Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
What ever happend to camping for xp?
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
You said, as you do in EVERY "old school game" thread, popular ONLY needs to be made.
Do you disagree that an MMO built for group play needs to be built "from the ground up" around group play?
Pertinent paragraph you "conveniently" cut out of your response:
"What you need is a game that is designed from the group up to be designed around group content. Challenging mobs both in open world and in dungeons that make solo'ing extremely challenging for same level and above content. These games were the foundation of what the MMO genre was built and what the genre will eventually return to."
Notice how djcincy did NOT say, imply, or anything like that "ALL MMOs NEED TO BE MADE FOR GROUPING." You, Axehilt, said that, not djcincy.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
"Freedom" and this is what it is point blank period, these new school guys don't get it.
Any mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!
Freedom, Mystery, the Unknown, Feeling Special, being able to play like you want to and stay competitive. But i agree to the above
Whatever happened to camping for XP?
The Milkman, the Paperboy, evening TV?
Camps were replaced by dungeons. Some dungeons you level in, some dungeons you get loot from. Camps were also true as sometimes a place was camped for a rare loot to drop instead of just xp.
What I really miss though is downtime. Classes used to be balanced based on some classes having to wait between monster pulls. Even WoW was far more reliant on eating and drinking between fights. Now days base regen is so high that you just chain pull and are always fighting. This leaves a lot less time for talking to group members.
Now days people just play looking for group public groups and do not talk. I might as well be playing with bots.
Saturday morning cartoons, even?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Communism?
It's actually somewhat rare for me to argue any personal agenda or opinion. Mostly I relate confirmable, objective observations of which types of game designs have performed well over the years.
The times I come down hardest are when the minority insists 100% of the games on the market have to be their game, as someone did in this thread when they said MMORPGs needed to be group-centric. But in that case as in most cases, I related confirmable, objective observational evidence that the biggest MMORPG ever wasn't group-centric and so obviously they don't need to be group-centric.
But mostly I'm just relating to players what has and hasn't worked in the past. History has a lot to teach us, but only if we open our eyes to actually observe the patterns and trends, including understanding the underlying patterns of how players are entertained by games, so that we know what currently-unrealized opportunities have merit.
So I'm not really fighting for anyone, majority or otherwise, I'm simply relaying the realities of the industry.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I didn't get that memo.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
"All" is your word, not mine.
The notion that any MMORPG needs to be about grouping is what's wrong.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You are comparing levelling in EQ to raiding in wow. Raiding in EQ is even more hardcore than vanilla wow. I could level up in wow for 10 min and log off. Wow was way more accessible to people with limited playtime. Raiding after classic and tbc became a lot more accessible.
There were tons of casuals in wow not so much the case in EQ. Both games had no lifers but EQ made it quite difficult to play for less than 1-3 hours as you needed to get a group. And yeah there were tons of EQ people playing 10-12 hours a day.
Also play EQ for 2 hours a day and you will see barely any progress.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
According to you, "mild hot sauce" does not "need" to be made, for it sells less then "regular hot sauce", and maybe you do not like it. If enough players want a group oriented MMORPG, then there IS a "need" for it. Not according to you,. though.
Are you seeing the fallacy of your "opinion" yet?
Now, if you want to say instead, "A group oriented MMORPG will do poorly." I have no qualms. It may or not do poorly. Only if one ever gets made will we truly ever know. The rest is speculation, conjecture, and most importantly opinion, not fact, as you consistently try to state it.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Demand isn't need.
Demand is want.
You don't need mild hot sauce or Ferraris or sonic toothbrushes. MMORPGs don't need to be designed group-centric.
This isn't opinion. This is what these words mean. Is hyperbole so commonplace nowadays that people don't bother to distinguish want vs. need?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
I've done this most recently in SW:TOR and RIFT. I'm sure there are other games out there that also still have it.
So there you go.
Sure, might not be the most effective way to level up, but there are other perks, like loot drops.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Well I guess UO, SWG and most of the early mmorpg's games were not really mmorpg's since most of them had soloing as a legitimate and viable option.
MMORPG has by and large NEVER been designed around grouping, it was always just an option that you could do. Yes there may be activities that required a group but in games by and large most of them were NEVER group centric.
The few games that were group centric were the outliers.
No, all of the minority want 100% of all games to be group centric. People want a few games to be group centric at least to have a chance to play variety. I see more people come along and tell people they're out of touch and every game needs to be WoW like. Besides WoW was very much group centric and still is end game. And what you mean by group centric is more likely combat grouping which is only a branch of interdepency. Because us UO/SWG lovers know you don't need forced group combat to have interdepency.
History of MMORPG's is that an anomaly World of Warcraft shaped the design decisions of the genre for two cycles of MMORPG devolopment. The reality is majority of MMORPGs have held to the same 250-500k players that the top tier older games had. And that's not even subs that's free to play players since many of those games held to old standards would have died.
I applaud you on your patience and willingness to continually educate those who need it. I get tired after schooling them 2 or 3 times just for them to bring the same tired, defeated logic back in another thread almost verbatim. I am afraid your words fall on deaf ears though. Hopefully if there happens to be some young impressionable readers about, they will see the fallacies which you continue expose.
It's completely fine to want group-centric games. It's just wrong to claim they need to be group-centric.
Personally I prefer (want) small-group instances. But I'm not arguing personal preference in these forums. I'm mostly just talking about the realities of the industry, and we know from many sources that players generally prefer solo games.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Axehilt, keep in mind that you're posting on a forum where some can't separate fact from opinion. With that in mind, confusion over or, worse, lack of acceptance of the difference between 'want and need' isn't surprising, especially when acknowledging it creates an uncomfortable dichotomy.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Realities on how you VIEW them and interpret them.. but that doesn't make it scientific FACT.. The one thing about FACTS, is they NEVER change.. The topic is about "camping" for experience and why devs avoid it..... That is a huge question I want ANSWERED by a publicly known developer.. Pay attention here.. >> This is NOT saying I want the entire game to be group or solo focused on camping.. There is the option of having parts of the game allow camping without effecting the rest of it.. Example coming: (WoW) You are in Westfall and down by Dagger Hills where people are doing the pirate bandit quest stuff, why not add in a seperate section where ELITE mobs roam with "reward" NPC.. If you are soloing, then ignore this section, but if you wish to group up with others and "camp" for xp/reward this becomes an option.. OUTSIDE of doing dungeons.. This is something that everyone should be endorsing and promoting.. Group content should NOT be forced to live in an instance.. IMO
PS.. I know there are isolated areas, or at least there were areas that some elites lived, but it was all part of high level end game, not something people can do while leveling..
Ye, like you talk and "befriend" every single person you see in RL.
You know what they say about waiting for things to happen on their own.
Actually no. As have been proven time and time again. Vast majority of people want solo vast majority of time. But there should be grouping opportunities, and best way is to scale conent in both height and widht (levels(if there are any) and numbers)
Grouping should NEVER be an obstacle (sitting around spamming chat/in queue because "no tank" or w/e)
Actually some games were designed for forced grouping, but as any bad design, some classes slipped through and could solo stuff. Thats what you get for complete imbalance and bad design.
Some games cant even be played unless in group (not MMOs though, mostly coop games)