I agree with you. I'm a mild-mannered Oracle DBA (ok, not really mild), and I don't mind paying $15 a month to be super hero. I vastly minded paying $7 + popcorn to see hellboy. It wasn't a horrible movie, but it wasn't worth $7 for two hours.
"Choices are hard for most of less intelligent people. Any choices, not necessarily those related to computer software or even the technology as a whole."
I suspect that you have it backwards; it's the intelligent people who have problems with too many choices. They see the options, the details, etc, and tend to get lost in all the minutiae.
People who don't see all the options have it easier.
One point I didn't see in the discussion above - why build games for a bunch of people who are notorious for wanting free stuff? That hardly seems like a healthy basis for a market.
I don't want to craft, and I don't have the time to grind professions. There aren't any interesting loot drops. What exactly do I get to do? I'd love to PvP, but everything I read and saw indicated that PvP was highly unbalanced in some cases, and generally over far too quickly.
Oh, and the mobs are dumb as stumps, so regular hunting is even more boring than games like DAoC, where there's some rhyme or reason to mob's responses.
-Jeff
P.S. Not to mention the baffling decision to let Jedi off-the-hook. Now all the powergamers will have a Jedi, and that will become the standard for PvE and PvP content.
Actually it's more like cleavland winning 50 games in a row, then loses one game, which resets their season record to 0-0-0 again.
Cleveland's record doesn't affect how they play any one game; it's simply an indicator of how well they play. In MMORPGs, your level affects your next fight, and that's a major difference.
But again, you just prove my point. You're more interested in preserving your accomplishments (record), while others are more interested in a fair game each time even if they lose each time.
-Jeff
P.S. Btw, Cleveland's record does reset every year; it's called the beginning of a new season.
I don't think this issue will ever be fully resolved. Many mmorpgers can be split into two categories: puzzle-solvers and competitors. Obviously, some have aspects of both and others are more interested in other areas, but the two categories are reasonable as a rule.
Now, your problem is that the puzzle-solvers can't tolerate being forced to redo something they've already solved. They want to hold-onto their accomplishments.
The competitors, otoh, aren't worried about that and can deal with resets, lost items, etc. It's all part of the game.
-Jeff
P.S. One last thought: can you imagine baseball where the score of your games with a team added up all season? So Chicago beats Cleveland 5-4 and wins. Next game Cleveland has to overcome a one-run deficit to win. It doesn't make sense, and that's how some players (competitors) view these games.
Isn't that just a tad simplistic? I met numerous people who went into the army served their times, and came out better people (by their own standards) in the end. They never killed anyone, or came close to it, but they learned discipline, teamwork, and most of all how to suck-it-in and just deal.
The army experience is not as simple as you make it.
...in the real world people fear dying, and that fear makes all the difference. Not the fear of losing, not a sense of caution, but real, gut-wrenching fear.
The simulators may help them practice tactics more easily, but they will never give them the taste of fear they're going to feel on the battlefield, so the experience won't be anything like the battlefield.
I'm not a big fan of this game. Oh, the mechanics are fine and the concept is a good one, but the winning strategy for this game, like for many others, is to stay in 2nd place until near the end. I've grown tired of that dynamic in gaming - gang up on the winner until the quiet person who didn't draw attention to him/her self wins. I prefer a game where you can give your all every turn and that's the best strategy.
RvR in Camelot was a great step, but more needs to be added. I believe developers need to borrow more from sports. For example:
1) Clearer rules, tougher refs. We've all complained when people get away with cheating. I believe that every game needs to be monstrously despotic in tone when it comes to the rules of its game. However, to facilitate this people need to be clear on what is an infraction, and what isn't one. Too often I see a tactic labelled an exploit, and players penalized for limits in the game engine, especially AI. (No, I don't perch or anything like it.)
2) Announced victors, new seasons, culminating events. People don't simply play baseball forever: there's a set season, and at the end of the playoffs a victor is determined and people move forward. Imagine DAoC where every year from November to the new year the top 3 realms (or best of each realm) were allowed to transfer their characters to a new server where they competed for the championship. (Determined by keep-taking, kill ratio, and so on.)
Why focus on competition? Because that's the essence of any game. I think most games tend to lack a robust competitive environment; once that exists, I feel the support elements (crafting, etc) will take on added importance in the grand scheme. But again, for that to happen, the competative environment must be honed.
-Jeff
P.S. Sorry for the rambling nature of this. Late night, early morning, the usual...:-)
I played eve for a couple of months. There is a very, very in-depth economy that you're glossing over. It may not be your cup of tea (or mine), but that doesn't make it insignificant.
Also, you are wrong about the mining: you can always go out and pound mobs (pirates) in lieu of mining. Unlink some recent games (e.g. SWG), the drops from mobs can be worthwhile (and some are better than you can buy).
If you read his whole article, his argument boils down to this sentance in the end: "If this service model continues to be developed and rammed down the throats of the game-buying public, eventually, people will tire and walk away from the genre."
Given that this doesn't seem to be happening (people don't seem to be walking away), I have to question the logic behind the rest of the article. Color me simple, but I think capitalism will decide this in the end: as long as the game is priced to the tastes of the market, people will buy it however it's packaged and delivered.
First off, one person can't steal from another in-game because nobody owns anything. The company who made the game owns it all.
Second of all, could you imagine the ramifications if this actually gained substance? I kill someone in PvP, loot their corpse, and instead of whining about griefing, the victim sues me? How silly.
Third, the more interesting question (to me) involves slander (libel? whichever's verbal). Now I can see a provocative question.
There are extremes to everything. If I played in a basketball league with Jordan, Kobe, etc, I'd quit. No amount of play on my part is ever going to put me into the same league as them.
That's why leagues in real life tend to segregate based on skill. That's why online games should as well.
-Jeff
P.S. Actually, if I ever had that opportunity I would grin and deal with the humiliation, because the one day I ever actually scored, or blocked a shot, or stole the ball, would be a day I'd never forget. But it's a good analogy anyway.
I'm enjoying SWG, and I enjoyed DAoC. I'm not exactly sure how that makes me a 'pathetic fanboy', just someone with a more positive and apparently less extreme viewpoint than yourself. For what its worth, I'm hardly an apologist for these games - I certainly have things I dislike about both.
To get back on track, you suggested a number of ways to make mmorpgs appealing to you, and by extension, other people in the "MMORPG as a job" club. I question strongly whether appealing to that crowd is what it will take to make mmorpgs grow. I believe, instead, that to make mmorpgs grow will require appealing to the (say) 10 hour a week and less crowd. This may involve lighter rules, more toys, more action (one of your points, I grant), but whatever it is I'm sure it's different than the perspective of someone who spends 70-120 hours a week playing an mmorpg.
You play a game more than most people put in hours of work a week, and you're suprised when you've plumbed the depths after a few months? Heck, you played SWG practically every waking hour (and then some), of course you're tired of these things.
I believe mmorpgs will continue to grow. I think as far as games go, they can provide great value per entertainment dollar out there. I know, we all spent umpteen hours playing and didn't pay anything beyond the initial price, but such games are few and far between.
They're also a decent deal for the developers & producers: a steady stream of cash is a nice business model, and I hope strong encouragement to the industry to continue to improve their product.
How many hours did you put in during your two months of either DAoC or SWG? I put in quite a long time in the first and am satisfied with the hours I spent versus the money it cost. I'm probably approaching my two months in the second, and I'm happy there as well. When I'm not, I'll leave.
One last thing - this isn't a math equation, it's entertainment; it would help if you used "IMO" occasionally.
-Jeff
One of these things is not like the other...
on
IT Career Horoscopes
·
· Score: 1
From Capricorn:
a) Embrace new ideas b) play strictly by the rules c) Don't take foolish chances d) stick to established protocols
It's like I went to the elves for advice or something.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you. I'm a mild-mannered Oracle DBA (ok, not really mild), and I don't mind paying $15 a month to be super hero. I vastly minded paying $7 + popcorn to see hellboy. It wasn't a horrible movie, but it wasn't worth $7 for two hours.
-Jeff
"Arguably, this might be just what MMORPGs need... something that enforces sociability and cooperation with a person who they don't get to choose."
Why? I can't choose my co-workers or my family; now you don't want me to choose my gaming buddies? Geez.
-Jeff
"Choices are hard for most of less intelligent people. Any choices, not necessarily those related to computer software or even the technology as a whole."
I suspect that you have it backwards; it's the intelligent people who have problems with too many choices. They see the options, the details, etc, and tend to get lost in all the minutiae.
People who don't see all the options have it easier.
-Jeff
Watch David Schwimmer in Band of Brothers. That changed my opinion of him as an actor.
-Jeff
One point I didn't see in the discussion above - why build games for a bunch of people who are notorious for wanting free stuff? That hardly seems like a healthy basis for a market.
-Jeff
I don't want to craft, and I don't have the time to grind professions. There aren't any interesting loot drops. What exactly do I get to do? I'd love to PvP, but everything I read and saw indicated that PvP was highly unbalanced in some cases, and generally over far too quickly.
Oh, and the mobs are dumb as stumps, so regular hunting is even more boring than games like DAoC, where there's some rhyme or reason to mob's responses.
-Jeff
P.S. Not to mention the baffling decision to let Jedi off-the-hook. Now all the powergamers will have a Jedi, and that will become the standard for PvE and PvP content.
Actually it's more like cleavland winning 50 games in a row, then loses one game, which resets their season record to 0-0-0 again.
Cleveland's record doesn't affect how they play any one game; it's simply an indicator of how well they play. In MMORPGs, your level affects your next fight, and that's a major difference.
But again, you just prove my point. You're more interested in preserving your accomplishments (record), while others are more interested in a fair game each time even if they lose each time.
-Jeff
P.S. Btw, Cleveland's record does reset every year; it's called the beginning of a new season.
I don't think this issue will ever be fully resolved. Many mmorpgers can be split into two categories: puzzle-solvers and competitors. Obviously, some have aspects of both and others are more interested in other areas, but the two categories are reasonable as a rule.
Now, your problem is that the puzzle-solvers can't tolerate being forced to redo something they've already solved. They want to hold-onto their accomplishments.
The competitors, otoh, aren't worried about that and can deal with resets, lost items, etc. It's all part of the game.
-Jeff
P.S. One last thought: can you imagine baseball where the score of your games with a team added up all season? So Chicago beats Cleveland 5-4 and wins. Next game Cleveland has to overcome a one-run deficit to win. It doesn't make sense, and that's how some players (competitors) view these games.
There's no PvP period, not even dueling. Imagine: no Spidey vs Thor, Silver Surfer, Torch, Daredevil, etc. Heck, no wolverine vs anybody! :-)
I could understand holding off on a Villain engine because it was just too hard to design, but no dueling? C'mon, read a comic book!
-Jeff
"The Army is about killing people."
Isn't that just a tad simplistic? I met numerous people who went into the army served their times, and came out better people (by their own standards) in the end. They never killed anyone, or came close to it, but they learned discipline, teamwork, and most of all how to suck-it-in and just deal.
The army experience is not as simple as you make it.
-Jeff
...in the real world people fear dying, and that fear makes all the difference. Not the fear of losing, not a sense of caution, but real, gut-wrenching fear.
The simulators may help them practice tactics more easily, but they will never give them the taste of fear they're going to feel on the battlefield, so the experience won't be anything like the battlefield.
Fear rules.
-Jeff
I'm not a big fan of this game. Oh, the mechanics are fine and the concept is a good one, but the winning strategy for this game, like for many others, is to stay in 2nd place until near the end. I've grown tired of that dynamic in gaming - gang up on the winner until the quiet person who didn't draw attention to him/her self wins. I prefer a game where you can give your all every turn and that's the best strategy.
-Jeff
"Movies are limited to only 2 of he five senses"
So books taste better than movie popcorn? Sorry, I'll buy healthier (all that fiber), but not better tasting.
-Jeff
RvR in Camelot was a great step, but more needs to be added. I believe developers need to borrow more from sports. For example:
:-)
1) Clearer rules, tougher refs. We've all complained when people get away with cheating. I believe that every game needs to be monstrously despotic in tone when it comes to the rules of its game. However, to facilitate this people need to be clear on what is an infraction, and what isn't one. Too often I see a tactic labelled an exploit, and players penalized for limits in the game engine, especially AI. (No, I don't perch or anything like it.)
2) Announced victors, new seasons, culminating events. People don't simply play baseball forever: there's a set season, and at the end of the playoffs a victor is determined and people move forward. Imagine DAoC where every year from November to the new year the top 3 realms (or best of each realm) were allowed to transfer their characters to a new server where they competed for the championship. (Determined by keep-taking, kill ratio, and so on.)
Why focus on competition? Because that's the essence of any game. I think most games tend to lack a robust competitive environment; once that exists, I feel the support elements (crafting, etc) will take on added importance in the grand scheme. But again, for that to happen, the competative environment must be honed.
-Jeff
P.S. Sorry for the rambling nature of this. Late night, early morning, the usual...
I played eve for a couple of months. There is a very, very in-depth economy that you're glossing over. It may not be your cup of tea (or mine), but that doesn't make it insignificant.
Also, you are wrong about the mining: you can always go out and pound mobs (pirates) in lieu of mining. Unlink some recent games (e.g. SWG), the drops from mobs can be worthwhile (and some are better than you can buy).
-Jeff
If you read his whole article, his argument boils down to this sentance in the end: "If this service model continues to be developed and rammed down the throats of the game-buying public, eventually, people will tire and walk away from the genre."
Given that this doesn't seem to be happening (people don't seem to be walking away), I have to question the logic behind the rest of the article. Color me simple, but I think capitalism will decide this in the end: as long as the game is priced to the tastes of the market, people will buy it however it's packaged and delivered.
-Jeff
So we should leave our good name in the hands of the email-spammers, virus-writers, and evil CEOs?
-Jeff
I see numbers, colors and names. Where's the data behind the chart?
-Jeff
First off, one person can't steal from another in-game because nobody owns anything. The company who made the game owns it all.
Second of all, could you imagine the ramifications if this actually gained substance? I kill someone in PvP, loot their corpse, and instead of whining about griefing, the victim sues me? How silly.
Third, the more interesting question (to me) involves slander (libel? whichever's verbal). Now I can see a provocative question.
-Jeff
There are extremes to everything. If I played in a basketball league with Jordan, Kobe, etc, I'd quit. No amount of play on my part is ever going to put me into the same league as them.
That's why leagues in real life tend to segregate based on skill. That's why online games should as well.
-Jeff
P.S. Actually, if I ever had that opportunity I would grin and deal with the humiliation, because the one day I ever actually scored, or blocked a shot, or stole the ball, would be a day I'd never forget. But it's a good analogy anyway.
I'm enjoying SWG, and I enjoyed DAoC. I'm not exactly sure how that makes me a 'pathetic fanboy', just someone with a more positive and apparently less extreme viewpoint than yourself. For what its worth, I'm hardly an apologist for these games - I certainly have things I dislike about both.
To get back on track, you suggested a number of ways to make mmorpgs appealing to you, and by extension, other people in the "MMORPG as a job" club. I question strongly whether appealing to that crowd is what it will take to make mmorpgs grow. I believe, instead, that to make mmorpgs grow will require appealing to the (say) 10 hour a week and less crowd. This may involve lighter rules, more toys, more action (one of your points, I grant), but whatever it is I'm sure it's different than the perspective of someone who spends 70-120 hours a week playing an mmorpg.
-Jeff
You play a game more than most people put in hours of work a week, and you're suprised when you've plumbed the depths after a few months? Heck, you played SWG practically every waking hour (and then some), of course you're tired of these things.
-Jeff
I believe mmorpgs will continue to grow. I think as far as games go, they can provide great value per entertainment dollar out there. I know, we all spent umpteen hours playing and didn't pay anything beyond the initial price, but such games are few and far between.
They're also a decent deal for the developers & producers: a steady stream of cash is a nice business model, and I hope strong encouragement to the industry to continue to improve their product.
-Jeff
DAoC now has housing. It's a free download.
How many hours did you put in during your two months of either DAoC or SWG? I put in quite a long time in the first and am satisfied with the hours I spent versus the money it cost. I'm probably approaching my two months in the second, and I'm happy there as well. When I'm not, I'll leave.
One last thing - this isn't a math equation, it's entertainment; it would help if you used "IMO" occasionally.
-Jeff
From Capricorn:
:-)
a) Embrace new ideas
b) play strictly by the rules
c) Don't take foolish chances
d) stick to established protocols
It's like I went to the elves for advice or something.
-Jeff