Well I hope it's made well, and I hope you join in
You do realise he is your Magneto don't you, and you could be trading actual lines they would say?
I had to look up Magneto, I guess your saying we repel each other and this is true.
This is how I see our bad relationship, at least my view:
Jean-Luc_Picard He comes from old school, but prefers modern less time consuming lite hearted mmorpg's now. He is not a spiteful poster as viewing many of his post. However he is strict in his beliefs and not open to others style of play, much like me. He doesn't push his agenda NEAR as hard but offers sassy remark's when things don't go his way. He hates me because of my ability to beat a dead horse and is very vocal about it.. He basically sees "red" when ever he views one of my post.
Delete5230 I come from second generation, and am excited for new first generation mmorpg's and despise the abomination of what mmorpg's had become. Without going into detail I believe they are not mmorpg's at all but games online created "strictly" for developers to reach a wide audience. I semi-hate him for the fact that he sees "red" and follows me around this site. Now this is somewhat understandable for the fact that I DO PUSH MY AGENDA VERY HARD.
Who is right, at least my view:
Openly, I would say were both right and wrong. I push my agenda to the point of irritation to many here. But (and this is important) I don't feel guilty because many posters here are a new crowed THAT ARE NOT MMO PLAYERS, but embrace a new style of games on-line, however many are still here because they like both mmorpg's and games-on-line. I'm wrong because I draw a line in the sand, and will not let anyone have both. He is wrong because he feels his way is the only way too.
Well I hope it's made well, and I hope you join in
You do realise he is your Magneto don't you, and you could be trading actual lines they would say?
I had to look up Magneto, I guess your saying we repel each other and this is true.
This is how I see our bad relationship, at least my view:
Jean-Luc_Picard He comes from old school, but prefers modern less time consuming lite hearted mmorpg's now. He is not a spiteful poster as viewing many of his post. However he is strict in his beliefs and not open to others style of play, much like me. He doesn't push his agenda NEAR as hard but offers sassy remark's when things don't go his way. He hates me because of my ability to beat a dead horse and is very vocal about it.. He basically sees "red" when ever he views one of my post.
Delete5230 I come from second generation, and am excited for new first generation mmorpg's and despise the abomination of what mmorpg's had become. Without going into detail I believe they are not mmorpg's at all but games online created "strictly" for developers to reach a wide audience. I semi-hate him for the fact that he sees "red" and follows me around this site. Now this is somewhat understandable for the fact that I DO PUSH MY AGENDA VERY HARD.
Who is right, at least my view:
Openly, I would say were both right and wrong. I push my agenda to the point of irritation to many here. But (and this is important) I don't feel guilty because many posters here are a new crowed THAT ARE NOT MMO PLAYERS, but embrace a new style of games on-line, however many are still here because they like both mmorpg's and games-on-line. I'm wrong because I draw a line in the sand, and will not let anyone have both. He is wrong because he feels his way is the only way too.
That was a joke, but you two do take very different sides on what is an ages old debate, much like Magneto and Prof X. Its was not meant to be about anyone hating anyone. Both of you like to post ripostes when you see anyone taking the other side in that debate, that's why you see so much of each other in threads.
I don't mind your threads as its an opportunity to look at it from a fresh angle like this split multiplayer/solo idea. But I have to say I have serious doubts that would solve the grouping/solo issue. There is an issue, it is just that many of us who see it just put up with the way thing are in MMOland now.
Also I see no easy solution, but then solutions to tricky issues are never easy. Meanwhile I can't see how you think the likes of WoW or ESO are that bad, they are examples of the best we have.
But I do want to see a heavy focused grouping game, I want to see different gameplay tried out. The idea that if you want to do that you can just go back to old MMOs is a rather false argument as those MMOs like all games change and the direction is invariably towards solo. In some ways that's why "classic" versions are coming out, but I am not sure that's will hit the spot grouping wise.
This is so much fact, it should be a sticky on the main page of this site.
Facts are not opinion. Facts are the same for everyone.
Your opinion is not a fact.
Forced grouping disappeared because most people don't like to be forced into something, specially during their leisure activities, but enjoy having the choice of what they can do instead.
Grouping is still there, and going strong. But people group because they want it, and not because they are forced into it anymore. And of course, the games offering such choices have millions more players than those old school forced grouping relics.
Indeed I was not a absolute fan of the amount of grouping needed in say DAOC. But its swings and roundabouts, if you don't do it grouping you do it solo, and which play is better solo or grouping? For me it is grouping, so there you have a quandary.
Of course if you are the sort of player who happily goes through an entire MMORPG without grouping this is not an issue. But that brings me back to my original point, if you are that sort of player can't we put them in their own bubble and get on with grouping?
But the idea about giving each solo players their own shard or whatever you want to call it, does not solve the problem. We still have issues with the grouping only shard of the game, and we may find players want to nip in and out of both shards. Which if you think about it is more or less what we have now.
I'm the kind of player who is having a blast in a group or a raid when he has the time to do it (and also the mood), but who also enjoys being able to make progress outside of those activities when I either don't have the necessary contiguous time or if I'm just in the mood to enjoy a story solo by taking my time.
To me, the biggest enemies of me grouping are those randoms who are like "go go go! faster, faster!". Nothing makes me leave a dungeon group faster, and considering most of the times I'm the tank... well... you see what I mean. That's why I stick to guild groups too nowadays.
If there's a cutscene, I want to watch it, and not being insulted by some kiddie in a hurry because I didn't completely forget the "RP" in "MMORPG".
This^ I have no problem with group centric games, the problem I have is with the community you have to group with in those games. Games and gamers 10 - 12 years ago are much different than they are now. You couldn't pay me to play a group centric game now, I just won't do it.
Communities make or break games for me, even more so than the game itself many times.
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
This is so much fact, it should be a sticky on the main page of this site.
Facts are not opinion. Facts are the same for everyone.
Your opinion is not a fact.
Forced grouping disappeared because most people don't like to be forced into something, specially during their leisure activities, but enjoy having the choice of what they can do instead.
Grouping is still there, and going strong. But people group because they want it, and not because they are forced into it anymore. And of course, the games offering such choices have millions more players than those old school forced grouping relics.
Indeed I was not a absolute fan of the amount of grouping needed in say DAOC. But its swings and roundabouts, if you don't do it grouping you do it solo, and which play is better solo or grouping? For me it is grouping, so there you have a quandary.
Of course if you are the sort of player who happily goes through an entire MMORPG without grouping this is not an issue. But that brings me back to my original point, if you are that sort of player can't we put them in their own bubble and get on with grouping?
But the idea about giving each solo players their own shard or whatever you want to call it, does not solve the problem. We still have issues with the grouping only shard of the game, and we may find players want to nip in and out of both shards. Which if you think about it is more or less what we have now.
I'm the kind of player who is having a blast in a group or a raid when he has the time to do it (and also the mood), but who also enjoys being able to make progress outside of those activities when I either don't have the necessary contiguous time or if I'm just in the mood to enjoy a story solo by taking my time.
To me, the biggest enemies of me grouping are those randoms who are like "go go go! faster, faster!". Nothing makes me leave a dungeon group faster, and considering most of the times I'm the tank... well... you see what I mean. That's why I stick to guild groups too nowadays.
If there's a cutscene, I want to watch it, and not being insulted by some kiddie in a hurry because I didn't completely forget the "RP" in "MMORPG".
This^ I have no problem with group centric games, the problem I have is with the community you have to group with in those games. Games and gamers 10 - 12 years ago are much different than they are now. You couldn't pay me to play a group centric game now, I just won't do it.
Communities make or break games for me, even more so than the game itself many times.
I don't blame the players !
I blame the demograph of the game set-up's.
They are GAMES-ONLINE. - They cater to people playing FREE games. - They cater to people that don't have to give-a-crap. - The games are easy, players don't have to care. - People playing a true mmorpg WILL LEARN FAST, that you can't be an ass hat. - The ass hat will go away or change. Leaving the standard 25%, as it has always been.
This is so much fact, it should be a sticky on the main page of this site.
Facts are not opinion. Facts are the same for everyone.
Your opinion is not a fact.
Forced grouping disappeared because most people don't like to be forced into something, specially during their leisure activities, but enjoy having the choice of what they can do instead.
Grouping is still there, and going strong. But people group because they want it, and not because they are forced into it anymore. And of course, the games offering such choices have millions more players than those old school forced grouping relics.
Indeed I was not a absolute fan of the amount of grouping needed in say DAOC. But its swings and roundabouts, if you don't do it grouping you do it solo, and which play is better solo or grouping? For me it is grouping, so there you have a quandary.
Of course if you are the sort of player who happily goes through an entire MMORPG without grouping this is not an issue. But that brings me back to my original point, if you are that sort of player can't we put them in their own bubble and get on with grouping?
But the idea about giving each solo players their own shard or whatever you want to call it, does not solve the problem. We still have issues with the grouping only shard of the game, and we may find players want to nip in and out of both shards. Which if you think about it is more or less what we have now.
I'm the kind of player who is having a blast in a group or a raid when he has the time to do it (and also the mood), but who also enjoys being able to make progress outside of those activities when I either don't have the necessary contiguous time or if I'm just in the mood to enjoy a story solo by taking my time.
To me, the biggest enemies of me grouping are those randoms who are like "go go go! faster, faster!". Nothing makes me leave a dungeon group faster, and considering most of the times I'm the tank... well... you see what I mean. That's why I stick to guild groups too nowadays.
If there's a cutscene, I want to watch it, and not being insulted by some kiddie in a hurry because I didn't completely forget the "RP" in "MMORPG".
This^ I have no problem with group centric games, the problem I have is with the community you have to group with in those games. Games and gamers 10 - 12 years ago are much different than they are now. You couldn't pay me to play a group centric game now, I just won't do it.
Communities make or break games for me, even more so than the game itself many times.
gamers 10 - 12 years ago were just as whining and assholey as they are today.
LFG/LFR is what ruined MMO's for me and has made me stop playing them completely. If players know they can easily replace the current group they are in then they place very little value on their current group and become toxic.
In WoW, prior to LFG you often spent hours trying to find a group of 5 or 10 players to run a dungeon/raid with. Because you had to spend all this time to get a group, you valued the group (things are worth what you give up to get them). After LFG was introduced, players got into the habit of leaving any group that wiped once or attempting to kick random players after each wipe. Because of this, they had to reduce the difficulty of content so that wipes were much more rare (otherwise very few non-guild groups would ever complete them). This removed the only thing about WoW that was fun for me: struggling to complete a group challenge and then finally achieving a hard fought victory (because a victory is also only worth what you have to give up to achieve it).
In the niche MMO I am building with some friends I am adamant about not having any kinds of systems in the game to make it easy for people to group up. I want a group to be worth something.
LFG/LFR is what ruined MMO's for me and has made me stop playing them completely. If players know they can easily replace the current group they are in then they place very little value on their current group and become toxic.
In WoW, prior to LFG you often spent hours trying to find a group of 5 or 10 players to run a dungeon/raid with. Because you had to spend all this time to get a group, you valued the group (things are worth what you give up to get them). After LFG was introduced, players got into the habit of leaving any group that wiped once or attempting to kick random players after each wipe. Because of this, they had to reduce the difficulty of content so that wipes were much more rare (otherwise very few non-guild groups would ever complete them). This removed the only thing about WoW that was fun for me: struggling to complete a group challenge and then finally achieving a hard fought victory (because a victory is also only worth what you have to give up to achieve it).
In the niche MMO I am building with some friends I am adamant about not having any kinds of systems in the game to make it easy for people to group up. I want a group to be worth something.
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
LFG/LFR is what ruined MMO's for me and has made me stop playing them completely. If players know they can easily replace the current group they are in then they place very little value on their current group and become toxic.
In WoW, prior to LFG you often spent hours trying to find a group of 5 or 10 players to run a dungeon/raid with. Because you had to spend all this time to get a group, you valued the group (things are worth what you give up to get them). After LFG was introduced, players got into the habit of leaving any group that wiped once or attempting to kick random players after each wipe. Because of this, they had to reduce the difficulty of content so that wipes were much more rare (otherwise very few non-guild groups would ever complete them). This removed the only thing about WoW that was fun for me: struggling to complete a group challenge and then finally achieving a hard fought victory (because a victory is also only worth what you have to give up to achieve it).
In the niche MMO I am building with some friends I am adamant about not having any kinds of systems in the game to make it easy for people to group up. I want a group to be worth something.
To be honest with you, you can still do this. To get better than the lowest tier of the gear you need to run higher than the LFR raids in WoW. So that requires you to either spam chat, or find a guild to run with. The content of anything higher than the LFR is ALOT harder than the finder groups as well so it's basically the same thing just with the option of running a trash version of the same raid for bad gear.
The LFG has ruined the feeling of finding a dungeon group and raid group, but I don't think you completely remember how annoying it was to have to carve out a section of your day trying to find a group for something in chat. Even back then you had people quit on one wipe, that was always a fear after finally finishing finding a group, you get to the first boss, someone makes a mistake and you wipe, and 5 out of your 10 group members quit, or 5 out of the 25. You had to go back out with the group, search for more players and hope more people didn't get impatient and quit. Half the time chat was just pickup groups that had already cleared two of the bosses, so you had to either accept not getting the first two bosses loot and being locked in for the week or keep searching for hours.
On top of that, toxicity was still around back then. Gear checks were always a thing, and the requirements to get into the raids were always a paradox, you needed gear higher than the raid to get into a majority of the groups because they wanted to be 100% sure to clear it. So you had to either find a group willing to drag you along with lower gear which required even more chat spam, or find a guild that was willing to take you on an alt raid.
I'm not supporting the current system 100%, but it does get rid of a lot of the trouble back in the day that you encountered.
LFG/LFR is what ruined MMO's for me and has made me stop playing them completely. If players know they can easily replace the current group they are in then they place very little value on their current group and become toxic.
In WoW, prior to LFG you often spent hours trying to find a group of 5 or 10 players to run a dungeon/raid with. Because you had to spend all this time to get a group, you valued the group (things are worth what you give up to get them). After LFG was introduced, players got into the habit of leaving any group that wiped once or attempting to kick random players after each wipe. Because of this, they had to reduce the difficulty of content so that wipes were much more rare (otherwise very few non-guild groups would ever complete them). This removed the only thing about WoW that was fun for me: struggling to complete a group challenge and then finally achieving a hard fought victory (because a victory is also only worth what you have to give up to achieve it).
In the niche MMO I am building with some friends I am adamant about not having any kinds of systems in the game to make it easy for people to group up. I want a group to be worth something.
This problem of finding groups could have been easily fixed by doing something other than using general chat to find others. "PEOPLE DON'T READ ROLLING CHAT". I proved this time after time by recruiting by /tells, filling groups instantly !!!
LFG had a negative effect by far... It was never well thought out and is now the normal
This is so much fact, it should be a sticky on the main page of this site.
Facts are not opinion. Facts are the same for everyone.
Your opinion is not a fact.
This right here should be the winner of this entire post! To many people think their opinions are facts. I admit I have done it before and most likely will again sometime in the future, but when that is the case it doesn't matter what you say or prove to them you will never win, because to them their opinion is the only thing that matters because it is FACT!
The LFG has ruined the feeling of finding a dungeon group and raid group, but I don't think you completely remember how annoying it was to have to carve out a section of your day trying to find a group for something in chat. Even back then you had people quit on one wipe, that was always a fear after finally finishing finding a group, you get to the first boss, someone makes a mistake and you wipe, and 5 out of your 10 group members quit, or 5 out of the 25. You had to go back out with the group, search for more players and hope more people didn't get impatient and quit. Half the time chat was just pickup groups that had already cleared two of the bosses, so you had to either accept not getting the first two bosses loot and being locked in for the week or keep searching for hours.
I agree with you that people usually look back on the past as a bit rosier than it actually was. But I do remember how hard it was. My sister and I were in a guild, but they wouldn't let us run Kara with them, so we would spend the entire Saturday trying to get together a PUG group to run Kara. We would do this every Saturday and early on it would take 2 or 3 hours to get 10 people and we usually would only get a few bosses down before the group would break up for some reason. But after doing it week after week it got easier and eventually we would be able to get a group fairly quickly and run the entire raid.
10 years later, I am not sure if I would spend 10 or 12 hours of my Saturday for a game, but the point I was trying to make is that the easier something is, the less it is worth. Game design works as a kind of god in the game world. The design sets the rules of the world. These rules combined with human nature will determine the outcome of the game. It isn't hard to predict. Basic economics. Humans gravitate towards the easiest path. It will always be this way. Therefore the game design needs to make the easiest path the BEST path. Developers need to build systems in game that encourage the kind of community they want their game to have. LFG/LFR and the ability to create weak player associations is not something I would want to encourage in a game. Better to play alone than in a group that treats you as an anonymous, replaceable entity.
The best way to play an MMO will always be with friends, but making new friends is something MMO's should encourage as well.
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
Yeah, I agree. Multiplayer games should be primarily about multiplayer. I also agree it is time for a revolution in MMO design.
I have not tried all of the MMO's out there, but I feel like all the big ones have let me down. After WotLK, WoW went downhill fast with their class homogenization. SWTOR was a poorly made WoW clone with bad single player storylines. FFXIV had an amazing world and pretty nice players, but combat was for brain-dead zombies. ESO felt like another WoW clone that brought nothing new to the table. It just improved a bit on existing ideas. LotR online entertained me for less than 30 minutes. PoE lasted less than that. I don't play PvP focused MMO's and I don't play free to play or PTW games. My guild from WoW (still friends with most of them even after 10 years) is looking for something to play, but there isn't anything out there for us... unless you know of some amazing MMO I have missed?
The LFG has ruined the feeling of finding a dungeon group and raid group, but I don't think you completely remember how annoying it was to have to carve out a section of your day trying to find a group for something in chat. Even back then you had people quit on one wipe, that was always a fear after finally finishing finding a group, you get to the first boss, someone makes a mistake and you wipe, and 5 out of your 10 group members quit, or 5 out of the 25. You had to go back out with the group, search for more players and hope more people didn't get impatient and quit. Half the time chat was just pickup groups that had already cleared two of the bosses, so you had to either accept not getting the first two bosses loot and being locked in for the week or keep searching for hours.
I agree with you that people usually look back on the past as a bit rosier than it actually was. But I do remember how hard it was. My sister and I were in a guild, but they wouldn't let us run Kara with them, so we would spend the entire Saturday trying to get together a PUG group to run Kara. We would do this every Saturday and early on it would take 2 or 3 hours to get 10 people and we usually would only get a few bosses down before the group would break up for some reason. But after doing it week after week it got easier and eventually we would be able to get a group fairly quickly and run the entire raid.
10 years later, I am not sure if I would spend 10 or 12 hours of my Saturday for a game, but the point I was trying to make is that the easier something is, the less it is worth. Game design works as a kind of god in the game world. The design sets the rules of the world. These rules combined with human nature will determine the outcome of the game. It isn't hard to predict. Basic economics. Humans gravitate towards the easiest path. It will always be this way. Therefore the game design needs to make the easiest path the BEST path. Developers need to build systems in game that encourage the kind of community they want their game to have. LFG/LFR and the ability to create weak player associations is not something I would want to encourage in a game. Better to play alone than in a group that treats you as an anonymous, replaceable entity.
The best way to play an MMO will always be with friends, but making new friends is something MMO's should encourage as well.
Again " PEOPLE DON'T READ ROLLING CHAT" it's a bad way to recruit.. /tell fills groups fast.
If it doesn't, you will know quickly that their is no desire from the server and you can move on !
In WoW, prior to LFG you often spent hours trying to find a group of 5 or 10 players to run a dungeon/raid with.
Which was a terrible mechanic, which resulted in people mostly running only scheduled guild groups.
But after that bad period, and way before LFG, there was a quite efficient group finder which fixed that problem, you no longer had to spam chat in town and could be in the world questing or gathering while you waited. Finding a group was also faster.
You still had to go to the dungeon, and it was also only for your server.
What really harmed communities way more than LFR/LFD with automatic teleporting is the whole multi server crap grafted over that mechanic.
Yeah, I think you are right. I think it was the fully automatic (read mindless) process that made it so bad. I remember the group finder and it never bothered me that much. When LFG came out I was annoyed, but I tolerated it because it was only for dungeons. LFR was what got me really angry because it made it much harder to keep a guild together. On our server we were one of only three serious raiding guilds and it was very difficult to keep a group together. I would spend many hours each week recruiting and patching up disputes between guildies so that when raid night(s) came around we had the required 25 talented players. I think I stopped playing before all the cross server stuff, but that makes it even worse because you are playing with people you will never see again. So they become even less valuable. How about we create some new game mechanics that make us value fellow players MORE instead of less.
In WoW, prior to LFG you often spent hours trying to find a group of 5 or 10 players to run a dungeon/raid with.
Which was a terrible mechanic, which resulted in people mostly running only scheduled guild groups.
But after that bad period, and way before LFG, there was a quite efficient group finder which fixed that problem, you no longer had to spam chat in town and could be in the world questing or gathering while you waited. Finding a group was also faster.
You still had to go to the dungeon, and it was also only for your server.
What really harmed communities way more than LFR/LFD with automatic teleporting is the whole multi server crap grafted over that mechanic.
Yeah, I think you are right. I think it was the fully automatic (read mindless) process that made it so bad. I remember the group finder and it never bothered me that much. When LFG came out I was annoyed, but I tolerated it because it was only for dungeons. LFR was what got me really angry because it made it much harder to keep a guild together. On our server we were one of only three serious raiding guilds and it was very difficult to keep a group together. I would spend many hours each week recruiting and patching up disputes between guildies so that when raid night(s) came around we had the required 25 talented players. I think I stopped playing before all the cross server stuff, but that makes it even worse because you are playing with people you will never see again. So they become even less valuable. How about we create some new game mechanics that make us value fellow players MORE instead of less.
And to think -- the raids I think of are 72 or 54 people in size, not 25.
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
Yeah, I agree. Multiplayer games should be primarily about multiplayer. I also agree it is time for a revolution in MMO design.
I have not tried all of the MMO's out there, but I feel like all the big ones have let me down. After WotLK, WoW went downhill fast with their class homogenization. SWTOR was a poorly made WoW clone with bad single player storylines. FFXIV had an amazing world and pretty nice players, but combat was for brain-dead zombies. ESO felt like another WoW clone that brought nothing new to the table. It just improved a bit on existing ideas. LotR online entertained me for less than 30 minutes. PoE lasted less than that. I don't play PvP focused MMO's and I don't play free to play or PTW games. My guild from WoW (still friends with most of them even after 10 years) is looking for something to play, but there isn't anything out there for us... unless you know of some amazing MMO I have missed?
Are you still playing in your/a guild, that's the most important thing, many of the changes which have made MMOs a different genre are mitigated by that.
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
ESO felt like another WoW clone that brought nothing new to the table.
That's the reason why I did NOT play ESO at release, because the beta felt like just another WoW. The major improvements they made and specially "One Tamriel" completely change the deal though. The freedom of activity and of character development in that game nowadays is only matched by few other games.
To be fair.. ESO was never intended to be something "new" or "Innovative" the Developers even admitted such when they were making the game, Their intention for ESO was to be fan service for those that liked and wanted more of the Elder Scrolls World to explore. It's good to see they opted to expand beyond that scope, and try to build a better game overall.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
Yeah, I agree. Multiplayer games should be primarily about multiplayer. I also agree it is time for a revolution in MMO design.
I have not tried all of the MMO's out there, but I feel like all the big ones have let me down. After WotLK, WoW went downhill fast with their class homogenization. SWTOR was a poorly made WoW clone with bad single player storylines. FFXIV had an amazing world and pretty nice players, but combat was for brain-dead zombies. ESO felt like another WoW clone that brought nothing new to the table. It just improved a bit on existing ideas. LotR online entertained me for less than 30 minutes. PoE lasted less than that. I don't play PvP focused MMO's and I don't play free to play or PTW games. My guild from WoW (still friends with most of them even after 10 years) is looking for something to play, but there isn't anything out there for us... unless you know of some amazing MMO I have missed?
I have a very similar opinion as you do here. The only real difference is, I am going through a rebuilding stage where I playing anything and everything just to see if something sticks. I joined the boards in 2004, and I have never seen a slump as bad as the one we are in right now.
It is hard to even get excited about upcoming game releases any more. So many disappoint, what with broken mechanics, terrible community, or and this is the main issue here: uninspired game design. Many have said it and it is true, there needs to be a revolution in gaming design. However, it will never happen if developers keep making money on the run of the mill crap games that keep puking out the end of the production cycle.
If we keep supporting crap, we will keep getting crap. It is as simple as that.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
ESO felt like another WoW clone that brought nothing new to the table.
That's the reason why I did NOT play ESO at release, because the beta felt like just another WoW. The major improvements they made and specially "One Tamriel" completely change the deal though. The freedom of activity and of character development in that game nowadays is only matched by few other games.
To be fair.. ESO was never intended to be something "new" or "Innovative" the Developers even admitted such when they were making the game, Their intention for ESO was to be fan service for those that liked and wanted more of the Elder Scrolls World to explore. It's good to see they opted to expand beyond that scope, and try to build a better game overall.
ESO was 'supposed' to be DAoC with an Elder Scrolls skin. At least that was what the top developer brass wanted. Unfortunately for them, the huge pool of fans were ES based, and didn't care for the artificially designed world walls. Told them in closed beta that they were doing it wrong, and suggested many changes that they (eventually) moved towards. They had to suffer through the effects of their design errors first though. Despite being an MMO, it was really difficult to team up with my friends. Oops. In a modern MMO, you need to have things that can be enjoyed solo, and things that require grouping. It's not rocket surgery.
Always thought the original design was better placed on consoles. Don't know what the sales split on the game has become, but I'd bet it was stronger there.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Are you still playing in your/a guild, that's the most important thing, many of the changes which have made MMOs a different genre are mitigated by that.
After my guild left WoW in 2010, we played EVE Online for a year, then SWTOR for 3 months, and now we play tabletop games (Pathfinder mostly). Individually some of the guys play PoE, LotR Online and ESO, but none of these are games all of us want to play, so we are still looking for something to get into together.
Are you still playing in your/a guild, that's the most important thing, many of the changes which have made MMOs a different genre are mitigated by that.
After my guild left WoW in 2010, we played EVE Online for a year, then SWTOR for 3 months, and now we play tabletop games (Pathfinder mostly). Individually some of the guys play PoE, LotR Online and ESO, but none of these are games all of us want to play, so we are still looking for something to get into together.
That is a tricky one, hard to find one that the baulk of the guild will go for. If you can't get enough you may need to find a new guild, which is a total pain but well worth it.
P.S. I just noticed Torval changed his avatar again, I thought he was on holiday or something. That is so annoying!
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
Yeah, I agree. Multiplayer games should be primarily about multiplayer. I also agree it is time for a revolution in MMO design.
I disagree, we do not need a revolution, or new formats, I believe we actually need devolution with regards to MMORPG's.
Older MMORPGs had/have better systems for crafting, combat, socialising. In my opinion, pretty much every aspect (except for graphics in some cases) is/was better realised in older MMORPGs than they are in newer, "modern" MMORPGs.
It is a funny world we live in. We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
Yeah, I agree. Multiplayer games should be primarily about multiplayer. I also agree it is time for a revolution in MMO design.
I disagree, we do not need a revolution, or new formats, I believe we actually need devolution with regards to MMORPG's.
Older MMORPGs had/have better systems for crafting, combat, socialising. In my opinion, pretty much every aspect (except for graphics in some cases) is/was better realised in older MMORPGs than they are in newer, "modern" MMORPGs.
I agree that older mmorpgs had some better systems for socializing. The games that i would put to the forefront that i played that showcased heavy socializing systems within the actual game structure itself is Nexus TK, Dark Ages(not DAoC, Dark Ages by Nexon), Astonia III. I disagree on better combat systems and crafting systems.
Combat has only gotten better imo. Pvp in those early games were unbalanced messes. Pve barely had mechanics to speak of and most of them could be solved by zergfests and throwing bodies at the mob until it died.
Crafting in most of those early mmo's were just money sinks and the vast majority were useless goods that only those with spare money actually bought. Far better gear was obtained from just questing or doing a dungeon. They were all just push a button and craft as well. Was no originality or immersion to them. At least FFXIV tried to make their crafting reinvented with giving crafting skills and making it matter what you did when it came to the crafting process and it wasn't just push 1 button and win.
About the only thing that i can really say old mmorpgs did better than new ones is they weren't as afraid to take risks and their socializing aspects built into the game were many and deep. It wasn't that uncommon to see player run politics, religion and so on back then. Now, it's practically unheard of. Used to be some games you had to find another player to become another class, nowadays you just pick your class from a prompt before logging in.
So i'll give you the socializing aspect. The rest though? nah.
For me it raises the issue, why even have a multiplayer game if you don't have to play it multiplayer? But I reject the idea that MMOs have some how failed us, or that the current big hitters are second rate. It is just way past time we tried some different formats.
Yeah, I agree. Multiplayer games should be primarily about multiplayer. I also agree it is time for a revolution in MMO design.
I disagree, we do not need a revolution, or new formats, I believe we actually need devolution with regards to MMORPG's.
Older MMORPGs had/have better systems for crafting, combat, socialising. In my opinion, pretty much every aspect (except for graphics in some cases) is/was better realised in older MMORPGs than they are in newer, "modern" MMORPGs.
I agree that older mmorpgs had some better systems for socializing. The games that i would put to the forefront that i played that showcased heavy socializing systems within the actual game structure itself is Nexus TK, Dark Ages(not DAoC, Dark Ages by Nexon), Astonia III. I disagree on better combat systems and crafting systems.
Combat has only gotten better imo. Pvp in those early games were unbalanced messes. Pve barely had mechanics to speak of and most of them could be solved by zergfests and throwing bodies at the mob until it died.
Crafting in most of those early mmo's were just money sinks and the vast majority were useless goods that only those with spare money actually bought. Far better gear was obtained from just questing or doing a dungeon. They were all just push a button and craft as well. Was no originality or immersion to them. At least FFXIV tried to make their crafting reinvented with giving crafting skills and making it matter what you did when it came to the crafting process and it wasn't just push 1 button and win.
About the only thing that i can really say old mmorpgs did better than new ones is they weren't as afraid to take risks and their socializing aspects built into the game were many and deep. It wasn't that uncommon to see player run politics, religion and so on back then. Now, it's practically unheard of. Used to be some games you had to find another player to become another class, nowadays you just pick your class from a prompt before logging in.
So i'll give you the socializing aspect. The rest though? nah.
Crafting wise, no MMORPG has done it better than SWG, either before, or since, I would even go further and claim that nobody has implemented gathering resources for crafting better than SWG did either, and the best items in the game were made by crafters, not mob drops.
Look at EQ2 crafting when it first released, not quite as good as SWG, but very, very close, lots of dependency on other crafters. More involved than just click a button and gain an item.
As for combat and PvP, once again SWG handled PvP better than any MMORPG since, the way abilities functioned in a different way when used for PvE as opposed to PvP was great, the flagging system/factions worked perfectly.
As far as combat balance, I feel that is where MMOs go wrong in the first place, trying to get balance, when really, they should be aiming for a rock/paper/scissors type system.
Obviously the above is just my opinion, and sure, not every older MMORPG (or MMOwhatever) has or had better systems than newer MMOs, but you can certainly find older MMOs that do have, or had, better functionality of a certain system than a lot of MMOs today.
It is a funny world we live in. We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
Comments
This is how I see our bad relationship, at least my view:
Jean-Luc_Picard
He comes from old school, but prefers modern less time consuming lite hearted mmorpg's now. He is not a spiteful poster as viewing many of his post. However he is strict in his beliefs and not open to others style of play, much like me. He doesn't push his agenda NEAR as hard but offers sassy remark's when things don't go his way. He hates me because of my ability to beat a dead horse and is very vocal about it.. He basically sees "red" when ever he views one of my post.
Delete5230
I come from second generation, and am excited for new first generation mmorpg's and despise the abomination of what mmorpg's had become. Without going into detail I believe they are not mmorpg's at all but games online created "strictly" for developers to reach a wide audience. I semi-hate him for the fact that he sees "red" and follows me around this site. Now this is somewhat understandable for the fact that I DO PUSH MY AGENDA VERY HARD.
Who is right, at least my view:
Openly, I would say were both right and wrong.
I push my agenda to the point of irritation to many here. But (and this is important) I don't feel guilty because many posters here are a new crowed THAT ARE NOT MMO PLAYERS, but embrace a new style of games on-line, however many are still here because they like both mmorpg's and games-on-line. I'm wrong because I draw a line in the sand, and will not let anyone have both. He is wrong because he feels his way is the only way too.
I don't mind your threads as its an opportunity to look at it from a fresh angle like this split multiplayer/solo idea. But I have to say I have serious doubts that would solve the grouping/solo issue. There is an issue, it is just that many of us who see it just put up with the way thing are in MMOland now.
Also I see no easy solution, but then solutions to tricky issues are never easy. Meanwhile I can't see how you think the likes of WoW or ESO are that bad, they are examples of the best we have.
But I do want to see a heavy focused grouping game, I want to see different gameplay tried out. The idea that if you want to do that you can just go back to old MMOs is a rather false argument as those MMOs like all games change and the direction is invariably towards solo. In some ways that's why "classic" versions are coming out, but I am not sure that's will hit the spot grouping wise.
Pantheon may fail. I'm highly concerned with the odd programming and coding of developers choice.
I could assure you this !
Someone someday will make a true mmorrpg and it will be a grand day for millions !!!
It would be much better with more choices than strictly group only mechanics only.
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
I blame the demograph of the game set-up's.
They are GAMES-ONLINE.
- They cater to people playing FREE games.
- They cater to people that don't have to give-a-crap.
- The games are easy, players don't have to care.
- People playing a true mmorpg WILL LEARN FAST, that you can't be an ass hat.
- The ass hat will go away or change. Leaving the standard 25%, as it has always been.
In WoW, prior to LFG you often spent hours trying to find a group of 5 or 10 players to run a dungeon/raid with. Because you had to spend all this time to get a group, you valued the group (things are worth what you give up to get them). After LFG was introduced, players got into the habit of leaving any group that wiped once or attempting to kick random players after each wipe. Because of this, they had to reduce the difficulty of content so that wipes were much more rare (otherwise very few non-guild groups would ever complete them). This removed the only thing about WoW that was fun for me: struggling to complete a group challenge and then finally achieving a hard fought victory (because a victory is also only worth what you have to give up to achieve it).
In the niche MMO I am building with some friends I am adamant about not having any kinds of systems in the game to make it easy for people to group up. I want a group to be worth something.
The LFG has ruined the feeling of finding a dungeon group and raid group, but I don't think you completely remember how annoying it was to have to carve out a section of your day trying to find a group for something in chat. Even back then you had people quit on one wipe, that was always a fear after finally finishing finding a group, you get to the first boss, someone makes a mistake and you wipe, and 5 out of your 10 group members quit, or 5 out of the 25. You had to go back out with the group, search for more players and hope more people didn't get impatient and quit. Half the time chat was just pickup groups that had already cleared two of the bosses, so you had to either accept not getting the first two bosses loot and being locked in for the week or keep searching for hours.
On top of that, toxicity was still around back then. Gear checks were always a thing, and the requirements to get into the raids were always a paradox, you needed gear higher than the raid to get into a majority of the groups because they wanted to be 100% sure to clear it. So you had to either find a group willing to drag you along with lower gear which required even more chat spam, or find a guild that was willing to take you on an alt raid.
I'm not supporting the current system 100%, but it does get rid of a lot of the trouble back in the day that you encountered.
LFG had a negative effect by far... It was never well thought out and is now the normal
10 years later, I am not sure if I would spend 10 or 12 hours of my Saturday for a game, but the point I was trying to make is that the easier something is, the less it is worth. Game design works as a kind of god in the game world. The design sets the rules of the world. These rules combined with human nature will determine the outcome of the game. It isn't hard to predict. Basic economics. Humans gravitate towards the easiest path. It will always be this way. Therefore the game design needs to make the easiest path the BEST path. Developers need to build systems in game that encourage the kind of community they want their game to have. LFG/LFR and the ability to create weak player associations is not something I would want to encourage in a game. Better to play alone than in a group that treats you as an anonymous, replaceable entity.
The best way to play an MMO will always be with friends, but making new friends is something MMO's should encourage as well.
I have not tried all of the MMO's out there, but I feel like all the big ones have let me down. After WotLK, WoW went downhill fast with their class homogenization. SWTOR was a poorly made WoW clone with bad single player storylines. FFXIV had an amazing world and pretty nice players, but combat was for brain-dead zombies. ESO felt like another WoW clone that brought nothing new to the table. It just improved a bit on existing ideas. LotR online entertained me for less than 30 minutes. PoE lasted less than that. I don't play PvP focused MMO's and I don't play free to play or PTW games. My guild from WoW (still friends with most of them even after 10 years) is looking for something to play, but there isn't anything out there for us... unless you know of some amazing MMO I have missed?
If it doesn't, you will know quickly that their is no desire from the server and you can move on !
It is hard to even get excited about upcoming game releases any more. So many disappoint, what with broken mechanics, terrible community, or and this is the main issue here: uninspired game design. Many have said it and it is true, there needs to be a revolution in gaming design. However, it will never happen if developers keep making money on the run of the mill crap games that keep puking out the end of the production cycle.
If we keep supporting crap, we will keep getting crap. It is as simple as that.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Always thought the original design was better placed on consoles. Don't know what the sales split on the game has become, but I'd bet it was stronger there.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
That is a tricky one, hard to find one that the baulk of the guild will go for. If you can't get enough you may need to find a new guild, which is a total pain but well worth it.
P.S.
I just noticed Torval changed his avatar again, I thought he was on holiday or something. That is so annoying!
Older MMORPGs had/have better systems for crafting, combat, socialising.
In my opinion, pretty much every aspect (except for graphics in some cases) is/was better realised in older MMORPGs than they are in newer, "modern" MMORPGs.
We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
Look at EQ2 crafting when it first released, not quite as good as SWG, but very, very close, lots of dependency on other crafters. More involved than just click a button and gain an item.
As for combat and PvP, once again SWG handled PvP better than any MMORPG since, the way abilities functioned in a different way when used for PvE as opposed to PvP was great, the flagging system/factions worked perfectly.
As far as combat balance, I feel that is where MMOs go wrong in the first place, trying to get balance, when really, they should be aiming for a rock/paper/scissors type system.
Obviously the above is just my opinion, and sure, not every older MMORPG (or MMOwhatever) has or had better systems than newer MMOs, but you can certainly find older MMOs that do have, or had, better functionality of a certain system than a lot of MMOs today.
We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...