Nope, no sarcasm at all. That statement is very true and I'm pretty damn sure you can't disaprove the fact that taking longer is not synonymous to challenge and difficulty.
I did.
Keep dreaming!!!!!! LOL All you did was made me chuckle. For everything you throw at me that takes long and challenging I can throw back at you something that takes a long time but not challenging or difficult. Case in point, those things are not synonymous.
Threw what back at me? You either change the topic or focus replying to statements that are irrelevant to my point.
You dance around answering because you know where this leads and don't even realize that not directly answering the question is an answer in itself, demonstrating that I am right.
If you can't see that making it through the duration of running a marathon is a greater challenge and accomplishment then completing the duration of running a mile, then you are either unreasonable or stupid.
LOL I danced around nothing, you are right about nothing. My point has always been clear. Longer is not synonymous to challenge and difficulty and your one example does not make you right in any way. I can give you plenty of example in which it's not the case. I"m sure the one that's unreasonable and stupid here is you sir and only you.
See?
That's not for us to decide anymore.
Oh I definitely see something.....and I'm sure you're not going to like it.
Which would be a greater challenge for you and give you more of a sense of accomplishment? Running a mile or running a marathon?
Neither requires skill. Just endurance. I appreciate the health benefits of running, but I don't consider running an accomplishment.
While as a designer it's comforting to know that players like you exist who would be completely happy if all I did was take my existing content and add a bunch of zeros to the XP requirements of the leveling curve, that's not really the quality level of game I want to make. I try to avoid watering down the beer wherever possible, because it makes for a higher quality product.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
OK....running......time frame......give me 5 mins to run a mile or a week to run a marathon......I'll take my time RUNNING the marathon, taking breaks, resting, etc but still RUNNING it.....my point still stands......it's all in context.....tell me again longer means exactly challenging and difficult?
So to explain it clearly:
Longer does not = Challenging and Difficult
however
Challenging and Difficult normally = Longer (at least it did for older games like EQ1), which is what most of the vets are trying to make clear.
however
We do know that by today's MMO standards:
Challenging and Difficult does not always have to = Longer
As you say, challenging and difficult can be placed in a neat 15-30min package, to which I agree.
however
Some vets do miss the social aspects that longer content created, which you simply cannot always get with shorter, albiet, just as challenging and difficult content.
It totally went over your head too. He wrote running for both examples. No where did he say walk the marathon. So try answering again with that in mind.
OK....running......time frame......give me 5 mins to run a mile or a week to run a marathon......I'll take my time RUNNING the marathon, taking breaks, resting, etc but still RUNNING it.....my point still stands......it's all in context.....tell me again longer means exactly challenging and difficult?
OK....running......time frame......give me 5 mins to run a mile or a week to run a marathon......I'll take my time RUNNING the marathon, taking breaks, resting, etc but still RUNNING it.....my point still stands......it's all in context.....tell me again longer means exactly challenging and difficult?
So to explain it clearly:
Longer does not = Challenging and Difficult
however
Challenging and Difficult normally = Longer (at least it did for older games like EQ1), which is what most of the vets are trying to make clear.
however
We do know that by today's MMO standards:
Challenging and Difficult does not always have to = Longer
As you say, challenging and difficult can be placed in a neat 15-30min package, to which I agree.
however
Some vets do miss the social aspects that longer content created, which you simply cannot always get with shorter, albiet, just as challenging and difficult content.
So you agree my simple statement is TRUE. It was THAT SIMPLE. I said nothing more or less. You folks are the ones that totally try to disprove it with nothing but nonsense analogies. It was fun though, I'll tell you that. LOL
It totally went over your head too. He wrote running for both examples. No where did he say walk the marathon. So try answering again with that in mind.
OK....running......time frame......give me 5 mins to run a mile or a week to run a marathon......I'll take my time RUNNING the marathon, taking breaks, resting, etc but still RUNNING it.....my point still stands......it's all in context.....tell me again longer means exactly challenging and difficult?
And why would you stop and take breaks?
Because they gave me a week to finish running it!!!!! [mod edit]
option 1, run a marathon, option 2 run 26 miles by running on the spot, or option 3, you walk 1mile and get a certificate saying you ran 26. guess 'vet' would go for 1, I would.
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
Which would be a greater challenge for you and give you more of a sense of accomplishment? Running a mile or running a marathon?
Neither requires skill. Just endurance. I appreciate the health benefits of running, but I don't consider running an accomplishment.
While as a designer it's comforting to know that players like you exist who would be completely happy if all I did was take my existing content and add a bunch of zeros to the XP requirements of the leveling curve, that's not really the quality level of game I want to make. I try to avoid watering down the beer wherever possible, because it makes for a higher quality product.
You think running the duration of 26.2 miles for 4 hours wouldn't be mentally and physically challenging to someone that can only run 1 mile?
It totally went over your head too. He wrote running for both examples. No where did he say walk the marathon. So try answering again with that in mind.
OK....running......time frame......give me 5 mins to run a mile or a week to run a marathon......I'll take my time RUNNING the marathon, taking breaks, resting, etc but still RUNNING it.....my point still stands......it's all in context.....tell me again longer means exactly challenging and difficult?
And why would you stop and take breaks?
Because they gave me a week to finish running it!!!!! [mod edit]
So why would a longer duration of a game matter to you when you can take a break? What are you arguing about?
As you say, challenging and difficult can be placed in a neat 15-30min package, to which I agree.
however
Some vets do miss the social aspects that longer content created, which you simply cannot always get with shorter, albiet, just as challenging and difficult content.
It's definitely reasonable for vets to want the social aspects that longer play provided. They should just drop the notion that longer means more challenging, because the two things are entirely unrelated.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The idea that vets want longer content is unfounded. That's not to say that what the OP says is untrue, just that I am unaware of any demographic study to back it up. It is perception. Second, I object to the idea that you can know what "non-vets" want when there's a conspicuous lack of choices in the market place and therefore a lack of ability for them to demonstrate a preference. If you have to play a 15 year old game to get longer content then obviously that skews what you know about preferences.
More than any of that, I don't understand the whole point of the thread. It is simple reality that only thing of value in a game world is the players time. It is reality that things that take longer take more time, and there is therefore a greater investment in achieving them. A greater investment is obviously going to translate into the accomplishment of the goal being a more meaningful experience. I don't understand how anyone can argue that longer isn't more meaningful when the only thing they have that really means anything to them is their time spent playing the game. Your trying to argue that 2+2 doesn't equal 4.
One answer to the questions though is simply that some players have a preference for a game which they make their home and spend years in. They don't feel a particular need to rush through those games and want to savor the content rather than burn through it.
The better question to me is why do some people feel so strongly about this issue that they will come to the boards of games they don't even intend to play and argue tooth and nail to change it. If you ask me that sounds like someone who, for reasons I cannot quite comprehend, is threatened by the idea of the existence of a game with longer content. If you don't like it why not just write off those who do as having a different preference and move on.
Doing anything to much is unhealthy, but a lot of people in the past were rewarded for it. There were many inventions that bring modern comfort today that wouldn't exist if someone wasn't fanatical in their passion to do something and likely it hurt them in some way weather it be physically or socially. It was mostly things that require patience and determination more then anything else. You have to want it more then anything else. It seems silly to waste your health on a game, but some people did. I spent lots of time and had a lot of fun because of my ignorance of it being bad for my health. I did a lot of things out of ignorance. Still it was all a lot of fun at the time. I wouldn't trade the experience, but I also wouldn't go through it again. There are some things from old MMOs that I would like, but I don't think playing them to the extent they are a detriment to my health and missing out on important things like eating healthy, exercising, and being responsible in general is something I would do. Everything in moderation is the key to good health IMO.
As you say, challenging and difficult can be placed in a neat 15-30min package, to which I agree.
however
Some vets do miss the social aspects that longer content created, which you simply cannot always get with shorter, albiet, just as challenging and difficult content.
It's definitely reasonable for vets to want the social aspects that longer play provided. They should just drop the notion that longer means more challenging, because the two things are entirely unrelated.
Unless doing the original act is no accomplishment at all, then doing it longer or more times is more challenging. Sorry, it's not opinion its math.
Doing anything to much is unhealthy, but a lot of people in the past were rewarded for it. There were many inventions that bring modern comfort today that wouldn't exist if someone wasn't fanatical in their passion to do something and likely it hurt them in some way weather it be physically or socially. It was mostly things that require patience and determination more then anything else. You have to want it more then anything else. It seems silly to waste your health on a game, but some people did. I spent lots of time and had a lot of fun because of my ignorance of it being bad for my health. I did a lot of things out of ignorance. Still it was all a lot of fun at the time. I wouldn't trade the experience, but I also wouldn't go through it again. There are some things from old MMOs that I would like, but I don't think playing them to the extent they are a detriment to my health and missing out on important things like eating healthy, exercising, and being responsible in general is something I would do. Everything in moderation is the key to good health IMO.
I don't even look at the challenging aspect. I'm looking more at the fun aspect.
If I have a 2 hours to play, spend 15 minutes looking for a group or making one, then play until my 2 hours are up, that is 1 hour 45 minutes of fun I just had in a 2 hour period.
If I'm doing fast dungeons with LFD that take 15 minutes each, I usually spend at least 15 minutes, often more looking for a dungeon, but lets keep it at 15 min for argument's sake.
SO, 15 minutes wait, then 15 min of play, then wait and play. By the end of 2 hours, I have played only 1 hour, and waited another hour. What is more fun? The shorter intervals that I waited the same amount of time or longer, or the longer interval that I got to play more of? And if a person can't stay on 2 hours, but find they have to leave after an hour, they can just leave the group and still have more playing time.
I loved doing camps and dungeons for many hours at a time, swapping out players as needed. I enjoyed RvR for several hours killing those dirty hibs. If i wanted shorter, I had that choice, but now if I want longer dungeons, I don't have that choice (until raiding). It just seems that with longer dungeons and camps, people could choose their duration of play so people that had only a small time to play or a lot benefited, now, not so equal.
PROTIP: If you have 60 minutes and the dungeon lasts 15 minutes you can do 4 different dungeons.
It seems many in this thread are under the impression that if content can be enjoyed in 15 minute chunks, it cannot be enjoyed in 60 minute chunks. That's simply not true.
Some even think these games somehow aren't about the journey if they can be enjoyed in shorter spurts. Also not true.
Would you rather have sex with 4 fairly ugly people that are bad in bed, that lasted 15 minutes at a time... or spend 60 minutes once with someone who is gorgeous and amazing in bed?
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
PROTIP: If you have 60 minutes and the dungeon lasts 15 minutes you can do 4 different dungeons.
It seems many in this thread are under the impression that if content can be enjoyed in 15 minute chunks, it cannot be enjoyed in 60 minute chunks. That's simply not true.
Some even think these games somehow aren't about the journey if they can be enjoyed in shorter spurts. Also not true.
Would you rather have sex with 4 fairly ugly people that are bad in bed, that lasted 15 minutes at a time... or spend 60 minutes once with someone who is gorgeous and amazing in bed?
lol end of thread right here in fact I would rather have 1 gorgeous in an hour than rush about with 4 in an hour!
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
PROTIP: If you have 60 minutes and the dungeon lasts 15 minutes you can do 4 different dungeons.
It seems many in this thread are under the impression that if content can be enjoyed in 15 minute chunks, it cannot be enjoyed in 60 minute chunks. That's simply not true.
Some even think these games somehow aren't about the journey if they can be enjoyed in shorter spurts. Also not true.
Would you rather have sex with 4 fairly ugly people that are bad in bed, that lasted 15 minutes at a time... or spend 60 minutes once with someone who is gorgeous and amazing in bed?
I'm starting to think that these people need to go back to consoles. Doing that would solve all of their issues. They want to be a MMO gamer so bad, but can't do it. They need to admit this to themselves and go back. Will never happen, but....
Or, lets just make all MMOs like console games because I only have 15 minutes to play. It's all that my mommy allows on school nights.
PROTIP: If you have 60 minutes and the dungeon lasts 15 minutes you can do 4 different dungeons.
It seems many in this thread are under the impression that if content can be enjoyed in 15 minute chunks, it cannot be enjoyed in 60 minute chunks. That's simply not true.
Some even think these games somehow aren't about the journey if they can be enjoyed in shorter spurts. Also not true.
Would you rather have sex with 4 fairly ugly people that are bad in bed, that lasted 15 minutes at a time... or spend 60 minutes once with someone who is gorgeous and amazing in bed?
I'm starting to think that these people need to go back to consoles. Doing that would solve all of their issues. They want to be a MMO gamer so bad, but can't do it. They need to admit this to themselves and go back. Will never happen, but....
Or, lets just make all MMOs like console games because I only have 15 minutes to play. It's all that my mommy allows on school nights.
You must be posting from 2010, because here in 2015 this is reality.
When Dvinn camped the zone line we actually thought we could beat him with enough low level players despite the pile 40+ bodies sitting under him. When someone needed help we just intuitively helped them without concern for kill stealing or mob aggro. We simply didn't know the mechanics so WE WERE FREE TO IMAGINE THIS WAS REAL LIVING BREATHING WORLD. We simply didn't know how route and mechanical the simulation was so we gazed in wonder and astonishment at what we "thought" it was.
That sums up my early MMO experiences. Stumbling in the dark and occasionally sharing shreds of information and tips with the others that were stumbling in the dark. And... AND... if that person didn't try to kill you, you usually stumbledin the dark together with them for a while.
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
PROTIP: If you have 60 minutes and the dungeon lasts 15 minutes you can do 4 different dungeons.
It seems many in this thread are under the impression that if content can be enjoyed in 15 minute chunks, it cannot be enjoyed in 60 minute chunks. That's simply not true.
Some even think these games somehow aren't about the journey if they can be enjoyed in shorter spurts. Also not true.
Would you rather have sex with 4 fairly ugly people that are bad in bed, that lasted 15 minutes at a time... or spend 60 minutes once with someone who is gorgeous and amazing in bed?
I'm starting to think that these people need to go back to consoles. Doing that would solve all of their issues. They want to be a MMO gamer so bad, but can't do it. They need to admit this to themselves and go back. Will never happen, but....
Or, lets just make all MMOs like console games because I only have 15 minutes to play. It's all that my mommy allows on school nights.
You must be posting from 2010, because here in 2015 this is reality.
True.
It sounds weird because I had to re-word some things because of feels.
I'm starting to think that these people need to go back to consoles. Doing that would solve all of their issues. They want to be a MMO gamer so bad, but can't do it. They need to admit this to themselves and go back. Will never happen, but....
Or, lets just make all MMOs like console games because I only have 15 minutes to play. It's all that my mommy allows on school nights.
You have it in reverse.
It is MMO devs who want to cater to the console gamers and make MMOs more like console gamers.
Console gamers probably wouldn't care less about MMOs, and they only play them when they cater to their preferences enough.
But what does that have to do with challenges?
Again, still no one can dispute that running high greater rift in D3 .. a 15 min activity .. is very challenging.
I'm starting to think that these people need to go back to consoles. Doing that would solve all of their issues. They want to be a MMO gamer so bad, but can't do it. They need to admit this to themselves and go back. Will never happen, but....
Or, lets just make all MMOs like console games because I only have 15 minutes to play. It's all that my mommy allows on school nights.
You have it in reverse.
It is MMO devs who want to cater to the console gamers and make MMOs more like console gamers.
Console gamers probably wouldn't care less about MMOs, and they only play them when they cater to their preferences enough.
But what does that have to do with challenges?
Again, still no one can dispute that running high greater rift in D3 .. a 15 min activity .. is very challenging.
I agree with this, at least partially. I think the old school MMORPG players were much closer to arcade game players. They equated challenge to dying and having to put another quarter in and start over, There were arcade games that could make you sweat bullets because of death penalty was so severe. I could play battlezone for an hour on a quarter so long battles where you had to have skill to survive were common.
Whether they are console players or just a different kind of group, I think modern MMORPGs cater to a much larger group, including many people who didn't care for arcade games, or sports, or card games, etc. They have totally different concepts of "fun" and to many it is just seeing what is around the corner. It is the themepark not the sandbox.
Get those two groups together in a discussion board and they are talking at cross purposes. They won't agree on what "fun" even means.
I'm starting to think that these people need to go back to consoles. Doing that would solve all of their issues. They want to be a MMO gamer so bad, but can't do it. They need to admit this to themselves and go back. Will never happen, but....
Or, lets just make all MMOs like console games because I only have 15 minutes to play. It's all that my mommy allows on school nights.
You have it in reverse.
It is MMO devs who want to cater to the console gamers and make MMOs more like console gamers.
Console gamers probably wouldn't care less about MMOs, and they only play them when they cater to their preferences enough.
But what does that have to do with challenges?
Again, still no one can dispute that running high greater rift in D3 .. a 15 min activity .. is very challenging.
Would you rather have sex with 4 gorgeous and amazing in bed people, that lasted 15 minutes at a time... or spend 60 minutes once with someone who is gorgeous and amazing in bed?
Fixed that for you. Unless, of course, you're working off of the ridiculously poor assumption that a 15-minute dungeon compared to a 60-minute dungeon has worse graphics, lower AI or some other equally absurd premise.
I expect a reply of circular logic as to how the 15-minute dungeon is lower quality ("ugly") because it isn't a 60-minute dungeon.
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
Comments
Oh I definitely see something.....and I'm sure you're not going to like it.
Neither requires skill. Just endurance. I appreciate the health benefits of running, but I don't consider running an accomplishment.
While as a designer it's comforting to know that players like you exist who would be completely happy if all I did was take my existing content and add a bunch of zeros to the XP requirements of the leveling curve, that's not really the quality level of game I want to make. I try to avoid watering down the beer wherever possible, because it makes for a higher quality product.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
So to explain it clearly:
Longer does not = Challenging and Difficult
however
Challenging and Difficult normally = Longer (at least it did for older games like EQ1), which is what most of the vets are trying to make clear.
however
We do know that by today's MMO standards:
Challenging and Difficult does not always have to = Longer
As you say, challenging and difficult can be placed in a neat 15-30min package, to which I agree.
however
Some vets do miss the social aspects that longer content created, which you simply cannot always get with shorter, albiet, just as challenging and difficult content.
And why would you stop and take breaks?
So you agree my simple statement is TRUE. It was THAT SIMPLE. I said nothing more or less. You folks are the ones that totally try to disprove it with nothing but nonsense analogies. It was fun though, I'll tell you that. LOL
Because they gave me a week to finish running it!!!!! [mod edit]
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
You think running the duration of 26.2 miles for 4 hours wouldn't be mentally and physically challenging to someone that can only run 1 mile?
So why would a longer duration of a game matter to you when you can take a break? What are you arguing about?
It's definitely reasonable for vets to want the social aspects that longer play provided. They should just drop the notion that longer means more challenging, because the two things are entirely unrelated.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Sorry, but I object to the thole thread.
The idea that vets want longer content is unfounded. That's not to say that what the OP says is untrue, just that I am unaware of any demographic study to back it up. It is perception. Second, I object to the idea that you can know what "non-vets" want when there's a conspicuous lack of choices in the market place and therefore a lack of ability for them to demonstrate a preference. If you have to play a 15 year old game to get longer content then obviously that skews what you know about preferences.
More than any of that, I don't understand the whole point of the thread. It is simple reality that only thing of value in a game world is the players time. It is reality that things that take longer take more time, and there is therefore a greater investment in achieving them. A greater investment is obviously going to translate into the accomplishment of the goal being a more meaningful experience. I don't understand how anyone can argue that longer isn't more meaningful when the only thing they have that really means anything to them is their time spent playing the game. Your trying to argue that 2+2 doesn't equal 4.
One answer to the questions though is simply that some players have a preference for a game which they make their home and spend years in. They don't feel a particular need to rush through those games and want to savor the content rather than burn through it.
The better question to me is why do some people feel so strongly about this issue that they will come to the boards of games they don't even intend to play and argue tooth and nail to change it. If you ask me that sounds like someone who, for reasons I cannot quite comprehend, is threatened by the idea of the existence of a game with longer content. If you don't like it why not just write off those who do as having a different preference and move on.
Doing anything to much is unhealthy, but a lot of people in the past were rewarded for it. There were many inventions that bring modern comfort today that wouldn't exist if someone wasn't fanatical in their passion to do something and likely it hurt them in some way weather it be physically or socially. It was mostly things that require patience and determination more then anything else. You have to want it more then anything else. It seems silly to waste your health on a game, but some people did. I spent lots of time and had a lot of fun because of my ignorance of it being bad for my health. I did a lot of things out of ignorance. Still it was all a lot of fun at the time. I wouldn't trade the experience, but I also wouldn't go through it again. There are some things from old MMOs that I would like, but I don't think playing them to the extent they are a detriment to my health and missing out on important things like eating healthy, exercising, and being responsible in general is something I would do. Everything in moderation is the key to good health IMO.
Unless doing the original act is no accomplishment at all, then doing it longer or more times is more challenging. Sorry, it's not opinion its math.
I couldn't agree more.
I don't even look at the challenging aspect. I'm looking more at the fun aspect.
If I have a 2 hours to play, spend 15 minutes looking for a group or making one, then play until my 2 hours are up, that is 1 hour 45 minutes of fun I just had in a 2 hour period.
If I'm doing fast dungeons with LFD that take 15 minutes each, I usually spend at least 15 minutes, often more looking for a dungeon, but lets keep it at 15 min for argument's sake.
SO, 15 minutes wait, then 15 min of play, then wait and play. By the end of 2 hours, I have played only 1 hour, and waited another hour. What is more fun? The shorter intervals that I waited the same amount of time or longer, or the longer interval that I got to play more of? And if a person can't stay on 2 hours, but find they have to leave after an hour, they can just leave the group and still have more playing time.
I loved doing camps and dungeons for many hours at a time, swapping out players as needed. I enjoyed RvR for several hours killing those dirty hibs. If i wanted shorter, I had that choice, but now if I want longer dungeons, I don't have that choice (until raiding). It just seems that with longer dungeons and camps, people could choose their duration of play so people that had only a small time to play or a lot benefited, now, not so equal.
Would you rather have sex with 4 fairly ugly people that are bad in bed, that lasted 15 minutes at a time... or spend 60 minutes once with someone who is gorgeous and amazing in bed?
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
lol end of thread right here
in fact I would rather have 1 gorgeous in an hour than rush about with 4 in an hour!
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'm starting to think that these people need to go back to consoles. Doing that would solve all of their issues. They want to be a MMO gamer so bad, but can't do it. They need to admit this to themselves and go back. Will never happen, but....
Or, lets just make all MMOs like console games because I only have 15 minutes to play. It's all that my mommy allows on school nights.
You must be posting from 2010, because here in 2015 this is reality.
That sums up my early MMO experiences. Stumbling in the dark and occasionally sharing shreds of information and tips with the others that were stumbling in the dark. And... AND... if that person didn't try to kill you, you usually stumbledin the dark together with them for a while.
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
True.
It sounds weird because I had to re-word some things because of feels.
You have it in reverse.
It is MMO devs who want to cater to the console gamers and make MMOs more like console gamers.
Console gamers probably wouldn't care less about MMOs, and they only play them when they cater to their preferences enough.
But what does that have to do with challenges?
Again, still no one can dispute that running high greater rift in D3 .. a 15 min activity .. is very challenging.
I agree with this, at least partially. I think the old school MMORPG players were much closer to arcade game players. They equated challenge to dying and having to put another quarter in and start over, There were arcade games that could make you sweat bullets because of death penalty was so severe. I could play battlezone for an hour on a quarter so long battles where you had to have skill to survive were common.
Whether they are console players or just a different kind of group, I think modern MMORPGs cater to a much larger group, including many people who didn't care for arcade games, or sports, or card games, etc. They have totally different concepts of "fun" and to many it is just seeing what is around the corner. It is the themepark not the sandbox.
Get those two groups together in a discussion board and they are talking at cross purposes. They won't agree on what "fun" even means.
Nothing. Why do you ask?
Fixed that for you. Unless, of course, you're working off of the ridiculously poor assumption that a 15-minute dungeon compared to a 60-minute dungeon has worse graphics, lower AI or some other equally absurd premise.
I expect a reply of circular logic as to how the 15-minute dungeon is lower quality ("ugly") because it isn't a 60-minute dungeon.
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