it took less time than it does now when you wait in your queue, because you actually knew lots of people in game - did you not know this? Now actually read my post, it was about opportunities to socialise and actually interacting with people. Mmorg used to = fun from socialising, not getting in 3 instances an hour (that are more about getting fold per hour than having fun) Your working pattern is pretty normal btw, it hasnt really got anything to do with this thread.
PROTIP: You can still have friends in modern MMORPGs, and group instantly.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
it took less time than it does now when you wait in your queue, because you actually knew lots of people in game - did you not know this? Now actually read my post, it was about opportunities to socialise and actually interacting with people. Mmorg used to = fun from socialising, not getting in 3 instances an hour (that are more about getting fold per hour than having fun) Your working pattern is pretty normal btw, it hasnt really got anything to do with this thread.
PROTIP: You can still have friends in modern MMORPGs, and group instantly.
People are less inclined to socialize with each other in MMORPGs unless there is a clear benefit for doing so. A person wanting to socialize with a person who sees no real point in it => no social bond created.
It is not hard to see why the total socialization in a game is strongly dependant on how much the players directly benefit from socializing.
Come one bunnyhopper you need to cut using those horrible, horrible strawmen. No one said there is no gameplay in travel times. There can be, but it is so scarce that it is not worth the tedium it creates. Most people choose to give that up in favor of less tedium.
If only 3 players like a feature which causes the other 7 players tedium and/or discomfort, it is perfectly acceptable to pursue a solution that is accepted by the majority. If you make travel times optional by allowing fast travel, it is a lesser evil than forcing one or the other. There's always someone who suffers, but the only way to objectively gauge a feature is by its popularity.
Point out the strawmen arguments.
Game world dynamics and mechanics can provide gameplay mechanics that people enjoy. One or two people seem to have some issue with that statement and would try and use their own highly subjective opinion on what they want from a game or what they feel other people would want from a game to try and somehow counter that statement. Which is somewhat odd to say the least.
If you agree that a game world and repeat travel through it can provide gameplay then one wonders why you have jumped into the argument. If the other poster had simply said, "yes game worlds can provide gameplay mechanics which are removed by the ability to port through, but that is not what everyone wants" then there would be no issue would there.
Out of interest what exactly does acceptability have to do with it? I never think that all games should be the same and find it perfectly acceptable that people prefer games with mechanics which I may or may not like. It is interesting to see that one or two posters seem to have an issue accepting the fact that mechanics that are not wanted by the majority have some gameplay merit.
Lesser evil? Yes to you maybe, to someone looking for a dynamic game world... I don't think so Tim. More people may not want that, but then in a few years more people may want to have no pvp or no pve at all in their mmos, it may all become total facebook style games which dominate the market. That would be perfectly fine but then it would in no way mean that pve of pvp suddenly did not provide gameplay content.
It is quite amazing that some people can argue with the viewpoint that game worlds can provide gameplay mechanics, mechanics which are ruined by fast travel, but said mechanics are not the most popular form at the moment. It seems to be a case that people cannot accept the fact that mechanics outside of the scope that they want can actually provide a fun gaming experience for other people.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
it took less time than it does now when you wait in your queue, because you actually knew lots of people in game - did you not know this? Now actually read my post, it was about opportunities to socialise and actually interacting with people. Mmorg used to = fun from socialising, not getting in 3 instances an hour (that are more about getting fold per hour than having fun) Your working pattern is pretty normal btw, it hasnt really got anything to do with this thread.
PROTIP: You can still have friends in modern MMORPGs, and group instantly.
queuing and not having to talk to people to form groups is not social. Instead you get instance runs where people use terms like 'PROTIP' in caps a lot. The point with regards to travelling is that you spent more time together where you could chat prior to getting your head down in the instance ( and not just your current group of fiends, gasp others too! 'OFC' you can still have friends in mmorgs, did anyone say this was not the case?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
which is exactly why coming onto a site like this and making that kind of comment gives me a little tickle!
Not arguing with you friend just what the black and white was already telling us.
I admit i am a minority, is that a bad thing? of course not. it's just simply different. fact is this site is known through the mmo community as a major player....am i wrong? and if the majority of people here are voting for the "old school" then surely there are enough players there to cater for?
I am in no way saying there are more than the modern mmo player, just that surely there are enough.
Who said it is a bad thing? but i would never use this website or forums as some kind of proof for just anything considering the minority of players who visit forums on regular basis compared to amount of players all over the world. if you think 60% out of 297 those who voted are enough to support an old school freedom MMO well..who am i to deny it to you
But like i have said many many times the old school MMOS have been coming and going for quite some time now and no the production of such games is not completely halted. But sadly they either end up getting closed like Spellborn or see very tough times like Fallen Earth. So that kinda puts a question mark on 'if there are surely enough players there to cater for'.
Why cut out the parts of my post that answer what you are writing? you do realise that others following the thread have probably read the part in that same post where i said that in no way am i saying that there are more old scholers than modern players, and all i am saying is that if there are obviously enough asking for it to warrant a decent profitable game if made correctly.
And do you really believe that old school players only visit this site? of course they dont and of course there is a large number of each side that not only didnt vote, but have not ever visited this site. and as has been proven by many smaller dev teams countless times.....you simply dont need millions to keep a game running.
and i see your last point...but even you can see that these old school games are e=still running even to this day?
EQ, Vanguard, uo to name a few. Even fallen earth is still making cash. and add to that the few players that call for an old style SWG ( i say few in jest by the way, as you know there are hundreds of thousands of them always arguing about thier beloved game ).
So yes going from the evidence, i would say there are plenty for good old school style game to cater for.
but of course i may be wrong. just simply my opinion on it
I didn't cut a single part of your post. And from nowhere on these forums since you are basing your opinion on basis of these forums / polls i got even a slightest idea that there are enough players to sustain games like these. Yes FE is still making cash after being almost closed down and now it is F2P. Now there is just getting by and then there is living good. If you are hoping for a quality AAA MMO with all these features well sorry i have been also waiting for that but not gonna happen. All you will get is more indy low quality broken MMOS. I never said you need millions to keep running the game but who in their right mind would want another Spellborn and Vanguard? not that games were bad but why would companies want to sink money in something which is most probably going to shut downor completely ignored?
i for one would want another Vanguard! and i think all the players still plaing Vanguard would not mind either, then theres EQs players, SWG players, FE's players and all the other smaller games. My opinion is not based on these forums, it's based on the fact...plain simple fact that even you cannot argue with as it is not an opinion but a fact, that games like Vanguard, eq, fe, and many more still have subs. are they making millions? no they are not. are they making enough to pay themselves a wage and put food on the table? of course they are and only the most naive would think not...because as you say its all about the money, money, money!
Just to let you know friend i dont give a crap about the so called AAA games, i have been let down so many times by them that i dont buy into hype anymore, i just try them out and make my own decision.
So if you think i am hoping for a quality AAA gane then you are without a doubt wrong. I would just like a company to take a chance thats all.
And all of this is just our opinion after all, i mean isnt a game called archeage in production at the moment? isnt Dawntide in development? so in essence, devs are already trying something different.
edit ah i thought of a great example to demonstrate how slow travel works:
Scenario : I decide I want to do an instance, and I want to setup a group.
Old School, you advertise, you talk to people, when you get a couple people you start making you way towards the instance, while you are doing this you are chatting with the people you are grouped with, you socialise a bit - and the instance when you get there is more pleasurable because of the socialisation and planning activities your group took.
New School. You sit in a queue, you donbt talk to the people you group up with, you just tear into the instance and try to get through it as fast as possible.
So one example amongs many where slow travelling works, in this case it creates a window where you get time to socialise and bond with the players you group with. MMO.
edit, bunny im from Scotland, pick another country! :P
How long did it take you to get this group together? Was this before or after you finished mowing the lawn.
I don't get how many of keep arguing that waiting around for hours to get a group going is even remotely fun.
Sorry seeing how my work day begins at:
5:50am with a good hour workout
40-50min commute
6:30pm-7pm to come home.
I don't want to wait for hours to find a group to run an instance.
You know what I was doing before this? I was unemployed for over 10mons.
You know what I had? Time! Time, to play any game as long as I want.
you probably wouldnt have noticed the time as that was the last thing on your mind, you were more than likely chatting to friends, crafting, searching the auctions or getting a few solo parts finished up.
If you agree that a game world and repeat travel through it can provide gameplay then one wonders why you have jumped into the argument. If the other poster had simply said, "yes game worlds can provide gameplay mechanics which are removed by the ability to port through, but that is not what everyone wants" then there would be no issue would there.
I said that.
Multiple times.
Then I explained why it's inefficient. Multiple times.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
queuing and not having to talk to people to form groups is not social. Instead you get instance runs where people use terms like 'PROTIP' in caps a lot. The point with regards to travelling is that you spent more time together where you could chat prior to getting your head down in the instance ( and not just your current group of fiends, gasp others too! 'OFC' you can still have friends in mmorgs, did anyone say this was not the case?
If you're incapable of being social just because a queue exists, I think that's your problem not the game's. Meanwhile anyone who wants to be social still can be. Social centers, guilds, and chat still exist, and people socialize all the time in MMOs. Those same people then group together to do things.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
If you agree that a game world and repeat travel through it can provide gameplay then one wonders why you have jumped into the argument. If the other poster had simply said, "yes game worlds can provide gameplay mechanics which are removed by the ability to port through, but that is not what everyone wants" then there would be no issue would there.
I said that.
Multiple times.
Then I explained why it's inefficient. Multiple times.
Inefficient if you are marketing a game towards a themepark audience, yes. Inefficient if you are marketing a game towards a sandbox audience, no. One audience is clearly larger, but then people still make products for the niche market amazingly enough.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
And this is where you somehow just don't get it. Have you played MMO's pre-WoW? I am asking seriously.
Yet again, this is why MMORPG's and console games are different genre's. One is meant for fast paced fun and gratification, one isn't. MMORPG's are different from console gaming for the fact you can take it at your own pace, and everything takes longer because there are no set paths (Or shouldn't be anyways).
But even taking it at your own pace in today's Hamster wheel MMO's you get to cap in a month,...because they are so linear and instanced.
I tried a lot of MMORPGs pre-WOW (basically everything except UO and EQ.) They were big empty wastes of time.
This definitely isn't a console vs. MMORPG thing. Most PC games provide gameplay for your dollar. Early MMORPGs were pretty empty.
Getting to cap is irrelevant because there's so much more left to do. But you're fixated on leveling.
Empty wastes of time TO YOU. To others it isn't. Some find it time to relax and take in the scenery, explore a bit off the beaten path and discover things, and allow for player interaction.
Most MMO's now are so fast paced people barely glance at one another let alone talk. Unless of course it's for "end game" (<---still the dumbest term used in MMO's. Shouldn't even exist) content. Many players complain their isn't enough content in MMO's, yet, they skip most of it racing to cap, or because they are skipping content with instant travel.
And how much more is there to do outside of PvP or Raiding at cap. Oh wait, I know..make an alt too. Could depend on the game in question, but this is usually all there is.
Game world dynamics and mechanics can provide gameplay mechanics that people enjoy. One or two people seem to have some issue with that statement and would try and use their own highly subjective opinion on what they want from a game or what they feel other people would want from a game to try and somehow counter that statement. Which is somewhat odd to say the least.
If you agree that a game world and repeat travel through it can provide gameplay then one wonders why you have jumped into the argument. If the other poster had simply said, "yes game worlds can provide gameplay mechanics which are removed by the ability to port through, but that is not what everyone wants" then there would be no issue would there.
Out of interest what exactly does acceptability have to do with it? I never think that all games should be the same and find it perfectly acceptable that people prefer games with mechanics which I may or may not like. It is interesting to see that one or two posters seem to have an issue accepting the fact that mechanics that are not wanted by the majority have some gameplay merit.
Lesser evil? Yes to you maybe, to someone looking for a dynamic game world... I don't think so Tim. More people may not want that, but then in a few years more people may want to have no pvp or no pve at all in their mmos, it may all become total facebook style games which dominate the market. That would be perfectly fine but then it would in no way mean that pve of pvp suddenly did not provide gameplay content.
It is quite amazing that some people can argue with the viewpoint that game worlds can provide gameplay mechanics, mechanics which are ruined by fast travel, but said mechanics are not the most popular form at the moment. It seems to be a case that people cannot accept the fact that mechanics outside of the scope that they want can actually provide a fun gaming experience for other people.
What Axehilt meant, I think, is that the journey from point A to B is not as much fun the second time as it was the first time. It becomes a tedium very fast. That is why it is good to have a system where you can travel to places where you've already been. You can travel the old fashioned way still, but you don't have to if you feel like you've seen it one too many times.
Option for fast travel is the lesser evil for me and you because you would suffer more with forced fast travel and I would suffer more with forced travel.
Skyrim's content between points A and B are more or less scripted. I've not even finished my first play through and when I walk on a road in Skyrim, I can predict taht there will be a deer in the next bend, a pack of wolves on top of the hill after it, and a random encounter after that. I learn very quickly how the nuts and bolts work. There really isn't anything "dynamic" about it other than the diceroll what that random encounter might be. Plus the quirky AI ofcourse .
Removing fast travel from Skyrim would make it a worse game, because I was already disenchanted about the world after my second journey up that same road. It was amazing the first time, tedium the second and third. I'm glad the game has fast travel option.
Eve's content between points A and B is the possibility of PvP. Other players. The game actually offers no content in between those points other than the possibility of rats on the gates. Usually when I am travelling, I am not looking for PvP. So when PvP is forced upon me, my first reacton is not "ooh goody dynamic content". No. Like with Skyrim, I am quite disenchanted by Eve's "content" between points A and B. Gatecamp is a gatecamp, gank is a gank in a long line of ganks etc.
You try to maintain atleast some level of attention and scout when possible in null-sec. You spam "jump-to" button in low-sec while high-sec space is fully afkable. There's your exciting content right there.
Funnily enough, when I want PvP, I don't want to look for it.
As I was writing this I sort of forgot where I was going with this (yeah, yeah), but atleast you got one alternative viewpoint.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Empty wastes of time TO YOU. To others it isn't. Some find it time to relax and take in the scenery, explore a bit off the beaten path and discover things, and allow for player interaction.
Most MMO's now are so fast paced people barely glance at one another let alone talk. Unless of course it's for "end game" (<---still the dumbest term used in MMO's. Shouldn't even exist) content. Many players complain their isn't enough content in MMO's, yet, they skip most of it racing to cap, or because they are skipping content with instant travel.
And how much more is there to do outside of PvP or Raiding at cap. Oh wait, I know..make an alt too. Could depend on the game in question, but this is usually all there is.
Fast paced TO YOU. Most people want their gameplay to be filled with content, which modern games come closer to providing than the empty games of the past -- but gameplay sessions filled with content is too fast paced for you there are always empty alternatives.
The purpose of games is to entertain, so the frequency and quality with which they deliver gameplay and content to players is how good they are at entertaining them. Unsurprisingly, games with big empty holes in their gameplay fail to do as well.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Empty wastes of time TO YOU. To others it isn't. Some find it time to relax and take in the scenery, explore a bit off the beaten path and discover things, and allow for player interaction.
Most MMO's now are so fast paced people barely glance at one another let alone talk. Unless of course it's for "end game" (<---still the dumbest term used in MMO's. Shouldn't even exist) content. Many players complain their isn't enough content in MMO's, yet, they skip most of it racing to cap, or because they are skipping content with instant travel.
And how much more is there to do outside of PvP or Raiding at cap. Oh wait, I know..make an alt too. Could depend on the game in question, but this is usually all there is.
People do talk. I have more than half a dozen friends that I met in GW1 and with whom I am still in contact with. And that is a heavily instanced game with fast travel! I turn on my computer, put my VOIP program on, shoot the breeze with my friends and play games together. I do not need downtime to socialize so I don't want it.
I skip all the content which is not worth doing i.e. not good enough to warrant my time. There is not enough completionist in me to go through all the content in the game, good and bad.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Empty wastes of time TO YOU. To others it isn't. Some find it time to relax and take in the scenery, explore a bit off the beaten path and discover things, and allow for player interaction.
Most MMO's now are so fast paced people barely glance at one another let alone talk. Unless of course it's for "end game" (<---still the dumbest term used in MMO's. Shouldn't even exist) content. Many players complain their isn't enough content in MMO's, yet, they skip most of it racing to cap, or because they are skipping content with instant travel.
And how much more is there to do outside of PvP or Raiding at cap. Oh wait, I know..make an alt too. Could depend on the game in question, but this is usually all there is.
Fast paced TO YOU. Most people want their gameplay to be filled with content, which modern games come closer to providing than the empty games of the past -- but gameplay sessions filled with content is too fast paced for you there are always empty alternatives.
The purpose of games is to entertain, so the frequency and quality with which they deliver gameplay and content to players is how good they are at entertaining them. Unsurprisingly, games with big empty holes in their gameplay fail to do as well.
What kind of PvE content would you argue a normal person would not grow tired of after completing it 10 times? You say that traveling is such a unjustifiable timesink, but what fresh PvE content is it stealing time from? Most of the time, after you played a game for over 2 months, you will be spending time in different forms of timesinks to get your rewards; the timesink can be repetitive travel, repetitive killing of old PvE enemies, repetitive dungeon runs, repetitive crafting, repetitive questing, etc.
What makes repetitive travel such a bad timesink compared to the other timesinks I've mentioned?
I would agree that repetitive traveling is often an unnecessary form of timesink in single player games, since in many single player games you should focus on creating new fresh content; however, in MMORPGs due to scaling-issues you will never be able to keep creating fresh content faster than the average player can consume it.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity. I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
if i only had to pick one, I would go with the new school if it was swtor, a mix of the 2 would be what really works. I find it fasinating that in the vote old school wins handily over new, however old school sounds alot like sandbox andd we all know that sandboxes do poorly. So although we have fond dreams of sand box, once we start playing them we dont like the freedom. that is whay a mix of the 2 would be right
What Axehilt meant, I think, is that the journey from point A to B is not as much fun the second time as it was the first time. It becomes a tedium very fast. That is why it is good to have a system where you can travel to places where you've already been. You can travel the old fashioned way still, but you don't have to if you feel like you've seen it one too many times.
Option for fast travel is the lesser evil for me and you because you would suffer more with forced fast travel and I would suffer more with forced travel.
Skyrim's content between points A and B are more or less scripted. I've not even finished my first play through and when I walk on a road in Skyrim, I can predict taht there will be a deer in the next bend, a pack of wolves on top of the hill after it, and a random encounter after that. I learn very quickly how the nuts and bolts work. There really isn't anything "dynamic" about it other than the diceroll what that random encounter might be. Plus the quirky AI ofcourse .
Removing fast travel from Skyrim would make it a worse game, because I was already disenchanted about the world after my second journey up that same road. It was amazing the first time, tedium the second and third. I'm glad the game has fast travel option.
Eve's content between points A and B is the possibility of PvP. Other players. The game actually offers no content in between those points other than the possibility of rats on the gates. Usually when I am travelling, I am not looking for PvP. So when PvP is forced upon me, my first reacton is not "ooh goody dynamic content". No. Like with Skyrim, I am quite disenchanted by Eve's "content" between points A and B. Gatecamp is a gatecamp, gank is a gank in a long line of ganks etc.
You try to maintain atleast some level of attention and scout when possible in null-sec. You spam "jump-to" button in low-sec while high-sec space is fully afkable. There's your exciting content right there.
Funnily enough, when I want PvP, I don't want to look for it.
As I was writing this I sort of forgot where I was going with this (yeah, yeah), but atleast you got one alternative viewpoint.
A well thought out post, thank you for taking the time to put your own actual take on it across instead of simply extolling the "majority line".
There is no doubt that if a game world is static that fast travel(well lets be clear, the ability to fast travel through pretty much all of it) after you have seen it once or twice is a good thing. If it provides nothing new or does not generate other mechanics (an important point), then skip it. Skyrim is no doubt a case in point.
But then that is to be expected from a single player game or from a themepark mmo. Please note I am not using the term themepark in a derogatory way here. I am simply using it to distinguish between an mmo which has more pocket content, and one which is a "simulator". It is nigh in impossible to generate the kind of mechanics from a game world in a single player game in comparison to a multiplayer game. Not unless you have some amazing AI.
You see EVE's game world provides pvp between points A and B, but it's gameplay driving mechanics from the space between A and B is actually a hell of a lot more than that. EVE's economy and territory control is driven by the game world space and the need to travel through and control it. The game play mechanic provided to the players extends beyond the mere instant interaction within the space. It is more than you at that set time having to worry about a gank, it drives the entire games system. EVE is all about the meta game, the meta game is more than just pvp between gank spots. That is what the game world provides. Gameplay you simply cannot find without said gameworld.
It is the knock on effects, things that are above just the here and now. Now some may find that boring which is fair play, but it generates gameplay some players love. Moreover it has the potential to drive gameplay which you simply cannot find in direct A to B systems because they lack the fluidity and dynamism of an open game world. True that may mean a less constant return of a specific gameplay type, but then to some that is a worthwhile pay off. To others it is not, c'est la vie.
As for wanting pvp instantly. Yep I do for the most part (hence I predominantly pvp in e-sport games believe it or not) and no doubt the majority of players do. I will never deny that fact. But then some seek the longer term, tactical (in a macro sense), territorial pvp, or hell just random pvp encounters. Game worlds can provide that, instant pvp cannot to the same extent.
As for forgetting where you where going with that I can well understand, I am having the same trouble now. I feel it is because whilst we may have different opinions on what we happen to look for in an mmorpg (to an extent), we are not really disagreeing on much here.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
queuing and not having to talk to people to form groups is not social. Instead you get instance runs where people use terms like 'PROTIP' in caps a lot. The point with regards to travelling is that you spent more time together where you could chat prior to getting your head down in the instance ( and not just your current group of fiends, gasp others too! 'OFC' you can still have friends in mmorgs, did anyone say this was not the case?
If you're incapable of being social just because a queue exists, I think that's your problem not the game's. Meanwhile anyone who wants to be social still can be. Social centers, guilds, and chat still exist, and people socialize all the time in MMOs. Those same people then group together to do things.
I am not talking about a use case here, and ignoring the rather inappropriate 'incapability' comment, im talking about reality, go spend some time in wow and analyse the behaviour first hand. Im serious, its fascinating to watch when you are not involved. People DO NOT socialise with people they are teaming up with in queued instances, in fact far from that there is often hostility. Hostile behaviour in a game that people are meant to be enjoying?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
What kind of PvE content would you argue a normal person would not grow tired of after completing it 10 times? You say that traveling is such a unjustifiable timesink, but what fresh PvE content is it stealing time from? Most of the time, after you played a game for over 2 months, you will be spending time in different forms of timesinks to get your rewards; the timesink can be repetitive travel, repetitive killing of old PvE enemies, repetitive dungeon runs, repetitive crafting, repetitive questing, etc.
What makes repetitive travel such a bad timesink compared to the other timesinks I've mentioned?
Players are paying for a game to give them gameplay, which is why it's fine when timesinks are gameplay. They're not paying for their time to be wasted.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I am not talking about a use case here, and ignoring the rather inappropriate 'incapability' comment, im talking about reality, go spend some time in wow and analyse the behaviour first hand. Im serious, its fascinating to watch when you are not involved. People DO NOT socialise with people they are teaming up with in queued instances, in fact far from that there is often hostility. Hostile behaviour in a game that people are meant to be enjoying?
Sure but why does that matter? You said you could find groups faster with friends/socializing, and I pointed out you can still do that even in games with a queue.
Although the "hostility" comment is pretty far-fetched. Out of the hundreds of queued instances I've run, only like 1% of them involve the hostility you're talking about (which is honestly the same 1% of jerk players you experienced in non-queued instances, tbh.) And with the queueing system, kicking and replacing a jerk player is fast and easy.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
What kind of PvE content would you argue a normal person would not grow tired of after completing it 10 times? You say that traveling is such a unjustifiable timesink, but what fresh PvE content is it stealing time from? Most of the time, after you played a game for over 2 months, you will be spending time in different forms of timesinks to get your rewards; the timesink can be repetitive travel, repetitive killing of old PvE enemies, repetitive dungeon runs, repetitive crafting, repetitive questing, etc.
What makes repetitive travel such a bad timesink compared to the other timesinks I've mentioned?
Players are paying for a game to give them gameplay, which is why it's fine when timesinks are gameplay. They're not paying for their time to be wasted.
Specifiy MMORPG PvE decisions that are fresh, non-repetitive and that are always available to replace the time "lost" in the travel timesink. Because unless there are meaningful (repetitive decisions are always meaningless and just timesinks) decisions to substitute the time "lost", then why trade one timesink for another timesink?
Repetitive gameplay is as bad as no gameplay: practically just another timesink.
Repeating a certain form of gameplay over and over again is waste of time, is it not? There needs to be significant variation to be at least somewhat entertaining.
Im part of the new mmo generation (which means wow was my first mmo) and i even want the open world make your own adventure style mmo. I would love an mmo where i start with nothing and build my own story, i dotn rp much but i would in those games. Just dont make it a gankfest ffa pvp. I would play mortal online, darkfall or FE if they were extremely well done.
Playing: FFXIV, DnL, and World of Warships Waiting on: Ashes of Creation
Specifiy MMORPG PvE decisions that are fresh, non-repetitive and that are always available to replace the time "lost" in the travel timesink. Because unless there are meaningful (repetitive decisions are always meaningless and just timesinks) decisions to substitute the time "lost", then why trade one timesink for another timesink?
Repetitive gameplay is as bad as no gameplay: practically just another timesink.
Repeating a certain form of gameplay over and over again is waste of time, is it not? There needs to be significant variation to be at least somewhat entertaining.
So let's say you were locked in a room for a month with food and a special computer terminal, and this terminal could either (your choice) do absolutely nothing or let you play a game you've played before.
What do you feel will be more entertaining? No gameplay, or repeat gameplay?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
PROTIP: You can still have friends in modern MMORPGs, and group instantly.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
People are less inclined to socialize with each other in MMORPGs unless there is a clear benefit for doing so. A person wanting to socialize with a person who sees no real point in it => no social bond created.
It is not hard to see why the total socialization in a game is strongly dependant on how much the players directly benefit from socializing.
Point out the strawmen arguments.
Game world dynamics and mechanics can provide gameplay mechanics that people enjoy. One or two people seem to have some issue with that statement and would try and use their own highly subjective opinion on what they want from a game or what they feel other people would want from a game to try and somehow counter that statement. Which is somewhat odd to say the least.
If you agree that a game world and repeat travel through it can provide gameplay then one wonders why you have jumped into the argument. If the other poster had simply said, "yes game worlds can provide gameplay mechanics which are removed by the ability to port through, but that is not what everyone wants" then there would be no issue would there.
Out of interest what exactly does acceptability have to do with it? I never think that all games should be the same and find it perfectly acceptable that people prefer games with mechanics which I may or may not like. It is interesting to see that one or two posters seem to have an issue accepting the fact that mechanics that are not wanted by the majority have some gameplay merit.
Lesser evil? Yes to you maybe, to someone looking for a dynamic game world... I don't think so Tim. More people may not want that, but then in a few years more people may want to have no pvp or no pve at all in their mmos, it may all become total facebook style games which dominate the market. That would be perfectly fine but then it would in no way mean that pve of pvp suddenly did not provide gameplay content.
It is quite amazing that some people can argue with the viewpoint that game worlds can provide gameplay mechanics, mechanics which are ruined by fast travel, but said mechanics are not the most popular form at the moment. It seems to be a case that people cannot accept the fact that mechanics outside of the scope that they want can actually provide a fun gaming experience for other people.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
queuing and not having to talk to people to form groups is not social. Instead you get instance runs where people use terms like 'PROTIP' in caps a lot. The point with regards to travelling is that you spent more time together where you could chat prior to getting your head down in the instance ( and not just your current group of fiends, gasp others too! 'OFC' you can still have friends in mmorgs, did anyone say this was not the case?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
i for one would want another Vanguard! and i think all the players still plaing Vanguard would not mind either, then theres EQs players, SWG players, FE's players and all the other smaller games. My opinion is not based on these forums, it's based on the fact...plain simple fact that even you cannot argue with as it is not an opinion but a fact, that games like Vanguard, eq, fe, and many more still have subs. are they making millions? no they are not. are they making enough to pay themselves a wage and put food on the table? of course they are and only the most naive would think not...because as you say its all about the money, money, money!
Just to let you know friend i dont give a crap about the so called AAA games, i have been let down so many times by them that i dont buy into hype anymore, i just try them out and make my own decision.
So if you think i am hoping for a quality AAA gane then you are without a doubt wrong. I would just like a company to take a chance thats all.
And all of this is just our opinion after all, i mean isnt a game called archeage in production at the moment? isnt Dawntide in development? so in essence, devs are already trying something different.
you probably wouldnt have noticed the time as that was the last thing on your mind, you were more than likely chatting to friends, crafting, searching the auctions or getting a few solo parts finished up.
I said that.
Multiple times.
Then I explained why it's inefficient. Multiple times.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
If you're incapable of being social just because a queue exists, I think that's your problem not the game's. Meanwhile anyone who wants to be social still can be. Social centers, guilds, and chat still exist, and people socialize all the time in MMOs. Those same people then group together to do things.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Inefficient if you are marketing a game towards a themepark audience, yes. Inefficient if you are marketing a game towards a sandbox audience, no. One audience is clearly larger, but then people still make products for the niche market amazingly enough.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Empty wastes of time TO YOU. To others it isn't. Some find it time to relax and take in the scenery, explore a bit off the beaten path and discover things, and allow for player interaction.
Most MMO's now are so fast paced people barely glance at one another let alone talk. Unless of course it's for "end game" (<---still the dumbest term used in MMO's. Shouldn't even exist) content. Many players complain their isn't enough content in MMO's, yet, they skip most of it racing to cap, or because they are skipping content with instant travel.
And how much more is there to do outside of PvP or Raiding at cap. Oh wait, I know..make an alt too. Could depend on the game in question, but this is usually all there is.
What Axehilt meant, I think, is that the journey from point A to B is not as much fun the second time as it was the first time. It becomes a tedium very fast. That is why it is good to have a system where you can travel to places where you've already been. You can travel the old fashioned way still, but you don't have to if you feel like you've seen it one too many times.
Option for fast travel is the lesser evil for me and you because you would suffer more with forced fast travel and I would suffer more with forced travel.
Skyrim's content between points A and B are more or less scripted. I've not even finished my first play through and when I walk on a road in Skyrim, I can predict taht there will be a deer in the next bend, a pack of wolves on top of the hill after it, and a random encounter after that. I learn very quickly how the nuts and bolts work. There really isn't anything "dynamic" about it other than the diceroll what that random encounter might be. Plus the quirky AI ofcourse
.
Removing fast travel from Skyrim would make it a worse game, because I was already disenchanted about the world after my second journey up that same road. It was amazing the first time, tedium the second and third. I'm glad the game has fast travel option.
Eve's content between points A and B is the possibility of PvP. Other players. The game actually offers no content in between those points other than the possibility of rats on the gates. Usually when I am travelling, I am not looking for PvP. So when PvP is forced upon me, my first reacton is not "ooh goody dynamic content". No. Like with Skyrim, I am quite disenchanted by Eve's "content" between points A and B. Gatecamp is a gatecamp, gank is a gank in a long line of ganks etc.
You try to maintain atleast some level of attention and scout when possible in null-sec. You spam "jump-to" button in low-sec while high-sec space is fully afkable. There's your exciting content right there.
Funnily enough, when I want PvP, I don't want to look for it.
As I was writing this I sort of forgot where I was going with this (yeah, yeah), but atleast you got one alternative viewpoint.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Fast paced TO YOU. Most people want their gameplay to be filled with content, which modern games come closer to providing than the empty games of the past -- but gameplay sessions filled with content is too fast paced for you there are always empty alternatives.
The purpose of games is to entertain, so the frequency and quality with which they deliver gameplay and content to players is how good they are at entertaining them. Unsurprisingly, games with big empty holes in their gameplay fail to do as well.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
People do talk. I have more than half a dozen friends that I met in GW1 and with whom I am still in contact with. And that is a heavily instanced game with fast travel! I turn on my computer, put my VOIP program on, shoot the breeze with my friends and play games together. I do not need downtime to socialize so I don't want it.
I skip all the content which is not worth doing i.e. not good enough to warrant my time. There is not enough completionist in me to go through all the content in the game, good and bad.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
What kind of PvE content would you argue a normal person would not grow tired of after completing it 10 times? You say that traveling is such a unjustifiable timesink, but what fresh PvE content is it stealing time from? Most of the time, after you played a game for over 2 months, you will be spending time in different forms of timesinks to get your rewards; the timesink can be repetitive travel, repetitive killing of old PvE enemies, repetitive dungeon runs, repetitive crafting, repetitive questing, etc.
What makes repetitive travel such a bad timesink compared to the other timesinks I've mentioned?
I would agree that repetitive traveling is often an unnecessary form of timesink in single player games, since in many single player games you should focus on creating new fresh content; however, in MMORPGs due to scaling-issues you will never be able to keep creating fresh content faster than the average player can consume it.
D. Both
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
if i only had to pick one, I would go with the new school if it was swtor, a mix of the 2 would be what really works. I find it fasinating that in the vote old school wins handily over new, however old school sounds alot like sandbox andd we all know that sandboxes do poorly. So although we have fond dreams of sand box, once we start playing them we dont like the freedom. that is whay a mix of the 2 would be right
Old school sounds alot like vanguard, and although I like Vanguard most people do not. that is why i find the voteing LOL
A well thought out post, thank you for taking the time to put your own actual take on it across instead of simply extolling the "majority line".
There is no doubt that if a game world is static that fast travel(well lets be clear, the ability to fast travel through pretty much all of it) after you have seen it once or twice is a good thing. If it provides nothing new or does not generate other mechanics (an important point), then skip it. Skyrim is no doubt a case in point.
But then that is to be expected from a single player game or from a themepark mmo. Please note I am not using the term themepark in a derogatory way here. I am simply using it to distinguish between an mmo which has more pocket content, and one which is a "simulator". It is nigh in impossible to generate the kind of mechanics from a game world in a single player game in comparison to a multiplayer game. Not unless you have some amazing AI.
You see EVE's game world provides pvp between points A and B, but it's gameplay driving mechanics from the space between A and B is actually a hell of a lot more than that. EVE's economy and territory control is driven by the game world space and the need to travel through and control it. The game play mechanic provided to the players extends beyond the mere instant interaction within the space. It is more than you at that set time having to worry about a gank, it drives the entire games system. EVE is all about the meta game, the meta game is more than just pvp between gank spots. That is what the game world provides. Gameplay you simply cannot find without said gameworld.
It is the knock on effects, things that are above just the here and now. Now some may find that boring which is fair play, but it generates gameplay some players love. Moreover it has the potential to drive gameplay which you simply cannot find in direct A to B systems because they lack the fluidity and dynamism of an open game world. True that may mean a less constant return of a specific gameplay type, but then to some that is a worthwhile pay off. To others it is not, c'est la vie.
As for wanting pvp instantly. Yep I do for the most part (hence I predominantly pvp in e-sport games believe it or not) and no doubt the majority of players do. I will never deny that fact. But then some seek the longer term, tactical (in a macro sense), territorial pvp, or hell just random pvp encounters. Game worlds can provide that, instant pvp cannot to the same extent.
As for forgetting where you where going with that I can well understand, I am having the same trouble now. I feel it is because whilst we may have different opinions on what we happen to look for in an mmorpg (to an extent), we are not really disagreeing on much here.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
I am not talking about a use case here, and ignoring the rather inappropriate 'incapability' comment, im talking about reality, go spend some time in wow and analyse the behaviour first hand. Im serious, its fascinating to watch when you are not involved. People DO NOT socialise with people they are teaming up with in queued instances, in fact far from that there is often hostility. Hostile behaviour in a game that people are meant to be enjoying?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Decisions. PVE, PVP, and economy gameplay involve decisions. Travel involves virtually none.
Decisions are gameplay.
Players are paying for a game to give them gameplay, which is why it's fine when timesinks are gameplay. They're not paying for their time to be wasted.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Sure but why does that matter? You said you could find groups faster with friends/socializing, and I pointed out you can still do that even in games with a queue.
Although the "hostility" comment is pretty far-fetched. Out of the hundreds of queued instances I've run, only like 1% of them involve the hostility you're talking about (which is honestly the same 1% of jerk players you experienced in non-queued instances, tbh.) And with the queueing system, kicking and replacing a jerk player is fast and easy.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Specifiy MMORPG PvE decisions that are fresh, non-repetitive and that are always available to replace the time "lost" in the travel timesink. Because unless there are meaningful (repetitive decisions are always meaningless and just timesinks) decisions to substitute the time "lost", then why trade one timesink for another timesink?
Repetitive gameplay is as bad as no gameplay: practically just another timesink.
Repeating a certain form of gameplay over and over again is waste of time, is it not? There needs to be significant variation to be at least somewhat entertaining.
i hate new style story driven mmos. HATE THEM HHAATEE THEM!!!
i played neverwinter nights 1 the original campaign and fell asleep within the first 20 minutes, at the keyboard.
but the moment i played online multiyer open world nwn and other open owrld mmos, i love them.
i hate WOW because it has fixed storylines. NWN has totally open lines once you go out into multiplayer with many more realms than WOW has.
Im part of the new mmo generation (which means wow was my first mmo) and i even want the open world make your own adventure style mmo. I would love an mmo where i start with nothing and build my own story, i dotn rp much but i would in those games. Just dont make it a gankfest ffa pvp. I would play mortal online, darkfall or FE if they were extremely well done.
Playing: FFXIV, DnL, and World of Warships
Waiting on: Ashes of Creation
So let's say you were locked in a room for a month with food and a special computer terminal, and this terminal could either (your choice) do absolutely nothing or let you play a game you've played before.
What do you feel will be more entertaining? No gameplay, or repeat gameplay?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver