Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
It is offensive...
Niien
Member UncommonPosts: 99
So on Theory Forge last night, Joppa had to handle some pretty on the spot questions in regards to game play that isn't fully hashed out. Some people including one of the interviewers expressed their disinterest for some of the games planed mechanics.
I was curious to know if anyone here has ever been told that a game wasn't for them due to their opinions for a certain game. If so; did they feel the interaction with that person was offensive or were they hurt in anyway when the other person stated that the game wasn't for them?
It seems like today's games have a jack of all trades type of thing going. There are enough of certain elements that grabs a lot of people's interests for a small amount of time, however they don't have enough or don't do it just right in attempts to not offend anyone and turn them off from the game initially.
Has the market come to a point in time where we are too concerned with people's feelings to not tell them that a game might be for them? Have we lost the balls to say... "I'm sorry this game isn't for you". I know a lot of it has to due with mass appeal and money, though it seems like that's not even the entirety of the matter.
There are as of late a very few games in development that aren't afraid to tell people that their game WILL NOT be for everyone. They know what they are aiming for and it's not the entire gaming market. The ones I'm aware of currently are Camelot Unchained and Pantheon. I personally know that CU is not a game for me as I know that 99% of the MMO's out today aren't for me, however I don't feel like I need to try to get those MMOs to change or that I need to bash them. Though I do seem some people that feel the need to do so, could this be due to their hurt feelings that they were told the game might not be for them? Were they offended because someone said they might not enjoy a game like this? Did they feel singled out in?
Anyway... just a thought... I see lots of threads here dooming the project, yet I'm not sure why. Maybe I'm naive, though I have made many mistakes in the past and I don't intend on stopping now. I'm mature enough to know that this certainly might not be 100% of what I want from my next MMO-RPG. I'm also mature enough to know that even if I don't have time for a game like this, and if it's not what I want from my next MMO-RPG, a game like this needs to be created. A game moving back to the DnD roots where the adventure with friends was the greatest loot you could ever find.
Comments
Ignoring the rest of the topic because i STRONGLY agree with this statement.
Bring back grouping and interdependence.
MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.
Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?
Unfortunately this has become a side effect of MMOs becoming mainstream. Now it is all about mass appeal and trying to draw as many people as possible in for a quick sell rather than actually creating an inspired game which may appeal to only a portion of gamers but will keep them playing for many years because the game is designed purely with those players in mind. Could they tell people a game isnt for them? Sure. But that doesnt line their pockets nearly as much as insisting that their game is for everyone and then doing a dozen different things half assed instead of just a few things fully fleshed out.
There are a few indie games / companies about trying to shy away from the mass appeal aspect, which is great, but unfortunately that also means less money than they already have being an indie project, which means slower progress due to lack of staff / needing to have day jobs, and general inferior programming and broken systems / mechanics.
We really need some game devs with a good middle ground. Enough money to create and fully support a well polished product, but that can also survive on a niche community without having to cut corners. Basically some decent funding from someone who isnt going to suck the soul out of the game and will let them developers create what they want rather than forcing things on them or pushing for early releases before they can fix things.
I would LOVE it if a developer/game company said "this game is not for you based on your preferences".
If I owned a game company I would, tactfully say the same thing.
I would even go so far as to say "thank you for your interest in our game. Listening to your preferences and what appeals to you I believe that our game would NOT be for you. I believe in people being informed consumers so believe me when I say that you should not spend a dime on our game as it will never incorporate the features that you love most. I do invite you to take part in one of our many "open house" weekends just to try it for yourself and so that you don't waste your hard earned money on a game when you can be using that money on something else that will have more meaning to you".
Also, Niien, you've made a completely incorrect assessment if this is your actual thought:
Has the market come to a point in time where we are too concerned with people's feelings to not tell them that a game might be for them?
It's not about people's feelings. This bandied about a lot on this forum. Feelings are not a part of the consideration. What they don't want to do is alienate a customer on the off chance that customer might throw a few dollars their way.
Even a person who would never play the game but who might buy it just to try it is of value to them.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Playing Warframe for some weeks now. I have to deal with people in order to do my trading. I hated every second of it. Give me my auction house and no enforced grouping and we're golden!
I understand what you're saying Niien. I was watching the stream and I too got the same impression. I believe Joppa was just being professional, because perhaps Pantheon won't be the game for him.
Though, I'd have countered with this. Maybe you don't have the time to gain entire levels or complete entire dungeons in a play session, but at least you experienced challenge, took risks, learned, or met people, made inroads and perhaps gained some experience towards a level and logged out knowing there is more to achieve the next time you log on.
Having played modern games, even casually in the busiest times of my life, I find it disturbing how quickly I am able to experience all they have to offer and dispense with them due to boredom. To me, I'd rather spend an hour working towards a larger goal that I know I can pick up on later. I'd rather spend that hour learning an area, exploring, or maybe fighting down in a difficult zone or dungeon just to learn the area, and prepare myself for grouping there at a later time. That was what was so exciting to me every time I logged on Everquest. The game was hard, the world was dangerous, and knowledge meant everything! Without it, you spent more time getting back your corpse and lost experience than you did progressing. Learning took time and a lot of help, and you couldn't just speed up this process. Rushing meant death in Everquest. I feel like this mystery is missing entirely from modern MMORPGs. That intrigue, the sense of wonder that comes from facing challenges that can't be overcome in a single play session.
Do I think its offensive or rude to tell someone the game isn't for them? No. I think Joppa is probably coming to terms with it. People like us who played classic EQ have a hard time understanding how people can enjoy playing any other type of game. Eventually he will understand that there really is people out there that just don't want to devote the amount of time and thought to a video game that Pantheon may require. Some people just like fast paced casual fun.
Its true though, we've come to a point where its taboo to say something isn't for everyone. It must be ALL INCLUSIVE. Its that whole discrimination thing messing with people's heads. I certainly hope we don't get to the point where its no longer OK to cater to target audience.
It's obvious people get butt hurt when they find out a game isn't for them. Look at all the PvE lovers that are coming out against CU and Crowfall. Those games are for a specific niche crowd who like PvP based games mixed with strategy, if you aren't into this type of game move on. PvP games have always been my type of game since DAoC and I'm glad to see this type of game being resurrected in some new forms.
Pantheon is not a game for me, its PvE based with quests. I'm not offended in any way that this game is what others might be looking for and I wish it well. I don't like PvE games, I find them boring but I'm not going to bitch and cry about how the game should have PvP in it so I can play it. I will just not follow it as its not for me, I know its a hard move for most people to let things go but its the era we live in now that people are used to mass appeal games.
Just like you wouldn't find me at a Country music concert, I don't like that type of music. I don't know... people just like to bitch about anything and everything today.
Maybe MMORPGs are not for you. SPG might be your thing.
That's a perfect way to put it Dullahan, and it makes perfect sense to me. I don't think the guy was offended, though I believe if it was stated the way you stated it, it might have made him/them think twice about playing instead of simply saying the game isn't for me. Joppa I hope you read this for all of us
That's a great selling point to the game. The same goals are in Pantheon as in other games, however the goals are more meaningful in a lot of ways. One of the ways is that with almost anything in life... the more time you put into something, the more you get out of it usually. The greater the feeling of accomplishment when that goal is finally met. If the goal took you 5-30 minutes to accomplish, compared to a goal that took you a week or even month. I would bet that most people would be more emotionally attached to that longer goal for longer.
Fearum, you seem like a level headed guy, though most people are not lol. I would agree that I appreciate that fact that games like CU are being made, due to the fact that they are trying to do the same thing Pantheon is doing. They are trying to cater to a smaller crowd and not to the masses. Money is always an important factor, though as long as companies aren't too greedy they should do very well for themselves.
I definitely don't cry or complain that their game doesn't have pvp and hell I even backed CU heavily and I don't really care for pvp only games for my own reasons.
I have never been offended by the notion that a game just is not for me. In my personal opinion, I have never found the adoration for Shooters or Racing games despite having played a fair share in my life so far. Those games never really hit the spot for me that other titles and genres in this hobby do so well.
It is incredibly healthy for the Gaming Industry and for different genres to be offering games and experiences that is just not meant to be played by everyone. Diversity is necessary for a market to thrive and evolve beyond certain preconceived barriers. If someone were to tell me the game is not for me, that I would not enjoy a particular product due to X system or Y mechanic, then I would be inclined to agree with them if those certain objects in question were not to my taste.
I will also say that I believe there is a segment of "gamers" out there which do believe that games are just meant to be played and desire them to just be playable to their own particular standards with not thought or love for what a developer will be trying to accomplish with their product. While sometimes it might behoove a developer or community to listen and understand points being offered, sometimes a development team needs to continue with what their vision or ideal of that game is. It is easy to look at certain systems a game offers and complain about them in a vacuum, but what most people never consider is how do those systems play off of each other in the entire game. Creating a game is often akin to creating a great piece of music, each sound and instrument needs to feed off of it's constituents. Changing one value in the equation can often imbalance the other parts to a detrimental effect.
It is acceptable if a book is not created to your taste. It is acceptable if a movie does not have you in mind during its conception. I believe it is understandable if a video game falls within similar lines.
It is nice to hear the devs are sticking to their guns. They want an EQ-esque game and the attempt to evolve the concept of the original mmorpgs ... the games that evolved from table top role playing game (through MUDS and into 3D games both single and multi-player). This original style of mmo was not allowed to evolve. Only a small section of our culture plays role playing games and only a small section played old school mmos. Companies trying to make it mainstream is what destroyed this genre. It should NEVER have been made mainstream.
Role playing games are not the most popular game because they take time, commitment and great knowledge of the game to enjoy them. They are by design NOT meant for quick and easy access like a card game or many board games. They are meant for people wanting a complete, rewarding and complex hobby. The mmorpg was originally developed to be a hobby in itself. This is different than video games where a video game player bounces from game to game to game. Yes a mmorpg is a video game but it isn't an arcade game and never was meant to be. Being converted to a computer game was merely a medium change.
Watching that stream was painful. Listening to the one panel member it became very clear he had no concept of what sort of game Pantheon was trying to make. His ignorance was clear. It is one thing to not like something but to not understand why others like it is insulting to the audience.
The origins of the mmorpg is based on the same principle of the table top rpg: it is a social game entirely driven by the cooperation of it's players. The game does not exist without the interaction of it's players. It is a very simply concept. Pathfinder wants to bring this sort of game back.
As another thread on MMORPG talked about: it is a niche game. Niche means targeting and customizing a product for a specific need. It is not about the size of the need. It is about making the best product for that need. If you do not share the need then, again, the concept is simple: it is not the game for you ... so don't play it ... don't bitch about it ... simply move on.
You stay sassy!
Did you read the 'MOBAs are killing gaming freedom' column?
The writer argues that because MOBAs are targeting a specific audience (young, male gamers interested in competition) that they are killing the entire gaming genre and pushing women and disabled gamers away through their explicit sexism and lack of respect for the impaired.
Needless to say, some people are completely delusional.
You can't argue with these people because they don't live in the same world you do. They portray themselves as the constant victim and anything not built specifically for them is evil and an affront to what they believe in. You should try to avoid telling them off because they will make it their own personal crusade to get it and you shutdown. Just ignore them, and move on.
Some people like Coors Light.
Some prefer a neat single malt scotch.
Neither preferences are offensive and I may ridicule one's taste over the other - in jest. I just happen to prefer something that slaps me around a little and keeps me coming back for more.
The majority of people keeping an eye on PROTF have had their fill of Coors Light over the years and are yearning for that oh so sweet single malt.
I'm still not sold enough to buy what Brad is selling (side note: please Brad get someone with some serious business acumen into Visionary Realms)- but he certainly has my attention.
I am pessimistically hopeful,
Skeez
You don't need a news article to see that, just look at every other thread posted in the pub.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the OP and topic in general.. I didn't watch the panel, so I don't know how these folks were acting, were they offended or annoyed?
"This game isn't for you" is an often used phrase. While it has merits in some instances, it isn't exactly a fair rebuttal to critique in regard to design decisions. As others have stated examples like PVE folks blasting CU, CF etc...A game like CU or CF is a different scenario than Pantheon. Crowfall as well as CU are essentially new ideas. While they may share the quintessential ingredient to an MMORPG ( a massive amount of players) their designs are unique, they're not rehashes like Pantheon.
They also focus on action more or less ( PVP) not drudgery. Drudgery does not equal to a deep game outright... Old school drudgery was a symptom of lacking a better way to flesh out the experience. I hope Pantheon is as deep as people say it is shaping up to be, I love deep games.. Problem is I don't want to go back to 1999 or even 2003 to get it... I think a lot of the overall market feels that way.
Yes Old school MMORPGs had different roots for the most part. They also had archaic designs, as like I said most of that overly grindy feel came from lacking a better way to add lengthy adventuring. If their plan is to just throw some of that old school time waste on top of better graphics, to me that's a horrible decision. I don't find it offensive I find it annoying that devs would lack a better vision to move those old designs forward, instead of simply moving back.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
True words. I see this happening more than ever around here. There is no opinions, only theirs which is fact (or so they think).
You say things like drudgery, grindy and archaic, but you aren't really substantiating what that means. It sounds more like you're repeating the mantra of themepark apologists who lack an understanding of classic mmorpgs and the purpose the element of time played in their design.
I figured those terms are self explanatory, anyone who played back should/would know exactly what I am talking about. But if needed I will gladly explain, and I'll ignore your themepark nonsense you brought up.
A good RPG has many systems that tie together to create opportunity for strategy to flourish. which *Many* old games did have. That's what made them good. However, a good RPG aslo has interesting narrative, interesting character involvement, a good DM as an example can go a long way to making an adventure exciting. This is where they were lacking. Instead of interesting mechanics, they simply occupied your time with overly repetitive mechanics. It was understandable back then, it really isn't today.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Sorry, my OP wasn't specific to just the people on the panel. Just one person on the panel was playing devils advocate. Which is perfectly fine by me, though I was more curious if people are offended if they find out or are just told that the game wouldn't suit their tastes.
I would have to disagree with the CU/CF argument due to the fact that CU itself is supposed to be a spiritual successor to DAOC for it's three realm PvP combat. They are putting new spins on it, though I believe it may just turn into a lot of other PvP games where numbers are pretty much all that matter and you will have a few big guilds that pretty much run the servers.
I would agree however that some of the leveling in EQ could be seen as drudgery, however the main reason I find that a person would play a game like EQ/Pantheon would be due to the social aspect of hanging out with friends. This same aspect applies to PvP games. You're just killing other players instead of NPCs. One might be easier in one's opinion, however in the end you are socializing with the people you are playing with. The drudgery is what helps that social aspect of the PvE game thrive. If it's action packed and no one gets a chance to talk then no one will, or it will be limited at best.
I would go on a limb and say that if someone only sees grinding as a waste of boring time, then this might not be the game for them, however I would guess most realize that almost anything worth attaining takes time and hard work to attain. If it was given freely it wouldn't be worth anything in my opinion. So I believe that there has to be some form of work, time, or drudgery involved to improve a character in order to make them stronger or everyone should just start at the highest level with the best equipment.
Strange, I found my time in classic EQ to be exponentially more varied than what modern games have to offer. I don't remember feeling like it was grindy at all. Grindy is logging in to do dailies. I didn't have to do shit daily in EQ. There was always more than enough to explore and achieve to prevent it from ever feeling grindy to me. Sounds like its just "not for you."
Not that I don't enjoy interesting narrative and dynamic events, but the learning curve was so much steeper in EQ I never felt like I was just doing the same thing that I did the day before. Going back to play it again on an emulator I only became more aware of the fact that EQ was filled with emergent gameplay. What I recall being very hard originally, I found new and better ways to accomplish today. We've managed to conquer raids that took 40+ people on live with less than 20 just because we employed different strategies or made use of different items for certain encounters that we never previously considered.
Either way, different strokes for different folks.
Pantheon seems like it's for me, certainly isn't for everyone. Nor shold it or any other game be.
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Dwight D Eisenhower
My optimism wears heavy boots and is loud.
Henry Rollins
(Orange) That's what I was referring to in regard to what they did have, they had many systems, and that's what kept them interesting at least to me. However game-play itself, was what lacked. Even the idea of challenge was generic (ie throw more hit-points into the equation) granted they did add nice mechanics like different types of damage/armor needed in different situations. Again it's the detailed features like that that kept it interesting... yet that was then.
(Grindy) I'm simply using that term for lack of a better one, it's less abrasive than generic. Generic is more what I am talking about. Now that doesn't mean I'm saying it needs to be a quest grinder and all about story. That's just as generic at this point. Nor do i think they should take the route of GW2 and go for generic dynamics either...
If anything I'd rather they look at games like Dark Souls, Crpgs, mob ecology like Ryzom..etc... That's where the real creative genius has been in the greater RPG genre IMO. As they use interesting game-play to tie their mechanics together.
As much as I loved games like DAOC, SWG etc.. back then, they lacked so much in presenting interesting content into their worlds, they were very static. EQ to a lesser extent I would assume due to their roaming MOB ecology. Yet still player vs MOB was about as interesting as it got
. Where are the interesting mysteries to solve? Where were the worldly consequences etc? Things of that nature were sorely lacking, at least IMO.
My overall point was I simply hope they plan to offer a truly deep game, where the game-play fleshes out the mechanics much more profoundly than in the past. I would hope devs could answer that without resorting to "it's just not for you" as all that says is they have no plan to take what was great then and make it more interesting for today.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson