Semi-procedural H&S games? Um, the H&S genre is mostly games like God of War and Shadow of Mordor. Which is partly why your renaissance comment doesn't make sense, because these games remain just as popular as ever (quite popular, and possibly more popular than RPGs, but nothing has really changed.)
You're mistaking hack&slash genre with slasher genre. Two diffrent things.
Raise your hand if Halloween, Friday the 13th, Happy Birthday to Me, or April Fool's Day went through your mind when you read "slasher genre".
o/
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I'm a powergamer. Ultimately I dont care for lore and stuff. Thats all just fluff to me.
Foremost I want to play my character optimally. And I want it to be really hard, if not impossible, what exactly "optimally" would be. I want it to be a real intellectual challenge.
Thus a game that doesnt give me the information I need to optimize my character build and playstyle is definitely not for me.
Thats one of the things I loved about Vanguard, you could think endlessly about how to play your character the best way.
Oh, so you would not just go to the wiki and find the optimal build for your character?
If you won't, you can be sure the next "Powergamer" will.
Wiki this, Google that, Youtube the other thing............
There use to be a time you actually played the game and found details IN THE GAME (shocker I know).
Sarcasm aside, I do believe having more information and numbers is not what kills the fascination of the game. If done right and designed well it only adds to the fascination of the game. At present I will point to the developers of Crowfall and the fascination they are creating with their game. I know it is early, but they are creating what I like to call "healthy buzz". Another would be Camelot Unchained.
What kills fascination for a game, for me, is toxic communities, horrible content that has little lore and story to increase the depth of the world I play in, poorly designed UIs that get in my way more than help, unoptimized game engines that ruin my immersion and etc....
Too little information is also bad. Having to test or guess the rules that govern the actions of your own avatar is not immersive, it's stupid. The world and enemies around you can and should be unkown, but you should never have to guess what your own abilities do.
I suppose you've never touched anything hot and got burned before? The brain is capable of deducing such things, once it realizes what hot is. Same is true for gaming. How do you think the people who wrote the add-ons and wikis found out such things? Trial and error. The world first kills aren't done with a play by play outline in front of them, they learned the patterns after repeating them again and again. Trial and error is what makes the world go round.
I know that things have to be found out by trial and error in real life.
That doesn't make it immersive that a trained battlemage would have to blast rabbits with fireballs to learn what his fireballs do. My avatar is a professional fighter, he has trained his abilities, and he knows exactly what they do. If you want immersion you want to know the same things that your character would know, not more, not less. That means you want to know the rules that govern your own actions, but not necessarily much about the enemy.
Most games RPG games I used to play started you in rags with no direction on what to do. I thought they were a lot of fun. I still do. It makes your progression feel more enjoyable if you have to learn like your character would have to learn IMO. That is part of the enjoyment.
You're mistaking hack&slash genre with slasher genre. Two diffrent things.
Hack&slash games are: Diablo 3, Path of Exile, Torchlight 2, Marvel Heroes Online, Van Hellsing, Grim Dawn, etc
Hack&slash games are games which are heavy about character build and loot and take place in procedural or semi-procedural maps. Term originated afair when Diablo 1 released.
Slashers are action combat games - which are well about fast slashery action combat and take place on non-procedural maps made by developers "by hand". Term originated afair in PS1 times - that is when those types of games (TPP, fast action combat, usually linear story gameplay) started to appear in bigger numbers and be increasingly popular.
I'll adress rest of your points in my next post when I'll find time to answer them.
No, I'm definitely not mistaken here.
Hack & Slack is a much larger group of genres, of which action RPGs are a smaller part.
Even among Action RPGs there's a lot of variety, so if you were specifically referring to Diablo clones, you'd probably say Diablo clones.
Google, wikipedia, and common use will back me up.
Okay. Googled it.
I've shaped my video game genere categorization in 90s in Polish intternet and video game community.
I don't know if current categorization is because English categorization was always diffrent, it changed during course of the years or combination of both - but it does not matter, but you are right that current english mainstream categorization put games like Shadow of Mordor in hack&slash genre and describe dungeon crawler 'loot whore' hack&slash games like Diablo as Action RPG. (super odd )
The Witcher 2 seem like a game that would fit Action RPG name ok, but Diablo? Yeah, I know that it is in use, but it still feel odd - it just does not fit.
Which for me is very odd since that is very diffrent what I am used to or what other players on my second gaming forum (non-english) I frequent are used to either.
Originally posted by Axehilt
Originally posted by Sulaa
MMORPGs will never be able to beat hack&slash games in that.
For same reason why they are not able to beat specialized lobby PVP games in instanced PVP.
That is also why there is hack&slash renessaince going on and why they are sucking out some of MMORPG playerbase out of genre.
Once someone will figure out how to make popular and profitable lobby scripted dungeon crawl&raid game with dungeons made "by hand" by developers (as opposed to semi-procedural generation in h&s games) then PVE MMORPGs will lose most of remainijng PVE min-maxers.
As for map stuff - rich map & quest information make content being exhaused very quickly. This model is already crumbing.
MMORPGs don't have to beat another genre to be successful games.
RPG combat is deliberately slower paced to make it less twitch intensive (and therefore more accessible), so it's not directly competing with hack and slash games. (Though certainly some games blur the line, and those games do begin competing with them.)
The MMORPG market isn't pushing out as many WOW clone attempts because many have failed, so fewer MMORPGs are released, but that doesn't mean an unusual amount of hack & slash games have been released. They're not having a renaissance.
Semi-procedural H&S games? Um, the H&S genre is mostly games like God of War and Shadow of Mordor. Which is partly why your renaissance comment doesn't make sense, because these games remain just as popular as ever (quite popular, and possibly more popular than RPGs, but nothing has really changed.)
But you're right that if someone replicates team-based PVE fun at a high level of quality without being an MMO, it'll do great. Being MMO provides few inherent advantages, and significant disadvantages.
Remind me again how WOW is "crumbling". They provide boatloads of content and make it easy to get to that content, and by deliberately not wasting players' time they create a game most want to play. Players are going to experience something in a given session and it's generally going to be a better experience if they get into the content you've deliberately designed, rather than wander lost.
Ad.1 They don't, but they can lose significant playerbase % to them. They are especially suseptible to that because MMORPG playerbase used to/is composed of very diffrent player types with very diffrent expectations as a result of MMORPG boom in 00s, more varied than playerbases of most other genres.
Ad. 2. Since by hack&slash games I've meant mostly Diablo and Diablo-"clones" - and those Diablo-clones compete with MMORPGs much stronger than God of War-like games.
On a side note - RPG games had plenty of diffrent combat types, sure most of them had slower turn-based or semi-turn based combat, but real time or even semi-twitch combat was present in RPG genre preety early, so I don't know if it is justified to use term "RPG combat" as this lack specificity.
Ad.3 Again. Since by hack&slash games I've meant games that could be descibed (insufficiently,but still) as Diablo-clones then those games certainly are undergoing renessaince.
Ad.4. Answered in one of my previous posts.
Ad.5. Yup. MMO used to have one significant advantage from business point of view, it used to be for a very long time - only type of game that allowed for wide-acceptance of on-going fees (subcriptions or microtransactions) and that was main driver of MMO bandwagon.
From gameplay point of view, basically only significant advantage of MMO is when you want to create virtual world simulator game. For a gamified (semi) simulator of virtual world you need plenty of players in one undivided gameplay space.
For other game types, in almost all cases MMO does not provide signiciant advantages to gameplay and often actually provide disadvantages, also severe ones.
Ad.6. I was specifiying whole genre and not WoW. Genre can be in overall decline, while it strongest title can be healthy or even growing. There is no contradiction in that. When certain sector is in trouble it is usually it's weaker players than suffer most rather than market leader.
Signs of MMORPG decline:
- decrease of money invested by insitutional financial investors or studios themself in new (especially big) MMORPG projects.
- closure of many AAA projects in last few years
- MMORPG media on-going transformation to general gaming sites
- heavy restructurisations of several MMORPG focused companies connected with changing their profile (MMORPG companies -> general onlin gaming companies, AAA focus -> general or medium&low budget focus, scaling down operations, etc)
Market leader especially one with such huge lead as WoW will suffer last, not first.
Too little information is also bad. Having to test or guess the rules that govern the actions of your own avatar is not immersive, it's stupid. The world and enemies around you can and should be unkown, but you should never have to guess what your own abilities do.
That is indeed true, logically do you character know his or her abilities very well and so should you playing her.
Also you should at least have information about your home town and the near area because your character was born there after all. A good map of that area is a very logical thing unlike in far away places you never been to before.
As for maps of the other areas you could solve it by slowly adding more and more information as your character adventures in the area, the more quests, DEs or similar things you do the more information you should get about the area, it is less and less likely to get lost the more stuff you have done in an area after all.
The same thing could be done with mobs, if you killed thousands of wywerns your character will be able to judge the individual targets strenght very good (except maybe some rare abilities).
A veteran adventurer do have plenty of knowledge and should get more help from the UI than someone who just picked up a blade and wandered out in the world for the first time. And I think it would be more fun as well with more exploration.
The truth is out there. Like others mentioned the days of no information are over.
Before the game is finished people can pay to play even in alpha beta. And ofcourse they talk about it. Or even make on you tube movies about it. Or you can even watch someone playing beta on twitch these days.
The days people where buying game magazines with only pictures are over. Before the release of a mmo people have allready allmost 100% proof planned how to play and finish the game.
Agree with the ones who say, do not read, do not watch. But when playing a mmorpg it is to play (sometime) with others. If you are not getting the information, others will and you will be left behind. So allmost forced to get that extra bit of information.
Its all about the best gear, the best dps/heal score. And the famous race to be world/server/guild first max level.
And in the end. Most of the mmo's are been there, done that.
Agree with the OP completely , and hopefully some of the games in the future will try to address some of these issues , but this what the Red-Bull chuggin , Hot Pocket eatin X-box generation that invavded this genre and has cried for on every dev forum known .. They ruin most games and move on to the next leaving behind a F2P cash- shop mess...
Originally posted by Scorchien Agree with the OP completely , and hopefully some of the games in the future will try to address some of these issues , but this what the Red-Bull chuggin , Hot Pocket eatin X-box generation that invavded this genre and has cried for on every dev forum known .. They ruin most games and move on to the next leaving behind a F2P cash- shop mess...
I don't know who you are but I like you very much.
It is not that too much information (as in alot of information) is bad, the chaos is bad. Because chaos is entertaining and a very easy challenge to design (as opposed to epic game design).
I also agree with OP, too much information destroys the mystery, it also ruins the opportunity for people to learn and discover. Worse, look at group dps meters and how it impacts behaviour in games, some information can have negative a impact.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Thats what happens when you cross diablo type action rpg gameplay (aka loot whore gameplay) and open world with lot of people where each and every one of those people want to be that special snowfalke ;P
Want a real CRPG? Fallout 1/2 create character with almost no combat abilities and smooth talk your way to the end. No need for uber loot and stat chasing and highly entertaining.
I've shaped my video game genere categorization in 90s in Polish intternet and video game community.
I don't know if current categorization is because English categorization was always diffrent, it changed during course of the years or combination of both - but it does not matter, but you are right that current english mainstream categorization put games like Shadow of Mordor in hack&slash genre and describe dungeon crawler 'loot whore' hack&slash games like Diablo as Action RPG. (super odd )
The Witcher 2 seem like a game that would fit Action RPG name ok, but Diablo? Yeah, I know that it is in use, but it still feel odd - it just does not fit.
Which for me is very odd since that is very diffrent what I am used to or what other players on my second gaming forum (non-english) I frequent are used to either.
Ad.1 They don't, but they can lose significant playerbase % to them. They are especially suseptible to that because MMORPG playerbase used to/is composed of very diffrent player types with very diffrent expectations as a result of MMORPG boom in 00s, more varied than playerbases of most other genres.
Ad. 2. Since by hack&slash games I've meant mostly Diablo and Diablo-"clones" - and those Diablo-clones compete with MMORPGs much stronger than God of War-like games.
On a side note - RPG games had plenty of diffrent combat types, sure most of them had slower turn-based or semi-turn based combat, but real time or even semi-twitch combat was present in RPG genre preety early, so I don't know if it is justified to use term "RPG combat" as this lack specificity.
Ad.3 Again. Since by hack&slash games I've meant games that could be descibed (insufficiently,but still) as Diablo-clones then those games certainly are undergoing renessaince.
Ad.4. Answered in one of my previous posts.
Ad.5. Yup. MMO used to have one significant advantage from business point of view, it used to be for a very long time - only type of game that allowed for wide-acceptance of on-going fees (subcriptions or microtransactions) and that was main driver of MMO bandwagon.
From gameplay point of view, basically only significant advantage of MMO is when you want to create virtual world simulator game. For a gamified (semi) simulator of virtual world you need plenty of players in one undivided gameplay space.
For other game types, in almost all cases MMO does not provide signiciant advantages to gameplay and often actually provide disadvantages, also severe ones.
Ad.6. I was specifiying whole genre and not WoW. Genre can be in overall decline, while it strongest title can be healthy or even growing. There is no contradiction in that. When certain sector is in trouble it is usually it's weaker players than suffer most rather than market leader.
Signs of MMORPG decline:
- decrease of money invested by insitutional financial investors or studios themself in new (especially big) MMORPG projects.
- closure of many AAA projects in last few years
- MMORPG media on-going transformation to general gaming sites
- heavy restructurisations of several MMORPG focused companies connected with changing their profile (MMORPG companies -> general onlin gaming companies, AAA focus -> general or medium&low budget focus, scaling down operations, etc)
Market leader especially one with such huge lead as WoW will suffer last, not first.
When I grew up Hack & Slash was first applied to games like Golden Axe and Gauntlet. But it's also never been in common use.
Are you saying you don't think Diablo is an action RPG? It's an RPG in the same manner as all preceding videogame RPGs, but with an action focus.
As for the rest (1-6), yeah I'd basically agree with everything you've said there.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Maybe for you but not for me. Different stroke for different folks.
There was a fashionable trend in the early-mid 90s in the MUD scene with just this type of thinking. This blanket thing that everyone experiences immersion the same and that numbers= bad and words=good. It was pretty stupid, but a bunch of MUDs started displaying word like "Good" "Excellent" or "Poor" instead of the underlying numbers which they didn't change since that worked fine.
So instead of immersion they simply got a less comprehensible system with an inferior way of comminicating. You couldn't tell when skill actually skilled up each time. Instead you could only tell each 5th time, or even worse if you had bonuses you could only tell every 10th or 20th time (for skills that went over 100 the broadened the word range).
Of course this just confused all the new players, and I as a veteran player would explain the exact numeric breakpoints for them from memory and let them know the +skill ring gave X amount of points and the the "words" would change at Y amount of points unless they were high enough to change at Z amount of points.
I've shaped my video game genere categorization in 90s in Polish intternet and video game community.
I don't know if current categorization is because English categorization was always diffrent, it changed during course of the years or combination of both - but it does not matter, but you are right that current english mainstream categorization put games like Shadow of Mordor in hack&slash genre and describe dungeon crawler 'loot whore' hack&slash games like Diablo as Action RPG. (super odd )
The Witcher 2 seem like a game that would fit Action RPG name ok, but Diablo? Yeah, I know that it is in use, but it still feel odd - it just does not fit.
Which for me is very odd since that is very diffrent what I am used to or what other players on my second gaming forum (non-english) I frequent are used to either.
Ad.1 They don't, but they can lose significant playerbase % to them. They are especially suseptible to that because MMORPG playerbase used to/is composed of very diffrent player types with very diffrent expectations as a result of MMORPG boom in 00s, more varied than playerbases of most other genres.
Ad. 2. Since by hack&slash games I've meant mostly Diablo and Diablo-"clones" - and those Diablo-clones compete with MMORPGs much stronger than God of War-like games.
On a side note - RPG games had plenty of diffrent combat types, sure most of them had slower turn-based or semi-turn based combat, but real time or even semi-twitch combat was present in RPG genre preety early, so I don't know if it is justified to use term "RPG combat" as this lack specificity.
Ad.3 Again. Since by hack&slash games I've meant games that could be descibed (insufficiently,but still) as Diablo-clones then those games certainly are undergoing renessaince.
Ad.4. Answered in one of my previous posts.
Ad.5. Yup. MMO used to have one significant advantage from business point of view, it used to be for a very long time - only type of game that allowed for wide-acceptance of on-going fees (subcriptions or microtransactions) and that was main driver of MMO bandwagon.
From gameplay point of view, basically only significant advantage of MMO is when you want to create virtual world simulator game. For a gamified (semi) simulator of virtual world you need plenty of players in one undivided gameplay space.
For other game types, in almost all cases MMO does not provide signiciant advantages to gameplay and often actually provide disadvantages, also severe ones.
Ad.6. I was specifiying whole genre and not WoW. Genre can be in overall decline, while it strongest title can be healthy or even growing. There is no contradiction in that. When certain sector is in trouble it is usually it's weaker players than suffer most rather than market leader.
Signs of MMORPG decline:
- decrease of money invested by insitutional financial investors or studios themself in new (especially big) MMORPG projects.
- closure of many AAA projects in last few years
- MMORPG media on-going transformation to general gaming sites
- heavy restructurisations of several MMORPG focused companies connected with changing their profile (MMORPG companies -> general onlin gaming companies, AAA focus -> general or medium&low budget focus, scaling down operations, etc)
Market leader especially one with such huge lead as WoW will suffer last, not first.
When I grew up Hack & Slash was first applied to games like Golden Axe and Gauntlet. But it's also never been in common use.
Are you saying you don't think Diablo is an action RPG? It's an RPG in the same manner as all preceding videogame RPGs, but with an action focus.
As for the rest (1-6), yeah I'd basically agree with everything you've said there.
An ARPG is a diablo-like isometric game. However lots of games like the Witcher or Darksiders are called Action RPGs.
Although of Witcher and Darksiders, Witcher is clearly an RPG and Darksiders just has some RPG stuff in it.
Anyway the whole thing is confused and pretty much worthless from a nomenclature standpoint. Usually you can tell if some means an isometric diablo-like genre thing because they just use the abbreviation of ARPG. Usually if people use the whole word "Action" its pretty much ambiguous without using context.
Anyway, expecting a non-english speaking person or even a perfectly fine english speaking person not versed in RPGs to understand and of that is pretty much a non-starter.
An ARPG is a diablo-like isometric game. However lots of games like the Witcher or Darksiders are called Action RPGs.
Although of Witcher and Darksiders, Witcher is clearly an RPG and Darksiders just has some RPG stuff in it.
Anyway the whole thing is confused and pretty much worthless from a nomenclature standpoint. Usually you can tell if some means an isometric diablo-like genre thing because they just use the abbreviation of ARPG. Usually if people use the whole word "Action" its pretty much ambiguous without using context.
Anyway, expecting a non-english speaking person or even a perfectly fine english speaking person not versed in RPGs to understand and of that is pretty much a non-starter.
When the first Diablo came out it was just labeled "action", not sure where they got the RPG part from. Elder scrolls: Daggerfall where at about the same time seen as an action RPG.
The problem is that people slap the RPG thing on almost any kind of game today, before it had to do with interaction with npc/players or that it was based on a pen and paper RPG. Just killing stuff for loot does not a RPG make, or Doom would be a RPG as well.
An ARPG is a diablo-like isometric game. However lots of games like the Witcher or Darksiders are called Action RPGs.
Although of Witcher and Darksiders, Witcher is clearly an RPG and Darksiders just has some RPG stuff in it.
Anyway the whole thing is confused and pretty much worthless from a nomenclature standpoint. Usually you can tell if some means an isometric diablo-like genre thing because they just use the abbreviation of ARPG. Usually if people use the whole word "Action" its pretty much ambiguous without using context.
Anyway, expecting a non-english speaking person or even a perfectly fine english speaking person not versed in RPGs to understand and of that is pretty much a non-starter.
It's a little strange that you'd imply Witcher's combat wasn't action-intensive. It had a very noticeable twitch component.
Didn't play Darksiders, but it always looked to be a straight up action game (or hack & slash, if we want to use that genre label.) A light RPG layer doesn't cause something to be an RPG (or we'd call Call of Duty an RPG too.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
When even distrubiting one of 100 skill points wrong can mean your character is basically useless, you need all the information you get.
And most RPGs actually suffer from not enough, or maybe better, the wrong information. You can see your supposed DPS with 3 decimal places, ithere is even a special page where it's adjusted for every damn enemy including the last 20 players you fought, but when you actually test it, you'll soon discover that that number is basically useless, as it's just your basic strength * basic weapon damage, but you have like 20 different enchantments on your weapon, your armor reflects 20% damage, you use several spells to increase your strength, and crits aren't accounted for at all, while you managed to get 75% crit chance and 500% damage.
Or i have two weapon, both do 15-23 damage, and i have the same listed DPS with both, but i kill twice as fast with the first one, because they actually didn't take weapon speed into account when calculating DPS. Or attributes like "hits twice" or "chance to kill 10%" aren't listed.
So i'd say it's not per se too much, but simply the wrong information.
The more stats you include, the more you have to show..
When you have like 5 weapons total, and a bigger weapon always is slower but does more damage, then you can get away with not showing any stats at all. If you kill 3 enemies and they drop 4 weapons, all having the same icon and being called "rusty broadsword", you have to make it clear whether they actually are the same, or if you have a range of stats for each weapon.
I'll wait to the day's end when the moon is high And then I'll rise with the tide with a lust for life, I'll Amass an army, and we'll harness a horde And then we'll limp across the land until we stand at the shore
When the first Diablo came out it was just labeled "action", not sure where they got the RPG part from. Elder scrolls: Daggerfall where at about the same time seen as an action RPG.
The problem is that people slap the RPG thing on almost any kind of game today, before it had to do with interaction with npc/players or that it was based on a pen and paper RPG. Just killing stuff for loot does not a RPG make, or Doom would be a RPG as well.
Witcher is indeed a RPG though.
Eh, Diablo had the same core traits as the preceding 35+ years of videogame RPGs. Why is it even a question whether it's an RPG?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The information is made available because most players want it. Yes, I can take hours or days looking for that hidden Waypoint or Vista, or I can go to the wiki and compare it with what I've found already to hunt it down in mins. so 100% map completion takes me weeks instead of months.
I've looked at my play style over the years and most open games tend to remain uncompleted when I play them. I usually get bored of always searching for stuff and if I don't research the game, I just drop it and leave it unfinished. I tend to complete and replay games that on on rails and have a strong story-line with alternative ways to play the game, like stealth vs assault styles.
I like how they did Skyrim. The story is there if you want it, if not just go out and adventure.
"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
When even distrubiting one of 100 skill points wrong can mean your character is basically useless, you need all the information you get.
And most RPGs actually suffer from not enough, or maybe better, the wrong information. You can see your supposed DPS with 3 decimal places, ithere is even a special page where it's adjusted for every damn enemy including the last 20 players you fought, but when you actually test it, you'll soon discover that that number is basically useless, as it's just your basic strength * basic weapon damage, but you have like 20 different enchantments on your weapon, your armor reflects 20% damage, you use several spells to increase your strength, and crits aren't accounted for at all, while you managed to get 75% crit chance and 500% damage.
Or i have two weapon, both do 15-23 damage, and i have the same listed DPS with both, but i kill twice as fast with the first one, because they actually didn't take weapon speed into account when calculating DPS. Or attributes like "hits twice" or "chance to kill 10%" aren't listed.
So i'd say it's not per se too much, but simply the wrong information.
The more stats you include, the more you have to show..
When you have like 5 weapons total, and a bigger weapon always is slower but does more damage, then you can get away with not showing any stats at all. If you kill 3 enemies and they drop 4 weapons, all having the same icon and being called "rusty broadsword", you have to make it clear whether they actually are the same, or if you have a range of stats for each weapon.
+1
"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
The information is made available because most players want it. Yes, I can take hours or days looking for that hidden Waypoint or Vista, or I can go to the wiki and compare it with what I've found already to hunt it down in mins. so 100% map completion takes me weeks instead of months.
I've looked at my play style over the years and most open games tend to remain uncompleted when I play them. I usually get bored of always searching for stuff and if I don't research the game, I just drop it and leave it unfinished. I tend to complete and replay games that on on rails and have a strong story-line with alternative ways to play the game, like stealth vs assault styles.
I like how they did Skyrim. The story is there if you want it, if not just go out and adventure.
I am of the opposite view. I don't care about the 100% map completion. In fact it is more enjoyable to know there is something you might have missed. If you return to that area again for some reason you might think WoW that is pretty neat. I remember that feeling in a lot of old games before there were GPSs and Maps with markers showing you exactly where to go, what to do, and where to do it. Often times it would add to the replayability. For instance in games like Legend of Zelda and Baldur's Gate I missed many secrets while still completing the game. I went back and played through the game again finding things I didn't find the first times. I actually played through Baldur's Gate 1/2 over 10 times I believe and always found something I had missed the pervious time.
I am of the opposite view. I don't care about the 100% map completion. In fact it is more enjoyable to know there is something you might have missed. If you return to that area again for some reason you might think WoW that is pretty neat. I remember that feeling in a lot of old games before there were GPSs and Maps with markers showing you exactly where to go, what to do, and where to do it. Often times it would add to the replayability. For instance in games like Legend of Zelda and Baldur's Gate I missed many secrets while still completing the game. I went back and played through the game again finding things I didn't find the first times. I actually played through Baldur's Gate 1/2 over 10 times I believe and always found something I had missed the pervious time.
So you hit every single quest in WOW on the first play-through? GPS/map type features definitely don't prevent the type of replayability you're describing. I've maxed chars in WOW over 10 times and always found something I'd missed on previous plays.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The original wow that wasnt as stream lined had some replayability. The recent version does not past the point that you can start in a few different areas. It takes you from one to one hundred with little challenge and along a very precise/boring path for each area. It might as well be the same content.
Comments
Raise your hand if Halloween, Friday the 13th, Happy Birthday to Me, or April Fool's Day went through your mind when you read "slasher genre".
o/
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Wiki this, Google that, Youtube the other thing............
There use to be a time you actually played the game and found details IN THE GAME (shocker I know).
Sarcasm aside, I do believe having more information and numbers is not what kills the fascination of the game. If done right and designed well it only adds to the fascination of the game. At present I will point to the developers of Crowfall and the fascination they are creating with their game. I know it is early, but they are creating what I like to call "healthy buzz". Another would be Camelot Unchained.
What kills fascination for a game, for me, is toxic communities, horrible content that has little lore and story to increase the depth of the world I play in, poorly designed UIs that get in my way more than help, unoptimized game engines that ruin my immersion and etc....
Most games RPG games I used to play started you in rags with no direction on what to do. I thought they were a lot of fun. I still do. It makes your progression feel more enjoyable if you have to learn like your character would have to learn IMO. That is part of the enjoyment.
Okay. Googled it.
I've shaped my video game genere categorization in 90s in Polish intternet and video game community.
I don't know if current categorization is because English categorization was always diffrent, it changed during course of the years or combination of both - but it does not matter, but you are right that current english mainstream categorization put games like Shadow of Mordor in hack&slash genre and describe dungeon crawler 'loot whore' hack&slash games like Diablo as Action RPG. (super odd )
The Witcher 2 seem like a game that would fit Action RPG name ok, but Diablo? Yeah, I know that it is in use, but it still feel odd - it just does not fit.
Which for me is very odd since that is very diffrent what I am used to or what other players on my second gaming forum (non-english) I frequent are used to either.
Ad.1 They don't, but they can lose significant playerbase % to them. They are especially suseptible to that because MMORPG playerbase used to/is composed of very diffrent player types with very diffrent expectations as a result of MMORPG boom in 00s, more varied than playerbases of most other genres.
Ad. 2. Since by hack&slash games I've meant mostly Diablo and Diablo-"clones" - and those Diablo-clones compete with MMORPGs much stronger than God of War-like games.
On a side note - RPG games had plenty of diffrent combat types, sure most of them had slower turn-based or semi-turn based combat, but real time or even semi-twitch combat was present in RPG genre preety early, so I don't know if it is justified to use term "RPG combat" as this lack specificity.
Ad.3 Again. Since by hack&slash games I've meant games that could be descibed (insufficiently,but still) as Diablo-clones then those games certainly are undergoing renessaince.
Ad.4. Answered in one of my previous posts.
Ad.5. Yup. MMO used to have one significant advantage from business point of view, it used to be for a very long time - only type of game that allowed for wide-acceptance of on-going fees (subcriptions or microtransactions) and that was main driver of MMO bandwagon.
From gameplay point of view, basically only significant advantage of MMO is when you want to create virtual world simulator game. For a gamified (semi) simulator of virtual world you need plenty of players in one undivided gameplay space.
For other game types, in almost all cases MMO does not provide signiciant advantages to gameplay and often actually provide disadvantages, also severe ones.
Ad.6. I was specifiying whole genre and not WoW. Genre can be in overall decline, while it strongest title can be healthy or even growing. There is no contradiction in that. When certain sector is in trouble it is usually it's weaker players than suffer most rather than market leader.
Signs of MMORPG decline:
- decrease of money invested by insitutional financial investors or studios themself in new (especially big) MMORPG projects.
- closure of many AAA projects in last few years
- MMORPG media on-going transformation to general gaming sites
- heavy restructurisations of several MMORPG focused companies connected with changing their profile (MMORPG companies -> general onlin gaming companies, AAA focus -> general or medium&low budget focus, scaling down operations, etc)
Market leader especially one with such huge lead as WoW will suffer last, not first.
That is indeed true, logically do you character know his or her abilities very well and so should you playing her.
Also you should at least have information about your home town and the near area because your character was born there after all. A good map of that area is a very logical thing unlike in far away places you never been to before.
As for maps of the other areas you could solve it by slowly adding more and more information as your character adventures in the area, the more quests, DEs or similar things you do the more information you should get about the area, it is less and less likely to get lost the more stuff you have done in an area after all.
The same thing could be done with mobs, if you killed thousands of wywerns your character will be able to judge the individual targets strenght very good (except maybe some rare abilities).
A veteran adventurer do have plenty of knowledge and should get more help from the UI than someone who just picked up a blade and wandered out in the world for the first time. And I think it would be more fun as well with more exploration.
The truth is out there. Like others mentioned the days of no information are over.
Before the game is finished people can pay to play even in alpha beta. And ofcourse they talk about it. Or even make on you tube movies about it. Or you can even watch someone playing beta on twitch these days.
The days people where buying game magazines with only pictures are over. Before the release of a mmo people have allready allmost 100% proof planned how to play and finish the game.
Agree with the ones who say, do not read, do not watch. But when playing a mmorpg it is to play (sometime) with others. If you are not getting the information, others will and you will be left behind. So allmost forced to get that extra bit of information.
Its all about the best gear, the best dps/heal score. And the famous race to be world/server/guild first max level.
And in the end. Most of the mmo's are been there, done that.
The OP is merely expressing what he considers the "Right" way to play (his way, naturally).
His ideal of perfect game is just about gone.
It harms nothing to let him rage against the machine in peace.
I don't know who you are but I like you very much.
I am inclined to think that OP is wrong.
It is not that too much information (as in alot of information) is bad, the chaos is bad. Because chaos is entertaining and a very easy challenge to design (as opposed to epic game design).
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Thats what happens when you cross diablo type action rpg gameplay (aka loot whore gameplay) and open world with lot of people where each and every one of those people want to be that special snowfalke ;P
Want a real CRPG? Fallout 1/2 create character with almost no combat abilities and smooth talk your way to the end. No need for uber loot and stat chasing and highly entertaining.
When I grew up Hack & Slash was first applied to games like Golden Axe and Gauntlet. But it's also never been in common use.
Are you saying you don't think Diablo is an action RPG? It's an RPG in the same manner as all preceding videogame RPGs, but with an action focus.
As for the rest (1-6), yeah I'd basically agree with everything you've said there.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Maybe for you but not for me. Different stroke for different folks.
There was a fashionable trend in the early-mid 90s in the MUD scene with just this type of thinking. This blanket thing that everyone experiences immersion the same and that numbers= bad and words=good. It was pretty stupid, but a bunch of MUDs started displaying word like "Good" "Excellent" or "Poor" instead of the underlying numbers which they didn't change since that worked fine.
So instead of immersion they simply got a less comprehensible system with an inferior way of comminicating. You couldn't tell when skill actually skilled up each time. Instead you could only tell each 5th time, or even worse if you had bonuses you could only tell every 10th or 20th time (for skills that went over 100 the broadened the word range).
Of course this just confused all the new players, and I as a veteran player would explain the exact numeric breakpoints for them from memory and let them know the +skill ring gave X amount of points and the the "words" would change at Y amount of points unless they were high enough to change at Z amount of points.
The whole thing was assinine. Screw you Bartle.
An ARPG is a diablo-like isometric game. However lots of games like the Witcher or Darksiders are called Action RPGs.
Although of Witcher and Darksiders, Witcher is clearly an RPG and Darksiders just has some RPG stuff in it.
Anyway the whole thing is confused and pretty much worthless from a nomenclature standpoint. Usually you can tell if some means an isometric diablo-like genre thing because they just use the abbreviation of ARPG. Usually if people use the whole word "Action" its pretty much ambiguous without using context.
Anyway, expecting a non-english speaking person or even a perfectly fine english speaking person not versed in RPGs to understand and of that is pretty much a non-starter.
When the first Diablo came out it was just labeled "action", not sure where they got the RPG part from. Elder scrolls: Daggerfall where at about the same time seen as an action RPG.
The problem is that people slap the RPG thing on almost any kind of game today, before it had to do with interaction with npc/players or that it was based on a pen and paper RPG. Just killing stuff for loot does not a RPG make, or Doom would be a RPG as well.
Witcher is indeed a RPG though.
It's a little strange that you'd imply Witcher's combat wasn't action-intensive. It had a very noticeable twitch component.
Didn't play Darksiders, but it always looked to be a straight up action game (or hack & slash, if we want to use that genre label.) A light RPG layer doesn't cause something to be an RPG (or we'd call Call of Duty an RPG too.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
When even distrubiting one of 100 skill points wrong can mean your character is basically useless, you need all the information you get.
And most RPGs actually suffer from not enough, or maybe better, the wrong information. You can see your supposed DPS with 3 decimal places, ithere is even a special page where it's adjusted for every damn enemy including the last 20 players you fought, but when you actually test it, you'll soon discover that that number is basically useless, as it's just your basic strength * basic weapon damage, but you have like 20 different enchantments on your weapon, your armor reflects 20% damage, you use several spells to increase your strength, and crits aren't accounted for at all, while you managed to get 75% crit chance and 500% damage.
Or i have two weapon, both do 15-23 damage, and i have the same listed DPS with both, but i kill twice as fast with the first one, because they actually didn't take weapon speed into account when calculating DPS. Or attributes like "hits twice" or "chance to kill 10%" aren't listed.
So i'd say it's not per se too much, but simply the wrong information.
The more stats you include, the more you have to show..
When you have like 5 weapons total, and a bigger weapon always is slower but does more damage, then you can get away with not showing any stats at all. If you kill 3 enemies and they drop 4 weapons, all having the same icon and being called "rusty broadsword", you have to make it clear whether they actually are the same, or if you have a range of stats for each weapon.
I'll wait to the day's end when the moon is high
And then I'll rise with the tide with a lust for life, I'll
Amass an army, and we'll harness a horde
And then we'll limp across the land until we stand at the shore
Eh, Diablo had the same core traits as the preceding 35+ years of videogame RPGs. Why is it even a question whether it's an RPG?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The information is made available because most players want it. Yes, I can take hours or days looking for that hidden Waypoint or Vista, or I can go to the wiki and compare it with what I've found already to hunt it down in mins. so 100% map completion takes me weeks instead of months.
I've looked at my play style over the years and most open games tend to remain uncompleted when I play them. I usually get bored of always searching for stuff and if I don't research the game, I just drop it and leave it unfinished. I tend to complete and replay games that on on rails and have a strong story-line with alternative ways to play the game, like stealth vs assault styles.
I like how they did Skyrim. The story is there if you want it, if not just go out and adventure.
"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
+1
"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
I am of the opposite view. I don't care about the 100% map completion. In fact it is more enjoyable to know there is something you might have missed. If you return to that area again for some reason you might think WoW that is pretty neat. I remember that feeling in a lot of old games before there were GPSs and Maps with markers showing you exactly where to go, what to do, and where to do it. Often times it would add to the replayability. For instance in games like Legend of Zelda and Baldur's Gate I missed many secrets while still completing the game. I went back and played through the game again finding things I didn't find the first times. I actually played through Baldur's Gate 1/2 over 10 times I believe and always found something I had missed the pervious time.
So you hit every single quest in WOW on the first play-through? GPS/map type features definitely don't prevent the type of replayability you're describing. I've maxed chars in WOW over 10 times and always found something I'd missed on previous plays.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky