Can I first say to Pkpkpk that this attack on MMOs is puzzling, it ranges from gaming definitions to moral philosophy to blaming the corporate nature of studios. In your book MMORPGs are the worst thing gaming has every put out, so to me you are way of the mark.
In many ways MMOs are a best fit, the best that can be done given all the issues with making such a game. While I think commerce has had too great an influence on how MMOs evolved even there you are overzealous, gaming did not have the issues we have now in the nineties and it was very commercial then.
Finally, saying things like "I don't know why you are replying to me", "your last paragraphs are rather amusing" and so on, just alienates posters from you. It does not further your argument, indeed it is quite counter productive.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Can I first say to Pkpkpk that this attack on MMOs is puzzling, it ranges from gaming definitions to moral philosophy to blaming the corporate nature of studios. In your book MMORPGs are the worst thing gaming has every put out, so to me you are way of the mark.
In many ways MMOs are a best fit, the best that can be done given all the issues with making such a game. While I think commerce has had too great an influence on how MMOs evolved even there you are overzealous, gaming did not have the issues we have now in the nineties and it was very commercial then.
Finally, saying things like "I don't know why you are replying to me", "your last paragraphs are rather amusing" and so on, just alienates posters from you. It does not further your argument, indeed it is quite counter productive.
Err, there's a name for this
I think you are being too cynical, our time on here can make us like that. But just imagine what it would be like if we were on Twatter and Facepalm every day, I would be holding a card saying "The End Of The World Is Nigh!".
The failure of the MMORPG is pretty simple and doesn't require walls of text to figure out:
It hasn't done enough to leverage what it can do that other game types can't as in really and truly focusing on the MM part.
About the only time these days I feel like I'm doing something in an MMORPG that is unique and fun is in games that have large scale 24/7 RvR style PvP where several hundred players can be focused on one task/goal simultaneously.
Anything else they do, including socializing, has been done much better in other types of games that are more popular simply because they do it better.
It's that simple.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
In many ways MMOs are a best fit, the best that can be done given all the issues with making such a game. (Snip)
I don't agree here. MMORPGs are not a "best fit." They are the easiest way to make a game that people think are "roleplaying games."
But that definition of "roleplaying" is tainted. It's the mechanics of D&D without the player supplied roleplaying supported by the DM, and offers very little in support of roleplay in it's DM-less state.
These MMORPGs are built to entice players to get stuck on a treadmill of level grinding and gear advancement. The payoff is cool new stuff, in abilities and gear, and even collectibles. All granted for staying around and running through the lab rat's maze. The same maze as everyone else. Over and over again, just with different pictures (as you run through) and different participants.
A Sandbox game with depth is the only way to get out of that rat race. That does NOT REQUIRE PvP. But limited PvP, in the open world, would enhance that game world and it's story. I believe that can be done by enlistment in military or militias, and setting some things to auto-PvP mode, such as mines (territory control), large cargo vessels (caravans and cargo ships), and the like. These are "community" things, connected to city states, and a solo player can still perform these things on their individual level without using the auto-PvP "thing" involved here.
Thanks for the banter guys. I did some poking around and here's my conclusion: 1) no games on Steam are at all like what I want, 2) no new MUDS caught my eye. I also gave some serious thought to programming a game, and concluded that if anyone was going to go to the trouble to make a game I'd like, he'd certainly have put death in it, which narrows the choices down significantly. So seeing there were no real choices, I realized it was either make my own game or give it a rest. Then I remembered someone in here mentioned UO; checked it out, and there was the UO Renaissance server. Trouble is--people use 'macros', people exploit, etc. Not to mention the wealth of spoilers available on the Internet about that game. I opened up a 'beginners tutorial video' and there was somebody running a third party macro program in the background, using some kind of exploit to increase his skills from 'fighting' a rat for a -very- long time, indeed he didn't seem to be 'fighting' at all, and it just looked hokey. So I figure on one hand although UO is likely as good as it gets, it was an extremely soft game (way too soft for the ruthless kind of peopl ethat play it). It's a well designed game (maybe not up to my personal standards)but then again I don't make my own single player games when that's the case, no I think UO is the type of game I should play, but it's just not meant to be. Lots of people wrote about the problems of cheating long ago on newsgroups. Let's face it, they made a good game, but people will cheat in online games (whether UO, Diablo, Counter Strike or whatever), whether it's buying gold, spoiler sites, running bots, using macros, third party programs, wallhacks, aimbots, etc.
I have always said MMORPG players don't really like MMORPG. Most gamers don't like MMORPG. We have been given RPG as a service. That is what the post WoW players wanted and what the genre has been whittle down to. That is kind of the failure of the genre.
Thanks for the banter guys. I did some poking around and here's my conclusion: 1) no games on Steam are at all like what I want, 2) no new MUDS caught my eye. I also gave some serious thought to programming a game, and concluded that if anyone was going to go to the trouble to make a game I'd like, he'd certainly have put death in it, which narrows the choices down significantly. So seeing there were no real choices, I realized it was either make my own game or give it a rest. Then I remembered someone in here mentioned UO; checked it out, and there was the UO Renaissance server. Trouble is--people use 'macros', people exploit, etc. Not to mention the wealth of spoilers available on the Internet about that game. I opened up a 'beginners tutorial video' and there was somebody running a third party macro program in the background, using some kind of exploit to increase his skills from 'fighting' a rat for a -very- long time, indeed he didn't seem to be 'fighting' at all, and it just looked hokey. So I figure on one hand although UO is likely as good as it gets, it was an extremely soft game (way too soft for the ruthless kind of peopl ethat play it). It's a well designed game (maybe not up to my personal standards)but then again I don't make my own single player games when that's the case, no I think UO is the type of game I should play, but it's just not meant to be. Lots of people wrote about the problems of cheating long ago on newsgroups. Let's face it, they made a good game, but people will cheat in online games (whether UO, Diablo, Counter Strike or whatever), whether it's buying gold, spoiler sites, running bots, using macros, third party programs, wallhacks, aimbots, etc.
You should have seen UO the first couple of years. Yes, it had a lot of problems. But it was the most alive game, the most interesting, social, mysterious, etc. game I've ever seen. Nothing has compared to it, before or after.
The failure of the MMORPG is pretty simple and doesn't require walls of text to figure out:
It hasn't done enough to leverage what it can do that other game types can't as in really and truly focusing on the MM part.
About the only time these days I feel like I'm doing something in an MMORPG that is unique and fun is in games that have large scale 24/7 RvR style PvP where several hundred players can be focused on one task/goal simultaneously.
Anything else they do, including socializing, has been done much better in other types of games that are more popular simply because they do it better.
It's that simple.
This is something we don't talk enough about, the rise of whole new genres of games like MOBA and the increase in certain styles of play like team and co-op stole MMORPG's thunder. I still think MMORPG's can combine the best of all worlds but that is a huge ask.
In many ways MMOs are a best fit, the best that can be done given all the issues with making such a game. (Snip)
I don't agree here. MMORPGs are not a "best fit." They are the easiest way to make a game that people think are "roleplaying games."
But that definition of "roleplaying" is tainted. It's the mechanics of D&D without the player supplied roleplaying supported by the DM, and offers very little in support of roleplay in it's DM-less state.
These MMORPGs are built to entice players to get stuck on a treadmill of level grinding and gear advancement. The payoff is cool new stuff, in abilities and gear, and even collectibles. All granted for staying around and running through the lab rat's maze. The same maze as everyone else. Over and over again, just with different pictures (as you run through) and different participants.
A Sandbox game with depth is the only way to get out of that rat race. That does NOT REQUIRE PvP. But limited PvP, in the open world, would enhance that game world and it's story. I believe that can be done by enlistment in military or militias, and setting some things to auto-PvP mode, such as mines (territory control), large cargo vessels (caravans and cargo ships), and the like. These are "community" things, connected to city states, and a solo player can still perform these things on their individual level without using the auto-PvP "thing" involved here.
I have to say "best fit" is in many ways "easiest fit". I would like to see what you propose, but could a designer be convinced? We have some MMOish games similar like EVE, but no one seems to want to go down this road for a proper MMORPG.
I have always said MMORPG players don't really like MMORPG. Most gamers don't like MMORPG. We have been given RPG as a service. That is what the post WoW players wanted and what the genre has been whittle down to. That is kind of the failure of the genre.
I think OP is trying to make fun of Lineage 2. But the crazy thing is it is still very popular right now in the year 2021.
Must be dopamine in the works that keep people playing these type of games.
IMHO, the problem had its origin with tabletop D&D. Not really the game itself, but the way it was played. You had basically two types of players:
- the ones who were ready to invest themselves in the theatrical experience that a tabletop RPG can possibly provide and helped by a talented GM able to create interesting long-term stories in which players had real choices. Some other GM were also so great at improvising/preping that they could offer a mix between stories and a sandboxed world. For these players, a great night was when the role interpretations, the choices made, and when the atmosphere created by the GM was at its peak.
- the other type of player were more strategists/optimizers only interested by how many hexes they could go in each turn, what combinations of abilities was the best for any given situation, and the rewards obtained. They were planning carefully their progression and did not care about roleplaying nor the GM descriptions besides the essential facts. For these players, a great night was when the team or one of its member had the mot ingenious creative idea on how to solve a dangerous situation!
Each I went to a tabletop RPG convention, I met mainly the second type of players. They wanted levels, they wanted loot, they wanted a tactical role in group (not understanding that Role stands for Roleplay not tactical class). They are at the origin of the DOOR-MONSTER-TREASURE loop that plagued tabletop RPGs for years up to the quite recent Pathfinder.
Grasping its addictive power, video games translated this DOOR-MONSTER-TREASURE loop into something more suitable: some of them removed the DOOR!
And here you go, now you have games that are basically just slaughter-fest! Kill a monster, get XP, get loot, spend points in a skill tree or whatever new ability. Now do it again.
Nowadays, it seems that survival games offer better worlds and mechanics to roleplay in than MMORPGs that are just looters/grinders paradises.
And ain't it great!!
As someone who played and enjoyed tabletop RPGs as a kid, I am glad that MMORPG's are more "rigorous" and objective-oriented. I can fire up a game like EVE or Albion or Foxhole and I do not have to "roleplay" or pretend I am a fighter or trader or pirate or crafter or diplomat or miner. I am actually one - within the scope and rules of that game.
Of course! But the two games you cited (I don't know Foxhole) are not themeparks (which were my target). Indeed, in a sandboxed world, you can just BE what you want. Which is also why I highlighted survival games.
Nothing in MMORPGs I play whether themepark or sandbox prevents me from being what I want. Any such game that did I simply wouldn't play.
In regard to your last point, how does one roleplay if there is no 'death'? If an orc decapitates me, or another player kills me, I die. Frankly one begins to feel a little defensive in such a discussion. The question it seems to me should not be, why should an RPG have death, but why should an RPG not have death? The burden is on them to answer that. The fact that 99.999% of RPGs do not was the genesis of this rather mocking and humorous thread. But you have shown me the 00.0001% that does not, and I will indeed read much about it and watch many videos.
How does one role-play with death?
*decomposes*
Such is somewhat compromising to the enjoyment of play for most I expect, which is all the rationale needed to soften or eliminate the blow of it in a product purely for entertainment purposes. Those inclined can opt to apply more rigorous penalties than the game itself provides, which some do.
In many ways MMOs are a best fit, the best that can be done given all the issues with making such a game. (Snip)
I don't agree here. MMORPGs are not a "best fit." They are the easiest way to make a game that people think are "roleplaying games."
But that definition of "roleplaying" is tainted. It's the mechanics of D&D without the player supplied roleplaying supported by the DM, and offers very little in support of roleplay in it's DM-less state.
These MMORPGs are built to entice players to get stuck on a treadmill of level grinding and gear advancement. The payoff is cool new stuff, in abilities and gear, and even collectibles. All granted for staying around and running through the lab rat's maze. The same maze as everyone else. Over and over again, just with different pictures (as you run through) and different participants.
A Sandbox game with depth is the only way to get out of that rat race. That does NOT REQUIRE PvP. But limited PvP, in the open world, would enhance that game world and it's story. I believe that can be done by enlistment in military or militias, and setting some things to auto-PvP mode, such as mines (territory control), large cargo vessels (caravans and cargo ships), and the like. These are "community" things, connected to city states, and a solo player can still perform these things on their individual level without using the auto-PvP "thing" involved here.
I have to say "best fit" is in many ways "easiest fit". I would like to see what you propose, but could a designer be convinced? We have some MMOish games similar like EVE, but no one seems to want to go down this road for a proper MMORPG.
Someday, someone will. Because there is no place else to go. And if they do it well, it'll be a huge hit.
I have to say "best fit" is in many ways "easiest fit". I would like to see what you propose, but could a designer be convinced? We have some MMOish games similar like EVE, but no one seems to want to go down this road for a proper MMORPG.
Is there much profit to it? How much does EVE or similar bring in compared to any of WoW, FFXIV, or ESO. The larger the game the broader appeal it must have.
If companies aren't going down that road for MMORPGs it's because they don't expect enough return at the end to justify travel on it.
I have to say "best fit" is in many ways "easiest fit". I would like to see what you propose, but could a designer be convinced? We have some MMOish games similar like EVE, but no one seems to want to go down this road for a proper MMORPG.
Is there much profit to it? How much does EVE or similar bring in compared to any of WoW, FFXIV, or ESO. The larger the game the broader appeal it must have.
If companies aren't going down that road for MMORPGs it's because they don't expect enough return at the end to justify travel on it.
Well, Eve is a PvP game. And you don't have an actual character in-game to run around and dress up (so to speak). What we really need for a fair comparison is a Sandbox game without forced PvP (for all and best rewards), but everything else. So lets choose that sort of MMORPG. Lets go with.....ummm...well there's.....uhhh....oh well. Maybe someday in the future.
I agree with the OP's sentiment that it would be cool if more games came out that really had the vibe of old chat and MUD RP. I was in an RP kinship in LOTRO that was close to replicating the experience. So many amazing players who were passionate about making it happen! Games, these days, feel like thousands of solo players on the same map. Not sure how to bring the magic back.
Amaranthar - OMG that UO story you linked is why I loved that game so much back in the day!
I'm hoping that things like Palia and Book of Travels can change up the gameplay loops and social aspects of MMOs.
It's shocking how popular table top roleplaying has become again. I see stores everywhere. Whoever taps that demo in a game worlds is gonna make some dough!
I agree with the OP's sentiment that it would be cool if more games came out that really had the vibe of old chat and MUD RP. I was in an RP kinship in LOTRO that was close to replicating the experience. So many amazing players who were passionate about making it happen! Games, these days, feel like thousands of solo players on the same map. Not sure how to bring the magic back.
Amaranthar - OMG that UO story you linked is why I loved that game so much back in the day!
I'm hoping that things like Palia and Book of Travels can change up the gameplay loops and social aspects of MMOs.
It's shocking how popular table top roleplaying has become again. I see stores everywhere. Whoever taps that demo in a game worlds is gonna make some dough!
Thanks, Cuddleheart. That story had other players besides me searching for answers, and ultimately for the Black Necklace (Mondain's Embrace). But everyone was very secretive because of the expected power it held. After all, Juo'Nar turned himself into a ultra powerful Liche with it. And it probably held Mondain's evil essence inside it.
There were other unique aspects of UO that were amazing. Especially the true Rare Items. They mostly ended up as a collected treasure hoard. It was housed, secretly, in a large custom house in Luna. I found it by accident one day when the owner was working to set things up on display. Another secretive thing that most players were totally unaware of. He accidentally left the house unlocked, and I was going by and did an "all names" and saw hi pop up inside. I recognized the name as a suspect of these secret affairs, so I walked in. I did a "show items" and saw an amazing number of Rare Items, many of them duplicates, so Cross Sharding was being done to buy and gather them all up. I was in awe that someone had done this. No doubt a lot of real money exchanged hands for that to be done. I'm not into the RMT crap, but I was still amazed to see all of that collected in one place.
I kept my mouth shut about it, after all I was secretive too. I understood. But some time later someone hacked the server and cause half of the city houses to vanish, stopping right in the middle of the house in question. And then they looted it of most of the rare items. But they were caught, and the GMs did a wipe and restored everything back to a save previous to the hack.
"Games, these days, feel like thousands of solo players on the same map. Not sure how to bring the magic back."
So much has changed I jsut don't think you can bring it back in 2021.....I occasionally drop in on EQ1 and EQ2 and visit a little.....It used to be that everyone visited in chat and we grouped and did things together...now everything is done either by voice chat or by Discord....Almost no one talks in game.....THings have changed drastically in our lives since MMORPGs began in 1997 with UO......Even if a game like Pantheon tries to recreate the gameplay from back then , you still ahve to deal with all the stuff that comes with 2021 (social media, discord, voice chat, google, etc etc).
"Games, these days, feel like thousands of solo players on the same map. Not sure how to bring the magic back."
So much has changed I jsut don't think you can bring it back in 2021.....I occasionally drop in on EQ1 and EQ2 and visit a little.....It used to be that everyone visited in chat and we grouped and did things together...now everything is done either by voice chat or by Discord....Almost no one talks in game.....THings have changed drastically in our lives since MMORPGs began in 1997 with UO......Even if a game like Pantheon tries to recreate the gameplay from back then , you still ahve to deal with all the stuff that comes with 2021 (social media, discord, voice chat, google, etc etc).
They could put voices into the game, with a range. They could even change the voices to fit a RP chosen sound, couldn't they?
They could also add tools like channels, and anyone else close by just hears murmurs unless they click on a character to listen in, from within range.
I don't know if that idea works or how extensive the coding would be, but you brought up a good point.
Then again, if communication by game design brings up conversations with people not in your social sphere, maybe nothing needs to be done. And a very social game design might accomplish that (I would hope so).
I have to say "best fit" is in many ways "easiest fit". I would like to see what you propose, but could a designer be convinced? We have some MMOish games similar like EVE, but no one seems to want to go down this road for a proper MMORPG.
Is there much profit to it? How much does EVE or similar bring in compared to any of WoW, FFXIV, or ESO. The larger the game the broader appeal it must have.
If companies aren't going down that road for MMORPGs it's because they don't expect enough return at the end to justify travel on it.
Well, Eve is a PvP game. And you don't have an actual character in-game to run around and dress up (so to speak). What we really need for a fair comparison is a Sandbox game without forced PvP (for all and best rewards), but everything else. So lets choose that sort of MMORPG. Lets go with.....ummm...well there's.....uhhh....oh well. Maybe someday in the future.
You have an in game presence. That you only see the spacecraft surrounding yourself doesn't mean you aren't in it.
EVE is a sandbox MMORPG. It has PvP that one will almost certainly have to engage in at times but one need not make that their focus in play.
EVE doesn't have forced PvP as everyone playing knowingly opts into being subject to attack by other players. Every EVE conflict is inherently and incontestably consensual.
Let's stick with what comparisons can be made, assuming the goal is some kind of discussion rather than the evasion of it.
Comments
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
It hasn't done enough to leverage what it can do that other game types can't as in really and truly focusing on the MM part.
About the only time these days I feel like I'm doing something in an MMORPG that is unique and fun is in games that have large scale 24/7 RvR style PvP where several hundred players can be focused on one task/goal simultaneously.
Anything else they do, including socializing, has been done much better in other types of games that are more popular simply because they do it better.
It's that simple.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
But that definition of "roleplaying" is tainted. It's the mechanics of D&D without the player supplied roleplaying supported by the DM, and offers very little in support of roleplay in it's DM-less state.
These MMORPGs are built to entice players to get stuck on a treadmill of level grinding and gear advancement. The payoff is cool new stuff, in abilities and gear, and even collectibles. All granted for staying around and running through the lab rat's maze.
The same maze as everyone else. Over and over again, just with different pictures (as you run through) and different participants.
A Sandbox game with depth is the only way to get out of that rat race.
That does NOT REQUIRE PvP.
But limited PvP, in the open world, would enhance that game world and it's story.
I believe that can be done by enlistment in military or militias, and setting some things to auto-PvP mode, such as mines (territory control), large cargo vessels (caravans and cargo ships), and the like. These are "community" things, connected to city states, and a solo player can still perform these things on their individual level without using the auto-PvP "thing" involved here.
Once upon a time....
And Sandbox games REQUIRE low power gaps and/or Horizontal Progression.
Otherwise you cannot have a "Sandbox."
Any game with big power gaps is going to default into "level grinds" and Themepark rat mazes.
Once upon a time....
Here's a bit of it's depth for you...
https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/487824/the-greatest-quest-artifact-to-ever-exist-in-mmorpgs
Once upon a time....
I have to say "best fit" is in many ways "easiest fit". I would like to see what you propose, but could a designer be convinced? We have some MMOish games similar like EVE, but no one seems to want to go down this road for a proper MMORPG.
I think OP is trying to make fun of Lineage 2. But the crazy thing is it is still very popular right now in the year 2021.
Must be dopamine in the works that keep people playing these type of games.
Nothing in MMORPGs I play whether themepark or sandbox prevents me from being what I want. Any such game that did I simply wouldn't play.
How does one role-play with death?
*decomposes*
Such is somewhat compromising to the enjoyment of play for most I expect, which is all the rationale needed to soften or eliminate the blow of it in a product purely for entertainment purposes. Those inclined can opt to apply more rigorous penalties than the game itself provides, which some do.
And if they do it well, it'll be a huge hit.
Once upon a time....
Is there much profit to it? How much does EVE or similar bring in compared to any of WoW, FFXIV, or ESO. The larger the game the broader appeal it must have.
If companies aren't going down that road for MMORPGs it's because they don't expect enough return at the end to justify travel on it.
What we really need for a fair comparison is a Sandbox game without forced PvP (for all and best rewards), but everything else.
So lets choose that sort of MMORPG.
Lets go with.....ummm...well there's.....uhhh....oh well. Maybe someday in the future.
Once upon a time....
I agree with the OP's sentiment that it would be cool if more games came out that really had the vibe of old chat and MUD RP. I was in an RP kinship in LOTRO that was close to replicating the experience. So many amazing players who were passionate about making it happen! Games, these days, feel like thousands of solo players on the same map. Not sure how to bring the magic back.
Amaranthar - OMG that UO story you linked is why I loved that game so much back in the day!
I'm hoping that things like Palia and Book of Travels can change up the gameplay loops and social aspects of MMOs.
It's shocking how popular table top roleplaying has become again. I see stores everywhere. Whoever taps that demo in a game worlds is gonna make some dough!
That story had other players besides me searching for answers, and ultimately for the Black Necklace (Mondain's Embrace). But everyone was very secretive because of the expected power it held. After all, Juo'Nar turned himself into a ultra powerful Liche with it. And it probably held Mondain's evil essence inside it.
There were other unique aspects of UO that were amazing.
Especially the true Rare Items. They mostly ended up as a collected treasure hoard.
It was housed, secretly, in a large custom house in Luna.
I found it by accident one day when the owner was working to set things up on display. Another secretive thing that most players were totally unaware of.
He accidentally left the house unlocked, and I was going by and did an "all names" and saw hi pop up inside. I recognized the name as a suspect of these secret affairs, so I walked in.
I did a "show items" and saw an amazing number of Rare Items, many of them duplicates, so Cross Sharding was being done to buy and gather them all up.
I was in awe that someone had done this. No doubt a lot of real money exchanged hands for that to be done. I'm not into the RMT crap, but I was still amazed to see all of that collected in one place.
I kept my mouth shut about it, after all I was secretive too. I understood. But some time later someone hacked the server and cause half of the city houses to vanish, stopping right in the middle of the house in question. And then they looted it of most of the rare items. But they were caught, and the GMs did a wipe and restored everything back to a save previous to the hack.
So, somewhere in UO, still today, there is a secret...
https://youtu.be/UDmPLiYUXoI?t=103
UO was by far the most amazing MMORPG ever made.
Once upon a time....
They could also add tools like channels, and anyone else close by just hears murmurs unless they click on a character to listen in, from within range.
I don't know if that idea works or how extensive the coding would be, but you brought up a good point.
Then again, if communication by game design brings up conversations with people not in your social sphere, maybe nothing needs to be done.
And a very social game design might accomplish that (I would hope so).
Once upon a time....
You have an in game presence. That you only see the spacecraft surrounding yourself doesn't mean you aren't in it.
EVE is a sandbox MMORPG. It has PvP that one will almost certainly have to engage in at times but one need not make that their focus in play.
EVE doesn't have forced PvP as everyone playing knowingly opts into being subject to attack by other players. Every EVE conflict is inherently and incontestably consensual.
Let's stick with what comparisons can be made, assuming the goal is some kind of discussion rather than the evasion of it.