Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
(I want a Living Breathing World) vs (I want a Video Game)! Well why not BOTH?!
MMOExposed
Member RarePosts: 7,400
Hey I was reading part of this thread here
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/319972/current-mmos-suck.html
And something a person said in the thread had me thinking about an idea I had.
Originally posted by Kyleran
Well, the reason most people don't want this is because they view MMORPG's as games, no different than a single player console soccer game, and are not looking to live in an alternate universe.
I'm with you, I've been waiting for MMO's to evolve to the point that I can jack in and leave real life behind, but I'm not seeing that happen any time soon.
This seem to be a two sided argument.
On one side we have the players that want MMORPG to be a VIDEO GAME.
on the other side, we have players that want MMORPG to be a LIVING BREATHING WORLD
@Players that want MMORPG to be a Video Game:
I am confused by this desire. Since all MMORPG are already a Video Game, what is it that you define as being a Video game? Maybe once that is answered, we can take things to the next step, of combining your desires with those of the players that want a living breathing world group.
@players that want a Living Breathing World:
Well sorry to tell you this, but all MMORPGs are video games. There is nothing LIVING, nor BREATHING about the world. Maybe if you can elaborate on what you mean by living breathing world, inside a video game, actually means, then we can manage to combine the two group's interest.
---------------------------------------
I have my own views of these two groups interest, but this is simply a 3rd party perspective, so please feel free to jump in a correct me on this subject.
Seems the group that want a Video Game, simply want Action at all times. They want to be able to jump into the game and have action thrown at them. They want a Goal at all times, and want to be able to complete that goal.
the group that wants a Living breathing world, simply want to have a game that doesnt have goal. They want to be placed in a goal free environment. And not to have action gameplay, forced down their necks.
Well cant we have both?
CCP and Trion Worlds, are both doing something similar.
CCP has a freedom Sandpark game (Eve), but are developing a Console Game that has some kind of connections to the Sandpark MMO. So both of both worlds are happy.
Same thing for Trion Worlds. They are making a Scifi MMO that will coexist with another format. This gives players multiple ways to access the same game. Well what if this concept was expanded on more, to make both groups even more happy, all in the same game? How could this be done? what you think?
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Comments
Why? I'll tell you why: Because video games are no longer being made by gamers or passionate artists. They're being made by stuffy, rich C.E.O. businessmen who know absolutely nothing about the video gaming industry, yet hold exclusive creative control over the entire company.
Heh, no it's worse than that, much worse. It's being made by people that know a lot about videogames and enjoy playing games, but they don't dream anymore, they are cold people that know very well why are they in the industry and what is expected from them: hook the maximum amount of players to make the maximum amount of money. Period. The dream and romanticism of 15-20 years ago is over.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
huh?
Well what happens when a game is not created like that. What happens to that game?
Darkfall was developed like that or no? How did that turn out?
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Just to elaborate on the living breathing world thing...
(IMHO) This is really closely tied to the whole sandbox concept. When players say they want a "living breathing world," I think they mean they want a game that features a high degree of world interactivity and supports lots of dynamic content that can be created and experienced by players.
Another way to think about it is this:
In a pure "video game" MMORPG, the developer creates all the content that is experienced by the players and it is basically static. This is your typical run of the mill quest grind type of MMO.
In a pure "living breathing world" MMORPG, the developer grants tools to the players so that they can create content, but does not create much of the "primary" adventure-like content that is experienced by the players. They basically populate the world, give you the tools to shape it, and say "have at it." The players then create the content for themselves.
Personally, I think going to either extreme isn't good for an MMORPG. A pure "video game" MMORPG loses the point of an MMORPG all together. What's the point of having all these players in a persistent world when everything is completely static and a lot of it instanced? WHy not just have that be a multiplayer RPG?
And on the other extreme, a pure "living breathing world" can be very inaccessible. It often turns into an "elite club" where only players that are willing to devote the time it takes to be part of the world can enjoy it.
I think that the wave of the future should be combining enough "video game" concepts to make the game accesible, with enough "living breathing world" concepts to make it dynamic and really leverage the "MMO" part of MMORPG.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
There's a little bit of a middle ground between the two, but a lot of game design decisions boil down to "What's convenient to enable streamlined, pure gameplay" vs. "What makes the world more real?"
Most of "why not both?" is answered with the question "Does it take me a long time to travel to the gameplay?" World-purists say 'yes, travel is a big deal'. Game-purists say 'no, that's a waste of my time.''
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Holodeck vs. Pacman? I'll take the Holodeck. I'd like to think I can rub shoulders with both crowds though. Pacman inside the holodeck? Sure, why not?
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
KInd of disagree with this. They are still being made by gamers and artists, but they are being financed by, stuffy, rich, C.E.O. businessmen who know absoloutely nothing (nor really care) about the video gaming industry, yet hold exclusive creative control over the entire company. The same way it is for every other entertainment industry that takes a huge start up cost to create said "art". Until the cost and technological effort needed to make this kind of game evolve a bit, and they already are, look at games like Xzyon, and Perpetuum, we are stuck with these massive cash cow games where the bottom line is the biggest goal, instead of fun or quality.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
I disagree. MMORPGs today tend to be *drumroll*
Real life.
You go out there you "work" then after that you get paid. You keep "working" in order to get betterstuff and thats what we have in MMORPGS today.
In video games, you "work" then after you "work" and enjoy it for the simple fact that you find it fun.
I personally want MMOs to go back closer into gaming instead of the route of "reward reward" focus.
Does this clash with "I want a living breathing world"? absolutely not. But the reward reward focus is taking away from BOTH fun gameplay and sandboxiness.
''/\/\'' Posted using Iphone bunni
( o.o)
(")(")
**This bunny was cloned from bunnies belonging to Gobla and is part of the Quizzical Fanclub and the The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club**
That really is an extreme definition of "living, breathing world". I see it mostly as another way to say immersion. A world that is immersive feels alive through and through. To get such a great deal of immersion needs a lot of attention to the small things in the world as well as superb music ang sound to create the atmosphere.
That was before the recession. Now we'll pay to fantasize about having that sort of job security.
No, that is not the point at all. People who want a living world all want goal but they want to set the goals themselves, not just play through a premade story.
It is more like a pen and paper roleplaying game than a movie or a book. A good game actually allows you to do more than just hang around for the ride, it also allows you to make your own choices.
More like:
Use the holodeck to work a desk job after sitting in virtual traffic 45 mins (world)
vs.
Use the holodeck to take down a mafia headquarters (game)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
That is not exactly true, PnP RPG's are more on rails and a guided experience (and more themepark style) than you'd think, with the DM in the role of the devs to provide content. Without DM to provide the storylines and content, nothing is happening; even more, let's say you'd go 'screw the campaign, I want to go leave it all behind. I want to hang around in that village, raise some crop and do nothing else', then you're not really allowed to. It's follow the campaign that the DM has prepared or that he has as backup, but in any case it's following what he has in mind for the adventurers.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
AOC HAS ALL THAT MY FRIEND
Who the hell would want a game without any goals whatsoever? If I just wanted to look at scenery, I'd go outside
Anyways, I have to agree with Loke's post, and the part in red completely sums it up.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Well, I believe ArenaNet is on a good way on making both the 'living breathing world' ( a very coomon phrase they use ) and a great 'video game'.
Guild Wars 2 Youtube Croatian Maniacs
My Guild Wars titles
Then you have a really poor DM. I'm one of 3 DMs in our group (we rotate game/DM every now and again) and we all three fully allow the players to do as you suggested above. It's very easy for a skilled / veteran DM to come up with plots on the fly and make events happen around such a character. You just have to be a decent story teller.
Sure, having a great pre-planned story is nice to have. But if you have creative thinking players who know there are more possibilities than "hack-n-slash, gimme mah lewtz an XP" then you will learn to be equally or more creative on the fly.
Heck, even in the grand-daddy of them all D&D the rule-book states that it is merely a guide and encourages the players/dm to add in their own flavorings to their liking.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
That all depends on the DM. If the DM is creative enough, the "rules" of DnD become alot more flexible. The last DnD campaign I was involved in (as a player) was about as "sandboxy" as anyone could hope for, IMO.
@ Creslin = Agreed
also, yes, it is "just a game", but in a way it is (or should be) more. I still keep hoping devs will start looking at MMO's social/world engineering problems as much as game building problems.
No, the difference is:
You walk in and the air is blowing the trees. You can smell freshly cut grass. A beautiful woman approaches that you have not met. She asks you to have a drink with her.
vs.
Gobble up the pellets to get points.
In both of your examples, there is a pre-determined course. You are going to work. You are working to get money. Or you are taking down the mafia headquarters to level up or grind faction. In a living breathing world, the woman could flirt with you or smack you in the face, depending on what you say.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.