Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by ignore_me
I'm for splitting the genre at this point. Console, SPRPG, CORPG one one side; MMORPG VWS on the other.

No disagreement from me. I don't care about genre labels, only if a specific game is fun.

If you call STO a CORPG, it won't make it less fun, or more fun to me. It is the same game.

I think it should work like a warning label.

This game rated as a CORPG/Limited MMO.

-Limited Virtual World

-Options for play limited to: Solo Quests, 4 player challenge maps.

-Streamlined Gameplay

This Game rated as a MMOVWS.

-Open Worlds

-Options for play limited to: Undirected Objectives, Player Made Content

-Complex/Time Consuming Gameplay

Now if there were only some objective body, impervious to the lobbying of the manufacturers advertising departments,  to administer the ratings

Originally posted by ignore_me

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by ignore_me
I'm for splitting the genre at this point. Console, SPRPG, CORPG one one side; MMORPG VWS on the other.

No disagreement from me. I don't care about genre labels, only if a specific game is fun.

If you call STO a CORPG, it won't make it less fun, or more fun to me. It is the same game.

I think it should work like a warning label.

 

This game rated as a CORPG/Limited MMO.

-Limited Virtual World

-Options for play limited to: Solo Quests, 4 player challenge maps.

-Streamlined Gameplay

 

This Game rated as a MMOVWS.

-Open Worlds

-Options for play limited to: Undirected Objectives, Player Made Content

-Complex/Time Consuming Gameplay

 

Now if there were only some objective body, impervious to the lobbying of the manufacturers advertising departments,  to administer the ratings

It is not like things like LFD is a secret. It is actually a sort after feature. Plus, most MMOs are F2P anyway. It is not like one cannot find out how it plays after an hour of test run.

Don't tell me people don't know GW1 is all instanced, or DDO is focus on dungeon adventures. In fact, that is their selling point. I think the information is already out there, and clear enough.

Take TOR for another example. Does anything mistake TOR but as a story heavy game? That is their selling point (not that they are very successful in making a profit)!!

Originally posted by Goatgod76

NM, not going to waste my time any further with you...another that doesn't get it, or just doesn't want to get it.

Or i am just discussing a MMO characteristic that you don't like.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by ignore_me
I'm for splitting the genre at this point. Console, SPRPG, CORPG one one side; MMORPG VWS on the other.

No disagreement from me. I don't care about genre labels, only if a specific game is fun.

If you call STO a CORPG, it won't make it less fun, or more fun to me. It is the same game.

This comment here BTW, tells me you don't care about genre lables, as long as it's fun for you. Which is fine...UNTIL you try to spread these same ideas onto other genres they don't belong really. Because again, there are different genres for different tastes. Although yes, there are different variations of MMORPG's too. But every post of yours seems to want to make them ALL the same way. Quick fun.

Like having all chess pieces able to move anywhere because it's more convenient and makes for quicker fun (To you) rather than a specific range and pattern as they are meant to move in order to make it more strategic and different from checkers.

Originally posted by Goatgod76

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by ignore_me
I'm for splitting the genre at this point. Console, SPRPG, CORPG one one side; MMORPG VWS on the other.

No disagreement from me. I don't care about genre labels, only if a specific game is fun.

If you call STO a CORPG, it won't make it less fun, or more fun to me. It is the same game.

This comment here BTW, tells me you don't care about genre lables, as long as it's fun for you. Which is fine...UNTIL you try to spread these same ideas onto other genres they don't belong really. Because again, there are different genres for different tastes.

Like having all chess pieces able to move anywhere because it's more convenient and makes for quicker fun (To you) rather than a specific range and pattern as they are meant to move in order to make it more strategic and different from checkers.

Sure. That is true. But did i spread the idea? Look at it. MMO has non-massive, co-op small group gameplay long before i even joined this site. I am just merely commenting on it. The ideas are already implemented in MMOs. If you read the thread, no one disagree that much of the gameplay (like a dungeon run) does not happen in a virtual world. All people are ranting, is that they don't like it.

Secondly, spreading ideas across genre, in my view, is a GOOD thing. Borderland is a great fun game because it is a mix-up of RPG and FPS. Does anyone complain .. no no we can't have first person shooting in a RPG?

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Goatgod76

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by ignore_me
I'm for splitting the genre at this point. Console, SPRPG, CORPG one one side; MMORPG VWS on the other.

No disagreement from me. I don't care about genre labels, only if a specific game is fun.

If you call STO a CORPG, it won't make it less fun, or more fun to me. It is the same game.

This comment here BTW, tells me you don't care about genre lables, as long as it's fun for you. Which is fine...UNTIL you try to spread these same ideas onto other genres they don't belong really. Because again, there are different genres for different tastes.

Like having all chess pieces able to move anywhere because it's more convenient and makes for quicker fun (To you) rather than a specific range and pattern as they are meant to move in order to make it more strategic and different from checkers.

Sure. That is true. But did i spread the idea? Look at it. MMO has non-massive, co-op small group gameplay long before i even joined this site. I am just merely commenting on it. The ideas are already implemented in MMOs. If you read the thread, no one disagree that much of the gameplay (like a dungeon run) does not happen in a virtual world. All people are ranting, is that they don't like it.

Secondly, spreading ideas across genre, in my view, is a GOOD thing. Borderland is a great fun game because it is a mix-up of RPG and FPS. Does anyone complain .. no no we can't have first person shooting in a RPG?

 

 

No reason you can't. I actually had an idea for a Wild West sandbox RPG that incorporated FPS gun fights. But I don't have the time nor energy to go back and forth with you on this anymore.

And here he is again, trying to get MMOs to become something they never were intended to be. There sure are lots of other genres that cover this very thing, though. I guess he won't happy until ALL online games are lobby based games...

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Aeonblades

Originally posted by XAPGames

Yeah, they would notice.  Just look at all the threads of people complaining about empty overland zones indicating that a game is dead.

 

It's a paradox.  They might not want to play with others, but they like having them around.

 

This. If the world seems empty, it doesn't seem like a world anymore to most.

You don't need a world for this. You just need a city like Orgrimmar.

In fact, the world *is* empty. They may as well take it away.

There is a market for that kind of game, but... not here in the MMO sector. Look at ARPG's like Torchlight 2, I think thats what you are looking for. People come to MMO's for that virtual world, so your idea won't be an overly popular one. Again though, ARPG's have you covered :) 

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

You don't need a world for this. You just need a city like Orgrimmar.

In fact, the world *is* empty. They may as well take it away.

There is a market for that kind of game, but... not here in the MMO sector. Look at ARPG's like Torchlight 2, I think thats what you are looking for. People come to MMO's for that virtual world, so your idea won't be an overly popular one. Again though, ARPG's have you covered :) 

Really? Then explain to me that how it is not true that much of the MMO gameplay happens in instances, and that cities are used as lobby. Isn't that true?

Look at MMOs like WOW, DDO, GW1, STO ... tell me how that kind of gameplay is not happening in these games?

Sure there are other games for that too in other genre (ARPG), but that does not mean that some MMOs are not like that. And if my idea is not popular, why is many doing that in orgrimmar, stormwind, and so on ....

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Sure there are other games for that too in other genre (ARPG), but that does not mean that some MMOs are not like that. And if my idea is not popular, why is many doing that in orgrimmar, stormwind, and so on ....

"Insert something about there not being any games that allow for a different approach/incentivize the open world as an alternate solution to being stuck in a lobby."

Originally posted by Istavaan
Yet all people seem to care about is instanced raiding and getting loot from raiding.

Tell me more about instanced raiding in EVE online :)

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Will most player even notice (etc.)

Doesn't the answer hinge on your criteria for "most players"?

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Will most player even notice (etc.)

Doesn't the answer hinge on your criteria for "most players"?

"Most readers of your topic" is about the best we could hope to accurately answer.

I just find it ridiculous to think that anywhere close to "most" for WoW players would not notice if Azeroth was replaced with a lobby.  I mean how can the OP even think that people would not notice when they logged into WoW such a thing had happened?  It's crazy to think they wouldn't notice such a massive change

Yes, I think they would notice - I know I would - and I think a good bit of the disenfranchisement with recent mmos (and WoW) has partly to do with this.

Playing as though you were exploring a virtual world, and playing a chain of highly stream-lined action scenarios or what not, are palpably different experiences, and they imply different play-styles. To illustrate, when I played WoW, there was a time when I mostly sat in town waiting for the dungeon queue to pop, but most of the time when I was enjoying the game, it was while leveling, because it meant exploring the game world and enjoying it *as* a world (at least, to the extent that the particular game encourages).

It could be said that the game, and others like it, especially at end-game, encouraged the other sort of condensed/stream-lined bite-sized gameplay that could be mimicked functionally by a lobby-game, but that doesn't mean that all players want that, or that they wouldn't know the difference. There is definitely a market for both styles of games, though I, like many, tend to think the virtual worlds populated by players make up what is essentially unique to mmos (even if it's not essential to their genre label - I'm talking historically), versus the rest of online gaming. It's a unique kind of experience that can't really be duplicated elsewhere. If you like, you can take that as a recommendation that a greater number of future mmos place emphasis on the virtual world experience rather than streamlined, pre-packaged content.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

You don't need a world for this. You just need a city like Orgrimmar.

In fact, the world *is* empty. They may as well take it away.

There is a market for that kind of game, but... not here in the MMO sector. Look at ARPG's like Torchlight 2, I think thats what you are looking for. People come to MMO's for that virtual world, so your idea won't be an overly popular one. Again though, ARPG's have you covered :) 

Really? Then explain to me that how it is not true that much of the MMO gameplay happens in instances, and that cities are used as lobby. Isn't that true?

Look at MMOs like WOW, DDO, GW1, STO ... tell me how that kind of gameplay is not happening in these games?

Sure there are other games for that too in other genre (ARPG), but that does not mean that some MMOs are not like that. And if my idea is not popular, why is many doing that in orgrimmar, stormwind, and so on ....

Just look at the replies you have in this thread, seems most that actually took notice of this topic would notice the absense.  Again what you are looking for is already available in ARPG's. No need for them to be in MMO's because people looking for MMO's tend to want that world. 

Games like Global Agenda actually had to add a quasi world to appease its players because the biggest criticism of that game was that it was a lobby based MMO. 

I mean your idea isn't bad, but it is no longer an MMO without the world as an option, it becomes an ARPG. Players looking for an MMO will be dissapointed like they were with Global Agenda. 

This thread is insidious. It's not even a "can I have a game with no virtual world?"

This thread posits the idea of taking away the VW for everyone.

Lobby Game fans of the world unite!