Slashdot Mirror


The Trouble with MMORPGs

jasoncart writes "The trouble with MMORPGs is a humorous account of one gamer's struggle to find and assume his place in the rapidly evolving societies which form a part of the online RPG explosion. Ultimately, it is also a lament for the loss of direction that is the scourge of the genre."

7 of 403 comments (clear)

  1. Problem with MMORPGS Today is by tarnin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They try and tailor each game to nothing more than time sinks. The longer your play the more money they make. This right there takes the "fun" factor away and adds in the grind. Why do the developers think its fun to go on a 14 hr raid to maybe get a piece of eq that I might need at some point in my characters life. Also, after the initial time sinks have been reached, instead of rewarding you they add more! Look at EQ and DAoC. Both of which have added pay for expansions that do nothing more than give you more pretty pictures and a TON more time sinks.

    At some point they have to realize that time sinks do not equal long term cash. Maybe back in the day when EQ and UO were the only game in town could this be done. Now, there are litterly hundreds of new MMORPGs on the horizon lining up to get a piece of the pie.

    Devs!! It's time to remember that we play these games for FUN not for another grind akin to our every day lives.

  2. This guy is preaching to the choir... by Xentax · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...as far as I'm concerned, anyway. I'm in the last stages of burning out on SWG big-time. As usual, that's more depressing than surprising, I knew going in that they'd have to really bust ass to keep me interested beyond a month. Considering how many other 39.99 or 49.99 games have only held my attention for a month or two, though, that's not a terrible thing, just another bad game to stack beside the various bad games and bad movies that come and go between the rarer good stuff.

    I also share the author's hope that World of Warcraft will actually BE DIFFERENT than the mass-multi's we've seen so far. I sum up my feeling on that as: "If anyone can do it, Blizzard can".

    But that still leaves me wondering *if* anyone can. I mean, how can the content creators ever hope to keep up with the powergamers? It takes 10 or even 100 times as long to create a robust, interesting, and distinctive quest or mission as it does for a typical player to complete it (at least, that's the sort of numbers game developers have tossed out when asked). Solutions like EQ epic quests aren't the answer, because they force the player to join enormous guilds in order to access significant amounts of the game's content, forces an amount of play (in terms of per session and per day or week) that is more than many players can afford to give.

    So, have the releases thus far been unable to keep it fresh and interesting because of incompetence or poor design choices (as the author claims), or is actually an unsolvable problem?

    Xentax

    --
    You shouldn't verb words.
  3. Re:Lack of multiplayer by rossz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The engine should allow a person to play a monster/creature. The type of monster you play should be completely random. This way a person won't choose the ancient red dragon for his friend to easily kill.

    Some safety controls need to be implemented. For example, two players get together, one plays the monster and allows himself to get killed, thus allowing the other player some easy experience. That's not good. Perhaps what is needed is to limit how often you can create a monster, e.g. once a day. This would severely limit the free experience of letting your buddy kill your monster.

    There needs to be some sort of payoff for playing a monster. Perhaps you get something of value each time you do it, e.g. (play) money you can give to a character of your choosing.

    Another feature to implement is some sort of bonus for cooperating with other players. The more people (to some reasonable limit) banded together for a common cause, the bigger the experience bonus. Be sure to adjust treasure finds for bigger parties, too. It sucks when you get together with a group of people only to have one person grab the one or two items worth keeping and skipping out (as happens all too often in diablo 2).

    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
  4. And MUSHes, and MOOs, and ... by stwrtpj · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I spent lots and lots of time playing MUDs

    There were also upmteen different varieties of the MUD that came out, many of which were devoted more to role-playing (RP) than level advancement.

    I was on PernMUSH (based on Anne McCaffrey's Dragonriders of Pern universe) for 3 years, 2 site changes, and 1 database rebuild. It was a huge timesink for me because it was fun. And the main reason it was fun was because the PLAYERS got to decide what plots to RP. Anyone could come up with a plot, round up enough interested players, and RP it, so long as it fit within the framework of the Pern universe. And more often than not, if it were interesting enough, other players spontaneously joined in after it started.

    Sure, it had places where you could "advance" (you could become a dragonrider, or you could advance in a craft, etc), but in most cases, advancement was determined by other players based more or less on your RP activity rather than arbitrary tasks.

    --
    Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
  5. Simple problem, Simple solution. by Duncan3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    American MMORPG have quite simply become MMOFPSG. No more roleplaying, way more FPS.

    3-D graphics engines, complex and pointless interface controls, with camera positioning and such of course, blah blah blah. Where are the deep quests the more-then-trivial guild structures and behefits... etc.

    Maybe that's why the largest MMORPGs in the world are still 2-D.

    MMORPG's need WRITERS not more caffine tweaked coders. You know, those creative types geeks are raised to dispise... problem is, THEY make good games.

    And that's why games are so damn lame after the first couple weeks... there really is nothing more to do.

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
  6. A Tale in the Desert is using this model by Noren · · Score: 3, Interesting
    In addition to being free to download and having a free 24 hours-of-actual-played-time trial as others have mentioned, A Tale in the Desert is explicitly intended to have a finite story arc. In theory, it's supposed to last a year, although we're nine months in and as far as I can tell we're about halfway through.

    It is expected that there will be a Second Telling once we win/lose this one. (basically, a complete reset with unspecified changes in world/tech/mechanics/etc.) Many people seem interested in staying after this reset, but it remains to be seen what effect this will have on the player base.

  7. comments from a gm by humankind · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As an ex-senior guide from Everquest, I'd like to add a few things to the discussion. The lion's share of online "helpers" are often volunteers; players like everyone else, that often field abuse from frustrated players. We ourselves are just as frustrated, but we just can't show it (hopefully).

    I agree with much that has been said on the issue, though I think Everquest is far and away the best and most successful MMORPG. Star Wars Galaxies turned out to be hugely anticlimactic. What makes EQ work are IMO, the core of solid low and mid-level people involved. The problem with most of the user's gripes are related to issues beyond the control of those who really have the ideas and the willingness to make the game more enjoyable.

    A good example of this is with real-time GM events. As quest coordinator for my server, I pushed very hard to add more dynamic, interesting content to Everquest. But we were very limited to certain confines as far as what quests we could run, and most importantly, limited to very substandard rewards that could be given away. As a result of the mediocre rewards, many players would groan at the discovery of a GM event because they knew it would not be worth it.

    This frustrated the GMs even more than the players, and resulted in morale loss across the board, as well as less enthusiasm to run events, which is why you don't see many, and when you do, they're lame. There's nothing more disappointing than participating in an event and getting a reward that you would sell to a merchant rather than use. But we couldn't do anything about it.

    To make matters worse, most volunteer GMs share all the same frustrations, but are afraid to publicly voice much opposition, even among their peers for fear of being excommunicated from the privileged fold. As a result, things don't change much.