 200 hours in shouldn't matter.
And you're totally missing the point that the author of that article made a sincere effort to enjoy an MMORPG and couldn't. Most of us dig the idea of an MMORPG. Most of us really want to like MMORPGs. Unfortunately, only those with self diagnosed Asperger's Syndrom (read social retards with superiority complexs) can like MMORPGs.
Accessibility refers to how easy it is for the average player to get in and play the game, so videos of Upper Tier gameplay are off-topic and therefore don't address my point.
I still don't think someone would have trouble figuring out how to control Mario or the kid. Minutes to learn, lifetime to master. But there is no mastery in MMORPGs, just rote memorization devoid of soul or skill.
If you take offense at progression, why are you playing videogame RPGs? Progression is what they're all about! It doesn't make them less complex/deep. (in the better games, it layers on additional depth on top of things.)
Progression, by itself, does not denote a lack of depth or need for skill. having played games like the original Phantasy Star, Legend of Legia and Final Fantasy Tactics, I'm well aware that RPGs can be damn difficult. MMORPGs cut out all tactical complexity, as well as a significant amount of logistical awareness, and reduce the RPG element to requiring all the skill of Peggle. Less than that actually since you can stack the odds overwhelmingly in your favor.
It does make them easier, but in a way which is fair. Failure in games is often a wall of the skill plateau. In most games, this wall is insurmountable - you just have to get better. RPGs are appealing because they provide a secondary method: by playing the game more, the wall shrinks in size.
Which is the exact opposite of the way games should work. The idea is to make it more challenging the further you get.
An important trait of MMORPGs then becomes "keeping things challening in a world where your character constantly grows stronger".
WOW doesn't accomplish this particularly well: if you succeed at content above your level, typically you receive poor compensation for the challenge you put yourself through (and as far as gear goes, you'd get the exact same loot whether you're 5 levels below or above that dungeon boss.)
COX nails it though: the greater difficulty you tackle, the greater your rewards.
I'll agree that COX was well made in this regard. Too bad the content could be blown through in a good three months of play. Although I understand this has changed with player made content being introduced.
Having played ~6 hours into Shiren (and 200+ hours into better roguelikes), I find it amusing that you feel it's deeper than WOW.
Isn't it neat how you totally ignored Angband and went straight for Shiren. No cherry picking here! Nope.
None of the challenge or breadth of content of Nethack.
And Nethack has none of the tactical finesse of Angband. And neither Nethack nor Angband have the sheer scope of Ancient Domains of Mystery. The point is, these games don't even have graphics and they kick the average triple-A MMORPG's ass.
Even though a 6-hour WOW character is shallow, you at least have decisions to make of what ability(ies) you use. 6 hours into Shiren I had perhaps 1/4th of the combat options/decisions I'd have in a 6-hour-old WOW character.
Decisions? You're kidding right?
You actually have to consider what hotkeys to press and what equipment to put on? I'll give you a hint, You press the hotkeys that cause the most damage, unless your health is at less than half then you heal, and you equip gear with higher stats than what you currently have.
And it continues to be obvious that you don't like MMORPGs. Congrats. Play different games.
The genre isn't going to magically shift into something entirely different because you complain about it.
If you dropped Community and Rewards from MMORPGs and made me a well-designed a Coop Multiplayer Role-Based Game, I would play it. It'd be pure MMORPG role-based combat, with teams taking on challenging coop levels.
That's what enjoy about MMORPGs: playing a specific role, in a group.
Particularly when there are many potential combinations of roles (such as games like COX where you can forgo tanks entirely if you have enough Controllers to disable mobs.)
In most MMORPGs there are not "many potential combinations of roles." In most MMORPGs, there is only the holy trinity. Tanker, healer and nuker. You can spice things up with the occasional ranged or melee DPS character, but they aren't exactly essential to the success of a group.
If I were playing Street Fighter 2, I wouldn't just spam the same attacks, in the same order, in the same rhythm throughout a game. But that is exactly what you do in most MMORPGs. It's less of an RPG and more a game of Simon.