Perhaps this is why we're stuck with so many mid-range games, because half of us want freedom and the other half want security.
We are "A Genre Divided"
There will always be griefers but to limit the overall experience for everyone because of those few is restricting and not fun in so many ways...
There can always be rules implemented to battle lawlessness in tactful ways if anyone gave a toot anymore.
I don't think anyone really has a problem with that other than the OP. The people in disagreement with Inter aren't asking for a police state, rather pointing out that Inter's utopian community-policed/governed environment is a lofty and unrealistic goal.
What did non-PvP players in PotBS feel about red zones? What would the population of EVE be if it was only NullSec? Have you seen screenshots of housing during UO's early years? The majority of MMO gamers do not want to have to govern and police the game, nor do they want to have their play negatively impacted by others.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Perhaps this is why we're stuck with so many mid-range games, because half of us want freedom and the other half want security.
We are "A Genre Divided"
There will always be griefers but to limit the overall experience for everyone because of those few is restricting and not fun in so many ways...
There can always be rules implemented to battle lawlessness in tactful ways if anyone gave a toot anymore.
I don't think anyone really has a problem with that other than the OP. The people in disagreement with Inter aren't asking for a police state, rather pointing out that Inter's utopian community-policed/governed environment is a lofty and unrealistic goal.
What did non-PvP players in PotBS feel about red zones? What would the population of EVE be if it was only NullSec? Have you seen screenshots of housing during UO's early years? The majority of MMO gamers do not want to have to govern and police the game, nor do they want to have their play negatively impacted by others.
I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood the message the OP was trying to convey. I took it as having the right to choose with enough options available differant and unique paths however he/she sees fit, not a follow the sign to another sign, then go to another sign type of scenario like we've been seeing a lot of as of late.
Generally when I hear the word freedom it means some 25 year old kiddie who wants to be free to act in the most obnoxious way possible, to exploit the game mechanics however he wants, or simply to ruin someone elses play expereince. They simply do not like the restrictions the real world puts upon them and want a game world with no rules where they can act out freely.
When these children complain about the lack of freedom or restrictions in their game they have no one else to blame but themselves. It is their childish behavior, desire to exploit and treat others badly that forces developers to restrict choices to protect the integrity of the game and the welfare of other players against anomyous children running free on the internet.
In other words freedom cannot exist without responsible mature behavior. Something the internet kiddies are incapable of understanding. Because it is all about them and their own experience. No one else matters to them. But again thats part of being a pre adult 15-25 year old child. Kids that age simply lack the physical and emotional maturity to develop empathy and understanding of needs outside their own. It does not make them bad people. It just means they are young and in the process of maturing. Young peoples brains do not fully develop until around age 25 when they can start understanding concepts like empathy.
I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood the message the OP was trying to convey. I took it as having the right to choose with enough options available differant and unique paths however he/she sees fit, not a follow the sign to another sign, then go to another sign type of scenario like we've been seeing a lot of as of late.
If so, then you've neatly condensed their sentiment to 1 sentence whereas they wrote 20. And i think that most people here would probably agree with you. Better quest design is a no brainer.
However, i rather think that their desire was more broad than opening up the choices available to you during a quest.
I think many of us here have played a game where we thought about a really cool 'what if' idea. Like i used to think about archery from a horse. But we tend to only think of the upsides, not the downsides. I think the OP is guilty of this as well.
Think the main problem with what the OP seems to want is it relies too much on players to police themselves. Frankly with no rule structure in place I would not trust even 10% of people in rl to behave like adults so i have 0 faith that it would work in a game. People are becoming vile little self absorbed beasties with very few redeemable qualities. But maybe I am just a little jaded.
I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood the message the OP was trying to convey. I took it as having the right to choose with enough options available differant and unique paths however he/she sees fit, not a follow the sign to another sign, then go to another sign type of scenario like we've been seeing a lot of as of late.
If so, then you've neatly condensed their sentiment to 1 sentence whereas they wrote 20. And i think that most people here would probably agree with you. Better quest design is a no brainer.
However, i rather think that their desire was more broad than opening up the choices available to you during a quest.
I think many of us here have played a game where we thought about a really cool 'what if' idea. Like i used to think about archery from a horse. But we tend to only think of the upsides, not the downsides. I think the OP is guilty of this as well.
Respectfully saying Mr Rscott6666...I was actually refering to many aspects of a game when I stated "paths", not just questing, I guess I should've made that more clear. Right now for things such as crafting there are many games that have very limited options. If the materials are not purchased from another player, store or auction house, you're restricted to gathering resources you need one way and one way only.You're also limited to how many professions you can have so you're forced to create a 2nd(or in some cases a 3rd) character that you might not even be too keen on playing to fully experience what it's like to create an item from start to finish on your main. Although to some I'm sure crafting is not a very important part of a game, I find it to be quite enjoyable and immersing when done right.
Jesus this thread is depressing. Seriously, you people? Freedom being a good thing didn't use to be controversial, let alone a minority opinion.
Well I guess this explains a lot about MMOs. Shit, it explains a lot about the world in general. I guess I'm out of touch. Sorry if I caused any trouble here.
People don't mind "freedom" as a concept.
But games are very personal and to some they want a "game". To others they want a "world". And still, to others they want a world where anything and everything is possible.
And I have to say I have run into some of the most scummy people in some of these games. Their attitudes would never play for long in the real world without some official interference.
If players were more courteous and appreciated that in the end this is entertainment as opposed to a way they can work out their issues (or indugle them) then I'm sure we wouldn't have a lot of problems in these games like we do now.
I don't mind being pk'ed at all. I look at it as being tackled in football. I do mind being pk'ed and having to hear someone run their mouth. Even more to the point, I really mind being pk'ed, taking it in stride, and then when I pk my assailant, i hear him cry, complain and start insulting me because I did the same thing to him.
Can't tell you how many times that has happened.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Freedom is not very fun from a gameplay standpoint.
The more you focus on gameplay, the less you can focus on freedom.
Fortunately freedom still exists even in AAA MMO's, so I don't really mind if some games take the gameplay>freedom route. Everyone gets what they want.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Freedom is not very fun from a gameplay standpoint.
The more you focus on gameplay, the less you can focus on freedom.
Fortunately freedom still exists even in AAA MMO's, so I don't really mind if some games take the gameplay>freedom route. Everyone gets what they want.
I guess the big question would be what would your definition of " gameplay" be ? For some of us, freedom is a part of gameplay, not taking from it. It also is considered how much freedom you are talking about. Freedom to choose what your armor stats are what armor you choose to wear, whether that armor relates to the attack style you choose, being able to switch between attack styles and combine different elements from different style, being a " hybrid class", Being able to choose or not to choose to do quests, being able to make your own items in game and use them in unconventional ways ( example: you want to fight someone with a spoon and socket it to have a poison effect), being able to trade any of your items in game with whomever you chose, being able to make your own enemies and allies and not have the game decide for you, being free to talk to whoever you wish to in game, being free to give any item to anyone you see fit. Your choice to partake in combat or not, your choice to wager on anothers fight or not, your choice to craft in the morning, pvp in the afternoon, and go kill some monsters in the evening all on the same character without having to make 3 seperate characters on different servers to do so.
Freedom enhances gameplay by giving players more things to partake in in the game. It allows for more decisions to be made by the players, not have them " prescripted" for them.
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Freedom enhances gameplay by giving players more things to partake in in the game. It allows for more decisions to be made by the players, not have them " prescripted" for them.
More is not necessarily better. Prescribed is not necessarily bad. Playing a game is about having fun. It is not about having 2000 options.
In fact, Apple is so successful precisely because they understand that above. COD modern warefare 2 is such a great game, not because it gives you loads of freedom, but because it can make you feel like you are in a movie doing something worthwhile.
In a MMO context, 10 well designed fun class, beat 20 repetitive ones, or a bunch of unbalanced skills.
Freedom enhances gameplay by giving players more things to partake in in the game. It allows for more decisions to be made by the players, not have them " prescripted" for them.
More is not necessarily better. Prescribed is not necessarily bad. Playing a game is about having fun. It is not about having 2000 options.
In fact, Apple is so successful precisely because they understand that above. COD modern warefare 2 is such a great game, not because it gives you loads of freedom, but because it can make you feel like you are in a movie doing something worthwhile.
In a MMO context, 10 well designed fun class, beat 20 repetitive ones, or a bunch of unbalanced skills.
It is not fun for me to be told what to do.
It is not fun for me to be told who my enemy is, I like to determine that for myself.
It is not fun for me to be told who my friends are, I like to determine that for myself.
It is not fun for me to participate in someone elses story, I want to create my own.
It is not fun for me to be told who I can and cannot talk to.
It is not fun for me to be told I cannot help my sister because she is part of an opposing faction.
I enjoy thinking for myself, doing whatever suits my mood, and making my own decisions.
Participating in a movie isn't much fun for me, If I wanted to watch movies, I would do just that- instead I want to play. I want to create, I want to make the decisions for myself, not have them made for me. To truly be a part of a game, you would have to be able to make decisions for yourself, not just " go along for the ride".
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
The simple fact is, designers can't account for "everything". For example, if you want to marry a dragon, someone has to create code and art for that situation. You can't just expect the system itself to make that up procedurally. A game is a game, and a game is fun beause of the various rules and systems the designers put into it.
It doesn't sound, to me, like you want to play a game. Maybe you should unplug and take part in the freedom of real life, where you truly can do anything... though maybe still not marry a dragon... depending on the country you live in.
The simple fact is, designers can't account for "everything". For example, if you want to marry a dragon, someone has to create code and art for that situation. You can't just expect the system itself to make that up procedurally. A game is a game, and a game is fun beause of the various rules and systems the designers put into it.
It doesn't sound, to me, like you want to play a game. Maybe you should unplug and take part in the freedom of real life, where you truly can do anything... though maybe still not marry a dragon... depending on the country you live in.
LOL you can marry dragons in games if dragons are a playable race. ROFL!
All you need is a player to play the preacher, go to an in game church invite some friends, and then have it crashed by some freaks that steal your bride. There ya go- problem solved by the players, developers just got extra content without having to do anything. Of course, dragons wouldn;t have to be a playable race, they could just add armor that makes you appear to be a dragon, then the guy with the dragon fetish wouldn't know the difference until he went on his honeymoon and undressed her.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
What if I don't want to? That doesn't sound like fun to me. I like to fight. That kind of inconvenience just gets in the way of my fun.
Now what if somebody wants to explore a player run economy but everyone can do everything themselves? There's no economy, only a bunch of god-mode mercenaries that only interact by killing each other.
There is no freedom of interaction. Even though it can be done doesn't mean people will do it- essentially making the game flawed in it's core. "Freedom" is just an illusion and only true for certain part of the playerbase.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
You will most likely not be able to repair everything yourself unless the game is really simplistic . So inconveniences will arise .
Let's look at why freedom isn't that great:
Freedom means no NPC police . So basically you'll rely on players to act as a police and we all know players are humans and they have flaws. Why not go for flawless beings enforcing the laws instead of players who wont be on 24/7 and won't always care about enforcing moral rules ? And there are loads of other problems like that (like corruption) , i guess thats why EVE has CONCORD : unbiased , unprejudiced , fair , aka: NPC's .
Freedom means everyone may do what he wants as long as his skill progression allows it . Which includes pissing the hell out of people , sure not many would do so but it just requires a few to ruin your day. One corpse camper was enough for me to stop playing WoW for a day . And if we add to that there is no bulletproof common-sense-rule enforcing , it just gets worse.
Freedom also means what Hyan said .
So really freedom has to be handled carefully and limited. There is a reason why we have laws in RL , not just to piss you off , no, to protect you from scumbags .
I can agree some MMO's do lack some freedom , but 100% freedom is plain silly if you ask me.
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt. Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
What if I don't want to? That doesn't sound like fun to me. I like to fight. That kind of inconvenience just gets in the way of my fun.
Now what if somebody wants to explore a player run economy but everyone can do everything themselves? There's no economy, only a bunch of god-mode mercenaries that only interact by killing each other.
There is no freedom of interaction. Even though it can be done doesn't mean people will do it- essentially making the game flawed in it's core. "Freedom" is just an illusion and only true for certain part of the playerbase.
If you don;t want to fix anything, you don;t have to at all, you can throw it in the gutter and go get another by continuing to fight and get more of said item from drops. Easy enough lol. Why would you be forced to? with freedom, you have that choice. You can determine that for yourself.
If you don;t want to fix anything, you don;t have to at all, you can throw it in the gutter and go get another by continuing to fight and get more of said item from drops. Easy enough lol. Why would you be forced to? with freedom, you have that choice. You can determine that for yourself.
That sounds like a huge inconvenience to me. I don't want to look for another weapon. I want to use my old weapon and not have to deal with the inconvenience of getting a new one every time my old one breaks.
If I want to continue fighting, I am forced to either find someone to repair my weapon (inconvenient), repair it myself (I don't want to), or get a new weapon (inconvenient).
I just want to have fun and that is not fun to me, yet I am forced to do it. There's no freedom.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
You will most likely not be able to repair everything yourself unless the game is really simplistic . So inconveniences will arise .
Let's look at why freedom isn't that great:
Freedom means no NPC police . So basically you'll rely on players to act as a police and we all know players are humans and they have flaws. Why not go for flawless beings enforcing the laws instead of players who wont be on 24/7 and won't always care about enforcing moral rules ? And there are loads of other problems like that (like corruption) , i guess thats why EVE has CONCORD : unbiased , unprejudiced , fair , aka: NPC's .
Freedom means everyone may do what he wants as long as his skill progression allows it . Which includes pissing the hell out of people , sure not many would do so but it just requires a few to ruin your day. One corpse camper was enough for me to stop playing WoW for a day . And if we add to that there is no bulletproof common-sense-rule enforcing , it just gets worse.
Freedom also means what Hyan said .
So really freedom has to be handled carefully and limited. There is a reason why we have laws in RL , not just to piss you off , no, to protect you from scumbags .
I can agree some MMO's do lack some freedom , 100% freedom is plain silly if you ask me.
There is a way to " build in" freedom. say you have an in game court system, in game bounty system and have moderators as judge and players as jury to determine a players fate. Say that instead of mutes and bans they sentence them to be tied to trees on an island and other players can throw rodents and stink bombs at them for a designated amount of time.
A bounty system that has wanted posters all over the game world and those who have killed the most players in those areas will appear on the wanted posters. The game automatically gives you cash for killing those players.
It doesn;t have to be anarchy and chaos to introduce fun player run systems.
If you don;t want to fix anything, you don;t have to at all, you can throw it in the gutter and go get another by continuing to fight and get more of said item from drops. Easy enough lol. Why would you be forced to? with freedom, you have that choice. You can determine that for yourself.
That sounds like a huge inconvenience to me. I don't want to look for another weapon. I want to use my old weapon and not have to deal with the inconvenience of getting a new one every time my old one breaks.
If I want to continue fighting, I am forced to either find someone to repair my weapon (inconvenient), repair it myself (I don't want to), or get a new weapon (inconvenient).
I just want to have fun and that is not fun to me, yet I am forced to do it. There's no freedom.
LOL it seems like you have more of a problem with your weapon breaking than having the option to fix it yourself. LOL Wouldn;t it be more convenient for you to use a weapon that doesn't break? LOL
what if the guy standing next to you can fix it, and you do not have to go to the crafters village to fix it at all? the way player crafting usually works is they have a designated place for these things in game. Players create a designated area for these things so all players know where to go to have items fixed, just as an NPC would be, except they get xp for fixing your weapons for you. SOme games even have an " assist system" that allows you to use their skills to fix your own items. The player with the skill can assist you and do not even have to train a skill yourself to accomplish that.
LOL it seems like you have more of a problem with your weapon breaking than having the option to fix it yourself. LOL Wouldn;t it be more convenient for you to use a weapon that doesn't break? LOL
what if the guy standing next to you can fix it, and you do not have to go to the crafters village to fix it at all?
What if I want to fix weapons for my profession? You are essentially killing my profession for giving everyone the option to use weapons that don't break. Where is the freedom in that?
The situation you're describing doesn't happen in reality. I might look for someone to repair it for hours. NPC's aren't good enough because then the crafter would be out of job.
I don't want to craft in a designated place, I want to craft wherever I want. I don't want my freedom as crafter being taken away.
What if I want to play a PvP only character but someone wants to play a PvE only character? That's huge inconvenience especially if I have to look for opponents around the world searching for hours because that's freedom for ya.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
You will most likely not be able to repair everything yourself unless the game is really simplistic . So inconveniences will arise .
Let's look at why freedom isn't that great:
Freedom means no NPC police . So basically you'll rely on players to act as a police and we all know players are humans and they have flaws. Why not go for flawless beings enforcing the laws instead of players who wont be on 24/7 and won't always care about enforcing moral rules ? And there are loads of other problems like that (like corruption) , i guess thats why EVE has CONCORD : unbiased , unprejudiced , fair , aka: NPC's .
Freedom means everyone may do what he wants as long as his skill progression allows it . Which includes pissing the hell out of people , sure not many would do so but it just requires a few to ruin your day. One corpse camper was enough for me to stop playing WoW for a day . And if we add to that there is no bulletproof common-sense-rule enforcing , it just gets worse.
Freedom also means what Hyan said .
So really freedom has to be handled carefully and limited. There is a reason why we have laws in RL , not just to piss you off , no, to protect you from scumbags .
I can agree some MMO's do lack some freedom , 100% freedom is plain silly if you ask me.
There is a way to " build in" freedom. say you have an in game court system, in game bounty system and have moderators as judge and players as jury to determine a players fate. Say that instead of mutes and bans they sentence them to be tied to trees on an island and other players can throw rodents and stink bombs at them for a designated amount of time.
A bounty system that has wanted posters all over the game world and those who ahve killed the most players in those areas will appear on the wanted posters. The game automatically gives you cash for killing those players.
It doesn;t have to be anarchy and chaos to introduce real player run systems.
But why do that when you can have a flawless law enforcement system ? Why rely on imperfect players ?
The jury could be corrupted by a guild to put a huge bounty on someone they hate . Many players might not value the risk worth the bounty money , etc... Sure it might not be anarchy , but i still prefer flawless enforcement over Human enforcement. Or like eve , a hybrid system . You have concord but you also have bounties.
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt. Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
Comments
Perhaps this is why we're stuck with so many mid-range games, because half of us want freedom and the other half want security.
We are "A Genre Divided"
There will always be griefers but to limit the overall experience for everyone because of those few is restricting and not fun in so many ways...
There can always be rules implemented to battle lawlessness in tactful ways if anyone gave a toot anymore.
I don't think anyone really has a problem with that other than the OP. The people in disagreement with Inter aren't asking for a police state, rather pointing out that Inter's utopian community-policed/governed environment is a lofty and unrealistic goal.
What did non-PvP players in PotBS feel about red zones? What would the population of EVE be if it was only NullSec? Have you seen screenshots of housing during UO's early years? The majority of MMO gamers do not want to have to govern and police the game, nor do they want to have their play negatively impacted by others.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood the message the OP was trying to convey. I took it as having the right to choose with enough options available differant and unique paths however he/she sees fit, not a follow the sign to another sign, then go to another sign type of scenario like we've been seeing a lot of as of late.
-- Freedom of constantly whining and complaining.--
I love it! I totally agree.
If so, then you've neatly condensed their sentiment to 1 sentence whereas they wrote 20. And i think that most people here would probably agree with you. Better quest design is a no brainer.
However, i rather think that their desire was more broad than opening up the choices available to you during a quest.
I think many of us here have played a game where we thought about a really cool 'what if' idea. Like i used to think about archery from a horse. But we tend to only think of the upsides, not the downsides. I think the OP is guilty of this as well.
Think the main problem with what the OP seems to want is it relies too much on players to police themselves. Frankly with no rule structure in place I would not trust even 10% of people in rl to behave like adults so i have 0 faith that it would work in a game. People are becoming vile little self absorbed beasties with very few redeemable qualities. But maybe I am just a little jaded.
Respectfully saying Mr Rscott6666...I was actually refering to many aspects of a game when I stated "paths", not just questing, I guess I should've made that more clear. Right now for things such as crafting there are many games that have very limited options. If the materials are not purchased from another player, store or auction house, you're restricted to gathering resources you need one way and one way only.You're also limited to how many professions you can have so you're forced to create a 2nd(or in some cases a 3rd) character that you might not even be too keen on playing to fully experience what it's like to create an item from start to finish on your main. Although to some I'm sure crafting is not a very important part of a game, I find it to be quite enjoyable and immersing when done right.
People don't mind "freedom" as a concept.
But games are very personal and to some they want a "game". To others they want a "world". And still, to others they want a world where anything and everything is possible.
And I have to say I have run into some of the most scummy people in some of these games. Their attitudes would never play for long in the real world without some official interference.
If players were more courteous and appreciated that in the end this is entertainment as opposed to a way they can work out their issues (or indugle them) then I'm sure we wouldn't have a lot of problems in these games like we do now.
I don't mind being pk'ed at all. I look at it as being tackled in football. I do mind being pk'ed and having to hear someone run their mouth. Even more to the point, I really mind being pk'ed, taking it in stride, and then when I pk my assailant, i hear him cry, complain and start insulting me because I did the same thing to him.
Can't tell you how many times that has happened.
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
Freedom is not very fun from a gameplay standpoint.
The more you focus on gameplay, the less you can focus on freedom.
Fortunately freedom still exists even in AAA MMO's, so I don't really mind if some games take the gameplay>freedom route. Everyone gets what they want.
I guess the big question would be what would your definition of " gameplay" be ? For some of us, freedom is a part of gameplay, not taking from it. It also is considered how much freedom you are talking about. Freedom to choose what your armor stats are what armor you choose to wear, whether that armor relates to the attack style you choose, being able to switch between attack styles and combine different elements from different style, being a " hybrid class", Being able to choose or not to choose to do quests, being able to make your own items in game and use them in unconventional ways ( example: you want to fight someone with a spoon and socket it to have a poison effect), being able to trade any of your items in game with whomever you chose, being able to make your own enemies and allies and not have the game decide for you, being free to talk to whoever you wish to in game, being free to give any item to anyone you see fit. Your choice to partake in combat or not, your choice to wager on anothers fight or not, your choice to craft in the morning, pvp in the afternoon, and go kill some monsters in the evening all on the same character without having to make 3 seperate characters on different servers to do so.
Freedom enhances gameplay by giving players more things to partake in in the game. It allows for more decisions to be made by the players, not have them " prescripted" for them.
Maybe I should clarify.
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Freedom enhances gameplay by giving players more things to partake in in the game. It allows for more decisions to be made by the players, not have them " prescripted" for them.
More is not necessarily better. Prescribed is not necessarily bad. Playing a game is about having fun. It is not about having 2000 options.
In fact, Apple is so successful precisely because they understand that above. COD modern warefare 2 is such a great game, not because it gives you loads of freedom, but because it can make you feel like you are in a movie doing something worthwhile.
In a MMO context, 10 well designed fun class, beat 20 repetitive ones, or a bunch of unbalanced skills.
It is not fun for me to be told what to do.
It is not fun for me to be told who my enemy is, I like to determine that for myself.
It is not fun for me to be told who my friends are, I like to determine that for myself.
It is not fun for me to participate in someone elses story, I want to create my own.
It is not fun for me to be told who I can and cannot talk to.
It is not fun for me to be told I cannot help my sister because she is part of an opposing faction.
I enjoy thinking for myself, doing whatever suits my mood, and making my own decisions.
Participating in a movie isn't much fun for me, If I wanted to watch movies, I would do just that- instead I want to play. I want to create, I want to make the decisions for myself, not have them made for me. To truly be a part of a game, you would have to be able to make decisions for yourself, not just " go along for the ride".
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
The simple fact is, designers can't account for "everything". For example, if you want to marry a dragon, someone has to create code and art for that situation. You can't just expect the system itself to make that up procedurally. A game is a game, and a game is fun beause of the various rules and systems the designers put into it.
It doesn't sound, to me, like you want to play a game. Maybe you should unplug and take part in the freedom of real life, where you truly can do anything... though maybe still not marry a dragon... depending on the country you live in.
LOL you can marry dragons in games if dragons are a playable race. ROFL!
All you need is a player to play the preacher, go to an in game church invite some friends, and then have it crashed by some freaks that steal your bride. There ya go- problem solved by the players, developers just got extra content without having to do anything. Of course, dragons wouldn;t have to be a playable race, they could just add armor that makes you appear to be a dragon, then the guy with the dragon fetish wouldn't know the difference until he went on his honeymoon and undressed her.
What if I don't want to? That doesn't sound like fun to me. I like to fight. That kind of inconvenience just gets in the way of my fun.
Now what if somebody wants to explore a player run economy but everyone can do everything themselves? There's no economy, only a bunch of god-mode mercenaries that only interact by killing each other.
There is no freedom of interaction. Even though it can be done doesn't mean people will do it- essentially making the game flawed in it's core. "Freedom" is just an illusion and only true for certain part of the playerbase.
You will most likely not be able to repair everything yourself unless the game is really simplistic . So inconveniences will arise .
Let's look at why freedom isn't that great:
Freedom means no NPC police . So basically you'll rely on players to act as a police and we all know players are humans and they have flaws. Why not go for flawless beings enforcing the laws instead of players who wont be on 24/7 and won't always care about enforcing moral rules ? And there are loads of other problems like that (like corruption) , i guess thats why EVE has CONCORD : unbiased , unprejudiced , fair , aka: NPC's .
Freedom means everyone may do what he wants as long as his skill progression allows it . Which includes pissing the hell out of people , sure not many would do so but it just requires a few to ruin your day. One corpse camper was enough for me to stop playing WoW for a day . And if we add to that there is no bulletproof common-sense-rule enforcing , it just gets worse.
Freedom also means what Hyan said .
So really freedom has to be handled carefully and limited. There is a reason why we have laws in RL , not just to piss you off , no, to protect you from scumbags .
I can agree some MMO's do lack some freedom , but 100% freedom is plain silly if you ask me.
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
If you don;t want to fix anything, you don;t have to at all, you can throw it in the gutter and go get another by continuing to fight and get more of said item from drops. Easy enough lol. Why would you be forced to? with freedom, you have that choice. You can determine that for yourself.
That sounds like a huge inconvenience to me. I don't want to look for another weapon. I want to use my old weapon and not have to deal with the inconvenience of getting a new one every time my old one breaks.
If I want to continue fighting, I am forced to either find someone to repair my weapon (inconvenient), repair it myself (I don't want to), or get a new weapon (inconvenient).
I just want to have fun and that is not fun to me, yet I am forced to do it. There's no freedom.
There is a way to " build in" freedom. say you have an in game court system, in game bounty system and have moderators as judge and players as jury to determine a players fate. Say that instead of mutes and bans they sentence them to be tied to trees on an island and other players can throw rodents and stink bombs at them for a designated amount of time.
A bounty system that has wanted posters all over the game world and those who have killed the most players in those areas will appear on the wanted posters. The game automatically gives you cash for killing those players.
It doesn;t have to be anarchy and chaos to introduce fun player run systems.
LOL it seems like you have more of a problem with your weapon breaking than having the option to fix it yourself. LOL Wouldn;t it be more convenient for you to use a weapon that doesn't break? LOL
what if the guy standing next to you can fix it, and you do not have to go to the crafters village to fix it at all? the way player crafting usually works is they have a designated place for these things in game. Players create a designated area for these things so all players know where to go to have items fixed, just as an NPC would be, except they get xp for fixing your weapons for you. SOme games even have an " assist system" that allows you to use their skills to fix your own items. The player with the skill can assist you and do not even have to train a skill yourself to accomplish that.
What if I want to fix weapons for my profession? You are essentially killing my profession for giving everyone the option to use weapons that don't break. Where is the freedom in that?
The situation you're describing doesn't happen in reality. I might look for someone to repair it for hours. NPC's aren't good enough because then the crafter would be out of job.
I don't want to craft in a designated place, I want to craft wherever I want. I don't want my freedom as crafter being taken away.
What if I want to play a PvP only character but someone wants to play a PvE only character? That's huge inconvenience especially if I have to look for opponents around the world searching for hours because that's freedom for ya.
But why do that when you can have a flawless law enforcement system ? Why rely on imperfect players ?
The jury could be corrupted by a guild to put a huge bounty on someone they hate . Many players might not value the risk worth the bounty money , etc... Sure it might not be anarchy , but i still prefer flawless enforcement over Human enforcement. Or like eve , a hybrid system . You have concord but you also have bounties.
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.