Are you guys in denial?

YOU DONT LIKE MMOS IF YOU WANT- SINGLE PLAYER - CUT SCENE - INSTANCED STORYS,

YOU LIKE RPGS,

stop ruining my genre.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Aelious

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Aelious
The other plus to using MMOs as "play along" stories is that a lot of them are free as opposed to single player games. Personally I just get bored with linear content. It's great to be involved in a story but after nine years of playing I'd rather play my own story than someone else's. If I do want a great story there are a lot of good novel series I've skipped while... playing MMOs. Then again, they aren't free :)

OP I think you are being a little black and white in your argument. There can be good storyline/quest opions and open world mob grind for groups/solo. Look at Vanguard, it has both.

It is not really an argument but a personal preference .. as stated. I suppose it is not impossible to have mob grind (world or not is irrelevent) that is fun. To some extent, D3 is nothing but a mob grind. However, i have yet to see open world combat as fun as an action RPG. Tell me .. will 20-30 mobs rush you in Vanguard? Will some of them have "special abilities"?

And yes, i agree with your first sentence. SOmetimes i just played STO like a SP game because there is really no SP game that i can solo a bunch of Star Trek missions with good tactical combat.

 

A stated opinion intended to draw the ire of a group of people is IMO the definition of an "argument".  Oh, I'm well aware of the purpose of your various "opinion pieces" .

 

Zerg smash'em combat? It can be fun for a time but not realistic in a virtual world so you give up far too much.  I much prefer a 5-6 man group grinding hard mobs than a D3 type of environment.  One thing that does persist through both types is that if you are going to "grind" doing it with a group is more fun.  Vanguard offers what many games do not however which is meaningful group content not just focused on instances.

 

I for one am glad there are so many options for people to play however they want.

 

LOL .. so your preference is valid, and mine is not? The world does not work that way.

 

What is valid or not isn't the issue, people having their own opinion seperate from others is something obvious to anyone over five.  My point is that you create threads designed to argue with the people here.  It's for your own amusement, power to you.

 

And zerg smash'em combat? Have you actually play these games? Do you know about the concept about space ship facing, the timing of skills to maximize DPS? I suppose that is quite beyond you.

 

Insults? You tell me how the world doesn't work and then insult me with how something is beyond me? That's sending mixed signals.  Heh, anyways yes I have played D3 and though it's fun for short periods and has a different feel I don't see anything superior about the gameplay.  I thought that was your point, that there was just preferences and not anything "better"... wierd.

 

And "not realistic in a virtual world" .. i don't really care about being realistic ... or a virtual world. D3, or Borderland .. is quite far from being realistic .. and i will take that over any "realistic combat" like you have to swing a sword, and one knock to your head, and you are down.

 

That's cool.  As long as you are enjoying what you spend your time doing.

 

You take whatever is fun to you .. just don't assume it is fun for me, or other people.

 

I never did, I'm sorry if you imagined that.  My replying with what I think is better to your public post on what you think is better does not mean I am saying what you think is better is not.  Yes, it sounds that out of whack.

I hit SWTOR again now since it is F2P and just love very piece of it.

Story driven content is captivating and something difficult to achieve without finely crafted game world and progression through it.

After all, this is was why games turned from away from "open world questing" - it's just grind.

With new era of MMOs with action combat mechanics, we will see if that will be an answer and alternative to story driven content.

Originally posted by Rydeson

Originally posted by Rimmersman

Originally posted by jtcgs

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by jtcgs

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Dungeons in Asheron's Call were NOT instanced. And you really can't call something a full sandbox if it has instances.

 Yes they were instances back when instances were called "Zones".

Instances and zones are two entirely different concepts and features. Learn the difference before trying to talk about MMORPGs.

 Learn about the history of the genre before trying to talk like you have a clue. I provided all the proof needed that I not only actually PLAYED Asherons Call 1 but how they are what is called instanced today.

The dungeons had their own SERVER not tied to the main worlds server. Not all dungeons were on the same server...AND you had to portal into each and every single dungeon.

You dont understand this because you came into the genre with "multi-instanced" gaming in which there can be copies of he same instance. Your understanding is limited. Take this opportunity to learn and grow.

Lol, what a load of rubbish, zones and instances are not the same thing. Its you who should know what you are talking about before you comment.

OK.. I never played AC, as I chose to follow friends into EQ back in 1999..  So the issue is, instanced or zones? hmm

1. Zones = 100 groups zone into duneon and ALL 100 groups are together in the same dungeon (Cazic Thule) at the same time..  Watch out for trains, and each group can help each other if they want..
2. Instance = 100 groups zone into dungeon and NONE of the groups are together.. Each have their own private space of cyber land.. No trains and No help.. You're on your own..

So which is AC?  EQ was never instance with the exception of "LDoN".. which I hated..  (alteast that was the only instancing I saw when I left the game)..

I played EQ and until LDON it had no instances but it had zones.

What you are talking about is an open dungeon and an instanced dungeon.Its 2

Originally posted by ice-vortex
Anytime you take people out of the world, you inflict damage to the community you are trying to foster in an MMORPG. The modern MMORPG does just that with instanced dungeons and instanced arena PVP. It's turned the modern MMORPG into a glorified lobby for a co-op RPG.

I think this is what I agree with the most.  It really is just causation.  I love a good RPG, all the way back to playing some kings quest or the very first final fantasy.  Now I enjoy the knights of the old republic series and all the elder scrolls games.  Sitting down with a good story driven game is a well loved pastime of mine. 

Now, I also love to delve into a good MMO in order to meet people and acomplish goals that could never be acomplished by myself.  If you mix in too many features of those single player RPGs, it will kill the multi player aspect of an MMORPG.  I have watched it happen.  In this case it really is a simple cause and effect.  Players think that this new feature is great because it makes everything faster and more streamlined.  They usually don't even know why, but in a couple months time, they are burnt out and quit the game.  It's happened to me, and I've seen it happen to memebers of my guild. 

Originally posted by WellzyC

 

Are you guys in denial?

 

YOU DONT LIKE MMOS IF YOU WANT- SINGLE PLAYER - CUT SCENE - INSTANCED STORYS,

 

YOU LIKE RPGS,

 

stop ruining my genre.

It is not your genre.

The "genre" seems to want to get the business of people who like RPG stories. I see no reason not to play some story instances if i find them fun.

Originally posted by ice-vortex
Anytime you take people out of the world, you inflict damage to the community you are trying to foster in an MMORPG. The modern MMORPG does just that with instanced dungeons and instanced arena PVP. It's turned the modern MMORPG into a glorified lobby for a co-op RPG.

I have no intention to "foster" anything in a MMORPG. I play it for fun. And yes, modern MMORPG is turning into co-op RPGs, which is exactly the point here. Proper used of isntances makes story mission much better, and it is fun for me (and based on its popularity, also fun for many).

In fact, when i see good fun story instances, sometimes i will just play it like a single player game.

after trying star wars i can honestly say i would rather get a group of my friends together and just grind mobs allways searching for the best location to do it, than ever go threw a story line again.

infact i dont think i will ever play another " so called MMO " that has a personal story line again.

I get my story line RPG stuff from god of war, assassins creed. i dont want it in my MMO.

Originally posted by mistmaker

instances belong to single player games IMO, or co-op games.

real mmorpgs

There's my favorite conjunction of terms.  Stopped reading there.

Thread seems to have devolved, very quickly, into the usual two teams of players telling each other What Games Should Be (proselytizing, preaching, tub-thumping, campaigning, soap-boxing; whatever you need to call it).

Originally posted by Aelious

LOL .. so your preference is valid, and mine is not? The world does not work that way.

 

What is valid or not isn't the issue, people having their own opinion seperate from others is something obvious to anyone over five.  My point is that you create threads designed to argue with the people here.  It's for your own amusement, power to you.

 Just like all the sandbox threads are designed to argue with people who like themepark, and all those PD thread who argue with people don't like harsh DP. Face it, any position here is going to spark off debate and flames. And i found no reason not to air my views.

And zerg smash'em combat? Have you actually play these games? Do you know about the concept about space ship facing, the timing of skills to maximize DPS? I suppose that is quite beyond you.

 

Insults? You tell me how the world doesn't work and then insult me with how something is beyond me? That's sending mixed signals.  Heh, anyways yes I have played D3 and though it's fun for short periods and has a different feel I don't see anything superior about the gameplay.  I thought that was your point, that there was just preferences and not anything "better"... wierd.

 I didn't say better ... i am just stating that your characterization "zerg smash'em" untrue, and misleading, ignoring all the depth of tactical combat. You certainly can prefer turn-based combat, or no combat at all. But saying action combat is just "zerg smash'em" is patronizing, and certainly untrue.

And "not realistic in a virtual world" .. i don't really care about being realistic ... or a virtual world. D3, or Borderland .. is quite far from being realistic .. and i will take that over any "realistic combat" like you have to swing a sword, and one knock to your head, and you are down.

 

That's cool.  As long as you are enjoying what you spend your time doing.

 Of course. Otherwise, why would i be doing it? No one will play a game that is not fun, right?

 

There is no reason why a sandbox (if there is such a thing) should not feature instances, especially personal story ones, it works quite good in a grindgame, Runescape, where this concept of clearly defined terms of "zones" and "instances" is completely broken down with big world, single instances, multinstances, phasing and switchable servers, as it is needed for a particular activity and purpose.

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by NaughtyP
I find I don't care about instanced (story) content simply because it isn't persistent. I guess that's just how I feel about MMOs. Why make an MMO when a coop game with a lobby would have the same result? Seems like a waste of money to me lol. I would hate to be an investor for these games when a lobby with instanced content would be cheaper to make and maintain.

What if you are getting the persisent world, *and* the lobby co-op customers? It is cheaper than building TWO games because you create the character/combat mechanics only once.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by NaughtyP
I find I don't care about instanced (story) content simply because it isn't persistent. I guess that's just how I feel about MMOs. Why make an MMO when a coop game with a lobby would have the same result? Seems like a waste of money to me lol. I would hate to be an investor for these games when a lobby with instanced content would be cheaper to make and maintain.

What if you are getting the persisent world, *and* the lobby co-op customers? It is cheaper than building TWO games because you create the character/combat mechanics only once.

They offer different (and imo opposing) game designs. I can enjoy both of them, but I don't see it as a good fit if they are in the same game. I understand the desire for it in many games, but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy it! They simply don't work in harmony from my pov.

Originally posted by WellzyC

 

Are you guys in denial?

 

YOU DONT LIKE MMOS IF YOU WANT- SINGLE PLAYER - CUT SCENE - INSTANCED STORYS,

 

YOU LIKE RPGS,

 

stop ruining my genre.

 

Narius won't admit it most likely, but if one were to analyze his posts you'd discover he is not an mmo fan. He more than or less likes any basic multilayer game with matchmaking. He has been trying to sway popular opinion towards limited numbers involved in a game at anytime, petitions for more separation of players via instances, believes a 4 player game can be an mmo, argues the validity of people's opinions and want for a sandbox (ie further away from the current trend), thinks lobby based games are the way to go and there is more. I'm am NOT trying to be offensive, and there may be an mmo or 2 he cares for, but overall he's a Diablo 3 kinda guy. So, that is where his perspective comes from. Also, another piece of advice, ignore anyone who posts newzoo numbers as they don't understand them as they probably can't afford to purchase the data (not the free stuff posted to entice the industry to purchase). While stories aren't anti mmo IMO its best to know where the op is coming from.

Originally posted by madazz

He more than or less likes any basic multilayer game with matchmaking. 

Iiii dont think he is that much into complexity :)

We should start a headshrink thread :)

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by Banaghran

Originally posted by madazz

He more than or less likes any basic multilayer game with matchmaking. 

Iiii dont think he is that much into complexity :)

We should start a headshrink thread :)

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by madazz
Stories equal end game. End game equals short term game. At least that's true at the moment. So it may be good for those who jump from mmo to mmo, but for those who want something long term its probably best if they are put in a world where they make their own story.

How do you get stories = end game? I have playing sto and they have story "episodes" since level 1 for leveling.

And of course how long it takes depends on how much content and how fast you play. For me, for a game like sto, i wont be out of content for at least months, which is very long to me. Realistically, i will play sth else way before i finish all the story.