Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Just wondering... What do players WANT anymore...
jackie28
Member UncommonPosts: 108
I'm an independent game developer ( among other things ) and I just have to ask, what do players WANT nowadays?
I started MMOs with Ultima Online, but to this day I can't say I've really enjoyed playing anything else.
And of course if I went back to UO, the magic is no longer there, so speaking for myself I think I'm competing with my own nostalgia for something that just cannot be recreated.
It's no longer novel to simply be "online" with other people in a shared environment.
It's very difficult from a developers point of view to determine what is "fun" when you're burned out.
I know what I HATE, but I have trouble envisioning what kind of compelling and immersive experience that *I* want from a game anymore that would also appeal to others and earn revenue.
It's a crappy place to be if game development is your main skill set 
Off hand I'd say I can appreciate sand box environments where the game play is emergent, non-linear, non-theme park, where the GM's aren't stormtroopers, secondary markets are accepted, where the game is more than just combat and PVP, and where the game world itself is more granular / atomic and interactive. But beyond that, I'm split on cartoonism versus realism, or what kind of novel features can be done that havent already been implemented elsewhere.
Curious what others thoughts are for their ideal game.
Comments
Anything with innovation really...even if the game doesn't draw me in for the long run. I enjoy playing different games and seeing how they work.
Little forum boys with their polished cyber toys: whine whine, boo-hoo, talk talk.
What i want is a GAME and there arent many.
in my vieuw a game is only a real game if player skill and some intellect is required to achieve something. i dont want a game wich would allow me to reach end game with my eyes closed while just spamming those fricking carebear prem shop health potions.
i dont want a kill 30 boars quests theres is no accomplishment in them i want the quest to be kill 3 boars and die 2 times while trying to do so becouse every type of mob and in this case boars require a diffrent approach making it incredible hard when you face them for the first time.
i dont want a game that when i bunnyhop around like a retard and i accidantly jump over the end of a cliffside to be hold by a invisable magical wall wich doesnt allow me to even fall of it i want the game to allow me to fall off it making my character break its neck.
mmorpgs need to stop going easymode.
This the main point, and one that many long-time MMO vets don't seem to understand.
Back in 1999 when EQ launched, and before then with games like UO and Meridian 59, it was uncommon to spend a lot of time with other people online, because the Internet really hadn't fully connected with people. Heavy socialization and finding that group of like-minded players was something new.
These days, every major console has an online component. People are plugged in 24/7 through their cell phones and tablets and spend their entire day at work plugged in to the internet. It's as natural to be online as it is to breathe now, since all you have to do is hit an icon on your Droid or iPhone or Windows Phone and be on the internet. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other social sites have exploded.
Simply put, if people want to socialize or build community, or whatever else online, they don't need a game for it anymore. They have other outlets. They can go on FB or Tumblr and chat with their real life friends or play games on XBox Live or Steam or the PSN. That's why MMO's don't have as many folks signing years of their lives away. There's no reason to, since you can connect with the rest of the world as easily as picking up your phone.
If game developers want to reach people, it's not enough to offer a virtual world. People already live their real lives online. They don't need a new virtual world to live in. What they need and want is something engaging and fun.
For me the magic of UO is lost as well.... but it isn't because what the game had just isn't fun now days, it's because I lived in the world of Sosaria for over a decade lol. The fun in UO was that you could log in and do w/e you wanted. I didn't have to tell my friends.... oh sorry I'm going to Doom and your to low level..... I didn't have to worry about what quest they were on or vice versa. We wanted to go do a dungeon run, whom ever was on could come no issues. Wanted to go PvP? It was there always waiting. Wanted to hang out in town and shop and show off it was always an option. Crafting mattered in UO as well, doesn't in any other game.
I swear if I see one more MMO where people are crafting for free I'll lose it lol. wtf is the point of crafting if your simply giving everything away? And friggin nodes, I hate node based harvesting. Questing, Questing, Questing, Questing. Why must I run around like an idiot all day doing nothing but errands for these stupid NPC's? Why can't I simply go out an adventure? Whats so horrid about letting me hang out in an area for awhile with friends and kill crap with it being worthwhile?
Want to level? Quest. Need armor? Quest. Need money? Quest. Want something to do? Go do some friggin quests cause thats all there is!
My ideal MMO right now would be a mix of UO and FFXI. UO's champion spawns and open dungeons and FFXI's garrison, beseiged, and campaignes were all nice as they were always there to offer something you could do with friends as a group and it was fun. The classes were pretty unique as well, meaning I wasn't stuck with the same ol same ol all the time. Rift has done a good job with the classes but even they are on a nerf happy spree trying to limit options.
Give me the freedom to do what I want and be what I want with reasonable limits and I'm happy. In UO I could play a game of chess, go do a dungeon, paricipate in an event hosted and run by players and or devs, sit around and show off what ubber crap I had, go do some fun and interactive treasure hunting, PvP, do some meaningful crafting, water plants, decorate my house, find a plot for a bigger house, etc.. I could be a samurai paladin if I wanted, a mage tamer, I mean I could ride around on a fire breathing horse and have a rune beetle with me.
Next.... make it mine. This ones important as well. It must be mine. I could go out and tame a dragon or a hyru or w/e and it wouldn't be exactly like everyone elses. Different stats, different colors, etc. Then I could train . I could name it and bond it to me. Giant beetles and fire beetles were awsome as well. It wasn't a steady progression to faster mounts or stronger pets. It was all about specializing. My Red Dragon was good in some situations that my White Wurm wasn't. Rune beetle and mare in others, 5 frenzied ostards in others. My house was my house, I could express myself in any way I wanted or I could use it purely for storage. It was my house.
FFXI had it's nice points to, I liked TP abilities. I liked that there was constantly a campaign or a besieged going on. I liked that you could spend a long period of time in the same area with friends if you wanted. I didn't like the solo options as they were nearly non existant back in the day. I liked NM's in FFXI. I liked the missions in FFXI. They were a set story ark for that city and each city had one.
I liked aspects of each game and wouls still be playing them if I hadn't played in that specific world for so many years. FFXI 5+ years, UO 11-12 years. I'm lucky to hit 6 months with the MMO's that have been coming out as of late.
I find fun in MMO's but it's generally short lived. The parts I find fun seem to be fleering side attractions while the main course is questing your arse off and trying to justify that sub fee by convincing myself that I like playing errand boy or I at least don't mind it. Eventually that damn breaks and I'm off to the next game that promises to be different.
Why aren't MMO's a grand adventure? Is the goal really to feel like we are paying for the privelege of picking up some NPC's dry cleaning?
The trouble is that different players want different things. And that a relative handful mainly just want to whine.
Personally, what I want is mainly something interesting that isn't just a knock-off of something else I've already played. I also want minimal grinding, and to be allowed at least as many alts as makes sense given the game mechanics. In particular, if there are n classes, then I should be allowed at least n characters, whether n = 1 or n = 100.
We're not in a situation where everything that can be done already has been. We're nowhere near that, and probably never will be. Quite a few games are still cranking out major gameplay innovations. I recently picked up Spiral Knights, and the combat there is done very well. In the last few years, I've also liked the quick tempo combat of Champions Online, the turn-based card game combat of Wizard 101 (though it really should play out faster once you've made your choice), the control an entire team combat of Atlantica Online (alas, the grinding ruined the game), the ship combat of Pirates of the Burning Sea (though the land combat was awful), and the diplomacy system of Vanguard. Some of those weren't even good games for a variety of reasons, but they did manage to do something interesting and different, and that made them at worth playing at least for a while. At some point, I'm going to pick up Uncharted Waters Online, and then eventually, Guild Wars 2, both of which also do some things that are interesting and different.
Developer or designer?
If you are a developer then this post doesn't really make sense since it is a game design feedback post.
If you are a designer then this post doesn't look like one either.
I've met some indie/medium-ish designers myself in the various tech intro expo the IT industry loves to have (which is little more than networking and shouting 'buy this product!') but they have a different mind-set. At least those I've met does.
The best thing I can say is to look at this.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2713-Playing-Like-a-Designer-Part-1
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Onigod :
* thinks players should be rewarded for thinking
* quests should be more difficult, dynamic and satisfying.
* does not appreciate the events / bugs that kill immersion and remind the player they are in a limited environment.
Lidane :
* thinks the new focus should be "fun" ( more sub-game? )
* massively-multiplayer is no longer a compelling selling point.
GrayGhost79:
( a lot to digest here )
* really appreciates the sandbox design
* open access to (at least Attempt) content
* doesn't like prerequisites ( level restrictions, unshareable objectives ) that get in the way of game play or isolate players from playing together.
* wants the economy to have value.
* doesn't like node-based harvesting ( world should be more atomic / granular? )
* enjoys the sub-game ( housing, crafting )
* needs a sense of ownership with a high degree of personalization / customization
Quizzical:
* appreciates an innovative game with a reasonable number of character slots
I pretty much agree with all of this ( though I struggle to imagine what the innovation should be ).
This is a bit of a ramble btw.
When I talk about the granularity or "atomic" nature of games ( I'll try to describe this ) what I tend to mean by that, is that the game world is contructed of more things, divisible and usable in nature, than a bunch of loaded terrain and object models. 3D games certainly have more potential for presentation, but one thing I admired about UO was that the world was tile-based and every type of tile was named and had its various properties. Somehow I want to see a game that knows a given spot is "dirt" versus "grass" and behaves differently when someone applies a shovel. 3D environments, colorful as they are, break immersion for me somehow / demystify the environment because I know I'm not dealing with a "rock" or a "plant" but rather a hollow object. I *know* that if I fall through the map there is nothing beneath me. Somehow tile based games lend better, to my mind, a world that is governed by more rules than simple collision detection. I would like to see a game where players can meaningfully modify the landscape ( yet not necessarily destroy the world ).
I am also of the opinion that while combat and PVP are important parts of any MMORPG, I don't think it should be the central focus of the game. Players need a lot of other things to do that are entertaining sub-games in themselves. That could crafting, gardening, remodeling your house, whatever.
One thing that appealed to me about UO was the fact the economy worked ( even with, and maybe as well because of, the unrestricted secondary market ). I think players should be able to craft and trade game gear, currency, whatever, without fear for their accounts. This sorta goes against the trend nowadays but I agree with Richard Garriott on this one, I believe dollar valuation of virtual assets vests the player in the game, gives them some motivation for doing "work".
As far as subscription models go, I personally hate the F2P model. I sorta resent the idea that there is no limit to how deeply a company can go into my wallet before I can access the full content. If I think I'm being matched up
against other players wallet-to-wallet, I will just walk away. I'm sorta old-school on this, I think everyone should pay the same flat fee for full access, price it so its worthwhile to players, and stay out of the secondary market / conserve it for players. The game company should protect player value like a bank, not whore it out like a mint.
Anyway, what I wanted to do, what makes sense to me, is to have a game downloadable, free to activate with a limited trial, and for $5 to $8 you can apply a 30 day gametime code that also turns your trial account into a full access account. The subscription model would also let me control for problem behavior, since I can block a payment, but I can't actually prevent nuisance players from rejoining a F2P game.
As far as chat mechanics go, this is something I'm bouncing around. I am not a fan of global chat. And this may be just a convention of the first person 3D model. In UO, when you spoke, only the people on your screen could see you
speak, and (imagine that) spamming was never a problem. That worked because UO was a 2D overhead view, but spamming was ineffective because players could just walk away from whoever was yelling. I'm a bit undecided on this, but if I do decide to include a chat window I do know how to control spamming. ( if someone puts an advertisement in the global chat channel, players should be able to right-click Report it. If 10 people report the same player, the system automatically squelches the player without notifying them and automatically elevates a trouble ticket to the GM queue, at which point the player will be looked at and banned ). I think if done correctly, a spam bot would only get one advert off before being blocked.
Mail systems could be regulated similarly. I think a player should be allowed to send a fixed amount of mails, per hour, like say 10, balanced in such a way that in normal play no one would ever bump the cap ( and get annoyed ), but restrictive enough that no one would be able to mail spam thousands of players within a few minutes. I really want to be able to protect the play experience for everyone, but at the same time not get into players business.
In a word, community. In a sentence it is easier to define everything I don't want : What I don't want is all of the things that have destroyed community in favor of cashing in as many subs as possible, to hell with the consequences, everything from badge gear and dalies to x-server LFD.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
jpnz:
Both. My primary skillset is C++/C# but, ironically I'm also a sprite artist, and I work with 3D well in 3dsMax. I am also a web-developer, use MySQL, PHP, etc. I'm using the 3.1 version of XNA as my development platform. XNA makes games for Windows easy. I've sorta gone the back way around all this haha due to my "game writers block" and ended up making an account management system that integrates with PayPal, uses gametime codes, etc, before actually having a finished game. Presently I can run around in the game world and manipulate items, but that's about it. The server manages connections and commits game state changes to a SQL database. I think if I can just commit to design I'll be ready to start creating (more) art content. That's why I'm fishing for input here. I need some sense that I'd be making a game that other people would enjoy and that I'm not just wasting my time. At some point I'll contract help ( I have an artist already ), but I don't want to invest in that without the necessary vision for what this product should be. Anyway.
I'm pretty much consigned to the fact no one makes a mint in this industry anymore, which is just saturated with bad products, so I'm trying hard to approach this from a hobbyist and a gamers perspective. What would I enjoy playing, and if I wrote it, would anyone play it with me?
Well, sort of.
I agree that massively multiplayer is no longer the selling point it used to be, except in offering a larger game experience for players. These days, being online and interacting with other people is entirely normal. Wtih the advent of sites like Twitter and Facebook and instant messaging services like Skype, people are used to talking to lots of other people online and forming their own social connections with each other. They're used to doing it in real time at work and in their social lives.
Trying to sell a "living, breathing virtual world" just doesn't have the same unique appeal anymore. Why do people need to go and log into a subscription based game to socialize with people around the world when they can do the same thing on Twitter or FB or Livejournal or Tumblr or wherever for free?
For a certain niche of player, yes. The virtual world aspect of an MMO still appeals to them. To the average consumer, however, these games are just a means to an end. They're a GAME that they can enjoy with their friends for a while. It's not a digital world that they want to live in, since their lives are already digital anyway.
This is a challenge for game designers that make MMOs. Hell, it's a challenge for people who make Facebook games. You have to come up with a game that has some kind of hook that will bring players in for a while, and keep them interested long enough to give your game a second or third or fourth look. You have to find a way to engage them.
The best way to engage them is by offering fun gameplay that is intuitive and which offers enough replay value that they'll stick around. Give them a polished experience that they don't have to have a degree in computer programming to enjoy, and which doesn't require a life-long commitment to get to the fun part, and you'll do well. Give them a boring, broken, buggy mess that forces them to waste their time with pointless time sinks and they'll leave.
Ultimately, that's what I want too, but the problem is, I want a good community and that pretty much rules out the vast majority of games and the overwhelming majority of gamers. I want decent people to hang out with, most, and perhaps virtually all players in most games are real asshats that I have no interest in being around. Maybe it's a matter of being older and not wanting to pretend a game world is real but honestly, I don't want to be around people who do.
Pretty much, that means I just don't play. Finding mature, intelligent, normal people who play MMOs is virtually impossible.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I want the game to allow for soloing in a multiplayer environment while making it extremely easy to team up.Some people just like to work alone so if a d00d wants to solo, let the d00d solo while helping the rest of the team and maybe do so without letting him know that theyre actually part of the team but letting other people know how hes helping. This way, people who love soloing and solo difficult things will still get some place in the community. Id prefer there to be multiplayer and solo content at all points in the game.
Lastly, i want the game to do as much as they can to prevent ba ppl from griefing or just ruining other peoples gaming without affectig the ease of playing
Ahh im so sleepie and its so hot x.x ill edit this tomorrow maybe when im not sleepieee
''/\/\'' Posted using Iphone bunni
( o.o)
(")(")
**This bunny was cloned from bunnies belonging to Gobla and is part of the Quizzical Fanclub and the The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club**
I want SWG pre-CU/NGE
Sub to me on YouTube @ http://www.youtube.com/user/JJJK29isGaming?feature=mhee
What's stopping you from playing it right now?
This is the most vague question you can ask, although you do make some interesting points. Simply sharing an online community with other people is now a regular occurence, but in my opinion, it was never the ultimate draw of MMOs. Rather, the ability to leave your mark on a virtual world is what makes MMOs completely unique, the ability to sign your name in a book and come back 3 years later to find the same book. In my opinion, this boils down to a few key features:
Non-linear Environmental Interaction - The game world changes in unpredicted ways based on the actions of players. This is much more indepth than simply faction-controlled fortresses or predetermined, server-wide events. Consider this: if you walk along the same stretch of grass enough, you will eventually have a pathway. If you siege a castle (player-built or not) and destroy it, it's gone forever. The history of the game world is in the hands of the players.
Non-linear Character Progression - In order for that history to be interesting, players must contribute in a number of ways. Combat is generally the go-to outlet in terms of entertainment, but an interesting world has infrastrcture behind that combat: important crafting, player-run economy, exploration, etc.. In addition, this is simply a matter of players being able to experience the game however they want to.
Single Server Play - This is the cherry on the cake, and in my opinion, the most under-appreciated feature of any MMO. I don't care about loading screens or "shards;" if an MMO doesn't exist as a single world, then the afformentioned features simply lose their value. If you pull some crazy sh*t in EVE, you are a big name. Not just on your realm, but to anybody on Earth who plays.
I feel that MMOs without these features (particularly the first) might as well be multiplayer dungeon crawlers.
In its current state it is no fun.
If your talking about the other way of playing SWG pre-CU/NGE, because everything is handed to you. No realy reason to play.
Sub to me on YouTube @ http://www.youtube.com/user/JJJK29isGaming?feature=mhee
I think you should just make a game that would be fun to you and who cares about the rest.
Of coarse it would be nice to make millions off your game, but to be realistic that rarely happens with indy/hobbyist developers.
I'm pretty tired of playing the same old quest, and mob grinders.
As an indy you have the freedom to create pretty much anything you want without worrying about what investors want so I'd take advantage of that and bust your brain thinking of new and FUN innovations.
I think, if you want any kind of longevity of an indy game, you're going to need player created content, or at least a high level of interactivity between the game and players.
The one thing that is certain is that you have to have something UNIQUE as an indy because it's highly doubtful anyone wants to play an indy WoW clone, hell, most people don't even want to play AAA WoW clones.
I think you might find some success if you came up with a game that included a moderate amount of mini games for different activities... stuff for maybe farming, raising/training animals, cooking, etc.
Personally I'm tired of the 99% combat focused games.
So ya, mix it up a little.
THIS ^^^^^.
I want the ADVENTURE back. That is all. Pure and simple. If that one thing was taken care of I could forgive a lot of other things being wrong, missing, tired, whatever, but the adventure.....must return to MMOs. And I am not some idiot NPC's slave girl either. I have had way past enough of those kinds of quests.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Read: Single Server Games
Single server seamless games aren't really possible. I don't really think EvE is really even a single server, it just seems like it. I don't know for sure but I think their different space sectors are run on numerous servers.
They can do this because they essentially have a loading time between systems when you gate to them. I think this would cause some problems in a seamless world game.
And also, could you imagine the problems of having everyone from all wows servers in org at the same time?
What's the purpose of having so many people on the same server if no more than a couple hundred can be in one location at a time?
There's pretty much no reason for this.
In a nutshell, we want:
Non-repetitive FUN.
That's the best way I can describe it.
What are MMORPG's like these days?
Gameplay = Repetitive. Click-and-wait style. rotations etc.
Quests = Kill (x) amount of (y). proceed to do so subbing in X with a random amount and Y with a random monster. This is what you'll do for the rest of the game.
nothing short of a bj for every monthly payment.
i don't feel this way, but this is how the majority of people on this site act.
/awaiting another ban
It sounds like you'd need to make sure your design didn't lend well to a precise walk-through if you're worried about this. One thing I'm noticing is a lot of people are tired apparently of the way the quest system is being handled, which reminded me of the earliest incarnation of UO - there was no quest system at all ( or character levels ). There were just play areas, openly accessible to all. If you keep the play experience dynamic and variably rewarding ( don't give a player a specific weapon for completing a specific task ) strategy guides probably wouldn't be as useful.
In UO I always enjoyed the treasure hunting system. This was something my friends and I could plan an evening around. You'd have to find the spot on the map, fight a dynamic mob spawn ( and not an easy one ), pick open a difficult chest which might be bombed, loot a ton of worthwhile items and spend a little time sorting it on the floor of our house when done. A lot of different skills went into this too, of course... you need a cartographer to translate the map, master lock picking to open the chest, etc. This was gratifying because it was like a little lottery, and when your item system is one of random properties, you know its totally possible to get one of the bad-assest weapons in the game or a piece of junk.
Another thing I'm getting is that players need immediate access to a style of play AND to be consequential. Some people like playing rogues that can hide and surprise people, some like spell casters, some like tanks, some like tamers, etc. I think this is another thing UO more or less did right - and this is a bone I pick with games like WoW - is that the difference between a complete newb and a master warrior is not so severe that a newbs actions in-game are inconsequential. I'd like to take the focus off levels and let something be said for strategy, timing, technique. I want a newbie that can cast a decent fireball right out the gate and doesn't have to train for 6 months just to feel competent to participate in the shenanigans that actually make the game fun. I know real life is not always a great indicator of what works in game play, but if I were to somehow quantify the "hit points" of every adult male out there age 35, I don't think I'd have a system that ranged from 100 to 10,000. It would be more like 100 to 500, because we all know an arrow to the neck would take down the strongest man just as quick as a weakling. So I guess what I'm saying, I'd like skill and character development to matter, but I don't think it should be Exaggerated to the point a players eyes gloss over thinking about getting to an end-game. And really, my opinion is that characters levels are just a throw back to the subscription based model. Companies that can't figure out how to make a game fun will at least cause you to take 6 months to find that out.
I think in any game I write, equipment will be AS important to performance as character development, I will probably opt for a skill based model ( no general character levels ) and I'm not sure I'll restrict equipment use ( except by weapon skill or stats ). People should be able to get into the action and matter on fairly short notice. Not saying that the game should be Easy, mobs will of course have scale. But I don't think its a reasonable for a given player to transform into a "god" as part of the play experience. I'd like to keep PVP wins and losses vital and interesting and actually having something to do with that players performance, not strictly the fact they've been playing a character for a year and no one can take a swing at it.
Btw I appreciate everyone's input. I'm seeing a lot of overlap actually.
Robokapp:
I can agree with what you wrote - there does need to be some sort of emergent goal that is social in nature and isn't assigned by the game. The game should be open-ended enough that they anticipate logging in and deciding what they want to do that day, instead of being given a mandate by the game, or required to act in accordance with a particular line of fiction. This is one reason I think games like LotRO have limited appeal. You're pretty much boxed into a role within the Middle Earth context. I don't like being told who my enemies are
Which addresses your issue with factions. Your alignment should be something you can elect and change later. Guild warfare probably works nicely in this respect.
On the topic of RISK, I wanted to ask : I mean I don't think there is presently a market for "punitive" games like the first EQ, so this is probably a can of worms. I know we could be talking about level loss, but I wanted to mention, in UO there was item loss when you died. You could be looted by a foe. Hell, a mob could loot you haha. I remember trying to hurry back to chase down an ogre that ran off with my reagent bag. Enough players didn't like the unrestricted PVP that they came up with a criminality system ( blues / reds / greys ) which I appreciated and was easy to understand. Anyway, I digress. I struggle with how to implement RISK without players thinking Oh That Sucks and not attempting the game. I think if your game was designed in such a way that no item is truly irreplaceable, you could mitigate all the keyboard smashing that would result. Hot topic. UO ultimately implemented a gold sink in the form of item insurance, though I thought that kinda sucked. Either protect people's inventory altogether or at least give them a "safe" bag where you put your "good" stuff. I think one thing UO could have benefitted from though is a better system for informing the player what the risk level was in their current play area and when they entered / left the area. A persistent icon on the screen would have helped a lot.
I have a story. You know one of THE most entertaining things we did in UO involved waiting on a road with a bombed-up crate. I would stand there dolled up in some expensive equipment, and wait for a passerby while my friends hid in the bushes. And of course I'd be on the very last tile of the guard zone in town. As soon as I saw someone I'd detonate the chest, which of course, killed me instantly ( my other character was a master tinker ). They'd call me a dumbass ( everyone KNOWS not to open a potentially trapped crate ), look around and evaluate whether they could steal something off my body ( which was a blue named corpse ). The moment we saw something come off the body, at that point they became criminal ( grey named ) and my friends would hop out and yell Guards! which would teleport in and slay the thief. And because they were criminal we were able to loot them. And the great thing about this, Yes it was a trick, but we we're only looting people who were thieves and tried to take advantage of someone's misfortune
Anyway, this is a perfect example of emergent game play. Some might call that griefing, but I always thought it was a case of knowing the rules and How not to make bad decisions. It's also really hard to empathize with the guy who tried to loot your corpse and failed 
For me I want:
1. EQ2 social mature community, game depth, and Lore. With all the social tools EQ2 has like in game guild chat that works well, and very good guild housing, rewards, ect.
2. SWG's money system, crafting, and player housing. SWG is still the only AAA mmo that had a super deep crafting/housing/money system. I remember how I loved how cretin animals went in and out of season, player ran cities with a government and everything.
3. FFXI Class System, Sound, Fishing, and cool factor. So miss the class system from FFXI I would be happy if every single mmo used it.
4. WoW's raiding and game stability. If it where not for all the parentless children in the raids wow would have the most fun raiding around imo, but got to say the wow community just ruins any good points it has which it does have quit a few.
5. AOC combat system, and graphics.
6. SWTOR all voiced over NPC. I am glad to see someone doing this I think its long over due.
7. EvE's Developers that care about their clients/
8. Last wish is something that has yet to be done well outside of space mmo. That is 1 sever that is not instanced off.
Of course everyone is different this is just me.