Originally posted by Rockgod99 Originally posted by elocke
Both. I think FFXI comes really close to offering both. As does the current installment of SWG. Lotro is close to come to think of it.
How do you figure any of those games eve come close to a player driven world? Due to housing? I don't know man when i think of player driven worlds I think of territorial conflic, players changing the lore specific to their server and everything a player does has an affect on everyone else in some way. I didn't see that in those games.
In FFXI you don't HAVE to do any of the storyline. Ever. Hence player driven. YOu make your own goals. Same with SWG. LOTRO on the other hand, yeah you probably have a point, BUT I've seen more RP in LOTRO then I have in any other game, and RP is totally player driven.
I would say a successful mmo needs to have both player and story driven worlds. Personally, I'd lean more towards a story driven world due to my intrigue of storytelling.
Really interesting topic and deffinately has some polar aspect to it.
For me it's incomprehensible that anyone would prefer a story driven world for anything other than single player rpg's. I don't really need a story in any way at all, just need a life to live within a world that gives me the tools to have fun within it, accompanied by friends.
----- The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
Really interesting topic and deffinately has some polar aspect to it.
For me it's incomprehensible that anyone would prefer a story driven world for anything other than single player rpg's. I don't really need a story in any way at all, just need a life to live within a world that gives me the tools to have fun within it, accompanied by friends.
A story makes the quest/dungeon runs/raids more fun. Story is part of that tool set.
And who wants to live a life? I just want some fun play sessions with my friends.
Really interesting topic and deffinately has some polar aspect to it.
For me it's incomprehensible that anyone would prefer a story driven world for anything other than single player rpg's. I don't really need a story in any way at all, just need a life to live within a world that gives me the tools to have fun within it, accompanied by friends.
Would it be incomprehensible for you to accept that some people need/want a story in some way or the other, in their MMO?
That's what it comes down to. You're not wrong for not needing a story to have fun... they're not wrong for wanting a story to have a better time in their game.
Beating a storyline in an MMO with your friends just has something more exciting about it than just beating a single player story alone. Cooperation, friendships, challenges to overcome... and rewards as amazing storyline to follow, kick-ass fights to overcome, and so on. I definitely see the appeal in that.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
endless content - the quantitiy of content that can be created by the whole playerbase is vastly larger than any limited number of developers can come up with.
unpredictable content - which is why PvP is always inherently more dynamic than any PvE. There is simply no telling what your opponent will come up with while dev content always gets stale and predictable, especially if they try really hard to "balance" it for some leveling progression or somesuch.
non-linear content - ok stories can be non-linear but it has never, so far, proven to be anything beyond your basic "choose your own adventure" type (pick A, B or C paths). player-driven beats story-driven here as well.
if only 10% of the resources spent into development and thus evolvement of linear RPGs were used to advance player-driven "sandbox" mechanics we'd have a much much healthier MMORPG scene right now. EQ-type games got all the $$ while conceptually player-driven sandboxes are still where they were 10 years ago (DF, for example tho EVE did advance the concept a bit). Shame.
In my humble opinion story-driven, linear progression MMOs are not true MMOs. They are hybrids between single player RPGs and MMOs (social networks are good examples of MMOs without the RPG component). I'm not saying they can't be really fun, entertaining and great social experience.. of course they can, but they do not utilize the inherent strengths of the MMO medium to the full.
Imo a game that will do to UO paradigm what WOW did to EQ is going to be the "next big thing". The current crop of heavily story-driven games (TOR, I'm looking at you) are doomed to relative failure - maybe huge initial sales due to hype and then massive drop in subs because of simple player "I've seen it all before" boredom. Even an average internet user has gotten used to being able to produce his own content for others to see and experience and in comparison the classical themepark MMORPG feels stiff and closed-in. Their time has passed imo.
Creating advanced sandbox tools which will provide maximum freedom for the user-creator (thus ensuring the largest potential quantitive range for the content) and at the same time ensure that said content is enjoyable (comparable in quality with dev-created one) is imo the biggest challenge for the mmo designers at the moment.
I think story(developer) driven worlds have more potential to have good content than player driven.
It isn't that I am too stupid to figure out what I want to do, it is just that there has to be something good to pick in the first place. Choice is all for not if there is nothing good to pick from. I like games where I can effect the world, but in a shared space my ability to do that in ways I care about is rather small, my experience is driven less by me and more by what other people are doing, and I largely have a negative view of player created "content".
Since I think player driven does not work well in a massively multiplayer environment I would rather have story driven, you are more likely to get good, consistant content that way. Player driven can work in a single player game and can coexist with a story as well, being able to make choices that change the world and the story, but it works because you are the only one effecting the world.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
what do you prefer. a world with a great story as a main feature. eg [only example of story driven, not great] wow.
or a world in which a player can create his or her own story.
i prefer player driven.
pros of player driven
players have more customization of rp
they get to create their own story
they arnt forced into roles
they arnt forced into unwanted activities like having to kill rats when they want to craft swords
cons of story driven
opposite of points above
post your own opinions.
Neither in of itself works for me. I think this probably needs some clarification on my point, so I will start with the issues that I see with each.
Story Driven:
Usually you are going to see a linear story that is repeated by every single character in the game world, which means nothing really matters. The world may be persistent, but it is not dynamic. It is very stagnant to be honest.
Thomas is level 1 and meets up with the quest giver William. Bill gives Tom a quest to go rescue Bill's cat, Theodore. So as Tom goes off to rescue Ted, you have Richard who shows up to get his next quest from Bill. Dick is level 10, and the quest that Bill gives to Dick is to go kill Ted - who turns out to be a minor demon power plaguing the village. So as Dick goes off to kill Ted, you have Harold who shows up to get his next quest from Bill. Harry is level 20, and the quest that Bill gives to Harry is to save Ted's eternal soul - as it was a case that Ted was not in control of his actions and was being manipulated by a greater Evil. So as Harry goes off to save Ted's soul, here comes Tom having just rescued Bill's cat Ted.
So yeah, um, yeah, anyway...this gets old very fast.
Player Driven:
May work great if you played in beta, preordered, get a head start, and are going to be part of a large guild that you have known for a long time and are comfortable playing with day in and day out. Cause otherwise...
You join the game several months or a year or more later, to find that the other players have created their story - their world - you can play their way or GTFO. All the land will be taken, all the spawns camped, and you will be left with very little to do other than grab your ankles and accept whatever scraps they toss your way.
Hybrid Actual Story and Player Driven:
Imagine if you will, removing the linear and repetetive aspects of the story. As players in the game take actions, it unlocks possible story events. Some games have had live events based on certain things taking place in the game, but those tend to be goal orientated. So if everybody gathers enough marshmallows, at some point there will be a campfire and smores. Um, yay! Not really. What if it were more along the lines of things like Fable, what is supposed to be happening with Going Rogue, etc? The players actions change various variables that will cause the world to change. There might be one city where instead of helping the villagers fight off the bandits, the players may end up helping the bandits. Instead of rescuing the princess, they could kidnap the princess. And guess what, if Event #123 took place two months before you created your character...maybe you can read about it somewhere. The game world would actually be dynamic and persistent.
You could still have an actual story, along the lines of a choose your own adventure. Heck, how long ago did we have those books?
Course, this would not work for the ADHD crowd that wants to continue to dilute MMORPGs into twitch based lulz....but oh well, just my humble opinion on the matter.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Thomas is level 1 and meets up with the quest giver William. Bill gives Tom a quest to go rescue Bill's cat, Theodore. So as Tom goes off to rescue Ted, you have Richard who shows up to get his next quest from Bill. Dick is level 10, and the quest that Bill gives to Dick is to go kill Ted - who turns out to be a minor demon power plaguing the village. So as Dick goes off to kill Ted, you have Harold who shows up to get his next quest from Bill. Harry is level 20, and the quest that Bill gives to Harry is to save Ted's eternal soul - as it was a case that Ted was not in control of his actions and was being manipulated by a greater Evil. So as Harry goes off to save Ted's soul, here comes Tom having just rescued Bill's cat Ted.
So yeah, um, yeah, anyway...this gets old very fast.
So, you can't play any single player RPG's because there's always thousands of people doing the same you are, only at a different stage in the story?
If you don't know about them, it shouldn't really matter. People walking around the streets of the city, but you don't know what they're doing. Some might be saving Ted's cat, but how do you figure this out? It's just a random guy- no cat following him or anything.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
I agree with VirusDancer above.. The future is a hybrid between free-for-all empty slate sandbox and a linear storyline themepark. In essence, a player driven world - on a MACRO level - so that it never goes stale or predictable, while storylined (so to speak, quests etc) on a micro level, that of a character.
classical themepark quests: dev written quests, designed for your enjoyment so you KNOW they are designed for you to beat them. Where's the thrill in that? Where's the suspense? Where is the sense of true accomplishment?
classical sandbox quests: there are no quests
"hybrid" quests: players create quests for other players to do. When you get a "kill 10 goblins" quest this is something that will impact some other player's game... and yours eventually through the changes in the world this brings about. (Is the clan that created this quest your ally? Are you helping your enemy?) In addition you might not get kill 10 goblins. You might get kill 20 goblins. Or kill something completely different each time you log in.
Really interesting topic and deffinately has some polar aspect to it.
For me it's incomprehensible that anyone would prefer a story driven world for anything other than single player rpg's. I don't really need a story in any way at all, just need a life to live within a world that gives me the tools to have fun within it, accompanied by friends.
It's all about preference.
I feel the exact opposite; I find it incomprehensible that anyone would seek such depth from what is (in my view) supposed to be a simple form of recreation to wind down after a days work.
There's no right or wrong answer, it's 100% dependant on the individuals tastes.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I really want games to be good at what they do. I actually play both WoW and EVE and enjoy both.
If you are a theme park game. Give people interesting quests, Lots of back story, quality endgame content, and if you ever do kill the big bad make it feel like you have acomplished something. Also have enough side quests so it doesn't feel like it is on rails.
If you are a Sand box game. Give people options. Let people claim land (space) Build roads, cut down trees and they stay cut down.Build your own cities (Or player owned stations) Make the world change as you interact with it. Give people a starting point, a good back story, then let the players go from there.
Too me it isn't so much about the style of the game, it is more about the quality and attention to detail of the game.
I want a bit of both cuz I am greedy like that. I want some predictability, and some unpredictability.
I have to agree.
I recall after playing Lineage 2 for a bit that I then tried WoW in earnest when it was released. I had a blast. I had more fun than I had in a while.
And this was because I was doing quests which was refreshing change from "find a space and grind and maybe protect it from a pk'er" or just grind until a siege.
Though Lineage 2 might not be considered a sandbox game by many, I actually do consider it such a game because the game play is not in the quests but completely on player interaction and politics.
Otherwise you just grind and that's about it. Maybe do some sieges or take down a raid boss which for the most part isn't that exciting.
But it was SO nice to be asked to do a task or quest that had purpose.
Having said that, the world of WoW is not to my liking and I don't like doing quests that I don't want to do but have to do because otherwise parts of the game might be closed off from you. Aion has a bit of that and I hate it.
I want the choice to grind up or explore or pvp and then perhaps take part in an epic quest.
I realize that players use the old mantra "make our own stories" but that really doesn't fall (usually) in the role play way of making stories and more about what happens when two groups intereact (positively or negatively).
That's all fine and good and in some ways it can have very great meaning.
But if the entirely of my gameplay is going to be about social interaction I would rather do something else. I have friends and social interaction out of game. I play games for the "game" part.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Both. I think FFXI comes really close to offering both. As does the current installment of SWG. Lotro is close to come to think of it.
How do you figure any of those games eve come close to a player driven world? Due to housing? I don't know man when i think of player driven worlds I think of territorial conflic, players changing the lore specific to their server and everything a player does has an affect on everyone else in some way.
I didn't see that in those games.
In FFXI you don't HAVE to do any of the storyline. Ever. Hence player driven. YOu make your own goals. Same with SWG. LOTRO on the other hand, yeah you probably have a point, BUT I've seen more RP in LOTRO then I have in any other game, and RP is totally player driven.
You can do that in any mmo. A player driven world makes the players the focus, through conflicts and social ties. It has the players actions affect other players in the game.
How does choosing to avoid the story make it a players driven world? What mechanics are in place that lets players affect the world as a whole?
Im not trying to slam you or even give you a hard time bro but I think you have a strange idea of what player driven really means.
Player driven. If I want a good story, I'll read a book. If I'm playing a game, I want to MAKE MY OWN STORY!
What if you want to interact with the story? Can't do that with a book. Can't do that with a movie.
It's another thing if the hero in the book defeats a dragon, than if you help him do it. More immersive that way.
I usually don't care about the game story because it deal with major events and world-changing occurrences that have nothing to do with the little guy. As an individual in any of these games, you can never make a world-changing difference, you can never go and kill a dragon and be a hero, everyone and their brother has already done the same quest. Who cares?
I can't stand being told i am the hero only to watch another 5 'heroes' do the same quest as i did. That doesn't mean i don't enjoy the story driven gameplay, i just don't want the whole game to be like that.
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds -Solid non level based game -Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
Comments
FREEDOM
I didn't see that in those games.
In FFXI you don't HAVE to do any of the storyline. Ever. Hence player driven. YOu make your own goals. Same with SWG. LOTRO on the other hand, yeah you probably have a point, BUT I've seen more RP in LOTRO then I have in any other game, and RP is totally player driven.
I would say a successful mmo needs to have both player and story driven worlds. Personally, I'd lean more towards a story driven world due to my intrigue of storytelling.
99% of player created content is crap. I would MUCH rather have a story driven MMO (WOW).
Playing with others are fine ... but i don't want to hear their stories.
Yes.
Really interesting topic and deffinately has some polar aspect to it.
For me it's incomprehensible that anyone would prefer a story driven world for anything other than single player rpg's. I don't really need a story in any way at all, just need a life to live within a world that gives me the tools to have fun within it, accompanied by friends.
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
A story makes the quest/dungeon runs/raids more fun. Story is part of that tool set.
And who wants to live a life? I just want some fun play sessions with my friends.
Would it be incomprehensible for you to accept that some people need/want a story in some way or the other, in their MMO?
That's what it comes down to. You're not wrong for not needing a story to have fun... they're not wrong for wanting a story to have a better time in their game.
Beating a storyline in an MMO with your friends just has something more exciting about it than just beating a single player story alone. Cooperation, friendships, challenges to overcome... and rewards as amazing storyline to follow, kick-ass fights to overcome, and so on. I definitely see the appeal in that.
player driven, anytime
endless content - the quantitiy of content that can be created by the whole playerbase is vastly larger than any limited number of developers can come up with.
unpredictable content - which is why PvP is always inherently more dynamic than any PvE. There is simply no telling what your opponent will come up with while dev content always gets stale and predictable, especially if they try really hard to "balance" it for some leveling progression or somesuch.
non-linear content - ok stories can be non-linear but it has never, so far, proven to be anything beyond your basic "choose your own adventure" type (pick A, B or C paths). player-driven beats story-driven here as well.
if only 10% of the resources spent into development and thus evolvement of linear RPGs were used to advance player-driven "sandbox" mechanics we'd have a much much healthier MMORPG scene right now. EQ-type games got all the $$ while conceptually player-driven sandboxes are still where they were 10 years ago (DF, for example tho EVE did advance the concept a bit). Shame.
In my humble opinion story-driven, linear progression MMOs are not true MMOs. They are hybrids between single player RPGs and MMOs (social networks are good examples of MMOs without the RPG component). I'm not saying they can't be really fun, entertaining and great social experience.. of course they can, but they do not utilize the inherent strengths of the MMO medium to the full.
Imo a game that will do to UO paradigm what WOW did to EQ is going to be the "next big thing". The current crop of heavily story-driven games (TOR, I'm looking at you) are doomed to relative failure - maybe huge initial sales due to hype and then massive drop in subs because of simple player "I've seen it all before" boredom. Even an average internet user has gotten used to being able to produce his own content for others to see and experience and in comparison the classical themepark MMORPG feels stiff and closed-in. Their time has passed imo.
Creating advanced sandbox tools which will provide maximum freedom for the user-creator (thus ensuring the largest potential quantitive range for the content) and at the same time ensure that said content is enjoyable (comparable in quality with dev-created one) is imo the biggest challenge for the mmo designers at the moment.
I think story(developer) driven worlds have more potential to have good content than player driven.
It isn't that I am too stupid to figure out what I want to do, it is just that there has to be something good to pick in the first place. Choice is all for not if there is nothing good to pick from. I like games where I can effect the world, but in a shared space my ability to do that in ways I care about is rather small, my experience is driven less by me and more by what other people are doing, and I largely have a negative view of player created "content".
Since I think player driven does not work well in a massively multiplayer environment I would rather have story driven, you are more likely to get good, consistant content that way. Player driven can work in a single player game and can coexist with a story as well, being able to make choices that change the world and the story, but it works because you are the only one effecting the world.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
Neither in of itself works for me. I think this probably needs some clarification on my point, so I will start with the issues that I see with each.
Story Driven:
Usually you are going to see a linear story that is repeated by every single character in the game world, which means nothing really matters. The world may be persistent, but it is not dynamic. It is very stagnant to be honest.
Thomas is level 1 and meets up with the quest giver William. Bill gives Tom a quest to go rescue Bill's cat, Theodore. So as Tom goes off to rescue Ted, you have Richard who shows up to get his next quest from Bill. Dick is level 10, and the quest that Bill gives to Dick is to go kill Ted - who turns out to be a minor demon power plaguing the village. So as Dick goes off to kill Ted, you have Harold who shows up to get his next quest from Bill. Harry is level 20, and the quest that Bill gives to Harry is to save Ted's eternal soul - as it was a case that Ted was not in control of his actions and was being manipulated by a greater Evil. So as Harry goes off to save Ted's soul, here comes Tom having just rescued Bill's cat Ted.
So yeah, um, yeah, anyway...this gets old very fast.
Player Driven:
May work great if you played in beta, preordered, get a head start, and are going to be part of a large guild that you have known for a long time and are comfortable playing with day in and day out. Cause otherwise...
You join the game several months or a year or more later, to find that the other players have created their story - their world - you can play their way or GTFO. All the land will be taken, all the spawns camped, and you will be left with very little to do other than grab your ankles and accept whatever scraps they toss your way.
Hybrid Actual Story and Player Driven:
Imagine if you will, removing the linear and repetetive aspects of the story. As players in the game take actions, it unlocks possible story events. Some games have had live events based on certain things taking place in the game, but those tend to be goal orientated. So if everybody gathers enough marshmallows, at some point there will be a campfire and smores. Um, yay! Not really. What if it were more along the lines of things like Fable, what is supposed to be happening with Going Rogue, etc? The players actions change various variables that will cause the world to change. There might be one city where instead of helping the villagers fight off the bandits, the players may end up helping the bandits. Instead of rescuing the princess, they could kidnap the princess. And guess what, if Event #123 took place two months before you created your character...maybe you can read about it somewhere. The game world would actually be dynamic and persistent.
You could still have an actual story, along the lines of a choose your own adventure. Heck, how long ago did we have those books?
Course, this would not work for the ADHD crowd that wants to continue to dilute MMORPGs into twitch based lulz....but oh well, just my humble opinion on the matter.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
So, you can't play any single player RPG's because there's always thousands of people doing the same you are, only at a different stage in the story?
If you don't know about them, it shouldn't really matter. People walking around the streets of the city, but you don't know what they're doing. Some might be saving Ted's cat, but how do you figure this out? It's just a random guy- no cat following him or anything.
I agree with VirusDancer above.. The future is a hybrid between free-for-all empty slate sandbox and a linear storyline themepark. In essence, a player driven world - on a MACRO level - so that it never goes stale or predictable, while storylined (so to speak, quests etc) on a micro level, that of a character.
classical themepark quests: dev written quests, designed for your enjoyment so you KNOW they are designed for you to beat them. Where's the thrill in that? Where's the suspense? Where is the sense of true accomplishment?
classical sandbox quests: there are no quests
"hybrid" quests: players create quests for other players to do. When you get a "kill 10 goblins" quest this is something that will impact some other player's game... and yours eventually through the changes in the world this brings about. (Is the clan that created this quest your ally? Are you helping your enemy?) In addition you might not get kill 10 goblins. You might get kill 20 goblins. Or kill something completely different each time you log in.
It's all about preference.
I feel the exact opposite; I find it incomprehensible that anyone would seek such depth from what is (in my view) supposed to be a simple form of recreation to wind down after a days work.
There's no right or wrong answer, it's 100% dependant on the individuals tastes.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I want a bit of both cuz I am greedy like that. I want some predictability, and some unpredictability.
I really want games to be good at what they do. I actually play both WoW and EVE and enjoy both.
If you are a theme park game. Give people interesting quests, Lots of back story, quality endgame content, and if you ever do kill the big bad make it feel like you have acomplished something. Also have enough side quests so it doesn't feel like it is on rails.
If you are a Sand box game. Give people options. Let people claim land (space) Build roads, cut down trees and they stay cut down.Build your own cities (Or player owned stations) Make the world change as you interact with it. Give people a starting point, a good back story, then let the players go from there.
Too me it isn't so much about the style of the game, it is more about the quality and attention to detail of the game.
I have to agree.
I recall after playing Lineage 2 for a bit that I then tried WoW in earnest when it was released. I had a blast. I had more fun than I had in a while.
And this was because I was doing quests which was refreshing change from "find a space and grind and maybe protect it from a pk'er" or just grind until a siege.
Though Lineage 2 might not be considered a sandbox game by many, I actually do consider it such a game because the game play is not in the quests but completely on player interaction and politics.
Otherwise you just grind and that's about it. Maybe do some sieges or take down a raid boss which for the most part isn't that exciting.
But it was SO nice to be asked to do a task or quest that had purpose.
Having said that, the world of WoW is not to my liking and I don't like doing quests that I don't want to do but have to do because otherwise parts of the game might be closed off from you. Aion has a bit of that and I hate it.
I want the choice to grind up or explore or pvp and then perhaps take part in an epic quest.
I realize that players use the old mantra "make our own stories" but that really doesn't fall (usually) in the role play way of making stories and more about what happens when two groups intereact (positively or negatively).
That's all fine and good and in some ways it can have very great meaning.
But if the entirely of my gameplay is going to be about social interaction I would rather do something else. I have friends and social interaction out of game. I play games for the "game" part.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
You can do that in any mmo. A player driven world makes the players the focus, through conflicts and social ties. It has the players actions affect other players in the game.
How does choosing to avoid the story make it a players driven world? What mechanics are in place that lets players affect the world as a whole?
Im not trying to slam you or even give you a hard time bro but I think you have a strange idea of what player driven really means.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
Player driven. If I want a good story, I'll read a book. If I'm playing a game, I want to MAKE MY OWN STORY!
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
What if you want to interact with the story? Can't do that with a book. Can't do that with a movie.
It's another thing if the hero in the book defeats a dragon, than if you help him do it. More immersive that way.
Story driven because if you leave it up in the hands of a player driven world things are full of chaos and imbalance.
This is why I think Sandbox mmos with FFA pvp should go the way of the dodo bird.
Games like Eve, Ryzom and Swg Pre-cu were much more civil player driven experiences than that of Darkfall and MO.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
Agreed!
I usually don't care about the game story because it deal with major events and world-changing occurrences that have nothing to do with the little guy. As an individual in any of these games, you can never make a world-changing difference, you can never go and kill a dragon and be a hero, everyone and their brother has already done the same quest. Who cares?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Player driven.
I can't stand being told i am the hero only to watch another 5 'heroes' do the same quest as i did. That doesn't mean i don't enjoy the story driven gameplay, i just don't want the whole game to be like that.
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds
-Solid non level based game
-Sharks with lasers attached to their heads