Damonvile, monster play was fun. What I remember was getting rolled by orcs and giant spiders. A player who chose to be on evil side could level a toon in monster play. Many quests. Seemed like it would be repetitive though. Been a few yeaars since I played(pre f2p).
Roses are red Violets are blue The reviewer has a mishapen head Which means his opinion is skewed ...Aldous.MF'n.Huxley
Bloodwych was one of the first MMO in my books,in one player(cheap Dungeon Master clone) mode player was playing well like one player but in multiplayer mode the game was completely different.
That feeling is missing in allmost every single MMO today when companies are trying to give that single player feeling in multiplayer mode.
So someone who have played Roguelikes,imagine that *10000000000000000.
ToME is getting there at some point i hope.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
My background is from eq, and back then eq was the game that really started to fire up my imagination of what the mmorpg genre could (have) become. This could become a long post and it still wouldn't cover much but lets get started.
- Bigger worlds. Actually huge world where you could get lost and find unexpected stuff just by exploring. So huge that You could log in every day for years and find new unexplored areas and content. This is very much a eq dream because eq hinted that this might be possible, I mean it would be "just" taking eq and multiply it by 10.
- Content explosion. With a bigger world there must be more content. At that time I didn't expect content to be so controlled (aka designed stories) as it has become. So with that mindset it was natural to think content was cheap to create, and therefore a grand mmorpg would just mass produce content. Little did I know that content would be so time consuming and costly to make in mmorpgs to come - And I still don't think it has to be, it is just a question of how the developer thinks.
- Intelligent NPC mechanics. AI based on neural networking and much deeper NPC interactions that would drive some of the virtual world. Sort of like what eqnext promises to do now. Self adjusting economy systems. Self adjusting politics system and NPC factions in a breathing living sort of world. One week the orc tribe might be strong and the next week they moved camp to a different location because the dwarf king decided til send out troops to deal with them.
- Game Masters. With more self sustaining world and game mechanics, resources could be re-alloced to shape the world dynamically. Create events, trigger bigger changes in factions, npc population, introduce and retire quests, and generally dedicate their time to keep the world healthy and a fun and interesting place for roleplayers to roam.
- Roleplaying on a grand scale. These new mmorpgs would be like second worlds where you would >>become<< your character and role play it. Logging in and beeing that character and taking decisions and forming a story. Simply just role playing on a much bigger scale, staying in character as much as possible and letting imagination take over.
- VR. The future dream would be "suiting" up and really be in character, with physics and VR or holodecks. Physcially controlling your character, swinging a sword, blocking an attack with shield, feeling the hits. I imagined that it might start with game halls where you could rent play time, inspired by the massive arcade halls back in the 80ies.
- Epicness. Being part of this huge world. Explore and adventure and experience stuff depending on your choices and who you met on the way. Not running designed content themepark style, but actually have freedom to create your own story only limited by the worlds setting and rules. This can only happen in a virtual WORLD, not a themepark.
- Sandbox. But not the sandbox designed for pvp. It was more from a pve perspective that it would be cool to have some sort of changing world. My mindset was limited to stuff like owning property or land, paying npc's to work and craft and stuff like that. More of the freedom stuff perspective I keep mentioning.
- EVERquesting. It is very simple, so much content, so great systems, so many options that a player virtually never would "come to the end" or reach "endgame". No Max levels, no playing just to get better gear, but playing because it was an adventure and it never stopped, always more ways to advance your character, always more "fame" to build. Eq laid out the path and it was my hope and dream that others would surpass and expand the concept. WoW showed promise back in the early days, but we all know what happened.
And much more, but I can feel my rambling is starting to wander of..
I think the basic thought back then was that it was the computing power and tech difficulties that were the limits, and it turned out that the limits were in the minds of the developers and the players instead.
Reading my post I am not satisfied, maybe I should have been more specific, it's just almost impossible because there is so much to say and so much that is based on other details and fundamentals that would need to be explained aswell.
there are many visions already posted in here i totally share. might it be bigger worlds, less gear grinding, more social interaction possibilities, better ai and so on.
but there is one thing in particular that was (more or less) becoming a problem back a decade ago and still isn't solved ... the seperation of pve and pvp. i belive that pve will flourish if developers doesn't have to care about 'the balance' in the pvp part of a game. pvp does limit pve in its possibilities. but thats vice versa, don't take me wrong. pvp could also win from pve abscence. in my opinion there was one game, that came close to get a very good mix - lord of the rings online. the monsters versus player thing was a very good idea. it still leaves a bitter taste when it comes to get the balance right, but its much more easier this way and gives the pve department more freedom (f.e. in adding more classes or skills).
and another thing. i thought mmorpgs would become more complex, more like a virtual world. back in the days many things seamed to be not possible with the technology at hand, but, gosh, how wrong was i. current mmorpgs does give the players better graphics, but way less freedom or features to play with. nowadays there are only a handfull games left (and most of them are really old) that provides more than linear questing until max level and then only the gear grinding treatmill is there to play with.
for example: i thought it might be possible to claim land for a guild, to build a castle, village or some sort of academy on it. that it would takes weeks and many diffrent mastercrafter to get even the basic layout of such a building done (similar to the housing in istaria former known as horizon); that you can hire nps like blacksmiths, tailors, farmers and traders; that there is administration to be dealt with. i thought mmorpgs would become much more complex and challenging. oh, i was so wrong.
it seams that today mmorpgs are made for simple people with simple minds. but i refuse to think that the majority of the customers are simple minded. we, the customers, eat whats on the plate. if companies still serve only fast food, we will eat it in expectation that we maybe find a good tasting one. prove that we didn't found what we are looking for and that we are not satisfied with the food we got are two facts. world of warcraft is by far still the number #1 and in the last ten years every new released mmorpg had a drop in their active playing members count by around 2/3 after the first 3 months.
I'm an EQ old-timer, and pen-n-paper role player since 1975-76 at the dawn of D&D. I went through various CRPGs on assorted computer systems. I am a dinosaur, though. Someone interested in role-playing.
For me, the thing I hoped for EQ and other MMORPGs was the development of new systems with new ways to represent the human character in a game. There's a limit to complexity in the Pen-N-Paper world, where the mass number crunching necessary to simulate complex situations overwhelmed the patience of the average player. The computer could step in and simulate combat and magic in different ways.
It hasn't happened, though. MMORPG developers initially converted existing pen-n-paper conventions into computer terms. This was probably necessary to get players to buy into the games. But the same Levels, AC and HP systems I saw in 1976 are the same ones I'm using today. Maybe these systems are best for computerized games, but I'm more disappointed in the development teams that have never questioned these fundamental systems. Instead they gave us more of the same. There's no innovation.
The only real tools the original MMORPGs gave the role players are chat and emotes. No one has even bothered giving the players embedded emotes -- /say I hear you, [hand-to-heart] my liege. I pledge my sword to your cause [salute-fist-clenched]. Today, I'm discouraged from role-playing because I have the same exact tools I had in my first MMORPG. There's been no evolution. There's not even a simple spell-check function in the chat function.
Additionally, there's been no expansion of what an MMORPG is. The basic core cycle of Combat-Loot-Level hasn't been really supplemented with other systems. Even crafting is, for the most part, tied to the combat system in order to get components. Where are the other systems for social events (Mayor's Ball, or the Harvest Festival). Where are systems to evaluate aesthetic values of vases made with the same crafting recipe, or judge which dancer performed better? The entire experience of an MMORPG is the combat system. Where's the avenue for advancement without violence?
Instead of focusing on the RP in MMORPG, newer products are concentrating on the G aspect. The products are geared more for the attention-deprived player, leaving those wanting a deeper, more complex experience on the proverbial vine. I had hoped for more social interaction with a variety of new systems, but it appears that games are more about catering for the solo combat-oriented experience. In fact, the only 'supported' way to experience the game is to fight (level) to the highest limits, then join a raiding guild, where you can fight some more.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I had envisioned a more advanced AI with bigger seamless worlds. Basically, the games becoming more and more perfect virtual worlds. Never have I thought they would turn into the dumb lobby games of today.
3) realistic combat, Screw the stupid trinity BS. Combat should be chaotic, loud and fun!
4) Epic quests not just an epic number of quests. A quest should take time to complete and once done you should feel a major sense of accomplishment. Go kill 10 rat quests are ok for beginners, but in every damn zone? Really?
5) Games that required real skill to be successful. Guess that one did a complete 180 from what I was hoping for. Thanks Blizzard and WoW. We are all now dumber for having been introduced to your game.
I like the variety of mmo's we now have. I've spent years playing mmo's that gave little informatiom. Most of the stuff you had to figure out for yourself. If you wanted maps you had to draw them. Some puzzles took months to figure out as there was little info available on the net. No youtube guides to walk you through stuff.
SWG and others were fun in their day but now it's plenty of variety to go around.
There is one thing i thought they would have that I've never seen. An off-line module for MMO Avatars. If I want to visit an Avatar I have to log-in. If the game is closed I have to use screen shots and videos to remember them. I'm surprised no games have come up with for a fee preserving your Avatar in an off-line home or small area where you can hangout with your Avatar and maybe mod it out, like an RPG mode.
Or, it could be like taking a character I made in ESO and being able to export it into Skyrim.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I've never even seen an mmo that uses turn based combat
Depends on how picky one gets, but Wizard101 uses turn based combat, where each side rolls an initiative roll that lasts throughout the combat. Pirate101 also uses this with movement and maneuvers involved. I think Atlantica uses turn based combat, too.
In Wizard101, it works very well because the only thing you can do is cast spells from a spell deck. There is no movement during combat. Also, combat does not go into a phase, all to yourself (I think like Atlantica does). Any other players (2-3 more) can join in and fight, too.
Pirate101 I do not enjoy as much, as I find it difficult to coordinate movement with "combat moves." Too often I move too far and can not get off an attack. Sometimes ranged attacks can not reach the opponent. When I move, the attack seems to "go away" as a choice.
I really miss Champions' (tabletop RPG) phases mechanic, though do not know how that would work in an MMORPG setting.
In most MMOs, my character's abilities figure into speed, initiative, reaction almost zero. It is all on me and my abilities. My character could have a Dexterity of 1 and I could still NOT MISS a target. No hand and eye coordination and still hitting targets left and right (and in front).
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I've never even seen an mmo that uses turn based combat
Depends on how picky one gets, but Wizard101 uses turn based combat, where each side rolls an initiative roll that lasts throughout the combat. Pirate101 also uses this with movement and maneuvers involved. I think Atlantica uses turn based combat, too.
In Wizard101, it works very well because the only thing you can do is cast spells from a spell deck. There is no movement during combat. Also, combat does not go into a phase, all to yourself (I think like Atlantica does). Any other players (2-3 more) can join in and fight, too.
Pirate101 I do not enjoy as much, as I find it difficult to coordinate movement with "combat moves." Too often I move too far and can not get off an attack. Sometimes ranged attacks can not reach the opponent. When I move, the attack seems to "go away" as a choice.
I really miss Champions' (tabletop RPG) phases mechanic, though do not know how that would work in an MMORPG setting.
In most MMOs, my character's abilities figure into speed, initiative, reaction almost zero. It is all on me and my abilities. My character could have a Dexterity of 1 and I could still NOT MISS a target. No hand and eye coordination and still hitting targets left and right (and in front).
One of the games i enjoyed the most (turn-based combat) was Final Fantasy Tactics for Psx, god i love that game, but what i loved the most was the turn-based combat, sadly i don't think that kind of system would work in a mmorpg.
I thought we'd head for simulated worlds like Ultima Online but with a larger budget and more sophistication.
We had simulated ecologies and food chains, open housing with tons of customization, playing items in the world, totally open skill systems... in 1997.
This....I really thought we would end up with more "open" worlds that while not completely a sandbox still allowed for more freedom and immersion.
In UO our guild built, owned and operated a store at an important intersection leading to Trinsic.
In AC my toon developed freely from skills I actually used and ultimately became my ideal avatar.
In EQ I enjoyed feeling a sense of dread lurking around every corner of Lower Guk when 50 was cap.
I am currently playing WOW, LOTRO and GW2 on a monthly rotation. While I enjoy each title on their own merits, I also find that I am just as focused on whats on TV while I play. I level quickly, risk little, crunch the same buttons and make few to no meaningful decisions regarding gameplay except when to direct my avatar to the next quest/story hub.
As my last sub expires I am going to take a break from MMO's and try out the Witcher 2 and Divinity:Original Sin while I wait for Shrouds of the Avatar and Project Gorgon to hopefully inspire my interest again in this genre.
Del Cabon A US Army ('Just Cause') Vet and MMORPG Native formerly of Trinsic, Norath and Dereth. Currently playing LOTRO.
Comments
A player who chose to be on evil side could level a toon in monster play. Many quests. Seemed like it would be repetitive though. Been a few yeaars since I played(pre f2p).
Roses are red
Violets are blue
The reviewer has a mishapen head
Which means his opinion is skewed
...Aldous.MF'n.Huxley
Multiplayer Hack(Nethack) 3D
Bloodwych was one of the first MMO in my books,in one player(cheap Dungeon Master clone) mode player was playing well like one player but in multiplayer mode the game was completely different.
That feeling is missing in allmost every single MMO today when companies are trying to give that single player feeling in multiplayer mode.
So someone who have played Roguelikes,imagine that *10000000000000000.
ToME is getting there at some point i hope.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
My background is from eq, and back then eq was the game that really started to fire up my imagination of what the mmorpg genre could (have) become. This could become a long post and it still wouldn't cover much but lets get started.
- Bigger worlds. Actually huge world where you could get lost and find unexpected stuff just by exploring. So huge that You could log in every day for years and find new unexplored areas and content. This is very much a eq dream because eq hinted that this might be possible, I mean it would be "just" taking eq and multiply it by 10.
- Content explosion. With a bigger world there must be more content. At that time I didn't expect content to be so controlled (aka designed stories) as it has become. So with that mindset it was natural to think content was cheap to create, and therefore a grand mmorpg would just mass produce content. Little did I know that content would be so time consuming and costly to make in mmorpgs to come - And I still don't think it has to be, it is just a question of how the developer thinks.
- Intelligent NPC mechanics. AI based on neural networking and much deeper NPC interactions that would drive some of the virtual world. Sort of like what eqnext promises to do now. Self adjusting economy systems. Self adjusting politics system and NPC factions in a breathing living sort of world. One week the orc tribe might be strong and the next week they moved camp to a different location because the dwarf king decided til send out troops to deal with them.
- Game Masters. With more self sustaining world and game mechanics, resources could be re-alloced to shape the world dynamically. Create events, trigger bigger changes in factions, npc population, introduce and retire quests, and generally dedicate their time to keep the world healthy and a fun and interesting place for roleplayers to roam.
- Roleplaying on a grand scale. These new mmorpgs would be like second worlds where you would >>become<< your character and role play it. Logging in and beeing that character and taking decisions and forming a story. Simply just role playing on a much bigger scale, staying in character as much as possible and letting imagination take over.
- VR. The future dream would be "suiting" up and really be in character, with physics and VR or holodecks. Physcially controlling your character, swinging a sword, blocking an attack with shield, feeling the hits. I imagined that it might start with game halls where you could rent play time, inspired by the massive arcade halls back in the 80ies.
- Epicness. Being part of this huge world. Explore and adventure and experience stuff depending on your choices and who you met on the way. Not running designed content themepark style, but actually have freedom to create your own story only limited by the worlds setting and rules. This can only happen in a virtual WORLD, not a themepark.
- Sandbox. But not the sandbox designed for pvp. It was more from a pve perspective that it would be cool to have some sort of changing world. My mindset was limited to stuff like owning property or land, paying npc's to work and craft and stuff like that. More of the freedom stuff perspective I keep mentioning.
- EVERquesting. It is very simple, so much content, so great systems, so many options that a player virtually never would "come to the end" or reach "endgame". No Max levels, no playing just to get better gear, but playing because it was an adventure and it never stopped, always more ways to advance your character, always more "fame" to build. Eq laid out the path and it was my hope and dream that others would surpass and expand the concept. WoW showed promise back in the early days, but we all know what happened.
And much more, but I can feel my rambling is starting to wander of..
I think the basic thought back then was that it was the computing power and tech difficulties that were the limits, and it turned out that the limits were in the minds of the developers and the players instead.
Reading my post I am not satisfied, maybe I should have been more specific, it's just almost impossible because there is so much to say and so much that is based on other details and fundamentals that would need to be explained aswell.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
there are many visions already posted in here i totally share. might it be bigger worlds, less gear grinding, more social interaction possibilities, better ai and so on.
but there is one thing in particular that was (more or less) becoming a problem back a decade ago and still isn't solved ... the seperation of pve and pvp. i belive that pve will flourish if developers doesn't have to care about 'the balance' in the pvp part of a game. pvp does limit pve in its possibilities. but thats vice versa, don't take me wrong. pvp could also win from pve abscence. in my opinion there was one game, that came close to get a very good mix - lord of the rings online. the monsters versus player thing was a very good idea. it still leaves a bitter taste when it comes to get the balance right, but its much more easier this way and gives the pve department more freedom (f.e. in adding more classes or skills).
and another thing. i thought mmorpgs would become more complex, more like a virtual world. back in the days many things seamed to be not possible with the technology at hand, but, gosh, how wrong was i. current mmorpgs does give the players better graphics, but way less freedom or features to play with. nowadays there are only a handfull games left (and most of them are really old) that provides more than linear questing until max level and then only the gear grinding treatmill is there to play with.
for example: i thought it might be possible to claim land for a guild, to build a castle, village or some sort of academy on it. that it would takes weeks and many diffrent mastercrafter to get even the basic layout of such a building done (similar to the housing in istaria former known as horizon); that you can hire nps like blacksmiths, tailors, farmers and traders; that there is administration to be dealt with. i thought mmorpgs would become much more complex and challenging. oh, i was so wrong.
it seams that today mmorpgs are made for simple people with simple minds. but i refuse to think that the majority of the customers are simple minded. we, the customers, eat whats on the plate. if companies still serve only fast food, we will eat it in expectation that we maybe find a good tasting one. prove that we didn't found what we are looking for and that we are not satisfied with the food we got are two facts. world of warcraft is by far still the number #1 and in the last ten years every new released mmorpg had a drop in their active playing members count by around 2/3 after the first 3 months.
I hoped for more games, (got it)
I hoped for larger worlds (arguable)
I hoped for more depth, (still hoping)
I'm an EQ old-timer, and pen-n-paper role player since 1975-76 at the dawn of D&D. I went through various CRPGs on assorted computer systems. I am a dinosaur, though. Someone interested in role-playing.
For me, the thing I hoped for EQ and other MMORPGs was the development of new systems with new ways to represent the human character in a game. There's a limit to complexity in the Pen-N-Paper world, where the mass number crunching necessary to simulate complex situations overwhelmed the patience of the average player. The computer could step in and simulate combat and magic in different ways.
It hasn't happened, though. MMORPG developers initially converted existing pen-n-paper conventions into computer terms. This was probably necessary to get players to buy into the games. But the same Levels, AC and HP systems I saw in 1976 are the same ones I'm using today. Maybe these systems are best for computerized games, but I'm more disappointed in the development teams that have never questioned these fundamental systems. Instead they gave us more of the same. There's no innovation.
The only real tools the original MMORPGs gave the role players are chat and emotes. No one has even bothered giving the players embedded emotes -- /say I hear you, [hand-to-heart] my liege. I pledge my sword to your cause [salute-fist-clenched]. Today, I'm discouraged from role-playing because I have the same exact tools I had in my first MMORPG. There's been no evolution. There's not even a simple spell-check function in the chat function.
Additionally, there's been no expansion of what an MMORPG is. The basic core cycle of Combat-Loot-Level hasn't been really supplemented with other systems. Even crafting is, for the most part, tied to the combat system in order to get components. Where are the other systems for social events (Mayor's Ball, or the Harvest Festival). Where are systems to evaluate aesthetic values of vases made with the same crafting recipe, or judge which dancer performed better? The entire experience of an MMORPG is the combat system. Where's the avenue for advancement without violence?
Instead of focusing on the RP in MMORPG, newer products are concentrating on the G aspect. The products are geared more for the attention-deprived player, leaving those wanting a deeper, more complex experience on the proverbial vine. I had hoped for more social interaction with a variety of new systems, but it appears that games are more about catering for the solo combat-oriented experience. In fact, the only 'supported' way to experience the game is to fight (level) to the highest limits, then join a raiding guild, where you can fight some more.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I no longer hope for simulated worlds.
I no longer envision the genre as I envisioned it 10 years ago.
I no longer play MMORPGS either.
I no longer have interest in development of open leveless simulated worlds.
I gave up.
If you are interested in making a MMO maybe visit my page to get a free open source engine.
1) Better Graphics
2) Vastly improved AI for NPC
3) realistic combat, Screw the stupid trinity BS. Combat should be chaotic, loud and fun!
4) Epic quests not just an epic number of quests. A quest should take time to complete and once done you should feel a major sense of accomplishment. Go kill 10 rat quests are ok for beginners, but in every damn zone? Really?
5) Games that required real skill to be successful. Guess that one did a complete 180 from what I was hoping for. Thanks Blizzard and WoW. We are all now dumber for having been introduced to your game.
MAGA
I like the variety of mmo's we now have. I've spent years playing mmo's that gave little informatiom. Most of the stuff you had to figure out for yourself. If you wanted maps you had to draw them. Some puzzles took months to figure out as there was little info available on the net. No youtube guides to walk you through stuff.
SWG and others were fun in their day but now it's plenty of variety to go around.
There is one thing i thought they would have that I've never seen. An off-line module for MMO Avatars. If I want to visit an Avatar I have to log-in. If the game is closed I have to use screen shots and videos to remember them. I'm surprised no games have come up with for a fee preserving your Avatar in an off-line home or small area where you can hangout with your Avatar and maybe mod it out, like an RPG mode.
Or, it could be like taking a character I made in ESO and being able to export it into Skyrim.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
In Wizard101, it works very well because the only thing you can do is cast spells from a spell deck. There is no movement during combat. Also, combat does not go into a phase, all to yourself (I think like Atlantica does). Any other players (2-3 more) can join in and fight, too.
Pirate101 I do not enjoy as much, as I find it difficult to coordinate movement with "combat moves." Too often I move too far and can not get off an attack. Sometimes ranged attacks can not reach the opponent. When I move, the attack seems to "go away" as a choice.
I really miss Champions' (tabletop RPG) phases mechanic, though do not know how that would work in an MMORPG setting.
In most MMOs, my character's abilities figure into speed, initiative, reaction almost zero. It is all on me and my abilities. My character could have a Dexterity of 1 and I could still NOT MISS a target. No hand and eye coordination and still hitting targets left and right (and in front).
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
One of the games i enjoyed the most (turn-based combat) was Final Fantasy Tactics for Psx, god i love that game, but what i loved the most was the turn-based combat, sadly i don't think that kind of system would work in a mmorpg.
Future of mmorpgs lies in technologies that allow for cheap development - generated areas, even NPCs and quests.
Private servers / server rental allowing for having community run servers without owning the code/game/software will be a big one imo.
Sinister Savant MMORPG Community
This....I really thought we would end up with more "open" worlds that while not completely a sandbox still allowed for more freedom and immersion.
In UO our guild built, owned and operated a store at an important intersection leading to Trinsic.
In AC my toon developed freely from skills I actually used and ultimately became my ideal avatar.
In EQ I enjoyed feeling a sense of dread lurking around every corner of Lower Guk when 50 was cap.
I am currently playing WOW, LOTRO and GW2 on a monthly rotation. While I enjoy each title on their own merits, I also find that I am just as focused on whats on TV while I play. I level quickly, risk little, crunch the same buttons and make few to no meaningful decisions regarding gameplay except when to direct my avatar to the next quest/story hub.
As my last sub expires I am going to take a break from MMO's and try out the Witcher 2 and Divinity:Original Sin while I wait for Shrouds of the Avatar and Project Gorgon to hopefully inspire my interest again in this genre.
Del Cabon
A US Army ('Just Cause') Vet and MMORPG Native formerly of Trinsic, Norath and Dereth. Currently playing LOTRO.