The TOPIC is the pyschology of SOCIAL behavior and mechanitcs.. Get on topic or don't post.. TY
Have a great day..
How exactly do games from Zynga, like Farmville and Mafia Wars encourage social activities better than Blizzards games?
The only social aspect to them are the already underlying ones from facebook itself, for the rest it's just spending a couple of hours on virtual crops (ffs btw).
TY.. now we can talk about the topic.. For this replay I'll use "Farmville and Everquest" as my examples. I've played WoW for 5 years, and EverQuest for about the same, and currently back to playing Everquest. I tinker with Facebook games for a social "how is the family" keep in touch thing with friends and family..
The major ingrediant that browser based games have, as well as Everquest is "networking".. This I believe is what makes games like Farmville, and even Everquest (as well as other MMOs) successful and enjoyable. It really didn't matter what gear you wore, or what you own or have to be involved.. Such as Farmville, people invite others by the dozens, even hundreds to be linked or grouped up. The social networking by such games is incredible.. You have first level "farmers" interacting with 70th level farmers. Can they do everything together? NO.. There are some limits in place. used as a carrot like most computer games. The limit on these games is close to 500 I believe.. depending on the game I guess..
This same mechanic is in place with Everquest as well, smaller in nature, but still there.. As an immediate example to compare EQ to WoW, are raids. Raids in EQ for the most part do NOT have a structued limit of who or how many can show up.. in general.. I remember back in the day when guilds would get together as an entire guild to go to ToV for armor. Later ToV became obsolete, but it was replaced by another location with the same mechanics. If 30 people showed up for raid night.. EVERYONE went.. if 40 people showed up.. EVERYONE went, if 50 people showed up.. EVERYONE went.. You get the idea.. WoW doesn't do this. Instead Blizzard forces guilds and groups to structure their dungeons in both classes and numbers. This often leaves people outside looking in.. This is anything but social, and in my opinion destroys the very fabric what MMORPG is all about..
I'm old school and I enjoy the social sandboxing that EverQuest used to have, and what many browser based games enjoy.. NETWORKING should be something all MMO strive for.. unless you just want to play an Esport.. In that case, good luck..
My guessing is that Blizzard doesn't find much advantage to go to the model you proposed, actually they rather to have a more structured content so they can balance risk for end game content. Guilds are the social component of wow and most fantasy mmos. Maybe if this socializing stuff proves to be better they will adopt it, if not you can always play farmville.
But you see the social attraction is from the websites they are based on (Facebook/Myspace) not the games themselves.
Imagine how unsuccessful Farmville would be if it had its own website, and wasn't based on others.
This is the real crux of the matter. Farmville is not social at all. I know people who play it, I used to get spammed by their shit on facebook until I hid that app. They do not talk to people about farmville, they don't get together and talk about their strawberry crops. They click a few buttons for half an hour while doing other things online (chatting, chatrouletting, emailing, wanking, etc) and then move on.
It bears absolutely no resemblance to a social game. Simply because your "friends" on facebook (or more accurately - the people you saw for 2 hours 8 years ago and who found you on facebook one day while bored out of their minds at work) can get an egg or some other random crap from your farm does not indicate social interaction.
Farmville is about as social as Evony. Compare those two games if you like.
I hate to say it, but Blizzard and other gamers could learn a thing or two from many of these Facebook games. I have to say that the psychological mechanics of promoting a social "work together" game from companies like Zynga, are far superior then the BS raidcraft crap that Blizzard puts out.. Shouldn't MMO's be about socializing and finding reasons to accept and work together
They were. Blizzard shouldn't take lessons from Facebook, they should take lessons from older MMORPGs where it was all about the social experience.
If you want social MMORPGs, you have to go back in time to when the market wasn't dominated by mini game instant gratification MMOs.
Facebook games are crap. They`re played mostly by non-gamers...tween girls, soccer moms and old people. Those people will never play mmo`s or any other type of serious game. Theres a lot more non-gamers than gamers, which explains why crap like Farmville makes so much money. I hope to God that Blizzard or any other game company never follows what the Facebook market does. As for the social aspect of WoW or other mmo`s, they`re as social as you want them to be. You seem to be confusing elitism (gearscore and whatnot) with social interaction. If you join a guild or play with a group of friends you won`t have to worry about it. Besides, there are hard requirements for gear when it comes to raids or dungeons in WoW. A freshly minted lvl 80 with quest gear simply can`t do some of the high end content. I know I`m not comfortable with a tank or healer with a really low gs even when I`m doing heroics. Its how the game works. I never played EQ but from what I heard raiding in that game requires certain levels of gear for raids.
Anyway, your point that Blizzard has anything to learn from shitty Facebook games is wrong. Everyone at Blizzard is laughing at that idea while wearing their money hats, which will only get bigger when the next WoW expac comes out, not to mention SC2 and D3. It may not be Farmville money but I`m sure they`re satisfied with what they have done.
Besides, Facebook is a fad that will be gone in the next few years, to be replaced with whatever is the new fad.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Facebook games are crap. They`re played mostly by non-gamers...tween girls, soccer moms and old people. Those people will never play mmo`s or any other type of serious game. Theres a lot more non-gamers than gamers, which explains why crap like Farmville makes so much money.
Does anyone actually know anyone who has ever spent money on a facebook game? I am really intrigued to know who these people are. I know a fair few people who play farmville and not one of them has ever paid any money and a couple of them even looked at me funny, as if the entire idea was ludicrous, when I asked them.
What do you even get if you spend money on farmville? Do your crops grow faster? Do you get special crops? Damn I thought it was strange people would shell out money to buy a celestial mount in WoW, but to spend money on virtual crops!
The TOPIC is the pyschology of SOCIAL behavior and mechanitcs.. Get on topic or don't post.. TY
Have a great day..
Seriously, before making a thread, YOU make sure what you want to write about. You clearly said in your OP that you found World of Warcraft not social enough: "have to say that the psychological mechanics of promoting a social "work together" game from companies like Zynga, are far superior then the BS raidcraft crap that Blizzard puts out"
So you clearly was implying that Blizzard should take a lesson from facebook games for god's sake - it's in your thread topic, and then ended up that you're gonna quit the whole genre,."I guess my subscription will stay inactive until someone makes a game that is a social sandbox, not a cliquie clubhouse.. lol"
So I repeat my line from my first post in this thread:
You're criticizing the whole MMORPG genre, because World of Warcraft isn't social enough. Is that it?
The TOPIC is the pyschology of SOCIAL behavior and mechanitcs.. Get on topic or don't post.. TY
Have a great day..
Seriously, before making a thread, YOU make sure what you want to write about. You clearly said in your OP that you found World of Warcraft not social enough: "have to say that the psychological mechanics of promoting a social "work together" game from companies like Zynga, are far superior then the BS raidcraft crap that Blizzard puts out"
So you clearly was implying that Blizzard should take a lesson from facebook games for god's sake - it's in your thread topic, and then ended up that you're gonna quit the whole genre,."I guess my subscription will stay inactive until someone makes a game that is a social sandbox, not a cliquie clubhouse.. lol"
So I repeat my line from my first post in this thread:
You're criticizing the whole MMORPG genre, because World of Warcraft isn't social enough. Is that it?
Seariously.. maybe you should read post #27 before posting again, or edit this one.. lmao
Learn from FB games? Seriously? What's (social "work together") in those games. The only social part is visiting others players farms or profile. I really want to understand what's this socializing factor in these games.
I played once farmville and the only multiplayer thing I did was when I visited the farm of my friend. What's social about that. Or are you mixing it with the socializing factor of facebook itself.
I think many of you are missing it.. no offence.. We aren't talking about changing the game that much, just changing the psychology of the game. If you think WoW is the role model of what a good "SOCIAL" mmo game is, then all is hopeless. The WoW of today is nothing like it was of yesterdays. The game has turned into a dog eat dog Esport, where rankings achievements and gear score mean everything. This is what I was addressing... IMO after Cataclysm, the game will start to lose subscriptions once people find out the game hasin't improved, but only gotten worst.. I used Facebook games as an example because they are successful in designing games because of the SOCIAL attraction and interaction..
I and many others currently went back to playing EQ and loving it.. Atleast there we dont' have to worry about lame clique mechanics of gear score to find out if someone is allowed to go on a raid or not..
WoW is based on one of the base human condition - greed.
Very similar to gold rushes. People mostly group up and raid in order to get easier access to rare items only obtainable by group of people. Not because they want to share it.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
The TOPIC is the pyschology of SOCIAL behavior and mechanitcs.. Get on topic or don't post.. TY
Have a great day..
Seriously, before making a thread, YOU make sure what you want to write about. You clearly said in your OP that you found World of Warcraft not social enough: "have to say that the psychological mechanics of promoting a social "work together" game from companies like Zynga, are far superior then the BS raidcraft crap that Blizzard puts out"
So you clearly was implying that Blizzard should take a lesson from facebook games for god's sake - it's in your thread topic, and then ended up that you're gonna quit the whole genre,."I guess my subscription will stay inactive until someone makes a game that is a social sandbox, not a cliquie clubhouse.. lol"
So I repeat my line from my first post in this thread:
You're criticizing the whole MMORPG genre, because World of Warcraft isn't social enough. Is that it?
Seariously.. maybe you should read post #27 before posting again, or edit this one.. lmao
Again, your original post ended with:
"I guess my subscription will stay inactive until someone makes a game that is a social sandbox, not a cliquie clubhouse.. lol"
(I like how you end every second sentence either with lol or lmao, but that's a different subject)
Anyway, it's very simple. You were babbling that WoW is a raidcraft and that you're gonna stay inactive until someone makes a social sandbox. I replied, in a simplified way if you missed it: there already are games like that. No need to wait. How was that offtopic?
Or did you actually expect people to discuss that facebook-social gaming jabber you came up with?
It's funny that the OP mentions this because Mike Morniem agrees with him, he priased Farmville at the last Blizzcon and GDC, and said that was the market that Blizzard needed to tap into. My wife did a interesting article on it a couple weeks ago, we were told by a Blizzard rep shortly after that people misunderstood what Mike was saying, and that WoW isn't going to become farmville (despite it already coping some of Farmvilles moves) But they were highly motivated to include facebook type games within WoW that can be played at Taverns and in towns. It is going to be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
This sword here at my side dont act the way it should Keeps calling me its master, but I feel like its slave Hauling me faster and faster to an early, early grave And it howls! it howls like hell!
I hate to say it, but Blizzard and other gamers could learn a thing or two from many of these Facebook games. I have to say that the psychological mechanics of promoting a social "work together" game from companies like Zynga, are far superior then the BS raidcraft crap that Blizzard puts out.. Shouldn't MMO's be about socializing and finding reasons to accept and work together, instead of finding reasons (gear score) to exclude people from events or guilds.. etc etc..
Unless Blizzard has no intention of wanting a game like that.. as many of us feared that Blizzard actually wants to promote a guild wars esport end game..
I guess my subscription will stay inactive until someone makes a game that is a social sandbox, not a cliquie clubhouse.. lol
"Social sandbox"?? I hate to break this to you, but sandbox type games have been on the decline in the west for years now. There are WAY too many opportunities for ganking and griefing in them, which isn't tolerated nearly as much now, as it was in the early years.
As for the other, its been obvious for the last two years that Blizzard is trying to make arena an e sport. Thats one of the reasons they keep "balancing" the various classes, which has really taken a toll on their PvE side. What they need to do is completely seperate PvP and PvE so that thay can "balance" one, without messing up the other.
As far as GS goes, people will almost always find some way of including/excluding, thats simply human nature. Blizzard is simply playing to their own player bases demographics and inclinations.
I think you missed the whole concept of the topic.. Maybe I should spell it out for you in simple financial terms..
A financial research report issued this month by NextUp! Research indicates that the social game publisher Zynga is probably worth around $3 billion dollars. The report expects an annual compound growth rate of 35% for Zynga through 2014. NextUp! projects revenue of $460 million for Zynga this year, increasing to $1.1 billion by 2014. The company has grown its userbase from roughly 30 million monthly active users in April 2009 to 228 million monthly active users in January 2010.
The fact is Blizzard hasn't shown any growth in subscription base for over a year. This is not a "this game will destroy that game" post.. It's a simple observation that while some companies seem to struggle with subscription numbers, others have shown double digit increases in active customers and revenues.. Ask yourself why do companies like Zynga thrive where other markets fizzle. Could it be they have learned to tap the "social" psychology to increase their market?
I and many others quit wow because if was becoming anything but social.. IMO
Ironic isn't it? Blizzard has demonstrated that when they make more content available(or as the raider types howl, make it easier) to a larger section of their player base, they up their retention numbers. Then along come abominations like Farmville and its ilk, and demonstrate just how large a base there is for such "games"...<shudder>. It would be interesting to see just how much money such companies are actually making. Throw away "games" like that can be popped out quickly and with relatively little expense, and then make huge profits. Who cares if they have a life span measured in months(if that), if they make a huge ROI? If this is the future of gaming, I'm finding another hobby.
Boy oh boy the WoW boys are out in force.... The OP is correct, blizzard themselves even said the biggest threat to thier market is Social networking games like those seen on facebook that can also be access via mobile devices.. these games achieve a networking level far beyond that of a WoW style game.
The social networking mmo prevent people from delving deeper and looking into more substantial MMO PC based games.
Also anything that diverts $ away from being spent in a mmo is a competitor, this includes gym memberships, swimming, shopping putting fuel in the car, all business in any genre, game, corporate at the end of the day are competing for your hard earned $ to be spent with them.
Accessibility is all they talked about at the last blizzcon.. so therefore folks try to think a little broader.
BTW 'social sandbox' does not refer to the sandox mmo - he refers to many cultural exchanges - which means that a game that ordinarily you would never touch because it is utterly foolish to do so, you enjoy because your playing with people you know, your friends and exchanging information, ideas and culture.
A good example is WoW the game looks graphically, sounds and feels extremely childish yet it got popular, why? Well it was one of the first to do mass media advertising to get the cool kids factor out there and it became popular orignally due to the exact style of social networking the the OP is talking about. Unfortunately end result is giant groups of cliques - and some very nasty individuals in game who go off thier tit just for rolling on some item... IE getting angry over a virtual item? Getting angry because one of your guildmates that you no very well, had something bad happen in real life is worth it.. getting mad over a game and folks need thier priorities checked.
So now wow is at the end of its life cycle after 5 years, like everquest before it, like never winter nights AOL before that 5 years is about the span - slowly but surely the 18 year olds that took the game up on mass are now in the work force with real world issues and do not want to put up with that kind of rubbish standards in a game anymore. A quick 5 minute game of farmville with your entire network of your family and friends during the coffee break is just what the doctor ordered. Here have 500 heads of corn see you tomorrow at afternoon tea.
Boy oh boy the WoW boys are out in force.... The OP is correct, blizzard themselves even said the biggest threat to thier market is Social networking games like those seen on facebook that can also be access via mobile devices.. these games achieve a networking level far beyond that of a WoW style game.
A networking level far beyond? In most cases the only thing a player share with others in these games are the achievments. Just numbers in a leaderboard. In farmville the only multiplayer social interaction is when you visit another's farm or when a sad cow comes from a friend. Is this the amazing interaction level you speak about?
I asked before in this thread but I'm asking again since didn't get an answer. What's social interaction about games like farmville, apart from sharing the achievments to each other.
OMG we're comparing a social newtwork game that is free to play with a subscription based MMORPG? They are not even the same genre of game! Farmville is not and never will be an MMORPG! So why is this even being discussed? If Blizzard was after the social network gamers they'd make a game geared for them. That simple. Why turn WoW into something it was never meant to be? That makes no sense and the OP is way out in left field of LALA land.
Boy oh boy the WoW boys are out in force.... The OP is correct, blizzard themselves even said the biggest threat to thier market is Social networking games like those seen on facebook that can also be access via mobile devices.. these games achieve a networking level far beyond that of a WoW style game.
A networking level far beyond? In most cases the only thing a player share with others in these games are the achievments. Just numbers in a leaderboard. In farmville the only multiplayer social interaction is when you visit another's farm or when a sad cow comes from a friend. Is this the amazing interaction level you speak about?
I asked before in this thread but I'm asking again since didn't get an answer. What's social interaction about games like farmville, apart from sharing the achievments to each other.
Sorry Edli i will try to define social networking even further. Social networking is where you influence your personal circle of friends and expand that circle of friends, the game you play is just an activity you share. Via chat messaging and voice communications is how the social networks are achieved and broadened. The game is just a tool of common interest.
Now if your game is a big heavy client download that requires specific non mobile hardware to play it, it is less accessbile than a small app game that can be shared via browser (facebook), iphone, ipod or any other futre device. More accessible means larger social network. larger social netwroking opportunities means more $ for advertising and promotion etc.
Wether you actually visit each other farms, or do quests in wow together it's the cultural exchance (ie enjoyment of good company - discussing other countries customs and sayings, the price of housing etc) that occurs between real life humans, its what makes a game like farmville so popular not the actual game itself or what you can and cant do via game mechanics.
It seems many are still a little confused as to what being social is all about.. IMO, Today's WoW does not welcome guildies with open arms. In fact many guilds recruit members like it's "REAL" jobs they are applying for. What are your achievements? What is your gear score? What is your dps? What is your health, mana or whatever I feel like using as a tool to see if you are worthy enough to join our gang, aka guild aka clique.
WoW only offers raids in two numbers.. 10 mans and 25 mans.. This itself is a design mechanic that forces leaders to choose who goes and who gets shit on and left out.. Is that SOCIAL? oh HELL no.. That is absolute BS Here is my example of a good social game mechanic for raiding.
A new Raid zone.. Lets call it "The Gauntlet" It's an outdoor zone that is filled with dozens of raid targets. Raid targets can be anything from towers, bunkers, buildings, camps, etc etc.. You may be required to burn a building, kill a target or rescue a prisorner. With each task you are awarded a variety of points depending on the difficulty of the task.. A task that is designed for 1-5 man team will not be worth as much as a 10 or a 20 man target. This dungeon is on a timer to be completed by that time before everyone is ported out. Each mob is worth points too.. The more mobs you kill, more task you complete and more targets you destroy the more points you earn..
If your a small guild that has 14 people that log on for raid night.. NO ONE, gets told they can't do the raid. All 14 of you queue up and go in.. How you split up and take out targets is up to you.. There is no benefit to run around as one big group, because you'll waste time running around, instead of spliting up and taking out multiple targets at a time. So do you split up to 2-7 man groups to attack the towers, or split up in 3 groups? If more guildies show up later, INVITE them in too.. Why should they be left out of the fun.. This type of zone can accomadate both small and large guilds.. Granted larger guiilds will be able to clear more and faster, but the rewards are the same.
I personally would shoot for a 40 man limit just for lag issues.. but I'm open to increase that higher and make the Raid zone bigger.. Imagine a huge maze complex bigger then Kara with 30 or 40 targets and a guild of 40 split up in multiple groups to complete as much as they can.. The beauty of this is that even IF members have to leave in the middle of the raid, your raid isn't bust.. IMO.. A RAID should be a social part for social guillds to enjoy ALL together, not this current style that WoW is pushing.. EQ never had that when I played it in 99-03..
Lets get back to more social interaction, not this esport exclusive mechanics..
PS.. Imagine a leader giving out assignments.. group 1 take out towers 3 and 4.. group 2 take out towers 1 and 5.. group 3 take out towers 2 and 6.. After your towers are down, everyone meet up at Bunker A.. etc etc.. group 1 might be waiting at teh bunker after their task are done, but maybe group 2 ran into a jam and wiped.. OOOPS.. do you wait for them, or go help them? This would almost be like one big battleground, but PvE style..
I hate to say it, but Blizzard and other gamers could learn a thing or two from many of these Facebook games. I have to say that the psychological mechanics of promoting a social "work together" game from companies like Zynga, are far superior then the BS raidcraft crap that Blizzard puts out.. Shouldn't MMO's be about socializing and finding reasons to accept and work together, instead of finding reasons (gear score) to exclude people from events or guilds.. etc etc..
Unless Blizzard has no intention of wanting a game like that.. as many of us feared that Blizzard actually wants to promote a guild wars esport end game..
I guess my subscription will stay inactive until someone makes a game that is a social sandbox, not a cliquie clubhouse.. lol
Boy oh boy the WoW boys are out in force.... The OP is correct, blizzard themselves even said the biggest threat to thier market is Social networking games like those seen on facebook that can also be access via mobile devices.. these games achieve a networking level far beyond that of a WoW style game.
The social networking mmo prevent people from delving deeper and looking into more substantial MMO PC based games.
Also anything that diverts $ away from being spent in a mmo is a competitor, this includes gym memberships, swimming, shopping putting fuel in the car, all business in any genre, game, corporate at the end of the day are competing for your hard earned $ to be spent with them.
Accessibility is all they talked about at the last blizzcon.. so therefore folks try to think a little broader.
BTW 'social sandbox' does not refer to the sandox mmo - he refers to many cultural exchanges - which means that a game that ordinarily you would never touch because it is utterly foolish to do so, you enjoy because your playing with people you know, your friends and exchanging information, ideas and culture.
A good example is WoW the game looks graphically, sounds and feels extremely childish yet it got popular, why? Well it was one of the first to do mass media advertising to get the cool kids factor out there and it became popular orignally due to the exact style of social networking the the OP is talking about. Unfortunately end result is giant groups of cliques - and some very nasty individuals in game who go off thier tit just for rolling on some item... IE getting angry over a virtual item? Getting angry because one of your guildmates that you no very well, had something bad happen in real life is worth it.. getting mad over a game and folks need thier priorities checked.
So now wow is at the end of its life cycle after 5 years, like everquest before it, like never winter nights AOL before that 5 years is about the span - slowly but surely the 18 year olds that took the game up on mass are now in the work force with real world issues and do not want to put up with that kind of rubbish standards in a game anymore. A quick 5 minute game of farmville with your entire network of your family and friends during the coffee break is just what the doctor ordered. Here have 500 heads of corn see you tomorrow at afternoon tea.
It seems many are still a little confused as to what being social is all about.. IMO, Today's WoW does not welcome guildies with open arms. In fact many guilds recruit members like it's "REAL" jobs they are applying for. What are your achievements? What is your gear score? What is your dps? What is your health, mana or whatever I feel like using as a tool to see if you are worthy enough to join our gang, aka guild aka clique.
WoW only offers raids in two numbers.. 10 mans and 25 mans.. This itself is a design mechanic that forces leaders to choose who goes and who gets shit on and left out.. Is that SOCIAL? oh HELL no.. That is absolute BS Here is my example of a good social game mechanic for raiding.
A new Raid zone.. Lets call it "The Gauntlet" It's an outdoor zone that is filled with dozens of raid targets. Raid targets can be anything from towers, bunkers, buildings, camps, etc etc.. You may be required to burn a building, kill a target or rescue a prisorner. With each task you are awarded a variety of points depending on the difficulty of the task.. A task that is designed for 1-5 man team will not be worth as much as a 10 or a 20 man target. This dungeon is on a timer to be completed by that time before everyone is ported out. Each mob is worth points too.. The more mobs you kill, more task you complete and more targets you destroy the more points you earn..
If your a small guild that has 14 people that log on for raid night.. NO ONE, gets told they can't do the raid. All 14 of you queue up and go in.. How you split up and take out targets is up to you.. There is no benefit to run around as one big group, because you'll waste time running around, instead of spliting up and taking out multiple targets at a time. So do you split up to 2-7 man groups to attack the towers, or split up in 3 groups? If more guildies show up later, INVITE them in too.. Why should they be left out of the fun.. This type of zone can accomadate both small and large guilds.. Granted larger guiilds will be able to clear more and faster, but the rewards are the same.
I personally would shoot for a 40 man limit just for lag issues.. but I'm open to increase that higher and make the Raid zone bigger.. Imagine a huge maze complex bigger then Kara with 30 or 40 targets and a guild of 40 split up in multiple groups to complete as much as they can.. The beauty of this is that even IF members have to leave in the middle of the raid, your raid isn't bust.. IMO.. A RAID should be a social part for social guillds to enjoy ALL together, not this current style that WoW is pushing.. EQ never had that when I played it in 99-03..
Lets get back to more social interaction, not this esport exclusive mechanics..
PS.. Imagine a leader giving out assignments.. group 1 take out towers 3 and 4.. group 2 take out towers 1 and 5.. group 3 take out towers 2 and 6.. After your towers are down, everyone meet up at Bunker A.. etc etc.. group 1 might be waiting at teh bunker after their task are done, but maybe group 2 ran into a jam and wiped.. OOOPS.. do you wait for them, or go help them? This would almost be like one big battleground, but PvE style..
Dude.. it's called Wintergrasp.. do us all a favor and keep your subscription inactive you also should learn that if you want a topic to be about "social interaction within a MMO" you should just name your post that way and not "Blizzard should take some lessons". You can't compare a company like Zynga to Blizzard, 1st of all Zynga ain't subscription based, just cash shop which means they take all the "crap" that floats on facebook and other social networks and just make it so the player feels he needs to buy a couple coins at least to have something "preety" in the games they offer.. If you played any Zynga games you know it's like that, eventualy you have to buy something. As for Blizzard you pay if you want to play, not like there ain't idiots there but.. it's more filtered.
Blizzard has an active dev community that actualy listens to the "playerbase".. try doing the same with Zynga..
Simply, if you don't like keep out. You're doing everyone else a favour.
It seems many are still a little confused as to what being social is all about.. IMO, Today's WoW does not welcome guildies with open arms. In fact many guilds recruit members like it's "REAL" jobs they are applying for. What are your achievements? What is your gear score? What is your dps? What is your health, mana or whatever I feel like using as a tool to see if you are worthy enough to join our gang, aka guild aka clique.
WoW only offers raids in two numbers.. 10 mans and 25 mans.. This itself is a design mechanic that forces leaders to choose who goes and who gets shit on and left out.. Is that SOCIAL? oh HELL no.. That is absolute BS Here is my example of a good social game mechanic for raiding.
A new Raid zone.. Lets call it "The Gauntlet" It's an outdoor zone that is filled with dozens of raid targets. Raid targets can be anything from towers, bunkers, buildings, camps, etc etc.. You may be required to burn a building, kill a target or rescue a prisorner. With each task you are awarded a variety of points depending on the difficulty of the task.. A task that is designed for 1-5 man team will not be worth as much as a 10 or a 20 man target. This dungeon is on a timer to be completed by that time before everyone is ported out. Each mob is worth points too.. The more mobs you kill, more task you complete and more targets you destroy the more points you earn..
If your a small guild that has 14 people that log on for raid night.. NO ONE, gets told they can't do the raid. All 14 of you queue up and go in.. How you split up and take out targets is up to you.. There is no benefit to run around as one big group, because you'll waste time running around, instead of spliting up and taking out multiple targets at a time. So do you split up to 2-7 man groups to attack the towers, or split up in 3 groups? If more guildies show up later, INVITE them in too.. Why should they be left out of the fun.. This type of zone can accomadate both small and large guilds.. Granted larger guiilds will be able to clear more and faster, but the rewards are the same.
I personally would shoot for a 40 man limit just for lag issues.. but I'm open to increase that higher and make the Raid zone bigger.. Imagine a huge maze complex bigger then Kara with 30 or 40 targets and a guild of 40 split up in multiple groups to complete as much as they can.. The beauty of this is that even IF members have to leave in the middle of the raid, your raid isn't bust.. IMO.. A RAID should be a social part for social guillds to enjoy ALL together, not this current style that WoW is pushing.. EQ never had that when I played it in 99-03..
Lets get back to more social interaction, not this esport exclusive mechanics..
PS.. Imagine a leader giving out assignments.. group 1 take out towers 3 and 4.. group 2 take out towers 1 and 5.. group 3 take out towers 2 and 6.. After your towers are down, everyone meet up at Bunker A.. etc etc.. group 1 might be waiting at teh bunker after their task are done, but maybe group 2 ran into a jam and wiped.. OOOPS.. do you wait for them, or go help them? This would almost be like one big battleground, but PvE style..
Dude.. it's called Wintergrasp.. do us all a favor and keep your subscription inactive you also should learn that if you want a topic to be about "social interaction within a MMO" you should just name your post that way and not "Blizzard should take some lessons". You can't compare a company like Zynga to Blizzard, 1st of all Zynga ain't subscription based, just cash shop which means they take all the "crap" that floats on facebook and other social networks and just make it so the player feels he needs to buy a couple coins at least to have something "preety" in the games they offer.. If you played any Zynga games you know it's like that, eventualy you have to buy something. As for Blizzard you pay if you want to play, not like there ain't idiots there but.. it's more filtered.
Blizzard has an active dev community that actualy listens to the "playerbase".. try doing the same with Zynga..
Simply, if you don't like keep out. You're doing everyone else a favour.
Really.. Wintergrasp is end game? and Wintergrasp is PvE? WoW.. you must play a different' WoW then the rest of us.. I'll make sure to resub my subscription today so I can join in on this Wintergrasp Raid fun.. sweet.. Good bye ICC, hello Wintergrasp..
I see also how you conviently ignored previous post how EverQuest raids were much more end game friendly then WoW.. especially in most guilds.. But then you cant' use your strawman argument like you tried to do with browser based games that have a better "social" design then Blizzard and other games..
Comments
TY.. now we can talk about the topic.. For this replay I'll use "Farmville and Everquest" as my examples. I've played WoW for 5 years, and EverQuest for about the same, and currently back to playing Everquest. I tinker with Facebook games for a social "how is the family" keep in touch thing with friends and family..
The major ingrediant that browser based games have, as well as Everquest is "networking".. This I believe is what makes games like Farmville, and even Everquest (as well as other MMOs) successful and enjoyable. It really didn't matter what gear you wore, or what you own or have to be involved.. Such as Farmville, people invite others by the dozens, even hundreds to be linked or grouped up. The social networking by such games is incredible.. You have first level "farmers" interacting with 70th level farmers. Can they do everything together? NO.. There are some limits in place. used as a carrot like most computer games. The limit on these games is close to 500 I believe.. depending on the game I guess..
This same mechanic is in place with Everquest as well, smaller in nature, but still there.. As an immediate example to compare EQ to WoW, are raids. Raids in EQ for the most part do NOT have a structued limit of who or how many can show up.. in general.. I remember back in the day when guilds would get together as an entire guild to go to ToV for armor. Later ToV became obsolete, but it was replaced by another location with the same mechanics. If 30 people showed up for raid night.. EVERYONE went.. if 40 people showed up.. EVERYONE went, if 50 people showed up.. EVERYONE went.. You get the idea.. WoW doesn't do this. Instead Blizzard forces guilds and groups to structure their dungeons in both classes and numbers. This often leaves people outside looking in.. This is anything but social, and in my opinion destroys the very fabric what MMORPG is all about..
I'm old school and I enjoy the social sandboxing that EverQuest used to have, and what many browser based games enjoy.. NETWORKING should be something all MMO strive for.. unless you just want to play an Esport.. In that case, good luck..
My guessing is that Blizzard doesn't find much advantage to go to the model you proposed, actually they rather to have a more structured content so they can balance risk for end game content. Guilds are the social component of wow and most fantasy mmos. Maybe if this socializing stuff proves to be better they will adopt it, if not you can always play farmville.
This is the real crux of the matter. Farmville is not social at all. I know people who play it, I used to get spammed by their shit on facebook until I hid that app. They do not talk to people about farmville, they don't get together and talk about their strawberry crops. They click a few buttons for half an hour while doing other things online (chatting, chatrouletting, emailing, wanking, etc) and then move on.
It bears absolutely no resemblance to a social game. Simply because your "friends" on facebook (or more accurately - the people you saw for 2 hours 8 years ago and who found you on facebook one day while bored out of their minds at work) can get an egg or some other random crap from your farm does not indicate social interaction.
Farmville is about as social as Evony. Compare those two games if you like.
They were. Blizzard shouldn't take lessons from Facebook, they should take lessons from older MMORPGs where it was all about the social experience.
If you want social MMORPGs, you have to go back in time to when the market wasn't dominated by mini game instant gratification MMOs.
Facebook games are crap. They`re played mostly by non-gamers...tween girls, soccer moms and old people. Those people will never play mmo`s or any other type of serious game. Theres a lot more non-gamers than gamers, which explains why crap like Farmville makes so much money. I hope to God that Blizzard or any other game company never follows what the Facebook market does. As for the social aspect of WoW or other mmo`s, they`re as social as you want them to be. You seem to be confusing elitism (gearscore and whatnot) with social interaction. If you join a guild or play with a group of friends you won`t have to worry about it. Besides, there are hard requirements for gear when it comes to raids or dungeons in WoW. A freshly minted lvl 80 with quest gear simply can`t do some of the high end content. I know I`m not comfortable with a tank or healer with a really low gs even when I`m doing heroics. Its how the game works. I never played EQ but from what I heard raiding in that game requires certain levels of gear for raids.
Anyway, your point that Blizzard has anything to learn from shitty Facebook games is wrong. Everyone at Blizzard is laughing at that idea while wearing their money hats, which will only get bigger when the next WoW expac comes out, not to mention SC2 and D3. It may not be Farmville money but I`m sure they`re satisfied with what they have done.
Besides, Facebook is a fad that will be gone in the next few years, to be replaced with whatever is the new fad.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Does anyone actually know anyone who has ever spent money on a facebook game? I am really intrigued to know who these people are. I know a fair few people who play farmville and not one of them has ever paid any money and a couple of them even looked at me funny, as if the entire idea was ludicrous, when I asked them.
What do you even get if you spend money on farmville? Do your crops grow faster? Do you get special crops? Damn I thought it was strange people would shell out money to buy a celestial mount in WoW, but to spend money on virtual crops!
Seriously, before making a thread, YOU make sure what you want to write about. You clearly said in your OP that you found World of Warcraft not social enough: " have to say that the psychological mechanics of promoting a social "work together" game from companies like Zynga, are far superior then the BS raidcraft crap that Blizzard puts out"
So you clearly was implying that Blizzard should take a lesson from facebook games for god's sake - it's in your thread topic, and then ended up that you're gonna quit the whole genre,."I guess my subscription will stay inactive until someone makes a game that is a social sandbox, not a cliquie clubhouse.. lol"
So I repeat my line from my first post in this thread:
You're criticizing the whole MMORPG genre, because World of Warcraft isn't social enough. Is that it?
REALITY CHECK
Seariously.. maybe you should read post #27 before posting again, or edit this one.. lmao
Learn from FB games? Seriously? What's (social "work together") in those games. The only social part is visiting others players farms or profile. I really want to understand what's this socializing factor in these games.
I played once farmville and the only multiplayer thing I did was when I visited the farm of my friend. What's social about that. Or are you mixing it with the socializing factor of facebook itself.
WoW is based on one of the base human condition - greed.
Very similar to gold rushes. People mostly group up and raid in order to get easier access to rare items only obtainable by group of people. Not because they want to share it.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
There is no such thing as a social computer game, you're siting in a room on your own playing a computer.
Wanna find a social game? Go play poker down the pub and actually speak to people face to face.
I swear give it a few more years and body language will be antiquated like latin.
Again, your original post ended with:
"I guess my subscription will stay inactive until someone makes a game that is a social sandbox, not a cliquie clubhouse.. lol"
(I like how you end every second sentence either with lol or lmao, but that's a different subject)
Anyway, it's very simple. You were babbling that WoW is a raidcraft and that you're gonna stay inactive until someone makes a social sandbox. I replied, in a simplified way if you missed it: there already are games like that. No need to wait. How was that offtopic?
Or did you actually expect people to discuss that facebook-social gaming jabber you came up with?
REALITY CHECK
It's funny that the OP mentions this because Mike Morniem agrees with him, he priased Farmville at the last Blizzcon and GDC, and said that was the market that Blizzard needed to tap into. My wife did a interesting article on it a couple weeks ago, we were told by a Blizzard rep shortly after that people misunderstood what Mike was saying, and that WoW isn't going to become farmville (despite it already coping some of Farmvilles moves) But they were highly motivated to include facebook type games within WoW that can be played at Taverns and in towns. It is going to be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
This sword here at my side dont act the way it should
Keeps calling me its master, but I feel like its slave
Hauling me faster and faster to an early, early grave
And it howls! it howls like hell!
"Social sandbox"?? I hate to break this to you, but sandbox type games have been on the decline in the west for years now. There are WAY too many opportunities for ganking and griefing in them, which isn't tolerated nearly as much now, as it was in the early years.
As for the other, its been obvious for the last two years that Blizzard is trying to make arena an e sport. Thats one of the reasons they keep "balancing" the various classes, which has really taken a toll on their PvE side. What they need to do is completely seperate PvP and PvE so that thay can "balance" one, without messing up the other.
As far as GS goes, people will almost always find some way of including/excluding, thats simply human nature. Blizzard is simply playing to their own player bases demographics and inclinations.
Ironic isn't it? Blizzard has demonstrated that when they make more content available(or as the raider types howl, make it easier) to a larger section of their player base, they up their retention numbers. Then along come abominations like Farmville and its ilk, and demonstrate just how large a base there is for such "games"...<shudder>. It would be interesting to see just how much money such companies are actually making. Throw away "games" like that can be popped out quickly and with relatively little expense, and then make huge profits. Who cares if they have a life span measured in months(if that), if they make a huge ROI? If this is the future of gaming, I'm finding another hobby.
Boy oh boy the WoW boys are out in force.... The OP is correct, blizzard themselves even said the biggest threat to thier market is Social networking games like those seen on facebook that can also be access via mobile devices.. these games achieve a networking level far beyond that of a WoW style game.
The social networking mmo prevent people from delving deeper and looking into more substantial MMO PC based games.
Also anything that diverts $ away from being spent in a mmo is a competitor, this includes gym memberships, swimming, shopping putting fuel in the car, all business in any genre, game, corporate at the end of the day are competing for your hard earned $ to be spent with them.
Accessibility is all they talked about at the last blizzcon.. so therefore folks try to think a little broader.
BTW 'social sandbox' does not refer to the sandox mmo - he refers to many cultural exchanges - which means that a game that ordinarily you would never touch because it is utterly foolish to do so, you enjoy because your playing with people you know, your friends and exchanging information, ideas and culture.
A good example is WoW the game looks graphically, sounds and feels extremely childish yet it got popular, why? Well it was one of the first to do mass media advertising to get the cool kids factor out there and it became popular orignally due to the exact style of social networking the the OP is talking about. Unfortunately end result is giant groups of cliques - and some very nasty individuals in game who go off thier tit just for rolling on some item... IE getting angry over a virtual item? Getting angry because one of your guildmates that you no very well, had something bad happen in real life is worth it.. getting mad over a game and folks need thier priorities checked.
So now wow is at the end of its life cycle after 5 years, like everquest before it, like never winter nights AOL before that 5 years is about the span - slowly but surely the 18 year olds that took the game up on mass are now in the work force with real world issues and do not want to put up with that kind of rubbish standards in a game anymore. A quick 5 minute game of farmville with your entire network of your family and friends during the coffee break is just what the doctor ordered. Here have 500 heads of corn see you tomorrow at afternoon tea.
A networking level far beyond? In most cases the only thing a player share with others in these games are the achievments. Just numbers in a leaderboard. In farmville the only multiplayer social interaction is when you visit another's farm or when a sad cow comes from a friend. Is this the amazing interaction level you speak about?
I asked before in this thread but I'm asking again since didn't get an answer. What's social interaction about games like farmville, apart from sharing the achievments to each other.
OMG we're comparing a social newtwork game that is free to play with a subscription based MMORPG? They are not even the same genre of game! Farmville is not and never will be an MMORPG! So why is this even being discussed? If Blizzard was after the social network gamers they'd make a game geared for them. That simple. Why turn WoW into something it was never meant to be? That makes no sense and the OP is way out in left field of LALA land.
Sorry Edli i will try to define social networking even further. Social networking is where you influence your personal circle of friends and expand that circle of friends, the game you play is just an activity you share. Via chat messaging and voice communications is how the social networks are achieved and broadened. The game is just a tool of common interest.
Now if your game is a big heavy client download that requires specific non mobile hardware to play it, it is less accessbile than a small app game that can be shared via browser (facebook), iphone, ipod or any other futre device. More accessible means larger social network. larger social netwroking opportunities means more $ for advertising and promotion etc.
Wether you actually visit each other farms, or do quests in wow together it's the cultural exchance (ie enjoyment of good company - discussing other countries customs and sayings, the price of housing etc) that occurs between real life humans, its what makes a game like farmville so popular not the actual game itself or what you can and cant do via game mechanics.
hope that clarifies somewhat
It seems many are still a little confused as to what being social is all about.. IMO, Today's WoW does not welcome guildies with open arms. In fact many guilds recruit members like it's "REAL" jobs they are applying for. What are your achievements? What is your gear score? What is your dps? What is your health, mana or whatever I feel like using as a tool to see if you are worthy enough to join our gang, aka guild aka clique.
WoW only offers raids in two numbers.. 10 mans and 25 mans.. This itself is a design mechanic that forces leaders to choose who goes and who gets shit on and left out.. Is that SOCIAL? oh HELL no.. That is absolute BS Here is my example of a good social game mechanic for raiding.
A new Raid zone.. Lets call it "The Gauntlet" It's an outdoor zone that is filled with dozens of raid targets. Raid targets can be anything from towers, bunkers, buildings, camps, etc etc.. You may be required to burn a building, kill a target or rescue a prisorner. With each task you are awarded a variety of points depending on the difficulty of the task.. A task that is designed for 1-5 man team will not be worth as much as a 10 or a 20 man target. This dungeon is on a timer to be completed by that time before everyone is ported out. Each mob is worth points too.. The more mobs you kill, more task you complete and more targets you destroy the more points you earn..
If your a small guild that has 14 people that log on for raid night.. NO ONE, gets told they can't do the raid. All 14 of you queue up and go in.. How you split up and take out targets is up to you.. There is no benefit to run around as one big group, because you'll waste time running around, instead of spliting up and taking out multiple targets at a time. So do you split up to 2-7 man groups to attack the towers, or split up in 3 groups? If more guildies show up later, INVITE them in too.. Why should they be left out of the fun.. This type of zone can accomadate both small and large guilds.. Granted larger guiilds will be able to clear more and faster, but the rewards are the same.
I personally would shoot for a 40 man limit just for lag issues.. but I'm open to increase that higher and make the Raid zone bigger.. Imagine a huge maze complex bigger then Kara with 30 or 40 targets
and a guild of 40 split up in multiple groups to complete as much as they can.. The beauty of this is that even IF members have to leave in the middle of the raid, your raid isn't bust.. IMO.. A RAID should be a social part for social guillds to enjoy ALL together, not this current style that WoW is pushing.. EQ never had that when I played it in 99-03..
Lets get back to more social interaction, not this esport exclusive mechanics..
PS.. Imagine a leader giving out assignments.. group 1 take out towers 3 and 4.. group 2 take out towers 1 and 5.. group 3 take out towers 2 and 6.. After your towers are down, everyone meet up at Bunker A.. etc etc.. group 1 might be waiting at teh bunker after their task are done, but maybe group 2 ran into a jam and wiped.. OOOPS.. do you wait for them, or go help them? This would almost be like one big battleground, but PvE style..
I like that idea alot, and see the potential in it.....but your completely off-topic from your original post.
this post infuriates me.
Is WoW at the end of it's Life cycle?
Dude.. it's called Wintergrasp.. do us all a favor and keep your subscription inactive
you also should learn that if you want a topic to be about "social interaction within a MMO" you should just name your post that way and not "Blizzard should take some lessons". You can't compare a company like Zynga to Blizzard, 1st of all Zynga ain't subscription based, just cash shop which means they take all the "crap" that floats on facebook and other social networks and just make it so the player feels he needs to buy a couple coins at least to have something "preety" in the games they offer.. If you played any Zynga games you know it's like that, eventualy you have to buy something. As for Blizzard you pay if you want to play, not like there ain't idiots there but.. it's more filtered.
Blizzard has an active dev community that actualy listens to the "playerbase".. try doing the same with Zynga..
Simply, if you don't like keep out.
You're doing everyone else a favour.
Really.. Wintergrasp is end game? and Wintergrasp is PvE? WoW.. you must play a different' WoW then the rest of us.. I'll make sure to resub my subscription today so I can join in on this Wintergrasp Raid fun.. sweet.. Good bye ICC, hello Wintergrasp..
I see also how you conviently ignored previous post how EverQuest raids were much more end game friendly then WoW.. especially in most guilds.. But then you cant' use your strawman argument like you tried to do with browser based games that have a better "social" design then Blizzard and other games..
Have a great day