Almost every MMORPG has PVP to an extent, but if you want something so specific you can't say "Where's all the PVP?" at.  You're putting a title so general as PVP on something that is filled with specifics and adjectives.  What I'm reading is you're asking why there aren't any real first person shooter death  match type games out, in an MMORPG format.  Such as Planetside, if it's pace was a bit faster, and it's objectives a little more linear.

Fact is its hard to mix the two.  Twitch shooters rely on a more pinpoint accuracy to succeed.  You aim, you fire at your target you hit it.  You play a single player FPS and you can count on your bullets hitting their mark.  However you throw in bandwidth, in a game such as Unreal Tournament or Quake 3, and you're relying on people having not only a good enough computer to run the game itself, but a good enough connection to handle the fact that your computer is telling another persons computer where you are, and in turn processing where they are.  Now, you take it up a notch and go from 20-30 people at a time to 1-2,000 at a time, and it gets a little more hard.  Fact is lag plays am uch larger part in a twitch shooter than any other game.  You aim and fire at someone where you visually see them to be, that doesn't mean they are there, its just where your connection is telling you they are. When in fact they could be behind you, you get killed by the guy you just put a rocket into and then you're unhappy.

It would take a lot of technology to make it work, but more so a lot more cash that the developers have to spend on equipment to keep the game play consistent enough to be enjoyable, that on top of the resources every MMORPG needs, and thats more money than a normal RPG needs to run things.

That in short is why there aren't many candidates to fill the "spot" in question.  While there are some Shooter MMO titles in development, I'd try the trials before I buy into the game.

The video only made it harder to wait.  It looks great.  What's the big deal about having a tattoo, it fits the lore of your character's back story and its not like you can't cover it with a shirt of some sort.

I think my only fear is that it's not going to get the amount of players it deserves, or perhaps at least not enough to keep it running.  I have high hopes for the game, and I think for the most part they will be lived up to, but no matter how great a game is, if an MMORPG doesn't have enough players it will be moderately less "fun".

For the short time I played LOTRO on the RP server it was a fun experience, the tavern was constantly full of congregations of RP'ers, I found several RP guilds as well.  Unfortunately the game play itself was lacking.  Graphics and art design were great though.

Unfortunately my other favorites have all but died now.  Everquest 2's RP servers have a lot of RP'ers but the way the game is programed makes staged conflicts hard to make up.

WoW is by far the worst.

I think its interesting that you base games solely on who else plays them, other than RP'ers.  Even if a game came out that was totally tailored to the role players, this includes not only the game play and the game design, but the advertisement campaigns directly targeted role players, sighting their best features as the ones role players would enjoy, dedicating full staff of GM's to keeping the integrity of chat in a general character format - if the PERFECT RP game came out, do you really think that more than 50 percent of the people playing would really be an RP'er?

I just think you're asking too much, or setting your standards more than a little too high.  Short hand internet lingo has existed since the first chat room was put online.  It's the nature of human literature, acronyms have been the demon of languages for centuries.  I personally don't see the problem, but I think even if I did see it as an issue, that I would just have to swallow it up and get on with the show, because simply put there's nothing you can do to stop it in any game.  But like you said, ignoring it is the best solution.  I just don't think you're looking necessarily at the right issues.

You said yourself that it's not about the game its about the community that takes part in the ongoings of that game.  So why does it matter if body parts fly about when you chop people with your sword, or that there is a heavier focus on PVP than PVE (or vice versa)?  In every game there is that RP'er niche, for the most part, most small but some larger than others.  I just think if you don't want to play the game itself at least marginally - you're just doomed to be disappointed, there are much more efficient (and cheaper) ways to get your fill of role play then having to hunt it down in an MMORPG.

Furthermore I agree with most of your "previews" on the games.  WAR is going to be WoW 2, despite any differences in the game play, the players who leave WoW for WAR will make it so, and honestly I don't see the lore as appropriate for role playing, nor will the game design.  For instance WoW's design is basically designed so snug and limiting that it smothers most chances of role play, I don't see this as being any different.  Example, you can't speak to the opposite faction, as you can't understand them, which basically takes 50 percent of the common role playing scenarios out.

I'm as old fashioned as the next gamer, I would fight in text alone in EQ/EQ2 for hours, because the PVP wasn't enabled, epic battles of pure text... but at some point you have to be able to slice another players avatar otherwise what's the point in playing the game?  If all I'm doing is reading a chat box then I may as well uninstall and look for a role playing chat room.

I've always based the role play-ability of a game on the options in which the game gives you.  The quality as well as quantity of customization within the world, not limited to character creation options, but the ability to do things within the world.  Such as city building, home furnishing, options for player interactions that go past "good guy vs. bad guy".  I think that's why AOC is so intriguing.  You're there to fit yourself into the world the developers lay out for you, the more leeway you have to set out a storyline of your own, for you as well as other people to follow.  To create and define your own factions within that world, give you and your guild mates an agenda that isn't necessarily part of an NPC quest or PVP objective - and still be a viable reason to play. 

Anyway I tend to drudge on...I will say more on topic, that the games made by small developers without any real backing scare me away more than intrigue me.   Adellion is promising I'll admit, but from what I can find out about the developers behind it, its mostly a makeshift game.

Originally posted by Soara

Hmm I'd say besides these replies, I definately LOVED runescape from age 10-14. That's just me though.

I would DEFINATELY stay away from World of Warcraft.
Other good ones include Pirates of the Carribean online and Anarchy Online

Star Wars Galaxies has a wonderful community and just brilliant to get into especially if youre into Star Wars. 
as does Anarchy Online and i THINK City of Heroes (which has a very good theme I think 10 year olds would love).
(assuming at that age you don't complain like other people about content and graphics etc).

I didn't even think about City of Heroes, that would be a prime choice.  The short period I played I didn't encounter much if any bad situations with other players.  The content is great, and it should be easy enough for a 10 year old.

The problem with MMORPG's is that despite the game play and what goes on in the game with the interaction between a player and the game's NPC's is that you aren't alone.  No matter what game you play there will always be someone in there willing to cross a line whether it be something as simple as cursing, or something as appalling as racism/sexism.

But, as far as MMORPG's content goes, there are actually games geared towards kids, one comes to mind - Toontown, its geared towards children, and is actually free to play, no subscription fee.   If you're looking for a more substantial game with a larger player base then as much as I hate to recommend it - World of Warcraft.  With the large community you'll find a large amount of douche baggery, but the fact is its popular because its a simple game, that manages to be easy while simultaneously offering a challenge.

Just looking to see what game that's not out yet, that you guys are looking for.  I personally am looking forward to Age of Conan, because it reminds me of Shadowbane if it had been done right from the start.  It offers a wide variety of world customizations and interactions which in turn offers you a broader horizon in which to RP about or on.

I expect a lot of "WAR" responses which is unfortunate because I think that game is doomed to succeed.  By that I mean it will succeed in the same way WoW has, by namesake, and timing - not necessarily by game play, innovation, and other such adjectives that should decide the success of a videogame, as well as any other product in a set genre or sub genre.  Even after looking past the screen shots, and reading the literature, I just don't see what they're changing.  Sure they're idea for combat is intriguing but really that's it.  Unfortunately its title as the "WoW Killer" will be the reason everyone plays it, a reason to leave World of Warcraft after so many years of slavery under its virtual whip!

Anyway end rant, what about you guys/gals?

Originally posted by cmgangrel

 

Originally posted by Echelons

-If you have a RP server, set asside a few GM's that are there souly to stop non-RP or at least RP trolls from participating in the servers ongoings.

Note that I agree, that post is too long.

 

I will jump down to this point as the rest are pretty good. Depending on how large the game world is, you could end up with more GM's moderating purely for roleplaying "quality" than for helping resolve player issues/tickets.

 

Even inside CoH (which is a pretty small game world to be honest), even with 1GM per zone, you are looking at 15 or so GM's just for roleplaying "quality"... even then they could still miss the local chat just due to being out of range for it. And if they could read all the chat in a zone, then they are superhuman (especially if a zone gets hugely busy very fast)... maybe even not human.

Granted in a fantasy setting it is indeed a bit easier to work out when somebody is "out of character" but in a present day setting, it gets much much harder.

Also roleplaying concepts which fit the game world perfectly (say being a con artist like "Cut Me Throat Dibbler" from Discworld) COULD be very hard to portray with GM's (and infact the GM might end up missing the point)....

 

Most of the people I know come to RP servers not to RP, but because there is a more mature demographic playing there, so essentially they move there to get away from the proverbial noobs.  So if that's the general feeling behind RP servers my guess is that the problems a GM on such a server faces is a lot less intense than on a PVE or PVP server.

I think there are two major points that have to be addressed.  One, if a game isn't fun for every type of player, whether they be PVP, PVE or RP oriented, then it will go under and be non-existant within the first year.  That's the one major flaw of an MMORPG, to survive and be playable for however long you as a player want to play it, other players have to enjoy it as well.

That of course leads to the next point, the fact that you can't sacrifice other parts of a game to make another part of it "ultra-viable".  Fact of the matter is a game like World of Warcraft is just too watered down and attractive to the 13 year old, or the old married couple, its way too family friendly and easy - to have an established role playing community. 

So it's not necessarily the game play that has to be different, but the demographic that's attracted to said game.  For instance, EQ2 has a small but more serious role playing community than World of Warcraft.  Suppose you're role playing in a public place and a non role player rolls by in EQ2 9 times out of 10 they will ignore it or take part into it on the rare occasions they feel antsy.  In WoW if this happens we all know that 9 out of 10 players will make a ridiculous comment and troll you.

I think a developer can however, choose to make tweaks to certain expendable parts of a game that will contour to the playstyle of a role player.  One way is to make the way a player can play their character customizable.  Factions for one is a popular way to embed conflict into the mechanics of the game, which most games do.  However what a lot of these same games don't do is allow you to change between them.  For instance a Tauren can't decide to go to Alliance, which takes a whole slew of RP opprotunities out of the game.  But a Ogre can sure as heck put his allegiance with the queen in EQ2 and there's an opening for all sorts of interactions, back story modifications, etc.  Fact of the matter is the more customizable the entire experience you have during the span of the game you're playing the heavier a role player can weave himself into that world, with the inhabitants around him.  For instance the two top role playing experiences I've ever had in a role playing game took place in two games.  Shadowbane (god rest its soul) and Star Wars Galaxies before SOE decided to burn it to the ground with inadequacies and matches.   The reason is because within those world there were so many different things (a majority of which were player controlled) going on, that I could find a reason to role play almost constantly.  Within SWG I could sit for hours in the cantina on Tattooine and role play, then head out to a player made city and start an argument.  Start war with a guild and have gang wars that didn't require combat but vicious rhetoric.  Within Shadowbane, the free reign PVP system, and the ability create and siege entire player cities made the conflicts unlimited.  Factions were created by the players, not the developers, and that in itself made the possiblities for role play nearly unlimited. Sure the RP'ers have all but disappeared in those two games, but for a time they were popular enough to the non-RP'ers as well, that they survived for a time.  Both still alive today, even if they are in a decrepit state, suffering from virtual Alzheimer's as it forgets about its old players, and eventually its players forget about it.

I have always thought that a players ability to customize their looks to a major extent was an under-rated feature.  One of those issues that seems to be at the bottom of a developers list.  And admittedly it should be, but who says you can't show it the proper amount of time once you get to it on that list?

The point I'm trying to make is sure, it's the developers job to make their game accessible to all types of players.  And yes, many of the games out now seem to have forgotten the role players out there, instead focusing their game play on the PVE with a side of PVP.  But it's up to you as a role player to find a way to role play in the world they create, the developers can only make that harder or easier, they can never make it impossible.  Unfortunately, the longevity of a role playing demographic within a game is usually much shorter lived than a PVP or PVE community within the same game. 

But that said there are a few things I think should be required in MMORPG's for our (the rp'ers) sake...

-Either very dynamic player visual customization(Elder Scrolls), or a large number of race and class options (EQ2)

-Surnames, how hard is it to give me the option to have a last name? Yeesh.

-Either give us factions, or the freedom to create our own, its hard to role play without enemies, and even harder to role play when you can't fight said enemies.  I was forced to yell at my enemies in EQ2, this problem could have been remedied by giving guilds the ability to declare war on each other.  Granted this problem only applied to the religious zealots setting out to cleanse the queens population of the mud blooded :) rawr

-Don't get lazy on the visuals, and I dont mean on the graphic quallity of the game.  I mean why does 90 percent of my leather look the same with a slightly different shade of green or brown?  Give every armor a different look, ever sword a different bend in the blade or art on the hilt.

-Add places in a game that are clearly there for the role player.  Taverns that aren't filled with quest givers but with usable tables and chairs, music and even musical events.

-If you have a RP server, set asside a few GM's that are there souly to stop non-RP or at least RP trolls from participating in the servers ongoings.

Note that I agree, that post is too long.

Originally posted by Rhoklaw

Well, your not understanding the MMO market then. You don't want to be competing with whats already out there. If you don't bring something new and exciting to the table, then what do you have to offer the already flooded market that will entice people to play your newly developed game?

I'm not trying to be funny or sarcastic in any way when I say this, but VSoH actually compares to Dark Age of Camelot in terms of gameplay. No, it does not compare to EQ2 or WoW, its not even close. There are strong points to this game, that I can agree with, but combat is definately not this games strong point.

Also, take a deep breath of reality folks. This game is suppose to be released in roughly 3 weeks, correct? Can you honestly tell me, the game is ready as is? Do you get the sense of a complete game, having its final tweaks and adjustment phases almost complete? I don't know, I just don't find this game interesting to me at all and it really hurts me to say it cause I loved EQ so much. I'm pretty sure the game will turn around, but my guess is, it's going to take longer then 3 weeks.