As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
I think part of the problem is that group stories can be difficult to organize. It takes a lot of work to bring everyone together. That's why such stories are often very short public events or dungeons. Plus you often get a mix of players with different experience levels and people getting kicked.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
As a solo player you play MMOs for the story. So why you play MMOs if you define yourself as a solo player? And do not blame me. The raids and PvP are the only multiplayer activities in the most so called MMORPGs.
You forgot dungeons and other small group content. I don't raid or PvP either but i play MMORPGs only because of small group content, which has been mostly removed or made stupid easy in modern MMOs.
As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
As a solo player you play MMOs for the story. So why you play MMOs if you define yourself as a solo player? And do not blame me. The raids and PvP are the only multiplayer activities in the most so called MMORPGs.
You forgot dungeons and other small group content. I don't raid or PvP either but i play MMORPGs only because of small group content, which has been mostly removed or made stupid easy in modern MMOs.
Dungeons usually have raid bosses. I do not know what you think raid means, but in general it means to raid a boss.
Err no. A raid is generally 20 person or more content, while a dungeon is usually 5 person content.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
As a solo player you play MMOs for the story. So why you play MMOs if you define yourself as a solo player? And do not blame me. The raids and PvP are the only multiplayer activities in the most so called MMORPGs.
You forgot dungeons and other small group content. I don't raid or PvP either but i play MMORPGs only because of small group content, which has been mostly removed or made stupid easy in modern MMOs.
Dungeons usually have raid bosses. I do not know what you think raid means, but in general it means to raid a boss.
For me raids are PvE encounters made for 10+ players. Dungeons on the other hand are small group content made for 3-5 players. I've been in the believe this was a universal industry standard but i guess it's now proven wrong.
As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
As a solo player you play MMOs for the story. So why you play MMOs if you define yourself as a solo player? And do not blame me. The raids and PvP are the only multiplayer activities in the most so called MMORPGs.
I like to play solo myself. I think your definition of solo is single player game. My definition of solo is I can jump in action any time I want without being obliged in a predetermined party, or have to socialize to achieve or acquire something in the game.
For example queuing solo in MOBA. Roaming solo in RvR. Doing public event solo without a party etc. Or even queuing dungeon in LFG solo.
As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
As a solo player you play MMOs for the story. So why you play MMOs if you define yourself as a solo player? And do not blame me. The raids and PvP are the only multiplayer activities in the most so called MMORPGs.
You forgot dungeons and other small group content. I don't raid or PvP either but i play MMORPGs only because of small group content, which has been mostly removed or made stupid easy in modern MMOs.
Dungeons usually have raid bosses. I do not know what you think raid means, but in general it means to raid a boss.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a raid classified that way, not by other developers or by other gamers. Are you saying any group content with a boss is a raid?
A game that enforcing grouping too strongly could be equally confining, as well as decisively unrealistic. How many of us in our real lives are always in a "group" of people? What makes an MMO so compelling to me is simply being in a game environment where other real people are around me. If I wanted, I could talk to them, and they, being real people, could intelligently respond to me.
If I so wish, and I should, I should seek to work together with those people and form friendships, and, if I do do this, it should be MORE rewarding than solo gameplay. The MMO offers a unique opportunity and it should be capitalized upon. Those game features, including exclusive, instanced, Bioware type stories are anti-multiplayer in the most extreme way.
I am not opposed to story per se. Again, I like that the Warcraft story -- or "game lore," as others have more aptly called it -- is there if you care to access it. But you do not have to. Hell, with Warcraft, for example, I really never cared about the story, as I was so immersed in the fact that I was in a virtual world. Playing through it again, now I am following the story, and that too is cool.
We should provide freedom to the player, optimized around creating a virtual world in which they can behave like a person in that world.
A game that enforcing grouping too strongly could be equally confining, as well as decisively unrealistic. How many of us in our real lives are always in a "group" of people? What makes an MMO so compelling to me is simply being in a game environment where other real people are around me. If I wanted, I could talk to them, and they, being real people, could intelligently respond to me.
If I so wish, and I should, I should seek to work together with those people and form friendships, and, if I do do this, it should be MORE rewarding than solo gameplay. The MMO offers a unique opportunity and it should be capitalized upon. Those game features, including exclusive, instanced, Bioware type stories are anti-multiplayer in the most extreme way.
I am not opposed to story per se. Again, I like that the Warcraft story -- or "game lore," as others have more aptly called it -- is there if you care to access it. But you do not have to. Hell, with Warcraft, for example, I really never cared about the story, as I was so immersed in the fact that I was in a virtual world. Playing through it again, now I am following the story, and that too is cool.
We should provide freedom to the player, optimized around creating a virtual world in which they can behave like a person in that world.
First, the real life is not a game. Second you have to play with the other players to call it multiplayer. If you play alone, it is not multiplayer, pretty simple. By your view it seems the Facebook is the best MMO - billion of people you can talk with. I understand your point of view, but that does not make it less delusional.
But my aim is to make an MMO be a virtual world--in that way, more lifelike. That is why I play this, after all: not to play a game, but to insert myself into another place where, to be honest, I feel my time is better spent.
Multiplayer is simply that: more than one player. You cannot really dictate how those "more than one players" interact with each other, but you should, in some way, encourage them to group up and make friendly, and optimize the game towards this end.
Facebook isn't a game. I'm not sure what's delusional about what I'm saying.
A game that enforcing grouping too strongly could be equally confining, as well as decisively unrealistic. How many of us in our real lives are always in a "group" of people? What makes an MMO so compelling to me is simply being in a game environment where other real people are around me. If I wanted, I could talk to them, and they, being real people, could intelligently respond to me.
If I so wish, and I should, I should seek to work together with those people and form friendships, and, if I do do this, it should be MORE rewarding than solo gameplay. The MMO offers a unique opportunity and it should be capitalized upon. Those game features, including exclusive, instanced, Bioware type stories are anti-multiplayer in the most extreme way.
I am not opposed to story per se. Again, I like that the Warcraft story -- or "game lore," as others have more aptly called it -- is there if you care to access it. But you do not have to. Hell, with Warcraft, for example, I really never cared about the story, as I was so immersed in the fact that I was in a virtual world. Playing through it again, now I am following the story, and that too is cool.
We should provide freedom to the player, optimized around creating a virtual world in which they can behave like a person in that world.
First, the real life is not a game. Second you have to play with the other players to call it multiplayer. If you play alone, it is not multiplayer, pretty simple. By your view it seems the Facebook is the best MMO - billion of people you can talk with. I understand your point of view, but that does not make it less delusional.
But my aim is to make an MMO be a virtual world--in that way, more lifelike. That is why I play this, after all: not to play a game, but to insert myself into another place where, to be honest, I feel my time is better spent.
Multiplayer is simply that: more than one player. You cannot really dictate how those "more than one players" interact with each other, but you should, in some way, encourage them to group up and make friendly, and optimize the game towards this end.
Facebook isn't a game. I'm not sure what's delusional about what I'm saying.
Every games has rules, so it dictates you how to play. If you call a game multiplayer it must dictates you to play with the other people. As for the real life simulations - well they are definitely delusional.
If you call a game multiplayer it just means it should have a feature supporting multiple players interacting at once. That doesn't mean it has to be exclusively multiplayer...
As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
As a solo player you play MMOs for the story. So why you play MMOs if you define yourself as a solo player? And do not blame me. The raids and PvP are the only multiplayer activities in the most so called MMORPGs.
I like to play solo myself. I think your definition of solo is single player game. My definition of solo is I can jump in action any time I want without being obliged in a predetermined party, or have to socialize to achieve or acquire something in the game.
For example queuing solo in MOBA. Roaming solo in RvR. Doing public event solo without a party etc. Or even queuing dungeon in LFG solo.
Solo is a singleplayer game. You are solo, when you do not play with other players. If they kill your character, or take your mobs, or help you at some way, you are not solo, no matter if you are in party. It seems you do not understand that if you do not compete or cooperate with the other players, you play a singleplayer game actually and the idea of MMO is delusional. Like in the real life you may be alone even with thousands people around you. To be with them, you need interaction.
Like with dynamic events. You have an option to join the crowd in doing dynamic content without forming a group, yet be part of the group. So you can solo in a group event if you want. Plus the more players the more NPC's join in.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
If you call a game multiplayer it just means it should have a feature supporting multiple players interacting at once. That doesn't mean it has to be exclusively multiplayer...
Like with dynamic events. You have an option to join the crowd in doing dynamic content without forming a group, yet be part of the group. So you can solo in a group event if you want. Plus the more players the more NPC's join in.
Haha, so the multiplayer game may be singleplayer. Well if we break a game on pieces and some of them are solo, you are kind of right. But that does not change the things - when you play solo, it is singleplayer, no matter how many players are online. And such a design usually makes the multiplayer parts pointless.
That's not at all the case, both for the design and development of the game. Making a game multiplayer means you need to add networking capability and it is a fundamental change to the code base. Single player games are designed for just the individual client and have all the data on a local machine. So while you can say that a particular feature is designed for groups or individuals or even both, the game itself will either be singleplayer or multiplayer by design. Basically, if there are people playing together in a game it is automatically considered multiplayer.
It's less about the story and more about the quality of the lore for me. Lore really brings a game world alive and makes it fun to play in. Even if you don't read every quest or watch every voiceover, you still pick up on the lore in different parts of the game and if affects how enjoyable a game feels. Otherwise a game is just an empty shell with some fun activities, but they get boring after a while without a rich background supporting them. Think about some of the Korean games with polished graphics, combat, and content, but with terrible lore and story. You didn't want to play them much or at all.
As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
As a solo player you play MMOs for the story. So why you play MMOs if you define yourself as a solo player? And do not blame me. The raids and PvP are the only multiplayer activities in the most so called MMORPGs.
I like to play solo myself. I think your definition of solo is single player game. My definition of solo is I can jump in action any time I want without being obliged in a predetermined party, or have to socialize to achieve or acquire something in the game.
For example queuing solo in MOBA. Roaming solo in RvR. Doing public event solo without a party etc. Or even queuing dungeon in LFG solo.
Solo is a singleplayer game. You are solo, when you do not play with other players. If they kill your character, or take your mobs, or help you at some way, you are not solo, no matter if you are in party. It seems you do not understand that if you do not compete or cooperate with the other players, you play a singleplayer game actually and the idea of MMO is delusional. Like in the real life you may be alone even with thousands people around you. To be with them, you need interaction.
If that is the case why are people calling mmorpg single player game? They have dungeon, battleground, public event, world boss which require multiple people, RvR or massive pvp.
Granted they do have solo quest and single player campaign. How are a mmorpg which have everything I listed above be called solo games by many people on this forum.
My answer is many mmorpg forced people to do the solo campaign. And many people simply don't enjoy the group content provided by today's mainstream themepark game.
If you call a game multiplayer it just means it should have a feature supporting multiple players interacting at once. That doesn't mean it has to be exclusively multiplayer...
Like with dynamic events. You have an option to join the crowd in doing dynamic content without forming a group, yet be part of the group. So you can solo in a group event if you want. Plus the more players the more NPC's join in.
Haha, so the multiplayer game may be singleplayer. Well if we break a game on pieces and some of them are solo, you are kind of right. But that does not change the things - when you play solo, it is singleplayer, no matter how many players are online. And such a design usually makes the multiplayer parts pointless.
That's not at all the case, both for the design and development of the game. Making a game multiplayer means you need to add networking capability and it is a fundamental change to the code base. Single player games are designed for just the individual client and have all the data on a local machine. So while you can say that a particular feature is designed for groups or individuals or even both, the game itself will either be singleplayer or multiplayer by design. Basically, if there are people playing together in a game it is automatically considered multiplayer.
I'm talking about the rules of the gameplay. Coding does not matter. By your definition Dark Souls is a MMORPG.
Dark Souls is a Multiplayer game but it is missing the Massively component that makes up the two Ms in MMORPG. Do I really need to explain this or do you just not want to admit you might be wrong at some point?
There is absolutely no reason an MMORPG should focus on "A story" what so ever. It's a huge area of wasted development that could have been focused on making the game better instead of directing the player on a scripted narrative.
A narrative they will see over and over and over and over and over again.
Oh you got Morgan Freeman to voice a quest giver? Well that sounds like a shit load of wasted money.
The only story that should exist in an MMORPG is mine. That's it. Period.
It's hard to sell your game though when its hot out the cheese factory and plays just like everything else has for the last decade.
See without Story, Without Your Story, there is to real reason to play the game other then the quest for get More Stuff, be it power, or in game currency, or whatever, but.. beyond greed for the sake of it.. you have no goal.
Not to say that greed for the sake of it is a bad thing, often enough it can people many people grinding a game for years, just to have more arbitrary power.
But story. gives you a sense of why you are there to stat with. Now, it does not need to guide you from start to end, bu tit has it's place.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I kind of feel like FFXI did story pretty decently (even though I played for nearly 10 years and still didn't know the story in most expansions). For most stuff, cut scenes were individual, so you'd handle all that stuff yourself and then group stuff was mostly that (aside for a few fights but most didn't have you waiting around or you could trigger the cut scene before actually starting the fight if there was one at the area). In my mind, story should be optional in that regard, because everyone plays for different reasons and has different motivating factors. Some people need story to help them feel apart of the world, some want to tell their own story within the world, and some just dont care at all and are there just for the fights etc.
As a non-raider and non-PvPer i play mmorpgs pretty much exclusively for the story. But the fact that it is an mmorpg and not a single player rpg makes me sad when all mmo stories revolve around me as the sole hero.
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
As a solo player you play MMOs for the story. So why you play MMOs if you define yourself as a solo player? And do not blame me. The raids and PvP are the only multiplayer activities in the most so called MMORPGs.
You forgot dungeons and other small group content. I don't raid or PvP either but i play MMORPGs only because of small group content, which has been mostly removed or made stupid easy in modern MMOs.
Dungeons usually have raid bosses. I do not know what you think raid means, but in general it means to raid a boss.
For me raids are PvE encounters made for 10+ players. Dungeons on the other hand are small group content made for 3-5 players. I've been in the believe this was a universal industry standard but i guess it's now proven wrong.
That was a universal industry standard. That guy's just the product of too much inbreeding.
As a writer, I'm really puzzled by the idea that lore isn't story. When I write lore it doesn't seem any different from story. Something like item flavor text is at least mechanically different from story, but a lorebook is often literally a short story, and may contain the exact same lines of information that an NPC elsewhere might say directly to the player as part of a quest.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
As a writer, I'm really puzzled by the idea that lore isn't story. When I write lore it doesn't seem any different from story. Something like item flavor text is at least mechanically different from story, but a lorebook is often literally a short story, and may contain the exact same lines of information that an NPC elsewhere might say directly to the player as part of a quest.
as a writer you should understand this better then anyone.
Lore is World Building.
Story, is the Tale you Write.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I personally do not like story in mmorpg. The main quest and what not is usually always generic and doesnt really fit with the multiplayer world.
I prefer a game with awesome lore and then an in-game mechanism to herald the achievements of other players.
For example, if a game tells you who crafted an item, it tells a story in the world of what a player does. If someone puts a bounty on another player. If someone is the first to find hidden stuff.
Best yet was when people unlocked jedi. The goal is to have a game keep a history to some degree of what goes on.
Lore is great world building, but players make the story and the game should announce it.
Cryomatrix
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
As a writer, I'm really puzzled by the idea that lore isn't story. When I write lore it doesn't seem any different from story. Something like item flavor text is at least mechanically different from story, but a lorebook is often literally a short story, and may contain the exact same lines of information that an NPC elsewhere might say directly to the player as part of a quest.
as a writer you should understand this better then anyone.
Lore is World Building.
Story, is the Tale you Write.
Every story that you tell builds the world, that goes for most of the personal stories as well.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
As a writer, I'm really puzzled by the idea that lore isn't story. When I write lore it doesn't seem any different from story. Something like item flavor text is at least mechanically different from story, but a lorebook is often literally a short story, and may contain the exact same lines of information that an NPC elsewhere might say directly to the player as part of a quest.
as a writer you should understand this better then anyone.
Lore is World Building.
Story, is the Tale you Write.
Technically you are correct, but lore and story are dependent on each other. To separate them would be like saying you can separate the people and the landscape in a picture you like. It is not that you can't do it, just that you lose context when you do.
When we come to games, the dividing line is if anything more blurred, because of the way story and lore can appear in videos, quest text, written on a webpage.
I think a classic literary example of this issue is Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. You have a story The Hobbit, a story with lore/history Lord Of The Rings, then you have The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales which lean to story but sometimes feel like lore.
Writing can feel like you are dipping between the two. To borrow a phrase, story is showing and lore is telling.
If you call a game multiplayer it just means it should have a feature supporting multiple players interacting at once. That doesn't mean it has to be exclusively multiplayer...
Like with dynamic events. You have an option to join the crowd in doing dynamic content without forming a group, yet be part of the group. So you can solo in a group event if you want. Plus the more players the more NPC's join in.
Haha, so the multiplayer game may be singleplayer. Well if we break a game on pieces and some of them are solo, you are kind of right. But that does not change the things - when you play solo, it is singleplayer, no matter how many players are online. And such a design usually makes the multiplayer parts pointless.
I play Skyrim, a single player game. When I play an MMO, I can do things there (help others, join groups, chat with real people, do drive-by healings, raid, compete with others for resources) that I could never do in Skyrim, the single player game.
An MMO is never a single player game, but a player can ignore all of the other players and play "solo." "Solo" does NOT equal "single player." Two very separate and distinct terms.
As for "Story in MMOs" (on topic), not important to me. "LORE" however, makes all the difference between a mediocre game and a great game.
- 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
Comments
I would love to see an mmorpg with a really well done story that revolves around every player as part of a huge organization (hunters, mercenaries, traders, scholars, alchemists, etc, etc), not just as one person.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
For example queuing solo in MOBA. Roaming solo in RvR. Doing public event solo without a party etc. Or even queuing dungeon in LFG solo.
If I so wish, and I should, I should seek to work together with those people and form friendships, and, if I do do this, it should be MORE rewarding than solo gameplay. The MMO offers a unique opportunity and it should be capitalized upon. Those game features, including exclusive, instanced, Bioware type stories are anti-multiplayer in the most extreme way.
I am not opposed to story per se. Again, I like that the Warcraft story -- or "game lore," as others have more aptly called it -- is there if you care to access it. But you do not have to. Hell, with Warcraft, for example, I really never cared about the story, as I was so immersed in the fact that I was in a virtual world. Playing through it again, now I am following the story, and that too is cool.
We should provide freedom to the player, optimized around creating a virtual world in which they can behave like a person in that world.
Multiplayer is simply that: more than one player. You cannot really dictate how those "more than one players" interact with each other, but you should, in some way, encourage them to group up and make friendly, and optimize the game towards this end.
Facebook isn't a game. I'm not sure what's delusional about what I'm saying.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Granted they do have solo quest and single player campaign. How are a mmorpg which have everything I listed above be called solo games by many people on this forum.
My answer is many mmorpg forced people to do the solo campaign. And many people simply don't enjoy the group content provided by today's mainstream themepark game.
This is my opinion.
There is absolutely no reason an MMORPG should focus on "A story" what so ever. It's a huge area of wasted development that could have been focused on making the game better instead of directing the player on a scripted narrative.
A narrative they will see over and over and over and over and over again.
Oh you got Morgan Freeman to voice a quest giver? Well that sounds like a shit load of wasted money.
The only story that should exist in an MMORPG is mine. That's it. Period.
It's hard to sell your game though when its hot out the cheese factory and plays just like everything else has for the last decade.
Lore is:
- History of the World,
- What is going on
- Why things are the way they are.
Story is:- Why you are here
- What moves you from Point A to Point B
- Why you keep Playing.
See without Story, Without Your Story, there is to real reason to play the game other then the quest for get More Stuff, be it power, or in game currency, or whatever, but.. beyond greed for the sake of it.. you have no goal.Not to say that greed for the sake of it is a bad thing, often enough it can people many people grinding a game for years, just to have more arbitrary power.
But story. gives you a sense of why you are there to stat with. Now, it does not need to guide you from start to end, bu tit has it's place.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
Lore is World Building.
Story, is the Tale you Write.
I prefer a game with awesome lore and then an in-game mechanism to herald the achievements of other players.
For example, if a game tells you who crafted an item, it tells a story in the world of what a player does. If someone puts a bounty on another player. If someone is the first to find hidden stuff.
Best yet was when people unlocked jedi. The goal is to have a game keep a history to some degree of what goes on.
Lore is great world building, but players make the story and the game should announce it.
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Technically you are correct, but lore and story are dependent on each other. To separate them would be like saying you can separate the people and the landscape in a picture you like. It is not that you can't do it, just that you lose context when you do.
When we come to games, the dividing line is if anything more blurred, because of the way story and lore can appear in videos, quest text, written on a webpage.
I think a classic literary example of this issue is Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. You have a story The Hobbit, a story with lore/history Lord Of The Rings, then you have The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales which lean to story but sometimes feel like lore.
Writing can feel like you are dipping between the two. To borrow a phrase, story is showing and lore is telling.
An MMO is never a single player game, but a player can ignore all of the other players and play "solo." "Solo" does NOT equal "single player." Two very separate and distinct terms.
As for "Story in MMOs" (on topic), not important to me. "LORE" however, makes all the difference between a mediocre game and a great game.
- 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