Culture clash

Hawkaya399

What's the meaning of my thread title? I'm referring to the conflict between casuals and hardcores, or creative-builders and survival-builders (in survival sandbox games), or last but not least real-time gamers and turn-based gamers. Indeed there're many others, like story-oriented gamers and combat-oriented gamers. Because of the divide between them, cultures usually form and these opposing cultures clash.

I've considered myself hardcore since the early days. I've never enjoyed playing on easy difficulty. I've always opted for the most despised games, the ones that were frequently chastised as being "grindy" and "unforgiving" and "depth to a fault" and "too much backtracking" and "too much combat filler" and "artificial difficulty". I hated cheating. It's simply not fun. To this day I don't think I've ever used a cheatcode unless it was aesthetic or bug checking. For me, a game isn't fun unless I die and get mad multiple times. I've long played in PvP MMO's or on PvP servers. I prefer FFA PvP in open world. PvE by itself too often doesn't present enough challenge or danger. And if the PvP is too restrictive, or too fair, things become too safe.

Hidden behind my every move in my gaming life has been a desire to play what I like to play. The problem? It usually conflicts with somebody else, or some sizeable group of players. In my pursuit to play what I like to play, I've frequently met with frustration, anger, and even loathing for those I don't agree with. Example? I mildly loathe players who just want to creatively build things in survival sandboxes, perfectly safe from harm or consequences. What's the point of building something if it can't be destroyed or you can't suffer any kind of repercussion if you did it badly? I've never seen the point  because everytime that ocassion has come up on me I lose interest. It's hard to fathom why they like it. This kinds of gamers are widespread and they can pollute game I like, making it become something I don't like.

One common theme in my gaming life has been a disliking for the frustration I feel in those moments when I loathe somebody or some group of players. I don't like me when I'm that way. When I observe myself in the moment, I'm a self-absorbed toxic a**hole, unfriendly and unreachable. It's like looking in the mirror and not liking the reflection.

We could call each other names. It seems like a popular name for hardcores is elitists. A popular name for casuals is carebear. How far can it go? How many labels can we throw at each other until we run out? I'm in my 40's. For a while I've been losing interest in judging other gamers based on their gaming choices. If I know somebody is a carebear (or whatever I disagree with), I tend to think that's how they're, and I try to adopt the live and let live motto. Insulting them or throw flames isn't healthy. It's the inspiration for making this thread. How to be a better person--err gamer.

Anybody feel me. Maybe not.

In toher news, I'm eeying this game. If this is part of their survival mode in the future, I agree with the poster, sign me up!:

And now a song for us all. To sit here around a campfire under the stars and contemplate our differences, and why we can't find peaceful ways to settle our disagreements, and live long and prosper together on this world:

Ungood

I have and will always preach the idea that an MMO should build for a target demographic and be damned anyone else.

Nothing is worse than an MMO trying to please everyone, as opposed to focusing on being something great for a specific demographic.

This idea of putting in things to make "everyone happy' ruins MMO's. If a developer wants to make a cake-walk-easy-mode MMO for care bears.. then.. they should go all in, and make that MMO, focus on that group, and everyone else.. can either deal, or find something else to play.

Equally so, if an MMO wants to make grown ass men cry with massive difficulty, they should own that and ride it and let everyone else hang.

Basically, it comes down to the Devs needing to have a set of balls and being able to say "Well then, this is just not going to be the game for you" 

Hawkaya399

Ungood, thanks for your reply. While I think it's well and good to produce for a single demographic, sometimes it's possible for a game to have different modes. In FPS games, for example, there was deahtmatch MP and some other MP, and story-mode. In strategy games, there was the campaign and also a skirmish mode--generally with random map, as well scenarios. In sandbox survival games, like minecraft and mahny others, there's usualy a creative and survival mode. I don't think ti's wrong for games to have these modes. Ironically, remove the 'e' from "modes" and you have mods. Modding is a huge component in gaming. Allowing players to adjust their game both by creating and/or installing mods has had positive results. So why not add a couple of modes if it's practical developmentally, and allow the players to take it from there? I've enjoyed over the years to "mode" my games by changing the options for creating a new game or in the main menu.

In an MMORPG I suppose it's different,  but not completely. The nature of an MMO is to put everybody together in teh same place and that's a major part of the problem, but it's still possible to have different servers and different styles of progressing on a single server. I agree however it can cause more trouble, possibly more than it's worth depending who they're trying to attract.

But everything I say here is all on paper. In practice, it's a lot harder to do this. The two or more modes in a single player game do seem to fight for priority, and it does seem like one or the other wins out, or predominantly defines the game.

I think I largely agree though. Eventually a target audience needs to be established, especially in this saturated market. A maker needs to know who they're making for. Like David and Goliath, ti's better to target something practical--re: niche--instead of going after Goliath everytime. And who knows, the little niche might be like a crack in a dam and explode to become hte next paradigm shift in mainstream gaming, but it's so unlikely it should never be expected.

Anyway, the reason I made this thread was to hopefully remind everyone to chill out. Don't insult. Listen to Sounds of Silence. How oftne do we communicate, but not really communicate? How often are we just confused when trying to communicate, and that's the summing up of these cultural slugfests.

Syanis

I'll agree with what others have said that a core issue is developers trying to make a game to please everyone and it ends up really pleasing no one. A game should instead be made for a niche which will interest a specific type or types of players that are compatible. 

However one thing also is we keep splitting the kind of players into either *casual* or *hardcore* and acting like that sums it up and we only have two kinds of players. That however is completely false. We have many different types of players and while the names can sometimes be swapped around these are some that I've seen.

Carebears - They want everything right now and easy. Everything should be so easy that the worst player can achieve the top. 

Casuals     - They play lightly and just kind of go with the flow. They don't invest very much time.

Hardcore   - The oppose of casuals. They play heavy often directional and invest a lot of time.

Elitists       - They only care about trying to be the very top. Content other then top content doesn't interest them but only being able to feel superior to the rest.

PvPr's        - They only care about pvp and the rest of the game is just an annoyance. They want to just smash other players all day long and fair fights usually don't matter to them.

Groupers  - They enjoy the social aspect of the game, making friends, making connections, and building a name as a character.

Soloists    - They enjoy running around alone and being *forced* into grouping pisses them off. The MMO part of the game is usually just for the showoff factor at best to them.

RPer's       - Similiar to groupers but they like taking their fiction of their character to another level socially.

There are more I'm missing I'm sure. Point is though some of these work well together and can even be the same player. However others don't get along and a game simply cannot successfully design itself for both groups. For instance a carebears often do not get along with non carebears in most of the other categories but then they are the biggest group as well. Catering to carebears can do alright with casuals because it won't effect them much but carebears won't get alone with hardcore, elitists, pvpr's, or groupers usually that aren't also carebears. 

This however also reflects the change in culture of the generations. The older gamer generation believed in gaming like we did in work which was work hard, learn your stuff, invest time, commitment, and eventual success in the end. Younger gamers want that success but don't want to wait very long. They don't work hard, they don't want to learn much, they don't want to invest time.... but they will spend more money for what they want faster. 

delete5230

My gripes with everything is this:
mmorpg's have changed into something that is not an mmorpg. Therefore they should be called something else, because they are NOT mmorpgs.  I don't even care if people like what they are, just DON'T call them mmorpgs.

Even the classics have turned into NOT mmorpgs, leaving no mmorpgs.

What are they ?... simple "games online" with others on your screen.
What are they ?... simple "cash shops" and they don't belong.

HALF THE PEOPLE AGREE.  They are disappointed because they want an mmorpg.
HALF THE PEOPLE ADAPTED.  Their OK with the change even if they are not mmoprgs.

Everything above is done by developers not the players ! 



My gripe with the people here:
They call the new abomination mmorpgs !
I could even live with that.... But they argue that a real mmorpg shouldn't even exist !

I say HALF the people agree, and the other HALF adapted.  However it wouldn't look that way because of roughly "ten very vocal power posters dominate" this site.



Something else thats interesting is, most that like mmoprgs are no longer here because they politely left.  They feel it's not worth arguing over. 

This makes wayyyyy MORE THAN HALF !


Again, we have no mmoprgs      

Phry

Hardcore seems a bit open to interpretation, some see it as a 'style' of gameplay and some see it as meaning anyone who invests over 20 hours a week in a single game, those types also tend to not play more than 1 or 2 games at any one time. Casuals imo, are people who tend not to focus on just one game and spread their time over 3 or 4 games, i think 'casual' is probably a misnomer as they likely spend as much, if not more, time playing games as 'hardcore' gamers. Why this is seen as some kind of culture clash i can't imagine as it seems more like people complaining, not so much that casual players play the same games as hardcore players, but that they play other games as well. 

Cryomatrix

@op ;

Play path of exile in hardcore, ARPG, you die, char is done and goes to softcore.

Ungood

Hawkaya399 said:

I think I largely agree though. Eventually a target audience needs to be established, especially in this saturated market. A maker needs to know who they're making for. Like David and Goliath, ti's better to target something practical--re: niche--instead of going after Goliath everytime. And who knows, the little niche might be like a crack in a dam and explode to become hte next paradigm shift in mainstream gaming, but it's so unlikely it should never be expected.

Anyway, the reason I made this thread was to hopefully remind everyone to chill out. Don't insult. Listen to Sounds of Silence. How oftne do we communicate, but not really communicate? How often are we just confused when trying to communicate, and that's the summing up of these cultural slugfests.

Do you know why MMO's 'evolve' and this often leads to them going to shit?

Trying to please too many groups. That is the core problem with games really, and the reason for the name calling, is because of ruined games.

To use two examples.

Dungeons and Dragons Online: This was a great game, that really was not an easy game, it's vastly complex character development based on the 3.5 AD&D rules, and as far as gear goes, this was not for the weak of heart, or anyone looking for a push-button-get-loot kind of game, this was old school, rare named loot, with a 1% drop rate, where players set up to run dungeons and raids hundreds of times to get their gear set up. And this game was about Raids, not easy stuff either. You had 12 people, and a whole lot of limited resources to beat the BBEG.

Then they tried to bring in more casuals, revamped gear, did all kinds of bullshit to easy mode the game, devalued and even nerfed raid gear, and all in all , ruined the whole game for the hardcore players that had been enjoying what it was as it was for the last few years.

It's impossible for the hardcore players to not be bitter towards the casuals for screwing over their game like that.

GW2 was marketed and designed to be the MMO for players that were jaded and burned out on traditional MMO's, and to that end, their Core game was spot on. Then the Hardcore players came in, cried, whined and complained that they needed more challenge and what have you. As opposed to saying "This is a game for people burned out in that" they instead started to ramp up the difficulty across the whole game with their final gracepoint being putting in Raids. Totally screwed over the whole feel and nature of the game.

It is impossible as a Casual not to be bitter at Hard Core players for screwing over their game like that.

And a large part of this problem stems from a developer not holding to a target demographic. They need to make a game for a target group, and focus on delivering the best game for that group of players.

If others want to play as well, they can, but the developer needs to keep the course going in one direction, and not look like some horny dog trying to hump every knee cap on the street.

When they play that kind of BS, it makes the game look directionless, like they have no idea what they are trying to do with what they have, or where they want to go with what they have, and this results in people looking faith in the game itself. 

Ungood

Syanis said:

Carebears - They want everything right now and easy. Everything should be so easy that the worst player can achieve the top. 

Minor Correction.

Carebear - Means someone that only PvE's, a player that does not like nor will they engage in PvP combat. This has nothing to do with how hard or easy the PvE content is.

Vermillion_Raventhal

I like solo combat because I don't like being forced to deal with online players.  I do group but like it to be natural or with friends.  Basically group on my terms. 

I do like depending on other players for trade, repair, healing, kingdom building and etc. 

I like PvP and kingdom building but don't like going through grinds or power gaps to get there.

AlBQuirky

Some good points!

The trouble is, not every "category" s being served anymore. It has all become a mish-mash of everything and plays like gray-green gravy: tasteless and awful. As the old saying goes, one can be a master of one thing, or average at lots of things.

Some of the categories may be able to co-exist, but one that I have yet to see work is PvE and PvP in the same game. One effects the other in basic gameplay, no matter how separated (different servers, toggle, etc). A crowd control mechanic that is fun in PvE will usually not be tolerated in a PvP game. Losing control of your character (rooting, blinding, fearing, sleeping, etc) is not fun in a PvP contest, yet is inordinately fun in a PvE contest.

Now, being civil on a message board is a great goal to strive for, but with internet anonymity, goes by the wayside way too often

PS: Great Simon & Garfunkel song! One of the few "remakes" I enjoy of songs is Disturbed's

Amathe

I think the problem lies with false equivalencies. People playing 2 hours a week wanting the same rewards as people playing 30 hours a week. People doing relatively easy content wanting the same rewards as someone doing more challenging content. And over time things got easier and easier to satisfy the desires of people who simply want things without needing to do much to get them. Now it's so bad, people just buy stuff in a cash shop.

goboygo

"I mildly loathe players who just want to creatively build things in survival sandboxes, perfectly safe from harm or consequences." This statement is pretty creepy actually.

Vermillion_Raventhal

Amathe said:

I think the problem lies with false equivalencies. People playing 2 hours a week wanting the same rewards as people playing 30 hours a week. People doing relatively easy content wanting the same rewards as someone doing more challenging content. And over time things got easier and easier to satisfy the desires of people who simply want things without needing to do much to get them. Now it's so bad, people just buy stuff in a cash shop.

Lol there are no false equivalencies.  There are taste and opinions.  You simply want things because you play more.  

I agree you should have more stuff within limit because games are meant to be played.  But not everyone wants to grind their life away.  

anemo

People that like PvP tend to also spend less on things that are allowed to be monetized by the community (mostly just cosmetics).   At least in cases where the point is to be an MMORPG, compared to something like an FPS.

So if you're expecting an AAA publisher to make your PvP sandbox, you can expect it to have clash of clans like monetization (to make up for those loses above).   Where you're able to do things like buy protection mode, buy resources that can be turned into attacks, and similar.

centkin

Really it falls under a few sliders.

1) How much do you feel you need to inflict your will over others?
2) How much do you micromanage your time played in game?
3) How much time do you play in game?
4) How much enjoyment do you get setting others back?
5) How important to you is interacting with the game as a world vs it just being a game?

Where those sliders are set determine just what kind of player you are.

Hawkaya399

Now a day later after making this thread, maybe I can try to sum up again the reasoning for making it. Have you ever got into an argument with someone in a forum or in-game over the way the game is played or should be played? Have you ever felt like a game was turning into something you don't like anymore, and you, in part, blamed it on certain kinds of players? Well that's what this is about. It's about the differences between players and how divisions between them foster conflicting cultures. It's unhealthy. Take a look at any forum for any game and you can actively see these divisions form and the ensuing exchanges of insults and finger pointing.

Maybe I've imagined it all along and we're all one happy family. Maybe I'm the only player who's ever disagreed with someone else on gameplay or choice of game, but I doubt that. I've seen these disagreements and "flamewars" for over 20 years. Even the posters in this thread are disagreeing on things.

Something I've long thought about is how we all might fail to appreciate our limited understanding, not realizing many of our thoughts about games are restricted to our own tastes. We like what we like individually, but somehow we inflate the importance of our choices or understandings. I can try to make a metaphor. For example, so you like Strawberry Icecream with some fresh milk? Well you then create a thesis on how Strawberries are special because they have a particular ingredient, and how milk and iccream AND Strawberries are scientifically the most amazing combination possible. All along you fail to acknowledge the fact everything can be explained merely by your preference for Strawberry icecream with some fresh milk. How much more simple would our world be if we could just be happy with our preferences and not try to exaggerate its importance?

So I like to die in games and be attacked and system-heavy features and sandbox and simulation and so forth, but at the end of the day, I shouldn't pretend I know anything about someone who DOESN'T like what I like. So I really stand on no solid ground to attack their preferences. It's like throwing stones at others from a glass house.

Maybe some of us want to feel like we're validated by others. Like others agree with us and we're logical and sound. We're popular. Maybe this is why some of us aren't happy with JUST our preferences, but have to somehow conclude they're representative and acceptable, or belong to a special minority.

Or maybe we I don't like to feel alone or alienated from others. Sometimes it's hard for me to find gamers who like what I like. I do find them, but the vast majority of gamers seem to be different than me, enjoying things I don't enjoy nearly as much. It's hard to relate to others when they enjoy somehting I don't.

More than anything, I'm eager to find a game I like and just play it, and not care what anybody else is playing, or what may or may not happen to the game I'm playing. Therer'e so many games now. There're so many choices. I'm staggered by the number of choices now. When I first started PC gaming in 1994, it was nothing like today. I'ts true games tend to be different then, but there far fewer choices. If you have the will and persistence to search for it, and you can comprimise, you can find just about anything now. Be it looking on Steam or Epic Games Store or the multitude of other options like GoG or Abandonwar sites, or googling emulateed servers, googling early development games (like Dual Unvierse), or searching the open source games. If you can't find a game you like now, you're not trying hard enough.

Hawkaya399

delete5230 said:

My gripes with everything is this:
mmorpg's have changed into something that is not an mmorpg. Therefore they should be called something else, because they are NOT mmorpgs.  I don't even care if people like what they are, just DON'T call them mmorpgs.

Even the classics have turned into NOT mmorpgs, leaving no mmorpgs.

What are they ?... simple "games online" with others on your screen.
What are they ?... simple "cash shops" and they don't belong.

HALF THE PEOPLE AGREE.  They are disappointed because they want an mmorpg.
HALF THE PEOPLE ADAPTED.  Their OK with the change even if they are not mmoprgs.

Everything above is done by developers not the players ! 



My gripe with the people here:
They call the new abomination mmorpgs !
I could even live with that.... But they argue that a real mmorpg shouldn't even exist !

I say HALF the people agree, and the other HALF adapted.  However it wouldn't look that way because of roughly "ten very vocal power posters dominate" this site.



Something else thats interesting is, most that like mmoprgs are no longer here because they politely left.  They feel it's not worth arguing over. 

This makes wayyyyy MORE THAN HALF !


Again, we have no mmoprgs      

I feel so sorry for you delete because there's some truth to your posts, but some dead ends. There's a lot of pain I think too. Don't ever feel like you're alone or can't find something. You're never alone, nor is there never something to enjoy. It's all about surviving the valleys so you can get to the peaks.

So I think what you're saying is soloing became so popular MMORPGs are now sinlge player games disguised as MMO's. amiright?

I think you're only partially right. And maybe friend that's where the hope is. Don't give it up. Keep up the search. I guarantee you if you don't give up you'll find the light at the end of this tunnel. All you need to do is put aside for a moment what you think you know and just let go of yourself. Therer'e MMORPGs out there waiting for you. You want to have fun. Pretend for a moment the only thing matters is your expectations. If yo ucan believe--for a while--your epxectations are enough to manifest the reality then there's a hope for you! Just believe it's possible and somehow it'll find a way to happen. I believe this applies to all of us. We all can benefit from a little faith.

This is so relaxing when I frist found it:

Ungood

Hawkaya399 said:

Now a day later after making this thread, maybe I can try to sum up again the reasoning for making it. Have you ever got into an argument with someone in a forum or in-game over the way the game is played or should be played? Have you ever felt like a game was turning into something you don't like anymore, and you, in part, blamed it on certain kinds of players? Well that's what this is about. It's about the differences between players and how divisions between them foster conflicting cultures. It's unhealthy. Take a look at any forum for any game and you can actively see these divisions form and the ensuing exchanges of insults and finger pointing.

Maybe I've imagined it all along and we're all one happy family. Maybe I'm the only player who's ever disagreed with someone else on gameplay or choice of game, but I doubt that. I've seen these disagreements and "flamewars" for over 20 years. Even the posters in this thread are disagreeing on things.

Something I've long thought about is how we all might fail to appreciate our limited understanding, not realizing many of our thoughts about games are restricted to our own tastes. We like what we like individually, but somehow we inflate the importance of our choices or understandings. I can try to make a metaphor. For example, so you like Strawberry Icecream with some fresh milk? Well you then create a thesis on how Strawberries are special because they have a particular ingredient, and how milk and iccream AND Strawberries are scientifically the most amazing combination possible. All along you fail to acknowledge the fact everything can be explained merely by your preference for Strawberry icecream with some fresh milk. How much more simple would our world be if we could just be happy with our preferences and not try to exaggerate its importance?

So I like to die in games and be attacked and system-heavy features and sandbox and simulation and so forth, but at the end of the day, I shouldn't pretend I know anything about someone who DOESN'T like what I like. So I really stand on no solid ground to attack their preferences. It's like throwing stones at others from a glass house.

Maybe some of us want to feel like we're validated by others. Like others agree with us and we're logical and sound. We're popular. Maybe this is why some of us aren't happy with JUST our preferences, but have to somehow conclude they're representative and acceptable, or belong to a special minority.

Or maybe we I don't like to feel alone or alienated from others. Sometimes it's hard for me to find gamers who like what I like. I do find them, but the vast majority of gamers seem to be different than me, enjoying things I don't enjoy nearly as much. It's hard to relate to others when they enjoy somehting I don't.

More than anything, I'm eager to find a game I like and just play it, and not care what anybody else is playing, or what may or may not happen to the game I'm playing. Therer'e so many games now. There're so many choices. I'm staggered by the number of choices now. When I first started PC gaming in 1994, it was nothing like today. I'ts true games tend to be different then, but there far fewer choices. If you have the will and persistence to search for it, and you can comprimise, you can find just about anything now. Be it looking on Steam or Epic Games Store or the multitude of other options like GoG or Abandonwar sites, or googling emulateed servers, googling early development games (like Dual Unvierse), or searching the open source games. If you can't find a game you like now, you're not trying hard enough.

Let me put this in another way.

If I like Open World, Sandbox, HardCore PvP with perma death.. and lets say, You like, Casual game play, with crafting, map exploration in PvE only content, with endless respanws... we should not be in the same game together.

The problem is that.. MMO developers are trying to make it happen so they can in fact market to both of us, and this ends with either one of us pissed off that the other ruined their otherwise fun game, or leaves us both let down that the game is only half assed fun and we have to deal with a ton of shit we don't like.

It is far, far better, for a game developer to chart out what kind of game they want to make, and who they want attract first and foremost.

AlBQuirky so eloquently called "Gray-Green Gravy: Tasteless and Awful" 

delete5230

Hawkaya399 said:

Now a day later after making this thread, maybe I can try to sum up again the reasoning for making it. Have you ever got into an argument with someone in a forum or in-game over the way the game is played or should be played? Have you ever felt like a game was turning into something you don't like anymore, and you, in part, blamed it on certain kinds of players? Well that's what this is about. It's about the differences between players and how divisions between them foster conflicting cultures. It's unhealthy. Take a look at any forum for any game and you can actively see these divisions form and the ensuing exchanges of insults and finger pointing.

Maybe I've imagined it all along and we're all one happy family. Maybe I'm the only player who's ever disagreed with someone else on gameplay or choice of game, but I doubt that. I've seen these disagreements and "flamewars" for over 20 years. Even the posters in this thread are disagreeing on things.

Something I've long thought about is how we all might fail to appreciate our limited understanding, not realizing many of our thoughts about games are restricted to our own tastes. We like what we like individually, but somehow we inflate the importance of our choices or understandings. I can try to make a metaphor. For example, so you like Strawberry Icecream with some fresh milk? Well you then create a thesis on how Strawberries are special because they have a particular ingredient, and how milk and iccream AND Strawberries are scientifically the most amazing combination possible. All along you fail to acknowledge the fact everything can be explained merely by your preference for Strawberry icecream with some fresh milk. How much more simple would our world be if we could just be happy with our preferences and not try to exaggerate its importance?

So I like to die in games and be attacked and system-heavy features and sandbox and simulation and so forth, but at the end of the day, I shouldn't pretend I know anything about someone who DOESN'T like what I like. So I really stand on no solid ground to attack their preferences. It's like throwing stones at others from a glass house.

Maybe some of us want to feel like we're validated by others. Like others agree with us and we're logical and sound. We're popular. Maybe this is why some of us aren't happy with JUST our preferences, but have to somehow conclude they're representative and acceptable, or belong to a special minority.

Or maybe we I don't like to feel alone or alienated from others. Sometimes it's hard for me to find gamers who like what I like. I do find them, but the vast majority of gamers seem to be different than me, enjoying things I don't enjoy nearly as much. It's hard to relate to others when they enjoy somehting I don't.

More than anything, I'm eager to find a game I like and just play it, and not care what anybody else is playing, or what may or may not happen to the game I'm playing. Therer'e so many games now. There're so many choices. I'm staggered by the number of choices now. When I first started PC gaming in 1994, it was nothing like today. I'ts true games tend to be different then, but there far fewer choices. If you have the will and persistence to search for it, and you can comprimise, you can find just about anything now. Be it looking on Steam or Epic Games Store or the multitude of other options like GoG or Abandonwar sites, or googling emulateed servers, googling early development games (like Dual Unvierse), or searching the open source games. If you can't find a game you like now, you're not trying hard enough.

I've been here since 2007, Back then, no one bitched about bad mmorpgs but more the game I'm playing is better than yours.  Sub forums for each game had positive constructive topics, never about cash shops or any negativity like it is today.

Theirs a reason for that... they were GOOD, but just not a persons style.

I remember my only complaint was FF11 and I couldn't get it to work well with my KB/mouse because it was developed for consoles..... I was mad because I really wanted to play it, several people at work had me hyped.  That was my only complaint about ANYTHING !

All I could think about in 2007 is what the future would hold.... I thought the THE ONLY WAY WAS TO GET BETTER BACK THEN...... Never did I think greed would take over, the thought never crossed my mind.

You would think, we would have at least 5 games equal to or better than World of Warcraft, but no we have 200 more of garbage half assed games that shouldn't even count as mmorpgs, but games-online.

sunandshadow

Hawkaya399 said:

Now a day later after making this thread, maybe I can try to sum up again the reasoning for making it. Have you ever got into an argument with someone in a forum or in-game over the way the game is played or should be played? Have you ever felt like a game was turning into something you don't like anymore, and you, in part, blamed it on certain kinds of players? Well that's what this is about. It's about the differences between players and how divisions between them foster conflicting cultures. It's unhealthy. Take a look at any forum for any game and you can actively see these divisions form and the ensuing exchanges of insults and finger pointing.

[snip]

Maybe some of us want to feel like we're validated by others. Like others agree with us and we're logical and sound. We're popular. Maybe this is why some of us aren't happy with JUST our preferences, but have to somehow conclude they're representative and acceptable, or belong to a special minority.

Or maybe we I don't like to feel alone or alienated from others. Sometimes it's hard for me to find gamers who like what I like. I do find them, but the vast majority of gamers seem to be different than me, enjoying things I don't enjoy nearly as much. It's hard to relate to others when they enjoy something I don't.

Have you considered that there's some kind of philosophical problem with declaring a human universal (forming factions) to be unhealthy?  Sure it's displeasing to be constantly bumping up against people who disagree with you, but it's literally impossible to have communities of humans where everyone agrees with each other.

I certainly do wish there were more people, or a higher percent of people, who shared my preferences about anything.  Yes, it does feel alienating when I can't find anyone I can consider "my people"; I've certainly felt frustrated and lonely about that situation.  But it's also pointless to angst about it or get mad at people who are different from me because it's a foundational aspect of human nature, and present just as much in me as them.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

AlBQuirky

Vermillion_Raventhal said:

Amathe said:

I think the problem lies with false equivalencies. People playing 2 hours a week wanting the same rewards as people playing 30 hours a week. People doing relatively easy content wanting the same rewards as someone doing more challenging content. And over time things got easier and easier to satisfy the desires of people who simply want things without needing to do much to get them. Now it's so bad, people just buy stuff in a cash shop.

Lol there are no false equivalencies.  There are taste and opinions.  You simply want things because you play more.  

I agree you should have more stuff within limit because games are meant to be played.  But not everyone wants to grind their life away.  

That certainly is their choice. Why do they cry for the same or equivalent rewards as those that choose to put the time in?

Vermillion_Raventhal

AlBQuirky said:

Vermillion_Raventhal said:

Amathe said:

I think the problem lies with false equivalencies. People playing 2 hours a week wanting the same rewards as people playing 30 hours a week. People doing relatively easy content wanting the same rewards as someone doing more challenging content. And over time things got easier and easier to satisfy the desires of people who simply want things without needing to do much to get them. Now it's so bad, people just buy stuff in a cash shop.

Lol there are no false equivalencies.  There are taste and opinions.  You simply want things because you play more.  

I agree you should have more stuff within limit because games are meant to be played.  But not everyone wants to grind their life away.  

That certainly is their choice. Why do they cry for the same or equivalent rewards as those that choose to put the time in?

Why do raiders feel like their gameplay is the only worthy of the best stuff?  Opinions.  If it wasn't debatable this wouldn't be here.  

AlBQuirky

Vermillion_Raventhal said:

AlBQuirky said:

Vermillion_Raventhal said:

Amathe said:

I think the problem lies with false equivalencies. People playing 2 hours a week wanting the same rewards as people playing 30 hours a week. People doing relatively easy content wanting the same rewards as someone doing more challenging content. And over time things got easier and easier to satisfy the desires of people who simply want things without needing to do much to get them. Now it's so bad, people just buy stuff in a cash shop.

Lol there are no false equivalencies.  There are taste and opinions.  You simply want things because you play more.  

I agree you should have more stuff within limit because games are meant to be played.  But not everyone wants to grind their life away.  

That certainly is their choice. Why do they cry for the same or equivalent rewards as those that choose to put the time in?

Why do raiders feel like their gameplay is the only worthy of the best stuff?  Opinions.  If it wasn't debatable this wouldn't be here.  

Now you're talking about specific gameplay: Raiding.

Kyleran

blueturtle13 said:

delete5230 said:

Hawkaya399 said:

Back in 2007 it was fairly obvious for many what direction the genre was going to take. WOW would dominate the market and everything else would just try and hang on eeking out a small profit.  

It was also obvious to many this model of everyone trying to recreate WOW's success in the MMORPG space by copying its design was going to implode in on itself.

Even Blizzard came to the same conclusion when they shut down project  Titan, redirecting the assets to the highly successful Overwatch.

The more successful titles of the modern era such as BDO, ESO,  GW2 and FFXIV broke away from the clone design with each carving it's own solid player niche in the market by offering interesting design variants on the theme park model.