Basketball is a team sport, and nothing else, and as such requires a concerted team effort to play it. MMORPGs have content that requires team play, and a great deal else. There are many activities in them that don't require a team, so concerted effort within them is optional.
The two are not analogous, making any attempt to try to use one to bolster your personal view of the other into some sort of universal truth destined to fail.
So you claim the multiplayer in MMORPG is only optional?
Largely so, except for raids and the like, and what raids provide is generally only needed to tackle the next raid in the progression of difficulty. MMORPGs have become increasingly more suited to solo play in a good percentage of their content, and I see no indication this trend will stop any time soon.
From the view of sustained viability it is a good thing, and likely necessary for some of the smaller companies, as it gives them a wider net to cast to attract and maintain players with a variety of tastes and interests, while keeping the harder, group focused content for those that seek it.
Generally the more items on your menu the broader your appeal.
This was GW2. And they had this Event called "The Mad King Festival"
Each part of the Festival dropped a specific piece of cosmetic gear, like did you did the Pumpkin carving you could get a Helm. Etc.
Well, they had a this Jump Puzzle, called the "Mad Kings Clock Tower"
As it were, I failed hard at this tower, I kept trying and trying on my own, finally watched videos on how to do it, after I joke not, a whole week of nothing but doing this tower, I would make runs for 2 hours a day till my hands hurt.. and I must have failed hundreds of times, I finally beat it.
Well I got my new Title "Emissary of the Mad King" , and I went off and did that tower a few dozen more times.
Do I feel like I accomplished something? No.. see, it ceased to be fun to me to get that, it became a job, it became a task, work, it was not done for the enjoyment of the game, I had to study, I had to invest serious effort and time into mastering that jump puzzle just to beat it.
I didn't feel like I was having fun playing a game, I felt like I was at work, dealing with a problem that I needed to solve.
In the end, there is a line for some people when the game ceases to be about enjoying the game for the game it is, and it becomes a job.
For me, once that line becomes crossed, the game goes down hill. My desire to play lessens to the point that I stop playing, as I see it, if I wanted to deal with work like situations.. I'd just put in overtime at work.
I play games to escape that kind of stuff.
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.
Actually, the Massively Multiplayer refers to a large group of people playing in the same world, this can be together, this can be alone. This can be PVE, this can be PVP, else it would be a MGORPG, Massively Grouping Online Roleplaying Game. Really, you got it fundamentally wrong, I wish you could see that instead of getting more and more snarky when backed into a corner because your definition doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The first rule of a proper debate, knowing you might be proven wrong... Ohh, and having facts, AND knowing what facts are.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Solo and singlepayer are two different things. And you are talking about singleplayer - a gameplay where you can ignore the other players if such exist.
Single player games can only be played by one player. There are no other players, so they are not subject to being ignored.
MMORPGs require the capability for concurrent play with others, but do not require players to take advantage of that feature, so they can be played solo, but not singly, as other players will still be about. I routinely have little to do with other players in MMORPGs. They are still there, regardless of what I may choose to do.
Actually, the Massively Multiplayer refers to a large group of people playing in the same world, this can be together, this can be alone. This can be PVE, this can be PVP, else it would be a MGORPG, Massively Grouping Online Roleplaying Game. Really, you got it fundamentally wrong, I wish you could see that instead of getting more and more snarky when backed into a corner because your definition doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The first rule of a proper debate, knowing you might be proven wrong... Ohh, and having facts, AND knowing what facts are.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Can you play solo in a football match? Of course you can. Check Ronaldo, Messi or Neymar. But you cannot play singleplayer. There is not a special ball only for you, neither a special field or door. Do you get the difference? Solo and singlepayer are two different things. And you are talking about singleplayer - a gameplay where you can ignore the other players if such exist.
Sigh... I literally have to debunk every single thing you say before you can even consider being wrong aren't I?
Fine, time to put your constant sport analogies in the grave then. I find it funny you keep bringing them up because sports have NOTHING in common with MMORPGs. How come? You ask. Glad you did! Let me explain.
First of all, no sport is massively, none use 100s or 1000s of players at the same time. Furthermore, sports are team based, not multiplayer, look them up in a dictionary, they're not close to the same. The match is PVP which isn't a requirement for an MMORPG ( you would know if you knew the definition ) and it is heavily instanced, on a field or in a stadium. It is also non-persistent ( persistance actually being a requirement which you would know if you knew the definition ) because after the match its all said and done. Lets not even talk about the ORPG in MMORPG. Your example is the opposite of a real MMORPG, its an instanced battleground.
So, there you go. Don't you just love it when I respond in great detail to what you write? This in stark contrast to your responses that never actually connect to what is written or explained. And on that note, still haven't seen that definition and its source.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Actually, the Massively Multiplayer refers to a large group of people playing in the same world, this can be together, this can be alone. This can be PVE, this can be PVP, else it would be a MGORPG, Massively Grouping Online Roleplaying Game. Really, you got it fundamentally wrong, I wish you could see that instead of getting more and more snarky when backed into a corner because your definition doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The first rule of a proper debate, knowing you might be proven wrong... Ohh, and having facts, AND knowing what facts are.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Can you play solo in a football match? Of course you can. Check Ronaldo, Messi or Neymar. But you cannot play singleplayer. There is not a special ball only for you, neither a special field or door. Do you get the difference? Solo and singlepayer are two different things. And you are talking about singleplayer - a gameplay where you can ignore the other players if such exist.
[mod edit]
a Single Player games is where there are no other players.
Post edited by Vaross on
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.
And here you are, trying to decide what goes and what doesn't, again....
But I learned a valuable lesson today. Besides not knowing what an MMO is you also don't know what a MOBA is, go figure.
Its like a grave digging itself, fascinating.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Yeah, after I won 150 games in LoL, I have no idea what I play. It is so obvious Have fun, you are wrong, I'm right, and nothing can change that. It's karma, the will of the gods, it is in your gens. You are born with that issue - you are wrong, I'm right
Ohh I almost missed this gem. Funny you kept lecturing me on WoW then when you haven't even played that and I have 10 years and 5000+ hours in it... Obviously I had no idea what I was playing too, since you felt the urge to constantly correct me.....
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Actually, the Massively Multiplayer refers to a large group of people playing in the same world, this can be together, this can be alone. This can be PVE, this can be PVP, else it would be a MGORPG, Massively Grouping Online Roleplaying Game. Really, you got it fundamentally wrong, I wish you could see that instead of getting more and more snarky when backed into a corner because your definition doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The first rule of a proper debate, knowing you might be proven wrong... Ohh, and having facts, AND knowing what facts are.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Can you play solo in a football match? Of course you can. Check Ronaldo, Messi or Neymar. But you cannot play singleplayer. There is not a special ball only for you, neither a special field or door. Do you get the difference? Solo and singlepayer are two different things. And you are talking about singleplayer - a gameplay where you can ignore the other players if such exist.
Sigh... I literally have to debunk every single thing you say before you can even consider being wrong aren't I?
Fine, time to put your constant sport analogies in the grave then. I find it funny you keep bringing them up because sports have NOTHING in common with MMORPGs. How come? You ask. Glad you did! Let me explain.
First of all, no sport is massively, none use 100s or 1000s of players at the same time. Furthermore, sports are team based, not multiplayer, look them up in a dictionary, they're not close to the same. The match is PVP which isn't a requirement for an MMORPG ( you would know if you knew the definition ) and it is heavily instanced, on a field or in a stadium. It is also non-persistent ( which IS a requirement if you knew the definition ) because after the match its all said and done. Lets not even talk about the ORPG in MMORPG. Your example is the opposite of a real MMORPG, its an instanced battleground.
So, there you go. Don't you just love it when I respond in great detail to what you write? This in stark contrast to your responses that never actually connect to what is written or explained. And on that note, still haven't seen that definition and its source.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Brilliant!
I also fell into the trap and tried to use multiplayer for Basketball. You're absolutely correct it is team based.
And here you are, trying to decide what goes and what doesn't, again....
But I learned a valuable lesson today. Besides not knowing what an MMO is you also don't know what a MOBA is, go figure.
Its like a grave digging itself, fascinating.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Yeah, after I won 150 games in LoL, I have no idea what I play. It is so obvious Have fun, you are wrong, I'm right, and nothing can change that. It's karma, the will of the gods, it is in your gens. You are born with that issue - you are wrong, I'm right
Ohh I almost missed this gem. Funny you kept lecturing me on WoW then when you haven't even played that and I have 10 years and 5000+ hours in it... Obviously I had no idea what I was playing too, since you felt the urge to constantly correct me.....
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Well maybe I have no idea what I play. But you cannot argue you are wrong.
Sigh... I literally have to debunk every single thing you say before you can even consider being wrong aren't I?
Fine, time to put your constant sport analogies in the grave then. I find it funny you keep bringing them up because sports have NOTHING in common with MMORPGs. How come? You ask. Glad you did! Let me explain.
First of all, no sport is massively, none use 100s or 1000s of players at the same time. Furthermore, sports are team based, not multiplayer, look them up in a dictionary, they're not close to the same. The match is PVP which isn't a requirement for an MMORPG ( you would know if you knew the definition ) and it is heavily instanced, on a field or in a stadium. It is also non-persistent ( which IS a requirement if you knew the definition ) because after the match its all said and done. Lets not even talk about the ORPG in MMORPG. Your example is the opposite of a real MMORPG, its an instanced battleground.
So, there you go. Don't you just love it when I respond in great detail to what you write? This in stark contrast to your responses that never actually connect to what is written or explained. And on that note, still haven't seen that definition and its source.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Every competitive sport is massively multiplayer. You think in boxes, and every child can find these boxes in Google search. As I did But you forget one simple thing - games exist far before the computers, and will exist after there is no computers anymore. I say what is a multiplayer game. You argue what is a multiplayer video game.
Now shall we ask if the video games are games really?
Did you just do acid?
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
As a dwarf, I find reaching for bottles of mead off the top shelf in my local branch of Mead 4 Heroes R US kinda difficult.
Giants have no problem here — until they try uncorking the bottles with their MONSTER FINGERS.
That's why we need game mechanics that deliver more than the essential hierarchy of progression.
EASY has to include how players interface with the adventures on offer.
If I can jump, fight, change my gear, level up and fix chats with guildies — how EASY does Game X make it for me to do this?
If you Pitch essential accessibility at this noobsie level, you make it EASY for players to engage with your stories, whatever level they're at.
Easy is fluid gameplay, easy scenario to hard scenario.
(Best part about the SO STUPIDLY EASY IT IS UNTRUE setting on the Supermarket Mead Raid scenario? Deal is to hang around till the giants show up and spill MASSIVE AMOUNTS of the good stuff everywhere.)
Stumpiness & Unbridled Misery Masquerading as VIRTUE
Need an AI-Free Elf Names Generator to bring your next elven character to life? Why ... course you do, you darn fool!
Getting out of the box is not the same as going over the edge. I know you have difficulty with terminology but geez man......
In other news, that whole statement about computers snd sports and boxes is just completely unhinged, making literally no sense in any way. These words are not connected, these terms not interchangable, sports are not massively multiplayer. Not before computers, not during computers, and not even AFTER computers. Please don't tell me you also don't know what sports are, the rabbit hole starts going mighty deep then...
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
He does not understand what massively multiplayer means ... just witnessed it above. It is as clear as day this guy is so in love with his own arguments he does not realise what absurd lengths he has just gone to. Gone case.
So I make a little effort and typed - multiplayer game meaning - in Google. All the results on the first page were about video games, and in general they point - A multiplayer video game is a video game in which more than one person can play in the same game environment at the same time, either locally or over the internet.
I would say you are right, if that was not so obviously wrong. As most multiplayer games are not video games.
So someone - obviously not you, created a new meaning of the word multiplayer, so it can fit to his perspective.
So you googled the meaning of Multiplayer, the Internet confirmed that it wasn't the meaning you are giving it, but you still insist the Internet is wrong. I am not surprised coming from you.
The Term Multiplayer didn't exist before Videogames. Even the first multiplayer game, Pong (Atari ST), wasn't called Multiplayer, this is a term that was actually introduced with the first LAN parties and then the Internet. It's a fact.
Google all you like, though you don't trust google, so it doesn't really matter, I guess.
The Single Player came even after the Term Multiplayer, because at the beginning the Multiplayer games were so few, they were the exception, so there was no need for a new terms to define 95% of games. Once the Multiplayer and MMORPGs became more popular, people started to feel the need to give a name to the 'normal' games, so Singleplayer was the obvious choice.
The term Multiplayer was specifically being introduced to distinguish traditional games (later labeled Single Player), from games played by more than 1 player in the same instance (Lobby, Map, World, Zone).
The term multiplayer is never used in any other instance, sports included.
Monopoly, is not a Multiplayer game, it's called Board Game. Basketball, is not a Multiplayer game, it's called Team Game.
I've never heard anyone calling Basketball, Football or Soccer a Multiplayer Sport. Unless you are playing Fifa or Madden.
EDIT: Ok OP, I have to rewrite this since it has no real relation to your question.
Have i ever searched for "easy" in the MMORPGs I've played? To some extent, I guess. I've usually played in ff pvp open world mmorpgs. But my intention was to avoid PvP and do PvE. Technically, that's seeking out something easier. However, by playing in ffa pvp open world MMORPGs, I'm doing the opposite. And some days I might be tired or busy and I'll try to do small things. And I always try to find hte shortest distance between two points in whichever game I play, be it character development or combat or a quest. So yes I do think I've preferred easy in some circumstances, but it has to all be put into perspective. I might want it easier, but get exactly the opposite, and be fine with that. Matter of factly, that might be exactly what I want to see sometimes in the games I play.
yah.. I think your mind went a little too far out of the box and got lost, might do you some good to sit in a box for a while.
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.
So what is the problem with the MMORPGs? In general the claim they are massively multiplayer, even if all the players can play singleplayer. Not solo, but completely to ignore the other players.
I did not know that singleplayer term was created later. But it is pretty logical as you pointed.
Ok, since you are at least making an effort, I'll be patient, and try to give it a last go.
Right..... (Deep breath).
What I want you to understand is the importance of the terminology. Just because Football can be played by more than one player, it is not considered or called a Multiplayer game, ever. It's called Team game, a game that can be played by many players. The term 'Team' has roughly the same meaning of Multiplayer, it means a "group composed by many (multi) players". Football has been given that definition, not Multiplayer.
For gaming, people decided for the term Multiplayer instead.
Multiplayer, refers only to Videogames, you will not find any other
definition in any vocabulary of this world that associate Multiplayer
with anything else other than videogames. So you should not use it to define anything else, even if it kinda make sense.
If you use loosely the word Multiplayer, justified by the fact that 'technically' it means 'many players', you just cause lots of confusion when discussing with people (example this thread), that's why there are certain terms to define certain things. To avoid confusion.
We should stick with it.
You can't say that most players in Multiplayer games play in Singleplayer. It just doesn't make sense, because both have a precise meaning. People came up with the term ' Solo', to avoid the mistake you are doing (using the term Singleplayer instead of Solo), and avoid confusion.
The terms are: Multiplayer : Games that ALLOW many people to play in the same instance (map, lobby, world etc.) Singleplayer: Games that DON'T ALLOW more than one player to play in the same instance. Solo: Player who prefer playing alone in Multiplayer games.
Yes, 'Solo' means completely ignore other players! It's short for 'playing in solitude', you don't need to use the term singleplayer, this is a better definition to describe the scenario in your post.
So, there are well defined terms (for a reason). Let's use it properly please.
So what is the problem with the MMORPGs? In general the claim they are massively multiplayer, even if all the players can play singleplayer. Not solo, but completely to ignore the other players.
I did not know that singleplayer term was created later. But it is pretty logical as you pointed.
Ok, since you are at least making an effort, I'll be patient, and try to give it a last go.
Right..... (Deep breath).
What I want you to understand is the importance of the terminology. Just because Football can be played by more than one player, it is not considered or called a Multiplayer game, ever. It's called Team game, a game that can be played by many players. The term 'Team' has roughly the same meaning of Multiplayer, it means a "group composed by many (multi) players". Football has been given that definition, not Multiplayer.
For gaming, people decided for the term Multiplayer instead.
Multiplayer, refers only to Videogames, you will not find any other
definition in any vocabulary of this world that associate Multiplayer
with anything else other than videogames. So you should not use it to define anything else, even if it kinda make sense.
If you use loosely the word Multiplayer, justified by the fact that 'technically' it means 'many players', you just cause lots of confusion when discussing with people (example this thread), that's why there are certain terms to define certain things. To avoid confusion.
We should stick with it.
You can't say that most players in Multiplayer games play in Singleplayer. It just doesn't make sense, because both have a precise meaning. People came up with the term ' Solo', to avoid the mistake you are doing (using the term Singleplayer instead of Solo), and avoid confusion.
The terms are: Multiplayer : Games that ALLOW many people to play in the same instance (map, lobby, world etc.) Singleplayer: Games that DON'T ALLOW more than one player to play in the same instance. Solo: Player who prefer playing alone in Multiplayer games.
Yes, 'Solo' means completely ignore other players! It's short for 'playing in solitude', you don't need to use the term singleplayer, this is a better definition to describe the scenario in your post.
So, there are well defined terms (for a reason). Let's use it properly please.
Minor Note, a Solo Player, simply means someone who does not depend on other players, it in no way means they don't play with or against other other players.
Like in some Realms vs Realms, there are a lot of people who "Solo Scout" which means they are not dependent upon anyone else, but they still communicate enemy locations, and even engage in fights if necessary.
Just wanted to point that out.
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.
Ok, since you are at least making an effort, I'll be patient, and try to give it a last go.
Right..... (Deep breath).
When I learned English every multiplayer game, was simply multiplayer - a game with multiple players, without a video in front. These terms are defined now like that, to approve the existence of a certain kind of games. So, sorry, but I will disagree. You may feel comfortable to draw a line between the video games and the other games, but that line is delusional. All they follow the same rules.
The MMOs stop to be multiplayer, when they become virtual reality instead of games. So the question I asked few posts above - are MMOGs games really? It is the right one.
I have never in my life heard "Football" called a "Multiplayer game" it was always called a Team Game.
I mean, if you wanted to say Every Game that has other players is a multiplayer game, then games like, say "Candy Land" or "Life" or even sports like "100 yard dash" are Multiplayer games, and I might add PvP games as well, but the players can't affect each other, they can only focus on their own progress, they cannot modify or affect another players progress.
So even with those terms, there are a lot of kinds of Multiplayer games, and the only requirement is there are other players, not that they can affect each other.
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.
Single Player is where you can not interact with other players in game.
Simple enough?
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.
Single Player is where you can not interact with other players in game.
Simple enough?
And how you could in a safe solo PvE gameplay?
Regardless if a player solos, you can still trade with them, talk with them, and in all MMO's, players can team up and heal, buff, and help each other reach end goals, no matter how PvE focused they are.
We all get that you only view being an asshole to someone as "Interaction" but you are wrong.
Multiplayer means there are other players with you playing the game, and that you can interact with them. Not that you will, not that you can impose upon them, not that they need to interact with you, but that the potential is there.
Single Player games means you cannot interact with other players in game.
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.
Regardless if a player solos, you can still trade with them, talk with them, and in all MMO's, players can team up and heal, buff, and help each other reach end goals, no matter how PvE focused they are.
We all get that you only view being an asshole to someone as "Interaction" but you are wrong.
Multiplayer means there are other players with you playing the game, and that you can interact with them. Not that you will, not that you can impose upon them, not that they need to interact with you, but that the potential is there.
Single Player games means you cannot interact with other players in game.
No. How you will play with them?
Through Mutual Desire.
One of the best parts of a lot of modern MMO's is that players only have to interact with the players they want to interact with, as opposed to forced interaction.
Having the Option to Interact with others is what makes it Multiplayer, not being forced.
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.
Regardless if a player solos, you can still trade with them, talk with them, and in all MMO's, players can team up and heal, buff, and help each other reach end goals, no matter how PvE focused they are.
We all get that you only view being an asshole to someone as "Interaction" but you are wrong.
Multiplayer means there are other players with you playing the game, and that you can interact with them. Not that you will, not that you can impose upon them, not that they need to interact with you, but that the potential is there.
Single Player games means you cannot interact with other players in game.
No. How you will play with them?
Through Mutual Desire.
One of the best parts of a lot of modern MMO's is that players only have to interact with the players they want to interact with, as opposed to forced interaction.
Having the Option to Interact with others is what makes it Multiplayer, not being forced.
So it is not a multiplayer game. It may become such, or maybe not, and that does not depend on you. Well if I call a friend in messenger and we both play Skyrim, talking what and how we do it - so Skyrim is multiplayer, or even MMO with more friends?
Since you cannot interact with your friend in-game, then it remains a single player game.
If you can interact with other players in-game, it is a multiplayer game.
This is not hard to understand.
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 think difficulty in MMOs is difficult to define. Dark Souls is hard; Ni No Kuni II is easy. MMOs muddy the water a bit, though. I think most would hold EQ (or even FFXI) up as one of the more "hard" MMOs, but is it really? Sure it took forever to achieve anything, but throw enough players at the problem, and that difficulty begins to vanish. Find someone with enough free time, and the difficulty then becomes one of commitment, not skill. Contrast EQ with live WoW, for example, and I think from a skill perspective, WoW is far more difficult at its top end. Mythic raids are hard, and require tons of coordination where a single mistake from just one member of the raid will wipe the group. As some have said though, MMOs are made for the masses, and we see the vast majority of WoW's content is easy and accessible. The hard stuff is completely optional.
If we take a look at history, through games like Wildstar and Darkfall, I think we can see that "difficult" MMOs are very much a niche. There's nothing wrong with that. They have their place and target audience, but it should answer OP's question. Most of MMO gamers today like easy, or at least a more laid back approach in our MMOs. F2P and some B2P titles offer an entirely different argument though. BDO, for example, while considered to be well made, has been crafted from the beginning with microtransactions in mind, and much of the "difficulty" can be circumvented by throwing real money at the game. Other, true, F2P titles aren't even worth a mention as they are simply cash grabs that favor the largest wallet.
In the end, I favor a good narrative and story over difficulty. If I need to wade through difficult mechanics to get there, then so be it. I particularly love the way FFXI has evolved over the years. It's story, which is fantastic, is now accessible where once it was hidden behind extremely tough to complete content. For me, this always broke the content up in such a way that I felt very disconnected from what was happening. WoW, SWTOR, and FFXIV all tell their stories very well, for example, without breaking it up with needlessly difficult things. Those more difficult parts are reserved as endgame activities instead. That's my preference. Tell your story, and leave the difficulty up to choice.
Regardless if a player solos, you can still trade with them, talk with them, and in all MMO's, players can team up and heal, buff, and help each other reach end goals, no matter how PvE focused they are.
We all get that you only view being an asshole to someone as "Interaction" but you are wrong.
Multiplayer means there are other players with you playing the game, and that you can interact with them. Not that you will, not that you can impose upon them, not that they need to interact with you, but that the potential is there.
Single Player games means you cannot interact with other players in game.
No. How you will play with them?
Through Mutual Desire.
One of the best parts of a lot of modern MMO's is that players only have to interact with the players they want to interact with, as opposed to forced interaction.
Having the Option to Interact with others is what makes it Multiplayer, not being forced.
So it is not a multiplayer game. It may become such, or maybe not, and that does not depend on you. Well if I call a friend in messenger and we both play Skyrim, talking what and how we do it - so Skyrim is multiplayer, or even MMO with more friends?
You claim people do not have to play - so to compete and cooperate together, the game to be multiplayer. Even a map with 1000 afk players and 1 playing is MMO. Even if it is designed like this - 1000 players just get the progression for staying afk, and 1 have to play.
So singleplayer offline game could be a MMORPG, if I agree with you. But I will not. Sorry, some things are too stupid, even to me. If the players do not compete and cooperate the game is not multiplayer, period.
Interesting. So people have to compete and cooperate in the game. Thing is, I don't believe you. Cooperation examples have been given plenty and you've all shot them down or ridiculed them, you only want the compete part. Which is interesting because when we talk about that you dismiss most of it because it is consentual and you don't consider that proper competition. You just want forced conflict.
And then everything falls into its place. Your attitude on these forums, pushing your crap into everybodies face until they give up or just ignore you. Your change of tone and style when you are on the losing end, playing victim all of a sudden. You want forced conflict, and you need to be the winner. You want an MMO where you can grief, that is multiplayer to you. Which is hysterical because that is about the most anti multiplayer there is.
On the one hand I want this thread to get shot in the head and die in a fire because of the derailing, which I unfortunately have been a part of. And because how chokeful of absolute crap it is.
But on the other hand people need to keep pushing back against this nonsense, you can not think you are right just because everybody else gave up trying to talk some common sense into you. And although I gave you the benefit of the doubt before, thinking you simply don't get it, taking the above into account I am pretty sure now that you are doing this on purpose, just to grief.
A hint, we don't call that multiplayer, we call it being a jerk.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Comments
From the view of sustained viability it is a good thing, and likely necessary for some of the smaller companies, as it gives them a wider net to cast to attract and maintain players with a variety of tastes and interests, while keeping the harder, group focused content for those that seek it.
Generally the more items on your menu the broader your appeal.
This was GW2. And they had this Event called "The Mad King Festival"
Each part of the Festival dropped a specific piece of cosmetic gear, like did you did the Pumpkin carving you could get a Helm. Etc.
Well, they had a this Jump Puzzle, called the "Mad Kings Clock Tower"
As it were, I failed hard at this tower, I kept trying and trying on my own, finally watched videos on how to do it, after I joke not, a whole week of nothing but doing this tower, I would make runs for 2 hours a day till my hands hurt.. and I must have failed hundreds of times, I finally beat it.
Well I got my new Title "Emissary of the Mad King" , and I went off and did that tower a few dozen more times.
Do I feel like I accomplished something? No.. see, it ceased to be fun to me to get that, it became a job, it became a task, work, it was not done for the enjoyment of the game, I had to study, I had to invest serious effort and time into mastering that jump puzzle just to beat it.
I didn't feel like I was having fun playing a game, I felt like I was at work, dealing with a problem that I needed to solve.
In the end, there is a line for some people when the game ceases to be about enjoying the game for the game it is, and it becomes a job.
For me, once that line becomes crossed, the game goes down hill. My desire to play lessens to the point that I stop playing, as I see it, if I wanted to deal with work like situations.. I'd just put in overtime at work.
I play games to escape that kind of stuff.
MMORPGs require the capability for concurrent play with others, but do not require players to take advantage of that feature, so they can be played solo, but not singly, as other players will still be about. I routinely have little to do with other players in MMORPGs. They are still there, regardless of what I may choose to do.
Fine, time to put your constant sport analogies in the grave then. I find it funny you keep bringing them up because sports have NOTHING in common with MMORPGs. How come? You ask. Glad you did! Let me explain.
First of all, no sport is massively, none use 100s or 1000s of players at the same time. Furthermore, sports are team based, not multiplayer, look them up in a dictionary, they're not close to the same. The match is PVP which isn't a requirement for an MMORPG ( you would know if you knew the definition ) and it is heavily instanced, on a field or in a stadium. It is also non-persistent ( persistance actually being a requirement which you would know if you knew the definition ) because after the match its all said and done. Lets not even talk about the ORPG in MMORPG. Your example is the opposite of a real MMORPG, its an instanced battleground.
So, there you go. Don't you just love it when I respond in great detail to what you write? This in stark contrast to your responses that never actually connect to what is written or explained. And on that note, still haven't seen that definition and its source.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
a Single Player games is where there are no other players.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I also fell into the trap and tried to use multiplayer for Basketball. You're absolutely correct it is team based.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
In other news, that whole statement about computers snd sports and boxes is just completely unhinged, making literally no sense in any way. These words are not connected, these terms not interchangable, sports are not massively multiplayer. Not before computers, not during computers, and not even AFTER computers. Please don't tell me you also don't know what sports are, the rabbit hole starts going mighty deep then...
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I am not surprised coming from you.
The Term Multiplayer didn't exist before Videogames.
Even the first multiplayer game, Pong (Atari ST), wasn't called Multiplayer, this is a term that was actually introduced with the first LAN parties and then the Internet.
It's a fact.
Once the Multiplayer and MMORPGs became more popular, people started to feel the need to give a name to the 'normal' games, so Singleplayer was the obvious choice.
The term Multiplayer was specifically being introduced to distinguish traditional games (later labeled Single Player), from games played by more than 1 player in the same instance (Lobby, Map, World, Zone).
The term multiplayer is never used in any other instance, sports included.
Monopoly, is not a Multiplayer game, it's called Board Game.
Basketball, is not a Multiplayer game, it's called Team Game.
I've never heard anyone calling Basketball, Football or Soccer a Multiplayer Sport. Unless you are playing Fifa or Madden.
Have i ever searched for "easy" in the MMORPGs I've played? To some extent, I guess. I've usually played in ff pvp open world mmorpgs. But my intention was to avoid PvP and do PvE. Technically, that's seeking out something easier. However, by playing in ffa pvp open world MMORPGs, I'm doing the opposite. And some days I might be tired or busy and I'll try to do small things. And I always try to find hte shortest distance between two points in whichever game I play, be it character development or combat or a quest. So yes I do think I've preferred easy in some circumstances, but it has to all be put into perspective. I might want it easier, but get exactly the opposite, and be fine with that. Matter of factly, that might be exactly what I want to see sometimes in the games I play.
Right..... (Deep breath).
What I want you to understand is the importance of the terminology.
Just because Football can be played by more than one player, it is not considered or called a Multiplayer game, ever.
It's called Team game, a game that can be played by many players.
The term 'Team' has roughly the same meaning of Multiplayer, it means a "group composed by many (multi) players".
Football has been given that definition, not Multiplayer.
So you should not use it to define anything else, even if it kinda make sense.
People came up with the term ' Solo', to avoid the mistake you are doing (using the term Singleplayer instead of Solo), and avoid confusion.
The terms are:
Multiplayer : Games that ALLOW many people to play in the same instance (map, lobby, world etc.)
Singleplayer: Games that DON'T ALLOW more than one player to play in the same instance.
Solo: Player who prefer playing alone in Multiplayer games.
Yes, 'Solo' means completely ignore other players! It's short for 'playing in solitude', you don't need to use the term singleplayer, this is a better definition to describe the scenario in your post.
So, there are well defined terms (for a reason).
Let's use it properly please.
Like in some Realms vs Realms, there are a lot of people who "Solo Scout" which means they are not dependent upon anyone else, but they still communicate enemy locations, and even engage in fights if necessary.
Just wanted to point that out.
I mean, if you wanted to say Every Game that has other players is a multiplayer game, then games like, say "Candy Land" or "Life" or even sports like "100 yard dash" are Multiplayer games, and I might add PvP games as well, but the players can't affect each other, they can only focus on their own progress, they cannot modify or affect another players progress.
So even with those terms, there are a lot of kinds of Multiplayer games, and the only requirement is there are other players, not that they can affect each other.
Simple enough?
We all get that you only view being an asshole to someone as "Interaction" but you are wrong.
Multiplayer means there are other players with you playing the game, and that you can interact with them. Not that you will, not that you can impose upon them, not that they need to interact with you, but that the potential is there.
Single Player games means you cannot interact with other players in game.
One of the best parts of a lot of modern MMO's is that players only have to interact with the players they want to interact with, as opposed to forced interaction.
Having the Option to Interact with others is what makes it Multiplayer, not being forced.
If you can interact with other players in-game, it is a multiplayer game.
This is not hard to understand.
And then everything falls into its place. Your attitude on these forums, pushing your crap into everybodies face until they give up or just ignore you. Your change of tone and style when you are on the losing end, playing victim all of a sudden. You want forced conflict, and you need to be the winner. You want an MMO where you can grief, that is multiplayer to you. Which is hysterical because that is about the most anti multiplayer there is.
On the one hand I want this thread to get shot in the head and die in a fire because of the derailing, which I unfortunately have been a part of. And because how chokeful of absolute crap it is.
But on the other hand people need to keep pushing back against this nonsense, you can not think you are right just because everybody else gave up trying to talk some common sense into you. And although I gave you the benefit of the doubt before, thinking you simply don't get it, taking the above into account I am pretty sure now that you are doing this on purpose, just to grief.
A hint, we don't call that multiplayer, we call it being a jerk.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer