This is such a silly post. Again all you say is words that are meant to insult and belittle old games without any real proof.
I covered a fair amount more then just aggro in my post and a could come up with more then that I'm sure. I'm generally just to lazy to do so.
You have yet to prove this amazing skill that current MMOs take. The skill that is so complex that it can't be solved via math in a simple manner for an example. In reality it is not complex. You are guided on a direct path from start to finish, told where to go, and told what to do. There are not skills involved other then being able to click a few buttons at the right time in some battles at the end of the game when you say the game is supposedly harder (more skill required) than any MMO that ever existed (still not proven).
The truth is there was a lot more you had to deal with then Aggro in older MMOs. There was also a lot more to deal with then just grinding. As I said in my post already (via math) is that there were many factors that contirbuted the fact that it at least somewhat diffuclt (not rocket science) to level up and accomplish things. You had to have a lot of basic human skills to get anywhere in the game without rage quiting. Generally people will come up with a lot of excuses for their quiting to make themsleves feel better about having done it. The truth is they just didn't have certain skills required to make it to the end of the game let alone beat some of the most difficult bosses in events that required massive teamwork and patience.
I don't need you to reply as I'm sure you will right the following again.
Skills are not patience, general problem solving, or anything that isn't almost instantly solvable (wast of time for you I know).
Old games were simply grind
Developers were to lazy to put in items and content
Games today require so much skill to beat a monster it baffles the mind.
Figuring out where to go (traveling) is not a skill (problem solving). It's a waste of time.
Aggro is so simple it's been removed from current games (I'm sure that is the reason ).
More people playing games means it's harder. (A grand concept, but I think it's the opposite).
There is probably something I missed in there, but I believe I have refuted all those points with mathematics, but it was generally ignored or not accepted because you seem to have a certain notion you will not give up regardless if it's wrong or not.
I've often posted this warlock rotation as a concrete example of how modern MMORPGs take skill. That rotation takes a while to completely master, and then on top of that bosses are deliberately designed to disrupt the rotation (you almost never get to just sit there and do a pure rotation all fight without being disrupted by fire, spell interrupts, changing targets, etc.) Whether you feel that much depth "baffles the mind" is up to your subjective perception, but all I've ever claimed is that clearly modern MMORPGs involve more skill than early ones.
I never said it can't be solved by math. But I'm not going to astound you all by typing out the complete mathematical solution to every boss fight -- that'd be almost as involved as showing the mathematical solution to chess in a forum post.
I didn't ignore your list: I described how the majority fell neatly into one of those three categories.
Let's not pretend aggro was something it wasn't. It was a radius, social aggro, a threat list, and a few abilities which interacted with that threat list, and the overall system was not significantly deeper than what we have in games nowadays. Certainly threat multipliers for tanks nowadays are much higher than they used to be, but that's because we understand that high-geared DPS having their DPS limited by their tank's gearing was a fundamentally flawed design that deserved fixing (your raid's DPS shouldn't be gated entirely on its tanks; that's stupid.) Modern games basically have the majority of depth you're going to get out of an aggro system, minus the things the industry learned didn't pan out well (and were pruned out.) But the focus of modern games is in the combat itself, not in managing how many mobs you're fighting at once.
Your list of things I would "right" is hit and miss, but a lot of it feels pretty off-topic.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
In otherwords, you agree with myself and Flyte27, and disagree with axehilt (sadly, an mmorpg developer who is either afraid or ashamed to say which company he works for).
I'm not a MMORPG developer. I work in other game genres. I don't reveal my company because people aren't rational, and are unable to tell the difference between a company and an individual. Since I enjoy conversation (especially spreading knowledge of game design and the industry) I don't reveal my company. So the decision is calm and rational, it's not about fear or shame.
As an example of people behaving irrationally:
Flyte created an imaginary version of Axehilt that 'said some things.'
The other poster disagreed with those things said by the imaginary character.
You're claiming the other poster disagrees with me. (When he's actually disagreeing with the imaginary character.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
In current MMOs there are far less decisions to make.
Ah yes, it's true those old MMORPGs had important decisions to make, like "where are the next best XP/hour mobs to grind ?".
That's one of the decisions in many cases, but at least it is a decision you had to make. It may not seem so simple when you don't know where to go. That is one of many simple factors that add to up to something more complex.
Most people didn't decide this on their own as there were usually guides listed on the web as to the best places to farm. So, no, usually you were just following the crowd on this one.
Exactly. The best spots were known, and everybody was going there.
Generally there were no guides in those days. I recall for Everquest there was allakhazam and that was not always easy to read. It was made up almost entirely by fan data and comments (another simple thing that made it more complex). Generally all you had was word of mouth in game or on message boards, but most people just went out and explored. Sometimes the best spot for exp was already taken and you had to decide where else to go. Not all people were interested in the best spot as there generally was a variety of different places to go level up for a level range.
Made up by fan data and comments... you mean, just like WIKIes and WOWhead and all other fansites today ?
And nowadays, neither are all the people interested in the fastest way to level... nothing changed.
The only thing that changed is that games no longer confuse complexity and difficulty with tedium. Grinding 1000 mobs to gain a level, with the risk of losing all the xp you gained if you happen to fall asleep because of boredom, is neither difficult nor complex, it's just tedious.
Not true at all. I've already went over the many different factors that made it more difficult. You just like to repeat the same basic thing like many others here. Old = tedium = boring. You just ignore what I've said and what I've written just like others here. I'd imagine this is a good example of why games have been made to require no skill to play other then pushing some buttons to win at combat. Basically you don't have patience to read or demonstrate your point with facts. Thus you would have likely been the one to quit the game and are happy with the ease of today's games. There is nothing wrong with that as there are many such as yourself. Many people like to play games where they have no real decisions to make.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
This is such a silly post. Again all you say is words that are meant to insult and belittle old games without any real proof.
I covered a fair amount more then just aggro in my post and a could come up with more then that I'm sure. I'm generally just to lazy to do so.
You have yet to prove this amazing skill that current MMOs take. The skill that is so complex that it can't be solved via math in a simple manner for an example. In reality it is not complex. You are guided on a direct path from start to finish, told where to go, and told what to do. There are not skills involved other then being able to click a few buttons at the right time in some battles at the end of the game when you say the game is supposedly harder (more skill required) than any MMO that ever existed (still not proven).
The truth is there was a lot more you had to deal with then Aggro in older MMOs. There was also a lot more to deal with then just grinding. As I said in my post already (via math) is that there were many factors that contirbuted the fact that it at least somewhat diffuclt (not rocket science) to level up and accomplish things. You had to have a lot of basic human skills to get anywhere in the game without rage quiting. Generally people will come up with a lot of excuses for their quiting to make themsleves feel better about having done it. The truth is they just didn't have certain skills required to make it to the end of the game let alone beat some of the most difficult bosses in events that required massive teamwork and patience.
I don't need you to reply as I'm sure you will right the following again.
Skills are not patience, general problem solving, or anything that isn't almost instantly solvable (wast of time for you I know).
Old games were simply grind
Developers were to lazy to put in items and content
Games today require so much skill to beat a monster it baffles the mind.
Figuring out where to go (traveling) is not a skill (problem solving). It's a waste of time.
Aggro is so simple it's been removed from current games (I'm sure that is the reason ).
More people playing games means it's harder. (A grand concept, but I think it's the opposite).
There is probably something I missed in there, but I believe I have refuted all those points with mathematics, but it was generally ignored or not accepted because you seem to have a certain notion you will not give up regardless if it's wrong or not.
I've often posted this warlock rotation as a concrete example of how modern MMORPGs take skill. That rotation takes a while to completely master, and then on top of that bosses are deliberately designed to disrupt the rotation (you almost never get to just sit there and do a pure rotation all fight without being disrupted by fire, spell interrupts, changing targets, etc.) Whether you feel that much depth "baffles the mind" is up to your subjective perception, but all I've ever claimed is that clearly modern MMORPGs involve more skill than early ones.
I never said it can't be solved by math. But I'm not going to astound you all by typing out the complete mathematical solution to every boss fight -- that'd be almost as involved as showing the mathematical solution to chess in a forum post.
I didn't ignore your list: I described how the majority fell neatly into one of those three categories.
Let's not pretend aggro was something it wasn't. It was a radius, social aggro, a threat list, and a few abilities which interacted with that threat list, and the overall system was not significantly deeper than what we have in games nowadays. Certainly threat multipliers for tanks nowadays are much higher than they used to be, but that's because we understand that high-geared DPS having their DPS limited by their tank's gearing was a fundamentally flawed design that deserved fixing (your raid's DPS shouldn't be gated entirely on its tanks; that's stupid.) Modern games basically have the majority of depth you're going to get out of an aggro system, minus the things the industry learned didn't pan out well (and were pruned out.) But the focus of modern games is in the combat itself, not in managing how many mobs you're fighting at once.
Your list of things I would "right" is hit and miss, but a lot of it feels pretty off-topic.
It appears to me that the builds you showed for Warlock were endgame builds using different talent trees. Generally you can switch between builds in WoW now if I recall instead of being locked into one build. Most games have a fairly complex rotation of skills to use. They always have. In older games you would also have to be a lot more careful about drawing aggro off the tank. This means you didn't just have to worry about rotations of skills, but making sure it was done at the right time without an indicator to flash and tell you your drawing to much aggro. It is also as I've stated that generally leveling is easy. You don't have any resistance on the way up. There is no way you can possible fail to gain a level or even go backwards if you are not a good player. You are generally insulated from failure and anyone else having an impact on your game. You are guided through the game, shown what to do, and where to go. Basically you don't need to solve any problems except how to master your rotation at endgame. In WoW they have macros (something older games like EQ didn't really have) that will often do most of the work for you (in case you suck). Either way basing a games difficulty simple on endgame combat is silly IMO. Regardless leveling was definitely harder in old games. I've shown the math and there were people who actually went backwards in level in may cases I saw in person. I even lost levels myself at times. This was all because of the different factors that went into making the world less then friendly for the player, but more interesting in many ways.
2) You shared your account with 2 ppl so as a team you could have the best character.
3) If you died you were so screwed.......
What else...?
Yes, i remember (not so glory) days when cars did not have air conditioning, no servo breaks, ... and I do not miss at all that times. Except for the fact I was much younger then. :-)
2) You shared your account with 2 ppl so as a team you could have the best character.
3) If you died you were so screwed.......
What else...?
Yes, i remember (not so glory) days when cars did not have air conditioning, no servo breaks, ... and I do not miss at all that times. Except for the fact I was much younger then. :-)
When cars didn't have air?
Are you like 59?
"Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
2) You shared your account with 2 ppl so as a team you could have the best character.
3) If you died you were so screwed.......
What else...?
Yes, i remember (not so glory) days when cars did not have air conditioning, no servo breaks, ... and I do not miss at all that times. Except for the fact I was much younger then. :-)
When cars didn't have air?
Are you like 59?
I learned to drive on a double clutching 3/4 ton flatbed pickup. It didn't have air. I am 60.
Are you like 14?
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
2) You shared your account with 2 ppl so as a team you could have the best character.
3) If you died you were so screwed.......
What else...?
Yes, i remember (not so glory) days when cars did not have air conditioning, no servo breaks, ... and I do not miss at all that times. Except for the fact I was much younger then. :-)
When cars didn't have air?
Are you like 59?
I learned to drive on a double clutching 3/4 ton flatbed pickup. It didn't have air. I am 60.
Are you like 14?
I'm in my 30's..
Did the f--ker have air vents?
"Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
2) You shared your account with 2 ppl so as a team you could have the best character.
3) If you died you were so screwed.......
What else...?
Yes, i remember (not so glory) days when cars did not have air conditioning, no servo breaks, ... and I do not miss at all that times. Except for the fact I was much younger then. :-)
When cars didn't have air?
Are you like 59?
I learned to drive on a double clutching 3/4 ton flatbed pickup. It didn't have air. I am 60.
Are you like 14?
I'm in my 30's..
Did the f--ker have air vents?
Air vents and a moveable windshield. Couldn't speed in it at all (55 mph tops), but it could've pulled houses off their foundations. 1947 International Harvester PU. Cool in a retro diesel-punk style.
But on topic, I didn't play the equivalent antique MMOs. Intentionally.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
In the "glory days" MMORPGs were more characterized by their timesinks than really being all that difficult. Their combat was fairly trivial to master, because it was usually quite shallow. While ostensibly a mob's HP and DPS might be balanced to make the DPS race tighter than the easier content in modern games, the challenge wasn't really centered around combat skill so much as avoiding getting into a fight you couldn't manage.
Because combat in today's MMORPG's is so much more involved and harder. Leroy into a group of mobs and practically 1 shoot them all while taking minimal damage. Gain a level. Please.
It appears to me that the builds you showed for Warlock were endgame builds using different talent trees. Generally you can switch between builds in WoW now if I recall instead of being locked into one build. Most games have a fairly complex rotation of skills to use. They always have. In older games you would also have to be a lot more careful about drawing aggro off the tank. This means you didn't just have to worry about rotations of skills, but making sure it was done at the right time without an indicator to flash and tell you your drawing to much aggro. It is also as I've stated that generally leveling is easy. You don't have any resistance on the way up. There is no way you can possible fail to gain a level or even go backwards if you are not a good player. You are generally insulated from failure and anyone else having an impact on your game. You are guided through the game, shown what to do, and where to go. Basically you don't need to solve any problems except how to master your rotation at endgame. In WoW they have macros (something older games like EQ didn't really have) that will often do most of the work for you (in case you suck). Either way basing a games difficulty simple on endgame combat is silly IMO. Regardless leveling was definitely harder in old games. I've shown the math and there were people who actually went backwards in level in may cases I saw in person. I even lost levels myself at times. This was all because of the different factors that went into making the world less then friendly for the player, but more interesting in many ways.
Not sure what talent-switching has to do with the depth of combat.
Games have not "always" had complex rotations. In all the threads I've posted that warlock rotation asking for anyone to cite evidence of rotations as deep or deeper there has been precisely one class shown to be more complex (Lancers from FFXIV.) You won't find a similarly complicated guide for rotations in other games, because those other games have shallower combat. Please do feel free to look! I think the most compelling argument for my case would be for you to try to find evidence that I'm wrong and fail to find it.
It was already pointed out how being limited by your tank's gear was a bad design. In modern games aggro/threat still both exist as a mechanics, and still bring most of their depth. So why try to claim it was exclusive to early games?
You could use a computer to play chess for you. Does that make chess a shallow game, or can we agree that macros (having a computer play a MMORPG for you) don't make MMORPGs shallow?
You've only shown math that leveling was time-consuming in early games. Nobody's arguing against that. In fact that's the basis of my argument that they weren't hard games (they were only timesink-intensive games.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Originally posted by Kaledren Because combat in today's MMORPG's is so much more involved and harder. Leroy into a group of mobs and practically 1 shoot them all while taking minimal damage. Gain a level. Please.
Feel free to catch up on the conversation, including the points made in this last page or two regarding how combat is objectively deeper in WOW/FFXIV than in earlier MMORPGs.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The more I think about MMOs in the past, the more I realize it was only the multitude of new gameplay experiences that made them so glorious. The actual gameplay wasn't superior to today's, but today I don't get nearly as excited or thrilled playing them when there isn't much that is new and original.
Originally posted by Axehilt Originally posted by VardahothIn otherwords, you agree with myself and Flyte27, and disagree with axehilt (sadly, an mmorpg developer who is either afraid or ashamed to say which company he works for).
I'm not a MMORPG developer. I work in other game genres. I don't reveal my company because people aren't rational, and are unable to tell the difference between a company and an individual. Since I enjoy conversation (especially spreading knowledge of game design and the industry) I don't reveal my company. So the decision is calm and rational, it's not about fear or shame.
As an example of people behaving irrationally:
Flyte created an imaginary version of Axehilt that 'said some things.'
The other poster disagreed with those things said by the imaginary character. You're claiming the other poster disagrees with me. (When he's actually disagreeing with the imaginary character.)
That's called a straw man argument (if it's true). . . Axe, I've seen you suggest 'skill' equates to game difficulty. I agree, the more skill a raid requires; the more difficult it is. However, if you had a much harder time getting the gear and levels necessary to even attempt that raid; wouldn't that game be considered game more difficult? I imagine you'd consider that 'more tedious.' . . Sounds like you are a console gamer at heart. I am an RPG player at heart. Of course we'll disagree on gaming.
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
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard ...My point is to remind those who look at those old games has some kind of holy grail of awesomeness, some flawless gems, that those game had many, many bad mechanics...
And our point is that we disagree with you entirely. The mechanics were sound and drew in the type of folks I enjoy spending time with; unlike the zergy folks of today. I think we agree to disagree even if we enjoy debating how much more correct our opinions are.
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
It's illogical and incorrect that all new games at worse than all old games. Anecdotally you can look at individual games and assert x is better than y ofc if you play that game.
What's more likely :
on average developers continue to become more experienced and produce better quality taking advantage of new tech. Some of those original players don't like the new games.
On average developers get continually worse over time and fail to take advantage of new tech. Every single new game is worse than old games.
Eneough said.
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
That's called a straw man argument (if it's true).
Axe, I've seen you suggest 'skill' equates to game difficulty. I agree, the more skill a raid requires; the more difficult it is. However, if you had a much harder time getting the gear and levels necessary to even attempt that raid; wouldn't that game be considered game more difficult? I imagine you'd consider that 'more tedious.'
Sounds like you are a console gamer at heart. I am an RPG player at heart. Of course we'll disagree on gaming.
"Much harder time" implies skill-requiring challenges, so that wouldn't be tedious at all.
Tedium comes from things which require a lot of time, but don't provide a lot of fun. So that would only be the case if the prerequisite gear/level required a lot of time, but not a lot of skill. Which of course is place where WOW could be improved, but early MMORPGs were much worse because you never really got out of the timesink mire.
I've been a PC gamer and an RPG gamer since Frogger and Ultima 3 on the C64. If you were a PC gamer anywhere near the long, you'd understand that timesink-intense gameplay only surfaced around the time games (MMORPGs) started selling time (subscriptions.) Prior to MMORPGs, PC gaming was certainly not dominated by timesinks but generally was quite good at providing interesting gameplay challenges.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Originally posted by Kaledren Because combat in today's MMORPG's is so much more involved and harder. Leroy into a group of mobs and practically 1 shoot them all while taking minimal damage. Gain a level. Please.
Feel free to catch up on the conversation, including the points made in this last page or two regarding how combat is objectively deeper in WOW/FFXIV than in earlier MMORPGs.
I read it ty. Sure, you have more skills on a hot bar these days. But that is it. Every one of them has a set (class wise that is) that is most effective and spammed. It still doesn't make it much different from earlier ones, besides that in older mmorpg's taking on more than one or two mobs meant death in most cases, whereas now you can take on several mobs with little danger unless you disconnect, lag too much, or mess up real bad.
Personally...yes, combat in,say EQ sucked in comparison to today's MMORPG's. As far as melee s concerned anyway. But again, personally speaking I feel it was harder to succeed in combat due to not having as many useful abilities, etc and tougher mobs outside of the raid circle than compared to today's selections. Very few exceptions aside.
The reason why they removed the possibilities of losing progress when you die is simply because people complained.
Players who knows how to play doesn't want to PUG anymore, they only play with their statics
who would risk death by playing with other players, they would play only with friends and other people that they trust won't f'ed up. That ruined the game for every single player that doesn't have a static.
Guilds would only want expert players, they don't want to risk losing level on teaching new players. They would task them to study the game and if they die once due to careless mistakes, you are out of the guild, you might say that you don't mind, but after losing weeks of progress teaching other players, yeah, you will change your mind quickly.
Only the elites prosper, and the rest leaves the game, therefore killing the game itself. That is why losing progress in MMORPG is just not really a good idea at all.
But I do think they should have implemented a safe guard, if you fail at this instance or dungeon or raid more than 3 times, the fourth fail will decrease all progress by 1 level. So it would stop players to constantly trying to do something over and over without breaks in between.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
In reply to a few different posts aimed at me. I am generally just here to prove that leveling was harder. I've strayed from the path a bit and got caught up in this is the game overall harder where basically we go back and forth with exactly the same arguments that are not proven in any way.
Weather you want to say old MMOs were boring or tedious is simply a matter of opinion. Of course there are those who could argue if you are having fun constantly then in general the game is easy because you are meeting little in the way of rsistance.
I'd rather not get involved in that subject as it's to much open to interpretation.
In terms of addiction I realize EVerquest was addicting. I played it a lot myself. I found that addiction is often formed for something you enjoy a lot. If you don't have a lot of will power you end up doing it more then you really should (health wise). I still had a lot of fun playing the game.
In terms of web sites that helped you again with contested areas and no real help in game it didn't matter much. You still had to get around a fairly hostile world where it was easy to die and dying meant a lot more.
In terms of aggro mechanics I realize they exist in today's games, but they are just a hollow form of what they once where. There are a lot of helpers in combat to indicate when something should be done, aggro has been reduced a lot, and mobs now have leashes (as I've pointed out before).
In terms of end game in current games I'm sure it's quite difficult in regards, but all of it is simple based on combat which is just one facet of many different skills that once were important in MMOs. I've pointed the other skills out before, but people generally brush them off like they are something everyone innately has, but it's not the truth at all. From both real life experience and also in game I find people have difficult figuring anything out on their own without help, have little patience, and have little determination when the going gets tuff. There are a lot of rage quitters in the world and they usually try to explain their ragequtting by belittling the skills of others.
I understand that old MMOs were not all fun,but what you don't seem to understand that to have something that is truly rewarding tat the end there almost has to be times when you are not having fun. That makes the overal goal far more rewarding.
In general if we stick to the topic leveling was harder based on a series of percentages that ended up preventing you from leveling up if you are a bad player. In today's MMOs there is no way you can't level up. Sure you could die (thought the fights are easy during the leveling process), but you are almost garunteed to succeed and since there are no death penalties to prevent progress you are pretty much certain to level up. That doesn't take into account other factors that increased your chances of dying. It also has nothing to do with weather or not a fight a endgame (after leveing is finished) is easy or not.
Originally posted by Kaledren I read it ty. Sure, you have more skills on a hot bar these days. But that is it. Every one of them has a set (class wise that is) that is most effective and spammed. It still doesn't make it much different from earlier ones, besides that in older mmorpg's taking on more than one or two mobs meant death in most cases, whereas now you can take on several mobs with little danger unless you disconnect, lag too much, or mess up real bad. Personally...yes, combat in,say EQ sucked in comparison to today's MMORPG's. As far as melee s concerned anyway. But again, personally speaking I feel it was harder to succeed in combat due to not having as many useful abilities, etc and tougher mobs outside of the raid circle than compared to today's selections. Very few exceptions aside.
Even many old games had lots of skills on the bar. They were the ones most guilty of having a lot of skills but where only a handful were most efficient and spammed. But it's only key newer MMORPGs like WOW and FFXIV which created rotations where most of the skills were necessary in a certain order, adjusted for whatever disruptions the encounter was causing.
The number of mobs you face doesn't speak to the actual challenge experienced. A game can be hard or easy with many or few mobs per pull.
Combat in early MMORPGs sucked because a large part of mastery was, "Is his HP bar falling faster than mine? Yes? Okay, easy victory as long as there aren't adds." Apart from that all you needed was time. And a lot of it, because you were going to repeat the previous HP-race boring fight over and over and over again.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Originally posted by Kaledren I read it ty. Sure, you have more skills on a hot bar these days. But that is it. Every one of them has a set (class wise that is) that is most effective and spammed. It still doesn't make it much different from earlier ones, besides that in older mmorpg's taking on more than one or two mobs meant death in most cases, whereas now you can take on several mobs with little danger unless you disconnect, lag too much, or mess up real bad. Personally...yes, combat in,say EQ sucked in comparison to today's MMORPG's. As far as melee s concerned anyway. But again, personally speaking I feel it was harder to succeed in combat due to not having as many useful abilities, etc and tougher mobs outside of the raid circle than compared to today's selections. Very few exceptions aside.
Even many old games had lots of skills on the bar. They were the ones most guilty of having a lot of skills but where only a handful were most efficient and spammed. But it's only key newer MMORPGs like WOW and FFXIV which created rotations where most of the skills were necessary in a certain order, adjusted for whatever disruptions the encounter was causing.
The number of mobs you face doesn't speak to the actual challenge experienced. A game can be hard or easy with many or few mobs per pull.
Combat in early MMORPGs sucked because a large part of mastery was, "Is his HP bar falling faster than mine? Yes? Okay, easy victory as long as there aren't adds." Apart from that all you needed was time. And a lot of it, because you were going to repeat the previous HP-race boring fight over and over and over again.
Actually this is pretty much false. In old MMOs there was almost always a chance of dying. Most people in EQ fought light blue mobs (yes no real number level indicator) which is basically many levels bellow you. Generally even green mobs (no experience gained) could kill you if there were a few of them and the aggro in that game was a lot larger in terms of radius then current MMOs. Most of the fights would be close and could easily land in the mobs favor. Even kiting classes could die easily from getting to close to a mob. Most caster mobs were almost unkillable solo. Healer mobs were almost immortal as they never ran out of magic. Did you ever feel like you were going to die at all in modern games during the leveling proccess? Even if you felt that did you care? Oh no I have to walk a few feet to get back to that same mob and kill them (my god!).
Comments
I've often posted this warlock rotation as a concrete example of how modern MMORPGs take skill. That rotation takes a while to completely master, and then on top of that bosses are deliberately designed to disrupt the rotation (you almost never get to just sit there and do a pure rotation all fight without being disrupted by fire, spell interrupts, changing targets, etc.) Whether you feel that much depth "baffles the mind" is up to your subjective perception, but all I've ever claimed is that clearly modern MMORPGs involve more skill than early ones.
I never said it can't be solved by math. But I'm not going to astound you all by typing out the complete mathematical solution to every boss fight -- that'd be almost as involved as showing the mathematical solution to chess in a forum post.
I didn't ignore your list: I described how the majority fell neatly into one of those three categories.
Let's not pretend aggro was something it wasn't. It was a radius, social aggro, a threat list, and a few abilities which interacted with that threat list, and the overall system was not significantly deeper than what we have in games nowadays. Certainly threat multipliers for tanks nowadays are much higher than they used to be, but that's because we understand that high-geared DPS having their DPS limited by their tank's gearing was a fundamentally flawed design that deserved fixing (your raid's DPS shouldn't be gated entirely on its tanks; that's stupid.) Modern games basically have the majority of depth you're going to get out of an aggro system, minus the things the industry learned didn't pan out well (and were pruned out.) But the focus of modern games is in the combat itself, not in managing how many mobs you're fighting at once.
Your list of things I would "right" is hit and miss, but a lot of it feels pretty off-topic.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I'm not a MMORPG developer. I work in other game genres. I don't reveal my company because people aren't rational, and are unable to tell the difference between a company and an individual. Since I enjoy conversation (especially spreading knowledge of game design and the industry) I don't reveal my company. So the decision is calm and rational, it's not about fear or shame.
As an example of people behaving irrationally:
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Not true at all. I've already went over the many different factors that made it more difficult. You just like to repeat the same basic thing like many others here. Old = tedium = boring. You just ignore what I've said and what I've written just like others here. I'd imagine this is a good example of why games have been made to require no skill to play other then pushing some buttons to win at combat. Basically you don't have patience to read or demonstrate your point with facts. Thus you would have likely been the one to quit the game and are happy with the ease of today's games. There is nothing wrong with that as there are many such as yourself. Many people like to play games where they have no real decisions to make.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
It appears to me that the builds you showed for Warlock were endgame builds using different talent trees. Generally you can switch between builds in WoW now if I recall instead of being locked into one build. Most games have a fairly complex rotation of skills to use. They always have. In older games you would also have to be a lot more careful about drawing aggro off the tank. This means you didn't just have to worry about rotations of skills, but making sure it was done at the right time without an indicator to flash and tell you your drawing to much aggro. It is also as I've stated that generally leveling is easy. You don't have any resistance on the way up. There is no way you can possible fail to gain a level or even go backwards if you are not a good player. You are generally insulated from failure and anyone else having an impact on your game. You are guided through the game, shown what to do, and where to go. Basically you don't need to solve any problems except how to master your rotation at endgame. In WoW they have macros (something older games like EQ didn't really have) that will often do most of the work for you (in case you suck). Either way basing a games difficulty simple on endgame combat is silly IMO. Regardless leveling was definitely harder in old games. I've shown the math and there were people who actually went backwards in level in may cases I saw in person. I even lost levels myself at times. This was all because of the different factors that went into making the world less then friendly for the player, but more interesting in many ways.
Yes, i remember (not so glory) days when cars did not have air conditioning, no servo breaks, ... and I do not miss at all that times. Except for the fact I was much younger then. :-)
When cars didn't have air?
Are you like 59?
"Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
I learned to drive on a double clutching 3/4 ton flatbed pickup. It didn't have air. I am 60.
Are you like 14?
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I'm in my 30's..
Did the f--ker have air vents?
"Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
Air vents and a moveable windshield. Couldn't speed in it at all (55 mph tops), but it could've pulled houses off their foundations. 1947 International Harvester PU. Cool in a retro diesel-punk style.
But on topic, I didn't play the equivalent antique MMOs. Intentionally.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Because combat in today's MMORPG's is so much more involved and harder. Leroy into a group of mobs and practically 1 shoot them all while taking minimal damage. Gain a level. Please.Agreed ... and Lineage 2 was NOT a great game.
Not sure what talent-switching has to do with the depth of combat.
Games have not "always" had complex rotations. In all the threads I've posted that warlock rotation asking for anyone to cite evidence of rotations as deep or deeper there has been precisely one class shown to be more complex (Lancers from FFXIV.) You won't find a similarly complicated guide for rotations in other games, because those other games have shallower combat. Please do feel free to look! I think the most compelling argument for my case would be for you to try to find evidence that I'm wrong and fail to find it.
It was already pointed out how being limited by your tank's gear was a bad design. In modern games aggro/threat still both exist as a mechanics, and still bring most of their depth. So why try to claim it was exclusive to early games?
You could use a computer to play chess for you. Does that make chess a shallow game, or can we agree that macros (having a computer play a MMORPG for you) don't make MMORPGs shallow?
You've only shown math that leveling was time-consuming in early games. Nobody's arguing against that. In fact that's the basis of my argument that they weren't hard games (they were only timesink-intensive games.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Feel free to catch up on the conversation, including the points made in this last page or two regarding how combat is objectively deeper in WOW/FFXIV than in earlier MMORPGs.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The more I think about MMOs in the past, the more I realize it was only the multitude of new gameplay experiences that made them so glorious. The actual gameplay wasn't superior to today's, but today I don't get nearly as excited or thrilled playing them when there isn't much that is new and original.
As an example of people behaving irrationally:
That's called a straw man argument (if it's true).
.
.
Axe, I've seen you suggest 'skill' equates to game difficulty. I agree, the more skill a raid requires; the more difficult it is. However, if you had a much harder time getting the gear and levels necessary to even attempt that raid; wouldn't that game be considered game more difficult? I imagine you'd consider that 'more tedious.'
.
.
Sounds like you are a console gamer at heart. I am an RPG player at heart. Of course we'll disagree on gaming.
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
And our point is that we disagree with you entirely. The mechanics were sound and drew in the type of folks I enjoy spending time with; unlike the zergy folks of today. I think we agree to disagree even if we enjoy debating how much more correct our opinions are.
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
What's more likely :
on average developers continue to become more experienced and produce better quality taking advantage of new tech. Some of those original players don't like the new games.
On average developers get continually worse over time and fail to take advantage of new tech. Every single new game is worse than old games.
Eneough said.
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
"Much harder time" implies skill-requiring challenges, so that wouldn't be tedious at all.
Tedium comes from things which require a lot of time, but don't provide a lot of fun. So that would only be the case if the prerequisite gear/level required a lot of time, but not a lot of skill. Which of course is place where WOW could be improved, but early MMORPGs were much worse because you never really got out of the timesink mire.
I've been a PC gamer and an RPG gamer since Frogger and Ultima 3 on the C64. If you were a PC gamer anywhere near the long, you'd understand that timesink-intense gameplay only surfaced around the time games (MMORPGs) started selling time (subscriptions.) Prior to MMORPGs, PC gaming was certainly not dominated by timesinks but generally was quite good at providing interesting gameplay challenges.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Feel free to catch up on the conversation, including the points made in this last page or two regarding how combat is objectively deeper in WOW/FFXIV than in earlier MMORPGs.
I read it ty. Sure, you have more skills on a hot bar these days. But that is it. Every one of them has a set (class wise that is) that is most effective and spammed. It still doesn't make it much different from earlier ones, besides that in older mmorpg's taking on more than one or two mobs meant death in most cases, whereas now you can take on several mobs with little danger unless you disconnect, lag too much, or mess up real bad.Personally...yes, combat in,say EQ sucked in comparison to today's MMORPG's. As far as melee s concerned anyway. But again, personally speaking I feel it was harder to succeed in combat due to not having as many useful abilities, etc and tougher mobs outside of the raid circle than compared to today's selections. Very few exceptions aside.
The reason why they removed the possibilities of losing progress when you die is simply because people complained.
Players who knows how to play doesn't want to PUG anymore, they only play with their statics
who would risk death by playing with other players, they would play only with friends and other people that they trust won't f'ed up. That ruined the game for every single player that doesn't have a static.
Guilds would only want expert players, they don't want to risk losing level on teaching new players. They would task them to study the game and if they die once due to careless mistakes, you are out of the guild, you might say that you don't mind, but after losing weeks of progress teaching other players, yeah, you will change your mind quickly.
Only the elites prosper, and the rest leaves the game, therefore killing the game itself. That is why losing progress in MMORPG is just not really a good idea at all.
But I do think they should have implemented a safe guard, if you fail at this instance or dungeon or raid more than 3 times, the fourth fail will decrease all progress by 1 level. So it would stop players to constantly trying to do something over and over without breaks in between.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
In reply to a few different posts aimed at me. I am generally just here to prove that leveling was harder. I've strayed from the path a bit and got caught up in this is the game overall harder where basically we go back and forth with exactly the same arguments that are not proven in any way.
Weather you want to say old MMOs were boring or tedious is simply a matter of opinion. Of course there are those who could argue if you are having fun constantly then in general the game is easy because you are meeting little in the way of rsistance.
I'd rather not get involved in that subject as it's to much open to interpretation.
In terms of addiction I realize EVerquest was addicting. I played it a lot myself. I found that addiction is often formed for something you enjoy a lot. If you don't have a lot of will power you end up doing it more then you really should (health wise). I still had a lot of fun playing the game.
In terms of web sites that helped you again with contested areas and no real help in game it didn't matter much. You still had to get around a fairly hostile world where it was easy to die and dying meant a lot more.
In terms of aggro mechanics I realize they exist in today's games, but they are just a hollow form of what they once where. There are a lot of helpers in combat to indicate when something should be done, aggro has been reduced a lot, and mobs now have leashes (as I've pointed out before).
In terms of end game in current games I'm sure it's quite difficult in regards, but all of it is simple based on combat which is just one facet of many different skills that once were important in MMOs. I've pointed the other skills out before, but people generally brush them off like they are something everyone innately has, but it's not the truth at all. From both real life experience and also in game I find people have difficult figuring anything out on their own without help, have little patience, and have little determination when the going gets tuff. There are a lot of rage quitters in the world and they usually try to explain their ragequtting by belittling the skills of others.
I understand that old MMOs were not all fun,but what you don't seem to understand that to have something that is truly rewarding tat the end there almost has to be times when you are not having fun. That makes the overal goal far more rewarding.
In general if we stick to the topic leveling was harder based on a series of percentages that ended up preventing you from leveling up if you are a bad player. In today's MMOs there is no way you can't level up. Sure you could die (thought the fights are easy during the leveling process), but you are almost garunteed to succeed and since there are no death penalties to prevent progress you are pretty much certain to level up. That doesn't take into account other factors that increased your chances of dying. It also has nothing to do with weather or not a fight a endgame (after leveing is finished) is easy or not.
Even many old games had lots of skills on the bar. They were the ones most guilty of having a lot of skills but where only a handful were most efficient and spammed. But it's only key newer MMORPGs like WOW and FFXIV which created rotations where most of the skills were necessary in a certain order, adjusted for whatever disruptions the encounter was causing.
The number of mobs you face doesn't speak to the actual challenge experienced. A game can be hard or easy with many or few mobs per pull.
Combat in early MMORPGs sucked because a large part of mastery was, "Is his HP bar falling faster than mine? Yes? Okay, easy victory as long as there aren't adds." Apart from that all you needed was time. And a lot of it, because you were going to repeat the previous HP-race boring fight over and over and over again.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Actually this is pretty much false. In old MMOs there was almost always a chance of dying. Most people in EQ fought light blue mobs (yes no real number level indicator) which is basically many levels bellow you. Generally even green mobs (no experience gained) could kill you if there were a few of them and the aggro in that game was a lot larger in terms of radius then current MMOs. Most of the fights would be close and could easily land in the mobs favor. Even kiting classes could die easily from getting to close to a mob. Most caster mobs were almost unkillable solo. Healer mobs were almost immortal as they never ran out of magic. Did you ever feel like you were going to die at all in modern games during the leveling proccess? Even if you felt that did you care? Oh no I have to walk a few feet to get back to that same mob and kill them (my god!).