Are multi-accounting ruining MMOs?

TheScavenger

I was thinking today after seeing a multi-accounter in WoW with 8 characters following him and it was very easy to tell it was the same person controlling all 8 characters...

But MMOs are about grouping, the social atmosphere and teaming up with others. Because if not, then its no different than playing a singleplayer RPG if all you are doing is doing all the group content by yourself.

One problem of multi-accounters comes from forced group MMOs (Pantheon will be a big issue if they don't deal with it)...but a previous MMO where this was a problem was Vanguard Saga of Heroes. Vast majority of content was grouping only...but then here comes a multi-accounter to solo it with all his characters.

How in any point is that fair for someone who can't afford all those accounts+PC(s) to set it all up? A game that forces grouping, but someone with money can just come along and solo it...which also completely nullifies the forced grouping part of the game.

Or end game in WoW. I've seen a multi accounter youtube video with over 20 accounts...soloing endgame content...by himself...

Not only does that make the forced grouping part of the game nullified, but that also ruins the social atmosphere. Why group at all when you can have potentially dozens of accounts to pretty much solo for you? Isn't the point however, of MMOs, to group? And why many MMOs have forced grouping content? 

MMO developers either need to make content for everyone, even endgame content, making multi-accounting pointless so its fair for everyone...or really start cracking down on people who bypass forced group content with all their accounts they control by themselves, so its fair for everyone.

Kyleran

Someone's envy is showing.


What the heck does fairness have to do in PVE centric MMOs, particularly if they are in a private instance and not denying others access.

Yes, I've been known to multibox and no, you cannot force me to group with you.

esc-joconnor

I don't think fair fits into the conversation. If they are only doing PvE content I don't see the issue. I saw a guy doing this in wow battlegrounds with a full team of Shamen. He was pretty deadly. THe same commands were being sent to each character, so 5 characters all attacking the same enemy at the exact same time. That should be considered an exploit.

TheScavenger

esc-joconnor said:

I don't think fair fits into the conversation. If they are only doing PvE content I don't see the issue. I saw a guy doing this in wow battlegrounds with a full team of Shamen. He was pretty deadly. THe same commands were being sent to each character, so 5 characters all attacking the same enemy at the exact same time. That should be considered an exploit.

Well, the way I see it, which you kinda go into a tiny bit as far as PvP concerned...

If there is PvP in an MMO, especially if its major content (like LOTRO pvp is a very minor side thing thats never at all updated so I wouldn't count it. Same with FFXIV)...means getting endgame items meant for endgame groups also effects PvP. Getting items most people can't get or need a large team of people to get (which takes a LOT of time), does make one better at PvP when the game (WoW) is highly about getting the best items and what not.

Which means that multi-boxer has an item advantage in PvP, where most people need a very dedicated guild to accomplish, or a casual guild but a LOT of time to get those items if it even ever happens.

Of course I did bring up Pantheon. Which is PVE only. That of course is harder to argue, since it isn't pay to win or have an over advantage over others like a PvP game would be. But, why design group content at all then at that point if allowing multi-boxers to just solo the content?

k61977

No problem at all as long as it isn't in a pvp setting.  Why shouldn't someone be able to do this for a purely pve experience.  If they don't want to group and can do it I say let them.  To me it just seems people get mad that they don't the know how or skills to do it themselves a lot of the time so they complain about it instead.  I have multiboxed before myself, don't really play to many MMO's anymore though like I used to, but to be honest I don't enjoy grouping anymore.  Most of the time the communities are so toxic that it drives me away from wanting to group.  That is the real issue.  The toxic behavior were you have to run things as fast as possible, forget that this might be your first time doing something, you can't enjoy it because the other person has done it hundreds of times already an they want you to go watch videos of others doing it instead of just enjoying it first hand.  The toxic behavior were you are still learning your skills but everyone expects you to know it all right from the start.  It just keeps going and going.  So in response if I decided to go back to playing MMO's like l once did I would most likely multibox again because it allows me to have fun at my own pace without having others try and screw it up.

Albatroes

OP, is this your first time seeing multi-clients or something? Its been around for at least 15 years (that was my first experience with it in FFXI). "Fair" is relative since those accounts are getting paid for one way or another. Its just like people selling in game loot for in game money, its all within the rules set, regardless if its "fair" or not.

So in short, no multi-clienting (multi-boxing) hasn't ruined mmorpgs since its been around during their peak. What's ruined mmorpgs is development (or competition if you want to hit the real core). Things being developed have no appreciation. Everything is made irrelevant in a matter of months, which in turn becomes predictable. If a person encounters something they dont like, they can either ignore it completely or stop engaging in the game period until a patch where devs always nerf/replace said content. There's also a lack of cohesion, which follows suit with the previous point, meaning, you dont have to do one thing in order to gain access to something else. With this kind of content constantly being churned out, it boggles my mind that a "hardcore" commmunity is even left in any mmorpg simply because they are doing literally the same thing in a different skin every 3 months and not even remembering the loot they get outside of the mount they may or may not use. I bet more people still remember the name of a weapon they got from ICC in WotLK from WoW vs even an armor peice they got from Antorus (since weapon drops are just vanity in legion). I will say mmorpgs are in a pathetic state atm, not really because of the lack of challenge, but more so the lack of purpose. I see some people saying things need to be "hard" but that's not really what made mmorpgs "good" in the past. What made them "good" was because there were less options, so you either did something or you were stuck, simple. Not try > fail > wait for nerf > fail again > wait to over gear via dungeon gear to get the vanity from it.

TheScavenger

Its funny how so far these posts support multi-boxing, but on these forums and other places pay to win MMOs get severely hated on. In both cases, the person is paying for an advantage.

TheScavenger

DMKano said:

TheScavenger said:

Its funny how so far these posts support multi-boxing, but on these forums and other places pay to win MMOs get severely hated on. In both cases, the person is paying for an advantage.

Again - mmorpgs have never been fair, back in 1998 and 1999 with UO and EQ1 - you could buy advantages for money be it - accounts, items, etc....

There is no fair play in mmorpgs you will always be able to pay for an advantage.

Then why does a huge amount of people always complain about pay to win MMOs if its never been fair? ArcheAge for example was heavily hated on here at MMORPG.com and Reddit for its pay to win. And BDO one of the things that drives many people away is the cash shop. Which is actually no different than paying for a bunch of accounts for an advantage. 

And also, many/some MMOs don't allow selling accounts or items (at least WoW doesn't, I've read about people brag about buying account(s) and getting banned).

Blizzard even has had an effort to banning people paying for (and starting up) raid groups to be speedrun through endgame content with paying real money.

No wonder so many on MMORPG.com hates newer MMOs all the time. They pay to win all of them and support the junk ones, and get stuck with trash that dies out. And so they are left with old MMOs where they can pay to win or pay for an advantage.

Now I know why so many gaming journalists hate their own viewers. Their viewers are stupid as hell.

EponyxDamor

Ruining MMOs? No. To say as much would be quite hyperbolic, as multi-boxing has been around as long as MMOs have been.

I don't think there is anything wrong with multi-boxing so long as players aren't breaking the EULA of the games they are playing. Additionally, as long as they aren't utilizing third-party tools to send multiple commands across several clients, I really don't see the problem. It really doesn't provide any additional power to that person or afford them any greater range of content completion that any other player doesn't also have access to.

TheScavenger

For a  forum that overall that sure complains about new MMOs being to solo friendly, not enough social/group content and complains of Destiny not being an MMO and how old MMOs were better...they sure love to support those who make group content into a solo experience

TheScavenger

DMKano said:

TheScavenger said:

Its funny how so far these posts support multi-boxing, but on these forums and other places pay to win MMOs get severely hated on. In both cases, the person is paying for an advantage.

Again - mmorpgs have never been fair, back in 1998 and 1999 with UO and EQ1 - you could buy advantages for money be it - accounts, items, etc....

There is no fair play in mmorpgs you will always be able to pay for an advantage.

actually, now I know where I saw you supporting pay to win before and terrible cash shop practices

https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/439526/quote-from-steam-player-2000-hours/p3

You were/are a big fan of Archeage. How that work out for yeah? Game still booming with population? : D Did archeage pay to win/terrible cash shop see it succeed? I see 312 on right now at time of this post on Archeage steam charts. 

aRtFuLThinG

Multi accounts have existed since the dawn of MMORPGs.

It is not a problem then and it is not a problem now.

TheScavenger

aRtFuLThinG said:

Multi accounts have existed since the dawn of MMORPGs.

It is not a problem then and it is not a problem now.

I do remember it being a thing in Ultima Online.

Which leads me to. If companies support players paying an advantage by having multiple accounts to skip group content...why not make every MMO let you buy endgame items? Of course like I said just a post above yours and to thread I linked, Archeage did this with an RNG based cash shop lottery system and everyone hated it seeing its dismal population numbers.

But...then I question even myself and would likely agree with DMKano on this...why do people hate THAT (pay to win/pay to lottery/pay for advantage cash shops) but not multiple accounts that is pretty much same thing as paying for advantage?

KnightFalz

TheScavenger said:

I was thinking today after seeing a multi-accounter in WoW with 8 characters following him and it was very easy to tell it was the same person controlling all 8 characters...

But MMOs are about grouping, the social atmosphere and teaming up with others. Because if not, then its no different than playing a singleplayer RPG if all you are doing is doing all the group content by yourself.

One problem of multi-accounters comes from forced group MMOs (Pantheon will be a big issue if they don't deal with it)...but a previous MMO where this was a problem was Vanguard Saga of Heroes. Vast majority of content was grouping only...but then here comes a multi-accounter to solo it with all his characters.

How in any point is that fair for someone who can't afford all those accounts+PC(s) to set it all up? A game that forces grouping, but someone with money can just come along and solo it...which also completely nullifies the forced grouping part of the game.

Or end game in WoW. I've seen a multi accounter youtube video with over 20 accounts...soloing endgame content...by himself...

Not only does that make the forced grouping part of the game nullified, but that also ruins the social atmosphere. Why group at all when you can have potentially dozens of accounts to pretty much solo for you? Isn't the point however, of MMOs, to group? And why many MMOs have forced grouping content? 

MMO developers either need to make content for everyone, even endgame content, making multi-accounting pointless so its fair for everyone...or really start cracking down on people who bypass forced group content with all their accounts they control by themselves, so its fair for everyone.

Are MMORPGs about grouping? Originally, yes. Now, not so much. Even if so, they are definitely not about fairness. Some will have more time to devote to them than most. Others will have more money to throw at them, and the machine that runs them. Online gaming is not and has never been a level playing field.

The point of MMORPGs from the perspective of the player is to have fun, with their own fun being of primary concern. However, grouping in MMORPGs isn't always that fun, and some simply don't like to group. In the old days players had to group regardless of their inclination to overcome difficult content. These days, it is technology to the rescue. Now those that have the resources can provide their own group and maximize their own fun, which is what gaming is about.

The point of MMORPGs from the perspective of the provider is to make money. From that point of view it doesn't matter to them if X number of people have X accounts, or if one person has X accounts. They make the same either way. Also, that the MMORPG market isn't exactly thriving at the moment, most if not all providers aren't in a position where they can just throw the opportunity for potential revenue away.

So, MMORPG developers don't need to do anything regarding multi-accounting or individuals proving their own personal group to do content with. They would be rather foolish to do so, as such could cause multi-account players to abandon their game and there is no guarantee they would be replaced by an equivalent amount of single account players.

TheScavenger

KnightFalz said:

TheScavenger said:

I was thinking today after seeing a multi-accounter in WoW with 8 characters following him and it was very easy to tell it was the same person controlling all 8 characters...

But MMOs are about grouping, the social atmosphere and teaming up with others. Because if not, then its no different than playing a singleplayer RPG if all you are doing is doing all the group content by yourself.

One problem of multi-accounters comes from forced group MMOs (Pantheon will be a big issue if they don't deal with it)...but a previous MMO where this was a problem was Vanguard Saga of Heroes. Vast majority of content was grouping only...but then here comes a multi-accounter to solo it with all his characters.

How in any point is that fair for someone who can't afford all those accounts+PC(s) to set it all up? A game that forces grouping, but someone with money can just come along and solo it...which also completely nullifies the forced grouping part of the game.

Or end game in WoW. I've seen a multi accounter youtube video with over 20 accounts...soloing endgame content...by himself...

Not only does that make the forced grouping part of the game nullified, but that also ruins the social atmosphere. Why group at all when you can have potentially dozens of accounts to pretty much solo for you? Isn't the point however, of MMOs, to group? And why many MMOs have forced grouping content? 

MMO developers either need to make content for everyone, even endgame content, making multi-accounting pointless so its fair for everyone...or really start cracking down on people who bypass forced group content with all their accounts they control by themselves, so its fair for everyone.

Are MMORPGs about grouping? Originally, yes. Now, not so much. Even if so, they are definitely not about fairness. Some will have more time to devote to them than most. Others will have more money to throw at them, and the machine that runs them. Online gaming is not and has never been a level playing field.

The point of MMORPGs from the perspective of the player is to have fun, with their own fun being of primary concern. However, grouping in MMORPGs isn't always that fun, and some simply don't like to group. In the old days players had to group regardless of their inclination to overcome difficult content. These days, it is technology to the rescue. Now those that have the resources can provide their own group and maximize their own fun, which is what gaming is about.

The point of MMORPGs from the perspective of the provider is to make money. From that point of view it doesn't matter to them if X number of people have X accounts, or if one person has X accounts. They make the same either way. Also, that the MMORPG market isn't exactly thriving at the moment, most if not all providers aren't in a position where they can just throw the opportunity for potential revenue away.

So, MMORPG developers don't need to do anything regarding multi-accounting or individuals proving their own personal group to do content with. They would be rather foolish to do so, as such could cause multi-account players to abandon their game and there is no guarantee they would be replaced by an equivalent amount of single account players.

Well this post is /thread

Can't beat the argument that the point of playing any game is to have fun.

mgilbrtsn

I don't buy the refrain that MMOs are being ruined or dying or anything else dire.  But for arguments sake, lets suppose that MMOs are ruined or dying or something else dire.  If anything multiple accounts are helping.  With the supposed disintegration of the MMO population, people with multiple accounts are helping to prop up MMOs by funneling money that otherwise would have left with the mythical diaspora happening.

Grunty

There just aren't that many people who can pay $120-$300 a month so they can solo raids.  No worries here.

Quizzical

If it's so hard to get a group for content with a fixed group size that multiboxing (which probably gives you a bad group, unless combat is trivial) gives you an enormous advantage, then the game's group content is terrible and it doesn't matter if multiboxing ruins it.

aRtFuLThinG

TheScavenger said:

aRtFuLThinG said:

Multi accounts have existed since the dawn of MMORPGs.

It is not a problem then and it is not a problem now.

I do remember it being a thing in Ultima Online.

Which leads me to. If companies support players paying an advantage by having multiple accounts to skip group content...why not make every MMO let you buy endgame items? Of course like I said just a post above yours and to thread I linked, Archeage did this with an RNG based cash shop lottery system and everyone hated it seeing its dismal population numbers.

But...then I question even myself and would likely agree with DMKano on this...why do people hate THAT (pay to win/pay to lottery/pay for advantage cash shops) but not multiple accounts that is pretty much same thing as paying for advantage?

They aren't skipping content though - they are still doing the same content, just with less number of controller.

Also the amount of effort to actually run dungeon as multi-accounts by a single player... I (and I suspect many others) wouldn't bother at all. It is more job than game if you have to get to that stage. So if those people wants to make it a job (unpaid job, in fact, might be a job that you are paying the company mind you), then well good luck to them.

I mostly only see multi-accounts for crafting (usually games that are crafting centric like SWG). I don't hear so much about multi-accounts for combat games.

TheDarkrayne

I am really surprised to see so many people on this site defending, even championing, multiboxing. I mean, if someone says they duped an item or something everyone goes crazy around here. If someone is botting, you all go crazy.

Multiboxing is OK, though? 

It a ridiculous concept and whether or not a game allows it, it's a form of cheating.

I mean, I just ignore it when I see it.. it doesn't bother me. But I do think to myself, every time, that it's pathetic that something like that is allowed when devs are constantly struggling and putting major effort into balance and things like that.

What is the point in nerfing a single Hunter's OP skill when someone is legitimately allowed to play 5 Hunters at the same time? Stupid.

WBadger

There's a difference between multiboxing and duping.  Duping usually involves exploiting a bug in the system to create a replica of a either a very powerful or very valuable item.  If there's an actual feature in the game that allows you to dupe, it's no longer duping but actual crafting because the developers intended the ability to replicate that item.

Multiboxing though in the case of WoW is someone purchasing another copy of the game, paying another subscription, and figuring out a method of controlling the other account.  The developers don't try to combat that because A. that's the developers gaining another sale of their game (more money, something THEY WANT.) and B. the people that multibox are a silent minority.  I'm not going to ask how the developers would want to combat that but rather WHY they would want to combat that?  Someone bought another copy of the game, leveled an additional character (Thus playing the game) and then figured out a way to control it in tandem with their original character.  They are playing the game same as anyone else, but they played it twice to gain an advantage.  There's nothing wrong with trying to gain an advantage over other players if you are doing so in a legitimate means.

Pay2win cash shops though are when the developers are taking the easy way out.  That's when they are putting something into the cash shop that are 100% required to pay for to remain competitive in a game, whether it's pvp or pve.  There's no gameplay required to gain this advantage, rather just a monetary requirement.  Nobody has to level an additional character from start to finish; just throw their credit card at any stage to gain a definite advantage.  Pay2win is lazy, but multiboxing does require you how to figure out how to not only utilize the multiple characters but also monitor them.

kjempff

There are many things "ruining" mmos. Multiboxing is not one, or at least so insignificant that it hardly qualifies as a "problem".

Albatroes

May the OP and some of us weren't playing the same game, cause even multi-boxing in its earlier days didn't have us not still requiring a group to do stuff, then again it does depend on the game at the bandwidth of the time.

For me, people didn't start "solo'ing" late game content until probably the final installment of Abyssea due to the implementation of the infinite auto-reraise atma (pretty much a buff you could get that would allow you to auto-rez indefinitely at the same value as a max level rez, with that being the rez that returned the most amount of exp since you lost exp when you died and could go down in level). That being said, people that ran probably more than 3 accounts and "solo'd" were often using other means like bots/trigger scripts/etc, which of course is against ToS in most games. You can't link access to something just because its there to something like buying straight up power because just because you can log into multiple toons at once doesn't mean everyone is operating them the same way or for the same purpose. And again, it goes back to my previous point of blaming development and not multi-clienting. If that buff was not in the game, it would not have been possible to do the large degree of "solo'ing" that was done later on in FFXI's lifespan, especially since many fights had enrage timers. Of course as time goes on and tech gets better, then response time/power creep/etc get better, so the access of multi-clienting allows for more things to be done, but again this is a result of poor development. If you look at the content that came post abyssea in FFXI, a lot of it was based around being solo friendly (in order to try and be competitive with other games that were coming out and 'looked' better).

Next thing you know is the OP will start blaming people that have more time to play games for ruining them. Life is unfair, but the difference between more time/more access and straight up buying an advantage is the effort. In order to get said advantage (legitimately at least), those people still have to put in a lot of time in order to gain it, vs buying 50$ worth of currency and going crazy in a cash shop to get power within 5mins.

iixviiiix

Being forced to group up with other created need for multi-boxing .

So the problem not being multi-boxing , but because those game are forced players to group up so it just ways people fight back the tyranny of game developers who want people to play as they rule .

TheScavenger

TheDarkrayne said:

I am really surprised to see so many people on this site defending, even championing, multiboxing. I mean, if someone says they duped an item or something everyone goes crazy around here. If someone is botting, you all go crazy.

Multiboxing is OK, though? 

It a ridiculous concept and whether or not a game allows it, it's a form of cheating.

I mean, I just ignore it when I see it.. it doesn't bother me. But I do think to myself, every time, that it's pathetic that something like that is allowed when devs are constantly struggling and putting major effort into balance and things like that.

What is the point in nerfing a single Hunter's OP skill when someone is legitimately allowed to play 5 Hunters at the same time? Stupid.

yeah I was surprised too. Maybe the days of people on MMORPG.com advocating that games like destiny aren't an MMO, and forced grouping games are NOT an archaic outdated MMO mechanic are over and now its time for the new breed of gamers...ones who want instant gratification (like WoW), and tons of solo content (like WoW) and quick easy gameplay. 

Guess that explains why so many oldschool "new" MMOs have failed these days compared to the new breed of MMOs that offer huge amounts of solo play and instant rewards (BDO, GW2, ESO and WoW being the biggest ones. FFXIV and EVE are the last big holdouts of the old ways of MMO). 

Does explain why oldschool MMOs in general, have gone to the wayside and ALL new breed of MMOs (the ones that are VERY solo friendly and/or have lots of action/easy gameplay) are far more popular.

Even pantheon I don't see much hype about compared to the new breed of MMOs. And now I fully understand why, and its the replies in this thread lol.

TheScavenger

iixviiiix said:

Being forced to group up with other created need for multi-boxing .

So the problem not being multi-boxing , but because those game are forced players to group up so it just ways people fight back the tyranny of game developers who want people to play as they rule .

yup. And its why I made this thread. I had a very good feeling people would reply in support of people soloing despite the games having forced group content. So I could link to this thread to people in the future whining about too much soloing and not enough grouping/socializing in MMOs and show them that this is what everyone supports...no grouping and finding any possible way (like multi boxing) to skip group content and multi box their way to soloing.

And this thread did what I wanted it to do in spades. But I was still surprised like I said above, I was hoping MMORPG.com forum users would put their money where their mouth is for all the years they complained about too much solo content.

But this thread brought out all the old classic MMOers of MMORPG.com to really show their true colors...them actually really not wanting solo/social content and allow anyone to solo to their hearts content as long as they have the money to do so. Which means they really don't want social/group content as a focus of MMOs, but actually the new breed of MMOs like WoW, BDO, ESO and GW2.