A Catass by any other name...

[stray]

Just as in for example, golf, the more work (practice, etc) you put into it, the better your shiny will be (lower handicap).

It seems as if you think "getting the shiny" is the actual objective of golf.

The objective of golf is to put a ball in a hole. Nothing else. That's the game. Anything else is a byproduct or a means in accomplishing that -- But they are not the main point.

[Zane0]

It seems to me that if one wanted constant gratification as they play, then a pure refined diku experience would be the best model to back.  The more freeform a game seems to get, the less the developers can ensure that the player is taking part in their controlled experience.

I consider this to be a delightful piece of irony, and it will probably keep Dikus on top, short of anything really crazy.

[SnakeCharmer]

Just as in for example, golf, the more work (practice, etc) you put into it, the better your shiny will be (lower handicap).

It seems as if you think "getting the shiny" is the actual objective of golf.

The objective of golf is to put a ball in a hole. Nothing else. That's the game. Anything else is a byproduct or a means in accomplishing that -- But they are not the main point.

The objective of golf is to put the ball in a hole in as few as strokes as possible.  And to beat the person/people you're playing against.  That's my shiny.  As well as being able to hit a low hook, or hit a power fade when I need to. 

The shiny is just a representation of your end goal.  For some, its the uber dagger one hit of death, or others it's carrying a tee shot 265 yards in the air.

[HaemishM]

Just as in for example, golf, the more work (practice, etc) you put into it, the better your shiny will be (lower handicap).

It seems as if you think "getting the shiny" is the actual objective of golf.

The objective of golf is to put a ball in a hole. Nothing else. That's the game. Anything else is a byproduct or a means in accomplishing that -- But they are not the main point.

The objective of golf is to put the ball in a hole in as few as strokes as possible.  And to beat the person/people you're playing against.  That's my shiny.  As well as being able to hit a low hook, or hit a power fade when I need to. 

The objective when playing golf is to hit the ball in the hole while enjoying a nice walk or golf cart ride in the open air.

See, it isn't all about achievement for everyone who plays. People like me who play with people like you end up whacking each other with golf clubs. I have no problem with achievmanauts having their games and enjoying them. What I have a problem with is those achievmanauts going to every game out there like locusts, driving the developers to make every game cater to their achievement-obsessed playstyle and then when the game is thoroughly ensconced in the achievmanaut mentality, they leave for another game because the devs couldn't get there fast enough.

I'm trying to enjoy whacking the ball in the open air when the drunk asswipe behind me keeps telling me how much I suck and exhorting me to hit faster, better, more while insulting my manhood and letting me know how much better at golf he is.

[StGabe]

What I have a problem with is those achievmanauts going to every game out there like locusts, driving the developers to make every game cater to their achievement-obsessed playstyle and then when the game is thoroughly ensconced in the achievmanaut mentality, they leave for another game because the devs couldn't get there fast enough.

And achievers have problems with casuals who just want to "dumb down" the game and "give away" all meaning to its accomplishments.  And in fact I think that a lot of MMO's, including UO and EQ1, have histories of significantly dumbing down content and just making content more accessible.  Compare EQ1 with full xp penalties, boats, etc., to what we have today.  It's not a one-way street.

As far as I can tell, both sides bitch and whine incessantly.  And the winner of any individual forum battle on this has little to do with development.  I think most players vastly overinflate the importance of random forum bitchfests on the direction that the game gets developed.  From what I have been told by people working in the industry, it is things like exit surveys, focus tests and player histories that companies really look at.

I'd be curious to hear in what ways you think that uber achievers have shifted development on the games you've played.  Is it a matter of making the existing game less playable for casuals or is it simply a matter of allowing more achievement for uber players which then creates a longer distance between casuals and ubers and therefore makes casual players feel less proud of their achievements.  If it's the former then I think that can be a problem.  I'm just not sure how much of that actually goes on.  With the latter, well, as a "focused" player I strenuously object.  If there isn't a way for me to do something better or worse than anyone else then what is the point?

Most games are, in fact, trying to hit somewhere in between.  And so they have to put up with the constant culture clash of their audience as it contains both ends of the spectrum.  These games both dumb down certain things and make certain bits more accessible (look at how much EQ2 has done for this since release) and add additional content down the road for focused players to head towards. 

[stray]

And achievers have problems with casuals who just want to "dumb down" the game and "give away" all meaning to its accomplishments.

What are you talking about? Short of presenting me with a blank screen, they're already about as dumbed down as something could get.

[Strazos]

Currently, the only thing difficult in an MMO, in ANY MMO, is the time investment. That's it.

[Venkman]

Currently, the only thing difficult in an MMO, in ANY MMO, is the time investment. That's it.

And for some, the people they don't know.

You make this same mistake every time you pontificate about the direction of the genre;  falsely assuming that because YOU don't enjoy it or see it as a long-term investment, it must be inherently flawed or wrong.   Therefore, any game that follows this design mode is 'setting back the genre.'

I think you have me confused with someone else. Or are remembering what I used to write at WT.o or some such.

First, and most importantly, I don't see a "direction" for the genre at all. There's too many different games, players and companies chasing individaul needs for there to be a singular direction. Maybe some marketing guru will continue to split this stuff into sub-genres. Maybe not. Maybe genres are irrelevant until the "most successful" games (as measured by outsiders) start showing some true differences in playstyles.

Second, like anyone who's been around awhile, playing, watching and talking, I do try to see the longterm investment in these games, from the individual's point of view. I know it was fun in the old days to mock anyone who still played {whatever}. But the fact is, being an "outsider" in this genre is a daily reality for all of us.

It's ok to not like something millions of others do. I'm just interested in finding out why. What I currently like is irrelevant. It has to be. Every year it's different (in both game and playstyle/motivation).

Good discussion though. I love this abstract crap :)

[Evangolis]

Compare EQ1 with full xp penalties, boats, etc., to what we have today. 

I have to say, I didn’t miss out on killing Naggy because I was waiting for the boat.  I didn’t kill dragons because I was doing something else, something I wanted to do.

And this old saw about these games taking nothing but time, this isn’t actually true.  They also take the choice to use that time in specific ways.  No, this isn’t grandmaster chess, but there are skills needed for some content.  Haemish’s old sig said he didn’t play games to be a politician, but that is one skill you will need in house to hold a large guild together.  Perhaps it is right to say these games don’t take skill, but they do take choices and abilities.  If all these games took was time, then I’d be fishing on the dock in ButcherBlock wearing planar robes.

Just as in for example, golf, the more work (practice, etc) you put into it, the better your shiny will be (lower handicap).

It seems as if you think "getting the shiny" is the actual objective of golf.

The objective of golf is to put a ball in a hole. Nothing else. That's the game. Anything else is a byproduct or a means in accomplishing that -- But they are not the main point.

The objective of golf is to put the ball in a hole in as few as strokes as possible.  And to beat the person/people you're playing against.  That's my shiny.  As well as being able to hit a low hook, or hit a power fade when I need to. 

The objective when playing golf is to hit the ball in the hole while enjoying a nice walk or golf cart ride in the open air.

See, it isn't all about achievement for everyone who plays. People like me who play with people like you end up whacking each other with golf clubs. I have no problem with achievmanauts having their games and enjoying them. What I have a problem with is those achievmanauts going to every game out there like locusts, driving the developers to make every game cater to their achievement-obsessed playstyle and then when the game is thoroughly ensconced in the achievmanaut mentality, they leave for another game because the devs couldn't get there fast enough.

I'm trying to enjoy whacking the ball in the open air when the drunk asswipe behind me keeps telling me how much I suck and exhorting me to hit faster, better, more while insulting my manhood and letting me know how much better at golf he is.

Whereas I am one of those who sees golf as something that screws up a perfectly good walk.  Games are always about choices.  But I think the choices presented in MMOs tend to drive people apart more than they bring them together.

[Zane0]

Currently, the only thing difficult in an MMO, in ANY MMO, is the time investment. That's it.

Ever done C'thun, a twenty minute encounter, where five seconds of bad positioning from one in forty members at the wrong time will kill the raid?  There are guilds in WoW that have half the raiding schedule of other guilds, and accomplish exactly as much, if not more. 

How do you explain this?

[Nebu]

Currently, the only thing difficult in an MMO, in ANY MMO, is the time investment. That's it.

Ever done C'thun, a twenty minute encounter, where five seconds of bad positioning from one in forty members at the wrong time will kill the raid?  There are guilds in WoW that have half the raiding schedule of other guilds, and accomplish exactly as much, if not more. 

How do you explain this?

By difficult you mean going to some web site, getting the secret to an encounter, then getting 40 people to do as their told.  I can see the last part taking skill. 

PvE in mmog's is easy.  The only thing even remotely interesting is being the first group to do an encounter.  Due to crazy things like a job and a personal life, I'm certain that's an interesting aspect I'll never partake in. 

[Zane0]

No, after a few days, there's no real secret.  It comes down to coordination, rapid communication, and battle awareness as an individual and as a whole- some have it and some do not.

You can believe otherwise, but you would be wrong.

[Nebu]

Most gamers are like drivers.  They all think that they're good at it.  Statistically, that can't possibly be the case. 

Second, I never said mmogs didn't take at least some modicum of skill.  I just stated that it didn't take much to be successful at pve in mmogs.  I'd also argue that for every 40 people in a raid, there are probably 5-10 that are good at the game being played.  Good enough to drag the other 30-35 along and still manage to succeed. 

> Rapid communication has now been turned to the voice chat programs.  Hardly rocket science. 

> Battle awareness = not screwing up.  Often doing nothing > screwing up, especially when there are enough competent people to accomplish the goal. I found this to be the case in most mmogs. 

> By coordination I assume you mean getting people to follow a unified scheme.  Now that, I admit, takes some talent to pull off. 

PvE in mmogs isn't hard.  It's not meant to be.  Given enough time, nearly every player gets to win.   

 

[Fordel]

No, after a few days, there's no real secret.  It comes down to coordination, rapid communication, and battle awareness as an individual and as a whole- some have it and some do not.

You can believe otherwise, but you would be wrong.

I'd buy that, if I saw a raid of people kill something like C'Thun in AuctionHouse greens.

[Rasix]

No, after a few days, there's no real secret.  It comes down to coordination, rapid communication, and battle awareness as an individual and as a whole- some have it and some do not.

You can believe otherwise, but you would be wrong.

I'd buy that, if I saw a raid of people kill something like C'Thun in AuctionHouse greens.

You registered for that gem? 

[Fordel]

You registered for that gem? 

That's what it comes down to though, isn't it? No matter how good of a player you are, unless you spend the time to gather all the previous top end gear and/or any special resist type gear for the zone, you just won't get anywhere. Your only as effective as your numbers in the end, and the only way to get the better numbers, is to spend the time farming it all up. With other games, you get better with time and practice. With MMO's, you spend time to get better. I guess you could say MMO's take some skill, but the bar is just so low, it is mostly moot when you take in the stat differences.

[Venkman]

True. Except getting that gear is just one step up the tech tree, enabling you to get the next step up.

It's not just about time. Anyone who's played an active role in raiding has experienced the skill required. But it also absolutely is about time investment, both during the raid and prior to it during preparation (which in large part is about prior raiding).

Not everyone can do this. My thought is that a lot of people who can't already accept this. They may feel a twinge of jealousy for someone parading around in their Sunday Best at IF AH. But they may also realize that they themselves are simply unequipped, lifestyle-wise, to make such a serious effort. The better games offer these people things to do as well. It is, of course, also the major issue people have with pre-60 WoW and after. Personally, I think WoW still does a good job for the most part.

You make this same mistake every time you pontificate about the direction of the genre;  falsely assuming that because YOU don't enjoy it or see it as a long-term investment, it must be inherently flawed or wrong.   Therefore, any game that follows this design mode is 'setting back the genre.'

I think you have me confused with someone else.

I went back and re-read the post you were referencing and can see how you think that's what I meant actually. It's not though, but my bad for not clarifying. I don't feel all, nor even most, will go from WoW to eventually SL, following some line of deepening preference for even more virtual lifestyle experiences. Heck, I'm a pendulum myself, back and forth from pure combat/diku to crafting/commerce. However, I do think some who leave WoW will eventually tire of the other games of the like and move to other experiences. There's a lot of breadth in this genre.

Doesn't mean Eve will hit 6.5mil from everyone who left WoW though :)

[Hoax]

Aside from what Haem said, a catasser of any stripe is not the ideal customer for an MMO. They use up far more resources (bandwidth, processing time) than a more casual player and pay in the same amount while likely generating more smoke, noise and CSR calls. Their overhead cost likely outstrips their monthly sub fee.

Do we actually believe that?

No, after a few days, there's no real secret.  It comes down to coordination, rapid communication, and battle awareness as an individual and as a whole- some have it and some do not.

You can believe otherwise, but you would be wrong.

*shakes head*  Yes I've watched C'Thun be taken down along with a few of the other bosses from that latest instance whose name escapes me.  I've watched every boss in MC die, Ony, everything in AQ40, most of ZG.  It does take some skill but again the time spent component of said "skills" is way too fucking high.  The fact is for every "skilled" uber raider there are 100-1,000 players who could just as easily do that job but they dont have the pre-requisite gear / ability to suck cock to get into a hardcore raiding guild.

While it does take skill, the barrier between defeat and success is not skill its time spent in-game and willingness to devote your life to a game.

You can believe otherwise, but you should realize it really sounds like you are in a ub3r-raiding guild and want to convince yourself that your actually accomplishing something when you "win" the same pve encounter that has been lovingly "put on farm status" over and over.  All so a handful of members per run can get relatively minor upgrades to their character's effectiveness.  While you wait for Blizz to release the next raid encounter which will have a little bit of power-creep then it is time to do it again.  Meanwhile you most likely dont have much fucking time for pvp or anything but raiding with the current # of instances and the reset times.  Most raiding guilds dont have enough hours in the day and everything pre-BWL is being dropped or done much less regularly.

[StGabe]

You can believe otherwise, but you should realize it really sounds like you are in a ub3r-raiding guild and want to convince yourself that your actually accomplishing something when you "win" the same pve encounter that has been lovingly "put on farm status" over and over.

On the other hand, the other side sounds like they are trying to convince themselves that it doesn't matter if other players accomplish things they don't because they must be assholes.  If they didn't care then why invest so much into calling them assholes.  I think there is some truth to both accusations.

Isn't it possible just to stop caring and say: you have your achievements, I have mine?  For both sides?  Developers stop listening to these bitchfests after the first few posts anyway and it ends up just being egos that are being thrown back and forth.

[stray]

Isn't it possible just to stop caring and say: you have your achievements, I have mine? For both sides?

There aren't just two sides here -- one casual, one less time constrained, both vying for "achievements" in their own way. It's more complex than that.

All of this backlash against catasses really comes down to the neglect of other playstyles. It's not about time or envy. It's about playstyles. It isn't easy to just "stop caring" when there aren't very many appealing MMOG alternatives, let alone other advancement paths within the same game as the one catasses are playing, for other types of players to flock to. There isn't one good game on the market, especially a big budget one, that is as intensely focused on "Explorers" or "fast paced, arcade action", for example, as these games tend to be focused on "Achievers", gear, and grinds.

Or to sum it up:

You have your achievements, and I don't give a fuck about achievements.

If there's anything that I'm jealous about, it isn't the catasses' schedules, it isn't their phat lootz, it isn't their raids on farming status, it isn't their serverwide fame, and it isn't their uber full tier 3 set --- It's that they've got the entire fucking MMO genre on lockdown. I want that shit.*


Note: I still have single and normal multiplayer games. I can still enjoy myself. It actually is possible for me to "stop caring". I don't need to play MMO's. But for the purpose of this thread, I'm going to act like it.

[Venkman]

It doesn't sound like you want more Explorer/Socializer games, but rather, more people who think and play like you do. The bigger companies and their $20mil+ budgets spend their money (and justify getting it in hte first place) by following the trend.

At the same time though, I get the sense that some folks think this genre only has about 10 titles or so, or at least, 10 titles worth checking out. I'm thinking that's because people naturally gravitate towards experiences obviously attractive to other people.

But since some already know they don't fit into that mold anyway, I'm surprised they haven't taken it upon themselves to change their barrier of entry. There's plenty of densely-populated alternatives out there beyond the sameold.

[stray]

It doesn't sound like you want more Explorer/Socializer games, but rather, more people who think and play like you do.

I'm just using those as examples (though I do fall heavily under the "Explorer" category). My point is that there should simply be more variety -- Both on the level of what types of players you cater to, and what kind of gameplay mechanics are involved.

It isn't easy for people to go their own seperate ways and "not care", as Gabe suggests, when there isn't exactly anywhere for them to go to. For the most part, the only players who can happily go their seperate ways are achievers/"focused" types/catasses, etc.. The market is flooded like crazy with games that can only appeal to them.

Also, I'm not necessarily arguing for more people who think and play like me. I don't need games completely centered around my tastes (though it'd be great....even if there was just ONE). If it was possible for a single game to cater to many player types and offered different methods of advancement -- Hey, fine with me.* What would I care what everyone else does in it?

*I guess SWG tried to do just that. I'll give it some credit. Too bad the gameplay sucked.

[Venkman]

I used that statement as an opening to the business rationale. I agree with you that other playstyles do not get the same focus as the achiever-types and their ilk. The better virtual worlds attempt to balance a number of different styles. Unfortunately, each is marked with its own special brand of broken.

But even that isn't the biggest hinderance in my opinion, since lots of MMOGs have problems. Rather, it's that there just aren't as many people seeking the experience you want, and therefore are not seen as a significant market for effort.

Personally, I think that's bunk. The bigguns in this genre are so focused on plying what is, they're missing the tens of millions of people playing online games everywhere else but here. They miss these people by making games that require massive times sinks and no-emergency-AFK dedication because that sells and has prompted emergent industries like RMTing such that now publishers can get their own cut (as we all watch the influx of Far East titles and/or the business models behind them).

This is cannabalization of a player archetype though, diminishing returns. It's a shame too, but not everyone is as fixated on them. It's just that the games that aren't fixated on the WoW-type player also don't get the coverage. That I feel is because a good number of people talking the most about the genre came up through achiever-focused games, creating a bit of media cannabalization as well. How many more places do we need talking about the same dozen titles?

That's why, finally, I mentioned earlier about those people off playing games not talked about in many of these places. They're different games for different people talked about in very different places without the shackles of "convention" as defined by diku.

Will that matter? Will there be some type of WoW killer in the form of MySpace with a graphical client? Maybe. I do think that the next game to make it big ain't coming from any of the usual suspects though, because they are, and their supporters are, locked in a specific mindset.

[HaemishM]

What I have a problem with is those achievmanauts going to every game out there like locusts, driving the developers to make every game cater to their achievement-obsessed playstyle and then when the game is thoroughly ensconced in the achievmanaut mentality, they leave for another game because the devs couldn't get there fast enough.

And achievers have problems with casuals who just want to "dumb down" the game and "give away" all meaning to its accomplishments.  And in fact I think that a lot of MMO's, including UO and EQ1, have histories of significantly dumbing down content and just making content more accessible.  Compare EQ1 with full xp penalties, boats, etc., to what we have today.  It's not a one-way street.

Please define the MEANING of accomplishments in MMOG's. Wait, I'll do it for you. They mean fuckall, other than your own self-aggrandizement or the puffing up of your group of closeted rejects. Seriously, being the first to kill Vox in EQ really doesn't mean a damn thing to anyone outside of the people who accomplish it and the small cadre of sycophants that cling to these hopeless achievemanauts like the barnacles to the underside of a ship.

EQ only dumbed down content when the new expansions were about to be released. The boats were changed because the EQ devs kept breaking them and just got tired of fixing them or were unable to. The full xp penalties were most of the time either broken or just plain implemented wrong.

I'd be curious to hear in what ways you think that uber achievers have shifted development on the games you've played.  Is it a matter of making the existing game less playable for casuals or is it simply a matter of allowing more achievement for uber players which then creates a longer distance between casuals and ubers and therefore makes casual players feel less proud of their achievements.  If it's the former then I think that can be a problem.  I'm just not sure how much of that actually goes on.  With the latter, well, as a "focused" player I strenuously object.  If there isn't a way for me to do something better or worse than anyone else then what is the point?

Sure there is. But what has traditionally happened in MMOG development, from EQ down to WoW is that the egomongers have driven the development. In EQ it was especially bad, because the developers of that game (McQuaid, Butler) took it as a personal insult when the Furors of the world beat their uber encounters in record time. So they tuned up the difficulty of encounters based not on skill, but on the mudflated item levels that the FOH's of the world had. They tuned encounters to be really hard for the ubers, and everyone else was fucked, because they didn't have the gear or the time or the levels to match. Kunark is the perfect example. Just plain walking-around encounters in Kunark were about 25% more difficult compared to their equal-level counterparts in the old world, all because the developers wanted to cockblock the FOH's of the world. Monsters hit harder, had more hit points and resistances, but gave mostly the same experience, all because the top 1% of the population could handle the stuff trivially. As a casual player, you couldn't keep up no matter what your individual player skill.

These games both dumb down certain things and make certain bits more accessible (look at how much EQ2 has done for this since release) and add additional content down the road for focused players to head towards. 

EQ2 has made itself more accessible because it was getting killed in box sales and subscriptions.

The uber-focused players are the squeaky wheel that gets more grease. WoW is another good example. Despite the fact that the best numbers that Blizzard can come up with show that only about 25-33% of the playerbase raids at all, every content-adding patch has added a raid dungeon for the highest levels. They monopolize the dev cycles because they chew up content so fast, leaving the rest of the playerbase starving for scraps. And this is a game that has done some things to cater to the casual player (fast leveling curve, lots of solo content) and has reaped success for it.

[Ironwood]

This thread isn't even an argument.  It's a goddamned cliche.

[HaemishM]

At the same time though, I get the sense that some folks think this genre only has about 10 titles or so, or at least, 10 titles worth checking out. I'm thinking that's because people naturally gravitate towards experiences obviously attractive to other people.

Actually, the MMOG medium has about 4 titles worth checking out, none of which hold my interest very long. WoW (because everything else is the same shit with varying flavors of sprinkles), Eve (which I just find too boring unfortunately), Second Life (which I just can't get myself into no matter how much I love the potential) and Planetside (which can be played for free and isn't as good as some non-massive counterparts). That's it. Everything else is just a different variation on the same thing. 

[WindiaN]

personally i don't think there is a way to design a pve game without falling in to one of these pitfalls. How can you get around the fact that no matter how great the content is or who you cater it for, you essentially have all of the players waiting on the dev team to pump out new shit?

PvP is the only thing that remains dynamic because if there is some sort of ranking or objective (like towns or castles) it changes based on player activity and the players don't need to wait for the dev team to implement content.

I also think a good way to balance the skill = time issue would be to limit the amount of abilities which you can bring in to combat (sort of like guild wars) so that those who put in a lot of time have the advantage of diversity, but the actual character power should be about equal. Also to take one of the formats from competitive FPS games, you could have a weekly ranked match and setup a sort of in game league with a big tournament of the top ranked teams every couple months.

[Venkman]

I agree with you in part WindiaN. There's a nice balancing technique GW uses, limiting the abilities.

The biggest problem with PvE in my opinion is that it's basically a rudimentary RPG without any real narrative and therefore no real end. People are not going to stop playing at level 60/75 just because they hit that point when there's always room for some form of improvement to be had. By the time they hit the cap, they're so accustomed to acquisition, they want more of it.

After, of course, convincing companies that collect so much money that this is actually a problem for them, one way to solve it would be to revert PvE to more traditional RPGing. Strong story, obvious cap, and then let the rest of the open-ended game take over. Sorta like a contrived UO, or what Age of Conan is trying with their 20-level solo-RPG front end (with public social and trade spaces) and 20+ PvP. Should be interesting. I’m a big fan of trying to leverage the aspects of this genre that make it unique, like large-scale PvP, commerce/economices, social emergent behavior, etc.

EQ2 has made itself more accessible because it was getting killed in box sales and subscriptions.

The core concept of EQ2 from way back in the design days was exactly that. It was SOE's misinterpretation of what "accessibility" truly meant that Blizzard has educated them on since. Basically, there was s "SOE accessible" and "everyone else accessible".

Everything else is just a different variation on the same thing.

At the mechanical level, yep. The nuances of delivery and community set each apart though, but the latter is the more important part, the element that makes even derivative schlock palpable. I’d recommend ATITD3 for the very different crafting system, DDO for what interesting dungeon romping is like, MxO because apparently it actually has gotten better and Eve if you haven’t played in the last 18 months or so (only because the last two times I tried it, I was bored in a day, whereas this time I’ve been in for months).

Ya gotta find the right people though. ATITD and DDO suck alone, and Eve has a good F13 contingent already.

[StGabe]

They mean fuckall, other than your own self-aggrandizement or the puffing up of your group of closeted rejects.

Yay for Teh Hate.

We need something like Jon Stewart's rant at Crossfire for all the people who think that mindlessly hating and name-calling at the other side of MMORPG discussions actually accomplishes something.

"Say something nice about Achievers, right now."

Come on, you can do it.

[HaemishM]

Everything else is just a different variation on the same thing.

At the mechanical level, yep. The nuances of delivery and community set each apart though, but the latter is the more important part, the element that makes even derivative schlock palpable. I’d recommend ATITD3 for the very different crafting system, DDO for what interesting dungeon romping is like, MxO because apparently it actually has gotten better and Eve if you haven’t played in the last 18 months or so (only because the last two times I tried it, I was bored in a day, whereas this time I’ve been in for months).

Ya gotta find the right people though. ATITD and DDO suck alone, and Eve has a good F13 contingent already.

Once you get past your first MMOG, the mechanical level is mostly all their is. I was immersed in EQ1 for the world. Since there, it's been all mechanics after the first 3 or 4 days of play.

And MxO may have gotten better, but it's still crap.

[SnakeCharmer]

Just as in for example, golf, the more work (practice, etc) you put into it, the better your shiny will be (lower handicap).

It seems as if you think "getting the shiny" is the actual objective of golf.

The objective of golf is to put a ball in a hole. Nothing else. That's the game. Anything else is a byproduct or a means in accomplishing that -- But they are not the main point.

The objective of golf is to put the ball in a hole in as few as strokes as possible.  And to beat the person/people you're playing against.  That's my shiny.  As well as being able to hit a low hook, or hit a power fade when I need to. 

The objective when playing golf is to hit the ball in the hole while enjoying a nice walk or golf cart ride in the open air.  

For YOU it may be that objective.

But not for me.  I'm a competitive person by nature.  I've played sports, in some fashion, all my life:  17 years of baseball (T ball to four years at a major Division I university), 12 years of football, 8 years of soccer, 7 years of boxing, 6 years of wrestling, and now playing mens softball and indoor soccer when time allows.  And I've played golf for 26 years now, with a single digit handicap.  Even when I get the earliest tee time possible, and it's just me and the course, I'm still competing against myself and the course.  

I don't see the point in doing *anything* and not trying to be the best I can absolutely possibly be at it.

Do I understand that there are people that aren't as driven as me to "be the best"?  Sure.  Do I look down on them?  No.  I realize everyone isn't as competitive, achievement oriented as I am.

You might do well put on a set of blinders and not worry about anyone else other than yourself.  That's what I do, and works perfectly.

[HaemishM]

Just as in for example, golf, the more work (practice, etc) you put into it, the better your shiny will be (lower handicap).

It seems as if you think "getting the shiny" is the actual objective of golf.

The objective of golf is to put a ball in a hole. Nothing else. That's the game. Anything else is a byproduct or a means in accomplishing that -- But they are not the main point.

The objective of golf is to put the ball in a hole in as few as strokes as possible.  And to beat the person/people you're playing against.  That's my shiny.  As well as being able to hit a low hook, or hit a power fade when I need to. 

The objective when playing golf is to hit the ball in the hole while enjoying a nice walk or golf cart ride in the open air.  

For YOU it may be that objective.

...

Do I understand that there are people that aren't as driven as me to "be the best"?  Sure.  Do I look down on them?  No.  I realize everyone isn't as competitive, achievement oriented as I am.

You might do well put on a set of blinders and not worry about anyone else other than yourself.  

As I said, the objectives and desires of the players are different. I'd have no problem with achievmanauts conquering their own piles of pixels if that's all they did. But their achievements drive almost the entire development cycle, spinning an ever-growing mountain for the casual players to climb. And it's a mountain we can't finish climbing, because it's always going to grow faster than we can tackle it.

I'd rather all content at all levels just auto-scaled to the level/item/power of the opponents at all times. You level 60 and uber-geared up? You get the assfucking version of Vox. You have Auction House greens and only level 35? You get the version of Molten Core that gives you just enough of a challenge to be fun without holding you down and dryhumping your rotting corpse.

But then, devs would have to make content that was unique and interesting, instead of endless iterations of level +1, because the homogenity of the mechanics would just seem too transparent at that point.

[edlavallee]

As I said, the objectives and desires of the players are different. I'd have no problem with achievmanauts conquering their own piles of pixels if that's all they did. But their achievements drive almost the entire development cycle, spinning an ever-growing mountain for the casual players to climb. And it's a mountain we can't finish climbing, because it's always going to grow faster than we can tackle it.

I'd rather all content at all levels just auto-scaled to the level/item/power of the opponents at all times. You level 60 and uber-geared up? You get the assfucking version of Vox. You have Auction House greens and only level 35? You get the version of Molten Core that gives you just enough of a challenge to be fun without holding you down and dryhumping your rotting corpse.

But then, devs would have to make content that was unique and interesting, instead of endless iterations of level +1, because the homogenity of the mechanics would just seem too transparent at that point.

There are times that I completely agree with HaemishM, and this is certainly one of them, although I would change one thing --

And it's a mountain we can't finish climbing, because it's always going to grow faster than we want to tackle it.

It's not that I can't finish climbing the mountain or even that it's growing faster than I have the ability to consume... it's that I don't want to consume it that fast. I don't need the ego gratification that bad that I have to button mash until I feel self-actualized.

[stray]

But not for me.  I'm a competitive person by nature.

  I've played sports, in some fashion, all my life:  17 years of baseball (T ball to four years at a major Division I university), 12 years of football, 8 years of soccer, 7 years of boxing, 6 years of wrestling, and now playing mens softball and indoor soccer when time allows.  And I've played golf for 26 years now, with a single digit handicap.  Even when I get the earliest tee time possible, and it's just me and the course, I'm still competing against myself and the course.

One can be competitive without the achiever mindset. One can compete without actually having the conscious drive to compete. The two are not synonymous. I've played sports (organized and otherwise) for a great deal of my life too. I've had great competitive and victorious moments both personally and on teams, but I'm hardly the "competitive" type in the commonly understood sense. I was good at a few sports and athletic abilities for a variety of reasons -- And my interest in those games sustained simply because they were fun. Not because I was competitive.

Back to Diku games. It's quite possible to be competitive in them and not really do it for the same reasons achievers do it for either. For example, there was once a time when I could plow through content, get all my shit, and do all the things a catass does --- But all by virtue of me just wanting to "explore".

Problem with that is, for an "explorer", that kind of experience can only happen once. Later on, there's nothing to keep that going. It's not really exploring when you know how these games work from the inside out.

[SnakeCharmer]

Just as in for example, golf, the more work (practice, etc) you put into it, the better your shiny will be (lower handicap).

It seems as if you think "getting the shiny" is the actual objective of golf.

The objective of golf is to put a ball in a hole. Nothing else. That's the game. Anything else is a byproduct or a means in accomplishing that -- But they are not the main point.

The objective of golf is to put the ball in a hole in as few as strokes as possible.  And to beat the person/people you're playing against.  That's my shiny.  As well as being able to hit a low hook, or hit a power fade when I need to. 

The objective when playing golf is to hit the ball in the hole while enjoying a nice walk or golf cart ride in the open air.  

For YOU it may be that objective.

...

Do I understand that there are people that aren't as driven as me to "be the best"?  Sure.  Do I look down on them?  No.  I realize everyone isn't as competitive, achievement oriented as I am.

You might do well put on a set of blinders and not worry about anyone else other than yourself.  

As I said, the objectives and desires of the players are different. I'd have no problem with achievmanauts conquering their own piles of pixels if that's all they did. But their achievements drive almost the entire development cycle, spinning an ever-growing mountain for the casual players to climb. And it's a mountain we can't finish climbing, because it's always going to grow faster than we can tackle it.

In the end, is that really a bad thing?  In my (admittedly) naive outlook, that means the casual gamer never runs out of content.

I'd rather all content at all levels just auto-scaled to the level/item/power of the opponents at all times. You level 60 and uber-geared up? You get the assfucking version of Vox. You have Auction House greens and only level 35? You get the version of Molten Core that gives you just enough of a challenge to be fun without holding you down and dryhumping your rotting corpse.

But then, devs would have to make content that was unique and interesting, instead of endless iterations of level +1, because the homogenity of the mechanics would just seem too transparent at that point.

Sounds like the Holy Grail of MMOs.  Sign me up.

Is the technology there to do that, and at what cost to the consumer?  And what cost is the *average* consumer willing to pay to get it?