Choices are always good ... except when your choice infringe on some others' choice.
In your example "Some players want to rescue other players, or capture them. Let them." .. that only works if it is consensual.
If i don't want to be captured, don't put me in that position.
Sure, it would be voluntary. As in you wanted to play a villain to someone else's hero.
Also, maybe you were captured by an NPC during Quest X, and another player later on Quest X finds you in a cage and rescues you. Some might like that, like many females I know.
My argument is, the whole "Players kinda work together to kill NPCs" has been done.
As long as there is a choice to opt out, i don't see a problem. As i said before choices are good. Personally i don't want to play a captured female .. but i have nothing against that choice.
What makes humans social is either the opportunity and time, such as down-time, to be social; or the requirement (game-difficulty) to be social. This isn't rocket science. Today's games have neither, and it is no surprise the communities are cesspools.
And today's game has neither because players choose lack of down-time and solo-able difficulty above socialization.
To some extent, it is inevitable because of competition. If you have a game with down-time and force grouping, many players will go somewhere else.
Fundamentally most players don't care much about community, and certainly not above gameplay fun. Their choice reflect that.
IMO.. There are ample reasons why MMO's seem less social then in the early days.. Of those reasons, the biggest one to me is the player base themselves.. When most of us old timers started with EQ or AC or whatever, it was a spin off of the RPG games we grew up with.. Those games such as AD&D were social games.. However today, I see more and more console players coming into the genre.. To them, mmo's are not social, but just another version of shoot em up games like Halo or Mortal Kombat..
2nd biggest issue is the design of the games themselves.. Whether it be speed of fighting, crafting or whatnot, games today have little social mechanics involved. During the peak of EQ, it was common for higher level characters to go to lower level areas and pass out buffs for favors, or just for the hell of it like I did at times.. In a way many of us players became the "task" NPC in a way and created content.. There was many of times I would offer buffs in return for bat wings, fish, leathers, ore.. etc etc.. During this time I chatted and socialized as well as the players that were helping.. Anyone remember being an EQ banker for other players? That is a social design mechanic.. Games back then were heavily designed for group reliance and interaction..
In the end, we have 2 types of players and it's impossible to design a game that fills both needs.... That is NOT to say that a company couldn't make changes between servers, promoting one to be more social then others.. WOW for example would be an easy game to offer both social and solo servers to accommodate either type of player.. I had beg and lobbied for that for years, but was always ignored.. oh well
In the end, we have 2 types of players and it's impossible to design a game that fills both needs.... That is NOT to say that a company couldn't make changes between servers, promoting one to be more social then others.. WOW for example would be an easy game to offer both social and solo servers to accommodate either type of player.. I had beg and lobbied for that for years, but was always ignored.. oh well
The question is "how many". It makes zero sense to create a social server only if 10 people ever use it.
Let me put it this way .. offering a social and a solo server is no different than offering the choice of fast travel, LFD, .... if players choose game over social, choose convenience over social .. what make you think that they will choose social, just because there is a server there. They can already choose to choose social today.
The game does not prevent you to stop and social. If no one else is interested, it is not game design issue.
A game doesn't have to be slow and boring to be social.
It seems that it does. We don't socialize unless we choose to, and if we have something else to do other than socialize, we don't choose it.
Your point is far more valid if you change 'we' to 'I'.
Ex-EQ player?
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
It's like going to a pick-up basketball game. If everyone shows up, plays the game and then leaves, then I supposed pick-up basketball isn't a social activity. But it's really up to the people participating in an activity to be social. Nothing is stopping those people from chatting while on the bench right?
I think it's funny that there's all this talk about downtime promoting social interaction while complaining about modern games. How come WoW isn't super social then? DPS has to wit in 10-20 minute queues for dungeons. Are they somehow not allowed to talk?
No, it's just that they're chatting with guildies or in vent speaking to them. Just because no one is sitting around talking to your lonely self doesn't mean there's no social interaction.
It's like going to a pick-up basketball game. If everyone shows up, plays the game and then leaves, then I supposed pick-up basketball isn't a social activity. But it's really up to the people participating in an activity to be social. Nothing is stopping those people from chatting while on the bench right?
I think it's funny that there's all this talk about downtime promoting social interaction while complaining about modern games. How come WoW isn't super social then? DPS has to wit in 10-20 minute queues for dungeons. Are they somehow not allowed to talk?
No, it's just that they're chatting with guildies or in vent speaking to them. Just because no one is sitting around talking to your lonely self doesn't mean there's no social interaction.
More likely, they're multitasking, talking to friends on Twitter or Facebook than even paying attention to the MMO that is keeping them waiting. They are being social, just not in a game talking to strangers they have nothing in common with.
In the end, we have 2 types of players and it's impossible to design a game that fills both needs.... That is NOT to say that a company couldn't make changes between servers, promoting one to be more social then others.. WOW for example would be an easy game to offer both social and solo servers to accommodate either type of player.. I had beg and lobbied for that for years, but was always ignored.. oh well
The question is "how many". It makes zero sense to create a social server only if 10 people ever use it.
Let me put it this way .. offering a social and a solo server is no different than offering the choice of fast travel, LFD, .... if players choose game over social, choose convenience over social .. what make you think that they will choose social, just because there is a server there. They can already choose to choose social today.
The game does not prevent you to stop and social. If no one else is interested, it is not game design issue.
You don't get it do you? The reason for a separation of server type goes to the saying of "Birds of a feather flock together".. In other words, people of like interest will normally gather together.. If the odds of being a social gamer is 1 in 5, or 1 in 10, whatever reasonable number you wish to use, having them spread out over dozens of servers would be better served allowing them to gather on to ONE server or a few.. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying I prefer group social climate, then a solo centric one..
I still fail to see why YOU always fight with others on their preferences.. GO PLAY your solo rpg game, no one is stopping you, and having people like me wanting a dedicated server has NO EFFECT upon you at all....... Please move on.. Have a good day
Social for me are first-most the dungeons. I don't have to talk to anyone but it feels like I have people when I'm in a party. Especially if my class is needed or wanted. Why I hate trinity - because if I want to archer or rogue I get the cold shoulder. No social when no one wants your skills.
Crafting can be social if done right.
PvP does NOT make me feel social. It makes me feel like a bully or someone's chew toy.
Just being online with others does NOT make me feel social. I hate quests and chat. Wish games would stop making questing mandatory. Exception are quest cutscenes. They feel more like watching a tv inside your game which feels fancy and nice. Really like it when I see my character I designed show up in a little mini movie. And then go talk about it on forums. Forums are a social aspect of the game even if they're not in game. Luv the forums.
MMOs are too easy nowadays, u use the stupid dungeon queue or w/e, u do the stupid raid/dungeon and that's it. You don't have to communicate. Give me a hard MMO without a dungeon finder thingy.
We are now led quickly to the "fun" with the game holding our hand. The difficulty was part of the MMOs fun as it was a challenge, the downtimes were part of the MMOs fun as you met new peeps.
RP did indeed make MMO's into a social world and still do if you find a good RP guild. In some ways that has been out gunned by social media, but that has replaced being social with those who have a like interest, to being social with those who like posing.
Originally posted by Rydeson ...would be better served allowing them to gather on to ONE server or a few.. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying I prefer group social climate, then a solo centric one..
Many many of us feel this way.
Originally posted by Rydeson I still fail to see why YOU always fight with others on their preferences..
Have you ever been somewhere with an annoying and repetitive background noise that your brain eventually filters out? MMORPG is no different.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
In the end, we have 2 types of players and it's impossible to design a game that fills both needs.... That is NOT to say that a company couldn't make changes between servers, promoting one to be more social then others.. WOW for example would be an easy game to offer both social and solo servers to accommodate either type of player.. I had beg and lobbied for that for years, but was always ignored.. oh well
The question is "how many". It makes zero sense to create a social server only if 10 people ever use it.
Let me put it this way .. offering a social and a solo server is no different than offering the choice of fast travel, LFD, .... if players choose game over social, choose convenience over social .. what make you think that they will choose social, just because there is a server there. They can already choose to choose social today.
The game does not prevent you to stop and social. If no one else is interested, it is not game design issue.
You don't get it do you? The reason for a separation of server type goes to the saying of "Birds of a feather flock together".. In other words, people of like interest will normally gather together.. If the odds of being a social gamer is 1 in 5, or 1 in 10, whatever reasonable number you wish to use, having them spread out over dozens of servers would be better served allowing them to gather on to ONE server or a few.. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying I prefer group social climate, then a solo centric one..
I still fail to see why YOU always fight with others on their preferences.. GO PLAY your solo rpg game, no one is stopping you, and having people like me wanting a dedicated server has NO EFFECT upon you at all....... Please move on.. Have a good day
Pointing out an issue is fighting?
And you ignore my question. If there are only 10 people who are like you ... is it worth it to create a server just for you guys?
BTW, of course i play solo RPG games. What do you think? I play MMO to socialize? If MMOs are not more and more solo RPG, why do you think i am here?
We are now led quickly to the "fun" with the game holding our hand. The difficulty was part of the MMOs fun as it was a challenge, the downtimes were part of the MMOs fun as you met new peeps.
RP did indeed make MMO's into a social world and still do if you find a good RP guild. In some ways that has been out gunned by social media, but that has replaced being social with those who have a like interest, to being social with those who like posing.
You mix up all the issues.
What does challenging have anything to do with social? There are plenty of challenging games that are not social, MMO and not-MMOs.
And what does down-time has anything to do with challenges? In fact, since by definition, during down-time, you don't get to do anything at all, it is not challenging. People avoid it because they don't want to be forced to social, and having nothing to do is not fun.
Originally posted by Algidity MMOs are too easy nowadays, u use the stupid dungeon queue or w/e, u do the stupid raid/dungeon and that's it. You don't have to communicate. Give me a hard MMO without a dungeon finder thingy.
More likely, they're multitasking, talking to friends on Twitter or Facebook than even paying attention to the MMO that is keeping them waiting. They are being social, just not in a game talking to strangers they have nothing in common with.
Yes. The point is that forced socialization is not desire by most. Looking at social within ONE game (or one server) is a limiting view.
I can call up, FB, twit, IM anyone i am friend's with. There is little reason to do it through a game. And if i happens to make a friend in a game, add him/her to my social network so i am not limited to only contact him through one game. Few plays only one game anyway.
We are now led quickly to the "fun" with the game holding our hand. The difficulty was part of the MMOs fun as it was a challenge, the downtimes were part of the MMOs fun as you met new peeps.
RP did indeed make MMO's into a social world and still do if you find a good RP guild. In some ways that has been out gunned by social media, but that has replaced being social with those who have a like interest, to being social with those who like posing.
You mix up all the issues.
What does challenging have anything to do with social? There are plenty of challenging games that are not social, MMO and not-MMOs.
And what does down-time has anything to do with challenges? In fact, since by definition, during down-time, you don't get to do anything at all, it is not challenging. People avoid it because they don't want to be forced to social, and having nothing to do is not fun.
Challenging has nothing to do with being social, I was painting a broader picture. Downtimes were not that long when we actually had downtimes and you met most other players when grouping. But they allowed for some chat, today you can just about squeeze in a "lol" if you are lucky.
In the end, we have 2 types of players and it's impossible to design a game that fills both needs.... That is NOT to say that a company couldn't make changes between servers, promoting one to be more social then others.. WOW for example would be an easy game to offer both social and solo servers to accommodate either type of player.. I had beg and lobbied for that for years, but was always ignored.. oh well
The question is "how many". It makes zero sense to create a social server only if 10 people ever use it.
Let me put it this way .. offering a social and a solo server is no different than offering the choice of fast travel, LFD, .... if players choose game over social, choose convenience over social .. what make you think that they will choose social, just because there is a server there. They can already choose to choose social today.
The game does not prevent you to stop and social. If no one else is interested, it is not game design issue.
You don't get it do you? The reason for a separation of server type goes to the saying of "Birds of a feather flock together".. In other words, people of like interest will normally gather together.. If the odds of being a social gamer is 1 in 5, or 1 in 10, whatever reasonable number you wish to use, having them spread out over dozens of servers would be better served allowing them to gather on to ONE server or a few.. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying I prefer group social climate, then a solo centric one..
I still fail to see why YOU always fight with others on their preferences.. GO PLAY your solo rpg game, no one is stopping you, and having people like me wanting a dedicated server has NO EFFECT upon you at all....... Please move on.. Have a good day
Pointing out an issue is fighting?
And you ignore my question. If there are only 10 people who are like you ... is it worth it to create a server just for you guys?
BTW, of course i play solo RPG games. What do you think? I play MMO to socialize? If MMOs are not more and more solo RPG, why do you think i am here?
Naaa there is no issue to point out.. Some of use enjoy group activity, and you just prefer to solo things.. You have your opinion and preference and we or I have ours.. I'm sure there are thousands out there like me, why do you think team sports are so popular these days? Every game has LFG to do instances and raids.. The issue is HOW is that done.. You like the easy way, and some of us enjoy the more social way.. Let me ask you this.. I'm sure we all know your answer, but I want to ask it anyways.. IF "LFD" was removed from your MMO's and no random instancing was available, would you still play the game?
Comments
As long as there is a choice to opt out, i don't see a problem. As i said before choices are good. Personally i don't want to play a captured female .. but i have nothing against that choice.
And today's game has neither because players choose lack of down-time and solo-able difficulty above socialization.
To some extent, it is inevitable because of competition. If you have a game with down-time and force grouping, many players will go somewhere else.
Fundamentally most players don't care much about community, and certainly not above gameplay fun. Their choice reflect that.
IMO.. There are ample reasons why MMO's seem less social then in the early days.. Of those reasons, the biggest one to me is the player base themselves.. When most of us old timers started with EQ or AC or whatever, it was a spin off of the RPG games we grew up with.. Those games such as AD&D were social games.. However today, I see more and more console players coming into the genre.. To them, mmo's are not social, but just another version of shoot em up games like Halo or Mortal Kombat..
2nd biggest issue is the design of the games themselves.. Whether it be speed of fighting, crafting or whatnot, games today have little social mechanics involved. During the peak of EQ, it was common for higher level characters to go to lower level areas and pass out buffs for favors, or just for the hell of it like I did at times.. In a way many of us players became the "task" NPC in a way and created content.. There was many of times I would offer buffs in return for bat wings, fish, leathers, ore.. etc etc.. During this time I chatted and socialized as well as the players that were helping.. Anyone remember being an EQ banker for other players? That is a social design mechanic.. Games back then were heavily designed for group reliance and interaction..
In the end, we have 2 types of players and it's impossible to design a game that fills both needs.... That is NOT to say that a company couldn't make changes between servers, promoting one to be more social then others.. WOW for example would be an easy game to offer both social and solo servers to accommodate either type of player.. I had beg and lobbied for that for years, but was always ignored.. oh well
If only we could take photos of our meals and somehow display them in a chat bubble in our favorite mmo.
Then the whole thread is moot. It isn't the game that's social, it's the people and the people have to CHOOSE to be social. If they don't, so what?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
The question is "how many". It makes zero sense to create a social server only if 10 people ever use it.
Let me put it this way .. offering a social and a solo server is no different than offering the choice of fast travel, LFD, .... if players choose game over social, choose convenience over social .. what make you think that they will choose social, just because there is a server there. They can already choose to choose social today.
The game does not prevent you to stop and social. If no one else is interested, it is not game design issue.
Your point is far more valid if you change 'we' to 'I'.
Ex-EQ player?
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
People have to make the effort to be social.
It's like going to a pick-up basketball game. If everyone shows up, plays the game and then leaves, then I supposed pick-up basketball isn't a social activity. But it's really up to the people participating in an activity to be social. Nothing is stopping those people from chatting while on the bench right?
I think it's funny that there's all this talk about downtime promoting social interaction while complaining about modern games. How come WoW isn't super social then? DPS has to wit in 10-20 minute queues for dungeons. Are they somehow not allowed to talk?
No, it's just that they're chatting with guildies or in vent speaking to them. Just because no one is sitting around talking to your lonely self doesn't mean there's no social interaction.
More likely, they're multitasking, talking to friends on Twitter or Facebook than even paying attention to the MMO that is keeping them waiting. They are being social, just not in a game talking to strangers they have nothing in common with.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
You don't get it do you? The reason for a separation of server type goes to the saying of "Birds of a feather flock together".. In other words, people of like interest will normally gather together.. If the odds of being a social gamer is 1 in 5, or 1 in 10, whatever reasonable number you wish to use, having them spread out over dozens of servers would be better served allowing them to gather on to ONE server or a few.. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying I prefer group social climate, then a solo centric one..
I still fail to see why YOU always fight with others on their preferences.. GO PLAY your solo rpg game, no one is stopping you, and having people like me wanting a dedicated server has NO EFFECT upon you at all....... Please move on.. Have a good day
Social for me are first-most the dungeons. I don't have to talk to anyone but it feels like I have people when I'm in a party. Especially if my class is needed or wanted. Why I hate trinity - because if I want to archer or rogue I get the cold shoulder. No social when no one wants your skills.
Crafting can be social if done right.
PvP does NOT make me feel social. It makes me feel like a bully or someone's chew toy.
Just being online with others does NOT make me feel social. I hate quests and chat. Wish games would stop making questing mandatory. Exception are quest cutscenes. They feel more like watching a tv inside your game which feels fancy and nice. Really like it when I see my character I designed show up in a little mini movie. And then go talk about it on forums. Forums are a social aspect of the game even if they're not in game. Luv the forums.
I was told by two separate people on these forums that if I wasn't chit chatting with strangers regularly then I shouldn't be playing MMOs.
http://forum.gloriavictisgame.com/member.php?action=register&referrer=2457
Now if you meant mmoRPG's, then it's the RPG factor and the fact that you need people to progress for yourself.
We are now led quickly to the "fun" with the game holding our hand. The difficulty was part of the MMOs fun as it was a challenge, the downtimes were part of the MMOs fun as you met new peeps.
RP did indeed make MMO's into a social world and still do if you find a good RP guild. In some ways that has been out gunned by social media, but that has replaced being social with those who have a like interest, to being social with those who like posing.
Many many of us feel this way.
Have you ever been somewhere with an annoying and repetitive background noise that your brain eventually filters out? MMORPG is no different.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Pointing out an issue is fighting?
And you ignore my question. If there are only 10 people who are like you ... is it worth it to create a server just for you guys?
BTW, of course i play solo RPG games. What do you think? I play MMO to socialize? If MMOs are not more and more solo RPG, why do you think i am here?
You mix up all the issues.
What does challenging have anything to do with social? There are plenty of challenging games that are not social, MMO and not-MMOs.
And what does down-time has anything to do with challenges? In fact, since by definition, during down-time, you don't get to do anything at all, it is not challenging. People avoid it because they don't want to be forced to social, and having nothing to do is not fun.
Why not just a hard MMO *with* a dungeon finder?
Yes. The point is that forced socialization is not desire by most. Looking at social within ONE game (or one server) is a limiting view.
I can call up, FB, twit, IM anyone i am friend's with. There is little reason to do it through a game. And if i happens to make a friend in a game, add him/her to my social network so i am not limited to only contact him through one game. Few plays only one game anyway.
Challenging has nothing to do with being social, I was painting a broader picture. Downtimes were not that long when we actually had downtimes and you met most other players when grouping. But they allowed for some chat, today you can just about squeeze in a "lol" if you are lucky.
Naaa there is no issue to point out.. Some of use enjoy group activity, and you just prefer to solo things.. You have your opinion and preference and we or I have ours.. I'm sure there are thousands out there like me, why do you think team sports are so popular these days? Every game has LFG to do instances and raids.. The issue is HOW is that done.. You like the easy way, and some of us enjoy the more social way.. Let me ask you this.. I'm sure we all know your answer, but I want to ask it anyways.. IF "LFD" was removed from your MMO's and no random instancing was available, would you still play the game?
Stop PuGing, and you won't spend nearly as much time worrying about what other people are up to.
You're social, right? You've got a big list of friends and a guild full of buddies, right?
What in the world are you doing in the PuG system anyway? Put together your own groups the old-fashioned way, and stop gnawing off your own limbs.
What's makes an Mmo social? The players.
No special formula in the making of an Mmo nowadays will change this fact.
Need.
If you don't need anyone you're going to be scarcely compelled to socialize, and it'll be even harder to convince others of it.