At the end of the day - in all games, ranging from the hardest hardcore full loot sandbox to the most casual themepark..
It's a video game that you play on the internet. The 'memories' only exist within the boundaries set by the game. You might remember what you did in real life, but it only holds significance in the game (well, except selling your gold/ISK for real money, but let's not ruin my spiritual reflection!). EVE Is Real until you log off and more pressing matters come to your attention. Then it's a game of internet spaceships.
The audience that gets to see your accomplishments would only matter if you are concerned with having everyone see them in the first place. For us, it's not a big deal. We're not looking for recognition, fame, and glory on the internet. We just want to have fun.
in my opinion in mmorpgs a good gameplay with no story is as bad as a good story with no gameplay. If i have to choose one i choose the 2 combined or nothing at all.... find something else.
If mmorpgs had nothing to do with story then mind as well remove the rpg from the name. Its not coincidence that the best stories in game come from rpgs (see all the good classic rpgs), so in an mmorpg the story should be as important and strong as the gameplay.
I agree with that but there are still questions about how a story should work in mmos.
Can you just use the old quest mechanics that have existed in single player games like "Pool of radiance" or Biowares dialogues trees from baldurs gate?
Should you instead have the story being fed in the background?
Or something else?
It is my belief that MMOs shoukl share the story among the players, might it be between your group or everyone. In a singleplayer game it is your story, but that doesn't work so good in a social game as a MMO.
I think that a MMO story should be about the entire world, not just you and you need to take action to join the story. GW2s use of dynamic events is interesting here,it is rather primitive yet but it have the potential to incorporate a story unlike regular questing.
A MMO story should not be your or mine, it should be ours and not just about the players but about the entire world. I think that it is a must that it feels like NPCs actually have their own life as well instead of just staying in the same spot awaiting for you to help them with a quest. A farmer should work on his field in the day and go home to his family in the night and only be a part of your story at just the moment he needs help.
And I think that MMOs should show you the story in front of your eyes instead of just having you read (or listen to) a quest text. It will make the story and the world feel alive.
I agree. Lineage had a huge story as a backdrop, but the players didn't play through that story. They played in the world of that story. I sort of miss that sort of environment.
Above said it best.
A good mmorpg has a great vibrant story as a back drop, and then we play in the world of that story. I think what the OP is pointing out is this idea of a story that we play through in terms of questing and raiding. Almost every MMO that comes out now has this sort of over-arching quest line that you follow through as your story. Essentially no different than a sinlge player game.
All of the best MMO's of the past were games that had giant ellaborate stories/lore for a backdrop and you simply played in that world. UO, EQ, AC, DAoC, even original WoW. This is how a game should be, and that's not to say that we need to shun quests and raiding (even though i personally despise both), but they should be part of the world and lore, not a path on a storyline.
The smaller crowd of let us say pen and paper gamers, or the community who could make their own story and enjoyment a reality, became a minority.
There is something pen and paper folks have to remember. Video-games are not pen and paper RPG's, certain expecations are held by video-gamers which are far different than what a P&P fan would feel are important to a game. Where in the P&P world imagination is key, in the video-game world it's visual immersion that takes precedent over that. This is just one example but an important one. It certinaly high-lights the disparity of the two mediums.
While I thought SWG was as Star Warsy of an experience as I could ever hope to have, the case was different for many others, due largely to the open ended, make your way style of game-play. This is far more relatable to a role-player, Video-gamers are more in-tune with iconic presentations, being the hero, saving the princess, being Boba Fett, Legolas...etc... That's how video-games are typically made RPG or otherwise.
Many video-gamers are in new territory when it comes to playing their first MMO. It's no surprise it took a change to story elements and presentation (WOW) to bring many of them into the MMO fold.
It seems you've already pointed out the issue. The type of gamer, RTS gamers, conventional console gamers, RPG gamers, the list goes on as well as the differences in their expectations, that's IF we are being stereotypical. I think the stereo types are generally true, gamers who like FPShooters are usually not huge fans of turn based games or RTS games. The thing about an MMO is that it's just a setting, unlike other genre's it's not limited to a playstyle like the others are.
MMO's themselves are not really a genre, just a setting. The problem is that MMO's try to rake in that "broad audience" money when some of them should just choose a crowd to appeal too. According to that logic, we have now all become minority gamers. They're making games for everyone, and therefore no one (Confucius say? lol).
They all want the WOW money so they make the most generic stuff possible. This is also the reason why PC games graphics are held back, simultaneous release for the masses. I loved when crysis came out and I could push my machine; bigger screens and higher res however, PS3 peoples were having a hard time playing it.
In the case of sandboxes, they drop the player off in a dessert and leave. I haven't seen a game where they truly give players the tools to make the world their own. Even in SWG pre JTL & NGE, people have to use houses AS WALLS.. A tragedy. In the case of themeparks, the rides suck or it gets repetative. In Asheron's Call they had monhtly CONTENT updates, in other games your lucky if they fix something every month, thats a HUGE difference.
@OP MMORPG's are supposed to either give you a roll and get outta the way so you can role play it, or give you so many choices that you can't tell the difference. Obviously that's not happening but, what large consumption item has gotten better over time? It's like everything you can spend money on is getting more expensive and going to shit.
At the end of the day - in all games, ranging from the hardest hardcore full loot sandbox to the most casual themepark..
It's a video game that you play on the internet. The 'memories' only exist within the boundaries set by the game. You might remember what you did in real life, but it only holds significance in the game (well, except selling your gold/ISK for real money, but let's not ruin my spiritual reflection!). EVE Is Real until you log off and more pressing matters come to your attention. Then it's a game of internet spaceships.
The audience that gets to see your accomplishments would only matter if you are concerned with having everyone see them in the first place. For us, it's not a big deal.
Well, not for you sure, but for eve players it is important. You have chronicles about epic battles all over the net. I personally cant get so deep in to any sandbox game and my goal is just to shoot people and loot something, but you will wonder how hardcore eve gamers are and how they talk about some past battles and admire some pilots like real life heroes.
Why even play an MMO then? If you are just always "Making your own fun", then why not just sit down with a pen and paper and write a whole story yourself?
Although that would take alot of work wouldnt it? So why Khaeros if i may ask do we play MMO's then if you can just imagine anything in the real world anyways?
Seriously though, if your just going to make it difficult for yourself by wearing terrible gear, placing loot roll limits, etc.etc.???
We can't just make a meet to play PnP with the guild. While we are mostly US, we are scattered around quite a bit. The game is an interface that gives us plenty more flexibility. A MUD would do as well, but we quite like our graphical interface (and players also enjoy the game itself - the community isn't a 24/7 roleplay reich). Consider it a preference, I guess.
Also, I've had my share of combat taking forever in pnp. In an interface like an MMO, it's all done by a computer who is much faster than me (and less prone to mistakes). While I loved the concept of turn-based battles, it's nice to do something different.
Have you never goofed off in an MMO by doing something with half your gear or with an absolutely ridiculous strategy or build? I mean, it all stems from there, except we take it to the Serious Business level.
It takes some effort, but it's not like I have to roll dice. The fun outweighs it.
Exactly, but thats YOU who perfer to play your games like that, and yet your looking down at others for wanting something different from the norm.
"Play the ones that don't focus on story. There's lots of them too."
Id like you to go ahead and show me all the mainstream MMO's that have come out in the past 5 years that are Sandbox or that let you make your own story??
Go ahead, lets see what your list has, and guess what? Its going to be nothing because they dont exist!
So if your going to say "Make your own fun" why dont you stop assuming that everyones definition of fun is the same as yours, or that your level of fun you have with Roleplaying without danger or consequnce is the same as mine, cause its not.
in my opinion in mmorpgs a good gameplay with no story is as bad as a good story with no gameplay. If i have to choose one i choose the 2 combined or nothing at all.... find something else.
If mmorpgs had nothing to do with story then mind as well remove the rpg from the name. Its not coincidence that the best stories in game come from rpgs (see all the good classic rpgs), so in an mmorpg the story should be as important and strong as the gameplay.
I agree with that but there are still questions about how a story should work in mmos.
Can you just use the old quest mechanics that have existed in single player games like "Pool of radiance" or Biowares dialogues trees from baldurs gate?
Should you instead have the story being fed in the background?
Or something else?
It is my belief that MMOs shoukl share the story among the players, might it be between your group or everyone. In a singleplayer game it is your story, but that doesn't work so good in a social game as a MMO.
I think that a MMO story should be about the entire world, not just you and you need to take action to join the story. GW2s use of dynamic events is interesting here,it is rather primitive yet but it have the potential to incorporate a story unlike regular questing.
A MMO story should not be your or mine, it should be ours and not just about the players but about the entire world. I think that it is a must that it feels like NPCs actually have their own life as well instead of just staying in the same spot awaiting for you to help them with a quest. A farmer should work on his field in the day and go home to his family in the night and only be a part of your story at just the moment he needs help.
And I think that MMOs should show you the story in front of your eyes instead of just having you read (or listen to) a quest text. It will make the story and the world feel alive.
agreed. Perhaps its hard to implement (not sure) but i would love to see and mmorpg where each player's story involves the rest of the players. A whole quest log based on an entire world that has to be saved by 1 hero (the player) is more suited to single player games. Its hard to think how in an mmo the story of 1 player can affect other players without messing up other parts of the game, but i think it could be possible to involve a community so it would give even more sense to the "massively multiplayer online roll playing game". Right now the MMO part only refers to many people online, even if they dont interact with each other or share anything (like a good story)
Hopefully GW2 will bring this whole story telling through dynamic events to replace the old pages long quest boxes. It can open doors for new story sharing between players in the future
Reply to exciting, new, and original thread #344288:
A few MMOs have a story element. If you don't like them, don't play them. MMORPGs don't have to follow your sovereign vision of success - developers have the freedom to reach in other directions and try different things. Isn't 'innovation' one of the key elements you people rail on about? It doesn't happen overnight, so give the genre a few iterations worth of time and do something else.
Play the ones that don't focus on story. There's lots of them too.
Why do they have to be mainstream all of a sudden? I thought you guys were hip. Going against the grain. Not the norm. Unique. Why would you be attracted to the mainstream in the first place?
That's why I said make /your/ own fun. Not mine. Yours.
If you can't make fun for yourself within a game, and require that a game be built around your very desires, then you are no different than the no-effort instant gratification themepark grinders who want everything handed to them. Why not put some effort in and make a better community for you and your fellow gamers? You can do this with zero knowledge of game development (though time management is a plus!)
I'm not looking down on you. I'm just bewildered why people continue to post the exact same topics week after week. Do they hope that one day, they will have a Spotlight thread? Is it because they believe that one post can change the course of a multi-million funded development team?
Maybe you should just take a break from MMORPGs all together. This era isn't for you.
I'll continue to carve my events out because I enjoy them. I'm just crazy like that.
---
pa:
You may remember your epic battles after you log off, but they no longer matter at that point. You are not going anywhere in life because you robbed a hauler and returned rich in-game.
I'm going nowhere with my pseudo-DMing, either. But I enjoy what I do, and my friends do too. Never for fame. Just for fun.
in my opinion in mmorpgs a good gameplay with no story is as bad as a good story with no gameplay. If i have to choose one i choose the 2 combined or nothing at all.... find something else.
If mmorpgs had nothing to do with story then mind as well remove the rpg from the name. Its not coincidence that the best stories in game come from rpgs (see all the good classic rpgs), so in an mmorpg the story should be as important and strong as the gameplay.
I agree with that but there are still questions about how a story should work in mmos.
Can you just use the old quest mechanics that have existed in single player games like "Pool of radiance" or Biowares dialogues trees from baldurs gate?
Should you instead have the story being fed in the background?
Or something else?
It is my belief that MMOs shoukl share the story among the players, might it be between your group or everyone. In a singleplayer game it is your story, but that doesn't work so good in a social game as a MMO.
I think that a MMO story should be about the entire world, not just you and you need to take action to join the story. GW2s use of dynamic events is interesting here,it is rather primitive yet but it have the potential to incorporate a story unlike regular questing.
A MMO story should not be your or mine, it should be ours and not just about the players but about the entire world. I think that it is a must that it feels like NPCs actually have their own life as well instead of just staying in the same spot awaiting for you to help them with a quest. A farmer should work on his field in the day and go home to his family in the night and only be a part of your story at just the moment he needs help.
And I think that MMOs should show you the story in front of your eyes instead of just having you read (or listen to) a quest text. It will make the story and the world feel alive.
agreed. Perhaps its hard to implement (not sure) but i would love to see and mmorpg where each player's story involves the rest of the players. A whole quest log based on an entire world that has to be saved by 1 hero (the player) is more suited to single player games. Its hard to think how in an mmo the story of 1 player can affect other players without messing up other parts of the game, but i think it could be possible to involve a community so it would give even more sense to the "massively multiplayer online roll playing game". Right now the MMO part only refers to many people online, even if they dont interact with each other or share anything (like a good story)
Hopefully GW2 will bring this whole story telling through dynamic events to replace the old pages long quest boxes. It can open doors for new story sharing between players in the future
I have not really seen that many mmos that are about the single player playing the game actually supposing to be the savior of the world or setting at all. Even in wow t is you as well as your allies that save or defeat great evils, with help from quite powerful allies as well to do this fact. Now where in most of the settings is the character i played even detailed as being the foretold hero in any quests, but merely feels much more like actual role plays in many pnp games. YOu have several tasks or quests that come up as you arrive in areas, but none of these actually point to your characer being anythgin more then a roaming adventurer really. Even in raids you are a cog in a massive machine compased of many other players seeking to protect the world you live in, but you are not the sole hero in the game by a long shot. Even in the fact that largely most game's quests never use your characetr's name, but instead your character's class to identify you is rather keeping with a less hero feel, since if you were a hero these people would know your name by the tails of what you did prior. Even the hero class from wow the Death knight was placed into the game in the intro for them as being a member of several legions of freed death knights, but not trully detailed as being trully any of heroic or villianous noteriety trully. Trully the overaching story of the game is secondary, with the zone stories being primary for most of the game, but trully the player needs to be in charge of making thier character's story in the game.
One issue i see with gw2 is that even if the de's are as dynamic as people think, and we have seen them to be. How much veriety can we trully expect of these events, and how long before people have taken them thru the various different paths several times. You can only create so much content in the game with so much veriety, before you start to redo the content with a twist, and even then players will play thru these so fast that over time players will see it all. In ways even de's will in some ways go like quests in the world, as how many versions of an event can you trully have in the areas. Each area might have it's unique de's, but how many different routes can you have in them per event, and hwo long before everyone or atleast a majority of the pop have seen them.The fact is that quests feel so odd in mmos really since you know so many have done them, and that many will do the same quest to come, but that is true of the de's in that each play thru might be different. Yet still you might get the same one several times, might do them several times to find all of them., and then they are not that different from quests. I see de's more as a new way of telling the quests to you in game, but that it is geared for players that prefer not to look at quest text. I would love to see a quest tree kind of approtch taken to quests in game like in de's, where as you finish parts of quests based on what or hwo you did that affects many thigns, such as what you get for the next part of the quest, what your next quests could be, and even unlocking things. Like if you failed a mission that allows a horde of undead to destroy a village it opens a questline to seattle a new town, or if you do not get to a item in time the person seeking it gets the item, and might become somethign like a demon or lich because of it.
I agree with that but there are still questions about how a story should work in mmos.
Can you just use the old quest mechanics that have existed in single player games like "Pool of radiance" or Biowares dialogues trees from baldurs gate?
Should you instead have the story being fed in the background?
Or something else?
It is my belief that MMOs shoukl share the story among the players, might it be between your group or everyone. In a singleplayer game it is your story, but that doesn't work so good in a social game as a MMO.
I think that a MMO story should be about the entire world, not just you and you need to take action to join the story. GW2s use of dynamic events is interesting here,it is rather primitive yet but it have the potential to incorporate a story unlike regular questing.
A MMO story should not be your or mine, it should be ours and not just about the players but about the entire world. I think that it is a must that it feels like NPCs actually have their own life as well instead of just staying in the same spot awaiting for you to help them with a quest. A farmer should work on his field in the day and go home to his family in the night and only be a part of your story at just the moment he needs help.
And I think that MMOs should show you the story in front of your eyes instead of just having you read (or listen to) a quest text. It will make the story and the world feel alive.
agreed. Perhaps its hard to implement (not sure) but i would love to see and mmorpg where each player's story involves the rest of the players. A whole quest log based on an entire world that has to be saved by 1 hero (the player) is more suited to single player games. Its hard to think how in an mmo the story of 1 player can affect other players without messing up other parts of the game, but i think it could be possible to involve a community so it would give even more sense to the "massively multiplayer online roll playing game". Right now the MMO part only refers to many people online, even if they dont interact with each other or share anything (like a good story)
Hopefully GW2 will bring this whole story telling through dynamic events to replace the old pages long quest boxes. It can open doors for new story sharing between players in the future
I have not really seen that many mmos that are about the single player playing the game actually supposing to be the savior of the world or setting at all. Even in wow t is you as well as your allies that save or defeat great evils, with help from quite powerful allies as well to do this fact. Now where in most of the settings is the character i played even detailed as being the foretold hero in any quests, but merely feels much more like actual role plays in many pnp games. YOu have several tasks or quests that come up as you arrive in areas, but none of these actually point to your characer being anythgin more then a roaming adventurer really. Even in raids you are a cog in a massive machine compased of many other players seeking to protect the world you live in, but you are not the sole hero in the game by a long shot. Even in the fact that largely most game's quests never use your characetr's name, but instead your character's class to identify you is rather keeping with a less hero feel, since if you were a hero these people would know your name by the tails of what you did prior. Even the hero class from wow the Death knight was placed into the game in the intro for them as being a member of several legions of freed death knights, but not trully detailed as being trully any of heroic or villianous noteriety trully. Trully the overaching story of the game is secondary, with the zone stories being primary for most of the game, but trully the player needs to be in charge of making thier character's story in the game.
One issue i see with gw2 is that even if the de's are as dynamic as people think, and we have seen them to be. How much veriety can we trully expect of these events, and how long before people have taken them thru the various different paths several times. You can only create so much content in the game with so much veriety, before you start to redo the content with a twist, and even then players will play thru these so fast that over time players will see it all. In ways even de's will in some ways go like quests in the world, as how many versions of an event can you trully have in the areas. Each area might have it's unique de's, but how many different routes can you have in them per event, and hwo long before everyone or atleast a majority of the pop have seen them.The fact is that quests feel so odd in mmos really since you know so many have done them, and that many will do the same quest to come, but that is true of the de's in that each play thru might be different. Yet still you might get the same one several times, might do them several times to find all of them., and then they are not that different from quests. I see de's more as a new way of telling the quests to you in game, but that it is geared for players that prefer not to look at quest text. I would love to see a quest tree kind of approtch taken to quests in game like in de's, where as you finish parts of quests based on what or hwo you did that affects many thigns, such as what you get for the next part of the quest, what your next quests could be, and even unlocking things. Like if you failed a mission that allows a horde of undead to destroy a village it opens a questline to seattle a new town, or if you do not get to a item in time the person seeking it gets the item, and might become somethign like a demon or lich because of it.
I still think Wows (and most other MMOs) story is far too much about your story instead of the worlds. yes, things are somewhat different for raids and dngeons but not really that much.
GW2s DEs probably have a lot of issues and are primitive since it really is the first real try to replace quests but I think it opens up many possibilities. The whole thing that you need to do something now, not whenever you feel for it makes the story feel a lot more alive than in a cripted railroaded regular MMO like EQ or Wow.
DEs are basically quests, I am not denying that but they involve the world around you and that is what i find interesting about them. no instances but they tell the story of the world and you as a player can step in and help out or ignore it.
I think the potential of this system is a lot larger than anyone can imagine just yet, including Jeff Strain who first had the idea to replace quests with DEs (originally for GW: Utopia).
As for how varied DEs can be it is similar to quests but there is a difference: In DEs you can choose which part to do, in most quests you need to do everything.
My point was that MMOs shouldn't be treated as single player games or even regular multiplayer games. A story is actually good but it should be about the world, not you, your group or even your guild. Options are good of course and I think we will se DEs with options in the future.
MMO devs needs to be better to find out ways to tell the games story, now all games use the mechanics meridian 59 borrowed from single player games 16 years ago with the addition of EQs 13 year old way of handling raids.
Yeah, phasing have been added to make the illusion that what you do matter but i think it is the wrong way. And we are talking about themeparks here of course, sandbox games have their own mechanics and story in them could be improved as well in other ways.
i dont understand this trend of people wanting to play a single player game with a strong story focus in a mmorpg. it doesnt make sense. why not just play skryim or some other SRPG, no one will ks your mobs, you wont get pked, you wont get out-epeened by that neckbeard raider. for majority of mmorpg players , WOW was their first mmo and they dont know any better. someone needs to develop a proper mmorpg that does justice to the massively multipler part. we dont need anymore WOW clones or low quality indie FFA full loot macrofests. minecraft is insanely popular and it is a sandbox game. this shows that there is a huge market for such gameplay, it just needs to be done right.
i dont understand this trend of people wanting to play a single player game with a strong story focus in a mmorpg. it doesnt make sense. why not just play skryim or some other SRPG, no one will ks your mobs, you wont get pked, you wont get out-epeened by that neckbeard raider. for majority of mmorpg players , WOW was their first mmo and they dont know any better. someone needs to develop a proper mmorpg that does justice to the massively multipler part. we dont need anymore WOW clones or low quality indie FFA full loot macrofests. minecraft is insanely popular and it is a sandbox game. this shows that there is a huge market for such gameplay, it just needs to be done right.
But (as we discussed earlier in the thread) why can't a multiplayer game have a good multiplayer story?
Even sandboxes can tells stories, even if it is more about background and making tools for creating good stories there.
Story does not have to be the same in singleplayer and multiplayer games, they should have unique mechanics.
i dont understand this trend of people wanting to play a single player game with a strong story focus in a mmorpg. it doesnt make sense. why not just play skryim or some other SRPG, no one will ks your mobs, you wont get pked, you wont get out-epeened by that neckbeard raider. for majority of mmorpg players , WOW was their first mmo and they dont know any better. someone needs to develop a proper mmorpg that does justice to the massively multipler part. we dont need anymore WOW clones or low quality indie FFA full loot macrofests. minecraft is insanely popular and it is a sandbox game. this shows that there is a huge market for such gameplay, it just needs to be done right.
But (as we discussed earlier in the thread) why can't a multiplayer game have a good multiplayer story?
Even sandboxes can tells stories, even if it is more about background and making tools for creating good stories there.
Story does not have to be the same in singleplayer and multiplayer games, they should have unique mechanics.
im not sure what you mean by multiplayer story. do you mean the stories that develop as a result of multiplayer interactions? example: all that crap that happens on EVE, scams, takeovers, fights etc
if thats what you mean, then yes i agree 100%. a properly made mmorpg should give rise to events which are the essential elements of a narrative. a proper mmorpg would have its own news, history and story developed by the players.
developers just need to realise that you can make a sandbox mmorpg accessible and user friendly. look at minecraft and learn from it. it is easy, accessible while being complicated and difficult at the same time (redstone stuff)
I agree with that but there are still questions about how a story should work in mmos.
Can you just use the old quest mechanics that have existed in single player games like "Pool of radiance" or Biowares dialogues trees from baldurs gate?
Should you instead have the story being fed in the background?
Or something else?
It is my belief that MMOs shoukl share the story among the players, might it be between your group or everyone. In a singleplayer game it is your story, but that doesn't work so good in a social game as a MMO.
I think that a MMO story should be about the entire world, not just you and you need to take action to join the story. GW2s use of dynamic events is interesting here,it is rather primitive yet but it have the potential to incorporate a story unlike regular questing.
A MMO story should not be your or mine, it should be ours and not just about the players but about the entire world. I think that it is a must that it feels like NPCs actually have their own life as well instead of just staying in the same spot awaiting for you to help them with a quest. A farmer should work on his field in the day and go home to his family in the night and only be a part of your story at just the moment he needs help.
And I think that MMOs should show you the story in front of your eyes instead of just having you read (or listen to) a quest text. It will make the story and the world feel alive.
agreed. Perhaps its hard to implement (not sure) but i would love to see and mmorpg where each player's story involves the rest of the players. A whole quest log based on an entire world that has to be saved by 1 hero (the player) is more suited to single player games. Its hard to think how in an mmo the story of 1 player can affect other players without messing up other parts of the game, but i think it could be possible to involve a community so it would give even more sense to the "massively multiplayer online roll playing game". Right now the MMO part only refers to many people online, even if they dont interact with each other or share anything (like a good story)
Hopefully GW2 will bring this whole story telling through dynamic events to replace the old pages long quest boxes. It can open doors for new story sharing between players in the future
I have not really seen that many mmos that are about the single player playing the game actually supposing to be the savior of the world or setting at all. Even in wow t is you as well as your allies that save or defeat great evils, with help from quite powerful allies as well to do this fact. Now where in most of the settings is the character i played even detailed as being the foretold hero in any quests, but merely feels much more like actual role plays in many pnp games. YOu have several tasks or quests that come up as you arrive in areas, but none of these actually point to your characer being anythgin more then a roaming adventurer really. Even in raids you are a cog in a massive machine compased of many other players seeking to protect the world you live in, but you are not the sole hero in the game by a long shot. Even in the fact that largely most game's quests never use your characetr's name, but instead your character's class to identify you is rather keeping with a less hero feel, since if you were a hero these people would know your name by the tails of what you did prior. Even the hero class from wow the Death knight was placed into the game in the intro for them as being a member of several legions of freed death knights, but not trully detailed as being trully any of heroic or villianous noteriety trully. Trully the overaching story of the game is secondary, with the zone stories being primary for most of the game, but trully the player needs to be in charge of making thier character's story in the game.
One issue i see with gw2 is that even if the de's are as dynamic as people think, and we have seen them to be. How much veriety can we trully expect of these events, and how long before people have taken them thru the various different paths several times. You can only create so much content in the game with so much veriety, before you start to redo the content with a twist, and even then players will play thru these so fast that over time players will see it all. In ways even de's will in some ways go like quests in the world, as how many versions of an event can you trully have in the areas. Each area might have it's unique de's, but how many different routes can you have in them per event, and hwo long before everyone or atleast a majority of the pop have seen them.The fact is that quests feel so odd in mmos really since you know so many have done them, and that many will do the same quest to come, but that is true of the de's in that each play thru might be different. Yet still you might get the same one several times, might do them several times to find all of them., and then they are not that different from quests. I see de's more as a new way of telling the quests to you in game, but that it is geared for players that prefer not to look at quest text. I would love to see a quest tree kind of approtch taken to quests in game like in de's, where as you finish parts of quests based on what or hwo you did that affects many thigns, such as what you get for the next part of the quest, what your next quests could be, and even unlocking things. Like if you failed a mission that allows a horde of undead to destroy a village it opens a questline to seattle a new town, or if you do not get to a item in time the person seeking it gets the item, and might become somethign like a demon or lich because of it.
I still think Wows (and most other MMOs) story is far too much about your story instead of the worlds. yes, things are somewhat different for raids and dngeons but not really that much.
GW2s DEs probably have a lot of issues and are primitive since it really is the first real try to replace quests but I think it opens up many possibilities. The whole thing that you need to do something now, not whenever you feel for it makes the story feel a lot more alive than in a cripted railroaded regular MMO like EQ or Wow.
DEs are basically quests, I am not denying that but they involve the world around you and that is what i find interesting about them. no instances but they tell the story of the world and you as a player can step in and help out or ignore it.
I think the potential of this system is a lot larger than anyone can imagine just yet, including Jeff Strain who first had the idea to replace quests with DEs (originally for GW: Utopia).
As for how varied DEs can be it is similar to quests but there is a difference: In DEs you can choose which part to do, in most quests you need to do everything.
My point was that MMOs shouldn't be treated as single player games or even regular multiplayer games. A story is actually good but it should be about the world, not you, your group or even your guild. Options are good of course and I think we will se DEs with options in the future.
MMO devs needs to be better to find out ways to tell the games story, now all games use the mechanics meridian 59 borrowed from single player games 16 years ago with the addition of EQs 13 year old way of handling raids.
Yeah, phasing have been added to make the illusion that what you do matter but i think it is the wrong way. And we are talking about themeparks here of course, sandbox games have their own mechanics and story in them could be improved as well in other ways.
But that is the thing the quests most of all in wow are not about your character per-say, but about telling the story of the area, of the history, and also about telling about what is happening at present in the area. Only in the way that what you do in the quest in the quest as the character can i agree the quests are about you, but in the same token they are geared towards explaining the history, telling of what is presently happening, and showing the zone trully. In this way to me your character is more like the insturment that you use to explore the quests of the game to find out about the history, events, and such in the game with these quests being the back drop to the travels of the character. Trully in my option a story should be tiered with several layers running from world, zone.area, character, party, ect. This is how i did it in my groups play Pen and paper games using the larger world events or area events as a back drop to the events happening to the player, and allowing the players to choose which to do. I gues for me teh distintion is that i do not see the quests that tell about what is happening in the area, of the past, lore or such as being about the player, but as being abotu telling the tale of the actually game thru the eyes of the character. I get a vary different feel from mmos compared to single player rpgs as i feel the story in single player rpgs are more about the actual character's life, where as the mmo seems more about what your characetr discovers in the world or is happening in the world about you.
For me i would rather have a quest-tree system where based on what happnes in quests it will unlock, close, or change furture quests in the games. Dynamic quests or events are nice for periods of time yet not all the time, just the same wiht regurlar quests, also the faster pace of dynamic quests will make it harder (compared to reg quests) to delve into the lore as deeply to me. Trully though even in dynamic events it is going to be about the group/yourself in the end, since the event like quests is the backdrop to your travels giving you a glimpse into the events of the area. For me i would rather see a more dynamic use of phasing in that it is not player-based, but zone-based in that when a player finishes or does thigns int he area it changes the area for all regardless of what they have done, but i think these kinds of event should be rare in the game as places do nto change as offen as people think.
In UO, UO HAD NO STORY, it really didnt, what made UO great was the player base
UO had an live event drive story handled by guides and gms rather than static quests. There were dev directed stories occurring in the game. Player participation could actually alter the events of ths story as well making each server unique (not dramatically nor noticably for most people). The live events introduced unique items and made alterations to the world. It did not last very long probably because the servers could not handle the events (numbers of players in a single area) and personel costs. Live events were fairly rare and I wouldn't expect most people have known about their existance.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
i dont understand this trend of people wanting to play a single player game with a strong story focus in a mmorpg. it doesnt make sense. why not just play skryim or some other SRPG, no one will ks your mobs, you wont get pked, you wont get out-epeened by that neckbeard raider. for majority of mmorpg players , WOW was their first mmo and they dont know any better. someone needs to develop a proper mmorpg that does justice to the massively multipler part. we dont need anymore WOW clones or low quality indie FFA full loot macrofests. minecraft is insanely popular and it is a sandbox game. this shows that there is a huge market for such gameplay, it just needs to be done right.
That is the thing though they do not want a single player game where they are the only one that is player comtroled, but that they want to feel like they are apart of a larger world of players not npcs. That fact of playing alongside players that might steal your kills, pk you, scam you, and such is part of feeling like you are part of a living world. They want to feel like they are in a world closer to the real world in ways, since even in real life you are living your own personal story that crosses with others, but also that plays out alongside other people's stories as well. In mmos players have the ption to make friends, enemies, group, solo, explore, and such all the while they are playing in a world of massive amounts of players. The fact of the choice to change from a solo playing to group to pvp style of play is big to many so called soloers, it is like in the real world we have the choice to proceed how we desire in the world. By most accounts a mmo is merely a massive online game that allows for the ability to interact with massive numbers of players in a game setting, and because of the fact it only must allow the ability to interact not force interaction between players many games can qualify as a mmo. It is this fact f choice in how you interact, as well as how much you interact that draws players of all kinds to the games, since it allows for a vast array of players to play the games. Also like in rl everyone is going to go about hwo they interact/live different, and so many will not like or frawn on those that do it different than them, but t is this fact of veriety to playstyles or play-methods that makes many mmos quite like real life.
People cant create their own stories anymore like they did in early mmo's. also the RPG part of MMORPG entails story. So you're wrong.
That depends really on if you want the dev's to create your story for your character, or you want to create it yourself in the game. I have had many times i have played in a mmo merely using the quests, zone/world events as backdrop creating a story for my character, and even creating scenes of what happened after or before acceptng quests. Yet i prefer this of using the quests, as well as many plots of the game story/setting to be a backdrop to the actual smaller story of my character, without any interfernce from the devs or such.
People cant create their own stories anymore like they did in early mmo's. also the RPG part of MMORPG entails story. So you're wrong.
I assume you're replaying to the OP who states "the gameplay, the wars, players made their own stories not the devs" - if you're referring to someone else, then nvm. Not really sure how the OP is wrong if they want people to make their own stories and not be so dependent on the story being a huge factor within the game.
The RPG part of MMORPG = having a role that you play out...if the mechanism that brings that about is story, then so be it. I know a decent amount of people just want to their role to be power lvlers and elites, not much room for story there For the most part the majority of games and the people who play them fail at creating their own stories as you said.
Confusing post, as you seem to agree and then say you're wrong/diagree at the same time.
it really was the back burner to game play, I dont know what this facination about mmorpgs and story is about, but mmorpgs were good when gameplay was good, not story, I did not play EQ for the story, I did not play UO for the story, I played them for the gameplay, I played them for the exploration, to overcome mighty creatures that in todays mmorpgs I can gather up 4-5 of them and solo them easily with any class. In UO, UO HAD NO STORY, it really didnt, what made UO great was the player base
the gameplay, the wars, players made their own stories not the devs. This whole facination with story is ruining todays mmorpgs, less focus on story, less focus on sparkly shiny things, and more focus on gameplay.
I couldn't agree more, and have been sounding like a broken record saying as much.
I don't want my adventures dictated to me. Just give us the backdrop, the lore and enough tools and room once again to allow our own stories to unfold.
It's been proven time and again that whether in the form of flavor text stapled to a mundane task or a 'sit down and watch us perform your task text' format, the developers pre-canned story always pales in comparison to the exploits friends and I have gotten into and out of over the years.
On top of that, it seems that a very heavy handed narrative is not only stifling, but clearly an unsustainable form of content. When 5+ years in development gets you 2 weeks of pre-canned story, you might want to reconsider trying to cram that into a persistant online space that generally aims to provide some longevity.
no... things don't need to be a black or white situation. Things never have to be black or white in any aspect of life. People merely choose the black or white path because it's easier to not worry about more than one side.
Everything I say is my opinion or personal preference. You may or may not find it useful to your cause but regardless I am entitled to it.
In my opinion story could be good if it would be a story for everybody on the server to experience together. Actually the problem of this is that only EvE-Online could do this atm cause its the only single-server-enviroment. Think about the fascinating things you could do with games if you had single-server enviroments.
You could write a gamestory for the whole lifespan of the game. A story people could follow for years to end in a big bang and shut down the servers after that I´d love to see a story telled to the whole server. Dark rising in the backlands getting stronger over time etc.
I really hope someone got the balls to do this in the next 10 years.
BTT: I´d prefer gameplay over those singleplayerstorys everyday. Im not sure if i would think the same about serverstorys.
Comments
At the end of the day - in all games, ranging from the hardest hardcore full loot sandbox to the most casual themepark..
It's a video game that you play on the internet. The 'memories' only exist within the boundaries set by the game. You might remember what you did in real life, but it only holds significance in the game (well, except selling your gold/ISK for real money, but let's not ruin my spiritual reflection!). EVE Is Real until you log off and more pressing matters come to your attention. Then it's a game of internet spaceships.
The audience that gets to see your accomplishments would only matter if you are concerned with having everyone see them in the first place. For us, it's not a big deal. We're not looking for recognition, fame, and glory on the internet. We just want to have fun.
I agree with that but there are still questions about how a story should work in mmos.
Can you just use the old quest mechanics that have existed in single player games like "Pool of radiance" or Biowares dialogues trees from baldurs gate?
Should you instead have the story being fed in the background?
Or something else?
It is my belief that MMOs shoukl share the story among the players, might it be between your group or everyone. In a singleplayer game it is your story, but that doesn't work so good in a social game as a MMO.
I think that a MMO story should be about the entire world, not just you and you need to take action to join the story. GW2s use of dynamic events is interesting here,it is rather primitive yet but it have the potential to incorporate a story unlike regular questing.
A MMO story should not be your or mine, it should be ours and not just about the players but about the entire world. I think that it is a must that it feels like NPCs actually have their own life as well instead of just staying in the same spot awaiting for you to help them with a quest. A farmer should work on his field in the day and go home to his family in the night and only be a part of your story at just the moment he needs help.
And I think that MMOs should show you the story in front of your eyes instead of just having you read (or listen to) a quest text. It will make the story and the world feel alive.
Above said it best.
A good mmorpg has a great vibrant story as a back drop, and then we play in the world of that story. I think what the OP is pointing out is this idea of a story that we play through in terms of questing and raiding. Almost every MMO that comes out now has this sort of over-arching quest line that you follow through as your story. Essentially no different than a sinlge player game.
All of the best MMO's of the past were games that had giant ellaborate stories/lore for a backdrop and you simply played in that world. UO, EQ, AC, DAoC, even original WoW. This is how a game should be, and that's not to say that we need to shun quests and raiding (even though i personally despise both), but they should be part of the world and lore, not a path on a storyline.
It seems you've already pointed out the issue. The type of gamer, RTS gamers, conventional console gamers, RPG gamers, the list goes on as well as the differences in their expectations, that's IF we are being stereotypical. I think the stereo types are generally true, gamers who like FPShooters are usually not huge fans of turn based games or RTS games. The thing about an MMO is that it's just a setting, unlike other genre's it's not limited to a playstyle like the others are.
MMO's themselves are not really a genre, just a setting. The problem is that MMO's try to rake in that "broad audience" money when some of them should just choose a crowd to appeal too. According to that logic, we have now all become minority gamers. They're making games for everyone, and therefore no one (Confucius say? lol).
They all want the WOW money so they make the most generic stuff possible. This is also the reason why PC games graphics are held back, simultaneous release for the masses. I loved when crysis came out and I could push my machine; bigger screens and higher res however, PS3 peoples were having a hard time playing it.
In the case of sandboxes, they drop the player off in a dessert and leave. I haven't seen a game where they truly give players the tools to make the world their own. Even in SWG pre JTL & NGE, people have to use houses AS WALLS.. A tragedy. In the case of themeparks, the rides suck or it gets repetative. In Asheron's Call they had monhtly CONTENT updates, in other games your lucky if they fix something every month, thats a HUGE difference.
@OP MMORPG's are supposed to either give you a roll and get outta the way so you can role play it, or give you so many choices that you can't tell the difference. Obviously that's not happening but, what large consumption item has gotten better over time? It's like everything you can spend money on is getting more expensive and going to shit.
Well, not for you sure, but for eve players it is important. You have chronicles about epic battles all over the net. I personally cant get so deep in to any sandbox game and my goal is just to shoot people and loot something, but you will wonder how hardcore eve gamers are and how they talk about some past battles and admire some pilots like real life heroes.
Exactly, but thats YOU who perfer to play your games like that, and yet your looking down at others for wanting something different from the norm.
"Play the ones that don't focus on story. There's lots of them too."
Id like you to go ahead and show me all the mainstream MMO's that have come out in the past 5 years that are Sandbox or that let you make your own story??
Go ahead, lets see what your list has, and guess what? Its going to be nothing because they dont exist!
So if your going to say "Make your own fun" why dont you stop assuming that everyones definition of fun is the same as yours, or that your level of fun you have with Roleplaying without danger or consequnce is the same as mine, cause its not.
agreed. Perhaps its hard to implement (not sure) but i would love to see and mmorpg where each player's story involves the rest of the players. A whole quest log based on an entire world that has to be saved by 1 hero (the player) is more suited to single player games. Its hard to think how in an mmo the story of 1 player can affect other players without messing up other parts of the game, but i think it could be possible to involve a community so it would give even more sense to the "massively multiplayer online roll playing game". Right now the MMO part only refers to many people online, even if they dont interact with each other or share anything (like a good story)
Hopefully GW2 will bring this whole story telling through dynamic events to replace the old pages long quest boxes. It can open doors for new story sharing between players in the future
MMORPGS are about getting stuff, so that you can show everyone eles what you have vs what other people dont have
Its a covet
its keeping up with the jones
it a "Look, Im better than you"
I dont play them, I play MMOFPS now
LMAO
Why do they have to be mainstream all of a sudden? I thought you guys were hip. Going against the grain. Not the norm. Unique. Why would you be attracted to the mainstream in the first place?
That's why I said make /your/ own fun. Not mine. Yours.
If you can't make fun for yourself within a game, and require that a game be built around your very desires, then you are no different than the no-effort instant gratification themepark grinders who want everything handed to them. Why not put some effort in and make a better community for you and your fellow gamers? You can do this with zero knowledge of game development (though time management is a plus!)
I'm not looking down on you. I'm just bewildered why people continue to post the exact same topics week after week. Do they hope that one day, they will have a Spotlight thread? Is it because they believe that one post can change the course of a multi-million funded development team?
Maybe you should just take a break from MMORPGs all together. This era isn't for you.
I'll continue to carve my events out because I enjoy them. I'm just crazy like that.
---
pa:
You may remember your epic battles after you log off, but they no longer matter at that point. You are not going anywhere in life because you robbed a hauler and returned rich in-game.
I'm going nowhere with my pseudo-DMing, either. But I enjoy what I do, and my friends do too. Never for fame. Just for fun.
I have not really seen that many mmos that are about the single player playing the game actually supposing to be the savior of the world or setting at all. Even in wow t is you as well as your allies that save or defeat great evils, with help from quite powerful allies as well to do this fact. Now where in most of the settings is the character i played even detailed as being the foretold hero in any quests, but merely feels much more like actual role plays in many pnp games. YOu have several tasks or quests that come up as you arrive in areas, but none of these actually point to your characer being anythgin more then a roaming adventurer really. Even in raids you are a cog in a massive machine compased of many other players seeking to protect the world you live in, but you are not the sole hero in the game by a long shot. Even in the fact that largely most game's quests never use your characetr's name, but instead your character's class to identify you is rather keeping with a less hero feel, since if you were a hero these people would know your name by the tails of what you did prior. Even the hero class from wow the Death knight was placed into the game in the intro for them as being a member of several legions of freed death knights, but not trully detailed as being trully any of heroic or villianous noteriety trully. Trully the overaching story of the game is secondary, with the zone stories being primary for most of the game, but trully the player needs to be in charge of making thier character's story in the game.
One issue i see with gw2 is that even if the de's are as dynamic as people think, and we have seen them to be. How much veriety can we trully expect of these events, and how long before people have taken them thru the various different paths several times. You can only create so much content in the game with so much veriety, before you start to redo the content with a twist, and even then players will play thru these so fast that over time players will see it all. In ways even de's will in some ways go like quests in the world, as how many versions of an event can you trully have in the areas. Each area might have it's unique de's, but how many different routes can you have in them per event, and hwo long before everyone or atleast a majority of the pop have seen them.The fact is that quests feel so odd in mmos really since you know so many have done them, and that many will do the same quest to come, but that is true of the de's in that each play thru might be different. Yet still you might get the same one several times, might do them several times to find all of them., and then they are not that different from quests. I see de's more as a new way of telling the quests to you in game, but that it is geared for players that prefer not to look at quest text. I would love to see a quest tree kind of approtch taken to quests in game like in de's, where as you finish parts of quests based on what or hwo you did that affects many thigns, such as what you get for the next part of the quest, what your next quests could be, and even unlocking things. Like if you failed a mission that allows a horde of undead to destroy a village it opens a questline to seattle a new town, or if you do not get to a item in time the person seeking it gets the item, and might become somethign like a demon or lich because of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transaction_cost
All explained there
No problem boss.
Website: http://www.thegameguru.me / YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/users/thetroublmaker
I still think Wows (and most other MMOs) story is far too much about your story instead of the worlds. yes, things are somewhat different for raids and dngeons but not really that much.
GW2s DEs probably have a lot of issues and are primitive since it really is the first real try to replace quests but I think it opens up many possibilities. The whole thing that you need to do something now, not whenever you feel for it makes the story feel a lot more alive than in a cripted railroaded regular MMO like EQ or Wow.
DEs are basically quests, I am not denying that but they involve the world around you and that is what i find interesting about them. no instances but they tell the story of the world and you as a player can step in and help out or ignore it.
I think the potential of this system is a lot larger than anyone can imagine just yet, including Jeff Strain who first had the idea to replace quests with DEs (originally for GW: Utopia).
As for how varied DEs can be it is similar to quests but there is a difference: In DEs you can choose which part to do, in most quests you need to do everything.
My point was that MMOs shouldn't be treated as single player games or even regular multiplayer games. A story is actually good but it should be about the world, not you, your group or even your guild. Options are good of course and I think we will se DEs with options in the future.
MMO devs needs to be better to find out ways to tell the games story, now all games use the mechanics meridian 59 borrowed from single player games 16 years ago with the addition of EQs 13 year old way of handling raids.
Yeah, phasing have been added to make the illusion that what you do matter but i think it is the wrong way. And we are talking about themeparks here of course, sandbox games have their own mechanics and story in them could be improved as well in other ways.
agree with OP%
i dont understand this trend of people wanting to play a single player game with a strong story focus in a mmorpg. it doesnt make sense. why not just play skryim or some other SRPG, no one will ks your mobs, you wont get pked, you wont get out-epeened by that neckbeard raider. for majority of mmorpg players , WOW was their first mmo and they dont know any better. someone needs to develop a proper mmorpg that does justice to the massively multipler part. we dont need anymore WOW clones or low quality indie FFA full loot macrofests. minecraft is insanely popular and it is a sandbox game. this shows that there is a huge market for such gameplay, it just needs to be done right.
But (as we discussed earlier in the thread) why can't a multiplayer game have a good multiplayer story?
Even sandboxes can tells stories, even if it is more about background and making tools for creating good stories there.
Story does not have to be the same in singleplayer and multiplayer games, they should have unique mechanics.
im not sure what you mean by multiplayer story. do you mean the stories that develop as a result of multiplayer interactions? example: all that crap that happens on EVE, scams, takeovers, fights etc
if thats what you mean, then yes i agree 100%. a properly made mmorpg should give rise to events which are the essential elements of a narrative. a proper mmorpg would have its own news, history and story developed by the players.
developers just need to realise that you can make a sandbox mmorpg accessible and user friendly. look at minecraft and learn from it. it is easy, accessible while being complicated and difficult at the same time (redstone stuff)
But that is the thing the quests most of all in wow are not about your character per-say, but about telling the story of the area, of the history, and also about telling about what is happening at present in the area. Only in the way that what you do in the quest in the quest as the character can i agree the quests are about you, but in the same token they are geared towards explaining the history, telling of what is presently happening, and showing the zone trully. In this way to me your character is more like the insturment that you use to explore the quests of the game to find out about the history, events, and such in the game with these quests being the back drop to the travels of the character. Trully in my option a story should be tiered with several layers running from world, zone.area, character, party, ect. This is how i did it in my groups play Pen and paper games using the larger world events or area events as a back drop to the events happening to the player, and allowing the players to choose which to do. I gues for me teh distintion is that i do not see the quests that tell about what is happening in the area, of the past, lore or such as being about the player, but as being abotu telling the tale of the actually game thru the eyes of the character. I get a vary different feel from mmos compared to single player rpgs as i feel the story in single player rpgs are more about the actual character's life, where as the mmo seems more about what your characetr discovers in the world or is happening in the world about you.
For me i would rather have a quest-tree system where based on what happnes in quests it will unlock, close, or change furture quests in the games. Dynamic quests or events are nice for periods of time yet not all the time, just the same wiht regurlar quests, also the faster pace of dynamic quests will make it harder (compared to reg quests) to delve into the lore as deeply to me. Trully though even in dynamic events it is going to be about the group/yourself in the end, since the event like quests is the backdrop to your travels giving you a glimpse into the events of the area. For me i would rather see a more dynamic use of phasing in that it is not player-based, but zone-based in that when a player finishes or does thigns int he area it changes the area for all regardless of what they have done, but i think these kinds of event should be rare in the game as places do nto change as offen as people think.
People cant create their own stories anymore like they did in early mmo's. also the RPG part of MMORPG entails story. So you're wrong.
Everything I say is my opinion or personal preference. You may or may not find it useful to your cause but regardless I am entitled to it.
UO had an live event drive story handled by guides and gms rather than static quests. There were dev directed stories occurring in the game. Player participation could actually alter the events of ths story as well making each server unique (not dramatically nor noticably for most people). The live events introduced unique items and made alterations to the world. It did not last very long probably because the servers could not handle the events (numbers of players in a single area) and personel costs. Live events were fairly rare and I wouldn't expect most people have known about their existance.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
That is the thing though they do not want a single player game where they are the only one that is player comtroled, but that they want to feel like they are apart of a larger world of players not npcs. That fact of playing alongside players that might steal your kills, pk you, scam you, and such is part of feeling like you are part of a living world. They want to feel like they are in a world closer to the real world in ways, since even in real life you are living your own personal story that crosses with others, but also that plays out alongside other people's stories as well. In mmos players have the ption to make friends, enemies, group, solo, explore, and such all the while they are playing in a world of massive amounts of players. The fact of the choice to change from a solo playing to group to pvp style of play is big to many so called soloers, it is like in the real world we have the choice to proceed how we desire in the world. By most accounts a mmo is merely a massive online game that allows for the ability to interact with massive numbers of players in a game setting, and because of the fact it only must allow the ability to interact not force interaction between players many games can qualify as a mmo. It is this fact f choice in how you interact, as well as how much you interact that draws players of all kinds to the games, since it allows for a vast array of players to play the games. Also like in rl everyone is going to go about hwo they interact/live different, and so many will not like or frawn on those that do it different than them, but t is this fact of veriety to playstyles or play-methods that makes many mmos quite like real life.
That depends really on if you want the dev's to create your story for your character, or you want to create it yourself in the game. I have had many times i have played in a mmo merely using the quests, zone/world events as backdrop creating a story for my character, and even creating scenes of what happened after or before acceptng quests. Yet i prefer this of using the quests, as well as many plots of the game story/setting to be a backdrop to the actual smaller story of my character, without any interfernce from the devs or such.
I assume you're replaying to the OP who states "the gameplay, the wars, players made their own stories not the devs" - if you're referring to someone else, then nvm. Not really sure how the OP is wrong if they want people to make their own stories and not be so dependent on the story being a huge factor within the game.
The RPG part of MMORPG = having a role that you play out...if the mechanism that brings that about is story, then so be it. I know a decent amount of people just want to their role to be power lvlers and elites, not much room for story there
For the most part the majority of games and the people who play them fail at creating their own stories as you said.
Confusing post, as you seem to agree and then say you're wrong/diagree at the same time.
I couldn't agree more, and have been sounding like a broken record saying as much.
I don't want my adventures dictated to me. Just give us the backdrop, the lore and enough tools and room once again to allow our own stories to unfold.
It's been proven time and again that whether in the form of flavor text stapled to a mundane task or a 'sit down and watch us perform your task text' format, the developers pre-canned story always pales in comparison to the exploits friends and I have gotten into and out of over the years.
On top of that, it seems that a very heavy handed narrative is not only stifling, but clearly an unsustainable form of content. When 5+ years in development gets you 2 weeks of pre-canned story, you might want to reconsider trying to cram that into a persistant online space that generally aims to provide some longevity.
no... things don't need to be a black or white situation. Things never have to be black or white in any aspect of life. People merely choose the black or white path because it's easier to not worry about more than one side.
Everything I say is my opinion or personal preference. You may or may not find it useful to your cause but regardless I am entitled to it.
In my opinion story could be good if it would be a story for everybody on the server to experience together. Actually the problem of this is that only EvE-Online could do this atm cause its the only single-server-enviroment. Think about the fascinating things you could do with games if you had single-server enviroments.
You could write a gamestory for the whole lifespan of the game. A story people could follow for years to end in a big bang and shut down the servers after that
I´d love to see a story telled to the whole server. Dark rising in the backlands getting stronger over time etc.
I really hope someone got the balls to do this in the next 10 years.
BTT: I´d prefer gameplay over those singleplayerstorys everyday. Im not sure if i would think the same about serverstorys.