I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
This material is considered highly classified information.
All we need is Darkfall and Mortal Online done well. If these 2 games saw a lot of love and polish then they would be the ultimate games.
not unless you get rid of FFA PVP and full loot, I will never touch those games. I don't believe full loot FFA PVP is needed for a game to be a sandbox.
sure you can say "but the freedom .... " sorry when your freedom overrides my freedom then im not free at all.
I agree.
One of the main problems with sandbox gameplay, is the misperception that sandbox gameplay equates to or otherwise requires FFA PvP with or without full looting.
We've yet to actually see a large budget MMO that is actually PvE oriented sandbox. Yet oddly people seem convinced that sandbox MMOs aren't popular, yet this entire facet has been largely ignored. It would be amusing if it wasn't so depressing.
FFA means nothing if not accompanied by a set of rules.
Also, full loot feeds the industry and it adds risk which is fun per se. Lucky you, you have an overwhelming amount of MMOs not FFA/ not full loot to chose from.
SWG didn't have FFA and it was a sandbox nor did it had full loot and industry was very well fed.
find me one non full loot and ffa sandbox MMORPG and I will play there. you can have some sort of PVP system but it has to be consensual.
All we need is Darkfall and Mortal Online done well. If these 2 games saw a lot of love and polish then they would be the ultimate games.
not unless you get rid of FFA PVP and full loot, I will never touch those games. I don't believe full loot FFA PVP is needed for a game to be a sandbox.
sure you can say "but the freedom .... " sorry when your freedom overrides my freedom then im not free at all.
I agree.
One of the main problems with sandbox gameplay, is the misperception that sandbox gameplay equates to or otherwise requires FFA PvP with or without full looting.
We've yet to actually see a large budget MMO that is actually PvE oriented sandbox. Yet oddly people seem convinced that sandbox MMOs aren't popular, yet this entire facet has been largely ignored. It would be amusing if it wasn't so depressing.
FFA means nothing if not accompanied by a set of rules.
Also, full loot feeds the industry and it adds risk which is fun per se. Lucky you, you have an overwhelming amount of MMOs not FFA/ not full loot to chose from.
SWG didn't have FFA and it was a sandbox nor did it had full loot and industry was very well fed.
find me one non full loot and ffa sandbox MMORPG and I will play there. you can have some sort of PVP system but it has to be consensual.
Istaira, one of/if not the most sandboxy fantasy game out there - only pvp is in one arena (one dev added it in for fun).
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
It does not have to be a choice... You can have both.
in GW2 there is new style story to be told in your personal story part, while the wide open world allows you to do juts whatever you want, even tough there are public events players will feel very free in their choices. And noboddy is forcing anyone to do anything, you will allways have a choice in the GW2 open world. And none of those choices are wrong.
And this happens with the personal story still running in the background, there probably will be much less story then in SWTOR, but the same immersive stories will be availalbe to those what like them, while others can just forget about the story and enjoy the freedom of the wide and open world as its not required to do those stories at all.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
people are soo forgetful..everquest was doing the story line thing before most but you had to type the correct phrase to get quests / convos going...its just there wasnt no cut scenes and no "easy" button to choose what you wanted to do like A / B/C..why? cuz no1 cares..THEY WANT TO "PLAY"...unless your a single player mmo player and solo'er 90% of the time...wich most people are nowa days thats why you see theamparks being pumped out like the octa'mom haveing kids
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
It's pretty easy to filter out comments from players who only want twitch games. It's basically part of the definition of RPG that it doesn't require a substantial amount of twitch skill. In fact, that's why they're a strong niche genre: there are always players who prefer a slower pace.
But that doesn't mean "little interaction" -- or at least, it shouldn't.
Good low-twitch combat involves a steady series of meaningful decisions. This means the game won't feel like it has "little interaction" because every choice you make will be reasonably important.
So "little interaction" actually wasn't a good trait of early MMORPGs. It's fine to be slow, but you still have to provide gameplay (and decisions are gameplay, so make them meaningful and you're set.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
You know what makes me boggle? ..... Replies like this.....Were talking about old school, not old games with stick figures.
MMO's with freedom to make your own story, Yes with Great graphics, Yes with great combat, all the latest features of the games as of late that would make your character fun.
But without all the FAKE - ME - OUTS like instanced dungeon finders and instanced PvP ONLY to give the appearance that your really living in a community where your really not !......Only to return to your lonely world of solo play with no use for a guild or friends list. A world full of zones where all the quest are chain quest. Your on quest chain part 5 and Joe over there is on quest chain part 2.
Did you know that you can number the quest in Rift, and they have to be played in order ?..." Yes, it's true ". Jim is on quest 146 and Larry is on quest 151. Jim and Larry can not play together in Rift or many of the new style story games...NOT AT ALL !
Aaaa...Maybe you like to que up for dungeons and pvp as the only way to play with others....Or maybe you don't know any better !
I am not aware anyone actually does a storydriven MMO, except Bioware's SW:TOR ?
And I'm fairly hopeful that SW:TOR will still allow much open world once you are finished or stop doing the class story.
Originally posted by Pynda
Congratulations on using a "just let me see the poll" option. You earned a gold star in my book - because you can't see a poll here unless you vote - for using your brains. I've bitched at people a couple of times over the years about this, but nobody ever seems to remember.
Thats because every halfway serious poll has a "view poll results" options that was for unknown reasons left out in this forum.
Fill players' time with quality, meaningful gameplay? They'll stay.
Freedom to choose solo vs. grouping? They'll stay.
Freedom to choose easy vs. hard, and rewarded accordingly? They'll stay.
(Inconveniences are terrrible for gameplay. Challenge is great for gameplay. The point of new MMORPGs is to strip out the inconveniences while leaving the challenge.)
Also were there any early MMORPGs which actually had deep rich dungeons? The dungeons in modern MMORPGs give me bosses so rich that they're minigames unto themselves. The dungeons in old MMORPGs (AC and AO and DAOC) were just mazy corridors with elite mobs. Not even close to what I'd call rich.
Blah blah blah blah. Axehilt, go peddle your pro-WoW style, want everything handed to me, make it a console RPG garbage elsewhere. New sure must be what is wanted since it is buried in this poll.
No one is saying they find inconveinience fun. It's only inconveinient to those who don't like to think or work a bit for rewards (Which is also a form of fun and gratification that most new gamers can't seem to grasp). Yet again...this is what seperates MMORPG's from console gaming. You want rewarded and to feel 1337 quickly, go play console games, or stick to WoW.
How does waiting for hours around for players to fill a group THINKING or WORK? Waiting for your DP to wear off, again how is that THINKING or WORK?
SEE HOW THAT WORKS? Do you need me to go on?
Time, if you got it, you can play it!
How about an MMO where you can't get to cap in less than a month and sit in capitals cities HAVING to wait for groups because that is all their is for you to do. Your finding things I didn't even mention to complain about...congratulations!
Problem is, MMORPG's were meant to take time, hence why they had monthly fees (Plus continuous updates). But players now don't want to dedicate time in this rat race society, so they rather whine to have them changed into RPG console games. And want everythign NOW NOW NOW.
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
This material is considered highly classified information.
Where's security?
His comments are idiotic, because MMORPG's were in their infancy when we played them, so of course they were slow and crude. As if we had a choice then. But even so, I would STILL take the "feel" (Actual possibility of immersion) of the older MMO's over the non-immersive give me everything now because I got to cap in a month MMO's today.
Blah blah blah blah. Axehilt, go peddle your pro-WoW style, want everything handed to me, make it a console RPG garbage elsewhere. New sure must be what is wanted since it is buried in this poll.
No one is saying they find inconveinience fun. It's only inconveinient to those who don't like to think or work a bit for rewards (Which is also a form of fun and gratification that most new gamers can't seem to grasp). Yet again...this is what seperates MMORPG's from console gaming. You want rewarded and to feel 1337 quickly, go play console games, or stick to WoW.
The inconveniences we're talking about are travel time or time-consuming death penalty or manual group-finding.
Are you really going to sit there and argue that travel time requires "thought" or "work"? That's preposterous.
Having to pick a route through dangerous terrain to get to a specific destination does take a bit more "thought and work" than clicking on a fucking teleport button. If you are really going to sit there and argue to the opposite then you are indeed being preposterous.
It may put a crimp in your day if you think an mmo only has the potential to be a shit version of a lobby pvp game and you have run out of your daily ritalin pills. But for a game trying to be a persistent, online world it works just fine.
Few argue that you should have to "walk" everywhere in a game world. Some "fast" travel is fine. But it should be clear that making it easy and nigh on instant, to get to pretty much everywhere in the game world kills off a great deal of potential for exploration, territory control and the genereal "feel" of being in an online world.
But to hell with potential, exploration and online worlds, what mmos should be is really piss poor versions of lobby pvp games that already exist in other genres.
IB4 a "but they are all only time sinks" rebuttal which fails to miss the point completely.
I would STILL take the "feel" (Actual possibility of immersion) of the older MMO's over the non-immersive give me everything now because I got to cap in a month MMO's today.
New games have certainly brought many positive innovations, but I'm with you in that they were more immersive. Using Everquest as an example. Each race had it's own starting city, and as you began to stretch outside of the confines of that city there was no clear place you should have been. There was no real indication of where you should be going or what you should be doing. There were no maps, no markers sending you to the next quest hub in line. So you just went out and you explored. Knowing that if you tried to get too crazy you might have a corpse out in the middle of mobs who you can't possibly kill, and you'd be naked until you recovered it.
While I think EQ's death penalties were a bit too harsh, they certainly made you fear dying. Especially unless you had a 49+ res coming your way. You slowly explored your way through the world, and each time you found something new and cool it was an accomplishment. Players were generally helpful, because the game almost required interaction with others. If you died in a bad spot, people were likely to help you retrieve your corpse, because it might happen to them some time.
Day and night felt different. Night time was dark, and there were spookier mobs at night.
The quests were often hard to figure out. At least until EQ'Lizer or Allakhazam spoiled them. Some of the epic quests took months for anyone to solve. And the rewards for completing those quests were often epic.
Now I want to make it clear that I am in no way trashing SWTor, I think it's going to be a monster hit and I enjoyed playing it. But let's compare it's mechanics to that. Yes, the UI is better. Yes, the cinematics are nice. Graphically it's obviously better. Combat is much better for melee types in particular. That goes without saying.
But there is never a point in SWTor when you aren't pretty much exactly sure of where you should be. And unless your traveling to planets that are too high for you (clearly marked on the galactic map), there isn't a whole lot of danger. When you die, you can instantly be respawned right where you died with a small hit to your armor's damage. There is no day or night cycle. And there is little in the way of social interacting outside of warzones or the occasional flashpoint. In fact the games mechanics more or less discourage it. It's easier for you to just grind thorugh quests solo. And quest wise, while you have some nice cinematics, there is never any point where you are actually trying to figure things out. There is never any challenge in them. There is rarely ever any mystery.
Blah blah blah blah. Axehilt, go peddle your pro-WoW style, want everything handed to me, make it a console RPG garbage elsewhere. New sure must be what is wanted since it is buried in this poll.
No one is saying they find inconveinience fun. It's only inconveinient to those who don't like to think or work a bit for rewards (Which is also a form of fun and gratification that most new gamers can't seem to grasp). Yet again...this is what seperates MMORPG's from console gaming. You want rewarded and to feel 1337 quickly, go play console games, or stick to WoW.
The inconveniences we're talking about are travel time or time-consuming death penalty or manual group-finding.
Are you really going to sit there and argue that travel time requires "thought" or "work"? That's preposterous.
Having to pick a route through dangerous terrain to get to a specific destination does take a bit more "thought and work" than clicking on a fucking teleport button. If you are really going to sit there and argue to the opposite then you are indeed being preposterous.
It may put a crimp in your day if you think an mmo only has the potential to be a shit version of a lobby pvp game and you have run out of your daily ritalin pills. But for a game trying to be a persistent, online world it works just fine.
Few argue that you should have to "walk" everywhere in a game world. Some "fast" travel is fine. But it should be clear that making it easy and nigh on instant, to get to pretty much everywhere in the game world kills off a great deal of potential for exploration, territory control and the genereal "feel" of being in an online world.
But to hell with potential, exploration and online worlds, what mmos should be is really piss poor versions of lobby pvp games that already exist in other genres.
IB4 a "but they are all only time sinks" rebuttal which fails to miss the point completely.
I would STILL take the "feel" (Actual possibility of immersion) of the older MMO's over the non-immersive give me everything now because I got to cap in a month MMO's today.
New games have certainly brought many positive innovations, but I'm with you in that they were more immersive. Using Everquest as an example. Each race had it's own starting city, and as you began to stretch outside of the confines of that city there was no clear place you should have been. There was no real indication of where you should be going or what you should be doing. There were no maps, no markers sending you to the next quest hub in line. So you just went out and you explored. Knowing that if you tried to get too crazy you might have a corpse out in the middle of mobs who you can't possibly kill, and you'd be naked until you recovered it.
While I think EQ's death penalties were a bit too harsh, they certainly made you fear dying. Especially unless you had a 49+ res coming your way. You slowly explored your way through the world, and each time you found something new and cool it was an accomplishment. Players were generally helpful, because the game almost required interaction with others. If you died in a bad spot, people were likely to help you retrieve your corpse, because it might happen to them some time.
Day and night felt different. Night time was dark, and there were spookier mobs at night.
The quests were often hard to figure out. At least until EQ'Lizer or Allakhazam spoiled them. Some of the epic quests took months for anyone to solve. And the rewards for completing those quests were often epic.
Now I want to make it clear that I am in no way trashing SWTor, I think it's going to be a monster hit and I enjoyed playing it. But let's compare it's mechanics to that. Yes, the UI is better. Yes, the cinematics are nice. Graphically it's obviously better. Combat is much better for melee types in particular. That goes without saying.
But there is never a point in SWTor when you aren't pretty much exactly sure of where you should be. And unless your traveling to planets that are too high for you (clearly marked on the galactic map), there isn't a whole lot of danger. When you die, you can instantly be respawned right where you died with a small hit to your armor's damage. There is no day or night cycle. And there is little in the way of social interacting outside of warzones or the occasional flashpoint. In fact the games mechanics more or less discourage it. It's easier for you to just grind thorugh quests solo. And quest wise, while you have some nice cinematics, there is never any point where you are actually trying to figure things out. There is never any challenge in them. There is rarely ever any mystery.
Completely agree on the EQ analysis.
And I feel the same about SWToR still being successful. Where we are different is I am cancelling my ToR pre-order. it simply didn't "grab" me and pull me in. Seemed like more of the same ole same ole....even as a long time Star Wars fan. =/ To each their own.
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
You know what makes me boggle? ..... Replies like this.....Were talking about old school, not old games with stick figures.
MMO's with freedom to make your own story, Yes with Great graphics, Yes with great combat, all the latest features of the games as of late that would make your character fun.
But without all the FAKE - ME - OUTS like instanced dungeon finders and instanced PvP ONLY to give the appearance that your really living in a community where your really not !......Only to return to your lonely world of solo play with no use for a guild or friends list. A world full of zones where all the quest are chain quest. Your on quest chain part 5 and Joe over there is on quest chain part 2.
Did you know that you can number the quest in Rift, and they have to be played in order ?..." Yes, it's true ". Jim is on quest 146 and Larry is on quest 151. Jim and Larry can not play together in Rift or many of the new style story games...NOT AT ALL !
Aaaa...Maybe you like to que up for dungeons and pvp as the only way to play with others....Or maybe you don't know any better !
I started out old school. Those old games were just chock full of freedom.....not. There might have been more leeway in regards to vareity of content and less funneling, but they always boiled down to one play style, hardcore. You guys don't want a return to some percieved era of freedom, you a want return to hardcore gameplay, hardcore values and hardcore dominance in the market.
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
You know what makes me boggle? ..... Replies like this.....Were talking about old school, not old games with stick figures.
MMO's with freedom to make your own story, Yes with Great graphics, Yes with great combat, all the latest features of the games as of late that would make your character fun.
But without all the FAKE - ME - OUTS like instanced dungeon finders and instanced PvP ONLY to give the appearance that your really living in a community where your really not !......Only to return to your lonely world of solo play with no use for a guild or friends list. A world full of zones where all the quest are chain quest. Your on quest chain part 5 and Joe over there is on quest chain part 2.
Did you know that you can number the quest in Rift, and they have to be played in order ?..." Yes, it's true ". Jim is on quest 146 and Larry is on quest 151. Jim and Larry can not play together in Rift or many of the new style story games...NOT AT ALL !
Aaaa...Maybe you like to que up for dungeons and pvp as the only way to play with others....Or maybe you don't know any better !
I started out old school. Those old games were just chock full of freedom.....not. There might have been more leeway in regards to vareity of content and less funneling, but they always boiled down to one play style, hardcore. You guys don't want a return to some percieved era of freedom, you a want return to hardcore gameplay, hardcore values and hardcore dominance in the market.
Lemme see...
Era of Freedom wanted? Check.
Hardcore Gameplay? How do you mean. Do you mean it as in having to spent COUNTLESS hours questing/leveling to progress your character? Then my answer would be yes....and no. Yes, because to me (IMO) it seems it should take time in an MMORPG to progress your character. More than a couple of months if not more. Players can barely have an attatchment to their characters when they can get to cap in a few weeks...without even trying to for most. And why even conduct yourself in a reasonable manner in game when no one pays attention long enough to note your name for future encounters.
But no as far as the hard-core, blatantly obvious time sinks. I mean, I know they are basically a necessity in MMO's, but at least TRY to disguise them. Some have managed this well...others not so much.
Hardcore Value? Again, how do you mean? When I think of that I say HELL YES! As in get that actual "community" feel on a server I am on. Players group, they sit and have interesting conversations, people are actually helpful and friendly. *queue cherubs with harps and butterflies as dreamland fades away* But...that probably won't happen.
Hardcore Dominance? Could care less. I'd just be happy with 1 or even, if I can refrain from sounding crazy, 2 companies could have the beanbags to just do a an old school flavored MMO with today's graphics and UI/Combat systems. WHEN O'LORD WHEN!?!
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
It's pretty easy to filter out comments from players who only want twitch games. It's basically part of the definition of RPG that it doesn't require a substantial amount of twitch skill. In fact, that's why they're a strong niche genre: there are always players who prefer a slower pace.
But that doesn't mean "little interaction" -- or at least, it shouldn't.
Good low-twitch combat involves a steady series of meaningful decisions. This means the game won't feel like it has "little interaction" because every choice you make will be reasonably important.
So "little interaction" actually wasn't a good trait of early MMORPGs. It's fine to be slow, but you still have to provide gameplay (and decisions are gameplay, so make them meaningful and you're set.)
Now I know the world's coming to an end, because I agree with you again on a specific issue.
Twitch is bad for the simple reason of variations in player connections and computer speeds.
But also, while some players love twotch action, I think the majority would much prefer the slower decisions as you describe. I know I do. I'd rather have to wait for the right time...wait for it...wait for it...to pull off the right manuever to put me on top of the situation. Not too much, I want the multiple decisions and to have them stack up for my success. But this fast paced twitching/twitching/twitching repeat action is just a sugar cube with no real meaning. It doesn't offer anything in the form of thought or game plans or experience, all it does is make your hand tired.
Having to pick a route through dangerous terrain to get to a specific destination does take a bit more "thought and work" than clicking on a fucking teleport button. If you are really going to sit there and argue to the opposite then you are indeed being preposterous.
It may put a crimp in your day if you think an mmo only has the potential to be a shit version of a lobby pvp game and you have run out of your daily ritalin pills. But for a game trying to be a persistent, online world it works just fine.
Few argue that you should have to "walk" everywhere in a game world. Some "fast" travel is fine. But it should be clear that making it easy and nigh on instant, to get to pretty much everywhere in the game world kills off a great deal of potential for exploration, territory control and the genereal "feel" of being in an online world.
But to hell with potential, exploration and online worlds, what mmos should be is really piss poor versions of lobby pvp games that already exist in other genres.
IB4 a "but they are all only time sinks" rebuttal which fails to miss the point completely.
The first time you travel there, the problem (finding a safe path) is interesting. Subsequent times, it's less interesting. After the 5th time, it's way less interesting. You've solved that problem. You're ready for the next one.
You were probably better off immediately being at the next new location, traveling a new path with those same exact types of challenges.
And the travel time itself certainly isn't gameplay. It's just delay. You only need as much as is absolutely necessary to accomplish the design goal (which is setting the feel for the surrounding area and giving the player a chance to breath between combat) Because apart from those goals it's certainly not adding challenge to gameplay.
I don't think MMORPGs should only be lobby PVP games. I don't even PVP in MMORPGs. I think MMORPGs should be a wealth of content to explore and experience -- much like how Skyrim entertains players, despite its weak combat.
I don't think MMORPGs should be a constant re-run of repetitive experience, which is apparently what you think it should be.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
It's pretty easy to filter out comments from players who only want twitch games. It's basically part of the definition of RPG that it doesn't require a substantial amount of twitch skill. In fact, that's why they're a strong niche genre: there are always players who prefer a slower pace.
But that doesn't mean "little interaction" -- or at least, it shouldn't.
Good low-twitch combat involves a steady series of meaningful decisions. This means the game won't feel like it has "little interaction" because every choice you make will be reasonably important.
So "little interaction" actually wasn't a good trait of early MMORPGs. It's fine to be slow, but you still have to provide gameplay (and decisions are gameplay, so make them meaningful and you're set.)
Now I know the world's coming to an end, because I agree with you again on a specific issue.
Twitch is bad for the simple reason of variations in player connections and computer speeds.
But also, while some players love twotch action, I think the majority would much prefer the slower decisions as you describe. I know I do. I'd rather have to wait for the right time...wait for it...wait for it...to pull off the right manuever to put me on top of the situation. Not too much, I want the multiple decisions and to have them stack up for my success. But this fast paced twitching/twitching/twitching repeat action is just a sugar cube with no real meaning. It doesn't offer anything in the form of thought or game plans or experience, all it does is make your hand tired.
That's my gameplay philosophy as well. I like gameplay where I get to judge the 'tipping point' of a situation. You spend the early part of the encounter assessing the situation and setting things up and then you use our main attack in just the right time to devastate the opponent. Sadly too many MMORPG fights are simple grind fights where it's just a matter of attrition.
This is also why I am such an opponent of too much repetition in MMORPGs. If you have to repeat the same fight multiple types, you are just going through the motions since you have solved the fight already and are just doing a memorized 'dance'. To keep me challenged the game needs to switch things up on a regular basis so I get the chance to figure out new tactics and approach the problem from a different angle. These do not have to be complicated things but can add lots of depth to the game. eg. having to fight two healers who support and heal each other can really shake up how you approach simple fights.
Having to pick a route through dangerous terrain to get to a specific destination does take a bit more "thought and work" than clicking on a fucking teleport button. If you are really going to sit there and argue to the opposite then you are indeed being preposterous.
It may put a crimp in your day if you think an mmo only has the potential to be a shit version of a lobby pvp game and you have run out of your daily ritalin pills. But for a game trying to be a persistent, online world it works just fine.
Few argue that you should have to "walk" everywhere in a game world. Some "fast" travel is fine. But it should be clear that making it easy and nigh on instant, to get to pretty much everywhere in the game world kills off a great deal of potential for exploration, territory control and the genereal "feel" of being in an online world.
But to hell with potential, exploration and online worlds, what mmos should be is really piss poor versions of lobby pvp games that already exist in other genres.
IB4 a "but they are all only time sinks" rebuttal which fails to miss the point completely.
The first time you travel there, the problem (finding a safe path) is interesting. Subsequent times, it's less interesting. After the 5th time, it's way less interesting. You've solved that problem. You're ready for the next one.
You were probably better off immediately being at the next new location, traveling a new path with those same exact types of challenges.
And the travel time itself certainly isn't gameplay. It's just delay. You only need as much as is absolutely necessary to accomplish the design goal (which is setting the feel for the surrounding area and giving the player a chance to breath between combat) Because apart from those goals it's certainly not adding challenge to gameplay.
I don't think MMORPGs should only be lobby PVP games. I don't even PVP in MMORPGs. I think MMORPGs should be a wealth of content to explore and experience -- much like how Skyrim entertains players, despite its weak combat.
I don't think MMORPGs should be a constant re-run of repetitive experience, which is apparently what you think it should be.
It's the repetition that is the real problem. Exploring a new area can be a great immersive experience. However, if I have to keep going through it over and over, it will quickly lose its appeal. Too much repetition will kill the immersion and can make you start hating the experience.
My preference is a design thatencourages teh players to try everything at least once but does not lock the player into playstyles and mechanics that they do not like.
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
It's pretty easy to filter out comments from players who only want twitch games. It's basically part of the definition of RPG that it doesn't require a substantial amount of twitch skill. In fact, that's why they're a strong niche genre: there are always players who prefer a slower pace.
But that doesn't mean "little interaction" -- or at least, it shouldn't.
Good low-twitch combat involves a steady series of meaningful decisions. This means the game won't feel like it has "little interaction" because every choice you make will be reasonably important.
So "little interaction" actually wasn't a good trait of early MMORPGs. It's fine to be slow, but you still have to provide gameplay (and decisions are gameplay, so make them meaningful and you're set.)
Now I know the world's coming to an end, because I agree with you again on a specific issue.
Twitch is bad for the simple reason of variations in player connections and computer speeds.
But also, while some players love twotch action, I think the majority would much prefer the slower decisions as you describe. I know I do. I'd rather have to wait for the right time...wait for it...wait for it...to pull off the right manuever to put me on top of the situation. Not too much, I want the multiple decisions and to have them stack up for my success. But this fast paced twitching/twitching/twitching repeat action is just a sugar cube with no real meaning. It doesn't offer anything in the form of thought or game plans or experience, all it does is make your hand tired.
That's my gameplay philosophy as well. I like gameplay where I get to judge the 'tipping point' of a situation. You spend the early part of the encounter assessing the situation and setting things up and then you use our main attack in just the right time to devastate the opponent. Sadly too many MMORPG fights are simple grind fights where it's just a matter of attrition.
This is also why I am such an opponent of too much repetition in MMORPGs. If you have to repeat the same fight multiple types, you are just going through the motions since you have solved the fight already and are just doing a memorized 'dance'. To keep me challenged the game needs to switch things up on a regular basis so I get the chance to figure out new tactics and approach the problem from a different angle. These do not have to be complicated things but can add lots of depth to the game. eg. having to fight two healers who support and heal each other can really shake up how you approach simple fights.
Damn, yes! Why do the NPCs never heal eachother? Or spread out so one can attack you from behind? Why are these simple tactics not coded in but we have to have ever increasing numbers instead?
I've always wanted to hear one NPC yell out "Heal Me!" and then see the cleric standing back a way cast a heal at him. This is a simple code, it's used all the time, but can't be used here? (i.e. "send")
And along the same lines, why do we never hear the MOB boss "send" "Archers, get that healer!"? This is how I'd rather see the game become harder, not through advanced level grind and BIG NUMBERS. AI and tactics.
MMO's will be New style from here on out NO MATTER WHAT !
Box sales were big for Rift, and box sales will be big for SWTOR also. How I see it is Rift was somewhat of a short fad, but box sales were up regardless. SWTOR will be big because its starwars. Sure many people will like it.....But I hope because of high box sales will not cause all mmos to follow in new style.
Of 215 votes :
Old School 63.7
New Style 23.3
Just let me see the poll 13.0
With taking out "just let me see the poll" we have 3 : 1 in favor of Old Style.
But :
1) Developers will not see this poll.
2) Developers will make games according to box sales of other games.
3) If your here on mmorpg.com, I would guess your a Pro-MMO player and not some 6 year old. So we may not be the majority like we used to be....The 6 year olds took over.
MMO's will be New style from here on out NO MATTER WHAT !
Box sales were big for Rift, and box sales will be big for SWTOR also. How I see it is Rift was somewhat of a short fad, but box sales were up regardless. SWTOR will be big because its starwars. Sure many people will like it.....But I hope because of high box sales will not cause all mmos to follow in new style.
Of 215 votes :
Old School 63.7
New Style 23.3
Just let me see the poll 13.0
With taking out "just let me see the poll" we have 3 : 1 in favor of Old Style.
But :
1) Developers will not see this poll.
2) Developers will make games according to box sales of other games.
3) If your here on mmorpg.com, I would guess your a Pro-MMO player and not some 6 year old. So we may not be the majority like we used to be....The 6 year olds took over.
So us that like Old style may be screwed !!!
this is actually a bad poll question as it leads the audience towards the old school answer, old school, if done well? ofcourse most people will pick that. it would have been better to have more detailed questions becouse "done well" means many things. you can get 51% of people to agree on a problem but you can never get 51% to agree on the solution.
Comments
What an absolutely ridiculous claim, with zero basis in fact.
I see polls like this and it makes me boggle. One of the biggest gripes on this board is about slow, non-twitch combat and yet old school games were the kings of slow combat with little interaction and 5 to 30 minute fights. Sometimes I think you old schoolers not only wear rose tinted glasses, but you're not even sure what it is you really want out of an MMO other than making sure game mechanics force everyone to play your way.
This material is considered highly classified information.
Where's security?
SWG didn't have FFA and it was a sandbox nor did it had full loot and industry was very well fed.
find me one non full loot and ffa sandbox MMORPG and I will play there. you can have some sort of PVP system but it has to be consensual.
Istaira, one of/if not the most sandboxy fantasy game out there - only pvp is in one arena (one dev added it in for fun).
Venge
It does not have to be a choice... You can have both.
in GW2 there is new style story to be told in your personal story part, while the wide open world allows you to do juts whatever you want, even tough there are public events players will feel very free in their choices. And noboddy is forcing anyone to do anything, you will allways have a choice in the GW2 open world. And none of those choices are wrong.
And this happens with the personal story still running in the background, there probably will be much less story then in SWTOR, but the same immersive stories will be availalbe to those what like them, while others can just forget about the story and enjoy the freedom of the wide and open world as its not required to do those stories at all.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
people are soo forgetful..everquest was doing the story line thing before most but you had to type the correct phrase to get quests / convos going...its just there wasnt no cut scenes and no "easy" button to choose what you wanted to do like A / B/C..why? cuz no1 cares..THEY WANT TO "PLAY"...unless your a single player mmo player and solo'er 90% of the time...wich most people are nowa days thats why you see theamparks being pumped out like the octa'mom haveing kids
im speaking older eq..not newer eq
It's pretty easy to filter out comments from players who only want twitch games. It's basically part of the definition of RPG that it doesn't require a substantial amount of twitch skill. In fact, that's why they're a strong niche genre: there are always players who prefer a slower pace.
But that doesn't mean "little interaction" -- or at least, it shouldn't.
Good low-twitch combat involves a steady series of meaningful decisions. This means the game won't feel like it has "little interaction" because every choice you make will be reasonably important.
So "little interaction" actually wasn't a good trait of early MMORPGs. It's fine to be slow, but you still have to provide gameplay (and decisions are gameplay, so make them meaningful and you're set.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You know what makes me boggle? ..... Replies like this.....Were talking about old school, not old games with stick figures.
MMO's with freedom to make your own story, Yes with Great graphics, Yes with great combat, all the latest features of the games as of late that would make your character fun.
But without all the FAKE - ME - OUTS like instanced dungeon finders and instanced PvP ONLY to give the appearance that your really living in a community where your really not !......Only to return to your lonely world of solo play with no use for a guild or friends list. A world full of zones where all the quest are chain quest. Your on quest chain part 5 and Joe over there is on quest chain part 2.
Did you know that you can number the quest in Rift, and they have to be played in order ?..." Yes, it's true ". Jim is on quest 146 and Larry is on quest 151. Jim and Larry can not play together in Rift or many of the new style story games...NOT AT ALL !
Aaaa...Maybe you like to que up for dungeons and pvp as the only way to play with others....Or maybe you don't know any better !
I am not aware anyone actually does a storydriven MMO, except Bioware's SW:TOR ?
And I'm fairly hopeful that SW:TOR will still allow much open world once you are finished or stop doing the class story.
Thats because every halfway serious poll has a "view poll results" options that was for unknown reasons left out in this forum.
How about an MMO where you can't get to cap in less than a month and sit in capitals cities HAVING to wait for groups because that is all their is for you to do. Your finding things I didn't even mention to complain about...congratulations!
Problem is, MMORPG's were meant to take time, hence why they had monthly fees (Plus continuous updates). But players now don't want to dedicate time in this rat race society, so they rather whine to have them changed into RPG console games. And want everythign NOW NOW NOW.
His comments are idiotic, because MMORPG's were in their infancy when we played them, so of course they were slow and crude. As if we had a choice then. But even so, I would STILL take the "feel" (Actual possibility of immersion) of the older MMO's over the non-immersive give me everything now because I got to cap in a month MMO's today.
Having to pick a route through dangerous terrain to get to a specific destination does take a bit more "thought and work" than clicking on a fucking teleport button. If you are really going to sit there and argue to the opposite then you are indeed being preposterous.
It may put a crimp in your day if you think an mmo only has the potential to be a shit version of a lobby pvp game and you have run out of your daily ritalin pills. But for a game trying to be a persistent, online world it works just fine.
Few argue that you should have to "walk" everywhere in a game world. Some "fast" travel is fine. But it should be clear that making it easy and nigh on instant, to get to pretty much everywhere in the game world kills off a great deal of potential for exploration, territory control and the genereal "feel" of being in an online world.
But to hell with potential, exploration and online worlds, what mmos should be is really piss poor versions of lobby pvp games that already exist in other genres.
IB4 a "but they are all only time sinks" rebuttal which fails to miss the point completely.
@OP. Old school version all the time.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
New games have certainly brought many positive innovations, but I'm with you in that they were more immersive. Using Everquest as an example. Each race had it's own starting city, and as you began to stretch outside of the confines of that city there was no clear place you should have been. There was no real indication of where you should be going or what you should be doing. There were no maps, no markers sending you to the next quest hub in line. So you just went out and you explored. Knowing that if you tried to get too crazy you might have a corpse out in the middle of mobs who you can't possibly kill, and you'd be naked until you recovered it.
While I think EQ's death penalties were a bit too harsh, they certainly made you fear dying. Especially unless you had a 49+ res coming your way. You slowly explored your way through the world, and each time you found something new and cool it was an accomplishment. Players were generally helpful, because the game almost required interaction with others. If you died in a bad spot, people were likely to help you retrieve your corpse, because it might happen to them some time.
Day and night felt different. Night time was dark, and there were spookier mobs at night.
The quests were often hard to figure out. At least until EQ'Lizer or Allakhazam spoiled them. Some of the epic quests took months for anyone to solve. And the rewards for completing those quests were often epic.
Now I want to make it clear that I am in no way trashing SWTor, I think it's going to be a monster hit and I enjoyed playing it. But let's compare it's mechanics to that. Yes, the UI is better. Yes, the cinematics are nice. Graphically it's obviously better. Combat is much better for melee types in particular. That goes without saying.
But there is never a point in SWTor when you aren't pretty much exactly sure of where you should be. And unless your traveling to planets that are too high for you (clearly marked on the galactic map), there isn't a whole lot of danger. When you die, you can instantly be respawned right where you died with a small hit to your armor's damage. There is no day or night cycle. And there is little in the way of social interacting outside of warzones or the occasional flashpoint. In fact the games mechanics more or less discourage it. It's easier for you to just grind thorugh quests solo. And quest wise, while you have some nice cinematics, there is never any point where you are actually trying to figure things out. There is never any challenge in them. There is rarely ever any mystery.
https://www.therepopulation.com - Sci Fi Sandbox.
I think I love you lol.
Completely agree on the EQ analysis.
And I feel the same about SWToR still being successful. Where we are different is I am cancelling my ToR pre-order. it simply didn't "grab" me and pull me in. Seemed like more of the same ole same ole....even as a long time Star Wars fan. =/ To each their own.
I started out old school. Those old games were just chock full of freedom.....not. There might have been more leeway in regards to vareity of content and less funneling, but they always boiled down to one play style, hardcore. You guys don't want a return to some percieved era of freedom, you a want return to hardcore gameplay, hardcore values and hardcore dominance in the market.
Lemme see...
Era of Freedom wanted? Check.
Hardcore Gameplay? How do you mean. Do you mean it as in having to spent COUNTLESS hours questing/leveling to progress your character? Then my answer would be yes....and no. Yes, because to me (IMO) it seems it should take time in an MMORPG to progress your character. More than a couple of months if not more. Players can barely have an attatchment to their characters when they can get to cap in a few weeks...without even trying to for most. And why even conduct yourself in a reasonable manner in game when no one pays attention long enough to note your name for future encounters.
But no as far as the hard-core, blatantly obvious time sinks. I mean, I know they are basically a necessity in MMO's, but at least TRY to disguise them. Some have managed this well...others not so much.
Hardcore Value? Again, how do you mean? When I think of that I say HELL YES! As in get that actual "community" feel on a server I am on. Players group, they sit and have interesting conversations, people are actually helpful and friendly. *queue cherubs with harps and butterflies as dreamland fades away* But...that probably won't happen.
Hardcore Dominance? Could care less. I'd just be happy with 1 or even, if I can refrain from sounding crazy, 2 companies could have the beanbags to just do a an old school flavored MMO with today's graphics and UI/Combat systems. WHEN O'LORD WHEN!?!
Now I know the world's coming to an end, because I agree with you again on a specific issue.
Twitch is bad for the simple reason of variations in player connections and computer speeds.
But also, while some players love twotch action, I think the majority would much prefer the slower decisions as you describe. I know I do. I'd rather have to wait for the right time...wait for it...wait for it...to pull off the right manuever to put me on top of the situation. Not too much, I want the multiple decisions and to have them stack up for my success. But this fast paced twitching/twitching/twitching repeat action is just a sugar cube with no real meaning. It doesn't offer anything in the form of thought or game plans or experience, all it does is make your hand tired.
Once upon a time....
The first time you travel there, the problem (finding a safe path) is interesting. Subsequent times, it's less interesting. After the 5th time, it's way less interesting. You've solved that problem. You're ready for the next one.
You were probably better off immediately being at the next new location, traveling a new path with those same exact types of challenges.
And the travel time itself certainly isn't gameplay. It's just delay. You only need as much as is absolutely necessary to accomplish the design goal (which is setting the feel for the surrounding area and giving the player a chance to breath between combat) Because apart from those goals it's certainly not adding challenge to gameplay.
I don't think MMORPGs should only be lobby PVP games. I don't even PVP in MMORPGs. I think MMORPGs should be a wealth of content to explore and experience -- much like how Skyrim entertains players, despite its weak combat.
I don't think MMORPGs should be a constant re-run of repetitive experience, which is apparently what you think it should be.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
That's my gameplay philosophy as well. I like gameplay where I get to judge the 'tipping point' of a situation. You spend the early part of the encounter assessing the situation and setting things up and then you use our main attack in just the right time to devastate the opponent. Sadly too many MMORPG fights are simple grind fights where it's just a matter of attrition.
This is also why I am such an opponent of too much repetition in MMORPGs. If you have to repeat the same fight multiple types, you are just going through the motions since you have solved the fight already and are just doing a memorized 'dance'. To keep me challenged the game needs to switch things up on a regular basis so I get the chance to figure out new tactics and approach the problem from a different angle. These do not have to be complicated things but can add lots of depth to the game. eg. having to fight two healers who support and heal each other can really shake up how you approach simple fights.
It's the repetition that is the real problem. Exploring a new area can be a great immersive experience. However, if I have to keep going through it over and over, it will quickly lose its appeal. Too much repetition will kill the immersion and can make you start hating the experience.
My preference is a design thatencourages teh players to try everything at least once but does not lock the player into playstyles and mechanics that they do not like.
Damn, yes! Why do the NPCs never heal eachother? Or spread out so one can attack you from behind? Why are these simple tactics not coded in but we have to have ever increasing numbers instead?
I've always wanted to hear one NPC yell out "Heal Me!" and then see the cleric standing back a way cast a heal at him. This is a simple code, it's used all the time, but can't be used here? (i.e. "send")
And along the same lines, why do we never hear the MOB boss "send" "Archers, get that healer!"? This is how I'd rather see the game become harder, not through advanced level grind and BIG NUMBERS. AI and tactics.
Once upon a time....
What I fear :
MMO's will be New style from here on out NO MATTER WHAT !
Box sales were big for Rift, and box sales will be big for SWTOR also. How I see it is Rift was somewhat of a short fad, but box sales were up regardless. SWTOR will be big because its starwars. Sure many people will like it.....But I hope because of high box sales will not cause all mmos to follow in new style.
Of 215 votes :
Old School 63.7
New Style 23.3
Just let me see the poll 13.0
With taking out "just let me see the poll" we have 3 : 1 in favor of Old Style.
But :
1) Developers will not see this poll.
2) Developers will make games according to box sales of other games.
3) If your here on mmorpg.com, I would guess your a Pro-MMO player and not some 6 year old. So we may not be the majority like we used to be....The 6 year olds took over.
So us that like Old style may be screwed !!!
this is actually a bad poll question as it leads the audience towards the old school answer, old school, if done well? ofcourse most people will pick that. it would have been better to have more detailed questions becouse "done well" means many things. you can get 51% of people to agree on a problem but you can never get 51% to agree on the solution.