The "fluff" is much of what made MMOs of the past feel like actual worlds. The complete focus on killing stuff is one of the main reasons most current games feel so limited - our characters are not denizens of a world, they are troop types and the only activity is slaughter. When games offer nothing other than killing, they can get boring fast.
"feel like actual world" is not a requirement for fun.
The "fluff" is much of what made MMOs of the past feel like actual worlds. The complete focus on killing stuff is one of the main reasons most current games feel so limited - our characters are not denizens of a world, they are troop types and the only activity is slaughter. When games offer nothing other than killing, they can get boring fast.
"feel like actual world" is not a requirement for fun.
Not only that, but they didn't really feel like worlds to me. The gameplay was bad, the mechanics were bad, the production quality was poor, the moment to moment gameplay was horrid: Few nuggets of fun here and there in the midst of long waits and a long list of arduous, mundane tasks.
Yeah, you can say I was disillusioned.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
The "fluff" is much of what made MMOs of the past feel like actual worlds. The complete focus on killing stuff is one of the main reasons most current games feel so limited - our characters are not denizens of a world, they are troop types and the only activity is slaughter. When games offer nothing other than killing, they can get boring fast.
"feel like actual world" is not a requirement for fun.
Not only that, but they didn't really feel like worlds to me. The gameplay was bad, the mechanics were bad, the production quality was poor, the moment to moment gameplay was horrid: Few nuggets of fun here and there in the midst of long waits and a long list of arduous, mundane tasks.
Yeah, you can say I was disillusioned.
Actually, for a person like myself, "feels' like an actual world" does make the game more fun to me, but it's not an absolute requirement.
And...I was a person who did like MMORPG's as they were originally presented, warts and all, and I enjoyed the gameplay even.
Go figure, must be something to do with differences in personal tastes.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The problem is most games nowadays are spending too much money on graphics, voice overs, and "new" features that aren't really worth it. Generally, the developer needs to make a choice: ignore the fluff/and try to make a game that will keep people in it, or add the fluff and have a game with little substance.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have the housing from UO or SWG again. THAT was enjoyeable. However, keep in mind one thing: Both of those games were Sandbox. Short of having a zone where you can place your houses (like DAoC), I don't see how a developer can do real housing in these crappy themepark games they keep releasing.
Personally, I'm tired of "apartments" (like EQ2). Give me a plot of land, give me the ability to bulid a real house.
While they're at it, give me a game that isn't WoW, has great customization and replayability, has more substance than a game with nothing but voice overs, and a game that has more to do than level to 80, grind gear that isn't that much better, and PvP.
You know what's fun for me? Having different types of things to do in the same game. This keeps me interested and not game hopping because each game is more shallow and basic as the last. Things like housing, active crafting and other various side activities to me show a quality game and that the developers actually want you to stay.
I think WoW is included in this conversation. Even though it's the poster boy for how MMOs have currently been "refined" there are a lot of different activities and more are being added. It has archeology, pet battles, farming and I believe recently the ability to have the little farm house, I'd have to check. It's a whole lot deeper of a game than some of the current ones.
Going forward if there is a trend away from "fluff" it's because it's too expensive with a F2P model. I do beleive we'll see a trend towards what people will actually pay for but at the moment the F2P is ripening.
Originally posted by Aelious You know what's fun for me? Having different types of things to do in the same game. This keeps me interested and not game hopping because each game is more shallow and basic as the last. Things like housing, active crafting and other various side activities to me show a quality game and that the developers actually want you to stay.
Or you can just game hop. That actually is more fun .. because not only you get different types of things to do, you can enjoy different settings.
It may be more fun for you but I like sticking to a single title over a period of time for a sense of real progression. My life schedule is such that if I was to game hop is never progress very far. If I am game hoping it's because I'm bored with what's out there.
Originally posted by Aelious It may be more fun for you but I like sticking to a single title over a period of time for a sense of real progression. My life schedule is such that if I was to game hop is never progress very far. If I am game hoping it's because I'm bored with what's out there.
No one said you cannot progress if you game hop. I played D3 since release and i got pretty far. And i play other games at the same time. In fact, i am surprised that you only play one game at a time. Wouldn't that be boring fast?
And what is "real" progression? Anything that makes your numbers go up is progression.
Music in LotRO is "fluff" done well. What I consider "fluff" would be gameplay that is extraneous to the main goals of the MMO. There are people in LotRO who might never have use music system, but there are plenty of folks playing LotRO who would tell you that the music system is one of the reasons they are STILL playing it. Many of these "fluff" items get incorporated to enhance the roleplay aspects of the game or are alternative methods of play. As long as they are done well, I don't see any reason why they wouldn't help stave off the sameness that can come with playing the same game, the same way, day after day. Perhaps one reason these systems are "not considered as important" these days is that with the enlargement of the MMORPG demographic that came with WoW, the proportion of players who enjoy role playing or alterative play styles shrank in relation to the overall population and major developers cutting "fluff" budget items that don't enhance core gameplay.
Originally posted by Aelious It may be more fun for you but I like sticking to a single title over a period of time for a sense of real progression. My life schedule is such that if I was to game hop is never progress very far. If I am game hoping it's because I'm bored with what's out there.
No one said you cannot progress if you game hop. I played D3 since release and i got pretty far. And i play other games at the same time. In fact, i am surprised that you only play one game at a time. Wouldn't that be boring fast?
And what is "real" progression? Anything that makes your numbers go up is progression.
Of course you CAN progress while game hoping, I tried it for a while and it fell flat. It was like a positive feedback respose where the more I hopped the quicker I went from game to game spinning my wheels. I didn't like it and came to the conclusion that it's not the way I want to spend my free time which is limited. I don't need to be fixed, I have my own reason and preferences for playing games as do you. "Real" progression is this mindset in a nutshell and applicable only to me. I find enjoyment enjoyment in long term goals that I slowly move toward. This also points to the fact I like deeper and/or more complex games. I have more fun playing them.
Originally posted by Aelious It may be more fun for you but I like sticking to a single title over a period of time for a sense of real progression. My life schedule is such that if I was to game hop is never progress very far. If I am game hoping it's because I'm bored with what's out there.
No one said you cannot progress if you game hop. I played D3 since release and i got pretty far. And i play other games at the same time. In fact, i am surprised that you only play one game at a time. Wouldn't that be boring fast?
And what is "real" progression? Anything that makes your numbers go up is progression.
Of course you CAN progress while game hoping, I tried it for a while and it fell flat. It was like a positive feedback respose where the more I hopped the quicker I went from game to game spinning my wheels. I didn't like it and came to the conclusion that it's not the way I want to spend my free time which is limited. I don't need to be fixed, I have my own reason and preferences for playing games as do you. "Real" progression is this mindset in a nutshell and applicable only to me. I find enjoyment enjoyment in long term goals that I slowly move toward. This also points to the fact I like deeper and/or more complex games. I have more fun playing them.
In that case, good luck.
I wouldnt just play one game, and there is also less chance that a single game can fit all my needs. But that is just me. You, of course, are free to pursue whatever entertainment strategy you want.
I would prefer to play just one game. Have one game that provides me with everything I am looking for. As nice as that would be, I realize it will probably never happen unless I win the lottery and hire people to make a game (my training is totally unrelated to games and will likely not ever be related to it haha)
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I would prefer to play just one game. Have one game that provides me with everything I am looking for. As nice as that would be, I realize it will probably never happen unless I win the lottery and hire people to make a game (my training is totally unrelated to games and will likely not ever be related to it haha)
I'm a one-gamer too. But I need a game that has the depth and diversity, and excitement stacked on top. I don't need constant sword play for "excitement". I don't even want that. I'd really prefer excitement in anticipation, and those great moments that a player remembers exactly because they aren't handed out like candy.
I also want an assortmant of long term goals. Building a business is one example, or mapping a woodland, or exploring a mountain range. Too much game play is lost because games hand out stuff as instant gratification. I like games where there are things you have to "work" for. Not to say I don't want the occasional instant grat, just not as a standard design of game play.
I'm a one-gamer too. But I need a game that has the depth and diversity, and excitement stacked on top. I don't need constant sword play for "excitement". I don't even want that. I'd really prefer excitement in anticipation, and those great moments that a player remembers exactly because they aren't handed out like candy.
I also want an assortmant of long term goals. Building a business is one example, or mapping a woodland, or exploring a mountain range. Too much game play is lost because games hand out stuff as instant gratification. I like games where there are things you have to "work" for. Not to say I don't want the occasional instant grat, just not as a standard design of game play.
Remember what you perceive as gameplay may not be gameplay for others. And alot of what is cut is just being user friendliness and streamlining. You should never feel like you're logging in for your other job.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
I'm a one-gamer too. But I need a game that has the depth and diversity, and excitement stacked on top. I don't need constant sword play for "excitement". I don't even want that. I'd really prefer excitement in anticipation, and those great moments that a player remembers exactly because they aren't handed out like candy.
I also want an assortmant of long term goals. Building a business is one example, or mapping a woodland, or exploring a mountain range. Too much game play is lost because games hand out stuff as instant gratification. I like games where there are things you have to "work" for. Not to say I don't want the occasional instant grat, just not as a standard design of game play.
Remember what you perceive as gameplay may not be gameplay for others. And alot of what is cut is just being user friendliness and streamlining. You should never feel like you're logging in for your other job.
Logging in and having to kill x number of enemies to advance my character so I can kill x number of enemies to advance, ad nauseum until I reach endgame so I can kill xxx number of enemies to prove I'm l33t, is just like a job for me and I'm guessing for many players that enjoy role playing games.
That's not to say that game hopping to keep up with all the festivals in them all isn't either, in fact that's largely why I just said the heck with them all and went back to UO.
I would just like a happy medium in one game with activities beyond hack and slashing, a little eye candy I can enjoy and a nice place to keep all the cool stuff I acquire along the way, otherwise why play to get it.
Nope, I don't need voice overs or fancy animations either, just good solid reaction times, some decent looking avatars to roleplay and some beautiful scenery is always nice too, plus it can afford opportunities for certain classes that utilize stealth not to mention makes the game a wee bit more immersive when you can look over yonder to see where you're headed and can see a stand of trees or a cliff face you will need to circumvent.
I'm a one-gamer too. But I need a game that has the depth and diversity, and excitement stacked on top. I don't need constant sword play for "excitement". I don't even want that. I'd really prefer excitement in anticipation, and those great moments that a player remembers exactly because they aren't handed out like candy.
I also want an assortmant of long term goals. Building a business is one example, or mapping a woodland, or exploring a mountain range. Too much game play is lost because games hand out stuff as instant gratification. I like games where there are things you have to "work" for. Not to say I don't want the occasional instant grat, just not as a standard design of game play.
Remember what you perceive as gameplay may not be gameplay for others. And alot of what is cut is just being user friendliness and streamlining. You should never feel like you're logging in for your other job.
Or maybe it's you. There's been loads of posts about this for a long time now. New releases built like you suggest are dropping users like flies in a Raid factory. When can this arguement die?
Or maybe it's you. There's been loads of posts about this for a long time now. New releases built like you suggest are dropping users like flies in a Raid factory. When can this arguement die?
That is only because raiding is getting old.
Look at LOL ... nothnig but fighting pvp in the same map and the number of players increased and surpassed WOW in terms of players.
Look at the top 10 online games on xfire .. how many are combat focus? I doubt you can argue that combat is not a central popular gameplay.
While combat may draw in some or most new (or changing game) people, it is often the "fluff" that keeps them there.
I originally started EQ2 back when it first arrived some 8 years ago, and though I have tried other games, none have the overall depth of EQ2 for me. I have not tried any of the very new games, but of all the games I have looked at, none have the depth of crafting, housing, and other non-combat activities of EQ2.
Fluff is not for everyone - not everyone wants to be a home decorator, but in those games where it is highly developed it tends to keep a loyal fan base of it's own, with our without combat.
While combat may draw in some or most new (or changing game) people, it is often the "fluff" that keeps them there.
I originally started EQ2 back when it first arrived some 8 years ago, and though I have tried other games, none have the overall depth of EQ2 for me. I have not tried any of the very new games, but of all the games I have looked at, none have the depth of crafting, housing, and other non-combat activities of EQ2.
Fluff is not for everyone - not everyone wants to be a home decorator, but in those games where it is highly developed it tends to keep a loyal fan base of it's own, with our without combat.
Do you actually have evidence to support that claim?
There are a long list of games people play for a long time, with nothing but combat. Diablo 1 & 2 are good examples. Even the third one is still up there in xfire ranking after 10 months.
SC2 is practically S Korea's national sport, as well as the first one. There is no fluff in SC .. it is just fight, fight and fight.
EQ2 is pretty small in the whole gaming market. I am sure there are those who play the SIMS a long time too .. but saying that "fluff" is "often" what keep people .... is just unsubstantiated, and don't gell with what we know about gaming.
While combat may draw in some or most new (or changing game) people, it is often the "fluff" that keeps them there.
I originally started EQ2 back when it first arrived some 8 years ago, and though I have tried other games, none have the overall depth of EQ2 for me. I have not tried any of the very new games, but of all the games I have looked at, none have the depth of crafting, housing, and other non-combat activities of EQ2.
Fluff is not for everyone - not everyone wants to be a home decorator, but in those games where it is highly developed it tends to keep a loyal fan base of it's own, with our without combat.
Thats what the whole thread has been about, and every statistic says otherwise.
I did battle with ignorance today, and ignorance won.
To exercise power costs effort and demands courage. That is why so many fail to assert rights to which they are perfectly entitled - because a right is a kind of power but they are too lazy or too cowardly to exercise it. The virtues which cloak these faults are called patience and forbearance.
The problem is that many of the posters here are telling people that they shouldn't have what they want in a game. When extra activities are in a game they don't take away from the pure combat types. But some people are saying that they leave the game because there isn't enough to keep them interested. This means population drop off, etc. The numbers may be fine in a fiscal sense, but a growing amount of loss of satisfaction is occurring. If your familiar with economics you know that such things often have an inertia that changes markets.
still, the combat-only crowd says:
You don't need Tolstoy, you need Two and Half Men!
I'm a one-gamer too. But I need a game that has the depth and diversity, and excitement stacked on top. I don't need constant sword play for "excitement". I don't even want that. I'd really prefer excitement in anticipation, and those great moments that a player remembers exactly because they aren't handed out like candy.
I also want an assortmant of long term goals. Building a business is one example, or mapping a woodland, or exploring a mountain range. Too much game play is lost because games hand out stuff as instant gratification. I like games where there are things you have to "work" for. Not to say I don't want the occasional instant grat, just not as a standard design of game play.
Remember what you perceive as gameplay may not be gameplay for others. And alot of what is cut is just being user friendliness and streamlining. You should never feel like you're logging in for your other job.
I'm pretty sure he meant work in the physics terms, effort applied over time.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I would prefer to play just one game. Have one game that provides me with everything I am looking for. As nice as that would be, I realize it will probably never happen unless I win the lottery and hire people to make a game (my training is totally unrelated to games and will likely not ever be related to it haha)
I'm a one-gamer too. But I need a game that has the depth and diversity, and excitement stacked on top. I don't need constant sword play for "excitement". I don't even want that. I'd really prefer excitement in anticipation, and those great moments that a player remembers exactly because they aren't handed out like candy.
I also want an assortmant of long term goals. Building a business is one example, or mapping a woodland, or exploring a mountain range. Too much game play is lost because games hand out stuff as instant gratification. I like games where there are things you have to "work" for. Not to say I don't want the occasional instant grat, just not as a standard design of game play.
It looks like WOW is headed in that direction, with the core WOW game being the world that your characters are in, and various games added within that world. Imagine logging into WOW and saying, "Let's see... do I want to play a MOBA, Tactics, raid or RTS today?" and then whatever your answer you jsut teleport to a different place within World of Warcraft to go do it.
One login, one set of characters. No need to level up new characters for new games, no need to start amassing wealth again. All your games in one game with the character set you're already familiar with playing and that already have overflowing banks and wallets to throw at new gameplay.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Comments
"feel like actual world" is not a requirement for fun.
Not only that, but they didn't really feel like worlds to me. The gameplay was bad, the mechanics were bad, the production quality was poor, the moment to moment gameplay was horrid: Few nuggets of fun here and there in the midst of long waits and a long list of arduous, mundane tasks.
Yeah, you can say I was disillusioned.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Actually, for a person like myself, "feels' like an actual world" does make the game more fun to me, but it's not an absolute requirement.
And...I was a person who did like MMORPG's as they were originally presented, warts and all, and I enjoyed the gameplay even.
Go figure, must be something to do with differences in personal tastes.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Of course. Obviously different people place different emphasis on core combat gameplay vs fluff.
The market decides which is more important.
I think WoW is included in this conversation. Even though it's the poster boy for how MMOs have currently been "refined" there are a lot of different activities and more are being added. It has archeology, pet battles, farming and I believe recently the ability to have the little farm house, I'd have to check. It's a whole lot deeper of a game than some of the current ones.
Going forward if there is a trend away from "fluff" it's because it's too expensive with a F2P model. I do beleive we'll see a trend towards what people will actually pay for but at the moment the F2P is ripening.
All the MMOs that had it except UO were in 3D...
Or you can just game hop. That actually is more fun .. because not only you get different types of things to do, you can enjoy different settings.
No one said you cannot progress if you game hop. I played D3 since release and i got pretty far. And i play other games at the same time. In fact, i am surprised that you only play one game at a time. Wouldn't that be boring fast?
And what is "real" progression? Anything that makes your numbers go up is progression.
Of course you CAN progress while game hoping, I tried it for a while and it fell flat. It was like a positive feedback respose where the more I hopped the quicker I went from game to game spinning my wheels. I didn't like it and came to the conclusion that it's not the way I want to spend my free time which is limited. I don't need to be fixed, I have my own reason and preferences for playing games as do you. "Real" progression is this mindset in a nutshell and applicable only to me. I find enjoyment enjoyment in long term goals that I slowly move toward. This also points to the fact I like deeper and/or more complex games. I have more fun playing them.
In that case, good luck.
I wouldnt just play one game, and there is also less chance that a single game can fit all my needs. But that is just me. You, of course, are free to pursue whatever entertainment strategy you want.
I'm a one-gamer too. But I need a game that has the depth and diversity, and excitement stacked on top. I don't need constant sword play for "excitement". I don't even want that. I'd really prefer excitement in anticipation, and those great moments that a player remembers exactly because they aren't handed out like candy.
I also want an assortmant of long term goals. Building a business is one example, or mapping a woodland, or exploring a mountain range. Too much game play is lost because games hand out stuff as instant gratification. I like games where there are things you have to "work" for. Not to say I don't want the occasional instant grat, just not as a standard design of game play.
Once upon a time....
Remember what you perceive as gameplay may not be gameplay for others. And alot of what is cut is just being user friendliness and streamlining. You should never feel like you're logging in for your other job.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Logging in and having to kill x number of enemies to advance my character so I can kill x number of enemies to advance, ad nauseum until I reach endgame so I can kill xxx number of enemies to prove I'm l33t, is just like a job for me and I'm guessing for many players that enjoy role playing games.
That's not to say that game hopping to keep up with all the festivals in them all isn't either, in fact that's largely why I just said the heck with them all and went back to UO.
I would just like a happy medium in one game with activities beyond hack and slashing, a little eye candy I can enjoy and a nice place to keep all the cool stuff I acquire along the way, otherwise why play to get it.
Nope, I don't need voice overs or fancy animations either, just good solid reaction times, some decent looking avatars to roleplay and some beautiful scenery is always nice too, plus it can afford opportunities for certain classes that utilize stealth not to mention makes the game a wee bit more immersive when you can look over yonder to see where you're headed and can see a stand of trees or a cliff face you will need to circumvent.
Or maybe it's you. There's been loads of posts about this for a long time now. New releases built like you suggest are dropping users like flies in a Raid factory. When can this arguement die?
Once upon a time....
That is only because raiding is getting old.
Look at LOL ... nothnig but fighting pvp in the same map and the number of players increased and surpassed WOW in terms of players.
Look at the top 10 online games on xfire .. how many are combat focus? I doubt you can argue that combat is not a central popular gameplay.
While combat may draw in some or most new (or changing game) people, it is often the "fluff" that keeps them there.
I originally started EQ2 back when it first arrived some 8 years ago, and though I have tried other games, none have the overall depth of EQ2 for me. I have not tried any of the very new games, but of all the games I have looked at, none have the depth of crafting, housing, and other non-combat activities of EQ2.
Fluff is not for everyone - not everyone wants to be a home decorator, but in those games where it is highly developed it tends to keep a loyal fan base of it's own, with our without combat.
Do you actually have evidence to support that claim?
There are a long list of games people play for a long time, with nothing but combat. Diablo 1 & 2 are good examples. Even the third one is still up there in xfire ranking after 10 months.
SC2 is practically S Korea's national sport, as well as the first one. There is no fluff in SC .. it is just fight, fight and fight.
EQ2 is pretty small in the whole gaming market. I am sure there are those who play the SIMS a long time too .. but saying that "fluff" is "often" what keep people .... is just unsubstantiated, and don't gell with what we know about gaming.
Thats what the whole thread has been about, and every statistic says otherwise.
I did battle with ignorance today, and ignorance won.
To exercise power costs effort and demands courage. That is why so many fail to assert rights to which they are perfectly entitled - because a right is a kind of power but they are too lazy or too cowardly to exercise it. The virtues which cloak these faults are called patience and forbearance.
The problem is that many of the posters here are telling people that they shouldn't have what they want in a game. When extra activities are in a game they don't take away from the pure combat types. But some people are saying that they leave the game because there isn't enough to keep them interested. This means population drop off, etc. The numbers may be fine in a fiscal sense, but a growing amount of loss of satisfaction is occurring. If your familiar with economics you know that such things often have an inertia that changes markets.
still, the combat-only crowd says:
You don't need Tolstoy, you need Two and Half Men!
See how that doesn't work?
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
I'm pretty sure he meant work in the physics terms, effort applied over time.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
It looks like WOW is headed in that direction, with the core WOW game being the world that your characters are in, and various games added within that world. Imagine logging into WOW and saying, "Let's see... do I want to play a MOBA, Tactics, raid or RTS today?" and then whatever your answer you jsut teleport to a different place within World of Warcraft to go do it.
One login, one set of characters. No need to level up new characters for new games, no need to start amassing wealth again. All your games in one game with the character set you're already familiar with playing and that already have overflowing banks and wallets to throw at new gameplay.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre