ONG BIG HUGE FLAW IN THE OP's opinion.. Isn't this all based on the assumption that RPG's = "complete dungeon" type of thinking? Who said playing a RPG is about starting and finishing an event.. Sure if you are playing linear games like Starcraft or Warcraft or Dragon Age, there is a beginning and an end.. Hell, I wouldn't want to play Dragon Age for 5 years to complete it.. However, playing AD&D, or poker or any form of entertainment isn't always about FINISHING it..
When I played EQ, I didn't enter Blackburrow to finish it.. I didn't enter Lower Guk to finish it.. I entered those zones to enjoy it, nothing more.. Shouldn't game worlds of a MMORPG be focused on repeating fun, then "finishing" the content and moving on.. This is where I think the devs and community screwed the pooch..
I guess landing on the moon wasn't a challenge either. Like, big deal and they were sitting down inside the rocket the whole time.
My posts haven't been very long, and nearly all of them have focused on skill as the difference between meaningful and meaningless challenge. Are you trying to imply you thought it took no skills to develop, produce, and fly a rocket to land on the moon? None at all?
Your posts are all subject to stating an opinion as if it were a fact, and therefore all your posts are meaningless.
In reality you are arguing against yourself.
The word skill is loosely defined.
You argue that the act of doing something repeatedly does not require a skill and is unimpressive such as in your bridge example. Where you made, quite possibly, the dumbest statement I have ever seen on these forums:
"Walking the bridge 10k times isn't challenging. It's just as easy as the first time I walked across it."
Next you will tell me it is just as easy to run a single mile as it is to run a marathon?
Seems to me it would take a few skills to continuously and repeatedly do something. You did not state walking a bridge 10k times consecutively or over a time frame, but if it were repeatedly that requires:
1. The ability to walk
The ability to walk over a long period of time
The strength in your body (muscle and bones) to keep walking
2. The determination to complete the task
Time management- need to be able to manage your time to complete the task without interruption (if it takes less time, you would need to be less skilled in time management)
Mental skill involved here (knowingly preparing for the long task, continuing during the task (even realizing the task is very likely considered... pointless)
3. The ability to count to 10k- or at least the ability to comprehend someone telling you that you have walked across the bridge 10k times.
The list goes on.
Can even continue on about how gear ties into this situation.
Walking across the bridge 1 time- barefoot may be an option. Walking across a bridge 10k times, being barefoot becomes less and less an attractive option. Don't get me started with the weather conditions- the conditions you choose just leads to a whole new challenge.
The money grab of early subscriptions, yea because 15 bucks all inclusive a month is just such a money grab compared to item mall cash shops that sell the game in pay to win pieces and charge a subscription on top of that.
So laughable. Why not tell us something else completely laughable like that time you said EVE online was buy to play.
Gonna guess you never played MUDs that were mostly completely free and had huge timesinks, you know the things they based EQ and early MMORPGs on...
The fact stands that it clearly was a money grab. There was no reason apart from making more subscription money for the excessive timesinks to have been added to MMORPGs when they haven't been a part of any other genre. You're free to try to pretend it wasn't a money grab by citing something you feel is more of a money grab, but that doesn't alter the underlying facts.
Just like EVE is B2P because it involves an initial 'box' sale. Any game with a box sale is B2P. It's also a subscription game.
MUDs didn't involve timesinks to the same degree. Travel was almost instant (N,N,N,N to go north 4 times). The only thing that took any time was downtime, so overall they really weren't anywhere close to as timesink-heavy as early MMORPGs. I'm sure there are isolated examples of poorly designed MUDs where downtime, travel, and other things required significant time, but that wasn't an example of typical MUD play it was simply an isolated poorly-designed game.
Design elements don't just randomly get thrown into games. They have a purpose or they don't get made. In the case of timesinks, rarely they do justify themselves for gameplay purposes. But in this case the justification was that these games were built upon the subscription model and keeping players paying was the goal. You don't have to take my word for it, MMORPG lead designers are saying this too.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Ok look its not the old or the new players that want more grind or farming.Its the developers that are building grind and farming content,so they can sell more skip items,and long term players that are foolishly indulging this developers.
I often see mmo vets bemoan current titles because dungeons and the like can be soloed or done in 5-10 mins unlike in the past where it was face-stompingly hard (I'm assuming). Nothing wrong wrong with this, I like a challenge myself, but thinking about it further I realized something. Isn't this content BETTER for vets? It's probably not a stretch to say this content was designed with you in mind. By now, most vets are in their 30s or 40s with a family, job, etc with very sparse time.
If challenging/long content WAS developed vets wouldnt be able to participate in it because of their limited time. So shouldnt we be seeing the opposite? Shouldnt vets be praising new developers for making content they can solo between a hectic life?
They seem to think longer, tedious, time consuming, etc is synonymous to challenging and difficult.
Sarcasm? I hope so.
OP, you answered your own question when you said - "... I like a challenge myself ..." (you also assume a lot of nonsense)
It's pretty safe to say that if a task is completed solo and within 5-10 minutes on a regular basis that it's not a very challenging task. Now if the amount of time to complete the task by doing everything flawlessly takes 5-10 minutes, sure, but if flawless is possible that means something is predictable and again, probably not terribly challenging.
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.
Oh no, it's true that they're not synonymous with each other, I figured sarcasm because it was a completely retarded thing to assume. I thought you were being funny, but now I laugh at you instead.
LMFAO laugh all you want, I've been enjoying myself commenting to people that's been trying to disprove it. Won't be hurting my feelings one bit. You agree it's true, good for you.
I often see mmo vets bemoan current titles because dungeons and the like can be soloed or done in 5-10 mins unlike in the past where it was face-stompingly hard (I'm assuming). Nothing wrong wrong with this, I like a challenge myself, but thinking about it further I realized something. Isn't this content BETTER for vets? It's probably not a stretch to say this content was designed with you in mind. By now, most vets are in their 30s or 40s with a family, job, etc with very sparse time.
If challenging/long content WAS developed vets wouldnt be able to participate in it because of their limited time. So shouldnt we be seeing the opposite? Shouldnt vets be praising new developers for making content they can solo between a hectic life?
They seem to think longer, tedious, time consuming, etc is synonymous to challenging and difficult.
Sarcasm? I hope so.
OP, you answered your own question when you said - "... I like a challenge myself ..." (you also assume a lot of nonsense)
It's pretty safe to say that if a task is completed solo and within 5-10 minutes on a regular basis that it's not a very challenging task. Now if the amount of time to complete the task by doing everything flawlessly takes 5-10 minutes, sure, but if flawless is possible that means something is predictable and again, probably not terribly challenging.
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.
Oh no, it's true that they're not synonymous with each other, I figured sarcasm because it was a completely retarded thing to assume. I thought you were being funny, but now I laugh at you instead.
LMFAO laugh all you want, I've been enjoying myself commenting to people that's been trying to disprove it. Won't be hurting my feelings one bit. You agree it's true, good for you.
Trolls will be trolls.
Thank you for accepting that you're trolling. Taking the first step in your recovery is very commendable.
Your posts are all subject to stating an opinion as if it were a fact, and therefore all your posts are meaningless.
In reality you are arguing against yourself.
The word skill is loosely defined.
You argue that the act of doing something repeatedly does not require a skill and is unimpressive such as in your bridge example. Where you made, quite possibly, the dumbest statement I have ever seen on these forums:
"Walking the bridge 10k times isn't challenging. It's just as easy as the first time I walked across it."
Next you will tell me it is just as easy to run a single mile as it is to run a marathon?
Seems to me it would take a few skills to continuously and repeatedly do something. You did not state walking a bridge 10k times consecutively or over a time frame, but if it were repeatedly that requires:
1. The ability to walk
The ability to walk over a long period of time
The strength in your body (muscle and bones) to keep walking
2. The determination to complete the task
Time management- need to be able to manage your time to complete the task without interruption (if it takes less time, you would need to be less skilled in time management)
Mental skill involved here (knowingly preparing for the long task, continuing during the task (even realizing the task is very likely considered... pointless)
3. The ability to count to 10k- or at least the ability to comprehend someone telling you that you have walked across the bridge 10k times.
The list goes on.
Can even continue on about how gear ties into this situation.
Walking across the bridge 1 time- barefoot may be an option. Walking across a bridge 10k times, being barefoot becomes less and less an attractive option. Don't get me started with the weather conditions- the conditions you choose just leads to a whole new challenge.
The word skill is not loosely defined. All skill is decision-making and/or execution of those decisions, as they relate to a goal.. In game terms this takes the form of strategy/tactics (decision-making) and/or twitch (execution).
Running a marathon doesn't require significant skill (how many people do you know who are unable to run?) It's predominantly endurance. The skill involved is so trivial that it's not worth mentioning.
If you told someone you walked across a bridge 10k times and they told you "Wow, you must be very skilled!" then clearly they'd mean it sarcastically, because the activity requires so little skill that nobody would ever make that statement seriously.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The money grab of early subscriptions, yea because 15 bucks all inclusive a month is just such a money grab compared to item mall cash shops that sell the game in pay to win pieces and charge a subscription on top of that.
So laughable. Why not tell us something else completely laughable like that time you said EVE online was buy to play.
Gonna guess you never played MUDs that were mostly completely free and had huge timesinks, you know the things they based EQ and early MMORPGs on...
The fact stands that it clearly was a money grab. There was no reason apart from making more subscription money for the excessive timesinks to have been added to MMORPGs when they haven't been a part of any other genre. You're free to try to pretend it wasn't a money grab by citing something you feel is more of a money grab, but that doesn't alter the underlying facts.
Just like EVE is B2P because it involves an initial 'box' sale. Any game with a box sale is B2P. It's also a subscription game.
MUDs didn't involve timesinks to the same degree. Travel was almost instant (N,N,N,N to go north 4 times). The only thing that took any time was downtime, so overall they really weren't anywhere close to as timesink-heavy as early MMORPGs. I'm sure there are isolated examples of poorly designed MUDs where downtime, travel, and other things required significant time, but that wasn't an example of typical MUD play it was simply an isolated poorly-designed game.
Design elements don't just randomly get thrown into games. They have a purpose or they don't get made. In the case of timesinks, rarely they do justify themselves for gameplay purposes. But in this case the justification was that these games were built upon the subscription model and keeping players paying was the goal. You don't have to take my word for it, MMORPG lead designers are saying this too.
You could argue that all games are a money grab.
I know your argument that games today offer more fun per time spent. That hasn't been the case for me so far.
All games are a waste of time for the most part. Regardless of if you are continually on the move or sitting in one place during certain points.
One could argue it's good to have some variation. Perhaps it's not a good thing to always be on the move when you are playing.
The term that was originally being discussed, easier to debate skill though isn't it.,.
A marathon is a huge challenge, mental, physical, it requires technique, planning, dedication, resilience.
A long term goal in a game needs dedication, discipline, resilience, planning. Skill is used throught the process. As has been said before both long and short term goals and activities may have low/high skill requirements. However short term goals can be hampered by time.
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
Welcome to reality. All games ARE a waste of time.
In general, I agree with this.
However, what about people who gain a sense of accomplishment. Is it still a waste of time to them?
Fishing until I break the state record for the Biggest Bull Trout in Montana, would be an accomplishment because I overcame the challenge. At least one person out there will think I wasted my time, even if I don't think that.
I guess this all depends if you think of MMOs as a hobby or entertainment. The two groups are separate.
Welcome to reality. All games ARE a waste of time.
In general, I agree with this.
However, what about people who gain a sense of accomplishment. Is it still a waste of time to them?
Fishing until I break the state record for the Biggest Bull Trout in Montana, would be an accomplishment because I overcame the challenge. At least one person out there will think I wasted my time, even if I don't think that.
I guess this all depends if you think of MMOs as a hobby or entertainment. The two groups are separate.
Welcome to reality. All games ARE a waste of time.
In general, I agree with this.
However, what about people who gain a sense of accomplishment. Is it still a waste of time to them?
Fishing until I break the state record for the Biggest Bull Trout in Montana, would be an accomplishment because I overcame the challenge. At least one person out there will think I wasted my time, even if I don't think that.
I guess this all depends if you think of MMOs as a hobby or entertainment. The two groups are separate.
How about an entertaining hobby?
Too polar of opposites. Not sure there could be a hybid of the two. But, I'm sure someone will argue for an exception, just because.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Well singing around a fire is also technically a waste of time as well but we humans like a bit of pleasure in our lives
Welcome to reality. All games ARE a waste of time.
In general, I agree with this.
However, what about people who gain a sense of accomplishment. Is it still a waste of time to them?
Fishing until I break the state record for the Biggest Bull Trout in Montana, would be an accomplishment because I overcame the challenge. At least one person out there will think I wasted my time, even if I don't think that.
I guess this all depends if you think of MMOs as a hobby or entertainment. The two groups are separate.
How about an entertaining hobby?
Too polar of opposites. Not sure there could be a hybid of the two. But, I'm sure someone will argue for an exception, just because.
Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? So hobbies can't be forms of entertainment? Playing games is a hobby. Games are forms of entertainment. My hobby is to play games which entertains me.
I know your argument that games today offer more fun per time spent. That hasn't been the case for me so far.
All games are a waste of time for the most part. Regardless of if you are continually on the move or sitting in one place during certain points.
One could argue it's good to have some variation. Perhaps it's not a good thing to always be on the move when you are playing.
All games are created to make money, but most other forms rely more on providing fun gameplay and less on watering down the gameplay with timesinks (ie non-gameplay.)
It's not today's games which offer more fun per time spent, but all games. All games except early MMORPGs.
There's "wasting" time (spending time playing games) and there is wasting time (spending time in a game where you're literally sitting around doing nothing because of travel or downtime.) A blanket statement that all game-playing is wasted time doesn't change that there's a very clear distinction between when you're playing a product which is interactive entertainment (gameplay) and when you're simply sitting in front of a screen doing nothing (timesinks.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Early games weren't design to waste time, this is modern cynical thinking applied in retrospect. Those old mmorpg were more complex than the rpg in the 80s, and those games in the 80s were more complex than ths games in the 70s. Pacnan wasn't built to waste time, it was built to the best of the dev abilities. What has however spolied things to a degree is the greed over innovation and investment seen through blizzard and ea and a few others. Corporate greed.
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
I know your argument that games today offer more fun per time spent. That hasn't been the case for me so far.
All games are a waste of time for the most part. Regardless of if you are continually on the move or sitting in one place during certain points.
One could argue it's good to have some variation. Perhaps it's not a good thing to always be on the move when you are playing.
All games are created to make money, but most other forms rely more on providing fun gameplay and less on watering down the gameplay with timesinks (ie non-gameplay.)
It's not today's games which offer more fun per time spent, but all games. All games except early MMORPGs.
There's "wasting" time (spending time playing games) and there is wasting time (spending time in a game where you're literally sitting around doing nothing because of travel or downtime.) A blanket statement that all game-playing is wasted time doesn't change that there's a very clear distinction between when you're playing a product which is interactive entertainment (gameplay) and when you're simply sitting in front of a screen doing nothing (timesinks.)
Theoretically you are doing something. You are either walking, running, or resting/recovering. One could argue non stop gameplay is not good for a person either. Taking breaks after every fight or just walking along doing something that is not critical to succeeding is a relaxing event in between the more stressful combat (especially group combat). That's not to say that you should be sitting down for 5 to 10 minutes recovering, but a minute or two wouldn't be bad.
Theoretically you are doing something. You are either walking, running, or resting/recovering. One could argue non stop gameplay is not good for a person either. Taking breaks after every fight or just walking along doing something that is not critical to succeeding is a relaxing event in between the more stressful combat (especially group combat). That's not to say that you should be sitting down for 5 to 10 minutes recovering, but a minute or two wouldn't be bad.
Sitting at your computer doing nothing while you wait for those things is doing nothing. It's not even the same level of engagement as watching TV/videos, since at least with that there's some interesting things happening which might make you think or teach you something. If you're sitting around doing nothing and nothing is happening onscreen that's a completely empty experience.
Taking a break should be a player-driven thing. The game should provide the opportunity to play it non-stop and if the player wants a break they'll choose to take a break. If the game forces a break, the player will choose to do something else.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Theoretically you are doing something. You are either walking, running, or resting/recovering. One could argue non stop gameplay is not good for a person either. Taking breaks after every fight or just walking along doing something that is not critical to succeeding is a relaxing event in between the more stressful combat (especially group combat). That's not to say that you should be sitting down for 5 to 10 minutes recovering, but a minute or two wouldn't be bad.
Sitting at your computer doing nothing while you wait for those things is doing nothing. It's not even the same level of engagement as watching TV/videos, since at least with that there's some interesting things happening which might make you think or teach you something. If you're sitting around doing nothing and nothing is happening onscreen that's a completely empty experience.
Taking a break should be a player-driven thing. The game should provide the opportunity to play it non-stop and if the player wants a break they'll choose to take a break. If the game forces a break, the player will choose to do something else.
I guess it's just a difference of opinion.
I don't think it's a waste of time to have a little down time. It's also simulation of resting in the game. It also may be a good thing that the player has time to think of things to do on their own and not just do what the game tells them to do.
I also don't find that traveling is doing nothing. I've gone over this in length before. Traveling doesn't have to be completely devoid of things happening along the way, but even if it was there is still the forest and scenery to enjoy. That is like saying going sightseeing or hiking is a waste of time.
I often find myself not engaged in the combat portion of MMOs these days. When I try one all there is are different forms of combat. Most of them are fairly boring combat if you have played a lot of MMOs before. In that instance I feel that my time is really being wasted. It's why I generally don't play MMOs these days.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Ah wait that's not right, it's more like 1 hour walking through beautiful countryside followed by 49 hours walking on a treadmill > 49 hours walking through beautiful countryside followed by 1 hour on a treadmill. Perfect
Yep. Anyone know what the starter area in Rift looks like from memory? I started beta, pushed through the first 5 zones in 10 minutes (or less), turned of the game and never went back. I've been waiting for a good MMO for a very long time.
The only thing i remember in rift was 1 of my characters out of 4, and umm that first PvP areana thing where u need to hold that crystal thing. Thats it and i played that game for a reasonable amount of time.
Now with EQ which i havant played since around 2004 or so i can literaly remember 95% of the zone names and how there connected together which zones connect to what and so on. Along with majority of the layouts and maps in my heads.
I could draw you a rough map from memory of both the Defiant and the guardian starting areas. And i havent played Rift in ~3 years.
"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."
They seem to think longer, tedious, time consuming, etc is synonymous to challenging and difficult.
Right, an inability to separate challenge from time consumption is definitely a factor.
This is really just an extension of the money-grab of early subscription games. For decades games didn't have excessive timesinks, and then suddenly a new business model comes along (subscriptions) which charged for time, and at the exact same time excessive timesinks start to be part of games (and just those games.) It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to notice the correlation, but if we wanted we could hear it from a MMORPG's lead designer as they define timesink in their own words too.
But there's this strange trait to veteran MMORPG players where many of them will still defend timesinks to this day, even after you point out how it was just a blatant money grab. It's a strange psychological trait.
The money grab of early subscriptions, yea because 15 bucks all inclusive a month is just such a money grab compared to item mall cash shops that sell the game in pay to win pieces and charge a subscription on top of that.
So laughable. Why not tell us something else completely laughable like that time you said EVE online was buy to play.
Gonna guess you never played MUDs that were mostly completely free and had huge timesinks, you know the things they based EQ and early MMORPGs on...
And from your very own link:
"No game should ever have a timesink for timesink’s sake. A good timesink has you interacting with the game on some level, earning some level of enjoyment or moving the story along. It might be “realistic”, but keep in mind that you are trying to entertain people here and useless timesinks tend to do the opposite of entertain. Always consider a cooldown if your timesink is boring. At least with that, the player is free to do whatever else they want while waiting on their gated content."
"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."
I often see mmo vets bemoan current titles because dungeons and the like can be soloed or done in 5-10 mins unlike in the past where it was face-stompingly hard (I'm assuming). Nothing wrong wrong with this, I like a challenge myself, but thinking about it further I realized something. Isn't this content BETTER for vets? It's probably not a stretch to say this content was designed with you in mind. By now, most vets are in their 30s or 40s with a family, job, etc with very sparse time.
If challenging/long content WAS developed vets wouldnt be able to participate in it because of their limited time. So shouldnt we be seeing the opposite? Shouldnt vets be praising new developers for making content they can solo between a hectic life?
They seem to think longer, tedious, time consuming, etc is synonymous to challenging and difficult.
Sarcasm? I hope so.
OP, you answered your own question when you said - "... I like a challenge myself ..." (you also assume a lot of nonsense)
It's pretty safe to say that if a task is completed solo and within 5-10 minutes on a regular basis that it's not a very challenging task. Now if the amount of time to complete the task by doing everything flawlessly takes 5-10 minutes, sure, but if flawless is possible that means something is predictable and again, probably not terribly challenging.
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.
Oh no, it's true that they're not synonymous with each other, I figured sarcasm because it was a completely retarded thing to assume. I thought you were being funny, but now I laugh at you instead.
LMFAO laugh all you want, I've been enjoying myself commenting to people that's been trying to disprove it. Won't be hurting my feelings one bit. You agree it's true, good for you.
You do realize that constantly re-stating something and providing no evidence or basis for argument doesn't make it true right? You can say that the moon looks like a squirrel until you're blue in the face, but it won't be true.
"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."
"No game should ever have a timesink for timesink’s sake. A good timesink has you interacting with the game on some level, earning some level of enjoyment or moving the story along. It might be “realistic”, but keep in mind that you are trying to entertain people here and useless timesinks tend to do the opposite of entertain. Always consider a cooldown if your timesink is boring. At least with that, the player is free to do whatever else they want while waiting on their gated content."
Eh, was that to me? That all seems to support exactly what I've been saying throughout this thread and others, that timesinks are basically the opposite of fun and should never exist for their own sake (no design element should exist for its own sake; it should all be deliberate and intentional, serving a clear purpose.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
ONG BIG HUGE FLAW IN THE OP's opinion.. Isn't this all based on the assumption that RPG's = "complete dungeon" type of thinking? Who said playing a RPG is about starting and finishing an event.. Sure if you are playing linear games like Starcraft or Warcraft or Dragon Age, there is a beginning and an end.. Hell, I wouldn't want to play Dragon Age for 5 years to complete it.. However, playing AD&D, or poker or any form of entertainment isn't always about FINISHING it..
When I played EQ, I didn't enter Blackburrow to finish it.. I didn't enter Lower Guk to finish it.. I entered those zones to enjoy it, nothing more.. Shouldn't game worlds of a MMORPG be focused on repeating fun, then "finishing" the content and moving on.. This is where I think the devs and community screwed the pooch..
Your posts are all subject to stating an opinion as if it were a fact, and therefore all your posts are meaningless.
In reality you are arguing against yourself.
The word skill is loosely defined.
You argue that the act of doing something repeatedly does not require a skill and is unimpressive such as in your bridge example. Where you made, quite possibly, the dumbest statement I have ever seen on these forums:
"Walking the bridge 10k times isn't challenging. It's just as easy as the first time I walked across it."
Next you will tell me it is just as easy to run a single mile as it is to run a marathon?
Seems to me it would take a few skills to continuously and repeatedly do something. You did not state walking a bridge 10k times consecutively or over a time frame, but if it were repeatedly that requires:
1. The ability to walk
2. The determination to complete the task
3. The ability to count to 10k- or at least the ability to comprehend someone telling you that you have walked across the bridge 10k times.
The list goes on.
Can even continue on about how gear ties into this situation.
Walking across the bridge 1 time- barefoot may be an option. Walking across a bridge 10k times, being barefoot becomes less and less an attractive option. Don't get me started with the weather conditions- the conditions you choose just leads to a whole new challenge.
The fact stands that it clearly was a money grab. There was no reason apart from making more subscription money for the excessive timesinks to have been added to MMORPGs when they haven't been a part of any other genre. You're free to try to pretend it wasn't a money grab by citing something you feel is more of a money grab, but that doesn't alter the underlying facts.
Just like EVE is B2P because it involves an initial 'box' sale. Any game with a box sale is B2P. It's also a subscription game.
MUDs didn't involve timesinks to the same degree. Travel was almost instant (N,N,N,N to go north 4 times). The only thing that took any time was downtime, so overall they really weren't anywhere close to as timesink-heavy as early MMORPGs. I'm sure there are isolated examples of poorly designed MUDs where downtime, travel, and other things required significant time, but that wasn't an example of typical MUD play it was simply an isolated poorly-designed game.
Design elements don't just randomly get thrown into games. They have a purpose or they don't get made. In the case of timesinks, rarely they do justify themselves for gameplay purposes. But in this case the justification was that these games were built upon the subscription model and keeping players paying was the goal. You don't have to take my word for it, MMORPG lead designers are saying this too.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Trolls will be trolls.
Thank you for accepting that you're trolling. Taking the first step in your recovery is very commendable.
The word skill is not loosely defined. All skill is decision-making and/or execution of those decisions, as they relate to a goal.. In game terms this takes the form of strategy/tactics (decision-making) and/or twitch (execution).
Running a marathon doesn't require significant skill (how many people do you know who are unable to run?) It's predominantly endurance. The skill involved is so trivial that it's not worth mentioning.
If you told someone you walked across a bridge 10k times and they told you "Wow, you must be very skilled!" then clearly they'd mean it sarcastically, because the activity requires so little skill that nobody would ever make that statement seriously.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You could argue that all games are a money grab.
I know your argument that games today offer more fun per time spent. That hasn't been the case for me so far.
All games are a waste of time for the most part. Regardless of if you are continually on the move or sitting in one place during certain points.
One could argue it's good to have some variation. Perhaps it's not a good thing to always be on the move when you are playing.
A marathon is a huge challenge, mental, physical, it requires technique, planning, dedication, resilience.
A long term goal in a game needs dedication, discipline, resilience, planning. Skill is used throught the process. As has been said before both long and short term goals and activities may have low/high skill requirements. However short term goals can be hampered by time.
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
In general, I agree with this.
However, what about people who gain a sense of accomplishment. Is it still a waste of time to them?
Fishing until I break the state record for the Biggest Bull Trout in Montana, would be an accomplishment because I overcame the challenge. At least one person out there will think I wasted my time, even if I don't think that.
I guess this all depends if you think of MMOs as a hobby or entertainment. The two groups are separate.
How about an entertaining hobby?
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
Too polar of opposites. Not sure there could be a hybid of the two. But, I'm sure someone will argue for an exception, just because.
It looked fun in Star Trek 5.
More bullshit,entertainment is not a waste of time.Ask the peasants made to fight lions with sticks in ancient Rome if they died for nothing.....
Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? So hobbies can't be forms of entertainment? Playing games is a hobby. Games are forms of entertainment. My hobby is to play games which entertains me.
All games are created to make money, but most other forms rely more on providing fun gameplay and less on watering down the gameplay with timesinks (ie non-gameplay.)
It's not today's games which offer more fun per time spent, but all games. All games except early MMORPGs.
There's "wasting" time (spending time playing games) and there is wasting time (spending time in a game where you're literally sitting around doing nothing because of travel or downtime.) A blanket statement that all game-playing is wasted time doesn't change that there's a very clear distinction between when you're playing a product which is interactive entertainment (gameplay) and when you're simply sitting in front of a screen doing nothing (timesinks.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Theoretically you are doing something. You are either walking, running, or resting/recovering. One could argue non stop gameplay is not good for a person either. Taking breaks after every fight or just walking along doing something that is not critical to succeeding is a relaxing event in between the more stressful combat (especially group combat). That's not to say that you should be sitting down for 5 to 10 minutes recovering, but a minute or two wouldn't be bad.
Sitting at your computer doing nothing while you wait for those things is doing nothing. It's not even the same level of engagement as watching TV/videos, since at least with that there's some interesting things happening which might make you think or teach you something. If you're sitting around doing nothing and nothing is happening onscreen that's a completely empty experience.
Taking a break should be a player-driven thing. The game should provide the opportunity to play it non-stop and if the player wants a break they'll choose to take a break. If the game forces a break, the player will choose to do something else.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I guess it's just a difference of opinion.
I don't think it's a waste of time to have a little down time. It's also simulation of resting in the game. It also may be a good thing that the player has time to think of things to do on their own and not just do what the game tells them to do.
I also don't find that traveling is doing nothing. I've gone over this in length before. Traveling doesn't have to be completely devoid of things happening along the way, but even if it was there is still the forest and scenery to enjoy. That is like saying going sightseeing or hiking is a waste of time.
I often find myself not engaged in the combat portion of MMOs these days. When I try one all there is are different forms of combat. Most of them are fairly boring combat if you have played a lot of MMOs before. In that instance I feel that my time is really being wasted. It's why I generally don't play MMOs these days.
I could draw you a rough map from memory of both the Defiant and the guardian starting areas. And i havent played Rift in ~3 years.
"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
And from your very own link:
"No game should ever have a timesink for timesink’s sake. A good timesink has you interacting with the game on some level, earning some level of enjoyment or moving the story along. It might be “realistic”, but keep in mind that you are trying to entertain people here and useless timesinks tend to do the opposite of entertain. Always consider a cooldown if your timesink is boring. At least with that, the player is free to do whatever else they want while waiting on their gated content."
"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
You do realize that constantly re-stating something and providing no evidence or basis for argument doesn't make it true right? You can say that the moon looks like a squirrel until you're blue in the face, but it won't be true.
"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
Eh, was that to me? That all seems to support exactly what I've been saying throughout this thread and others, that timesinks are basically the opposite of fun and should never exist for their own sake (no design element should exist for its own sake; it should all be deliberate and intentional, serving a clear purpose.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver