The point is that the longer route can be more fun and satisfying if done right. the other point that myself and few others have made are MMORPG's should feel like an investment, if you only play the game for a total of 3 or 4 months before you have moved on to the next thing then that game has failed. Here are a few things that have dwindled or disappeared over time that should still be here.
1. Support classes - honestly while they were not the top wanted class there was enough people playing them to warrant keeping them around.
2. Grind - yes i know its seems weird that i say this but MMO's need grind, they do, no if and or buts. If you're that impatient than MMO's arent for you. you have to keeping doing things to get better at them but the problem is MMO just need to make it so that you get in a pace and next thing you know you dont even realize your doing it.
3. GM events - these never took extremely long to do but they were fun and the rewards were about spot on. it would be awesome to be walking along and bam gnome monk mob. but gnomes cant be mobs in this game what is going on here and then pursueing to find out and uncovering the event was great.
4. AA's - a couple games still have these but not many modern MMO's do, they were great ways to keep playing your toon no matter what level to gain extra stats and abilities and too keep progressing even if you max out. further more you could pick and prioritize how you got them too.
5. Hell levels - yes hell levels need to come back as well . these would give you the chance to explore more look for more content in different places.
6. Forced grouping - not all the times but there should be times when you just have to group. if your just going run dungoens and raid in the end game anyways with other people then its just to your benefit to learn how to use your class abilities beforehand. that was the half the purpose of it anyways. but you make connections and learn about people and their classes as well. i know people always go well i dont want to be forced because i only go so much time, then my answer is MMO's are about time they want your time as much as possible. if you have a family and work then concentrate on those first and play when you got time. just plan to get by your roadblocks on the weekend or something.
1. Agree, Support classes should get more love. But on the other hand, I dunno if making another class role essential for grouping will help with the LFG issue, tank and healer are hard enough to deal with.
2. Well I think any game has an element of grind in there, but again, should a game be lengthen out just so you can say you have spend a lot of time in the game? I think content should be designed to be repeated to a certain degree without being repetitive. If content are fun to repeat, is it a grind?
Daily quest isn't a fun repetitive content, it is simply a reuse quest. Let say open world tower defence, you defending a city from enemies, that should provide enough variety to prevent the content from being repetitive.
3. I think GM controlled open world raid boss would be pretty fun :P, also to earn the hardest brag title ingame, "I beat the GM"
4. Well I'm never a fan of simply leveling system, for a game such as MMOG, which requires depth and complexity, leveling is too simple of a system to use in a MMO with depth.
5. I'm not sure what this promotes....you should die more often? I think story can allow inter realm exploration, or alterate realities, not necessarily restrict to just hell levels
6. While I think all content should be made group oriented, but it won't be the traditional grouping, but more ad hoc grouping. So everyone in the same zone is inheritently in a group together. without the need to invite or anything. Also the idea of scaling is needed, because you never know how many players are playing together, unless you specifically ask for group numbers, but that would just make life harder to start any content.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW? As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Originally posted by ZeroByteDNA For some people, endgame is a bad thing. Endgame turned MMORPGs into game lobbies. The journey no longer mattered. It was just a case of getting to the level cap as fast as possible so you could queue for game - as if you were playing a FPS or RTS game rather than a MMORPG.
BINGO! Endgame to me means, strangely enough, "END GAME". No more game to play. Why rush to get there?
If one is not having fun in a game, move on already! If you play an MMORPG to "beat it", you totally miss the boat on what the game is about in the first place.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
It's not about the speed of leveling or raiding...
It's about the fact that we've all been there and done that. New games launch and have very little difference when compared to WoW, e.g., same old bs battlegrounds, same old bs archer, ranger, hunter or whatever the game decides to call it, same old linear progression etc etc etc etc etc etc...
It's not that these new games suck. It's that they don't offer anything new. It gets boring. It's like eating Kellogg's Shredded Wheat for cereal every day... but then switching to Walmart's cheap version of Shredded Wheat - same concept with very mild differences.
Well you guys get the idea. As far MMO goes right now I'm in trouble. It's really not these games fault. It's my play style that is'nt being met. I HATE gear grinding..faction grinding..LvL grinding. I hate games that tell me that if I don't have certain gear me toon stinks. Or games that say we have a wide assortmant of trees and specs you can choose from then turns around at the end of the game and says...Oh we sorry but only a few builds are actually any good.
People have differnt play styles. That's just a fact of life. Lots of people love these games. I will hold out for SW:ToR. Then probably GW2.
Posting here will not change peoples opinion on anything. The younger players will love the give it to me now games. The older players like myself want more than gear and faction to run the game.
But I love reading these post makes me laugh..then I cry...then I realize I really don't give a.........SHEEP !!!
What is your playstyle then? Last I checked, UO required you to grind skills which is no different than grinding levels.
It's very much an RPG thing to have your characters ability based on what level you are and what kind of gear you're wearing.
Not only that, but his post reads like "I hate all these MMORPGs...and I fully plan on trying SW:ToR!"
...why would you bother with ToR if you strongly dislike the current crop of games (for reasons beyond simply tiring of older games.)?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
To be honest, why do we even need Levels? its a old concept from Table Top. Lets get rid of it
Or perhaps, you could understand - that there are people that enjoy PnP RPGs and want a computer/online version of that.
If you do not want that, then look for a genre that does not have it.
Ask for a new genre to be formed...not that the world be changed for you.
I'm allergic to nuts, including peanut butter. Say I go to a picnic, where they're serving PB&J sandwiches. Do I demand that everybody throw their sandwiches away, and that the person that made them make jelly sandiwches for everybody instead? Or maybe do I ask if there is any bread and jelly left so either somebody can make the jelly sandwich for me or I could make it myself? For the next such outing, do I demand that they do not make PB&J sandwiches and we just have jelly sandwiches instead? Or do I perhaps ask they could make some sandwiches without PB or bring my own?
This is how the MMORPG genre has been ruined... stripped of everything that made them MMORPGs - instead of just making other games with some of the MMORPG features that people wanted.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
To be honest, why do we even need Levels? its a old concept from Table Top. Lets get rid of it
Or perhaps, you could understand - that there are people that enjoy PnP RPGs and want a computer/online version of that.
If you do not want that, then look for a genre that does not have it.
Ask for a new genre to be formed...not that the world be changed for you.
I'm allergic to nuts, including peanut butter. Say I go to a picnic, where they're serving PB&J sandwiches. Do I demand that everybody throw their sandwiches away, and that the person that made them make jelly sandiwches for everybody instead? Or maybe do I ask if there is any bread and jelly left so either somebody can make the jelly sandwich for me or I could make it myself? For the next such outing, do I demand that they do not make PB&J sandwiches and we just have jelly sandwiches instead? Or do I perhaps ask they could make some sandwiches without PB or bring my own?
This is how the MMORPG genre has been ruined... stripped of everything that made them MMORPGs - instead of just making other games with some of the MMORPG features that people wanted.
It's more like traveling between Britain and the US and having "chips" mean two entirely different things.
Since long before MMORPGs, "RPG" in videogames meant games focused on non-twitch (or twitch-lite) combat, character progression, and storyline.
So the same advice you just gave applies to anyone insisting videogame RPGs should be tabletop RPGs. Videogame RPGs have always been something different, and the world isn't going to rotate around people who insist they should be the same thing.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
It's more like traveling between Britain and the US and having "chips" mean two entirely different things.
Since long before MMORPGs, "RPG" in videogames meant games focused on non-twitch (or twitch-lite) combat, character progression, and storyline.
So the same advice you just gave applies to anyone insisting videogame RPGs should be tabletop RPGs. Videogame RPGs have always been something different, and the world isn't going to rotate around people who insist they should be the same thing.
Honestly, I do not follow what you're trying to say here.
PnP RPGs. Videogame RPGs attempted to replicate most of that PnP RPG experience without the PnP being needed. MMORPGs evolved from the VGRPGs - adding in more social aspects and the persistent world. Still...based on the original PnP RPGs.
People saying that MMORPGs should be like VGRPGs should be like PnP RPGs... well, that is how they were. So all they're saying is that they should be like they were.
Those that have wanted to add twitch, do away with character progression, bring in all the rest . . . are the ones that have changed and are continually trying to change them from what they were.
My advice applies to them...
...likewise, it would apply to the RPG player trying to change a FPS or RTS game so that at the core it was no longer a FPS or RTS.
If people want some form of a hybrid - then there should be a hybrid. If a person wants a FPS-RPG; then a FPS-RPG should be made. Neither the FPS genre nor RPG genre should be destroyed because of the desire for the hybrid...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
It's more like traveling between Britain and the US and having "chips" mean two entirely different things.
Since long before MMORPGs, "RPG" in videogames meant games focused on non-twitch (or twitch-lite) combat, character progression, and storyline.
So the same advice you just gave applies to anyone insisting videogame RPGs should be tabletop RPGs. Videogame RPGs have always been something different, and the world isn't going to rotate around people who insist they should be the same thing.
Honestly, I do not follow what you're trying to say here.
PnP RPGs. Videogame RPGs attempted to replicate most of that PnP RPG experience without the PnP being needed. MMORPGs evolved from the VGRPGs - adding in more social aspects and the persistent world. Still...based on the original PnP RPGs.
People saying that MMORPGs should be like VGRPGs should be like PnP RPGs... well, that is how they were. So all they're saying is that they should be like they were.
Those that have wanted to add twitch, do away with character progression, bring in all the rest . . . are the ones that have changed and are continually trying to change them from what they were.
My advice applies to them...
...likewise, it would apply to the RPG player trying to change a FPS or RTS game so that at the core it was no longer a FPS or RTS.
If people want some form of a hybrid - then there should be a hybrid. If a person wants a FPS-RPG; then a FPS-RPG should be made. Neither the FPS genre nor RPG genre should be destroyed because of the desire for the hybrid...
Just naming some of the more memorable RPGs I've played over the years: Ultima 3, FF3, Secret of Mana, KOTOR, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect.
Are you saying that these games approach anything close to the tabletop experience? Because they feel completely different to me. Always have.
I enjoy both, but they're completely different gaming experiences.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Just naming some of the more memorable RPGs I've played over the years: Ultima 3, FF3, Secret of Mana, KOTOR, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect.
Are you saying that these games approach anything close to the tabletop experience? Because they feel completely different to me. Always have.
I enjoy both, but they're completely different gaming experiences.
I would not call the majority of those games RPGs. They're action/adventure games. No, I do not believe that adventure games approach gaming like a PnP RPG.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Honestly, I do not follow what you're trying to say here.
PnP RPGs. Videogame RPGs attempted to replicate most of that PnP RPG experience without the PnP being needed. MMORPGs evolved from the VGRPGs - adding in more social aspects and the persistent world. Still...based on the original PnP RPGs.
The problem is, videogame RPGs simply cannot replicate all but the most shallow elements from the PnP RPG experience. All they can do is replicate the mechanical aspects of combat. They cannot replicate the interpersonal relationships, the off-the-wall thinking, etc. If you want to do something unexpected, you simply can't do it in an MMO, there are very hard and fast rules that you're held to and you can only act within those rules. That really kills any similarity between MMOs and PnP.
Just because both have RPG slapped on them don't make them equivalent.
Just naming some of the more memorable RPGs I've played over the years: Ultima 3, FF3, Secret of Mana, KOTOR, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect.
Are you saying that these games approach anything close to the tabletop experience? Because they feel completely different to me. Always have.
I enjoy both, but they're completely different gaming experiences.
I would not call the majority of those games RPGs. They're action/adventure games. No, I do not believe that adventure games approach gaming like a PnP RPG.
Well my point (and your point) was the videogame RPGs have been called RPGs for over 20 years, so you can't just arbitrarily pretend they aren't RPGs because they are. They're videogame RPGs.
Nobody in Britain would take you seriously if you insisted chips weren't chips.
Just as no gamer will take you seriously if you insisted those RPGs weren't RPGs. We've all called them RPGs for 20+ years.
MMORPGs are as RPG as the average videogame RPG has ever been.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Just naming some of the more memorable RPGs I've played over the years: Ultima 3, FF3, Secret of Mana, KOTOR, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect.
Are you saying that these games approach anything close to the tabletop experience? Because they feel completely different to me. Always have.
I enjoy both, but they're completely different gaming experiences.
I would not call the majority of those games RPGs. They're action/adventure games. No, I do not believe that adventure games approach gaming like a PnP RPG.
Well my point (and your point) was the videogame RPGs have been called RPGs for over 20 years, so you can't just arbitrarily pretend they aren't RPGs because they are. They're videogame RPGs.
Nobody in Britain would take you seriously if you insisted chips weren't chips.
Just as no gamer will take you seriously if you insisted those RPGs weren't RPGs. We've all called them RPGs for 20+ years.
MMORPGs are as RPG as the average videogame RPG has ever been.
Chips are fries. Crisps are chips, but not the chips that are fries.
Did you ever play any of the SSI Gold Box games? Compare those to Mass Effect. Very different games.
Did you ever play Vanilla WoW? Compare that to post Cata WoW. Very different games.
Vanilla WoW was more of a MMORPG. Cata WoW is more of a MMOGL.
The term RPG and MMORPG (or MMO to represent a MMORPG when it is actually another type of MMO) are both used carelessly, imo.
People using a term in a marketing sense, does not really make it the case. The term may have lost meaning or never had the original meaning for somebody late to the game.
Too many things have lost meaning over the years.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
If you are going to use a pure PnP RPG standard than games like EQ or EVE would not be RPGs since they don't really play out like a PnP RPG session. UO probably would not qualify either.
If you are going to use a pure PnP RPG standard than games like EQ or EVE would not be RPGs since they don't really play out like a PnP RPG session. UO probably would not qualify either.
Which PnP RPG standard are you using? If AD&D/D&D - which version? The game changed many times through the versions. Traveller? Twilight 2000? GURPS? Hero System? One of the Palladium RPGs? Phoenix Command? Marvel SuperHeroes? The original one? It boggles my mind, how many different PnP games I've played since the late 70s.
As for sessions, even those would depend on the DM/GM running the game - even for the same game.
However, there are certain core elements of PnP RPG games...
...I would argue that early EQ and EVE adhere to more of them than most games.
It is not a black and white, either or... thing. I've never understood why things are so didactic on the forums. So polarized. There are few things that are actually black and white. That being said, there are enough things that if they exist or do not exist, they change the definition of the game.
At it's core, a RPG is different from an Adventure game. An Action game is different than both. Etc, etc, etc.
They may mix elements from other genres, but at their core - they are what they are.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Just naming some of the more memorable RPGs I've played over the years: Ultima 3, FF3, Secret of Mana, KOTOR, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect.
Are you saying that these games approach anything close to the tabletop experience? Because they feel completely different to me. Always have.
I enjoy both, but they're completely different gaming experiences.
I would not call the majority of those games RPGs. They're action/adventure games. No, I do not believe that adventure games approach gaming like a PnP RPG.
Well my point (and your point) was the videogame RPGs have been called RPGs for over 20 years, so you can't just arbitrarily pretend they aren't RPGs because they are. They're videogame RPGs.
Nobody in Britain would take you seriously if you insisted chips weren't chips.
Just as no gamer will take you seriously if you insisted those RPGs weren't RPGs. We've all called them RPGs for 20+ years.
MMORPGs are as RPG as the average videogame RPG has ever been.
Chips are fries. Crisps are chips, but not the chips that are fries.
Did you ever play any of the SSI Gold Box games? Compare those to Mass Effect. Very different games.
Did you ever play Vanilla WoW? Compare that to post Cata WoW. Very different games.
Vanilla WoW was more of a MMORPG. Cata WoW is more of a MMOGL.
The term RPG and MMORPG (or MMO to represent a MMORPG when it is actually another type of MMO) are both used carelessly, imo.
People using a term in a marketing sense, does not really make it the case. The term may have lost meaning or never had the original meaning for somebody late to the game.
Too many things have lost meaning over the years.
Genres are not strict definitions. They're very broad categories. Genres are used carelessly because they're such broad terms that careless use is fine unless a game truly falls outside a genre's broad definition.
Trying to claim any of the games you and I have cited somehow aren't RPGs, when everyone else feels they are, won't change the fact that everyone else feels they're RPGs. Especially since the term has been applied to RPGs since the beginning of the videogame RPG genre!
SSI Gold Box is nothing like playing tabletop AD&D (unless you played with a group where sessions were only predefined dialogue options and combat, I guess.) It didn't make them bad games, but in no way could they be mistaken for providing the same type of gameplay experience as tabletop AD&D.
So back to your own advice: ask for a new genre to be formed, not that the world change for you. Everyone feels one way, and there's an established norm, yet you feel differently -- so create a new genre which is defined as "videogame RPGs that play like tabletop RPGs". Eventually I think we'll see games trickle into that genre. Videogame RPGs aren't going to stop being called "RPGs" anytime soon, I assure you.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Speaking for myself, I find that MMO's are all basically the same. Get a quest/mission go kill X number of mobs, come back get reward. Rinse/repeat. Why should I buy a new game when it is going to be the same as the ones I already Paid for and play? The only difference of course is the window dressing. The graphics and eye candy are all that makes any of today's modern MMO's different from each other. But still just basically a kill fest with nothing to really diferentiate this game from that one.
Genres are not strict definitions. They're very broad categories. Genres are used carelessly because they're such broad terms that careless use is fine unless a game truly falls outside a genre's broad definition.
An Action Game with RPG Elements, is still an Action Game. A Country Song with Rock Elements, may be called Country Rock - but it is still a sub-genre of Country. Things are what they are. A Dramatic Horror Movie, is not thought of as a Horrific Drama (unless it gets really bad reviews).
Trying to claim any of the games you and I have cited somehow aren't RPGs, when everyone else feels they are, won't change the fact that everyone else feels they're RPGs. Especially since the term has been applied to RPGs since the beginning of the videogame RPG genre!
As a marketing ploy to attract those that played PnP RPGs... many such games have received harsh reviews for such false claims.
SSI Gold Box is nothing like playing tabletop AD&D (unless you played with a group where sessions were only predefined dialogue options and combat, I guess.) It didn't make them bad games, but in no way could they be mistaken for providing the same type of gameplay experience as tabletop AD&D.
If you are looking at the social interaction, then no - they are not. If you are looking at describing your actions, then no - they are not. However, you are directing the character to take an action - the results of that action are determined by some form of RNG or other success/fail mechanism.
If a game has the player actually doing the actions - Action/Adventure/FPS - then the player is no longer directing the character. Thus, it is no longer that RPG. It may have what others consider to be RPG elements - but in general, most of those can be considered general.
Yes, we lost the social interaction and the "global" story with singleplayer games - but that is something that we got back with MUDs and MMORPGs. Well, at least - initially we did - before the genre changed.
You could buy the various books for a PnP RPG...and play by yourself. It was possible. While it would miss the "social" aspect or the "global" story from that - those two features were not unique features. Tabletop RTS (wargaming) had such features without being RPGs.
So back to your own advice: ask for a new genre to be formed, not that the world change for you. Everyone feels one way, and there's an established norm, yet you feel differently -- so create a new genre which is defined as "videogame RPGs that play like tabletop RPGs". Eventually I think we'll see games trickle into that genre. Videogame RPGs aren't going to stop being called "RPGs" anytime soon, I assure you.
But as I have stated several times - I do not need a new genre to be formed. My genre already existed.
I need everybody else, well - that is not interested in how the genre was or how it was progressing - to get off my lawn, ahem, so to speak.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Even looking at PnP RPG and LARP. Those that chose to LARP, did not say they were doing PnP RPG. They were doing something different - they called it something different.
It is that simple.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
If people wants to play RPG with dice rolling reminisce to the good ol' Pen and Paper RPG
Why not just go play Pen and Paper RPG?
Let the computer handle calculations that require more than a 100 sided dice
Like physics calculations, or collision detections
Food for thought.
Do you break into people's homes, tell them that it is now your house, and that if they want a house of their own - that they should move?
While nowhere near an exact analogy - it is along the lines of what has happened to the MMORPG genre.
I find what you stated to be insulting... in such a manner.
Even in addressing just the aspects of RNG - almost every current MMORPG utilizes some form of RNG... so I find it odd that you would have even typed what you did. Even if it is not for hit chance, RNG is often a factor in damage.
If you do not want to direct the actions of a character that you are developing over a period of time...why on Earth did you decide to play a RPG?
Do you feel like going for a walk and sit down? Do you think about getting some fresh air and stand next to the cat's litter box? Do you feel like having pizza and eat chicken?
Not only have people done this - but they have in turn complained en masse about it. So that going for a walk now means sitting down, that getting some fresh air now means standing next to the cat's litter box, and that having pizza now means eating chicken...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Have to keep in mind, I'm talking about MMORPGs. It does not mean I feel all MMOs should be like MMORPGs. There are different types of MMOs for a reason. I believe developers should attempt to design games where there is a market. There is a market for MMOFPS games. There is a market for MMOAG games. There are many markets for many different types of games. Developers should develop for those markets...
...rather than try to design a single game for all the markets that runs the risk of alienating the majority of the players as it offers hints of what they are looking for - but is full of things they were not looking for.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
If people wants to play RPG with dice rolling reminisce to the good ol' Pen and Paper RPG
Why not just go play Pen and Paper RPG?
Let the computer handle calculations that require more than a 100 sided dice
Like physics calculations, or collision detections
Food for thought.
Do you break into people's homes, tell them that it is now your house, and that if they want a house of their own - that they should move?
While nowhere near an exact analogy - it is along the lines of what has happened to the MMORPG genre.
I find what you stated to be insulting... in such a manner.
Even in addressing just the aspects of RNG - almost every current MMORPG utilizes some form of RNG... so I find it odd that you would have even typed what you did. Even if it is not for hit chance, RNG is often a factor in damage.
If you do not want to direct the actions of a character that you are developing over a period of time...why on Earth did you decide to play a RPG?
Do you feel like going for a walk and sit down? Do you think about getting some fresh air and stand next to the cat's litter box? Do you feel like having pizza and eat chicken?
Not only have people done this - but they have in turn complained en masse about it. So that going for a walk now means sitting down, that getting some fresh air now means standing next to the cat's litter box, and that having pizza now means eating chicken...
I'm sorry if I sounded insulting, that wasn't my intention.
The problem is that, I see people bring the whole 'kids should go play PnP RPG and see what it means to play a RPG' argument in every single MMORPG. I understand some people loved those genre, but is it fair to force it upon others? I dunno, maybe people just needs to accept not all games are made for them. Sounds easy, but not a lot of people wants to accept it.
At least give it a go before complaining about games, then the argument will based actualy gameplay experience rather than preconceptual bias. I can safely say I have tried almost all the genres to some degree, and the games I've complained about, I have actually played them beforehand (unless obvious titles that you know will be horrible)
Also, I actually don't really have a problem with RNG, but I wish devs will use it somewhere other than combat, like deciding outcomes of certain story events, or maybe multiple pathway dungeons that uses RNG to direct players to a certain pathway. If you look at current games, RNG are only used in combat, everything else is set in a yes or no function. It makes the world linear in terms of progression.
One reason why I don't like RNG in combat is that, instead of trying to make results more random, it promotes players to try to 'beat the odds' with continuous gear grinding, you need a certain dodge rate to beat that boss, you need a certain block rate to tank that boss. While the factor variable is random, it promotes the number grinding instead of the random determination of outcomes. If anyone have done any sort of basic programming, RNG is usually used to achieve a random outcome, not intended to let people to beat the odds.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW? As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Comments
1. Agree, Support classes should get more love. But on the other hand, I dunno if making another class role essential for grouping will help with the LFG issue, tank and healer are hard enough to deal with.
2. Well I think any game has an element of grind in there, but again, should a game be lengthen out just so you can say you have spend a lot of time in the game? I think content should be designed to be repeated to a certain degree without being repetitive. If content are fun to repeat, is it a grind?
Daily quest isn't a fun repetitive content, it is simply a reuse quest. Let say open world tower defence, you defending a city from enemies, that should provide enough variety to prevent the content from being repetitive.
3. I think GM controlled open world raid boss would be pretty fun :P, also to earn the hardest brag title ingame, "I beat the GM"
4. Well I'm never a fan of simply leveling system, for a game such as MMOG, which requires depth and complexity, leveling is too simple of a system to use in a MMO with depth.
5. I'm not sure what this promotes....you should die more often? I think story can allow inter realm exploration, or alterate realities, not necessarily restrict to just hell levels
6. While I think all content should be made group oriented, but it won't be the traditional grouping, but more ad hoc grouping. So everyone in the same zone is inheritently in a group together. without the need to invite or anything. Also the idea of scaling is needed, because you never know how many players are playing together, unless you specifically ask for group numbers, but that would just make life harder to start any content.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
If one is not having fun in a game, move on already! If you play an MMORPG to "beat it", you totally miss the boat on what the game is about in the first place.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
It's not about the speed of leveling or raiding...
It's about the fact that we've all been there and done that. New games launch and have very little difference when compared to WoW, e.g., same old bs battlegrounds, same old bs archer, ranger, hunter or whatever the game decides to call it, same old linear progression etc etc etc etc etc etc...
It's not that these new games suck. It's that they don't offer anything new. It gets boring. It's like eating Kellogg's Shredded Wheat for cereal every day... but then switching to Walmart's cheap version of Shredded Wheat - same concept with very mild differences.
Not only that, but his post reads like "I hate all these MMORPGs...and I fully plan on trying SW:ToR!"
...why would you bother with ToR if you strongly dislike the current crop of games (for reasons beyond simply tiring of older games.)?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Or perhaps, you could understand - that there are people that enjoy PnP RPGs and want a computer/online version of that.
If you do not want that, then look for a genre that does not have it.
Ask for a new genre to be formed...not that the world be changed for you.
I'm allergic to nuts, including peanut butter. Say I go to a picnic, where they're serving PB&J sandwiches. Do I demand that everybody throw their sandwiches away, and that the person that made them make jelly sandiwches for everybody instead? Or maybe do I ask if there is any bread and jelly left so either somebody can make the jelly sandwich for me or I could make it myself? For the next such outing, do I demand that they do not make PB&J sandwiches and we just have jelly sandwiches instead? Or do I perhaps ask they could make some sandwiches without PB or bring my own?
This is how the MMORPG genre has been ruined... stripped of everything that made them MMORPGs - instead of just making other games with some of the MMORPG features that people wanted.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
It's more like traveling between Britain and the US and having "chips" mean two entirely different things.
Since long before MMORPGs, "RPG" in videogames meant games focused on non-twitch (or twitch-lite) combat, character progression, and storyline.
So the same advice you just gave applies to anyone insisting videogame RPGs should be tabletop RPGs. Videogame RPGs have always been something different, and the world isn't going to rotate around people who insist they should be the same thing.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Honestly, I do not follow what you're trying to say here.
PnP RPGs. Videogame RPGs attempted to replicate most of that PnP RPG experience without the PnP being needed. MMORPGs evolved from the VGRPGs - adding in more social aspects and the persistent world. Still...based on the original PnP RPGs.
People saying that MMORPGs should be like VGRPGs should be like PnP RPGs... well, that is how they were. So all they're saying is that they should be like they were.
Those that have wanted to add twitch, do away with character progression, bring in all the rest . . . are the ones that have changed and are continually trying to change them from what they were.
My advice applies to them...
...likewise, it would apply to the RPG player trying to change a FPS or RTS game so that at the core it was no longer a FPS or RTS.
If people want some form of a hybrid - then there should be a hybrid. If a person wants a FPS-RPG; then a FPS-RPG should be made. Neither the FPS genre nor RPG genre should be destroyed because of the desire for the hybrid...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Just naming some of the more memorable RPGs I've played over the years: Ultima 3, FF3, Secret of Mana, KOTOR, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect.
Are you saying that these games approach anything close to the tabletop experience? Because they feel completely different to me. Always have.
I enjoy both, but they're completely different gaming experiences.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I would not call the majority of those games RPGs. They're action/adventure games. No, I do not believe that adventure games approach gaming like a PnP RPG.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
The problem is, videogame RPGs simply cannot replicate all but the most shallow elements from the PnP RPG experience. All they can do is replicate the mechanical aspects of combat. They cannot replicate the interpersonal relationships, the off-the-wall thinking, etc. If you want to do something unexpected, you simply can't do it in an MMO, there are very hard and fast rules that you're held to and you can only act within those rules. That really kills any similarity between MMOs and PnP.
Just because both have RPG slapped on them don't make them equivalent.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Well my point (and your point) was the videogame RPGs have been called RPGs for over 20 years, so you can't just arbitrarily pretend they aren't RPGs because they are. They're videogame RPGs.
Nobody in Britain would take you seriously if you insisted chips weren't chips.
Just as no gamer will take you seriously if you insisted those RPGs weren't RPGs. We've all called them RPGs for 20+ years.
MMORPGs are as RPG as the average videogame RPG has ever been.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Chips are fries. Crisps are chips, but not the chips that are fries.
Did you ever play any of the SSI Gold Box games? Compare those to Mass Effect. Very different games.
Did you ever play Vanilla WoW? Compare that to post Cata WoW. Very different games.
Vanilla WoW was more of a MMORPG. Cata WoW is more of a MMOGL.
The term RPG and MMORPG (or MMO to represent a MMORPG when it is actually another type of MMO) are both used carelessly, imo.
People using a term in a marketing sense, does not really make it the case. The term may have lost meaning or never had the original meaning for somebody late to the game.
Too many things have lost meaning over the years.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
If you are going to use a pure PnP RPG standard than games like EQ or EVE would not be RPGs since they don't really play out like a PnP RPG session. UO probably would not qualify either.
Which PnP RPG standard are you using? If AD&D/D&D - which version? The game changed many times through the versions. Traveller? Twilight 2000? GURPS? Hero System? One of the Palladium RPGs? Phoenix Command? Marvel SuperHeroes? The original one? It boggles my mind, how many different PnP games I've played since the late 70s.
As for sessions, even those would depend on the DM/GM running the game - even for the same game.
However, there are certain core elements of PnP RPG games...
...I would argue that early EQ and EVE adhere to more of them than most games.
It is not a black and white, either or... thing. I've never understood why things are so didactic on the forums. So polarized. There are few things that are actually black and white. That being said, there are enough things that if they exist or do not exist, they change the definition of the game.
At it's core, a RPG is different from an Adventure game. An Action game is different than both. Etc, etc, etc.
They may mix elements from other genres, but at their core - they are what they are.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Genres are not strict definitions. They're very broad categories. Genres are used carelessly because they're such broad terms that careless use is fine unless a game truly falls outside a genre's broad definition.
Trying to claim any of the games you and I have cited somehow aren't RPGs, when everyone else feels they are, won't change the fact that everyone else feels they're RPGs. Especially since the term has been applied to RPGs since the beginning of the videogame RPG genre!
SSI Gold Box is nothing like playing tabletop AD&D (unless you played with a group where sessions were only predefined dialogue options and combat, I guess.) It didn't make them bad games, but in no way could they be mistaken for providing the same type of gameplay experience as tabletop AD&D.
So back to your own advice: ask for a new genre to be formed, not that the world change for you. Everyone feels one way, and there's an established norm, yet you feel differently -- so create a new genre which is defined as "videogame RPGs that play like tabletop RPGs". Eventually I think we'll see games trickle into that genre. Videogame RPGs aren't going to stop being called "RPGs" anytime soon, I assure you.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Speaking for myself, I find that MMO's are all basically the same. Get a quest/mission go kill X number of mobs, come back get reward. Rinse/repeat. Why should I buy a new game when it is going to be the same as the ones I already Paid for and play? The only difference of course is the window dressing. The graphics and eye candy are all that makes any of today's modern MMO's different from each other. But still just basically a kill fest with nothing to really diferentiate this game from that one.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Even looking at PnP RPG and LARP. Those that chose to LARP, did not say they were doing PnP RPG. They were doing something different - they called it something different.
It is that simple.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
If people wants to play RPG with dice rolling reminisce to the good ol' Pen and Paper RPG
Why not just go play Pen and Paper RPG?
Let the computer handle calculations that require more than a 100 sided dice
Like physics calculations, or collision detections
Food for thought.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Do you break into people's homes, tell them that it is now your house, and that if they want a house of their own - that they should move?
While nowhere near an exact analogy - it is along the lines of what has happened to the MMORPG genre.
I find what you stated to be insulting... in such a manner.
Even in addressing just the aspects of RNG - almost every current MMORPG utilizes some form of RNG... so I find it odd that you would have even typed what you did. Even if it is not for hit chance, RNG is often a factor in damage.
If you do not want to direct the actions of a character that you are developing over a period of time...why on Earth did you decide to play a RPG?
Do you feel like going for a walk and sit down? Do you think about getting some fresh air and stand next to the cat's litter box? Do you feel like having pizza and eat chicken?
Not only have people done this - but they have in turn complained en masse about it. So that going for a walk now means sitting down, that getting some fresh air now means standing next to the cat's litter box, and that having pizza now means eating chicken...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Have to keep in mind, I'm talking about MMORPGs. It does not mean I feel all MMOs should be like MMORPGs. There are different types of MMOs for a reason. I believe developers should attempt to design games where there is a market. There is a market for MMOFPS games. There is a market for MMOAG games. There are many markets for many different types of games. Developers should develop for those markets...
...rather than try to design a single game for all the markets that runs the risk of alienating the majority of the players as it offers hints of what they are looking for - but is full of things they were not looking for.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Play DDO, awesome content that is a lot of fun from level 1 through to level 20 and the endgame content that I've experienced.
I'm sorry if I sounded insulting, that wasn't my intention.
The problem is that, I see people bring the whole 'kids should go play PnP RPG and see what it means to play a RPG' argument in every single MMORPG. I understand some people loved those genre, but is it fair to force it upon others? I dunno, maybe people just needs to accept not all games are made for them. Sounds easy, but not a lot of people wants to accept it.
At least give it a go before complaining about games, then the argument will based actualy gameplay experience rather than preconceptual bias. I can safely say I have tried almost all the genres to some degree, and the games I've complained about, I have actually played them beforehand (unless obvious titles that you know will be horrible)
Also, I actually don't really have a problem with RNG, but I wish devs will use it somewhere other than combat, like deciding outcomes of certain story events, or maybe multiple pathway dungeons that uses RNG to direct players to a certain pathway. If you look at current games, RNG are only used in combat, everything else is set in a yes or no function. It makes the world linear in terms of progression.
One reason why I don't like RNG in combat is that, instead of trying to make results more random, it promotes players to try to 'beat the odds' with continuous gear grinding, you need a certain dodge rate to beat that boss, you need a certain block rate to tank that boss. While the factor variable is random, it promotes the number grinding instead of the random determination of outcomes. If anyone have done any sort of basic programming, RNG is usually used to achieve a random outcome, not intended to let people to beat the odds.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.