Trending Games | WildStar | Elder Scrolls Online | World of Warcraft | Guild Wars 2

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,736,418 Users Online:0
Games:713  Posts:6,174,416
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System Req: PC | Out of date info?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 » Why the open world is immersive?

7 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Search
139 posts found
  Axehilt

Novice Member

Joined: 5/09/09
Posts: 7213

5/10/13 9:47:41 PM#121
Originally posted by Deivos

 that you seem so focused on a single way to do games.

Nowhere did I suggest there's one way to do games.

I merely pointed out that in the context of traditional MMORPGs, travel sucks and should therefore be minimized.  Simple and logical.

I've even called out a specific actual example of a game doing it another way.

So I guess that means you agree with everything I've said.  So stop getting bent out of shape, have a beer (it's friday!), and relax. :P

  SupportPlayerMM

Novice Member

Joined: 12/12/12
Posts: 335

5/10/13 10:06:09 PM#122
The ability to go go go without load zones, screens and instances adds to the ability and population... drama... pvp... and social environments.
  Dauzqul

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 2/10/12
Posts: 1229

5/10/13 10:44:43 PM#123
With a wide and open world, I don't feel as if my hand is held as tight.
  MMORPGRIP

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/08/13
Posts: 90

5/11/13 7:21:59 AM#124
Originally posted by Axehilt
Originally posted by MMORPGRIP

Raid content, dungeons, and boss fights may take some decision making and brain power the first few times until a group (Guild) gets the sequence down, after that it is auto-pilot. 

But just because you seem to enjoy instant travel to the next raid/dungeon does not mean everyone does. With travel...depending on how the game world is laid out...you have options for travel routes that may make it faster, may be safer, may take you past another objective on your way to another objective, etc. There were MANY such options in EQ. 

That's not to say travel cannot be made more interesting either...

- Unique landscape additions players can use for directional purposes. Random spawn rare mobs that wander the landscape and offer great challenge and reward. (Just as EQ had mobs that were well above the level range of the zone you could find).

- Random AI bandit attacks along roadways...possibly have multiple spawn locations and spawn times.

- Why not have longer day and night cycles (Possibly 6 to 8 real hours) where either different creatures at maybe even a different level range come out between cycles. Also making zones visited at lower levels while er.....leveling viable to higher levels for revisits if night cycle mobs were near cap.

Could go on and on with ideas. It is possible, for the sake of those who enjoy exploration, to make it more inviting. And even more inviting for those such as yourself who shy away from travel.

The decision-making involved in learning the fight is the very essence of fun in games.  Animals and humans use play specifically to derive pleasure from learning  -- from transitioning knowledge from something you have to actively think about, to the point where it's "auto-pilot".  (Koster, 2004)

After it's auto-pilot, of course it isn't fun!  There's no learning left.

What makes a game fun is the magnitude of that learning.  In a combat system your character is a system (ability rotation) and the mobs have a system (threat-based AI), and your teammates have systems (their ability sets), and the environment can have systems (pain fields, physics-based gameplay, etc), you have to not only worry about optimizing each of those systems individually, but figuring out how they interact with each other.

In travel you just have mob avoidance.  A solitary system which isn't interacting with other systems.

It's no surprise then which set of systems bores players faster.

And yes, if we stop talking about how travel has traditionally been ultra-boring, and start talking about adding new facets to travel, that begins to make it far more acceptable.  But we can't say "games need more travel" until after we add gameplay to travel.  Otherwise we're saying "games should be boring", which most players will disagree with.

You really aren't telling me anything I don't know. I understand how humans work as I am one after all.

Seems your just trying to make it sound more in depth than it is as far as gaming goes to make your point because really....ALL these games are the same thing over and over and over...just with different characters, maybe a different setting, and a different title (As far as MMORPG's are concerned). They are all lack luster...no innovation, no creativity, no staying power.

These damn companies need to start looking beyond trying to be or beat WoW and make something that stands out from the crowd. I'd bet then...they'd be far more likely to succeed and reach beyond the short life spans of these post-WoW era MMORPG's and make surprisingly more profit.

  Axehilt

Novice Member

Joined: 5/09/09
Posts: 7213

5/11/13 11:56:54 AM#125
Originally posted by Deivos

Or I could use the travel systems in the game and actually scoot my butt along, something that video didn't show.

One thing that video shows, and this video shows even better, is how I wasn't "lying" about AC1's mob density being much lighter and travel consequently being even more mindless than modern MMORPGs.

Before you accuse someone of not knowing reality and "lying", you should probably make sure you're not the one lying, because youtube videos do make it rather easy to call someone out on that, friend.

  Jacxolope

Elite Member

Joined: 1/15/13
Posts: 735

5/11/13 4:45:10 PM#126

All I see is people wanting to argue.

Back and forth.

-Its actually sad. I understand trolling sometimes (and it can be fun) and I understand debate/discussion/disagreement - Its healthy and intellectually stimulating.

All I see online these days are people arguing for arguments sake- And its getting worse by the Month.

  1vald2

Apprentice Member

Joined: 1/20/12
Posts: 75

5/11/13 8:24:31 PM#127
Originally posted by Nitth

Once again, Why do people play mmorpgs when people want small encounters, instant action and 'Levels'....

QFT

So sad that MMO gamers nowadays only want the "instant hop in and hop out fun" RPGs are suppose to take a long time because it is about progression. How can you feel immersed or attached to your character if you hop in for the occasional dungeon/instance (like in GW2) and then call it quits at the end? There is no feel of achievement or adventure at all. There was a certain adventurous feeling when you had to find a group and hold it together. On your way to the boss or dungeon in the open world you might encounter enemies and you have to stick together (or fail!) but in the end you felt like you were part of something. Today's games (sorry for taking GW2 as an example again) you rarely befriend or socialise much with the players you "fast run" the dungeon with. If you do befriend them it's mostly for the fact that they know how to do the "fast run" as much as you do, so you can grind some more tokens. There is no feeling of achievement or epicness at all! 

Well enough ranting about GW2. There are plenty of other games that call themselves MMORPGs but have very little to do with it, IMHO. Like I said, MMORPGs are about progression and immersion and not the quick injection of fun which you can find in various minigames and action-oriented games (MMOFPSs, etc.). We shouldn't forget where the RPGs come from...

  Magiknight

Advanced Member

Joined: 4/10/09
Posts: 704

5/12/13 1:18:27 AM#128
Originally posted by koboldfodder

I started MMOs on EQ Tallon Zek server, which was teams PVP server with one-item+coin loot.  Back then you had druid and wizard teleports and that was that, you had to hoof it to wherever you wanted to go.

 

Part of the fun was getting organized to get going to the zone/dungeon and then setting off.  Yeah, it would take an hour or so to get everything together but once you set off it was great fun.  Along the way, if PVP happened you had to deal with it or try to run, so grouping was essential.

 

Then once you got into the dungeon, you had to get to where you were going and then set up an EXP camp.

 

So you had no real method of fast travel, no instances, team based PVP with item loot.  And ti was great, lol.  You cannot find that in any MMO today.  Some have total item loot, but those games are just frustrating. 

 

MMOs are fail today because they have no RISK.  So the rewards don't seem rewardy.  Yea, sit in town all day with your instance finder, then get into an instance and get the same piece of loot 200 other people have, don't interact with anyone for 99% of your playing time and when you finish that dungeon run, just /quit out.  Rinse and repeat for 10 years.....sounds like a lot of fun, right?

 

Wrong.

This.

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19117

5/12/13 7:34:55 AM#129

Originally posted by koboldfodder

 

 

Part of the fun was getting organized to get going to the zone/dungeon and then setting off.  Yeah, it would take an hour or so to get everything together but once you set off it was great fun.  Along the way, if PVP happened you had to deal with it or try to run, so grouping was essential.

 

Fun is subjective. What you described is horribly boring to me. I don't play games to spend time organizing. That is why i don't play MMOs without a LFD function anymore.

And you also said "once you set off it was great fun" .. seems to imply BEFORE you set off it, it was not fun.

 

  Jacxolope

Elite Member

Joined: 1/15/13
Posts: 735

5/12/13 11:02:28 AM#130

-I remember playing little league baseball and T-Ball as a kid. I remember the pride I had as I hit my first home run, won my first game and our team made it to the Championships (we didnt win...)

-Went to my Nephews T-ball game last year. Wow was it different.

No keeping score.

No winners and losers (everyone wins)

No strikes (everyone swings until they hit)

Parents clap for everyone regardless of outcome.

-But I am sure it was more "fun" than when I had to actually , you know, play the game- practice, learn a skill. Where I could fail and winning wasnt a guarantee. Where practice made perfect and if you practices hard enough , played well enough and had a little luck- You could win a trophy. (now everyone gets a trophy)

I got home and looked at my old trophies from baseball and Soccer. Not that many. But I earned them.

To me, I do not feel I "earned something" nor can I find enjoyment in something if the outcome is guaranteed. Why show up to play if no matter what you do- You Win? Hell, everyone "wins" now which in reality means "everyone really loses"

-I see this now in gaming as well (especially MMOs) people who never learned how to properly lose in real life and are accustomed to the 'everyone wins road"- Creativity non existent unless there is one single linear path to traverse.

-People who dont know when to quit arguing .

This entire conversation has debased into mudslinging and a back and forth- No discussion going on either. Just "I am right." (because again, when there is never any losing in  ones life how could they possibly see things from another point of view?)

Open World games should be far more immersive. Are they? No. Sadly in most cases they are not because the "open World" has no more going on in it than a lobby where you have to run around quest grinding. But that is part and parcel to the entire problem with the genre as a whole- A "theme park" linear world does not need anything more than a lobby IF there is no way to effect the "open world" anyhow.

People screaming for a lobby are right- The open World AS THEY SEE IT is pointless for the most part- And it is.

People screaming for Open World are right- IF developers would get back to their roots and give us a dynamic World with interaction and randomness- An Open World is clearly more immersive.

As things stand with the genre, what point is the open world? As MMORPGs are becoming e-sport, action games which are totally on rails- Why waste my time (and yours) with the false illusion of a "world" when none really exists and the resources could be used elsewhere?

-Everyone here is right and wrong and unwilling to bend at all to try to see the others point.

I blame this on giving trophies to everyone and not allowing anyone to strike out...ever.

 

  MMORPGRIP

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/08/13
Posts: 90

5/12/13 11:34:03 AM#131
Originally posted by Jacxolope

-I remember playing little league baseball and T-Ball as a kid. I remember the pride I had as I hit my first home run, won my first game and our team made it to the Championships (we didnt win...)

-Went to my Nephews T-ball game last year. Wow was it different.

No keeping score.

No winners and losers (everyone wins)

No strikes (everyone swings until they hit)

Parents clap for everyone regardless of outcome.

-But I am sure it was more "fun" than when I had to actually , you know, play the game- practice, learn a skill. Where I could fail and winning wasnt a guarantee. Where practice made perfect and if you practices hard enough , played well enough and had a little luck- You could win a trophy. (now everyone gets a trophy)

I got home and looked at my old trophies from baseball and Soccer. Not that many. But I earned them.

To me, I do not feel I "earned something" nor can I find enjoyment in something if the outcome is guaranteed. Why show up to play if no matter what you do- You Win? Hell, everyone "wins" now which in reality means "everyone really loses"

-I see this now in gaming as well (especially MMOs) people who never learned how to properly lose in real life and are accustomed to the 'everyone wins road"- Creativity non existent unless there is one single linear path to traverse.

-People who dont know when to quit arguing .

This entire conversation has debased into mudslinging and a back and forth- No discussion going on either. Just "I am right." (because again, when there is never any losing in  ones life how could they possibly see things from another point of view?)

Open World games should be far more immersive. Are they? No. Sadly in most cases they are not because the "open World" has no more going on in it than a lobby where you have to run around quest grinding. But that is part and parcel to the entire problem with the genre as a whole- A "theme park" linear world does not need anything more than a lobby IF there is no way to effect the "open world" anyhow.

People screaming for a lobby are right- The open World AS THEY SEE IT is pointless for the most part- And it is.

People screaming for Open World are right- IF developers would get back to their roots and give us a dynamic World with interaction and randomness- An Open World is clearly more immersive.

As things stand with the genre, what point is the open world? As MMORPGs are becoming e-sport, action games which are totally on rails- Why waste my time (and yours) with the false illusion of a "world" when none really exists and the resources could be used elsewhere?

-Everyone here is right and wrong and unwilling to bend at all to try to see the others point.

I blame this on giving trophies to everyone and not allowing anyone to strike out...ever.

 

Exactly. My recent Taekwando Tournament everyone got a trophy just for going to it. I mean really?

Only trophy remotely earned at it is the Grand Champion trophy, which was won on points from the other categories and how you placed. When I played 11 years of soccer, I was on a winning team twice. Although sure, it sucked sometimes constantly losing, it made it MUCH more gratifying when you did win because you worked hard for it and it was earned.

MMORPG's are about the journey, not the destination. They were different from console games for a reason...a different form of entertainment. But now they are just becoming like console games. Character development, reputation of said character, socialization, exploration, immersion are all going out the window for these lobby-like, heavily instanced, reward handing at every turn, solo laden shallow games they are calling MMORPG's that rarely last a year before server merges, or shut downs. Sad...
  Nevulus

Apprentice Member

Joined: 8/23/06
Posts: 1202

5/12/13 5:01:43 PM#132
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Aren_D

 



That's WoW Vanilla experience

All teleportations skills are best friends and worst enemys for the open world MMOs

There is a reason why open world gameplay is not that popular, except for large scale battle.

yeah reason being its cheaper to make instance worlds, easier on resources.

So your point of argument is invalid.

  Muke

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/04/07
Posts: 1528

5/12/13 5:48:13 PM#133
Originally posted by lolnik1

I will explain it on example.

I'm a 20 warrior in Wow. The world seems exciting, it's beauriful and has nice lore. So, why do I don't explore it? Simple, for what sake? I will don't find any open dungeon with dangerous monsters and the boss from which I can loot very rare item to become rich. All the challenge is in the instances, so even if I loot something worth it will be nothing after 3 lvls. So I stay in city and queque for instances. 

I'm a 20 warrior in open world mmo. Now I have only a wolf to ride on. I see a big hole in the middle of mountain. I go there, enter, but the monsters are too strong, I can't cope with them. 2 more people have arrived, because there were rumours that here is a monster which drops a very unique mount (1% chance). We clear the cave. Fight with the boss, but there isn't anything worth to loot. So, we come to the nearest village. People are talking about a raid on their village. In few minutes a dragon attacks the city. Only few people have killed him, but now I have a unique mount, and can explore the world, seeking for the adventure. 

What is better, standing in city queueing for instances and loot mounts which are useless, cuz you stay in city the whole time while not raiding/ doing instances/bg/ arenas, or the second option. I'm waiting for your opinion :).

That's a perfect example of a dated themepark for ya. :)

If you have a game with declining community or a game that has aged and grown too vast, players want instant gratifications, so devs are giving in and giving ppl teleportations, instance qeues etc, so it's easy to skip 80% of the content to reach your goal.

 

"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"

  Conjureman

Apprentice Member

Joined: 4/19/05
Posts: 5

5/12/13 6:10:08 PM#134

I don't think that the open world in and of itself creates immersion.  I think that for some people the dungeon finders eliminate immersion.  For me anything that reinforces "This is just a game I am playing" make sit feel less immersive.  This can range from certain sound effects to mechanical aspects to dungeon finders.

Back in EQ 1, I had a group of people I consistently adventured with, getting there was half the fun, and combat was slow enough that we actually had time to chat.  In modern games, you get instantly teleported to instances that you  run through instances with strangers barely ever speaking.  Not a lot of fun for me.  

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19117

5/13/13 11:17:27 AM#135
Originally posted by Conjureman

I don't think that the open world in and of itself creates immersion.  I think that for some people the dungeon finders eliminate immersion.  For me anything that reinforces "This is just a game I am playing" make sit feel less immersive.  This can range from certain sound effects to mechanical aspects to dungeon finders.

Back in EQ 1, I had a group of people I consistently adventured with, getting there was half the fun, and combat was slow enough that we actually had time to chat.  In modern games, you get instantly teleported to instances that you  run through instances with strangers barely ever speaking.  Not a lot of fun for me.  

And yet most players use LFD, despite the option of not using it, and run to the dungeon.

I don't think immersion is that important. Players are obviously choosing convenience at the expense of a little immersion breaking.

 

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10376

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

5/13/13 11:28:46 AM#136


Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Conjureman I don't think that the open world in and of itself creates immersion.  I think that for some people the dungeon finders eliminate immersion.  For me anything that reinforces "This is just a game I am playing" make sit feel less immersive.  This can range from certain sound effects to mechanical aspects to dungeon finders. Back in EQ 1, I had a group of people I consistently adventured with, getting there was half the fun, and combat was slow enough that we actually had time to chat.  In modern games, you get instantly teleported to instances that you  run through instances with strangers barely ever speaking.  Not a lot of fun for me.  
And yet most players use LFD, despite the option of not using it, and run to the dungeon.

I don't think immersion is that important. Players are obviously choosing convenience at the expense of a little immersion breaking.

 




Having players use a LFD or LFR tool doesn't mean the virtual world doesn't serve any purpose. There are some players using those tools exclusively, but even if half the players are using those tools exclusively, it doesn't make the virtual world irrelevant.

** ** **

Even reversing it with the reality of most players leveling in the world and then most players using LFD at end game doesn't make the virtual world irrelevant.

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

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19117

5/13/13 11:36:10 AM#137
Originally posted by lizardbones

 


Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Conjureman I don't think that the open world in and of itself creates immersion.  I think that for some people the dungeon finders eliminate immersion.  For me anything that reinforces "This is just a game I am playing" make sit feel less immersive.  This can range from certain sound effects to mechanical aspects to dungeon finders. Back in EQ 1, I had a group of people I consistently adventured with, getting there was half the fun, and combat was slow enough that we actually had time to chat.  In modern games, you get instantly teleported to instances that you  run through instances with strangers barely ever speaking.  Not a lot of fun for me.  
And yet most players use LFD, despite the option of not using it, and run to the dungeon.

 

I don't think immersion is that important. Players are obviously choosing convenience at the expense of a little immersion breaking.

 




Having players use a LFD or LFR tool doesn't mean the virtual world doesn't serve any purpose. There are some players using those tools exclusively, but even if half the players are using those tools exclusively, it doesn't make the virtual world irrelevant.

 

It makes the virtual world irrelevant for half of the players .. in your example. But that is not my point. My point is that immersion is just not that important.

 

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10376

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

5/13/13 11:46:02 AM#138


Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by lizardbones  

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Conjureman I don't think that the open world in and of itself creates immersion.  I think that for some people the dungeon finders eliminate immersion.  For me anything that reinforces "This is just a game I am playing" make sit feel less immersive.  This can range from certain sound effects to mechanical aspects to dungeon finders. Back in EQ 1, I had a group of people I consistently adventured with, getting there was half the fun, and combat was slow enough that we actually had time to chat.  In modern games, you get instantly teleported to instances that you  run through instances with strangers barely ever speaking.  Not a lot of fun for me.  
And yet most players use LFD, despite the option of not using it, and run to the dungeon.   I don't think immersion is that important. Players are obviously choosing convenience at the expense of a little immersion breaking.  
Having players use a LFD or LFR tool doesn't mean the virtual world doesn't serve any purpose. There are some players using those tools exclusively, but even if half the players are using those tools exclusively, it doesn't make the virtual world irrelevant.  
It makes the virtual world irrelevant for half of the players .. in your example. But that is not my point. My point is that immersion is just not that important.

 




It depends on what you mean by immersion. Immersion is being engaged in or immersed in what you are doing. You can be immersed in reading a book, assembling a wood table from planks of wood you've cut or in playing a game, with or without a virtual world. Players can be immersed in playing Tetris, which has no virtual world at all.

As far as a virtual world being important, it depends on the game. If you removed the virtual world from WoW, and half the players left the game, that would make the virtual world very important. In Diablo, if you added a virtual world, you probably wouldn't double the number of players, so there it's probably not an important concept.

** ** **

Take a game like Minecraft. If you removed the virtual world, you wouldn't have a game at all. What about Skyrim? How much of a game would you have without a virtual world there? Eve is almost nothing but virtual world. The idea that you can just trade a virtual world for a menu driven lobby is just silly. Many games with thousands or millions of players would no longer exist.

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

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19117

5/13/13 1:00:12 PM#139
Originally posted by

As far as a virtual world being important, it depends on the game. If you removed the virtual world from WoW, and half the players left the game, that would make the virtual world very important. In Diablo, if you added a virtual world, you probably wouldn't double the number of players, so there it's probably not an important concept.
I wonder if you remove the virtual world from WOW, half will leave. Most players are at max level doing LFR/LFD/BG/arena anyway. A better question is if you create a WOW like game without the world (all the gameplay are in instances), will it be successful?

** ** **

Take a game like Minecraft. If you removed the virtual world, you wouldn't have a game at all. What about Skyrim? How much of a game would you have without a virtual world there? Eve is almost nothing but virtual world. The idea that you can just trade a virtual world for a menu driven lobby is just silly. Many games with thousands or millions of players would no longer exist.
Hmm .. Minecraft has no persistent world. It is just a large zone you can build. SKYRIM also don't have a persistent world. It is more like a large SP zone. The only difference between the SKYRIM "world", and the Deus Ex "levels" is that the SKYRIM levels are bigger. 

 

 

7 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Search