Trending Games | The Crew | Landmark | Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor | WildStar

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,850,619 Users Online:0
Games:732  Posts:6,223,941
Rift (Rift)
Trion Worlds | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 03/01/11)  | Pub:Trion Worlds
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:Free | Pay Type:Free | Monthly Fee:Free
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

General Discussion Forum » The Pub at MMORPG.COM » We dont want games - we want worlds.

37 Pages First « 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 » Last Search
735 posts found
  Lucioon

Novice Member

Joined: 1/12/06
Posts: 840

11/16/12 11:13:29 AM#141
Originally posted by Nineven

 

I agree 100%

Nothing makes me more sad than to see MMO's DE-EVOLVE.

Back when they just started hitting the market, there were quite a few REALLY WELL DEVELOPED MMO's. Because they took into account the 'idea' of a virtual world, and created them as such. Blizzard was a both a curse and a blessing for the genre, they completely ruined the idea of a virtual world, but at the same time brought MMO's to the forefront, and to the serious masses. Ever since WoW's release, innovative MMO's have gone by the way side, the industry de-evolved to make a buck, which is fucking pathetic and sickening. The most fulfilling part of it, is all of these 'money-maker' games have fucking TANKED HARDCORE. So instead of innovating, yet again they go F2P trying to make money that way - which it has worked, and I like the idea to a certain extent.

MMORPG's in my opinion have always had the potential to evolve into virtual worlds, and be the best games on the market because of aggressive (but not alienating) innovation. I can sympathize with you man, when I was younger, I didn't want to play Mario Bros. multiplayer - the idea of what I was looking for came when I was playing the original Wing Commander, and they wouldn't let me fly from space down to a planet -  I wanted to feel like I lived in that world. Yet to this day the only game that has come remotely close to doing this is EVE and the original SWG.

I can tell you the future of MMORPG's ISN'T MMORPG's, it's MMOWSG's - massively multiplayer online world simulation games. The definition plays on realism, without sacrificing the fun factor of the game. As we watch more and more games go F2P, we will soon a movement towards just making money in games as we play them. Take farming gold for example: IT SUCKS because it takes so long. Imagine simply playing your favorite game and at the end of the day looking at your currency, knowing that you just made that money in real cash having fun playing your game. That is the future of the genre, and the first developer that incorporates this http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-step-into-the-game with a real cash economy that DOESN'T suck from the grind like Entropia Universe is not only going to redefine the genre, but more than likely tear Blizzard a new asshole.

 Blizzard really isn't at fault here, they developed a world , with set rules and laws for the players. Then everyone afterwards, took that same rule and laws set by WOW and changed the landscape. Thats why we are all tired of it, its just the same virtual world rules and laws that has a new paint job, it was great the first few years, but its almost a decade and we are just very tired of the same virtual world. As Gamers, I wanted a new world, with new rules and new laws, that helps me escape my real one.

Currently, if you look at various forums of single player games, there will always be talks about getting co-op as an Multiplayer aspect for the next game. Its definitely a trend, but its a trend that is moving away from Virtual worlds. And more as an add-on to an established world. Which in my opinion, ruins the experience than adding to it. 

Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19506

11/16/12 2:38:58 PM#142
Originally posted by Axxar
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Cephus404
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Axxar
I really enjoyed Skyrim. I didn't think the story or combat system were particularly great, and the characters you meet are very shallow. But the world they've scupted is fantastic, with great attention to detail. It was a joy to explore and behold.

It was fun for me for a while .. but it got too repetitive and traveling became a chore. Thus, i never finish it.

I prefer games like Deus Ex or Dishonored where the core gameplay is fun, and interesting things happen all the time.

Seriously, how can travel in Skyrim be a chore when you can fast-travel to anyplace you've ever been?  You have to go somewhere else, look at the map, pick the closest place you've ever been, teleport there and run for a minute or two.  Once I've done some basic exploring of the world, I can get to any point on the map in no more than 60 seconds.

You have to be there first. Some of the travelling .. say to north (i remember going to the mage college or something) ... too much walking around the same kind of terrain.

You will probably laugh, but I completed the game without ever using fast travelling, except to recover a horse I couldn't find - then I would fast travel to my current location to make it appear again.

i did. The horse is actually kind of slow. I know Skyrim is popular but just not my cup of tea. Dishonored, Deus Ex, Diablo 3, BL are all more entertaining games for me.

 

 

  Cephus404

Elite Member

Joined: 2/27/08
Posts: 3680

11/16/12 2:43:36 PM#143
Originally posted by nariusseldon

You have to be there first. Some of the travelling .. say to north (i remember going to the mage college or something) ... too much walking around the same kind of terrain.

Honestly, and I don't mean to get too far off topic, let's say for example that you are walking from Whiterun to Winterhold, it is a long walk if that's all you do is walk and kill wandering monsters.  However, Skyrim is absolutely packed with locations, during the walk you should easily have located 10+ sites, each of which you could go into and clear, whether you have the associated quest or not.  Once you get the quest, the site gets restocked anyhow.  So it's not a boring walk with nothing to do unless you choose to make it that way.  What could have been a 20 minute walk could easily have turned into a 3 hour trek punctuated with a dozen dungeons.

Heck, I used to do that all the time.  I'd start in Whiterun and pick a direction and just walk that way.  That's how I got so many sites I could fast-travel to, I just went walking and clearing dungeons.

Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19506

11/16/12 2:44:39 PM#144
Originally posted by Banaghran
Originally posted by nariusseldon


What narrow? In fact, i think my view is more open .. nothing is sacred .. and all possibility (say without a world) should be considered.

What i am arguing is that if certain features (like i am forced to spend 20 min traveling before fighting in a dungeon) do not add fun to me, then i do not want it in my game. It is a feature by feature determination.

No one says atmosphere and story are not important. But i do enjoy the combat and progression first and foremost.

And why do you think i play MMOs and put up with some of the slower aspect of it? That is because i took the whole picture into account. I can't completely get rid of walking if i like the wow classes, right?

Narrow because you always seem to view it as combat + feature, not the feature itself, you talk about travelling in the context of it being that thing that prevents you from doing combat, not about travelling itself (even if it is the worst possible thing we can talk about, travelling is quite uneventful usually :( ).

Dunno, maybe it is a defect, but i do understand people who get the same excitement as you have from killing a monster by mining that rare mineral, respeccing/regearing just so that they can walk in the desert without water, completing that quest, crafting that excellent necklace, trading that recipe, and i want them in my game.

In general, i think people who "endure" the slower aspects of mmos are well cared for atm, we should look after the people who "endure" combat and progression for a change. :)

(in b4 "mmos ARE combat and progression" :) ) 

Flame on!

:)

Well .. if you look at it that way .. then yes. My PREFERENCE is narrow. But i do consider all options. It is not like i haven't TRIED slow travel, and decided that it is a waste of my leisure time. It is not like i haven't tried a "realistic" game like the SIMS and decide decorating a room is not my idea of fun.

But, my view is also BROADER in the sense that i do not limit myself to see MMO in a certain mold. If there is no world, but lots of MMO type features, i will take a look and see if it fits my style of play.

And to be fair, i do enjoy more than just combat gameplay. Stealth travel is also one of them. In a game like Deus Ex, Dishonored or Splinter Cell, going from point A to B *is* exciting because you have to use your power and abilities (like those stealth abilities in Deus Ex or Blink in Dishonored) to avoid being detected. I have also no problem fighting my way from point A to B.

Doing nothing but walk .. i do havea  problem with.

And you should also open to other types of games. People who like big worlds and slow travel have Fallout 3 and Skyrim, and countless GTA. MMOs are not the only games out there.

  DAS1337

Novice Member

Joined: 11/28/07
Posts: 2378

11/16/12 2:45:18 PM#145
Originally posted by Ironfungus
If it proves to be profitable then we might see it happen.

Ultima Online already proved it.  What more do you need?

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19506

11/16/12 2:48:11 PM#146
Originally posted by Cephus404
Originally posted by nariusseldon

You have to be there first. Some of the travelling .. say to north (i remember going to the mage college or something) ... too much walking around the same kind of terrain.

Honestly, and I don't mean to get too far off topic, let's say for example that you are walking from Whiterun to Winterhold, it is a long walk if that's all you do is walk and kill wandering monsters.  However, Skyrim is absolutely packed with locations, during the walk you should easily have located 10+ sites, each of which you could go into and clear, whether you have the associated quest or not.  Once you get the quest, the site gets restocked anyhow.  So it's not a boring walk with nothing to do unless you choose to make it that way.  What could have been a 20 minute walk could easily have turned into a 3 hour trek punctuated with a dozen dungeons.

Heck, I used to do that all the time.  I'd start in Whiterun and pick a direction and just walk that way.  That's how I got so many sites I could fast-travel to, I just went walking and clearing dungeons.

But most of those locations are generic. There is where combat comes in. In Diablo 3, mobs have some variety but essentially you are fighting the same mob in the same random dungeon again and again. I like that because the combat mechanics is fun (and i am not going into why in this post, we can discuss WHAT combat i find fun later).

The problem with Skyrim is that combat is just NOT fun for me.

Personally, location, size of worlds are all pretty much unimportant to me. The core gameplay is. Deus Ex is good ... primarily because of the mechanics that let you hack, stealth or fight in in interesting (and you can combine) ways. It also have differnet locations to add flavor. But flavor means nothing (to me) if the core gameplay is not entertaining.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10564

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

11/16/12 2:50:03 PM#147


Originally posted by DAS1337

Originally posted by Ironfungus If it proves to be profitable then we might see it happen.
Ultima Online already proved it.  What more do you need?



UO did not cost fifty million dollars to develop, it peaked at less than 300k players and those players rapidly left when other options became available.

A lot more is needed.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Jemcrystal

Elite Member

Joined: 1/02/08
Posts: 1319

Let em put a slave ring thru u're nose u're prob not going to like where they're taking you. Think.

11/16/12 3:14:44 PM#148

We're going to need more than just a world to play in but yeah, that concept is very appealing to a lot of us.  We're in a loop hole of doom atm.  Companies are asking developers to build them a nice, quick cheezy game that will turn a profit.  They're releasing, making a little bit of money, and thinking "gawd, what a pain in the ass this was I shud a listn to mom and become a lawyer or manga artist instead."  Producing and maintaining is a beatch people and I'm sure it's figured in.  No one is thinking along the lines of "make something unique and awesome that will be spoken of in history books for generations to come!"

 

We need a pervasive simulative world.  Trees grow.  Flowers bloom.  Rabbits can be skinned for pelts but don't beat you up cause thats STUPID and dont drop armor because thats STUPIDER.

 

We need it not to lag on anyone's PC.  That's impossible.  I propose developing a new type of game station in the shape of PC's instead of Wii's, X-box, PlayStation, or DS's.  AND MAKE IT CHEAPER THAN BUYING A HOME COMPUTER.

 

No auto log out after idle for 5 minutes.  Auto log out after idle for 1 1/2 hrs (except personal shops).

 

Auction House yes.  Limit three digits so highest price can only be $999 gold.

 

No personal shop on person.  Personal Shop be stalls in home city that can be rented for 24hrs at a time, no consecutives, and earned thru in game privileges like quests, rep, etc.  Better rep get shop brownies/moogles w/e.  [I hate the disorganized way shops are splayed out in games and lagging up the place.  I hate how they bind a player char to one spot.]

 

No lvl cap; skill caps only (like Mabinogi bloody cheezy game I keep playing).

 

Complex animations akin to Sims 2.  Using toilet, eating at dinning tables, watching plays; all go to ONE bar called overall emotional health or stamina, w/e.  Give player choice of many things they can do to raise this bar so if they wanted to play a char that never used the john or ate food then great.

 

Farms.  Real economy.  I still like medieval not space age but...

 

Have planet zones but keep continents - space travel avail but not space game.  

 

LET US DESIGN OUR OWN ARMOR.  

 

Dragon / pet / mount  breeding on TS2 breeding system where you don't know what your will get.  Breed red dragon with white dragon get either a red and white, pink, polka dot, etc.  Dna carry to the 10th generation.  That was Sims 2 brilliance; simulated genetics.

 

Mobs more realistic.  No respawns.  Can raise young.  Need to keep from extinction.  Genetics lab.  Farms.  Ecology.

 

NO F'ING BOUND ITEMS EVER AGAIN EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130324141403/gaea-the-legendary-realm/images/4/47/Illena1.jpg

  Banaghran

Novice Member

Joined: 1/17/12
Posts: 872

11/16/12 4:34:08 PM#149
Originally posted by nariusseldon

And you should also open to other types of games. People who like big worlds and slow travel have Fallout 3 and Skyrim, and countless GTA. MMOs are not the only games out there.

Well, i could very well argue the opposite, that you have more than enough arcade games and action rpgs :)

But in the end it is like arguing in circles, and the essence gets lost.

You actually mentioned a thing which very well illustrates why i think we have gone too far towards arcade games and action rpgs, stealth. Back in the day a stealth class could enter a dungeon/instance, loot some chests, gather some resources for itself or to trade with other players, lets say someone who is good at aoe farming and has a easier access to other resources. This aspect is nonexistent now. Not even mentioning other advantages which had to be payed for with disadvantages. But at a point someone decided it is not fun, the life threatening dilemma of picking a stealth class or not, or coming up with content that would be meaningful for all (stealth, aoe, groupers and so on)  while not excessively favoring either.

I dont see that as progres, even if i can understand that if combat is your preference it may seem as progress, due to the fad in recent years that everything below 10 keybinds and 3 keypresses per second is for noobs (and not even mentioning "your opponent has done XYZ, YOU HAVE TO DO ASDF ID THE NEXT 2 SECONDS OR YOU WILL DIE!!!!1!1!!!1" :) )

Flame on!

:)

 

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19506

11/16/12 5:06:03 PM#150
Originally posted by Banaghran
Originally posted by nariusseldon

And you should also open to other types of games. People who like big worlds and slow travel have Fallout 3 and Skyrim, and countless GTA. MMOs are not the only games out there.

Well, i could very well argue the opposite, that you have more than enough arcade games and action rpgs :)

But in the end it is like arguing in circles, and the essence gets lost.

You actually mentioned a thing which very well illustrates why i think we have gone too far towards arcade games and action rpgs, stealth. Back in the day a stealth class could enter a dungeon/instance, loot some chests, gather some resources for itself or to trade with other players, lets say someone who is good at aoe farming and has a easier access to other resources. This aspect is nonexistent now. Not even mentioning other advantages which had to be payed for with disadvantages. But at a point someone decided it is not fun, the life threatening dilemma of picking a stealth class or not, or coming up with content that would be meaningful for all (stealth, aoe, groupers and so on)  while not excessively favoring either.

I dont see that as progres, even if i can understand that if combat is your preference it may seem as progress, due to the fad in recent years that everything below 10 keybinds and 3 keypresses per second is for noobs (and not even mentioning "your opponent has done XYZ, YOU HAVE TO DO ASDF ID THE NEXT 2 SECONDS OR YOU WILL DIE!!!!1!1!!!1" :) )

Flame on!

:)

 

Arcade games .. may be. Action RPG ... not so much. How many action RPGs (with online co-op) are released in 2012?

I would also make a difference between what you call stealth and what i call steath. There is NO true steath class in MMOs before. Not one that focuses on getting from point A to B undetected, by the use of many abilities (like in Thief). Noise/visual detection is simply not modelled in old, nor new MMOs.

I am not talking about sneak up with invis and nab one chest. I am talking about steath as a core gameplay element. To be fair, MMO is probably not the best setting to do stealth. It is probably better done in SP games.

Well, aside from reacting with the right skill, you also have to consider the meta game that one has to have the "ASDF" skill before it will work. I think customizing what skill to bring is another interesting aspect of combat. Aside from that, there are lots of other progress, like the use of CDs and procs .. which were not there in the EQ/UO days. Managing those are fun.

  Baramos79

Novice Member

Joined: 10/12/12
Posts: 69

11/16/12 9:44:34 PM#151
Originally posted by Lobotomist

We dont want games - we want worlds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you!

  Greymantle4

Elite Member

Joined: 2/27/07
Posts: 729

11/16/12 9:50:29 PM#152
Originally posted by Baramos79
Originally posted by Lobotomist

We dont want games - we want worlds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you!

Yes this pretty much sums it up. 

  Banaghran

Novice Member

Joined: 1/17/12
Posts: 872

11/17/12 7:56:01 AM#153
Originally posted by nariusseldon

Arcade games .. may be. Action RPG ... not so much. How many action RPGs (with online co-op) are released in 2012?

I would also make a difference between what you call stealth and what i call steath. There is NO true steath class in MMOs before. Not one that focuses on getting from point A to B undetected, by the use of many abilities (like in Thief). Noise/visual detection is simply not modelled in old, nor new MMOs.

I am not talking about sneak up with invis and nab one chest. I am talking about steath as a core gameplay element. To be fair, MMO is probably not the best setting to do stealth. It is probably better done in SP games.

Well, aside from reacting with the right skill, you also have to consider the meta game that one has to have the "ASDF" skill before it will work. I think customizing what skill to bring is another interesting aspect of combat. Aside from that, there are lots of other progress, like the use of CDs and procs .. which were not there in the EQ/UO days. Managing those are fun.

As for action rpgs, maybe good point, there are not THAT many of them coming out every year (and we could argue about whether or not they should, you know, replayability, longevity), however, 2012 is a bad year to make the point, d3 came out, tl2 came out, poe is in a playable state WITH a engame for hardcore people.

As for stealth, we are once again at combat, in this sense that you seem to replace the challenge of beating a monster with the challenge to evade it, throwing in another well talked about foggy concept - "core gameplay". I simply look at it more strategically, if i can put it that way. What you can do with it >> how specifically you are doing it.

As for the combat metagame, It is fun to a point, as everything, where grind is discouraging people with the number of monsters to kill and similar things, we are now dangerously close to discourage players by the sheer amount of decisions needed is a small timeframe, which is as dangerous, if not more, due to lag and other online limitations (and less and less posibilities to avoid the decisionmaking by putting in more "work" outside combat). Look at class composition, we fool ourselves in thinking that players go for fotm because of power and that they want to perform at "150%" due to being op, but in reality for most people it stops at 100% with just the advantage of being 50% less effort. That is why a hard to do fotm op thing never is as visible as one that is easy to pull off.

Flame on!

:)

  maccarthur2004

Hard Core Member

Joined: 10/02/12
Posts: 488

11/17/12 9:16:52 AM#154
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by ezduzit

We the consumers are to blame. Players like mmo's like WoW (a game) and companies ran with it. Forever changing the face of world gaming. 

Thank God Sandbox MMO's are making a comback. 

"Blame"? It is what it is.

So what if people like WOW more than EQ and UO. The old days are not coming back. It is called progress. MMOs are much better games today.

Better games, maybe. Better worlds...definitely no. 

"What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

  Siug

Advanced Member

Joined: 5/02/12
Posts: 984

11/17/12 9:19:47 AM#155
Personally I prefer good games because I have one world already where I live in. I don't need more worlds. Just a good game is all I want.
  User Deleted
11/17/12 9:43:36 AM#156
Originally posted by Piiritus
Personally I prefer good games because I have one world already where I live in. I don't need more worlds. Just a good game is all I want.

There are already thousands upon thousands of games. Using your line of reasoning you shouldn't want another one of those either.

  Onomas

Novice Member

Joined: 7/05/11
Posts: 1160

Sandbox is your only hope for a decent mmo ;)

11/17/12 9:53:37 AM#157
Originally posted by bunnyhopper
Originally posted by Piiritus
Personally I prefer good games because I have one world already where I live in. I don't need more worlds. Just a good game is all I want.

There are already thousands upon thousands of games. Using your line of reasoning you shouldn't want another one of those either.

 

Want just a game, go play a console RPG game. Don't try turning mmorpg's into console games. Mmorpg are meant to be huge with lots of features, social aspects, and much more. Stop trying to reason for dumbing down mmorpg's.
  User Deleted
11/17/12 10:02:46 AM#158
Originally posted by Onomas
Originally posted by bunnyhopper
Originally posted by Piiritus
Personally I prefer good games because I have one world already where I live in. I don't need more worlds. Just a good game is all I want.

There are already thousands upon thousands of games. Using your line of reasoning you shouldn't want another one of those either.

 

Want just a game, go play a console RPG game. Don't try turning mmorpg's into console games. Mmorpg are meant to be huge with lots of features, social aspects, and much more. Stop trying to reason for dumbing down mmorpg's.

Is that aimed at me?

  Onomas

Novice Member

Joined: 7/05/11
Posts: 1160

Sandbox is your only hope for a decent mmo ;)

11/17/12 10:12:29 AM#159
No to the guy u quoted. Was agreeing with u in a way, just didn't tell u ;-)
  maccarthur2004

Hard Core Member

Joined: 10/02/12
Posts: 488

11/17/12 10:15:41 AM#160
Originally posted by Piiritus
Personally I prefer good games because I have one world already where I live in. I don't need more worlds. Just a good game is all I want.

But in our real world we can't much be a feudal lord, a pirate, a knight, a king, a hero, to participate in political intrigues, fight for conquer lands or defend ours, search treasures, etc etc etc with or againts characters controled by actual human brains.

 

 

 

 

"What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

37 Pages First « 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 » Last Search