Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Devs take note: Anti-MMO features
mmoguy43
Member UncommonPosts: 2,770
In the light of the topic of MMOs that feel like singplayer games. What features do you feel are unproductive or even detrimental to making an MMO or MMORPG what it is or should be in your opinion? MMO design seems to have gotten off track somewhat and I wish devs would take notice to what they are doing compared to what players want (or based on what they don't want?). What is happening can't possibly be the result of not knowing what players want.
I'm not explicitly speaking to just your layman dev but mostly to those responsible for the direction of it's entirety.
Edit: So it is easier to follow I collected what most of you have to say and referenced the post.
Your Answers are...
Mixed views of cutscenes
- Convinences... of Auction house, fast travel, cross server grouping, LFG tools with instant travel (#5, #7, #15, #16, #24, #33, #70, #73, #103 )
- Devs have neglected to put features back into MMOs that make them social multiplayer games that they once were. (#95, #96 )
Nariussseldon likes features in the current generation of MMOs. Making it more like a game is worth sacrificing how old MMOs were. Longevity is not important. (paraphrasing here)
I personally don't think it is any one feature or design decision but with enough of them or neglect of adding the social systems MMOs need the MMO can end up being a lot less of an MMO.
Quoted Anti-MMO feature lists
#5 Originally posted by fenistil1. fully automatic LFG systems = changing game into lobby
2. cross-server tools and making world / zones channels / duplicates= no separate world feel anymore
3. cash shop or rmah = ruining immersion totally + destrying barrier between mmorpg and real world - thus making it feel like strictly a game and not mmorpg. Worst offender.
4.cutscenes especially if there are more than few rare occasional ones - separating player from game world & making it feel like single player
5. single player instances and overall too much instancing = the more things like that the more game feel like single player or co-op game.
6.Auction Houses like ebay - tunneling whole trade into one centralized person-less banalized experience. Sure more conveniant, but tbh more system like that = less mmo feel for me (very subjective I know).
7. teleporting without limits or with very small limits - making open world and travelling pointless. Teleporting is needed but it need to have quite a bit of limits, otherwise it banalize experience.
8. making whole or almost whole open world content soloable - it is as bad as making most of them group only.
9. UO and SWG did it best. They haven't really forced you into grouping to progress, but there were quite a bit of group only or group preferred content. Dynamic scaling NOT solve it completly. It makes it bit better, but not solve a problem.
10. end game focused in 95% at instances / arenas - speak for itself - when you couple it with cross server automatic LFG systems then playing end-game in mmorpg's is really NO DIFFRENT than playing any lobby-like games like FPS, MOBA or RTS games like CoD, LoL or Starcraft.
#24 Originally posted by Garvon3
Biggest anti social feature - instancing. MMOs are about interacting with other players and instancing does the exact opposite.
Quest based advancement - These guide the players by the nose, and they're always the ONLY way to level up in games that have them. That means, no one groups, because generally everyone will be doing different quests/on different steps/in different instances. They'll group for the one step they need a group then disband.
Lack of death penalty/any kind of real danger in the world - Lack of danger means players will go it alone. Its simply easier.
Auction Houses - They remove as much player interaction from crafting and selling as possible.
EQ/WoW tierred raiding - This is a sticky one. It encourages socialzing with closed cliques and guilds. It also encourages grinding and repeating and they're almost always instanced. In DAoC, dozens of different guilds would team up to do raids. That's blasphemy in modern MMOs. Work with strangers?!?!
Singleplayer storylines - These are usually instanced (or to use the WoW word for instancing- "phasing") which is bad on its own. Singleplayer games are a waste of time and dishonest. They'll never be as good as a singleplayer game mechanic wise, and they'll NEVER impact the game world. They try to trick the player into believing they're "The Chosen One" but as soon as they leave the instance they see 1000 other people doing the same thing, 1000 Chosen ones.
Lack of group rewards - No group xp bonus, no harder encounters that require lots of players...
No down time - This one is sticky. Down time sucks. It really does. BUT, when there's longer down time that encourages people to work together so that there's less down time, and it gives time for people to chat with each other. This is close to forced grouping though...
Global chat channels - I've noticedin modern MMOs NOBODY talks in local chat. It's all about global chat. In DAoC there was local, guild, and alliance (allied guilds). This gave plenty of global talk options, while still not making local obsolete.
Lack of any kind of depth/challenging mechanics/new ideas - Everyone comes into an MMO already knowing how to play, so players rarely rely on others.
In game GPS map - Same as the above.
Abundant quest rewards - Why talk to a crafter or even try to create a game econ when linear quest grinding gives you all you need?
#25 Originally posted by Icewhite
Massive. Scale determines how much company can actually affect players. Tiny CE staffs lead to "my god this community sucks", "I can't get an answer to my ticket", customer loss--so return to staffing levels we saw in the past, not 50k:1, designed for cost-efficiency. Get the bean counters out of the game.
Disconnect. Sealing off the devs from interacting with the players was a mistake in the long term.
Audience breadth. Your little company might want to pick an audience and go after it, instead of be-all-things-to-all-people. The big boys can try to juggle everything at once, try to keep all of these highly different people happy at the same time. Good luck to them. You shouldn't try to.
I bet most people are going to talk about specific systems...good luck to them, too. But there will never be a game that does everything that way I think it should be done; I'll settle for one that gets half of it right, and we can talk about the rest later.
#144 Originally posted by recidivism1. Breaking/Dividing the world up into more versions of the same piece of land/terrain ie. Excessive instancing
2. Shrinking the size of the virtual world by use of teleportation devices or skills ie. Excessive transportation
3. Limiting the possibilities of the formation of friendships and communites by the implementation of artificial tools ie. DF/RF
4. Eradication of the 'player driven economy' by binding items to the looter and reducing the effectiveness of crafting.
5. Extensions of the game world to incorporate 'mini-games' which do not have any ramifications nor influence ie. BG/WZ
6. Segregating communities by isolating the 'PvP Player' from the 'PvE Player' and designing content which is mutually exclusive.
Comments
I think the biggest one for me is cutscenes....They jsut have no place in a MMO....THey make me feel like the story is already written and my character isn't really a part of it.......Cutscenes are fine in a game like Dragon Age, especially where your choices do matter....In a game like TSW though, it absolutely destroys any immersion right off the bat.
The ability to makes ones avatar unique, and to play that avatar in ones own unique way. They all need to cater to greater diversity. There was a thread about UO talking about this. I remember people talking about the variety of options in SWG for different playstyles. MMO's these days tend to cater to different kill styles, not different playstyles.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Choosing characters as opposed to creating your own, storylines where you are the chosen one, and you are a special little snowflake and unnecessary barriers.
I will also agree with one of the above posters that the lack of playstyles hurts the MMO bit.
1. fully automatic LFG systems = changing game into lobby
2. cross-server tools and making world / zones channels / duplicates= no separate world feel anymore
3. cash shop or rmah = ruining immersion totally + destrying barrier between mmorpg and real world - thus making it feel like strictly a game and not mmorpg. Worst offender.
4.cutscenes especially if there are more than few rare occasional ones - separating player from game world & making it feel like single player
5. single player instances and overall too much instancing = the more things like that the more game feel like single player or co-op game.
6.Auction Houses like ebay - tunneling whole trade into one centralized person-less banalized experience. Sure more conveniant, but tbh more system like that = less mmo feel for me (very subjective I know).
7. teleporting without limits or with very small limits - making open world and travelling pointless. Teleporting is needed but it need to have quite a bit of limits, otherwise it banalize experience.
8. making whole or almost whole open world content soloable - it is as bad as making most of them group only.
9. UO and SWG did it best. They haven't really forced you into grouping to progress, but there were quite a bit of group only or group preferred content. Dynamic scaling NOT solve it completly. It makes it bit better, but not solve a problem.
10. end game focused in 95% at instances / arenas - speak for itself - when you couple it with cross server automatic LFG systems then playing end-game in mmorpg's is really NO DIFFRENT than playing any lobby-like games like FPS, MOBA or RTS games like CoD, LoL or Starcraft.
Really the only thing players have overwhelmingly spoken about (with their wallets, the speech which really matters) is that cloning isn't wanted. If you want to make a lot of money, hire some great designers and apply game design to the genre like WOW did (and like GW2 is doing.)
Notably absent from the above advice is "You must adhere 100% to what bittervets consider a MMORPG, because lots of players care about that."
Fact is players just care about gameplay. If you can use MMO-specific gameplay traits to make your game more fun, you're going to do better. But if MMO traits hold your game back (as they often do, because they come in direct tension with stronger game mechanics) then avoid those traits like the plague.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I am the complete opposite of you. I personally love getting to know the different NPC personalities, especially in video form. Cut scenes in MMO's give a nice break, and definitely add some diversity to the story line. I don't like random cut scenes though; I more or less enjoy the Aion/TERA style where they had the story quests that gave out cut scenes.
I wouldn't want ot see a cut scene after helping out Farmer Jim milk his cow or anything like that.
To add to the list of Dev nono's though
-LFG tool : I don't mind the LFG tool so much, but I HATE when they make it so you get teleported to the instance. The huge world is there for a reason, go travel about imo.
This sounds like every mmo on the market today. No wonder people are bored with the same thing on a daily basis.
Grim Dawn, the next great action rpg!
http://www.grimdawn.com/
yeah I know nariusseldon
I know you like those 'features' and you like them precisely for the same reasons I dislike them
I played some lobby games in past and I still play some (though less than in past).
That's why I look in mmorpg's for something diffrent not for more lobby. I already have enough lobby in Warcraft 3 I keep going back to on b.net and enough in BF3 + some occasional lobby games I play more rarely.
Lobby experience offered by mmorpg's get boring much faster, but even if it would be much more interesing it would only mean that it would fight for my attention with W3 & BF3 and would not fill void & need for virtual world / open / freedom games.
I have urges to play some small amount of lobby games and bigger amount of more open games.
Throwing more lobby or more open / sandboxy games at myself won't eradicate urges to play those second type of game
I was going to post but you hit the nail on the head perfectly, great post. Regarding #3, I think it's a hugely understated problem that cash shops and RMAH greatly impact on immersion within a game. You put it perfectly - people play games to get away from the real world. Cash shops bridge the barrier between the two.
My biggest concern is "single player MMOs".
Too many of them, why would I play an MMO just to play by myself?
The technology is there, use it.
Might be just me, but instead of asking developer to take out single player in MMO, maybe you should ask developer to creat more multi player game play, and allow player to choose if they want to play single player or multi player.
Below is where we can disscuss and come up with new ideas for Sandparks!
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5164689#5164689
I would say features like Auction House and fast travel take a lot of of the player interaction and immersion out of mmos. But they're convenient. A lot of what differentiates current MMOs from the first few are simple matters of convenience, and the things left out in favour of those conveniences.
Its like using wikipedia instead of going to the library and looking up info in books. Do certain social skills and experiences get lost in the process? Yes. But we live in a time where convenience is considered an advancement, and inconvenience is an impardonable offense to the majority of those living in the First World.
I mean even here, when people complain about game features, some of these things like "more challenge" and "more grouping" can be done by players, for players. But a lot of people complain because they don't like having to think about and work for those things without the game itself giving out lots of tools and rewards for such activities. They feel they're entitled to convenience because they paid for something, and indeed they are, but that kind of helpless attitude is why mmos are where they are right now.
i like what rissies said. convenience can take away from player interaction.
I think the whole point is dev knows those are anti-mmo features. But "some" people like it. Actually there are maybe more people that like "fast travel", "instance" etc.
I dont' agree or disagree. I just think there should be more variety kind of mmorpg.
This an example of where the genre is forking into "comics" and "worlds". From the comic point of view, cutscenes are great entertainment, providing a more complex scene than can be scripted in the game engine. From a world point of view they are like nails on chalkboard - they take away control of my character, don't let me interact with the events and place importance on scenarios/interactions which aren't even available as gameplay.
The first time I encountered one, I had an "ooh! That's cool!" reaction. But now I've swung around to dreading them because I'm more of a world person than a comic person.
I suppose you are right. Those that like the convience features outweigh the rest and the benefits of having them appear to be worth it compared to the things that subtract from being an MMO. Problem is there isn't much being put back in to make in an MMO again.
Would go with #5 as the worst offender, but still an outstanding post
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
Hmm .. you are illogical. Why would dev skipping storyline & leveling in instances? In fact, instances are GREAT for storyline.
And yeah .. lobby-based games are what i am looking for, and playing. SD Gundam, Diablo 3, Torchlight 2 (hopefully good), DDO, DCUO ....
A boring "immersed" game is still boring. Immersion should not get in the way of gameplay. We are talking about games here, not alternate worlds.
Plus, we *have* AH in the real world too. .
I agree. Convenience and immersion are not really in competition with each other. You may create a game out of the inconvenience of not having an AH but that has nothing to do with immersion.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Lots of small things, lots of big things... hmm.
Biggest anti social feature - instancing. MMOs are about interacting with other players and instancing does the exact opposite.
Quest based advancement - These guide the players by the nose, and they're always the ONLY way to level up in games that have them. That means, no one groups, because generally everyone will be doing different quests/on different steps/in different instances. They'll group for the one step they need a group then disband.
Lack of death penalty/any kind of real danger in the world - Lack of danger means players will go it alone. Its simply easier.
Auction Houses - They remove as much player interaction from crafting and selling as possible.
EQ/WoW tierred raiding - This is a sticky one. It encourages socialzing with closed cliques and guilds. It also encourages grinding and repeating and they're almost always instanced. In DAoC, dozens of different guilds would team up to do raids. That's blasphemy in modern MMOs. Work with strangers?!?!
Singleplayer storylines - These are usually instanced (or to use the WoW word for instancing- "phasing") which is bad on its own. Singleplayer games are a waste of time and dishonest. They'll never be as good as a singleplayer game mechanic wise, and they'll NEVER impact the game world. They try to trick the player into believing they're "The Chosen One" but as soon as they leave the instance they see 1000 other people doing the same thing, 1000 Chosen ones.
Lack of group rewards - No group xp bonus, no harder encounters that require lots of players...
No down time - This one is sticky. Down time sucks. It really does. BUT, when there's longer down time that encourages people to work together so that there's less down time, and it gives time for people to chat with each other. This is close to forced grouping though...
Global chat channels - I've noticedin modern MMOs NOBODY talks in local chat. It's all about global chat. In DAoC there was local, guild, and alliance (allied guilds). This gave plenty of global talk options, while still not making local obsolete.
Lack of any kind of depth/challenging mechanics/new ideas - Everyone comes into an MMO already knowing how to play, so players rarely rely on others.
In game GPS map - Same as the above.
Abundant quest rewards - Why talk to a crafter or even try to create a game econ when linear quest grinding gives you all you need?
Just emphasised that to keep the name-calling at a low boil.
Massive. Scale determines how much company can actually affect players. Tiny CE staffs lead to "my god this community sucks", "I can't get an answer to my ticket", customer loss--so return to staffing levels we saw in the past, not 50k:1, designed for cost-efficiency. Get the bean counters out of the game.
Disconnect. Sealing off the devs from interacting with the players was a mistake in the long term.
Audience breadth. Your little company might want to pick an audience and go after it, instead of be-all-things-to-all-people. The big boys can try to juggle everything at once, try to keep all of these highly different people happy at the same time. Good luck to them. You shouldn't try to.
I bet most people are going to talk about specific systems...good luck to them, too. But there will never be a game that does everything that way I think it should be done; I'll settle for one that gets half of it right, and we can talk about the rest later.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.