It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
To me, it is obvious. We mmorpg players are divided into two distinctive camps, which view upon the mmorpg playing experience is clearly different.
We have the 'gamers': mostly characterised by the wish of playing a "Diablo" but in a mmo context; i.e. clear progression paths for ones character, well-written and plentyful of quests etc. We are all quite familiar to the conecpt; it is well exploited in EQ, EQ2, WoW and even SWG (!) now adays.
Then there are the 'simulators': this group have a strong dedication to creating 'worlds', affect them and build them through their in-game actions. The world has to have a sence of realism to it in the meaning that your actions matters (at least on some level). This player type is less concerned with loot, quests etc. and more of e.g. open design concepts, player-driven economy, resources, trading, construction, territorial conquests. New mmorpg-tools as instancing is generally considered as an immersion-breaker and, hence, banned. EVE being the best example of this approach, but SoR, DAOC, SoG, early SWG are some others.
Without going into more detail of what characterises the two groups (I think you all know them and recognise them fairly well...); my main point is that these two type pf game designs are esentially two different type of games. Hence, to clear up some confusion in communication between devs->players, and vice versa on subjects of visions, development, design, changes etc., there should be denotion of 'mmorpg' and 'mmorpw' (w = world). The former is, ofc, EQ-stylish games and the latter being EVE design concepts.
So, without having to explain myself in detail of what game I actually am interested in playing (living in... ), I can wish for more mmorpw's. There are too few and we just lost one (SWG).
Ps. If the devs of SWG had from the very launch of NGE announced that "SWG is no longer an mmorpw - we, hereby through the launch of NGE, change it into a mmorpg", I would never even have had to try the sorry mess.
.............
When in doubt, troll.
Comments
Interesting. I like the idea, but if you're going to think about branching MMO RPG games into those two catagories, there will be games that break the mold. To quote some guy who's name I forgot: "There are two types of people in this world, those who believe there are two types of people in this world, and those who know better."
Just my two cents.
Yes, the distinction is not as definitive as I may have put it above - there are, ofc, always gray zones. But there is a clear difference in the approach from CCP's devs in the design of EVE compared to Blizzars with WoW. Yet they are both called 'mmorpg'.
I do belive, however, that there it is a main divider for a design concept of a mmorpg with regards to creating a world with static scripted content, mainly in the form of 'quests'; compared to creating a dynamic world focused on providing players (inhabitants ) with tools, or features, as basis for actions and interventions. Obviously there is the possebility of having both aspects in the same online world, but, as a player, I am eagerly interested in the intentions of a dev team and their vision.
Some clear concepts might though be benefitial to a slight more distinctive debate.
Well, just some humble thoughts of mine; I'm not on a personal crusade to revolutionise the mmorpg industry...
.............
When in doubt, troll.
Yeah but once you start thinking about games like MMO RPG/FPS, games with no combat, games that are all about combat and so on, you open up a whole new range of possibilities and ways to define and divide these games other then just RPG-RPW.