Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

Huge diffrence between skill, and knowing the mechanics guys. MMORPG are simply about who has the higher number, and who knows the mechanics better, FPS games do all of that, and include skill.

Another good point. I think though that some people equate learning the mechanics and memorizing them to skill though.

IDK

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

Huge diffrence between skill, and knowing the mechanics guys. MMORPG are simply about who has the higher number, and who knows the mechanics better, FPS games do all of that, and include skill.

 

Another good point. I think though that some people equate learning the mechanics and memorizing them to skill though.

 

IDK

Some MMOs like WOW specifically, reward FPS-like mechanics as well as all the number crunching. You can't just stand there or hit /face & /follow and hit 1-9 every 5 seconds in PvP and expect to beat anyone who knows what they're doing.   Without having the hand eye to move around A LOT, you hit a personal capp and no amount of gear will overcome it.  As evidenced by the best arena players, gear only takes you so far.  The highest level of PvP in that game requires that you do it ALL and its happening at the same speed as your average FPS.

---

Originally posted by BioNut
I have been playing MMOs for a long time (Aceron's Call was my first) and I have never really been satisfied by the gameplay. Well, why play them you ask? To be honest, I play them mostly to relax and have have some nice casual multiplayer with friends. I also play them for story and roleplaying purposes. But this said I would really like an MMO to come out that is not for casual gamers but for hardcore gamers.

But wait, wait!!!??!!! WoW has plenty Hardcore gamerzzz doesn't it?
Short answer= No, mmo hardcore people are NOT hardcore gamers. That thought is laughable.
Long answer= Hardcore gamers are people who enjoy games that require skill, not time commitment. (think street fighter, Call of Duty, japanese top down shooters).
This is really the crux of my issue with MMOs. They require absolutely no skill at all. I mean, there isnt a single open world MMO thats PvP or PvE doesn't boil down to who has better gear, higher levels, better traits, etc.
I want to see a guy tank the biggest boss in the game wearing nothing at all because he is just that FREAKING good. I wanna see an underdog win because he has a flawless fight against a better geared character. I want to get ganked by three other people and end up killing them all because I am just that freaking good. I want skill to matter and gear to be a bonus.
That way players can truely become legendary not for being "first to" but for being epic. For fighting against all odds and winning. Until then MMOs will continue to be casual "side attractions" and stuck in the stone ages they find themselves in now.
I will keep playing though. Its nice to have some carebear games to play too. :)

Before the flaming starts this is a thought piece, I am primarily a twitch gamer, and I wonder how many like minded people are out there like me.

---

---

Originally posted by Sinella
Most of the MMOs out there are MMORPGs, and your concept doesn't fit the RPG part. Playing an MMORPG means that people can be something they are not in real...even a 70 years old man can play a young, strong, fast warrior. Adding real life skills into MMORPGs would ruin the original concept of these games.
MMOs without RPG are different questions, real life skills can work there.

---

---

Originally posted by Sovrath
I think that's where the rift starts. "Twitch" players over other types of players.
I'll admit I like a more visceral combat experience but I'm not sure if I want my mmo's to become fps games.
It seems that mmos' have become attractive to players who like fps type of combat and they chafe because of how mmo's usually run.
Even though there is a closing gap of technical difficulties due to latency I know there are players out there who just don't have the fps mindset and will not be interested in stripping away the skills and gear for what essentially will be quake but in an open world.

---

---

Originally posted by Athcear
What do you mean by skill, and how does it differ from "practice"? Most arguments I see about skill are about how pepople who don't play very often should win over those who do, without having to put in time. You know, without practice.

---

Originally posted by Rabenwolf

Lets be fair here, I know you know that there is more to it than that. What you bring up was the general design for arcade games. Think about how the arcade mentality works, coin opperated limited play sessions entirely based around quick sprints of casual play. At home however, we see less twitch based games, especially as the technology improves. You also have to remember popular analog games which still existed that are not twitch based, chess, poker, dungeons and dragons...ect we see these modes of play also in the digital sphere, even to the point of experimental MUDs, text based adventures such as Zork, or even Collasal Cave Adventure? I just dont understand the rationality of your response.

To add to the comment you quote: People should look at South Korea's major leage gaming scene. Some players get paid to play, high skill games are not twitch based though like any game reaction time does mean something. Look at how they play Starcraft, I think this is a good example of skill in a game that is not about twitch based play as the core mechanic. It uses strategy, short term tactics, resource management, player growth and upgrades, progression...ect Many of these are features found in most of the mmorpgs that are not twitch based.

Seems like he's mostly disagreeing with the notion that "hardcore gaming has never been about twitch."

The notion is extremely flimsy logic, when you consider the fact that many non-twitch games are non-twitch specifically to be more accessible (aka less hardcore.) 

I also find it a little odd that you consider Starcraft not to be twitch-based.  It's not like SC was the first RTS.  They knew exactly what type of game they were making.  Maybe players were surprised to discover a strategy game was heavily reliant on twitch skills, but the game designers of Starcraft knew exactly how their game mechanics would be interacted with.

Originally posted by BioNut

APB failed when they removed headshots. The same failure that Global Agenda had. When you take away the ability for a skilled kill it once again boils down to stats. 

Game doesnt have to be an FPS. It could be an action game like god of war, devil may cry or my dream MMO Star Wars Jedi Knight the MMO.

TF2 manages to be highly rewarding of skill with almost no headshots involved.  The idea that headshots are the only form of skill in a FPS is sort of ridiculous -- they don't even make sense for all games.

Maybe you've already played APB and its combat does suck without headshots, but I just get sort of a "without headshots, a FPS doesn't involve skill" vibe from your post....as if headshots were the only form of "skilled kill" a player could make.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Rabenwolf

Lets be fair here, I know you know that there is more to it than that. What you bring up was the general design for arcade games. Think about how the arcade mentality works, coin opperated limited play sessions entirely based around quick sprints of casual play. At home however, we see less twitch based games, especially as the technology improves. You also have to remember popular analog games which still existed that are not twitch based, chess, poker, dungeons and dragons...ect we see these modes of play also in the digital sphere, even to the point of experimental MUDs, text based adventures such as Zork, or even Collasal Cave Adventure? I just dont understand the rationality of your response.

To add to the comment you quote: People should look at South Korea's major leage gaming scene. Some players get paid to play, high skill games are not twitch based though like any game reaction time does mean something. Look at how they play Starcraft, I think this is a good example of skill in a game that is not about twitch based play as the core mechanic. It uses strategy, short term tactics, resource management, player growth and upgrades, progression...ect Many of these are features found in most of the mmorpgs that are not twitch based.

Seems like he's mostly disagreeing with the notion that "hardcore gaming has never been about twitch."

The notion is extremely flimsy logic, when you consider the fact that many non-twitch games are non-twitch specifically to be more accessible (aka less hardcore.) 

I also find it a little odd that you consider Starcraft not to be twitch-based.  It's not like SC was the first RTS.  They knew exactly what type of game they were making.  Maybe players were surprised to discover a strategy game was heavily reliant on twitch skills, but the game designers of Starcraft knew exactly how their game mechanics would be interacted with.

Exactly, like I tried to explain (albiet probably poorly). Twitch is not just for shooters. There is twitch (quick) thinking too. Which is also based on your minds reaction time. You could also say that Starcraft uses physical twitch skills too because you have to be able to change your strategy on the fly (as with most competitive games).

To people that are still scratching their heads, Stop thinking twitch = halo deathmatch. Start thinking twitch = NFL running back.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by BioNut

APB failed when they removed headshots. The same failure that Global Agenda had. When you take away the ability for a skilled kill it once again boils down to stats. 

Game doesnt have to be an FPS. It could be an action game like god of war, devil may cry or my dream MMO Star Wars Jedi Knight the MMO.

TF2 manages to be highly rewarding of skill with almost no headshots involved.  The idea that headshots are the only form of skill in a FPS is sort of ridiculous -- they don't even make sense for all games.

Maybe you've already played APB and its combat does suck without headshots, but I just get sort of a "without headshots, a FPS doesn't involve skill" vibe from your post....as if headshots were the only form of "skilled kill" a player could make.

Sorry I didnt mean to imply it. TF2 does do that well but some games need headshots. APB I have not played but I played global agenda and it suffered from it.

A great shooter that has no head shots is Mass Effect 2.

RPG's are about character development and skill.  That is why I play them.  I am not interested in bastardizing ( I mean, hybridizing) these play styles.  I really don't understand this movement to turn RPG's into quasi FPSes.

Originally posted by Solestran

RPG's are about character development and skill.  That is why I play them.  I am not interested in bastardizing ( I mean, hybridizing) these play styles.  I really don't understand this movement to turn RPG's into quasi FPSes.

Many of us are done with auto-targeting, it gets incredibly dull after awhile.

The games don't have to be quasi FPSs just because they don't use dice to decide the outcome of a fight. I have good hand eye coordination and I would love to use it in a persistent world.

Games don't necessarily have to move towards an FPS style game.  I can do the PvE side of a FPS-type game.  However, from the PvP-side, I don't like it.  (Yes, I like PvP, just not FPS PvP).

Of course, with that being said, Everquest-style auto-attack and /afk doesn't work for me either.  Generally speaking, there needs to be something that keeps you occupied while at the keyboard.  To some extent, I don't really like the current favored system of attack and mash buttons. 

For the most part, I like re-active combat.  Example: Ability A triggers Ability B or C, which in turn triggers a final ability.  Heroic opportunities from EQ2 is a fine example of something I enjoy.  Outside of that, the only other combat system I like is a fully active system.  City of Heroes, Champions, and DDO are examples of this.  It requires a little more skill than just going through a simple rotation of 4-5 buttons because deviating from that rotation drops your dps.

So argueably speaking, some MMOs are implenting some level of "skill" requirement.  However, this quickly gets adjusted to better accommodate the less skilled or casual player.  You know, the ones that don't have time to do research on what abilities to take, or just go "hey, that sounds ability sounds cool" and selects something that isn't necessarily a good choice.

Concept/Flavor builds anyone?

Originally posted by Solestran

RPG's are about character development and skill.  That is why I play them.  I am not interested in bastardizing ( I mean, hybridizing) these play styles.  I really don't understand this movement to turn RPG's into quasi FPSes.

 i didn't see anybody in this thread say they wanted existing games to switch their genre.

rather that people instead of pumping out RPG after RPG into an MMO space thats already %99 RPGs to actually make massively multiplayer games of other gameplay genres.

i know its a very hard concept for many to grasp that a game could be massively multiplayer and/or set in an online virtual world without being an RPG, but you might as well get used to it cuz you'll be seeing alot more variety in the future.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Rabenwolf

Lets be fair here, I know you know that there is more to it than that. What you bring up was the general design for arcade games. Think about how the arcade mentality works, coin opperated limited play sessions entirely based around quick sprints of casual play. At home however, we see less twitch based games, especially as the technology improves. You also have to remember popular analog games which still existed that are not twitch based, chess, poker, dungeons and dragons...ect we see these modes of play also in the digital sphere, even to the point of experimental MUDs, text based adventures such as Zork, or even Collasal Cave Adventure? I just dont understand the rationality of your response.

To add to the comment you quote: People should look at South Korea's major leage gaming scene. Some players get paid to play, high skill games are not twitch based though like any game reaction time does mean something. Look at how they play Starcraft, I think this is a good example of skill in a game that is not about twitch based play as the core mechanic. It uses strategy, short term tactics, resource management, player growth and upgrades, progression...ect Many of these are features found in most of the mmorpgs that are not twitch based.

Seems like he's mostly disagreeing with the notion that "hardcore gaming has never been about twitch."

The notion is extremely flimsy logic, when you consider the fact that many non-twitch games are non-twitch specifically to be more accessible (aka less hardcore.) 

I also find it a little odd that you consider Starcraft not to be twitch-based.  It's not like SC was the first RTS.  They knew exactly what type of game they were making.  Maybe players were surprised to discover a strategy game was heavily reliant on twitch skills, but the game designers of Starcraft knew exactly how their game mechanics would be interacted with.

I suppose that comes down to the definition of Twitch. His argument, rather statement, was based off the earlier arcade games. We can debate whether they qualifiy as "hardcore" or not. By nature, arcades have to be casual, however as we have seen with documentaries like "The King of Kong", some people can turn anything into a hardcore event.

Following that train of thought, if even the casual can be turned into a hardcore "event", can the opposite be true. I think the OP is trying to promote this rhetoric that his definition of gaming is the end all, that instead of being subjective and assumptious, it is a type of fact. Maybe I am misreading into it, but that is the impression I am getting from this.

Games require the use of hands, often times if they are in real time they require action to be taken (through input) for a reaction to happen. This is called interactivity, and games are interactive media. Thus, one could say all games then are "twitch based". But that cant work, since the OP assumes there is a distinction.

And perhaps there is one... does the twitch input become the core mechanic, the main mode of play, or does design allow for a multifaceted mode of play? What it really comes down to is challenges. When I say challenges, I am referring not to what the average joe might think they are, but as tools that game designers use them for. Game Challenges in both analog and digital game theory have been broken down into a fairly specific science. This is how genres are created btw, they include those designer challenges.

When the OP suggests twitch based play is the only way for skill play, he must therefore assume that the only challenge in the game as designed by a developer, is reactionary through spacial awareness. What this means is that the player is the game, and not a shared experience between ruleset and player. It means the player must have complete control over the reactions on the screen in real time and that all modes of play for all players are equal, that the only difference is coming from player input and not from the game itself. This complete control, is twitch based by his definition, in the purist form. It would be no different if you were to go outside and with your body play any sport. Your limitations is the skill. Thus the computer becomes a part of your body and that is all there is to is.

Sadly I see this as simple minded play, it goes against the idea of interactive gaming, in which the rulesets that create the limitations which interact with the challenges create a type of 50 50 relationship between player and computer (game).

I cannot see Starcraft falling into that category since it isnt twitch based. It does require user input, and it is real time, but it features many different challenges found in the traditional MMO.

Anyways, I understand this isnt exactly easy to get right off the bat. Its ok if people disagree with this, just have a logical and clearly defined reason why.

Please start MMOFPS.com. kthxbye.

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by girlgeek

Originally posted by Comnitus

EVE takes skill. Skill with your brain, theorycrafting skill, social skills to make friends who will back you up, skills like common sense...

Oh, that's not the skill you were talking about, eh? Well, I hope you find an MMO to suit you. Darkfall or Mortal Online sound pretty accurate.

 

Yeah I have to agree.  It's pretty annoying when someone comes along and decides that only THEIR favorite skills (of course the things they personally may be best at doing) are the ONLY SKILLS that matter or that are necessary to play games.

 

Some of the people that have the most refined "twitch" combat skills or strategy skills (or whatever the war-hungry version of gamer thinks are the "important" gaming skills)....may have next to NO social skills, no organizational skills, no leadership skills, no ability to be diplomatic, little or none of the OTHER skills it takes to make things work in an MMORPG. Just like in the real world, a team is composed of a variety of different people with varying degrees of skill in a wide assortment of  skills.

 

If there was nothing at all but combat in MMORPGs....well first of all they wouldn't be RPGs.....but not only that, they would cease to provide a "world" or any reason to do anything but combat. THAT...to me....sounds like an FPS game, not an RPG. So what, imo, is needed....is the hole in the genre for MMOFPS games needs to be filled.  There really isn't much for this type of player atm, but....I believe those games are coming.

 

Read what I think skill is. Eve probably falls into the RTS form of skill.

 

I am a former guild leader, raid leader and general social junky. So saying I lack those skills because of my desire for games that branch outside YOUR skillset is insulting.

Where did I say that?   I said MAY lack....MAY.  I did not say that ALL lack.

I agree with you regarding EVE.  And that also applies to some OTHER MMOs as well.

My primary point was that games that have a teamwork mechanic, require MORE than one type of skill.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Please start MMOFPS.com. kthxbye.

Agreed.  As I've said before....the rash of MMOFPS games is coming. MMOs will, one day in the near future, imo, be very diversified.  I think MMORPG.com is a bit of a misnomer for this site, though.  It's really more about ALL MMOs, not just that ONE sub-genre.  So there are plenty of threads like this one, because there are plenty of site members who don't particularly care for MMORPGs in a traditional sense. No real problem there, other than they don't have as many games to choose from as the RPG style crowd. Just my opinion.

Originally posted by BioNut

I have been playing MMOs for a long time (Aceron's Call was my first) and I have never really been satisfied by the gameplay.  Well, why play them you ask? To be honest, I play them mostly to relax and have have some nice casual multiplayer with friends. I also play them for story and roleplaying purposes. But this said I would really like an MMO to come out that is not for casual gamers but for hardcore gamers.

 

But wait, wait!!!??!!! WoW has plenty Hardcore gamerzzz doesn't it?

Short answer= No, mmo hardcore people are NOT hardcore gamers. That thought is laughable.

Long answer= Hardcore gamers are people who enjoy games that require skill, not time commitment. (think street fighter, Call of Duty, japanese top down shooters).

This is really the crux of my issue with MMOs. They require absolutely no skill at all. I mean, there isnt a single open world MMO thats PvP or PvE  doesn't boil down to who has better gear, higher levels, better traits, etc.

I want to see a guy tank the biggest boss in the game wearing nothing at all because he is just that FREAKING good. I wanna see an underdog win because he has a flawless fight against a better geared character. I want to get ganked by three other people and end up killing them all because I am just that freaking good. I want skill to matter and gear to be a bonus.

That way players can truely become legendary not for being "first to" but for being epic. For fighting against all odds and winning. Until then MMOs will continue to be casual "side attractions" and stuck in the stone ages they find themselves in now.

I will keep playing though. Its nice to have some carebear games to play too. :)

 

Before the flaming starts this is a thought piece, I am primarily a twitch gamer, and I wonder how many like minded people are out there like me.

 

I think I get the spirit of your post and that is what attracted me to Guild Wars and gives me a great deal of hope for Guild Wars 2, despire the horrible support that NCSoft devotes to its products. Guild Wars is a game where you hit level cap fairly early and you have to choose what 8 skills you are going to use within explorable areas and arenas. Also, weapons and armour that are at 'max level' are fairly easy to get and when it comes down to brass tacks you're really looking for the skin you think is the coolest. One may argue that weapon modifications and armour modifications play a big role but, in reality, that role is minimal: while it does provide some advantage you have to have the skill to take advantage of those boosts.

Yes, Guild Wars has some rather noticeable bugs and heros tend to require more micro-management than should be necessary, also using skills in awkward ways at times, but this game really is all about skill. Even though I can bitch about NCSoft all day this game really is a winner and since you're looking for a MMORPG that is skill based I highly recommend it.

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by girlgeek

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by Rabenwolf

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

RPG players don't want skill in games, they want to "win" constiantly and chase gear. If this was not true, MMOFPS games would be more popular.

 

I hope you do not actually believe that. I would assume by definition, RPG players want DEPTH. Challenges that include everything from micromanagement to Identification and reaction challenges. A game is only created through rulesets that result in challenges, the types of challenges present define the genre.

 

I guess what I would have to ask the OP of this thread is...how do you define skill? is it player skill vs character skill? is twitch vs intelligent play? what kind of challenges are you associating with skill?

The fact that the OP claims that mmorpgs that are not "twitch" based are some how not for hardcore gamers, or even skill based... says a lot about their understanding of design and modes of play. I could counter argue that player skill without character skill (items, stats, levels, abilities) results in reactionary play rather than intelligent play. One would assume intelligent play is the most valued skill to have in any game.

To answer your question:

Skill in video games revolves around being good at strategy, spacial awareness and "twitch" gameplay.

Problem being...there is more TO mmoRPGs than combat skill. If you don't like the skill sets required in mmoRPGs....why not go find yourself a good mmoFPS?  I don't think the two need to be mutually exclusive. We can have ALL KINDS of MMOs.  What I think you're saying throughout this thread, is that MMOs don't require as much skill in YOUR FAVORITE gaming skill sets, which would be skills that have primarily to do ONLY with combat and not the myriads of other things involved in playing a role playing game on a massive scale.

Twitch gameplay is defined as both physical "hand eye coordinated" games such as halo and CoD and Mental "fast thinking" type of games such as starcraft or other RTSs.

Twitch is all about reaction time whether it be mental or physical.

 

There really are no MMOs that stress either. Some mmos will maybe cause your brain to work a little but never at the point where you really have to be quick on your feet.

This reinforces what I just said I thought your point is/was with this thread. Be patient....your games are coming. MMOs are becoming more and more diversified ALL the time. You'll have your games. Doesn't mean every other play style can't also have theirs, and vice versa.

For example most raid bosses can be beaten by any well geared characters regardless of whether the players using the characters are "skilled" or not. As long as 1 person knows the correct strategy and everyone exicutes there role (as defined by the devolopers) the boss will go down.

 

Another example is the use of zerg mentality in PvP. Superior numbers always destroys fewer numbers. There are no examples of 300 alliance holding off thousands of horde over a three day period. It is impossible to overcome odds in current MMO games.

For the 4th or 5th time, NOWHERE in my OP did I mention mmoRPGs. I made certain that I just said MMO games. So yes its obvious that I am refering to MMOaction games in the vein of Call of Duty or god of war. There are NO good open world games like this. So saying go find one is retarded.

I think you saying my comment is "retarded" is unnecessarily rude.  Rudeness seems to be a common denominator among PvP enthusiasts.  Why is that?  There also seems to be some elitist idea that they are ever so much more "skilled" than other gamers.  It's really kind of comical.  Because unless you're a professional gamer and making money at e-sports in competitions....it's really not all that much to brag about.  Our gaming "skills" don't really mean much in the real world where things actually MATTER.

I understand, however, your frustration at not being able to find the type of game that you feel challenges you. I certainly don't think you're alone with feeling THAT.  Even some of us that aren't as "skilled" as you are, would like to have more of a challenge than what today's crop of games provides, that's for sure.  But like I said....I think those games are coming.

Skillbased games just don't happen cause most won't pay 15/month for getting repeatedly told by the game that they suck.

Take wow for example most guilds fail with their Tx epics in icecrown and then we have one single group that did several bosses there in blue equipment , that's the equivalent of  20 retards with ak 47 failing and 10 competent with knifes succeding.

e.G you can't make a skillbased game for such people, you give them shiny epics and hook them up by gradually giving more power in exchange for playing time.

I am dreaming about an MMO that will bring sort of Gothic 1&2 combat style - reactive and dynamic but still quite easy to fight, even at 3'o clock in the morning (that's why I left all FPS-like MMOs - Darkfall, Fallen Earth, ... - they don't play well in bed on touchpad). I also don't think MMO(RPG)s don't require skill. Most of all it depends on how you define skill - Age of Empires require completely different skill than Counter Strike, for example. Then it boils down to what everyone thinks is the "right" skill that should lead the game. I've seen groups of uber-geared people fail on one of the first raid bosses and groups of "I-just-reached-the-cap" owning the PvP battlefield in "skill-less" games. I've seen a Lore Master in LotRO that could own any other character on the server in a duel, while having the same gear as any end-game char had.

So yes, MMOs do require skill without any doubt. The ease in gaining the necessary skill and the repetivness of the game after you reached some viable level of skill are another topics...

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

Huge diffrence between skill, and knowing the mechanics guys. MMORPG are simply about who has the higher number, and who knows the mechanics better, FPS games do all of that, and include skill.

 

Another good point. I think though that some people equate learning the mechanics and memorizing them to skill though.

 

IDK

What you've done is say that a person's memory isn't factoring in with their 'skill' and that is simply foolish. Remembering the game mechanics and how they work is a vital part of skill and to overlook that is just mind-boggling. Granted, what you do with these remembered mechanics is the other part of skill, but to so blithely dismiss memory...well, it's the difference between 'mere opinion' and 'informed opinion.'

The former, what you are offering, doesn't offer any supporting details and is largely inflammatory. The latter, what you are not offering, is based on some appreciable level of detail. The latter is what really belongs here, not merely people opining about this or that. If you think that one sentence was absolutely necessary to add, much like the poster you're quoting, you're missing the point of discussion and debate.