OP - you are not crazy - the issue is you are talking about MMORPGs - most newer games are MMOS which don't require strong communities.
Example Overwatch - its focused on small team play - you just need a handful of friends.
Or Destiny - it doesn't require a large community because the gameplay is focused on small team play.
Most newer online games are MMOs, that's the real reason why community is not priority because the focus is solo or small team play.
Actually community is a priority for those games, but efforts are concentrated where the communities are - and that's not inside the game world.
Not sure what your point is Loktofeit. Destiny is a shooter and Overwatch is sort of a lobby game if I am not mistaken. What does the community outside of the game have to do with socializing in an MMO?
Like Kano says , you are only "socializing" with the small group you play with. The rest are simply numbers to compare your prowess with.
Even in large MMO's, I really don't see the need to socialize with more than a small group. I like Guilds or Clans. The problem with them though is that very few people commit to them anymore. They come, they play for a month or two and just as you get to know them, they are gone.
It gets depressing actually, meeting and trying to help players in the game only to find your efforts were wasted when they simply disappear forever.
Encouraging people won't change that much IMO.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
I've been back in EQ for the past week and a half...and I must say...although there are less people playing then over a DECADE ago, there is still a community. I've chatted with more people and had more friendly buffs and assists in my week and a half than I have had in 3 months or more in any of the more recent MMORPG'S.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Sorry, but community is something that the players make. The developers have given you all the tools you need to make it happen... it's your choice whether you choose to make it happen. Sadly, the majority of the players choose not to.
Keep in mind, having a need for people to do something or help you do something is not *community*. A guild is not a community in and of itself. A community is a group of people who choose to hang out together doing whatever just for the hell of it. They aren't there purely to raid. Purely to build a castle. Purely to dominate the economy. That is just people playing a game. If said activities did not exist, they wouldn't even be playing the game.
So you see, *community* exists everywhere and no where... depending on your choice. Do you log in to a game and just hang out chatting with friends for hours on end, not really doing anything? Then you have a community. Do you log in just prior to a raid, park yourself near the instance all prepared to go, and wait for an invite? Then you don't have a community.
You don't need mechanics to force *community* because it doesn't work. *Community* happens despite the game mechanics... so just because there's a LFR or LFG or some other solo-izing mechanic in the game, doesn't mean you can't have *community*.
The water is there, it's up to each individual to decide whether to drink it. Problem is, everyone thinks it's someone else's job to make *community* happen... and that's why it doesn't... because it's a choice, not a mechanic.
I agree but I think developers make games anti-community. At some point if you're in your own isobubble 90% of the time what is the point of the game being an MMORPG instead of a single player or multiplayer game?
Players make games anti-community... they choose to play solo. They choose to rely on automated queue systems. They choose to sit in their little virtual homes waiting for their automated minions to return.
All games are single player if you play them that way. Again, a community exists because the players want it to exist. They are the only ones with the power to make it happen. THE ONLY ONES.
And for the record... most of your nostalgia experiences with community happened by accident, not by divine intervention. I'm pretty sure you didn't log into the game with the idea of finding life long friends that enjoy the same thing as you do. No, you logged in to play a game and found these people by accident and they found you. And yes, if you asked for help on a quest back then, you got you fair share of asshole responses in general chat. If you can navigate through a cesspool like these forums without turning a gun to your head, you can navigate the torrential rapids of asshats in game to find a real friend.
To me, it comes down to one word, accountability. It seems, even more than "forced grouping", people in general loudly express dislike for exclusivity, those in the "in group", the "ubers", the "hardcore". From the outside looking in, it's easy to vilify those with whom you have a sort of disconnect, but it's unfair. When people do this they're grossly neglecting the activity and time investiture of those who have spent time working together and working hard to make a name for themselves, both through performance and personal accountability.
Games are just for fun for most people. Most don't want to serve hours developing rapport and positive public reflection, and honestly, many people just don't know how. Once an individual has such a name for himself, he finds it much easier to be accommodated in more difficult tasks and reaps the benefit of more available opportunities. To me, this is, and always has been, a main, objective aspect of multi-player games, but it's not focused. It's easy to overlook, especially if rewards for so little activity are handed out so frequently, that part of the brain which harbors the reward response simply doesn't seek more.
Who keeps looking for something once they've found it?
So, in the end, there are alot of jealous people. What separates the "haves from have-nots" often isn't the cause most point to when they're concerned about fairness and equality in an mmo. It's the overlooked aspects. Not even requiring more than 10 or 30 minutes at a time, those concerned with that social aspect of accountability find themselves lumped in the "elitist group" for seemingly unknown reasons, as they're just carrying on the way they do. You can be mad about it and type forum flames about it, or you can give that extra 10% of a shit to show people you respect accountability.
OP - you are not crazy - the issue is you are talking about MMORPGs - most newer games are MMOS which don't require strong communities.
Example Overwatch - its focused on small team play - you just need a handful of friends.
Or Destiny - it doesn't require a large community because the gameplay is focused on small team play.
Most newer online games are MMOs, that's the real reason why community is not priority because the focus is solo or small team play.
Actually community is a priority for those games, but efforts are concentrated where the communities are - and that's not inside the game world.
Not sure what your point is Loktofeit. Destiny is a shooter and Overwatch is sort of a lobby game if I am not mistaken. What does the community outside of the game have to do with socializing in an MMO?
It has little to do with socializing in an MMO, and for good reason - that isn't where a game's players are normally socializing. Their FB crowd socializes there, their Twitter crowd interaqct there, their Pintrest/Instagram crowd shares there, their forum crowd discusses the game there.
The social circles already exist where people engage each other in a medium they are most comfortable with. The community teams engage those players and foster good communities in the players' chosen circles.
I get your point - there aren't any hugfests in game. And this crowd will chinscratch til the cows come home because they don't want to acknowledge the real answer, which is that most people in most games aren't there to make new friends and meet new people. They're there to have fun playing a game for a while, and if the people around them aren't dicks, well then that's just an awesome bonus.
That's the great thing about having so many MMOs right now. Want a game where players are looking to just jump in and run around with random people doing a bunch of cool stuff? Wildstar, GW2, and many others offer that in spades. Want a game where players are looking to band together as a community? Pathfinder Online, EVE Online, UO and plenty others offer that, too.
EDIT: Pepeq gave a similar answer, but from a really good angle - In most MMOs, the tools are there to build community, if that's what the playerbase wants to do.
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
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Sorry, but community is something that the players make. The developers have given you all the tools you need to make it happen... it's your choice whether you choose to make it happen. Sadly, the majority of the players choose not to.
Keep in mind, having a need for people to do something or help you do something is not *community*. A guild is not a community in and of itself. A community is a group of people who choose to hang out together doing whatever just for the hell of it. They aren't there purely to raid. Purely to build a castle. Purely to dominate the economy. That is just people playing a game. If said activities did not exist, they wouldn't even be playing the game.
So you see, *community* exists everywhere and no where... depending on your choice. Do you log in to a game and just hang out chatting with friends for hours on end, not really doing anything? Then you have a community. Do you log in just prior to a raid, park yourself near the instance all prepared to go, and wait for an invite? Then you don't have a community.
You don't need mechanics to force *community* because it doesn't work. *Community* happens despite the game mechanics... so just because there's a LFR or LFG or some other solo-izing mechanic in the game, doesn't mean you can't have *community*.
The water is there, it's up to each individual to decide whether to drink it. Problem is, everyone thinks it's someone else's job to make *community* happen... and that's why it doesn't... because it's a choice, not a mechanic.
I agree but I think developers make games anti-community. At some point if you're in your own isobubble 90% of the time what is the point of the game being an MMORPG instead of a single player or multiplayer game?
Players make games anti-community... they choose to play solo. They choose to rely on automated queue systems. They choose to sit in their little virtual homes waiting for their automated minions to return.
All games are single player if you play them that way. Again, a community exists because the players want it to exist. They are the only ones with the power to make it happen. THE ONLY ONES.
And for the record... most of your nostalgia experiences with community happened by accident, not by divine intervention. I'm pretty sure you didn't log into the game with the idea of finding life long friends that enjoy the same thing as you do. No, you logged in to play a game and found these people by accident and they found you. And yes, if you asked for help on a quest back then, you got you fair share of asshole responses in general chat. If you can navigate through a cesspool like these forums without turning a gun to your head, you can navigate the torrential rapids of asshats in game to find a real friend.
LOL
Thankfully I live in Canada and the majority of us don't have guns. Otherwise I might have trouble here, like you say.
But you are right, its a jungle out there in MMO's now.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Eve is a good example of a game design that encourages interaction and community. I'd much rather play in a medieval fantasy environment, but the lack of instances and constant updates to the game make it form communities and hold on to players like no other MMORPG I can think of.
It is the best sandbox the genre has produced so far and other games should look to it for inspiration. CCP is really doing something right here.
OP - you are not crazy - the issue is you are talking about MMORPGs - most newer games are MMOS which don't require strong communities.
Example Overwatch - its focused on small team play - you just need a handful of friends.
Or Destiny - it doesn't require a large community because the gameplay is focused on small team play.
Most newer online games are MMOs, that's the real reason why community is not priority because the focus is solo or small team play.
Actually community is a priority for those games, but efforts are concentrated where the communities are - and that's not inside the game world.
Not sure what your point is Loktofeit. Destiny is a shooter and Overwatch is sort of a lobby game if I am not mistaken. What does the community outside of the game have to do with socializing in an MMO?
I get your point - there aren't any hugfests in game. And this crowd will chinscratch til the cows come home because they don't want to acknowledge the real answer, which is that most people in most games aren't there to make new friends and meet new people. They're there to have fun playing a game for a while, and if the people around them aren't dicks, well then that's just an awesome bonus.
EDIT: Pepeq gave a similar answer, but from a really good angle - In most MMOs, the tools are there to build community, if that's what the playerbase wants to do.
Yes, I have to say, completely agree with the yellow. Whole paragraph actually.
Most of us probably would not be friends in real life. Why is it expected that we should all be friends in an MMO?
But always nice to run into someone of similar interests and such. That's the best I hope for.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Eve is a good example of a game design that encourages interaction and community. I'd much rather play in a medieval fantasy environment, but the lack of instances and constant updates to the game make it form communities and hold on to players like no other MMORPG I can think of.
It is the best sandbox the genre has produced so far and other games should look to it for inspiration. CCP is really doing something right here.
Some might consider that a "toxic" community however.
Competition in an anonymous environment generally does not bring out humanity's best characteristics.
But the within a corp community, may have merit. Haven't played EVE in that way, but I assume you have to take a lot of the bad to get the good.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Sorry, but community is something that the players make. The developers have given you all the tools you need to make it happen... it's your choice whether you choose to make it happen. Sadly, the majority of the players choose not to.
Keep in mind, having a need for people to do something or help you do something is not *community*. A guild is not a community in and of itself. A community is a group of people who choose to hang out together doing whatever just for the hell of it. They aren't there purely to raid. Purely to build a castle. Purely to dominate the economy. That is just people playing a game. If said activities did not exist, they wouldn't even be playing the game.
So you see, *community* exists everywhere and no where... depending on your choice. Do you log in to a game and just hang out chatting with friends for hours on end, not really doing anything? Then you have a community. Do you log in just prior to a raid, park yourself near the instance all prepared to go, and wait for an invite? Then you don't have a community.
You don't need mechanics to force *community* because it doesn't work. *Community* happens despite the game mechanics... so just because there's a LFR or LFG or some other solo-izing mechanic in the game, doesn't mean you can't have *community*.
The water is there, it's up to each individual to decide whether to drink it. Problem is, everyone thinks it's someone else's job to make *community* happen... and that's why it doesn't... because it's a choice, not a mechanic.
I agree but I think developers make games anti-community. At some point if you're in your own isobubble 90% of the time what is the point of the game being an MMORPG instead of a single player or multiplayer game?
Yea it's a lot more like not leading the horse anywhere and saying, "if's he is thirsty enough he will find something to drink."
This is true, and so is Pepeq's original comment, in a way.
Ultimately it is up to the players to decide if they want to play a game and be a part of its community. However, specifically in MMORPGs, there are a multitude of things that developers can do to direct players to one another. Creating quests in instances where you can't bring another player along (ESO at release) is an example of how developers can, in fact, discourage community.
This one will be more controversial, but it's worth mentioning: megaserver tech and cross-realm grouping and matchmaking also serves to kill community. In older games, I saw the same players multiple times throughout the leveling process. It became a natural thing to talk to them because we had grouped multiple times before through dungeons and what have you. With the way developers are handling servers these days (instances upon instances and cross-server queues upon cross-server queues), it is MUCH, MUCH more difficult for this kind of organic, repeated grouping of like-minded players to happen. You go into a queued dungeon in WoW, you'll more than likely never see the players you're there with again. In the name of "gotta give them action fast," developers have destroyed an organic method of meeting and creating gaming bonds with other players who started around the same time you did, who play roughly the same hours, and who progress at roughly the same pace. In some MMORPGs, even the wide open zones can be instanced. So not only do you enter mission areas that cut you off from other players, you are cut off from a bulk of players outside those player-specific mission instances. All in the name of making servers "more massive." It's absurd that anyone would think making a server cap larger, then separating those players into different instances of your zones (cutting off any organic interaction between them) makes for a better system than simply creating more world servers and lowering the player cap, but placing all players in the same open world to interact with one another.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Sorry, but community is something that the players make. The developers have given you all the tools you need to make it happen... it's your choice whether you choose to make it happen. Sadly, the majority of the players choose not to.
Keep in mind, having a need for people to do something or help you do something is not *community*. A guild is not a community in and of itself. A community is a group of people who choose to hang out together doing whatever just for the hell of it. They aren't there purely to raid. Purely to build a castle. Purely to dominate the economy. That is just people playing a game. If said activities did not exist, they wouldn't even be playing the game.
So you see, *community* exists everywhere and no where... depending on your choice. Do you log in to a game and just hang out chatting with friends for hours on end, not really doing anything? Then you have a community. Do you log in just prior to a raid, park yourself near the instance all prepared to go, and wait for an invite? Then you don't have a community.
You don't need mechanics to force *community* because it doesn't work. *Community* happens despite the game mechanics... so just because there's a LFR or LFG or some other solo-izing mechanic in the game, doesn't mean you can't have *community*.
The water is there, it's up to each individual to decide whether to drink it. Problem is, everyone thinks it's someone else's job to make *community* happen... and that's why it doesn't... because it's a choice, not a mechanic.
I agree but I think developers make games anti-community. At some point if you're in your own isobubble 90% of the time what is the point of the game being an MMORPG instead of a single player or multiplayer game?
Players make games anti-community... they choose to play solo. They choose to rely on automated queue systems. They choose to sit in their little virtual homes waiting for their automated minions to return.
All games are single player if you play them that way. Again, a community exists because the players want it to exist. They are the only ones with the power to make it happen. THE ONLY ONES.
And for the record... most of your nostalgia experiences with community happened by accident, not by divine intervention. I'm pretty sure you didn't log into the game with the idea of finding life long friends that enjoy the same thing as you do. No, you logged in to play a game and found these people by accident and they found you. And yes, if you asked for help on a quest back then, you got you fair share of asshole responses in general chat. If you can navigate through a cesspool like these forums without turning a gun to your head, you can navigate the torrential rapids of asshats in game to find a real friend.
You're not going to have community if you're rewarded for being anti-social. Most modern games places you on neat little train tracks to play the game best without having to talk to a soul. In fact interacting with players may even slow you down to the whole purpose of the game which is progression. That's what I mean being anti-community.
And the whole being forced argument is pointless because you're always forced to do something playing a game. Its the level and what you're being forced to do becomes the issue. A lot of players hate questhubs and the stories they're forced to grind through to max level, yet we still have them. In fact, developers have made the grind faster as proof. Then there are other grinds players seem to hate like dailies/faction/etc and they're still there. Many community inclusive things are far more subtle then putting people on the traditional MMORPG treadmills.
My point isn't to make players hold each other hand through the game. Again if you're minimizing other players to cater to players who want single player experience... you just as well make a single player game or a local multiplayer/lobby game and save on the server cost/latency. I don't need to make friends in a MMORPG either but I do like to actually have a reason to play with other people. That's why I started play MMORPGs way back in the mid 90s.
The answer to this is "encouraged interaction". Encouraged interaction is something that lets players interact out of need but is not forced upon them. This obviously works best in say a crafting enviroment. Example, cart maker (player 1) wants to build a trade cart. He has to interact with the blacksmith (player 2) to have an axle built. The blacksmith (player 2) needs iron. He purchases said iron from the miner (player 3). Once all of this is done, the cart maker makes his cart and sells it to the trader (player 4). Obviously, this is a simple from of interaction, but it mimicks real life. Where MMO go off the rails or jump the shark is when the fail to follow some real life axioms. Yes, people can go it alone. However, when you are given the benefits of working with others, faster crafting and specialization in my example, you get a gentle push to interact.
The part in red is a logical impossibility - if they need to do it, it's forced upon them. In fact, limiting the types of crafting any one avatar can do is a horrible design idea. Instead, you want to enable free and easy trade so that people who don't like mining can, with a minimum amount of annoyance, put their time into something they live better (perhaps brick-making or cotton-growing) and then swap for iron. Where MMOs jump the shark is when they waste gameplay by giving players access to less than 100% of it. It's a lot more difficult to justify a good mining minigame if you are only allowing 20% of your players to mine.
I'm not sure what is so bad about forced interaction. To me people gripe to much about this kind of thing. The best times I had in MMOs probably came from having no choice but to interact. I didn't really want to at the time, but had little choice in the matter. It ended up with the game experience being more enjoyable in the end though.
The the gaming masses have spoken and they have demanded 15 minute instance runs, lobby games, loot tokens/badges and massive solo content.
I liked the good old days but I feel we are a tiny minority.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
OP - you are not crazy - the issue is you are talking about MMORPGs - most newer games are MMOS which don't require strong communities.
Example Overwatch - its focused on small team play - you just need a handful of friends.
Or Destiny - it doesn't require a large community because the gameplay is focused on small team play.
Most newer online games are MMOs, that's the real reason why community is not priority because the focus is solo or small team play.
Actually community is a priority for those games, but efforts are concentrated where the communities are - and that's not inside the game world.
Not sure what your point is Loktofeit. Destiny is a shooter and Overwatch is sort of a lobby game if I am not mistaken. What does the community outside of the game have to do with socializing in an MMO?
I get your point - there aren't any hugfests in game. And this crowd will chinscratch til the cows come home because they don't want to acknowledge the real answer, which is that most people in most games aren't there to make new friends and meet new people. They're there to have fun playing a game for a while, and if the people around them aren't dicks, well then that's just an awesome bonus.
EDIT: Pepeq gave a similar answer, but from a really good angle - In most MMOs, the tools are there to build community, if that's what the playerbase wants to do.
Yes, I have to say, completely agree with the yellow. Whole paragraph actually.
Most of us probably would not be friends in real life. Why is it expected that we should all be friends in an MMO?
But always nice to run into someone of similar interests and such. That's the best I hope for.
You don't have to make lifelong companions in-game. But playing with others is what multiplayer games are about. Otherwise, they'd be singleplayer games.
It's one thing to not wanna tell a complete stranger online how your day went and what you've been up to. An entirely other thing to load up a multiplayer game and get angry if you have to, y'know, play together with other players.
You are not crazy,there are two problems preventing it however.One those that just want to hang out by themselves want a solo mmorpg,yet you get the EXACT same thing with a single player game.The problem is that devs feel they will sell less games if they simply call it a single player game and will be more steadfast on having to charge a box price and not have any way to form a cash shop,only dlc will be their revenue.So the whole idea is BETTER for a MMORPG but not better for revenue,so as you see it is all about the $$$ and NOT about delivering the best possible games.
It is the same reason they go around giving media sites early copies to give favorable reviews,they want to do nothing but mislead people into buying their products.They want to tell you about how great the game is as a mmorpg and as a single player game and as PVE and as PVP,oh ya our game is great for EVERYONE.Oh ya "Our game is different",our game what you do matters",we don't have quests ,we have DYNAMIC content" "we don't have quests,we have living story",it is all total BS marketing ways to influence consumers.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
OP - you are not crazy - the issue is you are talking about MMORPGs - most newer games are MMOS which don't require strong communities.
Example Overwatch - its focused on small team play - you just need a handful of friends.
Or Destiny - it doesn't require a large community because the gameplay is focused on small team play.
Most newer online games are MMOs, that's the real reason why community is not priority because the focus is solo or small team play.
Actually community is a priority for those games, but efforts are concentrated where the communities are - and that's not inside the game world.
Not sure what your point is Loktofeit. Destiny is a shooter and Overwatch is sort of a lobby game if I am not mistaken. What does the community outside of the game have to do with socializing in an MMO?
I get your point - there aren't any hugfests in game. And this crowd will chinscratch til the cows come home because they don't want to acknowledge the real answer, which is that most people in most games aren't there to make new friends and meet new people. They're there to have fun playing a game for a while, and if the people around them aren't dicks, well then that's just an awesome bonus.
EDIT: Pepeq gave a similar answer, but from a really good angle - In most MMOs, the tools are there to build community, if that's what the playerbase wants to do.
Yes, I have to say, completely agree with the yellow. Whole paragraph actually.
Most of us probably would not be friends in real life. Why is it expected that we should all be friends in an MMO?
But always nice to run into someone of similar interests and such. That's the best I hope for.
You don't have to make lifelong companions in-game. But playing with others is what multiplayer games are about. Otherwise, they'd be singleplayer games.
It's one thing to not wanna tell a complete stranger online how your day went and what you've been up to. An entirely other thing to load up a multiplayer game and get angry if you have to, y'know, play together with other players.
Is FPS death match a single player game? -No. Grouping is not required for a multiplayer game. The one thing that is required, is that you share the game space with other players. So if someone wants to go about playing MMORPGs solo, they are not doing anything wrong.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
So if someone wants to go about playing MMORPGs solo, they are not doing anything wrong.
They're not doing anything particularly "right" though, either, unless they're just mostly interested in playing with themselves. Hey, I do it sometimes, when I can't find someone readily to play with and I'm really in the mood. Usually I like someone else to be there, though.
OP - you are not crazy - the issue is you are talking about MMORPGs - most newer games are MMOS which don't require strong communities.
Example Overwatch - its focused on small team play - you just need a handful of friends.
Or Destiny - it doesn't require a large community because the gameplay is focused on small team play.
Most newer online games are MMOs, that's the real reason why community is not priority because the focus is solo or small team play.
Actually community is a priority for those games, but efforts are concentrated where the communities are - and that's not inside the game world.
Not sure what your point is Loktofeit. Destiny is a shooter and Overwatch is sort of a lobby game if I am not mistaken. What does the community outside of the game have to do with socializing in an MMO?
I get your point - there aren't any hugfests in game. And this crowd will chinscratch til the cows come home because they don't want to acknowledge the real answer, which is that most people in most games aren't there to make new friends and meet new people. They're there to have fun playing a game for a while, and if the people around them aren't dicks, well then that's just an awesome bonus.
EDIT: Pepeq gave a similar answer, but from a really good angle - In most MMOs, the tools are there to build community, if that's what the playerbase wants to do.
Yes, I have to say, completely agree with the yellow. Whole paragraph actually.
Most of us probably would not be friends in real life. Why is it expected that we should all be friends in an MMO?
But always nice to run into someone of similar interests and such. That's the best I hope for.
You don't have to make lifelong companions in-game. But playing with others is what multiplayer games are about. Otherwise, they'd be singleplayer games.
It's one thing to not wanna tell a complete stranger online how your day went and what you've been up to. An entirely other thing to load up a multiplayer game and get angry if you have to, y'know, play together with other players.
Is FPS death match a single player game? -No. Grouping is not required for a multiplayer game. The one thing that is required, is that you share the game space with other players. So if someone wants to go about playing MMORPGs solo, they are not doing anything wrong.
Agreed. MMOs may be about playing with others, but they are not necessarily about being tethered to them.
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
They brought it on themselves though. They want to make games that garner a quick profit and they don't seem to care if they tick off consumers as the shops grow because people take it and come right back for more. Oh sure there are a few people who have integrity and will shun a company but I think so many have their identity tied to MMOs that they take whatever is shoveled at them and ask for more.
Er, but it wasn't about turning a quick profit. The biggest change regarding community was the reduction in downtime and repetitive grinding that WOW introduced. The design choices weren't made to turn a quick profit, but to create gameplay which was much more enjoyable, which would in turn result in WOW's very long-term profit. At the same time, community did suffer because MMORPGs were no longer putting players through hell (which is ironically (but logically) the best way to get people to band together and create friendships.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
They brought it on themselves though. They want to make games that garner a quick profit and they don't seem to care if they tick off consumers as the shops grow because people take it and come right back for more. Oh sure there are a few people who have integrity and will shun a company but I think so many have their identity tied to MMOs that they take whatever is shoveled at them and ask for more.
Er, but it wasn't about turning a quick profit. The biggest change regarding community was the reduction in downtime and repetitive grinding that WOW introduced. The design choices weren't made to turn a quick profit, but to create gameplay which was much more enjoyable, which would in turn result in WOW's very long-term profit. At the same time, community did suffer because MMORPGs were no longer putting players through hell (which is ironically (but logically) the best way to get people to band together and create friendships.)
Well, there are different kinds of enjoyment, different styles and different extents. Some, like instant gratification, trip very few reward center "bells", but it's consistent. I'd compare it to cheap, played out slapstick humor that's funny about the first 200 times, but gets old for most people. Some people enjoy slapstick humor and instant gratification all the time. Many of those people are adolescents or younger. Contrast that to activities like skydiving which induce adrenaline surges (because you might flippin die), and you have different fun to different people, which isn't really fun at all to other people.
If it was somehow empirically fun, everyone would enjoy it. I'm talking a billion-plus people who have pc access.
I'm not making an argument here about things being fun or not fun or to whom, only that there are differences. If something is universally "much more enjoyable", from my experience, it's a drug, or it acts upon you and elicits the same brain response as a drug. No, it doesn't mean we should never have fun, that's hyperbole. I just wish more people asked important questions like "fun? fun how? fun why? what's it mean is happening when I'm experiencing fun? aside from the obvious content difference, why is this particular experience eliciting more fun than others?".
I liked WoW, but I don't think it was much more enjoyable. Measuring it from memory, vanilla and bc, I'd put it above (some popular things to avoid argument) and below (some popular things to avoid argument), but also aspects of the way it was fun in many ways made it less fun, if that makes any sense...
I think there are design choices to turn profit. I think they're psychological and I think people do design this way on purpose. I think this is important.
Well, there are different kinds of enjoyment, different styles and different extents. Some, like instant gratification, trip very few reward center "bells", but it's consistent. I'd compare it to cheap, played out slapstick humor that's funny about the first 200 times, but gets old for most people. Some people enjoy slapstick humor and instant gratification all the time. Many of those people are adolescents or younger. Contrast that to activities like skydiving which induce adrenaline surges (because you might flippin die), and you have different fun to different people, which isn't really fun at all to other people.
If it was somehow empirically fun, everyone would enjoy it. I'm talking a billion-plus people who have pc access.
I'm not making an argument here about things being fun or not fun or to whom, only that there are differences. If something is universally "much more enjoyable", from my experience, it's a drug, or it acts upon you and elicits the same brain response as a drug. No, it doesn't mean we should never have fun, that's hyperbole. I just wish more people asked important questions like "fun? fun how? fun why? what's it mean is happening when I'm experiencing fun? aside from the obvious content difference, why is this particular experience eliciting more fun than others?".
I liked WoW, but I don't think it was much more enjoyable. Measuring it from memory, vanilla and bc, I'd put it above (some popular things to avoid argument) and below (some popular things to avoid argument), but also aspects of the way it was fun in many ways made it less fun, if that makes any sense...
I think there are design choices to turn profit. I think they're psychological and I think people do design this way on purpose. I think this is important.
Keep in mind that deliberately delayed and diluted gratification only started appearing with the subscription business model (ie charging money for time.) It wasn't a desire of fun gameplay that caused the early MMORPGs to be characterized by grind, timesinks, and downtime. It was just a business move: how thin can we stretch this limited content while keeping players paying monthly?
In the end, the types of games that didn't get old were the "instant" gratification games. Because they were simply focused on providing fun gameplay in a timely manner. This increased retention compared with the older games, which is why the old ones faded away and the new one (WOW) grew huge. Naturally a higher retention doesn't mean 100% retention (before Cataclysm only 30% of WOW players reached level 10.) So "much more enjoyable" refers to an increase in retention, not universal appeal.
As for why things are fun, read A Theory of Fun. It delves into the most common way players enjoy games (apart from things like socializing or zen). In short:
People who enjoy learning have an evolutionary advantage, as they will tend to spend more time learning and end up better-equipped to survive and have offspring. So over a long period of time, nearly everyone ended up with this advantageous trait.
The result is that present-day mankind enjoys learning. (So do several other species.)
Play is learning. (Bear cubs play-fight to learn how to fight better, etc.)
Games are pre-packaged patterns that we've discovered people enjoy learning and mastering.
The way fun is experienced is indeed a similar brain response compared with some drugs.
In the end it doesn't let us specifically pinpoint what people will or won't enjoy, but it does provide a much clearer view of this most common way players enjoy games.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I definitely agree with the OP, coming from a big background of playing and really enjoying Everquest games, community really helps you enjoy it more and stay around longer.
OP - you are not crazy - the issue is you are talking about MMORPGs - most newer games are MMOS which don't require strong communities.
Example Overwatch - its focused on small team play - you just need a handful of friends.
Or Destiny - it doesn't require a large community because the gameplay is focused on small team play.
Most newer online games are MMOs, that's the real reason why community is not priority because the focus is solo or small team play.
Actually community is a priority for those games, but efforts are concentrated where the communities are - and that's not inside the game world.
Not sure what your point is Loktofeit. Destiny is a shooter and Overwatch is sort of a lobby game if I am not mistaken. What does the community outside of the game have to do with socializing in an MMO?
I get your point - there aren't any hugfests in game. And this crowd will chinscratch til the cows come home because they don't want to acknowledge the real answer, which is that most people in most games aren't there to make new friends and meet new people. They're there to have fun playing a game for a while, and if the people around them aren't dicks, well then that's just an awesome bonus.
EDIT: Pepeq gave a similar answer, but from a really good angle - In most MMOs, the tools are there to build community, if that's what the playerbase wants to do.
Yes, I have to say, completely agree with the yellow. Whole paragraph actually.
Most of us probably would not be friends in real life. Why is it expected that we should all be friends in an MMO?
But always nice to run into someone of similar interests and such. That's the best I hope for.
You don't have to make lifelong companions in-game. But playing with others is what multiplayer games are about. Otherwise, they'd be singleplayer games.
It's one thing to not wanna tell a complete stranger online how your day went and what you've been up to. An entirely other thing to load up a multiplayer game and get angry if you have to, y'know, play together with other players.
Is FPS death match a single player game? -No. Grouping is not required for a multiplayer game. The one thing that is required, is that you share the game space with other players. So if someone wants to go about playing MMORPGs solo, they are not doing anything wrong.
You're still interacting with other players in an FPS death match. I never said grouping, specifically. Actually, I never said the word grouping at all. You narrowed interaction down to that one specific instance. I said playing with other folks. Playing against folks is still interacting with them.
If you log into an MMORPG and quest solo, not having any interest in interacting with players either via chat (or voice comms) or in the game world (grouping, PvPing, etc.), then you're playing a game in a genre that, by the very definition and technical limitations, cannot service your interest in gaming as well as a singleplayer game could. If the other players might as well be NPCs running by you, there are much more well-tailored experiences for this elsewhere.
Having said that, I don't think the number of folks who log into MMORPGs not wanting any kind of interaction with other players is as high as some posters here make it out to be.
But most people play alone most of the time. CCP employee said it, Arenanet dev said it...
If these are the stats/facts, as a realist, you have to make sure these players have something to do in your game. You shouldn't always need someone else to accomplish something.
Despite being MMORPGs, these games need to have a healthy amount of soloable content and activities which don't require you to be in a group or have a guild.
Making an MMORPG where group is required all the time, is just not going to work very well and that's why you're not seeing many of those.
Features like face-to-face trading instead of auction house which OP mentions, are such that they offer no value to a player who is not interested in trading. It is a huge inconvenience. Why should these players trade off to a feature that makes their experience worse? Nevermind how things "should be" in MMORPGs - that whole discussion is ridiculous - why would you put in a feature from which the bigger part of the market would turn away from?
But if you're chasing down a niché you're fine going with face-to-face trading. Go crazy, man. Put in all the shit you think "MMORPGs should have".
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Comments
Not sure what your point is Loktofeit. Destiny is a shooter and Overwatch is sort of a lobby game if I am not mistaken. What does the community outside of the game have to do with socializing in an MMO?
Like Kano says , you are only "socializing" with the small group you play with. The rest are simply numbers to compare your prowess with.
Even in large MMO's, I really don't see the need to socialize with more than a small group. I like Guilds or Clans. The problem with them though is that very few people commit to them anymore. They come, they play for a month or two and just as you get to know them, they are gone.
It gets depressing actually, meeting and trying to help players in the game only to find your efforts were wasted when they simply disappear forever.
Encouraging people won't change that much IMO.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Players make games anti-community... they choose to play solo. They choose to rely on automated queue systems. They choose to sit in their little virtual homes waiting for their automated minions to return.
All games are single player if you play them that way. Again, a community exists because the players want it to exist. They are the only ones with the power to make it happen. THE ONLY ONES.
And for the record... most of your nostalgia experiences with community happened by accident, not by divine intervention. I'm pretty sure you didn't log into the game with the idea of finding life long friends that enjoy the same thing as you do. No, you logged in to play a game and found these people by accident and they found you. And yes, if you asked for help on a quest back then, you got you fair share of asshole responses in general chat. If you can navigate through a cesspool like these forums without turning a gun to your head, you can navigate the torrential rapids of asshats in game to find a real friend.
To me, it comes down to one word, accountability. It seems, even more than "forced grouping", people in general loudly express dislike for exclusivity, those in the "in group", the "ubers", the "hardcore". From the outside looking in, it's easy to vilify those with whom you have a sort of disconnect, but it's unfair. When people do this they're grossly neglecting the activity and time investiture of those who have spent time working together and working hard to make a name for themselves, both through performance and personal accountability.
Games are just for fun for most people. Most don't want to serve hours developing rapport and positive public reflection, and honestly, many people just don't know how. Once an individual has such a name for himself, he finds it much easier to be accommodated in more difficult tasks and reaps the benefit of more available opportunities. To me, this is, and always has been, a main, objective aspect of multi-player games, but it's not focused. It's easy to overlook, especially if rewards for so little activity are handed out so frequently, that part of the brain which harbors the reward response simply doesn't seek more.
Who keeps looking for something once they've found it?
So, in the end, there are alot of jealous people. What separates the "haves from have-nots" often isn't the cause most point to when they're concerned about fairness and equality in an mmo. It's the overlooked aspects. Not even requiring more than 10 or 30 minutes at a time, those concerned with that social aspect of accountability find themselves lumped in the "elitist group" for seemingly unknown reasons, as they're just carrying on the way they do. You can be mad about it and type forum flames about it, or you can give that extra 10% of a shit to show people you respect accountability.
It has little to do with socializing in an MMO, and for good reason - that isn't where a game's players are normally socializing. Their FB crowd socializes there, their Twitter crowd interaqct there, their Pintrest/Instagram crowd shares there, their forum crowd discusses the game there.
The social circles already exist where people engage each other in a medium they are most comfortable with. The community teams engage those players and foster good communities in the players' chosen circles.
I get your point - there aren't any hugfests in game. And this crowd will chinscratch til the cows come home because they don't want to acknowledge the real answer, which is that most people in most games aren't there to make new friends and meet new people. They're there to have fun playing a game for a while, and if the people around them aren't dicks, well then that's just an awesome bonus.
That's the great thing about having so many MMOs right now. Want a game where players are looking to just jump in and run around with random people doing a bunch of cool stuff? Wildstar, GW2, and many others offer that in spades. Want a game where players are looking to band together as a community? Pathfinder Online, EVE Online, UO and plenty others offer that, too.
EDIT: Pepeq gave a similar answer, but from a really good angle - In most MMOs, the tools are there to build community, if that's what the playerbase wants to do.
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
LOL
Thankfully I live in Canada and the majority of us don't have guns. Otherwise I might have trouble here, like you say.
But you are right, its a jungle out there in MMO's now.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Eve is a good example of a game design that encourages interaction and community. I'd much rather play in a medieval fantasy environment, but the lack of instances and constant updates to the game make it form communities and hold on to players like no other MMORPG I can think of.
It is the best sandbox the genre has produced so far and other games should look to it for inspiration. CCP is really doing something right here.
Yes, I have to say, completely agree with the yellow. Whole paragraph actually.
Most of us probably would not be friends in real life. Why is it expected that we should all be friends in an MMO?
But always nice to run into someone of similar interests and such. That's the best I hope for.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Some might consider that a "toxic" community however.
Competition in an anonymous environment generally does not bring out humanity's best characteristics.
But the within a corp community, may have merit. Haven't played EVE in that way, but I assume you have to take a lot of the bad to get the good.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
This is true, and so is Pepeq's original comment, in a way.
Ultimately it is up to the players to decide if they want to play a game and be a part of its community. However, specifically in MMORPGs, there are a multitude of things that developers can do to direct players to one another. Creating quests in instances where you can't bring another player along (ESO at release) is an example of how developers can, in fact, discourage community.
This one will be more controversial, but it's worth mentioning: megaserver tech and cross-realm grouping and matchmaking also serves to kill community. In older games, I saw the same players multiple times throughout the leveling process. It became a natural thing to talk to them because we had grouped multiple times before through dungeons and what have you. With the way developers are handling servers these days (instances upon instances and cross-server queues upon cross-server queues), it is MUCH, MUCH more difficult for this kind of organic, repeated grouping of like-minded players to happen. You go into a queued dungeon in WoW, you'll more than likely never see the players you're there with again. In the name of "gotta give them action fast," developers have destroyed an organic method of meeting and creating gaming bonds with other players who started around the same time you did, who play roughly the same hours, and who progress at roughly the same pace. In some MMORPGs, even the wide open zones can be instanced. So not only do you enter mission areas that cut you off from other players, you are cut off from a bulk of players outside those player-specific mission instances. All in the name of making servers "more massive." It's absurd that anyone would think making a server cap larger, then separating those players into different instances of your zones (cutting off any organic interaction between them) makes for a better system than simply creating more world servers and lowering the player cap, but placing all players in the same open world to interact with one another.
You're not going to have community if you're rewarded for being anti-social. Most modern games places you on neat little train tracks to play the game best without having to talk to a soul. In fact interacting with players may even slow you down to the whole purpose of the game which is progression. That's what I mean being anti-community.
And the whole being forced argument is pointless because you're always forced to do something playing a game. Its the level and what you're being forced to do becomes the issue. A lot of players hate questhubs and the stories they're forced to grind through to max level, yet we still have them. In fact, developers have made the grind faster as proof. Then there are other grinds players seem to hate like dailies/faction/etc and they're still there. Many community inclusive things are far more subtle then putting people on the traditional MMORPG treadmills.
My point isn't to make players hold each other hand through the game. Again if you're minimizing other players to cater to players who want single player experience... you just as well make a single player game or a local multiplayer/lobby game and save on the server cost/latency. I don't need to make friends in a MMORPG either but I do like to actually have a reason to play with other people. That's why I started play MMORPGs way back in the mid 90s.
The the gaming masses have spoken and they have demanded 15 minute instance runs, lobby games, loot tokens/badges and massive solo content.
I liked the good old days but I feel we are a tiny minority.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
You don't have to make lifelong companions in-game. But playing with others is what multiplayer games are about. Otherwise, they'd be singleplayer games.
It's one thing to not wanna tell a complete stranger online how your day went and what you've been up to. An entirely other thing to load up a multiplayer game and get angry if you have to, y'know, play together with other players.
You are not crazy,there are two problems preventing it however.One those that just want to hang out by themselves want a solo mmorpg,yet you get the EXACT same thing with a single player game.The problem is that devs feel they will sell less games if they simply call it a single player game and will be more steadfast on having to charge a box price and not have any way to form a cash shop,only dlc will be their revenue.So the whole idea is BETTER for a MMORPG but not better for revenue,so as you see it is all about the $$$ and NOT about delivering the best possible games.
It is the same reason they go around giving media sites early copies to give favorable reviews,they want to do nothing but mislead people into buying their products.They want to tell you about how great the game is as a mmorpg and as a single player game and as PVE and as PVP,oh ya our game is great for EVERYONE.Oh ya "Our game is different",our game what you do matters",we don't have quests ,we have DYNAMIC content" "we don't have quests,we have living story",it is all total BS marketing ways to influence consumers.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Is FPS death match a single player game? -No. Grouping is not required for a multiplayer game. The one thing that is required, is that you share the game space with other players. So if someone wants to go about playing MMORPGs solo, they are not doing anything wrong.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
They're not doing anything particularly "right" though, either, unless they're just mostly interested in playing with themselves. Hey, I do it sometimes, when I can't find someone readily to play with and I'm really in the mood. Usually I like someone else to be there, though.
Agreed. MMOs may be about playing with others, but they are not necessarily about being tethered to them.
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
Er, but it wasn't about turning a quick profit. The biggest change regarding community was the reduction in downtime and repetitive grinding that WOW introduced. The design choices weren't made to turn a quick profit, but to create gameplay which was much more enjoyable, which would in turn result in WOW's very long-term profit. At the same time, community did suffer because MMORPGs were no longer putting players through hell (which is ironically (but logically) the best way to get people to band together and create friendships.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Well, there are different kinds of enjoyment, different styles and different extents. Some, like instant gratification, trip very few reward center "bells", but it's consistent. I'd compare it to cheap, played out slapstick humor that's funny about the first 200 times, but gets old for most people. Some people enjoy slapstick humor and instant gratification all the time. Many of those people are adolescents or younger. Contrast that to activities like skydiving which induce adrenaline surges (because you might flippin die), and you have different fun to different people, which isn't really fun at all to other people.
If it was somehow empirically fun, everyone would enjoy it. I'm talking a billion-plus people who have pc access.
I'm not making an argument here about things being fun or not fun or to whom, only that there are differences. If something is universally "much more enjoyable", from my experience, it's a drug, or it acts upon you and elicits the same brain response as a drug. No, it doesn't mean we should never have fun, that's hyperbole. I just wish more people asked important questions like "fun? fun how? fun why? what's it mean is happening when I'm experiencing fun? aside from the obvious content difference, why is this particular experience eliciting more fun than others?".
I liked WoW, but I don't think it was much more enjoyable. Measuring it from memory, vanilla and bc, I'd put it above (some popular things to avoid argument) and below (some popular things to avoid argument), but also aspects of the way it was fun in many ways made it less fun, if that makes any sense...
I think there are design choices to turn profit. I think they're psychological and I think people do design this way on purpose. I think this is important.
Keep in mind that deliberately delayed and diluted gratification only started appearing with the subscription business model (ie charging money for time.) It wasn't a desire of fun gameplay that caused the early MMORPGs to be characterized by grind, timesinks, and downtime. It was just a business move: how thin can we stretch this limited content while keeping players paying monthly?
In the end, the types of games that didn't get old were the "instant" gratification games. Because they were simply focused on providing fun gameplay in a timely manner. This increased retention compared with the older games, which is why the old ones faded away and the new one (WOW) grew huge. Naturally a higher retention doesn't mean 100% retention (before Cataclysm only 30% of WOW players reached level 10.) So "much more enjoyable" refers to an increase in retention, not universal appeal.
As for why things are fun, read A Theory of Fun. It delves into the most common way players enjoy games (apart from things like socializing or zen). In short:
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I definitely agree with the OP, coming from a big background of playing and really enjoying Everquest games, community really helps you enjoy it more and stay around longer.
You're still interacting with other players in an FPS death match. I never said grouping, specifically. Actually, I never said the word grouping at all. You narrowed interaction down to that one specific instance. I said playing with other folks. Playing against folks is still interacting with them.
If you log into an MMORPG and quest solo, not having any interest in interacting with players either via chat (or voice comms) or in the game world (grouping, PvPing, etc.), then you're playing a game in a genre that, by the very definition and technical limitations, cannot service your interest in gaming as well as a singleplayer game could. If the other players might as well be NPCs running by you, there are much more well-tailored experiences for this elsewhere.
Having said that, I don't think the number of folks who log into MMORPGs not wanting any kind of interaction with other players is as high as some posters here make it out to be.
But most people play alone most of the time. CCP employee said it, Arenanet dev said it...
If these are the stats/facts, as a realist, you have to make sure these players have something to do in your game. You shouldn't always need someone else to accomplish something.
Despite being MMORPGs, these games need to have a healthy amount of soloable content and activities which don't require you to be in a group or have a guild.
Making an MMORPG where group is required all the time, is just not going to work very well and that's why you're not seeing many of those.
Features like face-to-face trading instead of auction house which OP mentions, are such that they offer no value to a player who is not interested in trading. It is a huge inconvenience. Why should these players trade off to a feature that makes their experience worse? Nevermind how things "should be" in MMORPGs - that whole discussion is ridiculous - why would you put in a feature from which the bigger part of the market would turn away from?
But if you're chasing down a niché you're fine going with face-to-face trading. Go crazy, man. Put in all the shit you think "MMORPGs should have".
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky