Originally posted by Dullahan Good post. The original MMORPGs were about the world, well said. We don't miss old graphics. We certainly don't miss melee classes like in EQ that had only 2 or 3 abilities. What we miss is the group dynamic. We miss having to struggle together to survive and progress. Shared adversity fosters community. Modern games are all about removing that adversity, and replacing it with the ability to succeed on your own, with little to no real time investment. Hub games, instancing, megaservers, all those things are for the sake of convenience and detract from the social aspect and the things that made old MMOs seem more like virtual fantasy worlds than merely video games.
By "we", you mean "you". Let's not over-generalize. I'm about as old school as they come for gaming, and I certainly do not miss forced grouping.
He definitely means "me". I'm also as old school as many and way more old school than some here, and I definitely don't miss those awful grinds, the poor and tedious mechanics and the forced grouping of those old school games.
What's amusing is that tentatives have been made to resurrect that "old school" model, and until now, all have failed. Next in line, "Pantheon". So those old schoolers are possibly just a minority of forum dwellers who will never be happy with any game anyway...
And that's the catch here. It's like the people who seem to feel a need to get their PhD in law and philosophy to properly define what sandbox means. Only, in this thread, it's a couple of people who seem to think their old school idea is more pure than everyone else. It's just silly, and you are right.
Even though I started with Pong, graduated to table-top D&D, played MUDs, and thrived in EQ and DAoC, I'm still not old school enough. I suppose I, like someone posted earlier, should just give up on gaming altogether and live out a bitter existence on gaming forums, b*tching about all those kids these days and their new fangled ideas.
..No. I'll just have fun and adapt.
What is wrong with having a definition of sandbox? Without a definition it is a meaningless word. Why call it sandbox in that case?
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
What is wrong with having a definition of sandbox? Without a definition it is a meaningless word. Why call it sandbox in that case?
Nothing. But at the same time, people don't agree on the definition, and they use their own versions. Dont tell me what you call a sandbox is the same as every single poster here.
We've done these discussions to death. If I had the will power, I could probably dredge up a post I made in 2008 on the same exact subject.
1. The genre is still multiplayer. The dungeon finder pioneered in WoW was designed to help lower the sting of too few healers and tanks. People wanted to do dungeons, but couldn't get the people to do them. The problem isn't people, but rather developers continuing to use a hard trinity instead of implementing systems that encourage more fluid and equally distributed teamwork.
2. People are more solo oriented because the people you meet during dungeon runs are on different servers. The reason people fondly remember the pain of waiting for others at a dungeon entrance is due to the long term relationships that formed from those meetings. Sure, we can try setting up a time to run a dungeon with others, but it's so much easier to use a dungeon finder. Unsurprisingly, a dungeon finder party is often more effective than one we can set up ourselves simply because the people on the other server might be more skilled. We'll jump through hoops for a friend, but we are far less charitable to acquaintances.
Originally posted by Dullahan Good post. The original MMORPGs were about the world, well said. We don't miss old graphics. We certainly don't miss melee classes like in EQ that had only 2 or 3 abilities. What we miss is the group dynamic. We miss having to struggle together to survive and progress. Shared adversity fosters community. Modern games are all about removing that adversity, and replacing it with the ability to succeed on your own, with little to no real time investment. Hub games, instancing, megaservers, all those things are for the sake of convenience and detract from the social aspect and the things that made old MMOs seem more like virtual fantasy worlds than merely video games.
By "we", you mean "you". Let's not over-generalize. I'm about as old school as they come for gaming, and I certainly do not miss forced grouping.
He definitely means "me". I'm also as old school as many and way more old school than some here, and I definitely don't miss those awful grinds, the poor and tedious mechanics and the forced grouping of those old school games.
What's amusing is that tentatives have been made to resurrect that "old school" model, and until now, all have failed. Next in line, "Pantheon". So those old schoolers are possibly just a minority of forum dwellers who will never be happy with any game anyway...
And that's the catch here. It's like the people who seem to feel a need to get their PhD in law and philosophy to properly define what sandbox means. Only, in this thread, it's a couple of people who seem to think their old school idea is more pure than everyone else. It's just silly, and you are right.
Even though I started with Pong, graduated to table-top D&D, played MUDs, and thrived in EQ and DAoC, I'm still not old school enough. I suppose I, like someone posted earlier, should just give up on gaming altogether and live out a bitter existence on gaming forums, b*tching about all those kids these days and their new fangled ideas.
..No. I'll just have fun and adapt.
What is wrong with having a definition of sandbox? Without a definition it is a meaningless word. Why call it sandbox in that case?
I'm not going down that slippery slope. It will just derail this lovely thread. You also didn't understand the context of that sentence, or chose to ignore it. Either way, that's an entirely other topic that has been beaten to death and really isn't that interesting to begin with.
... the pain of waiting for others at a dungeon entrance ...
I dreaded non-guild grouping circa WotLK.
45 minutes to an hour trying to get 5 people for a dungeon. The people who are grouped aren't even trying to help get us in there, off doing their own questing like it's someone else's job to get a group together and get them into the dungeon.
We finally get 5, get into the dungeon, and wipe on the first pull because these people are trying to run dungeons much higher than their capabilities and gear. The group falls apart with some in a pissy because THEIR needs aren't being met.
Pfft... too much headache. No way in hell I'd call it a fun experience.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
The more things change the more they stay the same. There were players trying to rush to max level back then and they would get banned for using exploits just like they do now. I remember the dancer macro that leveled you to max in about an hour in SWG.
Companies were in it to make money just like they are today. Games were rushed out before they were finished also just like today. Over the years my style hasn't changed that much. I still prefer solo pve play but will group once in awhile and pvp and will join guilds in some games and not in others. I've been playing MMO's since a little before 2003. The only difference now is that there's more to pick from and they don't all require subscriptions. I had about four accounts on SWG for awhile. I know today I would not put all the hours into MMO's that I did back then. Yes I have some great memories of playing with other players in games like WoW when it first came out but I've moved on. Most of the old school games pretty much bore me now cause I've been there and done that already.
"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 Dullahan Good post. The original MMORPGs were about the world, well said. We don't miss old graphics. We certainly don't miss melee classes like in EQ that had only 2 or 3 abilities. What we miss is the group dynamic. We miss having to struggle together to survive and progress. Shared adversity fosters community. Modern games are all about removing that adversity, and replacing it with the ability to succeed on your own, with little to no real time investment. Hub games, instancing, megaservers, all those things are for the sake of convenience and detract from the social aspect and the things that made old MMOs seem more like virtual fantasy worlds than merely video games.
By "we", you mean "you". Let's not over-generalize. I'm about as old school as they come for gaming, and I certainly do not miss forced grouping.
He definitely means "me". I'm also as old school as many and way more old school than some here, and I definitely don't miss those awful grinds, the poor and tedious mechanics and the forced grouping of those old school games.
Your memory must be pretty shoddy then. I don't remember any game other than EQ to have had forced grouping. I remember a ton of games that gave you multiple ways to level, and incentivized them so that grouping was organic and rewarded (which makes sense, because it's way harder than soloing).
And if you think the grind is gone, what do you think "quests" are? Grind with more production value, forced singleplayer, and more insulting to the player's intelligence.
If you want to claim old games "forced" you to group, then I'll argue that modern games "force" you to solo.
So what are peoples thoughts on ryzom its the only prettier older school mmorpg ive seen so far, I honestly was not sure what to think about it, the community is amazing.
Your memory must be pretty shoddy then. I don't remember any game other than EQ to have had forced grouping. I remember a ton of games that gave you multiple ways to level, and incentivized them so that grouping was organic and rewarded (which makes sense, because it's way harder than soloing).
And if you think the grind is gone, what do you think "quests" are? Grind with more production value, forced singleplayer, and more insulting to the player's intelligence.
If you want to claim old games "forced" you to group, then I'll argue that modern games "force" you to solo.
Yes some games literally force solo play on you during quest lines, it's not that common though, nor was forced grouping or super harsh penalties. A handful of titles went that route.
I just have to ask what's any more insulting to intelligence about story-lines, than expecting people to just beat on things all day for the sole reason of watching a number raise?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Your memory must be pretty shoddy then. I don't remember any game other than EQ to have had forced grouping. I remember a ton of games that gave you multiple ways to level, and incentivized them so that grouping was organic and rewarded (which makes sense, because it's way harder than soloing).
And if you think the grind is gone, what do you think "quests" are? Grind with more production value, forced singleplayer, and more insulting to the player's intelligence.
If you want to claim old games "forced" you to group, then I'll argue that modern games "force" you to solo.
Yes some games literally force solo play on you during quest lines, it's not that common though, nor was forced grouping or super harsh penalties. A handful of titles went that route.
I just have to ask what's any more insulting to intelligence about story-lines, than expecting people to just beat on things all day for the sole reason of watching a number raise?
First off, I'd said it's EXTREMELY common for a modern MMO to "force" you to solo. Any game where the primary way to level up is by doing linear quest chains basically forces you to play alone. You can't play with buddies really, unless they're on the EXACT same quest step as you, and you certainly aren't going to play with random people because they're all doing their own solo quest chains.
And then with instancing, many steps LITERALLY force you to be solo. So it's both "forced" and outright forced.
And what's insulting is having 100 "epic quests" marked by glowing !!!, with auto maps telling you where to go, and what to collect, with sparkling items on the ground. Forcing you to kill 10 of this and 10 of that, color coding everything so you know not to go off the rails or do anything too hard, and the "stories" are so poorly written and just completely unimportant. They're forcing you to grind, but they're trying to pretend it's some noble quest when it really isn't.
Whereas bashing on mobs they never tried to disguise it. You were free to try whatever combination of hard mobs you wanted, and free to play with other people in the way that YOU enjoyed, not the way the game forced you to go.
Older MMORPGs are actually better. For example, actually earning things instead of having them given to you. New games do what old games do the only difference is the newer ones gives it to you faster.
Hahaha not that common, every mmorpg recently did this except maybe eve or the secret world as there is allot of group content. Anyways ive played allot of them and almost all of them are way way way to catered to soloing to max level in 2 days for endgame raiding grinds, I will never understand why people think the highlight of an rpg is only gear and not leveling and getting new abilities or learning new things about your skills/class.
I completely agree and it gives the younger ones bad ideas about life, in real life you have to earn your way. I know they can be taught right but man those kids will have it hard when they have to face reality.
Originally posted by Dullahan Good post. The original MMORPGs were about the world, well said. We don't miss old graphics. We certainly don't miss melee classes like in EQ that had only 2 or 3 abilities. What we miss is the group dynamic. We miss having to struggle together to survive and progress. Shared adversity fosters community. Modern games are all about removing that adversity, and replacing it with the ability to succeed on your own, with little to no real time investment. Hub games, instancing, megaservers, all those things are for the sake of convenience and detract from the social aspect and the things that made old MMOs seem more like virtual fantasy worlds than merely video games.
By "we", you mean "you". Let's not over-generalize. I'm about as old school as they come for gaming, and I certainly do not miss forced grouping.
He definitely means "me". I'm also as old school as many and way more old school than some here, and I definitely don't miss those awful grinds, the poor and tedious mechanics and the forced grouping of those old school games.
Your memory must be pretty shoddy then. I don't remember any game other than EQ to have had forced grouping. I remember a ton of games that gave you multiple ways to level, and incentivized them so that grouping was organic and rewarded (which makes sense, because it's way harder than soloing).
And if you think the grind is gone, what do you think "quests" are? Grind with more production value, forced singleplayer, and more insulting to the player's intelligence.
If you want to claim old games "forced" you to group, then I'll argue that modern games "force" you to solo.
My memory is just fine, it's your reading which may be a bit shoddy though.
I never said all "old school" games had all those negative aspects.
For instance, AC1 didn't have forced grouping per se, even though the experience bonus you were getting when in a group was tremendous, but some other very tedious mechanics (just crafting different arrows for one hunting session with an archer was both tedious and boring) and a terrible levelling grind.
And questing = forced single player is nonsense. Questing is only one aspect of a game, when I'm with friends we mostly do dungeons. Forced solo doesn't exist as long as players can form a group.
Not to mention some modern MMORPGs like GW2 have provided very smart and efficient systems to negate the effects of level and quest stage differences.
Sorry, I forgot my rose glasses somewhere in the past... I must have lost them around the time when games started to offer more than just a terrible mob grind to level. I then realized that the only reason people played all those terribly designed "old school" games was because back then, there was no viable alternative.
Wrong the forced soloing is not nonsense, allot of mmorpgs are designed now where grouping is actually slowing down your leveling and way to easy, allot of mmorpgs revamped there games in this direction probably since they all copy off each other, please show another mmo that does not currently do this other then guild wars 2, I cannot speak for eso yet as ive yet to play it. And I remember you from before and reading some of these threads I am starting to believe you are some kind of troll everytime these kinds of topics come up.
Originally posted by Dullahan Good post. The original MMORPGs were about the world, well said. We don't miss old graphics. We certainly don't miss melee classes like in EQ that had only 2 or 3 abilities. What we miss is the group dynamic. We miss having to struggle together to survive and progress. Shared adversity fosters community. Modern games are all about removing that adversity, and replacing it with the ability to succeed on your own, with little to no real time investment. Hub games, instancing, megaservers, all those things are for the sake of convenience and detract from the social aspect and the things that made old MMOs seem more like virtual fantasy worlds than merely video games.
By "we", you mean "you". Let's not over-generalize. I'm about as old school as they come for gaming, and I certainly do not miss forced grouping.
He definitely means "me". I'm also as old school as many and way more old school than some here, and I definitely don't miss those awful grinds, the poor and tedious mechanics and the forced grouping of those old school games.
Your memory must be pretty shoddy then. I don't remember any game other than EQ to have had forced grouping. I remember a ton of games that gave you multiple ways to level, and incentivized them so that grouping was organic and rewarded (which makes sense, because it's way harder than soloing).
And if you think the grind is gone, what do you think "quests" are? Grind with more production value, forced singleplayer, and more insulting to the player's intelligence.
If you want to claim old games "forced" you to group, then I'll argue that modern games "force" you to solo.
And questing = forced single player is nonsense. Questing is only one aspect of a game, when I'm with friends we mostly do dungeons. Forced solo doesn't exist as long as players can form a group.
Not to mention some modern MMORPGs like GW2 have provided very smart and efficient systems to negate the effects of level and quest stage differences.
Nonsense? Quest grinding makes up for the vast majority of themepark gameplay. In games like SWTOR, it is about 90% of the content. The more scripted and linear the quests, the harder it is to group while doing them. Generally people only group with a few real life friends they already know, because there is no organic mechanic for meeting people in game.
GW2 is just about the ONLY game that doesn't force you to linear quest grind, in recent memory, and has good scaling mechanics. Granted, it's also one of the most anti social MMOs recently, for different reasons. But don't pretend all modern MMOs do what GW does. Because it's not true.
Nice try though.
Ways to level in DAoC in 2002. Battlegrounds, bounties, tasks, repeatable quests, mob grinding, crafting, dungeon runs.
Ways to level in LotRO in 2011. Quest grinding. The end.
You should try the secret world its on sale through steam and there website ultimate edition for 41dollars or you can buy the base game for 15 right now. Anyways its far from anti social and has plenty of grouping, not as good as old school but it has literally the best community ive seen since much older mmorpgs, I had amazing conversations with people do /chat join sanctuary its a cross server chat you can join anyone in groups to guilds across the servers. I think this is where allot of city of heroes and villians moved to.
Ways to level in DAoC in 2002. Battlegrounds, bounties, tasks, repeatable quests, mob grinding, crafting, dungeon runs.
I was playing DAoC back in 2002, and those things definitely were NOT in the game back then. They were added over the years. Everyone who played DAoC back then knows the main and only way people were leveling was mob grinding. Sit at a spot, kill, kill, kill, once you outlevelled it, jump to the next top spot, rince, repeat. Same for EQ, same for AO, same for all EQ clones until WoW arrived.
And if you had just a few levels less than the others, they wouldn't take you because of the risk of wipe and losing hours of XP.
That's truth without the rose glasses.
And amusingly, it's actually much nicer and less "elitist" to level through dungeons in modern games than to look for the perfect group with the perfect classes back then so you could farm the best spots without risk of death and XP loss.
What you people hate in reality is that other players now have a choice, and aren't forced to submit to your play style and endure your company if they don't want to. You call that regression, the vast majority calls it progress.
Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
Nice try though.
Indeed.
Your constant need to go use rose colored classes is silly and simply not true, not everyone is blinded by nostalgia and can be objective. there was nothing elitist about open world dungeons, it was also cool to meet other people, as they other groups helped keep the spawn rates down, yes the world was dangerous but thats what made it all the more unique, you actually have consequences unlike the easy mode of mmorpgs today, you could solo dungeons but it was safer to group certain classes where just better at it, but that was not an issue considering support classes are always needed in groups, it balanced out just fine in older mmorpgs.
I do not believe you played these older mmorpgs, what a narrow minded thing to say.
... the pain of waiting for others at a dungeon entrance ...
I dreaded non-guild grouping circa WotLK.
45 minutes to an hour trying to get 5 people for a dungeon. The people who are grouped aren't even trying to help get us in there, off doing their own questing like it's someone else's job to get a group together and get them into the dungeon.
We finally get 5, get into the dungeon, and wipe on the first pull because these people are trying to run dungeons much higher than their capabilities and gear. The group falls apart with some in a pissy because THEIR needs aren't being met.
Pfft... too much headache. No way in hell I'd call it a fun experience.
Yeh .. it was horrible. That is why LFD is so popular. If the group is falling apart, at least you can hit "quit" and get another one fast.
... the pain of waiting for others at a dungeon entrance ...
I dreaded non-guild grouping circa WotLK.
45 minutes to an hour trying to get 5 people for a dungeon. The people who are grouped aren't even trying to help get us in there, off doing their own questing like it's someone else's job to get a group together and get them into the dungeon.
We finally get 5, get into the dungeon, and wipe on the first pull because these people are trying to run dungeons much higher than their capabilities and gear. The group falls apart with some in a pissy because THEIR needs aren't being met.
Pfft... too much headache. No way in hell I'd call it a fun experience.
Yeh .. it was horrible. That is why LFD is so popular. If the group is falling apart, at least you can hit "quit" and get another one fast.
"oh no i might actually have to say something" such a horrible concept lol
i did tons of dungeons back then and hardly ever had any problems.
it also involved alot more than just kill loot repeat. we'd form groups and start moving toward the summoning stone.. and once there if we where lucky we'd also get a little PvP action going before the dungeon.
Originally posted by moonbound Hahaha not that common, every mmorpg recently did this except maybe eve or the secret world as there is allot of group content. Anyways ive played allot of them and almost all of them are way way way to catered to soloing to max level in 2 days for endgame raiding grinds, I will never understand why people think the highlight of an rpg is only gear and not leveling and getting new abilities or learning new things about your skills/class.
I was referring to literal forced situations. Hence "literally".. used in the sentence. IE quests that separate you from your group and place you in a personal instance. I play every modern game in a duo with my wife as well as a few friends, and have only ran into this in a few games.
Having a choice of doing solo questing or group oriented things is not being forced, it's having a choice (which we have that choice in most games we play together). This is what I was referring to about honesty earlier in this thread, there's little when it comes to these subjects just sensational exaggerated statements like the one you're agreeing with.
I'm no advocate for raiding that's for sure, nor gear grinds. These focuses are why I rarely stick around at endgame in modern MMORPGs. I don't mind duo adventuring and meeting folks to solve harder content, I'll play them for that, once that is over, I'm usually done as I don't like modern forms of PVP (ESO being the lone exception), or excessive dungeon types of content. Too predictable and/or inclosed for my taste.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
... the pain of waiting for others at a dungeon entrance ...
I dreaded non-guild grouping circa WotLK.
45 minutes to an hour trying to get 5 people for a dungeon. The people who are grouped aren't even trying to help get us in there, off doing their own questing like it's someone else's job to get a group together and get them into the dungeon.
We finally get 5, get into the dungeon, and wipe on the first pull because these people are trying to run dungeons much higher than their capabilities and gear. The group falls apart with some in a pissy because THEIR needs aren't being met.
Pfft... too much headache. No way in hell I'd call it a fun experience.
Yeh .. it was horrible. That is why LFD is so popular. If the group is falling apart, at least you can hit "quit" and get another one fast.
"oh no i might actually have to say something" such a horrible concept lol
i did tons of dungeons back then and hardly ever had any problems.
it also involved alot more than just kill loot repeat. we'd form groups and start moving toward the summoning stone.. and once there if we where lucky we'd also get a little PvP action going before the dungeon.
It is a waste of time if you want to play a game instead of going into a chatroom.
Oh, not having problem does not mean that it is fun. I could get a group before LFD too .. but why bother if you can do it by clicking a button. It is kill loot repeat ...if I want pvp, i will queue up a pvp BG instead. And "moving towards" the summoning stone is a waste of time for me.
... the pain of waiting for others at a dungeon entrance ...
I dreaded non-guild grouping circa WotLK.
45 minutes to an hour trying to get 5 people for a dungeon. The people who are grouped aren't even trying to help get us in there, off doing their own questing like it's someone else's job to get a group together and get them into the dungeon.
We finally get 5, get into the dungeon, and wipe on the first pull because these people are trying to run dungeons much higher than their capabilities and gear. The group falls apart with some in a pissy because THEIR needs aren't being met.
Pfft... too much headache. No way in hell I'd call it a fun experience.
Yeah, group finder is a very anti-social mechanic. I've always viewed its introduction to WoW as a stop-gap measure because the source of the tank/healer/DPS imbalance was too deeply ingrained in the core mechanics of WoW. The strict, hard role trinity of WoW proved itself in need of serious changes, but the people in charge of major MMORPG projects have not been the most informed project managers on the block.
Comments
What is wrong with having a definition of sandbox? Without a definition it is a meaningless word. Why call it sandbox in that case?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Nothing. But at the same time, people don't agree on the definition, and they use their own versions. Dont tell me what you call a sandbox is the same as every single poster here.
We've done these discussions to death. If I had the will power, I could probably dredge up a post I made in 2008 on the same exact subject.
1. The genre is still multiplayer. The dungeon finder pioneered in WoW was designed to help lower the sting of too few healers and tanks. People wanted to do dungeons, but couldn't get the people to do them. The problem isn't people, but rather developers continuing to use a hard trinity instead of implementing systems that encourage more fluid and equally distributed teamwork.
2. People are more solo oriented because the people you meet during dungeon runs are on different servers. The reason people fondly remember the pain of waiting for others at a dungeon entrance is due to the long term relationships that formed from those meetings. Sure, we can try setting up a time to run a dungeon with others, but it's so much easier to use a dungeon finder. Unsurprisingly, a dungeon finder party is often more effective than one we can set up ourselves simply because the people on the other server might be more skilled. We'll jump through hoops for a friend, but we are far less charitable to acquaintances.
I'm not going down that slippery slope. It will just derail this lovely thread. You also didn't understand the context of that sentence, or chose to ignore it. Either way, that's an entirely other topic that has been beaten to death and really isn't that interesting to begin with.
I dreaded non-guild grouping circa WotLK.
45 minutes to an hour trying to get 5 people for a dungeon. The people who are grouped aren't even trying to help get us in there, off doing their own questing like it's someone else's job to get a group together and get them into the dungeon.
We finally get 5, get into the dungeon, and wipe on the first pull because these people are trying to run dungeons much higher than their capabilities and gear. The group falls apart with some in a pissy because THEIR needs aren't being met.
Pfft... too much headache. No way in hell I'd call it a fun experience.
The more things change the more they stay the same. There were players trying to rush to max level back then and they would get banned for using exploits just like they do now. I remember the dancer macro that leveled you to max in about an hour in SWG.
Companies were in it to make money just like they are today. Games were rushed out before they were finished also just like today. Over the years my style hasn't changed that much. I still prefer solo pve play but will group once in awhile and pvp and will join guilds in some games and not in others. I've been playing MMO's since a little before 2003. The only difference now is that there's more to pick from and they don't all require subscriptions. I had about four accounts on SWG for awhile. I know today I would not put all the hours into MMO's that I did back then. Yes I have some great memories of playing with other players in games like WoW when it first came out but I've moved on. Most of the old school games pretty much bore me now cause I've been there and done that already.
"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
Your memory must be pretty shoddy then. I don't remember any game other than EQ to have had forced grouping. I remember a ton of games that gave you multiple ways to level, and incentivized them so that grouping was organic and rewarded (which makes sense, because it's way harder than soloing).
And if you think the grind is gone, what do you think "quests" are? Grind with more production value, forced singleplayer, and more insulting to the player's intelligence.
If you want to claim old games "forced" you to group, then I'll argue that modern games "force" you to solo.
Yes some games literally force solo play on you during quest lines, it's not that common though, nor was forced grouping or super harsh penalties. A handful of titles went that route.
I just have to ask what's any more insulting to intelligence about story-lines, than expecting people to just beat on things all day for the sole reason of watching a number raise?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
First off, I'd said it's EXTREMELY common for a modern MMO to "force" you to solo. Any game where the primary way to level up is by doing linear quest chains basically forces you to play alone. You can't play with buddies really, unless they're on the EXACT same quest step as you, and you certainly aren't going to play with random people because they're all doing their own solo quest chains.
And then with instancing, many steps LITERALLY force you to be solo. So it's both "forced" and outright forced.
And what's insulting is having 100 "epic quests" marked by glowing !!!, with auto maps telling you where to go, and what to collect, with sparkling items on the ground. Forcing you to kill 10 of this and 10 of that, color coding everything so you know not to go off the rails or do anything too hard, and the "stories" are so poorly written and just completely unimportant. They're forcing you to grind, but they're trying to pretend it's some noble quest when it really isn't.
Whereas bashing on mobs they never tried to disguise it. You were free to try whatever combination of hard mobs you wanted, and free to play with other people in the way that YOU enjoyed, not the way the game forced you to go.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
There are more MMO's out there then WoW-SWTOR-EQ2.
The type of games you described.....open world......... socializing.......crafting.........exploring.........are still out there.
They are not mainstream like WoW.
Only EVE has good publicity..........for the other games you have to dig a bit.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
Wrong the forced soloing is not nonsense, allot of mmorpgs are designed now where grouping is actually slowing down your leveling and way to easy, allot of mmorpgs revamped there games in this direction probably since they all copy off each other, please show another mmo that does not currently do this other then guild wars 2, I cannot speak for eso yet as ive yet to play it. And I remember you from before and reading some of these threads I am starting to believe you are some kind of troll everytime these kinds of topics come up.
Nonsense? Quest grinding makes up for the vast majority of themepark gameplay. In games like SWTOR, it is about 90% of the content. The more scripted and linear the quests, the harder it is to group while doing them. Generally people only group with a few real life friends they already know, because there is no organic mechanic for meeting people in game.
GW2 is just about the ONLY game that doesn't force you to linear quest grind, in recent memory, and has good scaling mechanics. Granted, it's also one of the most anti social MMOs recently, for different reasons. But don't pretend all modern MMOs do what GW does. Because it's not true.
Nice try though.
Ways to level in DAoC in 2002. Battlegrounds, bounties, tasks, repeatable quests, mob grinding, crafting, dungeon runs.
Ways to level in LotRO in 2011. Quest grinding. The end.
Your constant need to go use rose colored classes is silly and simply not true, not everyone is blinded by nostalgia and can be objective. there was nothing elitist about open world dungeons, it was also cool to meet other people, as they other groups helped keep the spawn rates down, yes the world was dangerous but thats what made it all the more unique, you actually have consequences unlike the easy mode of mmorpgs today, you could solo dungeons but it was safer to group certain classes where just better at it, but that was not an issue considering support classes are always needed in groups, it balanced out just fine in older mmorpgs.
I do not believe you played these older mmorpgs, what a narrow minded thing to say.
Yeh .. it was horrible. That is why LFD is so popular. If the group is falling apart, at least you can hit "quit" and get another one fast.
"oh no i might actually have to say something" such a horrible concept lol
i did tons of dungeons back then and hardly ever had any problems.
it also involved alot more than just kill loot repeat. we'd form groups and start moving toward the summoning stone.. and once there if we where lucky we'd also get a little PvP action going before the dungeon.
I had fun once, it was terrible.
I was referring to literal forced situations. Hence "literally".. used in the sentence. IE quests that separate you from your group and place you in a personal instance. I play every modern game in a duo with my wife as well as a few friends, and have only ran into this in a few games.
Having a choice of doing solo questing or group oriented things is not being forced, it's having a choice (which we have that choice in most games we play together). This is what I was referring to about honesty earlier in this thread, there's little when it comes to these subjects just sensational exaggerated statements like the one you're agreeing with.
I'm no advocate for raiding that's for sure, nor gear grinds. These focuses are why I rarely stick around at endgame in modern MMORPGs. I don't mind duo adventuring and meeting folks to solve harder content, I'll play them for that, once that is over, I'm usually done as I don't like modern forms of PVP (ESO being the lone exception), or excessive dungeon types of content. Too predictable and/or inclosed for my taste.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It is a waste of time if you want to play a game instead of going into a chatroom.
Oh, not having problem does not mean that it is fun. I could get a group before LFD too .. but why bother if you can do it by clicking a button. It is kill loot repeat ...if I want pvp, i will queue up a pvp BG instead. And "moving towards" the summoning stone is a waste of time for me.
Yeah, group finder is a very anti-social mechanic. I've always viewed its introduction to WoW as a stop-gap measure because the source of the tank/healer/DPS imbalance was too deeply ingrained in the core mechanics of WoW. The strict, hard role trinity of WoW proved itself in need of serious changes, but the people in charge of major MMORPG projects have not been the most informed project managers on the block.