The Divorce of MMO and RPG

Jeff wrote to mention a new article up on Gamergod.com discussing the divorce of MMO and RPG. From the article: "At close inspection, their marriage reveals what is sadly becoming the new American love tragedy. Two people with little in common, more in lust than anything resembling love, decide to tie the knot. The rest is a classic example of what happens when two people leave the idea stage of marriage and enter the reality of marriage, and find out they don't like, let alone love, each other."

Comments

Depends

[vga_init]

What makes a good RPG? To the author of the article, it seems to be a game ritch in depth; meaty dialogue, engaging story, the need to live more completely in another world. As he points out, this may not be a good game to pair with the MMO crowd (or most humans, for that matter). Excellent games I've played that contain all of what the author values most have been single player: (spanning across my own lifetime) Quest for Glory all the way up through Morrowind.

There are, however, more aspects that define the genre of RPG. Leveling system is probably the main thing. Also included are the ability to explore, kill things, and acquire items/gold. The authors mention latter two only disdainfully, but one man's trash is another man's treasure. Lots of people playing online like leveling and getting new items. To them that's what the game is all about, and it gives them a fun context within which to socialize with other people in a not necessarily role playing manner.

Based on the title of the article, I thought the auther would give real world examples of the two genres splitting, but it's really just his opinion. As far as I'm aware, most MMO games are still RPGs, and also, as far as I know, their popularity isn't exactly declining. So, when you look at sales as well as user base, is this supposed divorce fiction or reality?

Re:Depends

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

the crux of the problem is that most games don't reward roleplaying. in fact, roleplaying means you are gimping yourself, since you aren't killing monsters, getting loot and progressing the storyline.

I agree with you except the last phrase, "progressing the storyline." It doesn't really progress because of your actions (with a few exceptions noted later.)

In City of Heroes, I just stopped the Council from releasing a warehouse full of Superadine, the drug that makes street thugs into low-level supervillians.

Ok, fine.

Now tell me that there was one single spawn point anywhere out in the main city of trolls or outcast or bonecrushers anywhere that disappeared, even temporarily. One spawnpoint that even reduced the rate of spawn, even temporarily.

Hello? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes, the company will move the story along, slowly, to coincide with major publishes and/or expansion packs, in one-time events. But the only "player-led" change I can recall was in Star Wars Galaxies where each server would get/prevent the Rebels from getting one minor power depending on who won control of the most cities for the most days for a particular month or two.

And, though it isn't roleplaying technically, the most exciting thing, invasions, are sorely lacking from MMORPG's. Too many whiners that it's messing up their plans to group with their friends and camp orcs somewhere. SHIT, GOOFBALLS, THERE'S AN INVASION!

But spare me City of Heroes style invasion, which are just temporary spawn points of new monsters. I wanna see the possible loss of control of safety of a whole city area, not just a 2-week long temporary camp spot.