Thursday's hurt my brain

[AOFanboi]

It's important to ask why folks want to solo in an mmo.  Because it is their preferred playstyle?  Don't play an mmo then.

I think you have a very limited definition of "multiplayer". It should be sufficient that there is a persistent world where you can interact with other players - or not. Just like real life, you don't necessarily need other people to perform a task.

Also, since "group activities" in MMORPGs almost invariably is defined as fighting mobs or other player groups, one could just as easily say that people who like "grouping" in MMORPGs should stop and play some squad based shooter instead.

[Sloth]

Do you think I bitch about this for my health? I am a casual gamer. I have paid to subscribe to 6 or 7 MMOGs at the minimum. I pay the same fucking price for the box and per month, so I would like to get some sort of attention just like the bandwidth and CS-eating catasses.  Some us have more disposable income than time...why ignore us?

I read just fine.  I was responding to your post, particularly the part I FUCKING QUOTED. God you are a pedantic fuck. Just because you get your fucking jollies playing 8 hours a day with your invisible cyber friends doesn't necessarily mean that THERE AREN'T ALTERNATIVE PLAYSTYLES, YOU DUMBFUCK. Just jamming your head in your ass and pretending that casual players don't exist is extremely short sighted.

Every game can be broken down into fundamental concepts that you can't change. A FPS is always going to be a twitch game. A RTS game is always going to have micromanagement. An adventure game is always going to have puzzles. And an MMOG is always going to require lots of time investment. You are bitching about aspects of the game that are like Spic and Span, you can't have one without the other.

Look at the most casual player friendly fee based game out there, Sims Online. It does moderately well at best. Given the amount of Sims players in the world, who have to be considered the epitome of casual player, why isn't Sims Online the best selling game of all time?

You keep ranting against MMOGs, but they aren't rants that will change anything. Let me put it to you this way, the core component of every MMOG is leveling or grinding. That is essentially the main activity in these games. Now if you want to make leveling fast and make it easy, why have it in the game? If there is something better and more fun to play after you level then start your game there. The reality is though leveling is going to be 95% of your game so you may as well make it a hard and challenging climb.

If you are a casual gamer then you should be advocating fee based games with no leveling or skill advancement. Thats the kind of game you want. Not what is considered to be the standard MMOG model.

[Sairon]

The problem with most MMORPGs is there's basicly only 3 things to do, the XP treadmill, tradeskills and PVP. PVP mostly only being viable after excesive catassing on the XP treadmill.

What should be introduced is more things to do, here's some examples of what could be nice imo.

Raising a dog type of pet. You feed the pet with diffrent shit and it grows faster and better. Then you pay some of the game currency and have it race on a track, if your pet wins you get price money.

Poker mini game. Your ordinary poker, with game currency instead of real cash.

There's loads of shit around this things which could be intresting. For example, if we have a shadowbane type of game where players can build cities etc, players could be able to build race tracks and earn cash from the players racing. And i'd love to have Poker master as title, or something like that.

[Arydon]

Raising a dog type of pet. You feed the pet with diffrent shit and it grows faster and better. Then you pay some of the game currency and have it race on a track, if your pet wins you get price money.

Poker mini game. Your ordinary poker, with game currency instead of real cash.

There's loads of shit around this things which could be intresting. For example, if we have a shadowbane type of game where players can build cities etc, players could be able to build race tracks and earn cash from the players racing. And i'd love to have Poker master as title, or something like that.

And DEER HUNTER and STYLE MY BARBIE.

Throwing mini-games at a broken shell isn't going to fix a broken shell. Did Gems make EQ a better game? No, but it did make a lot of people realize something: Why is there such a painfully boring part of this one game (staring at a spellbook) that it requires a whole other auxiliary game to fill the egregious void?

You can tack on mini-games for atmosphere at appropriate parts of the world, but there still has to be an actual game there. I can play Blackjack on Yahoo without paying for some egotistical dev's Porche upgrades.

[Sairon]

Raising a dog type of pet. You feed the pet with diffrent shit and it grows faster and better. Then you pay some of the game currency and have it race on a track, if your pet wins you get price money.

Poker mini game. Your ordinary poker, with game currency instead of real cash.

There's loads of shit around this things which could be intresting. For example, if we have a shadowbane type of game where players can build cities etc, players could be able to build race tracks and earn cash from the players racing. And i'd love to have Poker master as title, or something like that.

And DEER HUNTER and STYLE MY BARBIE.

Throwing mini-games at a broken shell isn't going to fix a broken shell. Did Gems make EQ a better game? No, but it did make a lot of people realize something: Why is there such a painfully boring part of this one game (staring at a spellbook) that it requires a whole other auxiliary game to fill the egregious void?

You can tack on mini-games for atmosphere at appropriate parts of the world, but there still has to be an actual game there. I can play Blackjack on Yahoo without paying for some egotistical dev's Porche upgrades.

point is, there needs to be more to do in a game, I don't see why every damn MMORPG have to tie themselves to PVE, tradeskills and PVP. Even if PVE and PVP most likely always will be a part of MMORPG, there should be more things to engage in. Perhaps raising dogs and playing poker isn't the sollution, but something needs to be added to the formula atleast.

[WayAbvPar]

Thats the kind of game you want.

I have a good idea- why don't you let ME decide what kind of game I want, you arrogant cockmunch?

[Kairos]

You keep ranting against MMOGs, but they aren't rants that will change anything. Let me put it to you this way, the core component of every MMOG is leveling or grinding. That is essentially the main activity in these games. Now if you want to make leveling fast and make it easy, why have it in the game? If there is something better and more fun to play after you level then start your game there. The reality is though leveling is going to be 95% of your game so you may as well make it a hard and challenging climb.

I think one of the problems is that leveling isn't hard or challenging. It's just long.

[Kyper]

I think one of the problems is that leveling isn't hard or challenging. It's just long.

And usually boring.  Early reports from WoW indicate that it removes some of that boredom by having players level from questing.  I'm interested, but skeptical.  

Haven't we seen that model before?   *coughAC2cough*

[Venkman]

EQ worked very well as a solo and group friendly game. You just needed to know which class and which parts of the world you wouldn't see. But that's the same with all of these games.

Lums article was good, but it didn't answer any questions... which of course he probably wasn't intending anyway :)

[LadyGuardian]

Every game can be broken down into fundamental concepts that you can't change. A FPS is always going to be a twitch game. A RTS game is always going to have micromanagement. An adventure game is always going to have puzzles. And an MMOG is always going to require lots of time investment. You are bitching about aspects of the game that are like Spic and Span, you can't have one without the other.

Look at the most casual player friendly fee based game out there, Sims Online. It does moderately well at best. Given the amount of Sims players in the world, who have to be considered the epitome of casual player, why isn't Sims Online the best selling game of all time?

Probably because it's boring as hell.

There's nothing wrong with MMOGs requiring lots of time in order to accomplish worthy goals/levels/equipment/etc. It is generally expected that grouping is the fastest route to accomplishing said goals, but that shouldn't automatically make soloing useless or impossible.

Even though FFXI has the beastmaster class that is meant for solo play (and wound up being the ultimate class with Bards for BCNM fights), most other classes past 30 trying to take on a "too weak to be worthwhile" monster stand a good chance of getting schooled. This is the problem for me: I can live with earning 15-50 exp at a time as opposed to 150-200 per kill, but my interest wanes quickly when that option no longer exists. Even as a Red Mage, which usually find groups quick once they have dispel and refresh, it’s rare for me to be able to game for a 4 hour sitting that good parties ask for.

I also liked the Diablo method of monster difficulty/experience gained depending on the number of people -- with instanced gaming in popular MMORPGs now, I wonder if it'll appear more.

[koboshi]

The main reason I started reading and participating on boards like these, was that I really liked the idea of mmorpgs, but not the actual games anymore.
I'm a casual player and I paid not to play UO. I paid not to play AO and I just paid fifty bucks, so I could play Puzzle Pirates for life... but I don't have the time to play.
Apart from the last example there's a limit to how long I will pay for a game, clearly not catering for my style.
Which is a shame, because the reason I don't play is a rather good and wellpaying job, so for the first company to design a game, that gives me a reason to keep playing, I will be a potentially very large walking wallet.
And I'm not the only one.
I'm quite sure, that those of us with jobs, could be an even better source of income, than all the students and unemployed, if anybody would build a game compelling to us, instead of catering for the same 5-700.000 catasses.

   I agree totally.

   My main problem with the MMO game/business structure is that it is self defeating.  First of all from a business point of view: a service provider wants to have a customer that never ties up their services and yet pays month after month.  (True if they got there way the game would be empty, but hey, they get paid so who cares)  Then from the game structure: Most MMO games give the most reward to those who dedicate their entire lives to the pursuit of in-game goals.

   From a business point of view aren't the games inviting the wrong element, like the kids who hang out at the mall all day but only make one purchase and that's in the food court. (I can't stand fucking mallrats!)  Instead shouldn't there be more games targeted to the casual gamer? Of course.  I hate games that operate so that if I don't play for three days I'll lose all my worldly possessions.

   An interesting study in both what to do and what not to do is Starport:GE.  They have a system whereby those who play the most pay the most.  Whether it's paying for a refuel or upgrading your ship, you can either pay for it directly with cash, or just play with the in-game recourses already at your disposal. It's nice; you can choose your level of involvement.

   However there is the major problem that haunts all the MMO's that I've played which is magnified in this game, you can't sleep.  In this game it's because when you're sleeping every property you own is being plundered and destroyed.  It leaves you feeling a bit like the fat kid from lord of the flies but after playing the game for a while you find the serenity of the gallows.  You wake each day a fruit fly larvae blessed with a twenty four hour lifespan in which you will accomplish little more than assure that your lineage will survive through the long night.

   That's not how it should be.  Inevitably after all my flings with online games I come back to the same issue, I want to play later.  But the game holds a grudge like some scorned spoiled brat.  So I can't go back because my ship has been reduced to an escape pod or my house has fallen apart or been triple-mortgaged or where my mountain view used to be there now is a city of Italians! ... Ok so I can't blame the game for that last one.

   All I want is a casual online game that I can play without ending up feeling like Nietzsche on a bad day.  Is that so much to ask?

   Ok, so I got a bit off topic... I'll bring it back around:  If there are more community groups voluntary or otherwise, there is still the problem of how you deal with an offline player or casual player.  There should still be a way for that player to help the community, and for them to feel that if they leave for a week when they get back the world and the community they have forged won't have disappeared.

[Venkman]

Yea, but what game are you playing where you'd lose your stuff like that?

Losing all of one's stuff in SB requires a large enough group to create assets worth attacking but for that very same group to not care enough to defend them. SWG and UO assets are a joke to maintain (go mudflation go). It's up to the player first put a high value on their items and then to take the risks in losing them in games like EQ.

The rewards aren't only for those who put their whole lives on hold. Yea, that comparison is there, but many folks don't give a shit. It matters to me very little to not at all how often even my friends lap me in levels. What some anonymous punk does with the 15 hours a day he dedicates to the game while I'm working and spending time with the family doesn't matter a whit to me.

People want it all. Companies collect. The players have themselves to blame if they try to keep up with the time-rich crowd. It's just another way of "keeping up with the Joneses", just as annoying and just as impossible.

[Sloth]

There's nothing wrong with MMOGs requiring lots of time in order to accomplish worthy goals/levels/equipment/etc. It is generally expected that grouping is the fastest route to accomplishing said goals, but that shouldn't automatically make soloing useless or impossible.

Soloing is never going to be impossible, because inevitably some class will have an ability that makes it so. However the difference between EQ and DAOC is , EQ didn't design the game to allow soloing. Yes it happens, but its only because its the side effect of a few classes. I don't mind EQs system, because if you want to solo you can choose one of the classes that is able to do it, and the system isn't compromised because of it either.

[Sloth]

You keep ranting against MMOGs, but they aren't rants that will change anything. Let me put it to you this way, the core component of every MMOG is leveling or grinding. That is essentially the main activity in these games. Now if you want to make leveling fast and make it easy, why have it in the game? If there is something better and more fun to play after you level then start your game there. The reality is though leveling is going to be 95% of your game so you may as well make it a hard and challenging climb.

I think one of the problems is that leveling isn't hard or challenging. It's just long.

Its like running a marathon, its about endurance and determination. There will be people who get to the end and people who quit half way through. If it wasn't hard and challenging to some degree everyone would make it.

The second level of challenge is the grouping itself. The actual act of playing an MMOG is not that difficult, you punch some buttons, which is why soloing has a 99% success ratio. You choose the monster you know you can kill everytime, then do it. With a group you have to rely on the skills and know how of other people. Now normally most people can play at the minimum required ability. However, at the high level camps thats not that great for getting XP, you need people who are sharp and efficent as possible. I played EQ long enough to realize there is a large gap between minium required skill and great group.

Grouping is the best way to add difficulty and challenge because the players create it themselves. When you have to lead or support 5 other egos and all work cooperatively, it is alot more challenging than you can possibly make soloing.

.

[HaemishM]

Now I'm not saying take away the ability to solo completely afterall not everyone wants to group every day, but soloing shouldn't be a viable means of advancement.

Why not? After all, roleplaying is not just about the group, but about the lone individual as well. Sure, it shouldn't be a better means of advancement than grouping, but cockblocking solo players from advancing will just hamper the casual player.

It should be viable to advance solo, just harder.

casual player doesn't pay to play these games. Casual player excuse is just from people who don't like the genre to begin with.

Let me echo myself and Way.

Fuck you.

You are parrotting the same shit the developers of MMOG's are telling us, namely that you HAVE to play 20, 30, 40 hours a week to be competitive and have fun in these games. If you aren't willing to make these things a fucking lifestyle, don't apply.

Which is precisely why none of these pigfuckers get my money. You are not the mass market, you are not the majority of gamers. Most people don't have even 4 hours a night to devote to a goddamn game, and thus would like the option of having something provided to them in smaller chunks than forced grouping requires. We aren't AVERSE to grouping necessarily, so long as the group isn't filled with complete cockmunchers. But to force me to group with the first group I find, even if it's filled with cockmunchers, means you will not get my fucking money.

And honestly, though I may not be the current target demographic for MMOG's, I'm sitting here begging a dev to take my money. I'm also going to wager there are more of me than there are of you.

[Sloth]

Which is precisely why none of these pigfuckers get my money. You are not the mass market, you are not the majority of gamers. Most people don't have even 4 hours a night to devote to a goddamn game, and thus would like the option of having something provided to them in smaller chunks than forced grouping requires. We aren't AVERSE to grouping necessarily, so long as the group isn't filled with complete cockmunchers. But to force me to group with the first group I find, even if it's filled with cockmunchers, means you will not get my fucking money.

And honestly, though I may not be the current target demographic for MMOG's, I'm sitting here begging a dev to take my money. I'm also going to wager there are more of me than there are of you.

You aren't begging anyone to take your money. If you were you'd play whats out there (beggers can't be choosers). If you haven't found a MMOG you like by now you aren't ever going to.  I'm sure there are more people out there who don't like MMOGs than are, but they are never going to pay up.

You'll find that people who group in EQ and DAOC by and large encounter very few idiots. If you go into a game with a bad attitude that you won't like it, you probably won't have good grouping experiences.

[WayAbvPar]

I think I have figured it out- Sloth is a posting bot financed by SOE, Mythic, and any other company with an interest in keeping things status quo. There is no other explanation for it.

[Sloth]

I think I have figured it out- Sloth is a posting bot financed by SOE, Mythic, and any other company with an interest in keeping things status quo. There is no other explanation for it.

You don't even know what you want. All you've been able to come up with is, you want fun, small amounts of time investment, and not have to play with anyone you don't like. Thats great marketing speak, but it doesn't mean anything unless you got something like the Justice League Bat Computer that lets you put any random thoughts into it to get the right output.

In high school we had a project where we had to make toliet paper better. What can you come up with? LSD laced toliet paper? At the end of the day aren't you still building on toliet paper? Its not  like you ever remove the paper for pie. What else are you going to wipe your ass with? Silk? That would be cost prohibitive. You can refine toliet paper but no matter what idea you come up with its always going to be based on the paper. MMOGs aren't really any different. If you reject the core concepts as being fun, what are you left with? Looking for a different genre.

[HaemishM]

Ok, maybe begging isn't the right word. Pandering, perhaps? Let's describe the pattern of behavior and see if we can come up with the proper term.

Bought EQ, played for 2 1/2 years. Addicted.
Bought DAoC, played for 6 months. Burned out
Played SB beta, got the release, played for 2 months until the bugs were too much to take. Beaten and left for dead

I've have since tried Horizons, betaed AC2, Neocron, alpha'ed and beta'ed Wish, and followed the development of SWG and every other MMOG pretty closely. Beta'ed UBO. Any one of those instances was a chance for the genre developers to fashion a game that fit me. After all, if I'm taking the trouble to test a game, to the point of dealing with bugs and downloading HUGE installs, I'm quite obviously searching for a game to satisfy me. Sure, maybe my criteria for what gets my money is a cut above a bum on the street begging for spare chagne for a bottle of ripple.

I'm the cheaply dressed slut at the end of the bar, buying drinks for gentlemen callers to take me home. I'm the one asking them to dance. Short of prostrating myself on the floor in front of them with the words "FUCK ME LIKE THE PIG THAT I AM YOU STALLION" tattooed on my coochie, I'm not quite sure what more I can do to make this genre satisfy me.

[WayAbvPar]

I think I have figured it out- Sloth is a posting bot financed by SOE, Mythic, and any other company with an interest in keeping things status quo. There is no other explanation for it.

You don't even know what you want. All you've been able to come up with is, you want fun, small amounts of time investment, and not have to play with anyone you don't like.

I am pretty sure that I have told you to quit fucking telling me what I want. I don't know where the fuck you have been, but I have been posting about things I would like to see in this genre for years now. Terribly sorry if you missed the hundreds of posts I have made on the subject.

Have you noticed that there is more than one poster in this thread that vehemently disagrees with you? Is it because you know better than all of us, or is it because you have your head stuck so far up your ass that you haven't read ANY of the posts?

Don't bother responding with another "things aren't going to change" post- it makes you look like a fucking idiot. We are here to discuss games, not fellate the devs and accept the status quo. Perhaps you would feel more at home with the rest of the fanbois on the official boards, or the Vault.

[El Gallo]

So can anyone explain why the hell it should be slower to solo up a character? When I grouped in UO it was to fight the biggest baddest mofo spawns that our group could handle, the bigger the group the bigger the mofo spawn.

When I solo'd I fought Earth elementals, I earned about the same amount of gold, I gained the same amount of skill, but that didn't stop me from looking forward to the next time we were going to kick the bigger spawns ass.

I've yet to hear one compelling reason for the forced grouping model. Well other then "Uhm, EQ has a ton of users, yo".

I'll give it a shot.  People take the fastest/most hassle free route to the cheese.  In your game that's soloing.  So you end up with a game where most people usually solo, and with minimal class interdependence.  By doing this, you have painted yoruself into a corner, where you can't add much interesting group centered content because (a) your players are not trained for it and (b) your classes are not designed for it. AC, SWG, and other solo-centric games are all nothing but utterly mindless clickfest zergs when it comes to large group content.  Compare to EQ, where multi group content often requires a great deal of focus, finesse, and specialization [in addition to absurdly large amounts of time].

[El Gallo]

You are parrotting the same shit the developers of MMOG's are telling us, namely that you HAVE to play 20, 30, 40 hours a week to be competitive and have fun in these games. If you aren't willing to make these things a fucking lifestyle, don't apply.

The "be competitive" part is key here.  If you aren't obsessed with measuring your online peen against powerplayers, you can have fun in a lot of the current MMOGs on much less than 20 hours a week.  If you cannot have fun because you are tormented that some guy living in his mom's basement has bigger pixels than you, then no, you cannot be happy.

[HaemishM]

You are parrotting the same shit the developers of MMOG's are telling us, namely that you HAVE to play 20, 30, 40 hours a week to be competitive and have fun in these games. If you aren't willing to make these things a fucking lifestyle, don't apply.

The "be competitive" part is key here.  If you aren't obsessed with measuring your online peen against powerplayers, you can have fun in a lot of the current MMOGs on much less than 20 hours a week.  If you cannot have fun because you are tormented that some guy living in his mom's basement has bigger pixels than you, then no, you cannot be happy.

Be competitive does not mean be better, be bigger, be stronger, be faster, or any other measure you want to put on it.

Be competitive means that I can actually you know, COMPETE with the person. It means that in a PVP game, they don't automatically win because they've put more time into the level treadmill than me. In PVE, it means I can actually hunt with my friends who play the game more than me without feeling like a secondhand gimp they have to protect.

To compete != to succeed.

I'm ok with losing. I'm not ok with losing simply because I couldn't put 6 hours a night into the game 7 days a week.

If you cannot compete, you probably aren't going to have fun. Again, competing does not mean winning all the time every time, it means on "any given Sunday" I could beat the other guy.

[schild]

Again, competing does not mean winning all the time every time, it means on "any given Sunday" I could beat the other guy.

Oliver Stone would be proud.

[El Gallo]

Be competitive means that I can actually you know, COMPETE with the person. . . . In PVE, it means I can actually hunt with my friends who play the game more than me without feeling like a secondhand gimp they have to protect.

The problem here is that you can't have that unless you punish the higher time player by preventing them from meaningfully advancing.  If I play 5 minutes a week, you play 5 hours a week, and someone else plays 50 hours a week, and you want us to all be "competitive" as far as our contribution in a group of the three of us is concerned, that means that you gained pretty much jack and squat in the other 4 hours and 55 minutes you played, while the other guy gained jack and squat for 49 hours and 55 minutes.

I am just saying that it should be enough to make a game that can be fun for the casual player, whether they play alone or with other players who put in similar amounts of time (or with a series of players that play greater or fewer hours).

[Sloth]

I am pretty sure that I have told you to quit fucking telling me what I want. I don't know where the fuck you have been, but I have been posting about things I would like to see in this genre for years now. Terribly sorry if you missed the hundreds of posts I have made on the subject.

Have you noticed that there is more than one poster in this thread that vehemently disagrees with you? Is it because you know better than all of us, or is it because you have your head stuck so far up your ass that you haven't read ANY of the posts?

Don't bother responding with another "things aren't going to change" post- it makes you look like a fucking idiot. We are here to discuss games, not fellate the devs and accept the status quo. Perhaps you would feel more at home with the rest of the fanbois on the official boards, or the Vault.

I don't know why you are being so defensive. I'm defining the basis of my arguement. Which is that MMOGs are defined by fundamental concepts. Grinding, Grouping, Item Collecting, and Lotsa Time Investment. From there I'm saying what you should expect from the next new thing.

There are several MMOGs out now. If one of them hasn't suited your fancy yet, I don't see how any future MMOG could possibly change your opinion. Every MMOG does things slightly different, some are more polished than others. Perhaps WoW will be a game you like, but even WoW is grounded in the same MMOG model, it has just refined things with linear questing instead of linear camping.

I like pie in the sky features as much as the next person. I have my own ideas of what an ideal game is, but when I actually play something I look for things that I like, not stuff that I don't like. As long as there is enough features that I like i'll play it. I'm not sucking up to any Dev or Game, I take an optimistic approach because I want a game to play.

From what I've seen of WoW, I don't think anyone here will be able to complain about games again. I played a little on my friends account. And beyond some graphical issues, its essentially the most refined MMOG model ever made. Thats just honesty, not fanboy speak. Its too easy for me, but I'll defintely buy it and run through it in a month or so. Undoubtly I'll be bored by christmas though.

[Sloth]

Bought EQ, played for 2 1/2 years. Addicted.
Bought DAoC, played for 6 months. Burned out
Played SB beta, got the release, played for 2 months until the bugs were too much to take. Beaten and left for dead

I'm the cheaply dressed slut at the end of the bar, buying drinks for gentlemen callers to take me home. I'm the one asking them to dance. Short of prostrating myself on the floor in front of them with the words "FUCK ME LIKE THE PIG THAT I AM YOU STALLION" tattooed on my coochie, I'm not quite sure what more I can do to make this genre satisfy me.

To me the 2+ years at EQ is the key. I use to think I hated EQ, but I didn't hate it, I was just bored/burnt out on it. Because MMOGs are so similar its easy for that burnout to quickly set in on a new game. In some ways you almost want to go back to EQ because you are already maxed out and if you are gonna do the treadmill might as well do it in a game you remember liking at one point.

I think WoW will be the game to revitalize people burned out, although its not going to make anyone who TRULY doesn't like EQ and by truly I mean people who don't want to spend 8 hours on a weekend leveling and item collecting. However if you did at some point like EQ enough to play it for 2 years, you'll enjoy WoW.

[HaemishM]

I did at some point enjoy EQ. I did burn out.

And not one MMOG since then has either made me think I'm playing a NEW game. They ALL have made me feel like I'm playing the SAME GODDAMN GAME AGAIN, just with different skins. Which I'm pretty sure I've articulated multiple fucking times. Needless to say (although obviously not as you still don't seem to get it), if I've already burned out on EQ-style gameplay, why the fuck would more of the same in WoW, ONLY OMFG WITH WARCRAFT SKINS, would matter one fucking whit.

I want a NEW game, not an "EQ ONLY BETTER!!!11!"

As for the whole advancement argument, why is it automatically assumed that an MMOG has to be purely about the advancement? That's the problem I'm bitching about. MMOG's are about nothing but the advancement, and that shit is boring to me. I want to pay a dev a subscription fee for an MMOG that isn't about advancement, that isn't a badly-disguised or reskinned EQ clone, and that isn't buggy as fuck.

You'd think that wouldn't be asking too much, but apparently, my Passion is more rare than Mel's.

[Kyper]

Be competitive means that I can actually you know, COMPETE with the person. It means that in a PVP game, they don't automatically win because they've put more time into the level treadmill than me. In PVE, it means I can actually hunt with my friends who play the game more than me without feeling like a secondhand gimp they have to protect.

City of Heroes has no PVP, but it does have an interesting feature called "sidekicking".  Basically, It lets lower levels team up with higher levels and fight at the higher level player's effectiveness.  

If your buds are level 30 and you're level 12, one of them could make you a sidekick for a play session and you could hang with them in PVE.  You'd get xp appropriate for your level, so this is not supposed to be a way to twink lower levels.

Perhaps WoW will be a game you like, but even WoW is grounded in the same MMOG model, it has just refined things with linear questing instead of linear camping.

Which, to me, would be a big change and a welcome difference.  I still have nightmares about AC2, so forgive me if I watch this concept with a wary eye.

[El Gallo]

why is it automatically assumed that an MMOG has to be purely about the advancement? That's the problem I'm bitching about. MMOG's are about nothing but the advancement, and that shit is boring to me. I want to pay a dev a subscription fee for an MMOG that isn't about advancement, that isn't a badly-disguised or reskinned EQ clone, and that isn't buggy as fuck.

http://planetside.station.sony.com/

[Rodent]

For me the MMOG scene was/is about pvp, socialising and to some extent roleplaying... To this day only Ultima Online gave me all that in one package. And EA had to go and ruin it.

[Hanzii]

Its like running a marathon, its about endurance and determination. There will be people who get to the end and people who quit half way through. If it wasn't hard and challenging to some degree everyone would make it.

See, that's a stupid analogy right there.
I know marathon runners and I've heard them describe the training and the actual marathon as many things, but never as actual fun.
It's a challenge, it's something to accomplish - a mountain to climb - but the process is downright painful.

Is that a process you'd advise devs to adobt for games? I can just see the marketing department, when they get that one.
It's the way mmogs are now sure - but it's not how they're marketed and I'm sure most devs believe their games are fun to play, not just when you finally passes the line.

And the first mmog to find the new recipe, might actual get a new (bigger) playerbase instead of just cannibalizing the stricly finite number of catasses going from one painful challenge to another.

There's more of us than you - and we have more money. Catering to our needs would be good business.

[koboshi]

I don't know why you are being so defensive. I'm defining the basis of my arguement. Which is that MMOGs are defined by fundamental concepts. Grinding, Grouping, Item Collecting, and Lotsa Time Investment. From there I'm saying what you should expect from the next new thing.

   I agree there are only so many ways to mix these four. How ever if you add something new to the mix, like say, any other successful game element, you get something that no one else has.

For example... make grinding a puzzle game.  Puzzle game are damn addictive just ask pogo and pop cap, there accessible to the masses and a casual gamer can come on whip up some Proton Nunchucks of Levity, get rid of them and sign off.  The casual gamer: in; catasses: unaffected.
...Or you could hook DDR dance pads up and make the dancers in SWG actually work for it.
...Or add the ability for guild leaders to send orders to the guild by means of a spellforce like overview.
...Or artisans could create custom art pieces by painting with the mouse in game, using only collected pigments.
...Or you could throw sports in.  With simple commands you could have soccer; /passto HaemishM, /stealfrom Sloth, /shootgoal.  Some guy steals the ball from you? You just knock him in the back of the head with an arrow. Hilarity ensues!

The point is, there are an almost infinite number of possible derivations from the norm. So why should we settle for the same ol', same ol'?

[Sloth]

I did at some point enjoy EQ. I did burn out.

And not one MMOG since then has either made me think I'm playing a NEW game. They ALL have made me feel like I'm playing the SAME GODDAMN GAME AGAIN, just with different skins. Which I'm pretty sure I've articulated multiple fucking times. Needless to say (although obviously not as you still don't seem to get it), if I've already burned out on EQ-style gameplay, why the fuck would more of the same in WoW, ONLY OMFG WITH WARCRAFT SKINS, would matter one fucking whit.

I know what you are saying, I know whats its like to be burned out, but Reskinned EQ sums up everything you can expect. If you have burned out any desire to play EQish games, then I don't see how MMOGs are ever going to appeal to you again. WoW is easy, but it also MASKS the grind as well as you can expect. What I'm saying about WoW is that it has every core feature of a MMOG , but you don't notice it unless you are trying to find something wrong with it. If you just play and go with the flow its like playing an RPG. If you play it and can't get past the fact at the end of the day you are only going to be 1 or 2 levels higher with 40 more to go, its going to suck.

As for the whole advancement argument, why is it automatically assumed that an MMOG has to be purely about the advancement? That's the problem I'm bitching about. MMOG's are about nothing but the advancement, and that shit is boring to me. I want to pay a dev a subscription fee for an MMOG that isn't about advancement, that isn't a badly-disguised or reskinned EQ clone, and that isn't buggy as fuck.

You'd think that wouldn't be asking too much, but apparently, my Passion is more rare than Mel's.

Its assumed because companies want to make money, and the BEST way to retain players for months at a time is "grinding". You can play Planetside, although it does have advancement, its just not totally necessary advancement. But then what is there to do in PS? Its cheaper and faster to play one of many Team Based Shooters.

I'm sure you think that players will play for a year if they don't have to level up, but I don't think thats the case. I think the key to these games is persistency, which means saved character development. Players want something to show for their year of play. They want to see their guy who started out a weakling with a rusty sword turn into an epic hero with his Vorpal Sword.

[Sloth]

Its like running a marathon, its about endurance and determination. There will be people who get to the end and people who quit half way through. If it wasn't hard and challenging to some degree everyone would make it.

See, that's a stupid analogy right there.
I know marathon runners and I've heard them describe the training and the actual marathon as many things, but never as actual fun.
It's a challenge, it's something to accomplish - a mountain to climb - but the process is downright painful.

Is that a process you'd advise devs to adobt for games? I can just see the marketing department, when they get that one.
It's the way mmogs are now sure - but it's not how they're marketed and I'm sure most devs believe their games are fun to play, not just when you finally passes the line.

And the first mmog to find the new recipe, might actual get a new (bigger) playerbase instead of just cannibalizing the stricly finite number of catasses going from one painful challenge to another.

There's more of us than you - and we have more money. Catering to our needs would be good business.

I play Baseball, Football, and Basketball, some tennis. Its never "fun" when you are competing, not the fun you have playing Kotor, but it is "fun" to bust your ass and compete. This is just a semantics problem. When I say games should be challenging and hard, that implies its not going to be "easy fun" its going to be "hard fun". Hard fun is when you bust your ass and realize "man, i came out on top, I rock". it is a way better feeling than "easy fun" but your mileage will vary.