Years ago D&D Online had an amazing Social panel, Not sure if its the same now but :
You still had drop down boxes to pick your adventure, BUT it also had a type in space where you could write your intentions for what your looking for.
Players would write a paragraph making grouping less intimidating when reading it.....Can't think of an example right now but it REALLY made this issue much better !
In playing mmos like Vanilla WOW, EQ2, and Vanguard, where there were no cross realms nothing, players would spam chat for hours......I always thought this was silly
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS OPEN UP THE SOCIAL PANEL AND SEARCH
I always got groups in less than 10 minuets that way. First I would make sure there were many tanks, if not you simply were not going. Always ask tanks first ! Then healers.......Very easy. ...10 minuets no bull crap.
People don't watch the rolling chat....never did and never will.
Originally posted by delete5230 Lots of good stuff here.
However it seems many not all, feel anti social behavior with newer players is at fault. This is totally untrue !
Game design is at fault - Developers are under complete control of how an mmo can be played. This is not to say that developers can't give back freedom, BUT THEY CHOSE TO TAKE IT AWAY !
I have to ask, can you NOT chat/be sociable in today's MMOs due to mechanics/game design?
Some situations and mechanics make it more difficult, but there are still ways in which to socialize, if the other players are willing.
Once MMOs lack a chatbox, then I will agree with your "game design is at fault" stance.
However, if you are one of the players that can not be social unless you are forced to (like forced grouping), then you may believe this to be true. Is this the case?
But socializing is much more than being able to chat. It is also about playing the game with others, beeing influenced by others, trading, pvp, coop, even watching another player or tossing a buff to someone running by.. All interaction with other players. And that is made possible or limited by game fesign.
You're preaching to the choir here I usually say what you said to players who think "social interaction" involves only killing other players
However, other than TES:O's party members not showing up in some instanced areas (which was a bug, not by design), would you say that many, or few MMO's place limits on social interaction through game mechanics?
- I am influenced by others and can influence others, directly or indirectly every time I log in to any MMO. - I can think of some that do not allow trading between players, usually thanks to gold farmers. - Most MMOs have some form of PvP, though some do not. - I do not know if there is an MMO that does not allow for grouping (coop). - Is there an MMO where a player can not target another player for a buff if they wanted to? (One of my favorite activities, by the way.)
What I am saying is that most MMOs still allow for social interaction. Players play these MMOs and find social activities all of the time. However, the majority of MMO players today have no interest for social interaction, unless it is killing other players.
You also forgot one of my favorite social activities, emotes. Sure everyone knows about "/dance" and maybe "/rude", but how about "/clap", or "/bow", or "/grovel"? Emotes are the ultimate "waste of time"
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Nowadays you usually just have to push the LFD-button, go in, rush through and do not even talk. Buffs are mostly self-buffs, or aura like buffs. Trading is done by auction house. All in all everything is done to not have to communicate with others. Due to no downtimes communication is even more of an hindrance than a bonus. So game desing does its part in reducing player interaction.
and why is that? Because players view interdependencies as undesirable and dev respond. LFD is very popular.
Devs are just making games that people want to play.
Yes, it is the professionals who do not understand MMORPG design 101. A statement which makes perfect sense and can definitely withstand closer inspection.
Of course you couldn't be more wrong. But if people here truly understood MMORPG design 101, there would be no threads like this to amuse those who understand. Keep up the good work.
What is amusing are people that make statements, try to sound like they know what they are talking about, and yet do not offer any explanation. If you do know what you are talking about, explain how I am wrong with respect to your apparently profound riddle. If it has to do with the intention behind the "Free to Play" model, that still to this day does not apply to every MMORPG, as not all MMORPGs are "Free to Play" with Cash Shops having advantageous uses. That is the only "why developers did anything" that I am aware of, is "why developers went the free to play business model route." That point strictly comes down to exploitation of their customers to make more money. Meanwhile many players still scapegoat the "free to play" playerbase about the free to play business model, when the players had no impact on why it exists. The developers are the real guilty parties in that arena. Beyond that, I doubt you know anything more than what I have already stated, and that may be giving too much credit.
At least I'm not claiming I know better than the professionals who actually design these games. Now that's rich.
You are sadly all over the place, now blaming free to play out of all things.
Initially you were right in that players have only as much freedom can be placed into the game by the developers. But then you completely fail to acknowledge what is it that developers actually do when designing games. The game must have coherency, the game must have some sort of balance. It is only by knowing the variables (options) that developers insert into their game and understanding the ways said variables interact that developers can create a coherent, balanced game experience.
If the developers insert too many variables (choices) to the game, they will soon be faced with having too many variables to properly balance the game. Balance is the opposite of freedom, and it is this quest for balance that has made developers take away the freedom. Not completely, but enough to keep the number of variables and their interrelationships under control.
Of course you didn't understand this. You have never actually designed an MMO and seen the results. MMORPG devs know what happens when they aren't in control of the variables (having too many choices to control). The community looks for holes in the design and takes advantage of them in 2001 and in 2014. You cannot design anything properly in an environment where you have to guess what the community will do next. Yet there is nothing you can do but guess if you are not in control of the choices you have given the community. Games with more freedom are always subject to reduced balance and it is this reduced balance that the gamers find much worse than the elimination of freedom. The game that went beyond the norm in their balancing act is the most popular MMORPG to date.
Gamers chose balance over freedom. MMORPG devs know exactly how to bring about that balance. You on the other hand blame F2P for the reduced freedom. You missed the duck like a blind marksman.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
I only claim to have an actual strategy categories system which defines over 16 million "variables"... thus "categories"... of which does not include the "variables" within each category... It defines character skills, affinities, utilities, of combat, of harvesting, of crafting, of diplomacy... it further defines combat equipment, supplies, utilities, harvesting tools and gears, crafting tools and gears, diplomacy tools and gears... beyond that it still defines mass events and skill-triggered quests (yeah, not this "kill / collect x" or "go talk to / escort npc x" garbage) and even environments. And I can state that part about "skill-triggered quests" and the entire industry can steal that concept, they will need the headstart. It literally has more "variables" than any MMORPG I have ever seen yet. It literally is more complex than real life and is interpreted both from the perspective of nonfiction and fiction, yielding different possibilities from each perspective. So do excuse me when I do not "look up" to so called "professionals".
More complexity is not more interesting or more fun. At least the professionals know that.
Have I now? Then only time will tell. Challenge Accepted.
PS. Oh but I have designed everything to finalize that MMO that I have not designed. I already know what the results will be when that time comes, and it will come. I already know what will happen after it launches, and why. This in particular is IF the industry remains as is, which I suspect will be the case.
You boast at the amount of variables in this MMO/RPG project of yours. Yet, you have not given any consideration to the most important part of being a game designer - the ordeal by fire - letting thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people pick your game apart, looking for any single flaws in your design. Adamant confidence with zero actual testing done to support said confidence (not even other designers)? The only difference between you and all the other armchair designers is you have managed to take the longest to dabble with your concept without having it subject to the reality outside your head. Sorry if I'm not convinced.
Let me guess, it's probably the same deal with your quantum gravity solution. You are nothing until you allow your creation to be susceptible to the criticism of others. Only then will your creation truly be tested.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
oh dear. So no data modelling knowledge, no real understanding of networking architecture, application architecture, behavioural patterns, structural patterns - it goes on im afraid. nothing wrong with some fantasy game designer roleplay however (and i dont mean that in a bad way)
If you really want to design a system, first consider testability (you know that any good developer writes more tests than code right?) Then perhaps extensability and immutability (critical for a multi user system no?)
Considered theese in your design?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
oh dear. So no data modelling knowledge, no real understanding of networking architecture, application architecture, behavioural patterns, structural patterns - it goes on im afraid. nothing wrong with some fantasy game designer roleplay however (and i dont mean that in a bad way)
If you really want to design a system, first consider testability (you know that any good developer writes more tests than code right?) Then perhaps extensability and immutability (critical for a multi user system no?)
Considered theese in your design?
People often don't realize that being smart is not enough. Recreating the wheel by trial and error has been known to be highly inefficient for a long long time.
That is why people go to college and graduate school.
Solocentric design in MMOs I think is one of the big reasons we don't see community now in MMOs like we did years ago, but it's not the only reason. MMORPGs arose out of the PnP Desktop Gaming community as well as the RPG Gamers and the Programmers, it was a fusion of all these People and their ideas. Community to us back then was mostly face to face with some online comms, and People still considered "Socializing" to be a face to face in person activity. MMORPGs where made back then with that a foundation, Grouping in MMOs was considered natural and preferred, not inconvenient. We grouped in PnP Desktop Games and in MUDs/MOOs so we grouped in MMORPGs.
Now MMOs aren't made for grouping, not really. They are made so the Player only really groups with one other ... the Cash Shop (The MMO Devs/Publisher prefers Players rely on them instead of relying on other Players the way a MMO should work). To top that off most Players now want to play MMOs solo.
Short version: The Players NOW are nothing like the Players THEN. Myself included. Players now do not play games for the same reasons, they don't want the same things, they don't live life and interact with other People the same way as we did years ago.
Hypothetical situation to illuminate my point: If EA Mythic were to reLaunch Dark Age of Camelot with the ORIGINAL Code/Game Features/Races/Classes/etc. (updated only for the current PCs) it would fall on it's face because the Players that made the original launch so cool and enjoyable as a community have not only moved on in life but forgot why they played D&D and why they sought out DAoC in the first place. Even if all us original Players came back the community would be a pale shadow of what it was then.
I think it's quite impossible for us to find the same community experience we had back then because we have changed as individuals and as a Society. We are not the same People anymore.
And to me that's the REAL depressing part of this. I personally think we were better back than on many levels as a species than we are now. As much as I long for a MMO with a community like we had years ago I know it's just a dream that this Society now can't make come true.
Yes because forcing people to group is sure way to encourage socializing.
Not only does forced grouping encourage socialising, it is the principle of evolution. We are social creatures because we are more powerful as a group than as an individual.
There are many species that don't live in groups, these species are also not social and tend to have very few ways to communicate.
The word "force" does not have to have a negative connotation. A game that encourages grouping and puts in the right dynamics that create a social fabric in the game, like EQ, end up with a very strong community.
An MMO without a community is no longer an MMO, it's a big single player game. Many MMORPG put in the ORPG but forget to nourish the Massive Multiplayer part.
No one has an issue if someone wants to play an online RPG, but don't call them MMORPG, because they're not.
Regarding the negative connotation some are giving to forced grouping, which is unjustified.
Many places in real life force you to group. Trains, subways, schools, restaurants, movie theathers, theme parks, work...all of these places force you to get along with people and to behave in a certain way.
There is nothing wrong with this, there is nothing wrong with an environment forcing people to interact and get along, in fact it is in all of those places that socialising happens.
For socialising to happen, a set of rules that are adhered to are crucial. When you go out in public and interact with people, you are forced to adhere to a set of accepted standards, standards of mutual respect and these standards were set up to encourage dialogue and socializing instead of animosity towards each other.
These standards existed in games like Everquest too, a set of guidelines enforced by the community and a system that encouraged grouping and community building. There is nothing wrong with some rules here and there that promote the type of community you would want to be part of.
Regarding the negative connotation some are giving to forced grouping, which is unjustified.
Many places in real life force you to group. Trains, subways, schools, restaurants, movie theathers, theme parks, work...all of these places force you to get along with people and to behave in a certain way.
There is nothing wrong with this, there is nothing wrong with an environment forcing people to interact and get along, in fact it is in all of those places that socialising happens.
So when I'm in town using the swift travel/auction house/food vendors I'm actually doing group content as there is other players around?
I don't class what you state as group activities. I like group activities with organization and team work.
yup its common sense, community gaming is the reason for an MMO's existance therefore you should expect it incentivise and reward grouping, otherwise its a confused poorly designed single player game that has to be compromised by other peoples goals.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Regarding the negative connotation some are giving to forced grouping, which is unjustified.
Many places in real life force you to group. Trains, subways, schools, restaurants, movie theathers, theme parks, work...all of these places force you to get along with people and to behave in a certain way.
There is nothing wrong with this, there is nothing wrong with an environment forcing people to interact and get along, in fact it is in all of those places that socialising happens.
So when I'm in town using the swift travel/auction house/food vendors I'm actually doing group content as there is other players around?
I don't class what you state as group activities. I like group activities with organization and team work.
strawman. in a game that rewards group activities you are not 'forced' to travel together, or auction at the same time or go to the vendor at the same time. It is however more interesting and fun going to a busy town with a bit of atmosphere to do your shopping isnt it. The point stands, MMO's are deisgned with community in mind, it is the reason for the MMO's existance.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Comments
Social panel WORKS in every mmo :
Years ago D&D Online had an amazing Social panel, Not sure if its the same now but :
You still had drop down boxes to pick your adventure, BUT it also had a type in space where you could write your intentions for what your looking for.
Players would write a paragraph making grouping less intimidating when reading it.....Can't think of an example right now but it REALLY made this issue much better !
In playing mmos like Vanilla WOW, EQ2, and Vanguard, where there were no cross realms nothing, players would spam chat for hours......I always thought this was silly
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS OPEN UP THE SOCIAL PANEL AND SEARCH
I always got groups in less than 10 minuets that way. First I would make sure there were many tanks, if not you simply were not going. Always ask tanks first ! Then healers.......Very easy. ...10 minuets no bull crap.
People don't watch the rolling chat....never did and never will.
However, other than TES:O's party members not showing up in some instanced areas (which was a bug, not by design), would you say that many, or few MMO's place limits on social interaction through game mechanics?
- I am influenced by others and can influence others, directly or indirectly every time I log in to any MMO.
- I can think of some that do not allow trading between players, usually thanks to gold farmers.
- Most MMOs have some form of PvP, though some do not.
- I do not know if there is an MMO that does not allow for grouping (coop).
- Is there an MMO where a player can not target another player for a buff if they wanted to? (One of my favorite activities, by the way.)
What I am saying is that most MMOs still allow for social interaction. Players play these MMOs and find social activities all of the time. However, the majority of MMO players today have no interest for social interaction, unless it is killing other players.
You also forgot one of my favorite social activities, emotes. Sure everyone knows about "/dance" and maybe "/rude", but how about "/clap", or "/bow", or "/grovel"? Emotes are the ultimate "waste of time"
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
and why is that? Because players view interdependencies as undesirable and dev respond. LFD is very popular.
Devs are just making games that people want to play.
False analysis.
I do not need to interract directly with other players, yet there can be interdependence.
ie. EVE Online - every player is dependent on other players, yet there is no need to talk nor team up with anyone ever.
LFD is simple convenience - less hussle with setting a group up for dungeon raid.
The "communication" - spaming chat with trade offers or looking for party, has always been a hindrance. Luckily it got fixed.
At least I'm not claiming I know better than the professionals who actually design these games. Now that's rich.
You are sadly all over the place, now blaming free to play out of all things.
Initially you were right in that players have only as much freedom can be placed into the game by the developers. But then you completely fail to acknowledge what is it that developers actually do when designing games. The game must have coherency, the game must have some sort of balance. It is only by knowing the variables (options) that developers insert into their game and understanding the ways said variables interact that developers can create a coherent, balanced game experience.
If the developers insert too many variables (choices) to the game, they will soon be faced with having too many variables to properly balance the game. Balance is the opposite of freedom, and it is this quest for balance that has made developers take away the freedom. Not completely, but enough to keep the number of variables and their interrelationships under control.
Of course you didn't understand this. You have never actually designed an MMO and seen the results. MMORPG devs know what happens when they aren't in control of the variables (having too many choices to control). The community looks for holes in the design and takes advantage of them in 2001 and in 2014. You cannot design anything properly in an environment where you have to guess what the community will do next. Yet there is nothing you can do but guess if you are not in control of the choices you have given the community. Games with more freedom are always subject to reduced balance and it is this reduced balance that the gamers find much worse than the elimination of freedom. The game that went beyond the norm in their balancing act is the most popular MMORPG to date.
Gamers chose balance over freedom. MMORPG devs know exactly how to bring about that balance. You on the other hand blame F2P for the reduced freedom. You missed the duck like a blind marksman.
How about the popularity of solo content? That is the pinnacle of no dependency on others.
More complexity is not more interesting or more fun. At least the professionals know that.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
You boast at the amount of variables in this MMO/RPG project of yours. Yet, you have not given any consideration to the most important part of being a game designer - the ordeal by fire - letting thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people pick your game apart, looking for any single flaws in your design. Adamant confidence with zero actual testing done to support said confidence (not even other designers)? The only difference between you and all the other armchair designers is you have managed to take the longest to dabble with your concept without having it subject to the reality outside your head. Sorry if I'm not convinced.
Let me guess, it's probably the same deal with your quantum gravity solution. You are nothing until you allow your creation to be susceptible to the criticism of others. Only then will your creation truly be tested.
oh dear. So no data modelling knowledge, no real understanding of networking architecture, application architecture, behavioural patterns, structural patterns - it goes on im afraid. nothing wrong with some fantasy game designer roleplay however (and i dont mean that in a bad way)
If you really want to design a system, first consider testability (you know that any good developer writes more tests than code right?) Then perhaps extensability and immutability (critical for a multi user system no?)
Considered theese in your design?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
People often don't realize that being smart is not enough. Recreating the wheel by trial and error has been known to be highly inefficient for a long long time.
That is why people go to college and graduate school.
I would like to add to the original discussion.
Solocentric design in MMOs I think is one of the big reasons we don't see community now in MMOs like we did years ago, but it's not the only reason. MMORPGs arose out of the PnP Desktop Gaming community as well as the RPG Gamers and the Programmers, it was a fusion of all these People and their ideas. Community to us back then was mostly face to face with some online comms, and People still considered "Socializing" to be a face to face in person activity. MMORPGs where made back then with that a foundation, Grouping in MMOs was considered natural and preferred, not inconvenient. We grouped in PnP Desktop Games and in MUDs/MOOs so we grouped in MMORPGs.
Now MMOs aren't made for grouping, not really. They are made so the Player only really groups with one other ... the Cash Shop (The MMO Devs/Publisher prefers Players rely on them instead of relying on other Players the way a MMO should work). To top that off most Players now want to play MMOs solo.
Short version: The Players NOW are nothing like the Players THEN. Myself included. Players now do not play games for the same reasons, they don't want the same things, they don't live life and interact with other People the same way as we did years ago.
Hypothetical situation to illuminate my point: If EA Mythic were to reLaunch Dark Age of Camelot with the ORIGINAL Code/Game Features/Races/Classes/etc. (updated only for the current PCs) it would fall on it's face because the Players that made the original launch so cool and enjoyable as a community have not only moved on in life but forgot why they played D&D and why they sought out DAoC in the first place. Even if all us original Players came back the community would be a pale shadow of what it was then.
I think it's quite impossible for us to find the same community experience we had back then because we have changed as individuals and as a Society. We are not the same People anymore.
And to me that's the REAL depressing part of this. I personally think we were better back than on many levels as a species than we are now. As much as I long for a MMO with a community like we had years ago I know it's just a dream that this Society now can't make come true.
Not only does forced grouping encourage socialising, it is the principle of evolution. We are social creatures because we are more powerful as a group than as an individual.
There are many species that don't live in groups, these species are also not social and tend to have very few ways to communicate.
The word "force" does not have to have a negative connotation. A game that encourages grouping and puts in the right dynamics that create a social fabric in the game, like EQ, end up with a very strong community.
An MMO without a community is no longer an MMO, it's a big single player game. Many MMORPG put in the ORPG but forget to nourish the Massive Multiplayer part.
No one has an issue if someone wants to play an online RPG, but don't call them MMORPG, because they're not.
Regarding the negative connotation some are giving to forced grouping, which is unjustified.
Many places in real life force you to group. Trains, subways, schools, restaurants, movie theathers, theme parks, work...all of these places force you to get along with people and to behave in a certain way.
There is nothing wrong with this, there is nothing wrong with an environment forcing people to interact and get along, in fact it is in all of those places that socialising happens.
For socialising to happen, a set of rules that are adhered to are crucial. When you go out in public and interact with people, you are forced to adhere to a set of accepted standards, standards of mutual respect and these standards were set up to encourage dialogue and socializing instead of animosity towards each other.
These standards existed in games like Everquest too, a set of guidelines enforced by the community and a system that encouraged grouping and community building. There is nothing wrong with some rules here and there that promote the type of community you would want to be part of.
Grouping involves some kind of mutuallbeneficial activity.
So when I'm in town using the swift travel/auction house/food vendors I'm actually doing group content as there is other players around?
I don't class what you state as group activities. I like group activities with organization and team work.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
strawman. in a game that rewards group activities you are not 'forced' to travel together, or auction at the same time or go to the vendor at the same time. It is however more interesting and fun going to a busy town with a bit of atmosphere to do your shopping isnt it. The point stands, MMO's are deisgned with community in mind, it is the reason for the MMO's existance.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D