SWTOR

[Musashi]

Your mom's girl parts is what story.

[Rendakor]

That's his point Darniaq; you, at least partially, fall into the first category. I know many people who played Oblivion and KOTOR just to kill shit and get loot.

Why? Diablo has a fun combat system. I'd put Oblivion's as "acceptable" in context with driving a narrative, and KOTOR's as "shit you put up with because the rest is interesting enough". Are your friends saving, spawning an area, fighting a boss for the lootz and then reloading if they didn't like the drops? I can't see any reason why you'd play a game where loot drives the story for the loot. There are just too many better games in which to do that. Heck, that's why I play Borderlands (what story?).

Hmm, how do I put this? It's the same type of person that skips all of the dialogue/cut scenes to get back into the action. For several of my friends, the biggest difference between say Diablo and Oblivion would be the graphics, or the control scheme. Not that one is "loot driven" while the other is "story driven." The act of leveling up and customizing a character, then using that character to smash shit, is similar in almost all RPG".

[UnSub]

The early ones, when developers thought that's what most of their customers wanted, I suppose.  I would say UO was.  EQ also, in some ways.

The correct answer was *no MMO* was created to create a deep intimate bond with your character. That whole paragraph up there is just outright ridiculous (when applied to MMOGs).

I was mostly thinking about pnp RPGs when I wrote that, but certain people have certainly taken MMORPGs to that level. People crying as they unsummon their SWG pets before NGE shows that some kind of emotional bond was created with the game character. MxO might have offered something with its full events team that could involve individual players, but that fizzled out.

UO might have let you, EQ might have let you but as Schild says that wasn't really the point of them. MMOs today let you if you really want to go that way, but RP is a sideline that might be given some emotes - there is certainly no in-game benefit that mechanics provide for RPing. MMOs don't oppose RPing in general, but they certainly don't make it part of the game structure either - it's something that some players just do and provided there aren't complaints, they let it slide.

Tying back to SWOR: it is going to force you to role play to a degree by giving you limited conversation choices, so that you will be forced to play a role to continue. However, this still isn't true role play as the options are pretty much guaranteed to be "Act like Mother Teresa", "Be on the action side of neutral" and "Set those kittens on fire while you steal money from orphans". Role play needs options and potentially complicated reactions based on what you do - others have to react to your role. You can't get that from MMO NPC AI (yet).

Only way to have RP is to have other players involved and there really aren't enough dedicated RPers to make a dedicated game for. If you try, you end up with things like Sociotron.

Personally I don't RP because it is (in my humble opinion) a sad waste of fucking time. RP in single player games is different, since it forces actions and consequences for the in-game story. RP in MMOs is about pretending you are the special chosen one / last true King of Fantasia among a whole group of others who also are special chosen ones / last true Monarchs of Fantasia - you still end up doing the same content.

NB: I know the above info makes me look like a huge wanker; to wit:

but it's nearly Xmas and I'm not an Xmas person at all. 

[Venkman]

I don't think it's fair to compare "RP" in an RPG to "RP" in MMO. In the former, you're forced to make decisions that affect how the game world sees your character's personality. In the latter, it's merely how you conduct conversations in /chat. In both games, you're playing a "role", but in an RPG it's more about you as a citizen of a world while in MMOs it's entirely about what skills you bring to combat.

The only MMOs I can think of that had game systems around RP were EQ1 and SWG.

• EQ1 with its various factions. Yes, it was just another predictable grind. But not being able to enter Nektulous as a High Elf was a big deal. And this bare minimum of mechanics hasn't survived since (except the shades of it in EQ2).
• Pre-NGE SWG with Battle Fatigue and entertainer buffs. Yes they were annoying and contrived and linked to a combat system only mastered by understanding the brokenness of it. But it was an attempt to force interaction outside of pure combat. And it was in a setting that had a lot of RP-like interaction tools (houses, furniture, decor crafting, /music).

Hmm, how do I put this? It's the same type of person that skips all of the dialogue/cut scenes to get back into the action. For several of my friends, the biggest difference between say Diablo and Oblivion would be the graphics, or the control scheme. Not that one is "loot driven" while the other is "story driven." The act of leveling up and customizing a character, then using that character to smash shit, is similar in almost all RPG".

They've got to be reading enough to ensure they don't totally screw up their ability to enter towns I imagine I don't remember having to make any choices in Diablo beyond how to customize weapons, whereas in Oblivion if I wasn't paying attention, I'd be banned from half the country But yours is a good illustration of YMMV. [/list]

[Malakili]

Personally I don't RP because it is (in my humble opinion) a sad waste of fucking time. RP in single player games is different, since it forces actions and consequences for the in-game story. RP in MMOs is about pretending you are the special chosen one / last true King of Fantasia among a whole group of others who also are special chosen ones / last true Monarchs of Fantasia - you still end up doing the same content.

I've been in and out of RP communities in MMOs and I've pretty much given up on it at this point.  Most RPers in MMOs aren't interested in actual role play anyway, they are interested in what I might called story telling.  They write elaborate stories on forums, have RP "events" which 90% of the time are people standing around telling those stories.  Given most MMOs don't give you a single bit of control over the game world, I can't blame them for having to go this route really, but it just isn't really...role playing.

I'd actually argue a game like EVE Online is actually rather full of roleplaying, even though most of the population wouldn't define themselves as such.  You want to be a pirate, well go BE a pirate, play that role.  However, it seems that RPers want to write stories and SAY that are a pirate, but most of them hate actually having to learn to play the game past a first grade level in order to actually play that role.   The worst thing you can do to an RPer is mess with their predetermined destiny for their character, and this is the problem. 

Also, on the topic of single player RPGs, I don't find there to be much role playing in those either.  There are a few exceptions, like the Bethesda games, where you can effectively ignore the developer stories/quests.  However, stuff like the Bioware RPGs are just choose-your-own-adventure books with fun gameplay.  And thats ok, don't get me wrong, I like doing that too, it just isn't RP.

[Lantyssa]

MMOs do not support RP for the most part.  I hate the StoryTime MMO-RPer.  It's part of why I like sandboxes -- they let me assume a role and react to the world my character is in, instead of watching my character participate in Story Time.  That is all current quests or player run 'events' are these days.  It's also why I am watching SWTOR and GW2 to see if they can break that mould.

[ajax34i]

And thats ok, don't get me wrong, I like doing that too, it just isn't RP.

I think you guys have too strict a definition of RP.  It's like, you're imagining a theatrical production or something.  Computer games can't really do that - in single player there's no audience, and MMO's have too many shows at the same time, and a fully disinterested audience.  Actually, MMOs do have this theatre thing, but it's called "guild drama", heh.

[Lantyssa]

Theatrical Productions are how a lot of RP is in an MMO.  Maybe it was a combination of luck, environment, and a large enough guild, but my time in SWG was more about living our characters in that universe than making stories to tell one another.  It was a distinctly different experience than I have found elsewhere.  I've tried, but I keep running into groups that make me want to flee.

[SnakeCharmer]

Wow.  Looks like complete ass.  New video up. 

Highlight of the video are the two blonde gametesters at about the 3 minute mark or so.

[Malakili]

Most telling part of the video is when the dev says "Our ideal experience for the player is to play one class all the way through, then go back and play another class."  That really just sums up pretty much everything I expected from this title.

[Draegan]

Most telling part of the video is when the dev says "Our ideal experience for the player is to play one class all the way through, then go back and play another class."  That really just sums up pretty much everything I expected from this title.

That was the only quote that stood out to me as well.

I'm still not excited about this game.  I'm more excited about FFXIV than this title and I think FFXIV won't translate well to the western audience.

[Brogarn]

Ya that looks like shit. I really like the Old Republic as a setting but I can't see me playing this with what I've seen so far.

[Ingmar]

Most telling part of the video is when the dev says "Our ideal experience for the player is to play one class all the way through, then go back and play another class."  That really just sums up pretty much everything I expected from this title.

To me that's a positive. The 'look' of the game strikes me as a little odd, but I was initially resistant to WoW's look too, so who knows.

[Draegan]

It's only a positive if you're not paying a monthly sub and extra character slots don't cost you 4.99 at the SWTOR store.

[Ingmar]

I'm with you on the second half but not the first. I don't think an 'endgame' is necessarily a requirement for a subscription game.

[Malakili]

I'm with you on the second half but not the first. I don't think an 'endgame' is necessarily a requirement for a subscription game.

Maybe not strictly speaking and "end game" but I like the idea of having a single character that I can focus on forever.  I don't like to think of a character in an MMO as "finished" to me.  The premise is that my character is a person living in that virtual world, take away that premise and the genre becomes a lot less interesting to me.  I mean, the idea of a monthly fee is that you are paying for upkeep, not content.  If you are paying for content, it should be sold as such, rather than paying a monthly fee for the idea of future content, which is basically an odd idea. (This is one of the reasons people complain about Hellgate: London's sub structure, the server stuff was apparently free, but people were asked to pay a monthly fee for what?  Content that was yet to come?)

I guess it drives at the question: What exactly am I paying monthly FOR?  If the answer is supposed to be "content" I'd prefer they release and sell DLC.

[Malakili]

And thats ok, don't get me wrong, I like doing that too, it just isn't RP.

I think you guys have too strict a definition of RP.  It's like, you're imagining a theatrical production or something.  Computer games can't really do that - in single player there's no audience, and MMO's have too many shows at the same time, and a fully disinterested audience.  Actually, MMOs do have this theatre thing, but it's called "guild drama", heh.

I think I'm actually saying the exact opposite.  What I want is less "theatrical" RP, and more just...playing your character's role in the game world.  Most RPers are just telling stories, and most non-RPers are just min-maxing/playing game mechanics/just never occurs to them there is some sort of hypothetical "role" in the game world at all.

Instead of telling stories, people should be creating them, just by acting as someone would who lived in that world.   

[Ingmar]

Well, for me a model like this would be one where I'd unsubscribe when I'm 'done'. For someone who obsessively plays games one at a time like I often do a subscription model could actually end up cheaper than a 'normal' game in terms of $/hour of gameplay, assuming the hours of gameplay add up to more than an equivalently box priced single player game.

If we assume that the storylines are completely different the whole way through (do we know that?) its certainly conceivable that this could be a better value than most single player RPGs even with a couple months of sub fee tacked onto the box. The actual play experience may still end up sucking in which case all bets are off, but the model isn't guaranteed to suck.

[Malakili]

Well, for me a model like this would be one where I'd unsubscribe when I'm 'done'. For someone who obsessively plays games one at a time like I often do a subscription model could actually end up cheaper than a 'normal' game in terms of $/hour of gameplay, assuming the hours of gameplay add up to more than an equivalently box priced single player game.

If we assume that the storylines are completely different the whole way through (do we know that?) its certainly conceivable that this could be a better value than most single player RPGs even with a couple months of sub fee tacked onto the box. The actual play experience may still end up sucking in which case all bets are off, but the model isn't guaranteed to suck.

Ah, well I can see where you are coming from.  I like to think of a hypothetically great MMO in which I "never" unsubscribe.  But if you are going into it assuming "I'll play this for a couple months then quit" I can see approaching it totally differently.    Though truth be told, I've been bouncing around MMOs now for a while, waiting for one to "stick" maybe its me that isn't sticking rather than the games...

[Venkman]

People play these games for years and don't care to RP any more than someone in MW2. Most people are creating stories all the time. They're just not bothering to tell them. For the same reason most people don't write books, screenplays or blogs and keep themselves instead to a few characters in a Facebook status update.

MMOs are just games. They CAN be more, and are more to those people who bring more of themselves to the social experience. But those people are rare. They've been rare forever, and getting more rare as more gamer types show up, and these games evolve to be more appropriate for them.

[Fordel]

I really want this game to not suck.


I am going to be disappointed 

[Malakili]

People play these games for years and don't care to RP any more than someone in MW2. Most people are creating stories all the time. They're just not bothering to tell them. For the same reason most people don't write books, screenplays or blogs and keep themselves instead to a few characters in a Facebook status update.

MMOs are just games. They CAN be more, and are more to those people who bring more of themselves to the social experience. But those people are rare. They've been rare forever, and getting more rare as more gamer types show up, and these games evolve to be more appropriate for them.

I don't disagree, I just think its a shame.

Also, I don't really care if people TELL stories, I'm more interested in emergent stories because of player interactions that are effectively "in character" (even when not consciously as such.  EVE comes to mind.  The best MMO stories ever come from that game, and it isn't because people are walking around talking in middle english or something, its because there is actually motivation to act like person in the EVE universe would act.  The goals of your character (accumulate wealth, control systems, make friends, fight enemies) are all goals that you have in the game.  Unlike in WoW where your goal might be "get tier 7 gear" when the characters goal (ostensibly) is save the world from X threat.

[Venkman]

Well, that's the rift that was UO vs EQ1 back in the day. In UO, you made your own story. You adventured, sure, but there was a bunch of ways to do that both PvE and PvP style, and even then it wasn't the only thing to do. Crafting was something you did exclusively, unlike being tacked onto a combat class. Your house was more than just where you threw your crap. You had vendors, guild meetings (needed a house to have a guild), picked where you wanted to live based on availability of land. Land value was variable based on where you ended up. There was a whole real estate market in fact, something that didn't carry through into the massive tracts of land that were SWG planets.

The compromise of options was having to figure out where you wanted to be in the game yourself. That's sorta how it needs to be in open world games, but it's something that annoys people more so than being given a sword and a class and being pointed at creature X with directive Y.

Nowadays one could say "Eve vs WoW" in the same way we did "UO vs EQ1". The scales are much different, but the essence of the argument is similar.

[Lakov_Sanite]

paying 49.99 dollars for a single player game with an 'end' is fine....

paying that plus 14.99 a month just so you can play that single player game with others? not so much.

[UnSub]

Given how MMOs are currently going, I think SWOR is going to go down the box cost + sub fee + DLC cost + probably a cash shop route. BioWare are (allegedly) putting a lot of resources into this title; EA and Lucasarts will want to get paid for it.

[Velorath]

paying 49.99 dollars for a single player game with an 'end' is fine....

paying that plus 14.99 a month just so you can play that single player game with others? not so much.

Out of curiosity, why do you find it acceptable to pay sub fees for MMO's?  What is it that they do that you feel justifies them charging you on a monthly basis?

[Fordel]

Largely for the same reason I would pay for tickets to a sporting event. A Massive Shared experience. Persistence and new content/mechanics is always a nice bonus as well.

It doesn't mean I want to be best friends with all 20k people at the place, and I could probably get a much better view of the game from my own TV set at home, be better feed too, all for a fraction of the cost.


But chanting "D - FENCE" from the couch just doesn't have the same effect.

[Lantyssa]

When did they tell us there is a subscription fee?

[Fordel]

I have no idea, I think we are just assuming EA is evil.

[Velorath]

Largely for the same reason I would pay for tickets to a sporting event. A Massive Shared experience. Persistence and new content/mechanics is always a nice bonus as well.

It doesn't mean I want to be best friends with all 20k people at the place, and I could probably get a much better view of the game from my own TV set at home, be better feed too, all for a fraction of the cost.


But chanting "D - FENCE" from the couch just doesn't have the same effect.

That's a very... forced comparison.  Regardless, is that really why you buy tickets to a sporting event?  By that logic, would you pay $50-100 to watch sports on a big screen TV in a room with a fuckton of people in it just because it's a Massive Shared experience?  

Edit:  I just don't think a lot of people really understand why they're ok with paying sub fees for MMO's or why they think SWTOR wouldn't justify one.  For me, I see it in much the same way as Ingmar does.  I'm ok with paying sub fees because a good MMO will entertain me longer than most single player games (there are exceptions though).  The massively multiplayer part never entered into the equation. 

Well, except for maybe with DAOC because the massively mutiplayer part actually entered into the gameplay.  Hell, I could even understand EVE fans using the Massive Shared Experience stuff as an argument even though I'm not particularly fond of the game.  Anybody who plays WoW though and whips that shit out is a fucking hypocrite though, especially these days with it's 25 person maximum raids (less massive than a lot of FPS games out there), and random dungeon finder.  If there was ever a game that's Massively Singleplayer with some multiplayer options, it's WoW.  Now, not only can you hit max level soloing, but you can get dungeon groups without ever having to even say one word to another player.

[tkinnun0]

Anybody who plays WoW though and whips that shit out is a fucking hypocrite though, especially these days with it's 25 person maximum raids (less massive than a lot of FPS games out there), and random dungeon finder. 

Are you kidding, the dungeon finder is the most massive gameplay element in WoW so far. You can be interacting with 4 random people from a pool of probably hundreds of thousands any time you want.

Just yesterday I got put as the fifth member to a crazy 4-man Polish guildgroup. They didn't bother switching to English and I didn't bother requesting they do, but that didn't prevent us from playing our roles together and winning. Experiences like that are why I'm happy to pay a subscription fee.

[Koyasha]

Anybody who plays WoW though and whips that shit out is a fucking hypocrite though, especially these days with it's 25 person maximum raids (less massive than a lot of FPS games out there), and random dungeon finder. 

Are you kidding, the dungeon finder is the most massive gameplay element in WoW so far. You can be interacting with 4 random people from a pool of probably hundreds of thousands any time you want.

Just yesterday I got put as the fifth member to a crazy 4-man Polish guildgroup. They didn't bother switching to English and I didn't bother requesting they do, but that didn't prevent us from playing our roles together and winning. Experiences like that are why I'm happy to pay a subscription fee.

How was that functionally different than playing a single-player game with four automatic bots that do not converse with you and simply perform their roles in the game while you perform yours?  Being able to group with random people while not interacting with them in any meaningful way isn't really what I would call a massive gameplay element.

You didn't interact with those people on any meaningful level as people - you joined up with them, completed a dungeon, and left, and it sounds like you didn't even converse with them in the slightest.  As far as they are concerned, you may as well have been a bot that the game provided in order to round out their group.

[ajax34i]

No trying to min/max the AI like in single-player RPG's would be the only thing I can think of.

[Kageru]

Anybody who plays WoW though and whips that shit out is a fucking hypocrite though, especially these days with it's 25 person maximum raids (less massive than a lot of FPS games out there), and random dungeon finder.  If there was ever a game that's Massively Singleplayer with some multiplayer options, it's WoW.  Now, not only can you hit max level soloing, but you can get dungeon groups without ever having to even say one word to another player.

If you are making an argument, a questionable assertion, you are both wrong and rude.

There is a big difference between 25 people playing TF2 and complex encounters that require 25 people working as a tight knit group, over many months, to defeat. If you can't see the difference then that's more a limitation of your understanding and probably the reason you only see things from a PUG point of view. And naturally the flow of content and the shared world that allows those people to log on at any time and find both something to do and people to do it with requires resources and is worth money. Is it worth 15$ a month? Possibly not but that has become the accepted price.

[tkinnun0]

How was that functionally different than playing a single-player game with four automatic bots that do not converse with you and simply perform their roles in the game while you perform yours?  Being able to group with random people while not interacting with them in any meaningful way isn't really what I would call a massive gameplay element.

The run started with the tank running in the middle of a scripted fight, while I was rolling my eyes. It continued with everything feeling just a little bit 'off'. So we get to the tunnel with falling icicles and the leader tells me to hold my damage dealing until we get to the middle of the tunnel. "That's a good idea", I think. When get thru the tunnel I'm the only one to get the achievement for no-one in the group taking icicle damage. So maybe these guys actually know what they're doing. Last easy boss and suddenly I'm the main tank. Second attempt and the fight is smooth as silk.

So I interacted, observed and came to appreciate. So no, a single-player game is not going to give that experience, because while people are unpredictable because they're people, NPCs are unpredictably because devs are being dickheads.

And I also reject the notion that to roleplay you must have conversations.