Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Onomas

 

 

"MMORPG better for the entire community" .. LOL

MMOs are games .. if they are fun, i will play. Better for the entire community? Are you doing charity or something?

 

Well actualy us older gamers put the community before the game. Community is what makes a good game. Not being led around on a leash. You can have the most perfect game, and if the community is horrible, it just ruins it. With a good community you are less likely getting griefed, scammed, pk'ed, and so many other things you say is wrong with mmorpg's.

Just saying, but obviously you are a solo guy so you care less for the community or making a moorpg better.

I totally agree with op.

 

I loved Ultima Online. Was fortunate enough to start playing it a few months after it released.

Haven't found another mmo that could top it. Only one that came somewhat close to edging up to it was Vanguard Saga of Heroes but that was themepark as well.

People think sandbox can't cut it but they are wrong. If Ultima Online 2 was released with the same ruleset, skills etc (circa 2nd age) with graphics a notch or two below skyrims it would be insanely popular, Especially if marketed right.

In themepark its about what level you are that dictates your actions.

In a sandbox with a developed world, it's what "you want to do" that dictates your actions (build your house, dungeon dive for items n gold, harvest resources to work crafting, etc etc

 

So ya, best thing I got atm is Wurm Online.

Originally posted by Onomas

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Onomas

 

 

"MMORPG better for the entire community" .. LOL

MMOs are games .. if they are fun, i will play. Better for the entire community? Are you doing charity or something?

 

Well actualy us older gamers put the community before the game. Community is what makes a good game. Not being led around on a leash. You can have the most perfect game, and if the community is horrible, it just ruins it. With a good community you are less likely getting griefed, scammed, pk'ed, and so many other things you say is wrong with mmorpg's.

Just saying, but obviously you are a solo guy so you care less for the community or making a moorpg better.

"Wrong" .. once again .. your preference.

I am probably as old as you are .. or more. Have you played anything MMO like games before UO? I did .. a $2 per hour online "MMO" called Kingdom of Drakkar.

And i reject the you need a "community" to have fun idea. Why you even need a community? I play a lone wolf in PS2 ... there is zero community for me, and it is great fun to head shot people.

In D3, i have a couple of people on friend list but it is not like i need them or anything. It is not difficult to find group. You said "With a good community you are less likely getting griefed, scammed, pk'ed," .. why do i even NEED a community to achieve all that? I just need to pick a game that don't have mechanics to grief me.

And you are right .. i care less for "making a MMORPG better". I don't play games to make anything better .. i play games to have fun. And if a MMORPG is not "better", it is not like i cannot find another.

BTW, i am not a totally soloer. I was in a WOW raiding guild for a while. Raiding is too much work. There is a schedule, and you have to commit to hours of practice. LFR is much better. See the content, no commitment. Quit any time.

 

 

Originally posted by Dwarfman420

I totally agree with op.

 

I loved Ultima Online. Was fortunate enough to start playing it a few months after it released.

Haven't found another mmo that could top it. Only one that came somewhat close to edging up to it was Vanguard Saga of Heroes but that was themepark as well.

People think sandbox can't cut it but they are wrong. If Ultima Online 2 was released with the same ruleset, skills etc with graphics a notch or two below skyrims it would be insanely popular, Especially if marketed right.

I totally disagree with OP.

I dislike Ultima Online. Was unfortuante enough to start playing the beta because there is nothing else.

Any MMO afterwards is better. Jump to EQ right away.

If ultima online 2 was released with same ruleset, skills, i won't touch it with a ten foot pole. Clicking a rock for 1000 times to level up mining, really?

We want this and we want that...make it yourself.

---

Originally posted by nariusseldon

---

Originally posted by lizardbones I still think the biggest obstacle to that kind of stuff is the players themselves. They would find a way to break it, or to manipulate it. The town would yo-yo between prosperity and slums on a daily basis because guilds would find a way to both eliminate the goblins or allow them to over run the town on demand. Like in the original UO, when they tried to have dynamic mobs and monsters, but players just killed them so fast, the developers had to give up and just have them spawn in randomly.  

---

That is the point. If you think it costs a lot to stop bots and root out cheaters, think about what happen to testing costs, and time cycle of player management if you allows even more world like interactions.

Don't think it will make a very fun game .. but devs are welcomed to spend billions to prove me wrong.

---

The first step towards something like this was faction grinds. It didn't change the world, but it did change the response of certain NPCs towards your character. It doesn't seem to have progressed very far since those first steps though.

I think the idea has a lot of merit. But the details need work.

Actually, the detail I'd work on is that it probably needs to happen someplace other than an MMO. Small groups of players either on private servers or small scale servers run by the developer. Like TESO's idea of mega server with channels, except each channel would be much smaller than what they are planning.

So...I don't know where that takes me. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

Originally posted by lizardbones


The first step towards something like this was faction grinds. It didn't change the world, but it did change the response of certain NPCs towards your character. It doesn't seem to have progressed very far since those first steps though.

I think the idea has a lot of merit. But the details need work.

Actually, the detail I'd work on is that it probably needs to happen someplace other than an MMO. Small groups of players either on private servers or small scale servers run by the developer. Like TESO's idea of mega server with channels, except each channel would be much smaller than what they are planning.

So...I don't know where that takes me. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

 

The question is do we need a step "toward this". Take WOW as an example. Do anyone actually care what the NPC will say and grind faction? People grind faction because of the rewards.

The moment to moment gameplay is more important (for me) than the larger world. If killing mobs is not fun (so the combat mechanics need to be fun), i wouldn't kill 10000 to improve my faction. If it is fun, i would do it for much less reward.

 

@nariusseldon

Old n salty ain't no way to go through life pops.

As you said in another post "Fun is subjective. Obviously what is fun for you is not for me."

So in closing, sorry your so bitter but at least you get the good parking right?

Originally posted by Dwarfman420

Old n salty ain't no way to go through life pops.

As you said in another post "Fun is subjective. Obviously what is fun for you is not for me."

So in closing, sorry your so bitter but at least you get the good parking right?

lol

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by lizardbones


The first step towards something like this was faction grinds. It didn't change the world, but it did change the response of certain NPCs towards your character. It doesn't seem to have progressed very far since those first steps though.

I think the idea has a lot of merit. But the details need work.

Actually, the detail I'd work on is that it probably needs to happen someplace other than an MMO. Small groups of players either on private servers or small scale servers run by the developer. Like TESO's idea of mega server with channels, except each channel would be much smaller than what they are planning.

So...I don't know where that takes me. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

 

The question is do we need a step "toward this". Take WOW as an example. Do anyone actually care what the NPC will say and grind faction? People grind faction because of the rewards.

The moment to moment gameplay is more important (for me) than the larger world. If killing mobs is not fun (so the combat mechanics need to be fun), i wouldn't kill 10000 to improve my faction. If it is fun, i would do it for much less reward.

 

So what you are saying is :

Don't change for the better, because its already doing better already, and by improving and moving at the same direction as it is currently its the best thing. But if its moving in the wrong direction it still don't matter because its only meant as entertainment so once its novelity wears off, then move on to the next fun activity. 

Hmmmm.... Okay!!

Back to topic, I believe that in order for MMORPG to improve and bring longevity to its games and get itself back to something where it will last for years. Who knows if its better or the best way? But I do believe Making Worlds instead of Games will benefit in the long run. But still, I don't have crystal balls or an Psychic, but I don't like the current MMO market. 

 

Originally posted by Lobotomist

Originally posted by Quirhid
 

Based on design concept.

Aw, come on! How can you call practically every themepark a clone and then be pedantic about this?

Originally posted by Lucioon

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by lizardbones


The first step towards something like this was faction grinds. It didn't change the world, but it did change the response of certain NPCs towards your character. It doesn't seem to have progressed very far since those first steps though.

I think the idea has a lot of merit. But the details need work.

Actually, the detail I'd work on is that it probably needs to happen someplace other than an MMO. Small groups of players either on private servers or small scale servers run by the developer. Like TESO's idea of mega server with channels, except each channel would be much smaller than what they are planning.

So...I don't know where that takes me. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

 

The question is do we need a step "toward this". Take WOW as an example. Do anyone actually care what the NPC will say and grind faction? People grind faction because of the rewards.

The moment to moment gameplay is more important (for me) than the larger world. If killing mobs is not fun (so the combat mechanics need to be fun), i wouldn't kill 10000 to improve my faction. If it is fun, i would do it for much less reward.

 

So what you are saying is :

Don't change for the better, because its already doing better already, and by improving and moving at the same direction as it is currently its the best thing. But if its moving in the wrong direction it still don't matter because its only meant as entertainment so once its novelity wears off, then move on to the next fun activity. 

Hmmmm.... Okay!!

Back to topic, I believe that in order for MMORPG to improve and bring longevity to its games and get itself back to something where it will last for years. Who knows if its better or the best way? But I do believe Making Worlds instead of Games will benefit in the long run. But still, I don't have crystal balls or an Psychic, but I don't like the current MMO market. 

 

No what i am saying is that "better" is different for everyone. I stated what is important to me, and the free market decide.

What you term "better" may not be better for me.

And if it moves to the wrong direction for me, certainly it is true taht i can move to the next fun thing.

Don't assume what you think is "better" applies to everyone.

---

Originally posted by nariusseldon

---

Originally posted by lizardbones The first step towards something like this was faction grinds. It didn't change the world, but it did change the response of certain NPCs towards your character. It doesn't seem to have progressed very far since those first steps though. I think the idea has a lot of merit. But the details need work. Actually, the detail I'd work on is that it probably needs to happen someplace other than an MMO. Small groups of players either on private servers or small scale servers run by the developer. Like TESO's idea of mega server with channels, except each channel would be much smaller than what they are planning. So...I don't know where that takes me. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.  

---

The question is do we need a step "toward this". Take WOW as an example. Do anyone actually care what the NPC will say and grind faction? People grind faction because of the rewards.

The moment to moment gameplay is more important (for me) than the larger world. If killing mobs is not fun (so the combat mechanics need to be fun), i wouldn't kill 10000 to improve my faction. If it is fun, i would do it for much less reward.

 

---

It's not the grind part that gives some dynamic response from the world, it's the faction status part. It was limited to shops, and I think some dungeon access, but it changed how the world responded to the player. The grind part got to be pretty bad after awhile. It's never gotten better since.

I think there could be benefit to this kind of thing in MMOs, but at the same time, I think there's more benefit to a smaller scale. In an MMO, the changes have to be limited to what's visible by the player, or other players will lose out. So you get stuff like faction reputation. You also get players manipulating the system, which is just as bad. Meh.

I'm going to go with personal servers or much smaller scale servers would benefit a lot from dynamic or more interactive worlds. I'm not sold on doing this in MMOs. I'd need to see someone come up with an implementation like the village example that would easily scale up to hundreds or thousands of players.

Originally posted by lizardbones


I'm going to go with personal servers or much smaller scale servers would benefit a lot from dynamic or more interactive worlds. I'm not sold on doing this in MMOs. I'd need to see someone come up with an implementation like the village example that would easily scale up to hundreds or thousands of players.

 

I am not sold on the idea at all. There are plenty of fun/good games that are linear, or static without dynamic events. So i don't see it as a necessarily condition to have fun.

Even something like SKYRIM is just a lot of pre-scripted quests, and the main one is linear.

Some games like Diablo is totally static (with a choice of what quest point to start your dungeon run).

It is one of those things that sound good .. but is it really that necessarily to make a good game .. or a good MMO?

 

Originally posted by manakana
We want this and we want that...make it yourself.

All in good time.

But, this is a forum, it is here for discussing related topics to MMOG's...including expressing wants, if you do not like reading people expressing their wants please do not read these threads.

But I will agree with you that words alone are not enough and some action is in order, for now my action is to close my wallet on every new Themepark.

Originally posted by Cecropia

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by toddze

One problem, the majority of MMO players are not true MMO players, most are single player rpg players.

Why is this a "problem"? MMO should be adapting to players, not the other way around.

There is nothing sacred about "true MMOs" .. they are just a form of entertainment.

Enough already, we all understand that games are entertainment. You are not having an epiphany the 20 times a day you post this. lol.

Also, I am completely aware that you are struggling to understand why some of us hold this genre in a different light. A lot of us treat MMOs as more of a hobby than a mere game. They aren't "sacred", that's just being dramatic and silly. The concept of playing a game in a huge world with massive amounts of other players, that had so much to offer that people could potentially play for periods longer than a few weeks or months is what brought me here. Commitment to a good mmo does not mean that that's the only game that can be played. I have still remained a RTS/FPS gamer throughout my time with MMOs.

Singleplayer/multiplayer online games have all benefitted from borrowed MMO features and design. MMOs, on the hand, have had their foundation ripped out and are quickly losing any sense of what they were intended for. Now we have people literally gobbling them up like potato chips because they have zero lasting power. MMOs really got the shit end of the stick as these new disposable gamers started flooding the industry. 

You might be having a fiesta with this unfortunate abomination, but surely you can see why so many of us do not like where this genre is heading. Frankly, when we do get to the other side, I doubt many will be thrilled with the end result; yourself included.

And naturally these sort of players believe with a breathtaking degree to certainty that MMOs cannot be anything other than flash in the pan affairs - and that designers cannot create persistently engaging worlds, or reconcile themepark and sandbox successfully.

They are as 'fast food' in their thinking as their gaming.

In some games you can make it yourself, but in the vast majority that is not allowed. I would love to see a MMO that could be modded like ES but doubt even the new Neverwinter would allow that much control.

Updates of whatever sort have to be official ones everyone gets. But will that view hold out? We already have players playing from differant servers in PvP zones. This makes no sense whatsoever. So if a village springs up out of nowhere does it matter that the event makes no sense?

I agree with OP, up until he starts talking about sandboxes being 'dead worlds' where players build *everything*.

 

I think that's actually a problem.  There is no reason a sandbox needs to be dead.  Look at your primary example, UO.  UO had a vibrant world, rich in lore (obviously) with a lot going on in many ways.  PvE, PvP, etc etc.  Then on TOP of all the pre-made systems, players had the ability to interact with and change that world in many ways.  That, to me, is what a sandbox should be.

 

That said, I would surely be interested in trying an MMO where players do in fact build everything.  But the ideal world, to me, would pretty much be an updated UO type game, only larger and scope and modernized.  You could, as other posters have said, throw in some themepark elements to it to broaden its appeal.

 

Also I find it funny that so many in this thread come to post their disagreements so vehemently.  Obviously not every player is the same.  The issue is, if you prefer the standard themepark MMO which is being represented by the genre currently, then you can go play those games.  Nothing wrong with players who want something else discussing their ideas.  Nobody is going to force you to sit down and play a sandbox that you wouldn't enjoy, should one be released.  Sheesh.

Originally posted by Suraknar

But I will agree with you that words alone are not enough and some action is in order, for now my action is to close my wallet on every new Themepark.

How is that working out so far?

 

---

Originally posted by nariusseldon

---

Originally posted by lizardbones I'm going to go with personal servers or much smaller scale servers would benefit a lot from dynamic or more interactive worlds. I'm not sold on doing this in MMOs. I'd need to see someone come up with an implementation like the village example that would easily scale up to hundreds or thousands of players.  

---

I am not sold on the idea at all. There are plenty of fun/good games that are linear, or static without dynamic events. So i don't see it as a necessarily condition to have fun.

Even something like SKYRIM is just a lot of pre-scripted quests, and the main one is linear.

Some games like Diablo is totally static (with a choice of what quest point to start your dungeon run).

It is one of those things that sound good .. but is it really that necessarily to make a good game .. or a good MMO?

 

---

I think it's something that would be good to explore in addition to the existing systems being employed. If there was an MMORPG where such systems existed, and they also worked well with hundreds or thousands of people, then that's a good thing. Doesn't mean I would play the game, but I'm a fan of competition and choice.