"The pathing AI is not remotely the same as the AI components driving the Nemesis System, the AI personalities, or the database tracking/generating events in the game.
Hence to the point, it can still be flawed on something like the pathing of AI as seen in that video, while still being outstanding for it's progression of AI in many other ways."
Given what I already said in that quote, it would appear you are the one that missed the point by leagues. You complain about components of the AI that first of all have nothing to do with the AI system that makes Shadows of Mordor worth mentioning, and seem adamant on confusing how different components of the game work or are built to work.
As evidenced by that second video you just linked where the player is actively using a location in the game used to hide the character from detection to, well, hide from detection. You can even see the character going into a cloaked mode. That's not a fault of the AI, that's a very intentionally scripted mechanic of the game bypassing/limiting the AI. It's not even the performance of the AI being shown as a result in that second video.
Even the people responding to the video noticed that.
"Whats your point? When you enter a bush you go invisible? The character even phases out. The AI is spot on, the orc investigates the death..."
So again, you want to try writing something that's not just trolling?
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Everquest had roaming max level 50 npc's in starter zones. Mobs would chase you to the zone line or death. You could get diseased by Mummies & ghouls and required a cleric, necro or high level shadowknight to remove the disease which lowered stats and health regen. In vanilla EQ this was a thing.
I think games need to reintroduce this aspect to games and make them less hand held for pussies.
When myself and a few other trolls actually managed to make it out of Innothule swamp to the southern desert of ro it was a huge accomplishment. As we slowly started pulling dervish cutthroats we died countless times to Dry Bones Skeletons & Mummies... and the occasional Sand Giant.
You had to constantly watch your back while grinding mobs to level for those random high level npc's.
Trying to go from Innothule swap to Neriak (dark elves) was a huge journey for me at the time. Eastern Commanlands had human guards. Used to always see /shouts of Slate to zone (he was a higher level guard that killed all evil faction players). If someone ran him to zone and you were standing nearby he'd kill you instead and all over evil guys before walking away.
This was also abused at times. High level necromancers could charm a spectre level 50 (max at the time). His druid friend would then buff the spectre. They'd approach the oasis of marr docks (lvl 10-20 zone) then release the spectre from charm. You'd have a buffed 50th level spectre wiping out the entire zone of newbs.
Everquest had roaming max level 50 npc's in starter zones. Mobs would chase you to the zone line or death. You could get diseased by Mummies & ghouls and required a cleric, necro or high level shadowknight to remove the disease which lowered stats and health regen. In vanilla EQ this was a thing.
I think games need to reintroduce this aspect to games and make them less hand held for pussies.
When myself and a few other trolls actually managed to make it out of Innothule swamp to the southern desert of ro it was a huge accomplishment. As we slowly started pulling dervish cutthroats we died countless times to Dry Bones Skeletons & Mummies... and the occasional Sand Giant.
You had to constantly watch your back while grinding mobs to level for those random high level npc's.
Trying to go from Innothule swap to Neriak (dark elves) was a huge journey for me at the time. Eastern Commanlands had human guards. Used to always see /shouts of Slate to zone (he was a higher level guard that killed all evil faction players). If someone ran him to zone and you were standing nearby he'd kill you instead and all over evil guys before walking away.
This was also abused at times. High level necromancers could charm a spectre level 50 (max at the time). His druid friend would then buff the spectre. They'd approach the oasis of marr docks (lvl 10-20 zone) then release the spectre from charm. You'd have a buffed 50th level spectre wiping out the entire zone of newbs.
EQ also had a lot of NPC that ran off and agro'd adds. It was one of harsher games out.
I would at least appreciate human NPC to be smart and and animals to use their sense and animal behavior. How about powers and NPC type really making a difference. Most NPC are perfectly balanced that combat comes down to just different models and skins.
There are also Level 100 MVP monster in every area. So once player reach level 100, they will come back at the low level map to defeat the MVP. Furthermore, there is also mini boss monsters, that is level 10. Group of level 10 players can defeat the mobs.
All mobs spawn alone (too difficult if spawn in groups), but they have a logical line of sight and aggressive. Mobs cover certain areas and may chase players and if bad luck, player can get chase buy multiple enemies.
Players need to check careful before attacking the mobs. Of course a level 1 cannot defeat monsters who is level more than 1 alone. But a level 1 can help a level 10 player fighting level 10 mobs for exp.
Whats fun? the choice. Player have option where to grind. Not like typical MMO that force player to level up at certain area before can go to the another area.
Invoking AI is a contradiction to your desires. AI is to mimic the reactions, tendencies, reasoning, and more importantly randomness, of a living entity (humanoid in most cases). That's pushing the slider to the right.
You think you want to push the slider to the right, but more than likely you don't.
You don't like playing against other players unless you can set the rules of engagement
You won't admit it but you DO like playing against NPCs because you KNOW you can or eventually will beat them.
You don't like action combat of any sort because it's "too twitchy and spammy"
You do like traditional RPG elements because the dice controls your outcome.
If the above describes you, AI will only grief you worse than a human can. Be careful what you ask for
Yes, players are asking for something that most players (including many of the ones asking for it) wouldn't enjoy.
But your diagram makes no sense. Randomness and Pacing are two entirely different vectors. Chess completely lacks randomness (randomness: none) yet it's a turn-based game (action: none).
MMORPGs are highly deterministic (randomness: low) and yet exist in a middle ground between action and turn-based games (action: medium). I can't remember the last time I was in a fight in a MMORPG that was actually decided by random elements -- for the most part random elements are there only to make gameplay more dynamic, but aren't allowed to be significant enough to influence combat in any real way.
Worse, those factors don't even relate to Realistic AI. It's a completely different set of factors that would make realistic AI suitable to a game -- the amount of randomness and pacing are entirely unrelated.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
AI will be at it's absolute best when certain people start referring to it as non-consentual PVE.
Or when mobs start reporting players for griefing.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Shadow of Mordor has a believable, immersive, entertaining AI. An AI that is not necessarily difficult.
It's fun and immersive just to sneak around and watch the AI interact with itself. The AI is definitely the star of the show in that game.
SoM's AI is fun to interact with, but by no means can it be described as "realistic". It's not a smart AI that tries to mimic realistic behavior.
That's without Mivi's video pointing out its shortcomings.
That's without pointing out that it couldn't be done in open world gameplay. (Which isn't a problem for fun-factor, but most people consider instance-only games not to be MMORPGs.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Invoking AI is a contradiction to your desires. AI is to mimic the reactions, tendencies, reasoning, and more importantly randomness, of a living entity (humanoid in most cases). That's pushing the slider to the right.
You think you want to push the slider to the right, but more than likely you don't.
You don't like playing against other players unless you can set the rules of engagement
You won't admit it but you DO like playing against NPCs because you KNOW you can or eventually will beat them.
You don't like action combat of any sort because it's "too twitchy and spammy"
You do like traditional RPG elements because the dice controls your outcome.
If the above describes you, AI will only grief you worse than a human can. Be careful what you ask for
Yes, players are asking for something that most players (including many of the ones asking for it) wouldn't enjoy.
But your diagram makes no sense. Randomness and Pacing are two entirely different vectors. Chess completely lacks randomness (randomness: none) yet it's a turn-based game (action: none).
MMORPGs are highly deterministic (randomness: low) and yet exist in a middle ground between action and turn-based games (action: medium). I can't remember the last time I was in a fight in a MMORPG that was actually decided by random elements -- for the most part random elements are there only to make gameplay more dynamic, but aren't allowed to be significant enough to influence combat in any real way.
Worse, those factors don't even relate to Realistic AI. It's a completely different set of factors that would make realistic AI suitable to a game -- the amount of randomness and pacing are entirely unrelated.
You made the same false assumption and hand-wave of the scope of AI as Fly did.
As for your SoM comment, that's pretty insubstantial claim. The game does a lot more than most through the emulation of the enemies having activities, hunts, and general life-cycles as well as the general game functions for the AI to interact with the player directly on. As already pointed out about Mivi's videos, one doesn't even address AI with what it displays while the other pokes at the limitation of it's pathing, and both fail consequently to address the scope of the AI as it relates to the Nemesis or event systems that fleshes out that "realistic" element you assert has no presence.
This is the same kind of point that can be made about Bethesda titles as well. Most players have experienced firsthand how derpy the AI in their ES and Fallout titles can be, but part of that is actually a byproduct of just how complex some of the AI components are, notably including the Radiant AI system they built to track and direct AI life-cycles and dynamic quest elements.
Then there's the claim that this kind of AI can't work in open world gameplay, even though titles like Saga of Ryzom already have emulated life and migratory cycles for the fauna in a 12 year old MMO, and the last few iterations of the Far Cry titles have utilized individual AI personality suites to generate ecosystems through unscripted emergent gameplay, which equally applies in their offered multiplayer gameplay.
Or the bots in Dota 2, or even more uniquely the system that controls the animation rigging in Destiny (yup, the animation system in Destiny has it's own AI) to allow for dynamic adaptation/retargetting of the game's animations in runtime by the game itself to overcome limitations in skeleton animations. To which it is again worth noting Destiny is a multiplayer title with open world components.
So not only is it capable of being utilized in many forms within multiplayer and open world environments, AI has already been used by a variety of titles to solve a variety of problems unique to the open world format.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Everquest had roaming max level 50 npc's in starter zones. Mobs would chase you to the zone line or death. You could get diseased by Mummies & ghouls and required a cleric, necro or high level shadowknight to remove the disease which lowered stats and health regen. In vanilla EQ this was a thing.
I think games need to reintroduce this aspect to games and make them less hand held for pussies.
I don't see how that mechanic is in anyway anti-hand-holding. Being stomped by a mob without having a chance to fight back in a low level zone is just stupid and annoying for no good reason.
Like the Fel Reavers in Burning Crusade, that aggro noise still gives me nightmares. . .
I would repeat my statement, lest you offer something more meaningful.
It depends on what you meant. The OP seems to be talking about pve combat. Your post seemed to be meandering off the combat topic into "world activities". But is really wasn't clear. In many games, when there are no players in a given area, the mobs go into a set state which changes when players enter the area.
Could games do different things like have mobs have jobs (jobs for mobs!). But that increases server load and for what gain?
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
I would repeat my statement, lest you offer something more meaningful.
It depends on what you meant. The OP seems to be talking about pve combat. Your post seemed to be meandering off the combat topic into "world activities". But is really wasn't clear. In many games, when there are no players in a given area, the mobs go into a set state which changes when players enter the area.
Could games do different things like have mobs have jobs (jobs for mobs!). But that increases server load and for what gain?
just give more ideal animations to mobs...so they appear alive
I would repeat my statement, lest you offer something more meaningful.
It depends on what you meant. The OP seems to be talking about pve combat. Your post seemed to be meandering off the combat topic into "world activities". But is really wasn't clear. In many games, when there are no players in a given area, the mobs go into a set state which changes when players enter the area.
Could games do different things like have mobs have jobs (jobs for mobs!). But that increases server load and for what gain?
I meant quite a variety of things, but I also pointed out several points specific to combat if you want to re-read my prior posts.
So invitation is open and extended to you as well.
What you refer to with mobs despawning when no players are nearby is simply a performance mechanic, and very unlike what I had mentioned as well.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Whenever I see the subject of difficulty come up, I always wish people would expand more on what they consider "difficult" so that we could make appropriate suggestions. There are many different types of difficulty that games employ
1) Tactical - By this, I mean the game forces you to make important decisions during combat that will greatly affect the outcome. This is only really possible in games with good combat depth, so you wont find this sort of difficulty in action combat games, but you also don't see it in many games at all due to lack of depth. For example, if the game has strict resource management, having to decide whether to spend your last energy on a self-heal or on a big nuke is what I would call tactical depth. Its an important decision, has to be done on the fly and would greatly affect the outcome. Games with lots of class interdependency, harsh resource management and just general combat depth have this sort of difficulty.
2) Punishing Mistakes - This is when the game severely punishes you for a mistake. The gameplay itself might be easy, but make a mistake and you will die and fail. The difficulty comes from being able to concentrate for long periods of time. This sort of difficulty is really lazy but also very common, especially in action-combat.
3) Timers - Commonly seen as enrage timers, many games employ these as their method of difficulty. It basically means you'll fail unless you can meet strict requirements for damage output / healing output. You get a limited amount of time to complete the encounter, otherwise you fail. Usually, it just means you need a minimum gear score + a good rotation, then you'll win.
4) Strategy / Scripted Events - Mobs doing certain things at certain times, requiring specific responses in order to win. You tend not to see this much outside of bosses. For example, avoiding 1-shot attacks when a boss says something, or pulling levers at 50% health etc. This sort of difficulty is what the community really wants in my opinion - you fight something, die, learn the strategy then win. Its a very clear progression from no knowledge to understanding to success and doesn't place pressure on personal skill.
5) Teamwork - Playing solo, you are in complete control. Playing in a group, you have to rely on other people doing things right (which is kinda just tactical / punishing mistakes). In a game with lots of interdependency, group content is always more difficult as you have to approach it very differently to solo, work together well and have a deeper understanding of all classes. In a shallow game, group combat is pretty much the same as solo, you just get punished for other peoples mistakes as well as your own.
6) Just add more - The laziest method of increasing difficulty, just add more health and/or damage to the enemy. This includes adding more mobs as well as just increasing the numbers. This is effectively just an extension of the timers level of difficulty.
My preferred methods of difficulty is tactical + strategy. I like all combat to be tactical so that I'm constantly making important decisions during combat, combined with complicated strategies. Vanilla LotRO epitomises this for me and admittedly I've not seen it in any other MMO as no other MMO I've played has deep combat. Most MMOs I've played tend to stick to punishing mistakes and timers with a small amount of strategy on bosses.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
As mentioned EQ had this type of AI. The mobs would agro at long range and they would also run away, heal each other at the right times, and call for assistance. Most of this made many areas very difficult to traverse or camp along even if you had the right class with a variety of different aggro management abilities.
The answer to this is that people aren't interested in having a dangerous world to journey through. They want everything set up in a way that is clear for them to follow. They also don't want a universal difficulty of hard as that would make most people feel less. Most developers are more concerned about bring as many people as possible than making a game world that is scary to move around in.
Comments
"The pathing AI is not remotely the same as the AI components driving the Nemesis System, the AI personalities, or the database tracking/generating events in the game.
Hence to the point, it can still be flawed on something like the pathing of AI as seen in that video, while still being outstanding for it's progression of AI in many other ways."
Given what I already said in that quote, it would appear you are the one that missed the point by leagues. You complain about components of the AI that first of all have nothing to do with the AI system that makes Shadows of Mordor worth mentioning, and seem adamant on confusing how different components of the game work or are built to work.
As evidenced by that second video you just linked where the player is actively using a location in the game used to hide the character from detection to, well, hide from detection. You can even see the character going into a cloaked mode. That's not a fault of the AI, that's a very intentionally scripted mechanic of the game bypassing/limiting the AI. It's not even the performance of the AI being shown as a result in that second video.
Even the people responding to the video noticed that.
"Whats your point? When you enter a bush you go invisible? The character even phases out. The AI is spot on, the orc investigates the death..."
So again, you want to try writing something that's not just trolling?
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
I think games need to reintroduce this aspect to games and make them less hand held for pussies.
When myself and a few other trolls actually managed to make it out of Innothule swamp to the southern desert of ro it was a huge accomplishment. As we slowly started pulling dervish cutthroats we died countless times to Dry Bones Skeletons & Mummies... and the occasional Sand Giant.
You had to constantly watch your back while grinding mobs to level for those random high level npc's.
Trying to go from Innothule swap to Neriak (dark elves) was a huge journey for me at the time. Eastern Commanlands had human guards. Used to always see /shouts of Slate to zone (he was a higher level guard that killed all evil faction players). If someone ran him to zone and you were standing nearby he'd kill you instead and all over evil guys before walking away.
This was also abused at times. High level necromancers could charm a spectre level 50 (max at the time). His druid friend would then buff the spectre. They'd approach the oasis of marr docks (lvl 10-20 zone) then release the spectre from charm. You'd have a buffed 50th level spectre wiping out the entire zone of newbs.
I would at least appreciate human NPC to be smart and and animals to use their sense and animal behavior. How about powers and NPC type really making a difference. Most NPC are perfectly balanced that combat comes down to just different models and skins.
As a level 1, player can choose 10 different place to grind. It is because, level 1-10 mobs share the same areas.
1. Fight bandits
2. fight orc
3. fight demons
4. fight pirates
5. fight giant insects
6. fight ghost (may required enchanted weapon)
7. fight vampire
8. fight werewolf
9. fight centaur
10. fight zombies
There are also Level 100 MVP monster in every area. So once player reach level 100, they will come back at the low level map to defeat the MVP. Furthermore, there is also mini boss monsters, that is level 10. Group of level 10 players can defeat the mobs.
All mobs spawn alone (too difficult if spawn in groups), but they have a logical line of sight and aggressive. Mobs cover certain areas and may chase players and if bad luck, player can get chase buy multiple enemies.
Players need to check careful before attacking the mobs. Of course a level 1 cannot defeat monsters who is level more than 1 alone. But a level 1 can help a level 10 player fighting level 10 mobs for exp.
Whats fun? the choice. Player have option where to grind. Not like typical MMO that force player to level up at certain area before can go to the another area.
But your diagram makes no sense. Randomness and Pacing are two entirely different vectors. Chess completely lacks randomness (randomness: none) yet it's a turn-based game (action: none).
MMORPGs are highly deterministic (randomness: low) and yet exist in a middle ground between action and turn-based games (action: medium). I can't remember the last time I was in a fight in a MMORPG that was actually decided by random elements -- for the most part random elements are there only to make gameplay more dynamic, but aren't allowed to be significant enough to influence combat in any real way.
Worse, those factors don't even relate to Realistic AI. It's a completely different set of factors that would make realistic AI suitable to a game -- the amount of randomness and pacing are entirely unrelated.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
That's without Mivi's video pointing out its shortcomings.
That's without pointing out that it couldn't be done in open world gameplay. (Which isn't a problem for fun-factor, but most people consider instance-only games not to be MMORPGs.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
AI constitutes a much broader scope than that which you seem to understand.
As for your SoM comment, that's pretty insubstantial claim. The game does a lot more than most through the emulation of the enemies having activities, hunts, and general life-cycles as well as the general game functions for the AI to interact with the player directly on. As already pointed out about Mivi's videos, one doesn't even address AI with what it displays while the other pokes at the limitation of it's pathing, and both fail consequently to address the scope of the AI as it relates to the Nemesis or event systems that fleshes out that "realistic" element you assert has no presence.
This is the same kind of point that can be made about Bethesda titles as well. Most players have experienced firsthand how derpy the AI in their ES and Fallout titles can be, but part of that is actually a byproduct of just how complex some of the AI components are, notably including the Radiant AI system they built to track and direct AI life-cycles and dynamic quest elements.
Then there's the claim that this kind of AI can't work in open world gameplay, even though titles like Saga of Ryzom already have emulated life and migratory cycles for the fauna in a 12 year old MMO, and the last few iterations of the Far Cry titles have utilized individual AI personality suites to generate ecosystems through unscripted emergent gameplay, which equally applies in their offered multiplayer gameplay.
Or the bots in Dota 2, or even more uniquely the system that controls the animation rigging in Destiny (yup, the animation system in Destiny has it's own AI) to allow for dynamic adaptation/retargetting of the game's animations in runtime by the game itself to overcome limitations in skeleton animations. To which it is again worth noting Destiny is a multiplayer title with open world components.
So not only is it capable of being utilized in many forms within multiplayer and open world environments, AI has already been used by a variety of titles to solve a variety of problems unique to the open world format.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
It depends on what you meant. The OP seems to be talking about pve combat. Your post seemed to be meandering off the combat topic into "world activities". But is really wasn't clear. In many games, when there are no players in a given area, the mobs go into a set state which changes when players enter the area.
Could games do different things like have mobs have jobs (jobs for mobs!). But that increases server load and for what gain?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
So invitation is open and extended to you as well.
What you refer to with mobs despawning when no players are nearby is simply a performance mechanic, and very unlike what I had mentioned as well.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
1) Tactical - By this, I mean the game forces you to make important decisions during combat that will greatly affect the outcome. This is only really possible in games with good combat depth, so you wont find this sort of difficulty in action combat games, but you also don't see it in many games at all due to lack of depth. For example, if the game has strict resource management, having to decide whether to spend your last energy on a self-heal or on a big nuke is what I would call tactical depth. Its an important decision, has to be done on the fly and would greatly affect the outcome. Games with lots of class interdependency, harsh resource management and just general combat depth have this sort of difficulty.
2) Punishing Mistakes - This is when the game severely punishes you for a mistake. The gameplay itself might be easy, but make a mistake and you will die and fail. The difficulty comes from being able to concentrate for long periods of time. This sort of difficulty is really lazy but also very common, especially in action-combat.
3) Timers - Commonly seen as enrage timers, many games employ these as their method of difficulty. It basically means you'll fail unless you can meet strict requirements for damage output / healing output. You get a limited amount of time to complete the encounter, otherwise you fail. Usually, it just means you need a minimum gear score + a good rotation, then you'll win.
4) Strategy / Scripted Events - Mobs doing certain things at certain times, requiring specific responses in order to win. You tend not to see this much outside of bosses. For example, avoiding 1-shot attacks when a boss says something, or pulling levers at 50% health etc. This sort of difficulty is what the community really wants in my opinion - you fight something, die, learn the strategy then win. Its a very clear progression from no knowledge to understanding to success and doesn't place pressure on personal skill.
5) Teamwork - Playing solo, you are in complete control. Playing in a group, you have to rely on other people doing things right (which is kinda just tactical / punishing mistakes). In a game with lots of interdependency, group content is always more difficult as you have to approach it very differently to solo, work together well and have a deeper understanding of all classes. In a shallow game, group combat is pretty much the same as solo, you just get punished for other peoples mistakes as well as your own.
6) Just add more - The laziest method of increasing difficulty, just add more health and/or damage to the enemy. This includes adding more mobs as well as just increasing the numbers. This is effectively just an extension of the timers level of difficulty.
My preferred methods of difficulty is tactical + strategy. I like all combat to be tactical so that I'm constantly making important decisions during combat, combined with complicated strategies. Vanilla LotRO epitomises this for me and admittedly I've not seen it in any other MMO as no other MMO I've played has deep combat. Most MMOs I've played tend to stick to punishing mistakes and timers with a small amount of strategy on bosses.
The answer to this is that people aren't interested in having a dangerous world to journey through. They want everything set up in a way that is clear for them to follow. They also don't want a universal difficulty of hard as that would make most people feel less. Most developers are more concerned about bring as many people as possible than making a game world that is scary to move around in.