This is why MMO's are ruining PC gaming...

[Necronic]

That depends, in some cases the grinding can be covered up with story (as in not having any battles that aren't part of the story progression) and variation in gameplay.

Doesn't matter how much Nutella you spread on a shit sandwich. There's still shit in it.

To tell you the truth i barely have the time to play regular games, let alone a MMO.

Its true that MMOs can take a lot of time. Personally I don't think that's the case for EvE, but I'm sure some will disagree with me.

But right now i had a bunch of fun playing HoMM3 with some mates during downtime while visiting Belgium... which reminds me, i have to see if they want to continue it.

HOMM3 was the best of the series. Franchise just went downhill from there. More glam less AI and balance. Still though, its pretty much a baby strategy game. You should check out the Dwarf Fortress thread. From my perspective there are only a couple games that fit the definition of "hardcore" and if you don't have what it takes to play one of those, then most of your opinions on game design are null and void.

 

[@Li3n]

That depends, in some cases the grinding can be covered up with story (as in not having any battles that aren't part of the story progression) and variation in gameplay.

Doesn't matter how much Nutella you spread on a shit sandwich. There's still shit in it.

Put enough nutella on it and people won't be able to tell they're eating shit... it's how they do it in the food industry.

HOMM3 was the best of the series. Franchise just went downhill from there. More glam less AI and balance. Still though, its pretty much a baby strategy game. You should check out the Dwarf Fortress thread.

Frankly i though that HoMM3 made everything too "samey" and lost something of the feeling HoMM2 had.

And 4 was fun and tried new things, too bad it was released way before it was finished (i had to put it's music volume at 0 so it won't crash after every small battle, and it still crashed after the big ones) and the balance was crap and it still hasn't been fixed.

From my perspective there are only a couple games that fit the definition of "hardcore" and if you don't have what it takes to play one of those, then most of your opinions on game design are null and void.

I for one prefer my games to be fun regardless of the difficulty instead of "hardcore"...

 

[Necronic]

I for one prefer my games to be fun regardless of the difficulty instead of "hardcore"...

So it being "fun" is more important than design, basically "fun" is a justification in and of itself?

 

[sixpackshaker]

I for one prefer my games to be fun regardless of the difficulty instead of "hardcore"...

So it being "fun" is more important than design, basically "fun" is a justification in and of itself?[/QUOTE]

Hence, the name "game" not "job"

 

[Chibibar]

I for one prefer my games to be fun regardless of the difficulty instead of "hardcore"...

So it being "fun" is more important than design, basically "fun" is a justification in and of itself?[/QUOTE]

Hence, the name "game" not "job"[/QUOTE]

Heh, to each their own

I do like EvE. It is a lot of fun with different variables for players. You can do the following pretty much from the startup (not well, but it is open to you)

You can go mining (good old mining and grinding crowd)
You can go ratting (NPC pirate hunting - progressively harder when you go from 1.0 to 0.0 space)
you can go exploring - There are TONS of unique places to visit and such
You can go trading/hauling - you don't start off with much money, but you can start hauling stuff from place to place (space fedex) for players OR NPC
You can go PvP - I wouldn't recommended in early play, but it can be fun (suck if you lose your ship)

It is pretty open, but it does have its grind.

A good story can cover up the grind. I wouldn't say "shit sandwich + nutella" I am thinking of more of a hot dog. You have all edible parts (they are all edible in most cultures) but you can dress it to make a hot dog tasty and interesting.

 

[sixpackshaker]

Chibi, your description sounds fun. Nothing Necronic has mentioned sounds fun at all. It's all hardcore and shit, yo.

 

[KEM]

I for one prefer my games to be fun regardless of the difficulty instead of "hardcore"...

So it being "fun" is more important than design, basically "fun" is a justification in and of itself?[/QUOTE]

Hence, the name "game" not "job"[/QUOTE]

Heh, to each their own [/quote]Well everyone has their own definition of 'fun'. We have to have some reason to do any particular activity, like we go to work to earn a paycheck. Now if we happen to enjoy our work, that's a bonus. At the end of the day, though the only reason to play any game is for fun. What that fun entails is entirely up to the individual. Some people may think that doing spreadsheets is fun, and more power to them.

I do like EvE. It is a lot of fun with different variables for players. You can do the following pretty much from the startup (not well, but it is open to you)

You can go mining (good old mining and grinding crowd)
You can go ratting (NPC pirate hunting - progressively harder when you go from 1.0 to 0.0 space)
you can go exploring - There are TONS of unique places to visit and such
You can go trading/hauling - you don't start off with much money, but you can start hauling stuff from place to place (space fedex) for players OR NPC
You can go PvP - I wouldn't recommended in early play, but it can be fun (suck if you lose your ship)

It is pretty open, but it does have its grind.

Any large game like that is going to have a variety of activities, and hopefully one of them will be of interest to someone. I tried EvE for two weeks and it never really grabbed me. I think the problem is that when I play games I tend to be more 'intuitive', and EvE is just too full of little details you have to micro-manage to be intuitive. For some people that is frickin' Nirvana, and as I said, more power to 'em.

A good story can cover up the grind. I wouldn't say "shit sandwich + nutella" I am thinking of more of a hot dog. You have all edible parts (they are all edible in most cultures) but you can dress it to make a hot dog tasty and interesting.

Lots of things can cover up a grind, but I think for an MMO the most important thing is honestly good company. Even the most long and tedious grind can be made not only bearable but actually fun if you do it with friends. That's the main reason I quit WoW to be honest was when my Guild effectively broke up there wasn't anyone I wanted to play the game with anymore. We didn't even have to be doing anything together in the game, just keeping in touch through guildchat was enough.

 

[Necronic]

Nah, my description was really just to get @lien to shoot himself in the foot. Way I see it, as soon as someone says that "its fun" is a reason in and of itself for playing a game, then they no longer have any right to criticize other games, since what is "fun" is entirely subjective. A lot of times people get all sorts of "I'm a serious critic of games" about why they think a certain game is bad, but when pressed the reason they play the games they do it isn't based on anything more than it being fun.

And there's nothing wrong with a game being fun, I mean, that's the end goal right? But anyone who wants to consider himself a game critic never gets to use that as a reason (at least, not on its own.) Its either or.

 

[Bowielee]

Lots of things can cover up a grind, but I think for an MMO the most important thing is honestly good company. Even the most long and tedious grind can be made not only bearable but actually fun if you do it with friends. That's the main reason I quit WoW to be honest was when my Guild effectively broke up there wasn't anyone I wanted to play the game with anymore. We didn't even have to be doing anything together in the game, just keeping in touch through guildchat was enough.

I fully agree with the fact that company can make a severely grinding game fun. City of Heroes/villains comes to mind. The only reason I loved that game was for my supergroup at the time. The game itself outside of the character creator is boring as all hell.

I just want to say that I love RPGs but the article is completely right about the fact that you grind to get better stuff and that's the carrot. It's been that way since the beginning. Grinding isn't in and of itself fun, but that doesn't mean that it isn't part of the fun of a game. My favorite FF is 8 and that's the most grindy of all of the FF games with the draw system.

 

[KEM]

Nah, my description was really just to get @lien to shoot himself in the foot. Way I see it, as soon as someone says that "its fun" is a reason in and of itself for playing a game, then they no longer have any right to criticize other games, since what is "fun" is entirely subjective. A lot of times people get all sorts of "I'm a serious critic of games" about why they think a certain game is bad, but when pressed the reason they play the games they do it isn't based on anything more than it being fun.

And there's nothing wrong with a game being fun, I mean, that's the end goal right? But anyone who wants to consider himself a game critic never gets to use that as a reason (at least, not on its own.) Its either or.

The problem is that I don't think that really reflects on his comment at all. I think it has more to do with how you interact with the game, the extent to which you delve into the particular mechanics of the game. When he says he plays a game because 'it's fun', it merely means that he's playing it on a more broader level. Some people are able to just play a game without feeling the need to delve into the underlying mechanics of the game.

Obviously for people like yourself, playing a game means more than that, it means getting into the mechanics and finding out why things are happening. The kind of people who work out the percentages of bonuses for various talent specs in WoW, for example.

I don't think it's at all unreasonable to criticize or compare games on a broad level, because at the end of the day any such criticism/comparison is subjective. No matter how much you delve into the 'hardcore' mechanics, since your estimation of the value/importance of those mechanics is just as subjective as @lien's more 'broader' view. It just means you can write many more paragraphs on the subject, but again more details doesn't make things automatically better, it just makes them more detailed.

 

[Chibibar]

heh. I have been saying that since first page I think while individual games some people might find it fun, but when we boil it down to the "basics" the company will continue to produce stuff where you get the most people to play.

WoW is almost like a "benchmark" for MMORPG. At least when I say benchmark, I meat = profit/bottom line/ROI and stuff like that. Companies will invest millions of dollars to produce a game in hope to be the next WoW, Starcraft, Diablo, Team Fortress etc etc. To companies, it is all about how many copies/subscription they can make.

Now to us, it is more of a personal level. I love WoW and EvE, but if you look at a company's view (i.e. money) WoW has a WAY larger numbers and servers than EvE. So when a new company is going to make a MMORPG, they may follow WoW style or even Final Fantasy style (JMMO and KMMO) cause that is where the money is that.

The hard thing for consumers is that sometimes we want to play something other than "the next WoW clone" but that is a risky market for the company. Any company formed (that is not non-profit) is out to make profits and hopefully lots of it so some might stay "true to the formula like WoW" The numbers don't lie. Now is it a fun game? to some of us it is a LOT of fun while others never gotten into it, but to the companies, it is a multi millions money making machine.

 

[Necronic]

Yeah, this argument is kind of all over the place, and I'm having a hard time with it. So here's where I see it.

Assumption: There are both subjective and non-subjective aspects of the quality of a media product.

How much of the true Quality of a product is defined by the enjoyment it brings to people? Does something being liked mean that it is good?

Does it matter if an entertainment product operates on a skinner box design?

Do MMOs perpetuate skinner box game design more than other games?

Is this a fair breakdown of the argument?

---------------------

My interest in games is trying to figure out what will be next decades Jagged Alliance or Fallout or Star Control or MOO or Quake/Half-Life. What is it about those games that keeps us coming back for more? Why is it that certain games survive forever in our minds and others don't? Some of those games weren't the most popular games on the market at the time, but they are the ones that are remembered.

My belief is that the underlying design of a game defines a non-subjective quality of the product that is timeless, and while the big hotshot game of the day may reap big sales and magazine covers, their quality is mainly defined by things that age and wear out like graphics or hype, or, as is most pertinent to this conversation, reward structures.

So, that's why I look at some of these games the way I do. I don't think @lien is looking at it in an even remotely analytical sense (speculation on my part). The Brittney Spears argument is actually quite ironic. Brittney Spears (the group), is technically exceptional, and most music critics don't argue against that. As far as the PoP/MJ/Madonna genre goes, that group is one of the most technically skilled out there. Here's where its ironic. Most people rail on Britney, not because of the actual quality of the music, but because they see her as a symbol of something they don't like. More often than not it is a different social group that they want to appear to be in rebellion against (generally just to get more status/comfort in their own social group).

And I think that's what a lot of the WoW hate boils down to. Its not a technical analysis of the game or its design, its personal. Its about defining themselves as being rebels against what's popular. So people regurgitate analyses that someone else did, all the while never actually taking on a mindset of a true critic (not that I am one myself).

The one thing, as a critic, you can't convince someone of, is whether or not they find something enjoyable. You just can't have that argument. You can't say "This movie could not have been funny because of this, this, this and this." or "this song won't make you bob your head because it lacks this, this and this".

 

[@Li3n]

I for one prefer my games to be fun regardless of the difficulty instead of "hardcore"...

So it being "fun" is more important than design, basically "fun" is a justification in and of itself?[/QUOTE]


No, i was saying that "complex" or "hard" =! "good".

But i already argued about stuff being fun because it's actually good vs being fun because of personal bias (like you enjoying a game because not everyone can play it aka "hardcore"), and that i consider one better then the other. Kinda like drooling because you smell food vs drooling because a red light is on. I understand the reason for both, but don't ask me to let you not acknowledge the difference. (see my older posts here)

Most people rail on Britney, not because of the actual quality of the music, but because they see her as a symbol of something they don't like.

Are you actually implying that Britney Spears music is better then Johnny Cash because it's more edited on a computer (it's more complex to make)?!

But i guess i don't actually argue that BS should not exist, and it's the undeserved level of popularity that makes one argue against her... kinda like no one would give a shit about Twilight if it was just a fanfic on the internet... but we'd still mock it as shitty if we came across it...

And I think that's what a lot of the WoW hate boils down to.

I think i already mentioned that i haven't played much WoW (i think it under 2 hours), mostly because from what i saw it differed little from other MMO's (streamlined as it is).

The one thing, as a critic, you can't convince someone of, is whether or not they find something enjoyable. You just can't have that argument. You can't say "This movie could not have been funny because of this, this, this and this." or "this song won't make you bob your head because it lacks this, this and this".

Kevin Smith, is that you?!

 

[Chibibar]

Necronic: I like your last post. I think we are heading somewhere with it (I agree with you)

Li3n: You know.... if you compare Britney Spears vs Johnny Cash.... I don't know. I don't know who is Johnny Cash (music wise) but like Necronic said, maybe because she is popular to a world level, some people will hate it or at least vocal about it. Do you know that there are people who actually HATE Elvis Presley and the Beatles?? yea it happen. I happen to love The Monkeys (I listen to their songs and even watch their shows, cried at their breakup) but my wife gives a meh to them.

But I think some of the hate could stem from personal preferences instead of technical as Necronic have said. Think about it. What if YOU (anyone really not just you li3n) love something with all your heart, you love it so much cause it is SOOOOO awesome and great, but the rest of the public is either oblivious or not even recognize the product (games, music, movies) but something that is publicly popular dwarfs it and you don't like it. That person is likely to dis the "popular stuff" cause "his/her stuff" is not as popular and thinks the world is a moron. I think that is what boils down to it.

We can argue taste all day long till we are blue in the face, but it is hard to argue that Britney Spears or WoW are NOT popular. I am not saying that Britney and WoW are the same level, I'm just using two item that are popular. I use to remember before WoW, Everquest was "the big dog" in terms of MMO and before that was MUDs on BBS or Legend of the Red Dragon Door games (anyone remember those? hehe) or the Original Never Winter Nights (SSL games) on AoL?

but these things are popular now because the general public like it, but alas, there are nitch market for different games like EvE. It is harder and more detail than WoW but it survive for over 5 years with 50k+ players and going strong for all these years. There are games like Team Fortress (not MMO but a game) that remains popular for over 10 years now?

The original article shows that there are elements that are use in games to keep people hook. If it is blatant carrots on the stick and not as engaging, people won't play. WoW seems to do pretty good in sugar coat the grind and make it popular. I know that many KMMO and JMMO are pure grinds (FFXI, Ragnarok Online etc etc) BUT those remain popular cause there are people who LOVE to play those games and will continue to due so.

 

[Necronic]

Are you actually implying that Britney Spears music is better then Johnny Cash because it's more edited on a computer (it's more complex to make)?!

Uhm, no. I never said anything about Johnny Cash. There is nothing mutually exclusive in this.

I think i already mentioned that i haven't played much WoW (i think it under 2 hours), mostly because from what i saw it differed little from other MMO's (streamlined as it is).

So.......your basing your entire argument off of stuff other people told you and what you filled in yourself, without ever really looking at the product? Yeah......

 

[Chibibar]

Are you actually implying that Britney Spears music is better then Johnny Cash because it's more edited on a computer (it's more complex to make)?!

Uhm, no. I never said anything about Johnny Cash. There is nothing mutually exclusive in this.

I think i already mentioned that i haven't played much WoW (i think it under 2 hours), mostly because from what i saw it differed little from other MMO's (streamlined as it is).

So.......your basing your entire argument off of stuff other people told you and what you filled in yourself, without ever really looking at the product? Yeah......

well, critics does it in less than 5 hours so maybe Li3n is trying to be one of those gaming critics

personally I play for about 2 years including raids (10 and 25 man raids) so I have some insights at least and all my characters have crafting (all crafts max out except jewelry making)

 

[Necronic]

I really didn't mean to bring EvE into this conversation. EvE and Wow are different enough products that any comparison between them is like, well its like comparing Johnny Cash and Britney Spears (see Scythe, I have learned since our last conversation.)

And yeah, you're right that a critic only plays 5 hours of a game, but I think most would acknowledge that 5 hours is barely enough time to review a normal game, and making blanket statements about the quality of an MMO is pretty much impossible with that much time. Of course, I want to be clear when I state that I actually agree with the original post and feel that WoW is a thinly veiled skinner box with only the most basic and haphazard attempts at quality design in it. It will definitely hold a place in the history books for how it managed to pull that large of a crowd, and moreover maintain them, but I doubt there will ever be any big nods for design.

 

[Bowielee]

The thing I don't get is how everybody is viewing this as a new concept. MMOs are far from the first type of games to use the skinner-box concept to sell games.

 

[SpecialKO]

The thing I don't get is how everybody is viewing this as a new concept. MMOs are far from the first type of games to use the skinner-box concept to sell games.

My thoughts exactly. The idea was old when the NES came out.

This discussion has moved in this direction occasionally as various folks have prodded it, but it should really be a discussion of acceptable degree and visibility, not its existence. MMOs like WoW make their reward structure the blatantly obvious centerpiece of their game, but video games as a whole revolve around inducing play and have since they've been around.

 

[Chibibar]

The thing I don't get is how everybody is viewing this as a new concept. MMOs are far from the first type of games to use the skinner-box concept to sell games.

My thoughts exactly. The idea was old when the NES came out.

This discussion has moved in this direction occasionally as various folks have prodded it, but it should really be a discussion of acceptable degree and visibility, not its existence. MMOs like WoW make their reward structure the blatantly obvious centerpiece of their game, but video games as a whole revolve around inducing play and have since they've been around.[/QUOTE]

well, some of my post have stated this is pretty old concept even BEFORE games. It is the old carrot on the stick. Is it wrong? How else would you make game engaging? but if you do make the game engaging, aren't you using the skinner method anyways? there isn't really a way to NOT to do it.

 

[SpecialKO]

there isn't really a way to NOT to do it.

Agreed. There's just different ways TO do it.

I sort of think of "fun" and "engagement" in games as intrinsically similar - sort of like if you took the space-time continuum and replace "space" and "time" with "fun" and "engagement". It's really all the same thing, just that different games move in different directions.

 

[Chibibar]

there isn't really a way to NOT to do it.

Agreed. There's just different ways TO do it.

I sort of think of "fun" and "engagement" in games as intrinsically similar - sort of like if you took the space-time continuum and replace "space" and "time" with "fun" and "engagement". It's really all the same thing, just that different games move in different directions.[/QUOTE]

I guess the main "trick" would be making it fun with the grind. The main problem is that companies don't like to stray too far from the "what does work" to totally new stuff. It is a risky venture and people might not like it. It is a hit or miss with the crowd. It is a multi billion dollar industry and everyone wants a piece of that pie. If you are too innovative, you might just get left with the pie pan and with very little crumbs.

 

[@Li3n]

Are you actually implying that Britney Spears music is better then Johnny Cash because it's more edited on a computer (it's more complex to make)?!

Uhm, no. I never said anything about Johnny Cash. There is nothing mutually exclusive in this.

You said better then ...

... includes everything, so i can bring out whoever i want.

I think i already mentioned that i haven't played much WoW (i think it under 2 hours), mostly because from what i saw it differed little from other MMO's (streamlined as it is).

So.......your basing your entire argument off of stuff other people told you and what you filled in yourself, without ever really looking at the product? Yeah......

My argument was about MMO's in general, you guys started talking about WoW all the time...

And the stuff other people told me was mostly guys that where talking about liking the game... (and i already mentioned that i'm not saying it's all bad), and video evidence. I saw nothing that makes it in any way different then what one would expect from Blizzard, a regular MMO that's been streamlined.

---------- Post added at 08:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:17 AM ----------

The thing I don't get is how everybody is viewing this as a new concept. MMOs are far from the first type of games to use the skinner-box concept to sell games.

and it's always been boring...


Point: http://forums.gametrailers.com/thread/why-is-a-game-boring-without--/1046760

 

[Chibibar]

[/COLOR]

The thing I don't get is how everybody is viewing this as a new concept. MMOs are far from the first type of games to use the skinner-box concept to sell games.

and it's always been boring... to me!!


Point: http://forums.gametrailers.com/thread/why-is-a-game-boring-without--/1046760

Fixed it for you

 

[Necronic]

You said better then ...

... includes everything, so i can bring out whoever i want.

really? where? (also it's "than", yeah I'm a douchebag)

The Brittney Spears argument is actually quite ironic. Brittney Spears (the group), is technically exceptional, and most music critics don't argue against that. As far as the PoP/MJ/Madonna genre goes, that group is one of the most technically skilled out there. Here's where its ironic. Most people rail on Britney, not because of the actual quality of the music, but because they see her as a symbol of something they don't like. More often than not it is a different social group that they want to appear to be in rebellion against (generally just to get more status/comfort in their own social group).

-------

My argument was about MMO's in general, you guys started talking about WoW all the time...

Fair enough, but WoW is the archetype for most major MMOs so its kind of transitive.

and it's always been boring...

Since we aren't just talking about WoW here, let me bring up the biggest crackhead skinner box game ever made, which is not surprisingly the inspiration for WoW. Diablo. That game is designed around nothing other than clicking as much as you can until you get a reward. And I dunno, that's not boring to me.

However when that design is applied to a persistent game world like WoW, that does become boring and problematic to me. To be honest I can't figure out why though. Where's the line where Skinner systems stop working for certain people, and why? Now I'm just brainstorming. Maybe its because an MMO is meant to be a community game, and Skinner systems don't synergize as well with a community game as well as other games, like Diablo which (while multiplayer) is more individualistic. Or it could be that the amount of times you have to press the button in WoW is too large for the dwindling returns on getting the same rewards over and over agian, whereas in Diablo you fly through levels.

hm. Maybe the problem is that the reward structure in WoW is designed more for a game like Diablo, and too many of the fundamentals of the system are different for the reward structure to maintain sway over lots of people. Round peg square hole. It still works, because meth cooked in an outhouse will still get someone hooked, even if the stuff you get from Phizer is much higher quality.

What are the basic rewards you get in WoW and/or Diablo?

Expanded Skills/Levels
New content (at the expense of old content)
More access to community (WoW only)
Items (duh)
Mounts! (WoW only)

Can yall think of others? I'm trying to analytically break down the reward structure in WoW to see why some people like myself and @lien react to it so much differently than others.

In terms of the major gameplay differences between WoW and Diablo you have

Time invested per reward is higher in WoW
Community is far more persistant/pervaisve/important in WoW
Variety of rewards is much higher in WoW
World is much larger in WoW
More content in WoW, but you only ever see it once (as opposed to nightmare/hell diffs in Diablo)
Each combat takes longer, and soloing is more difficult in WoW
Once at Level Cap, previous rewards are invalidated when expansion hits/level cap is raised in WoW (personal least favorite)
WoW has structured PvP whereas Diablo (generally) doesn't.

---------

I'm thinking the issue is that the reward structure in WoW looses its ability to "Skinnerize" some players fairly quickly as the time invested increases while the reward quantity/quality decreases, the only exception is access to the community, which only really becomes possible at End Game levels, so is a MASSIVE investment of time for that final reward.

hrm.

 

[Chibibar]

In single player game, the skinner system does work, but probably get boring for some people in a long while. Single Player RPG, what is the carrot? items, level, cooler powers, and, achievements.

Diablo was a simple version of this. You just play the same 4 areas over and over and over again to get that rare "gold" item drop. raise levels, get powers, repeat.

MMO does add another factor into this. People. AI can only do so much with current technology. Live Players can change the dynamic of a game. Can you imagine playing TF2 with a team of live players VS AI? It can get boring REAL quick. but PvP does bring a nice change of pace and "unexpected" variable into a game.

The problem with current game system (any system) in order to keep a person keep pressing that control button, mouse button, or analog stick button is "loot" the full immersion experience doesn't exist yet. Wii came out with the Wii-mote and it did expand into non-gamers' home.

The new Natal and PS3 technology might bring player to experience MORE of the game rather than the carrot (i.e. levels or powers)

The Holodeck type RPG would change the world of gaming and it will be fun to play for the story than just "getting the next level"

 

[Necronic]

Hm. Immersion. I think defining that term is important before we move on, because I think we have different definitions. For me Immersion is about the completeness and complexity of the world I am presented with, which is something I think WoW and its clones fails tremendously at. I think your concept of immersion has to do with sensory input (visual/audio/control). Take for instance Dwarf Fortress. I think that is one of the most highly immersive games around, and its at best a tiled game, at worst its all ASCII.

Personally I don't think graphics/sound are very important in a game, as I fill in the blanks with my imagination, and with controls anything becomes intuitive if you use it enough. On the other side of things, however, people are asked to fill in the lack of complexity with their imagination. I remember when I first played Star Craft and saw the localized damage on the wireframe models and thought "OMFG that's awesome!" until I realized that there was no localized damage, that it was just something they were pretending to have.

With regards to the PvP I generally don't see much interesting in it as there is no penalty in it, only carrots, which doesn't feel right. I think that's why I started playing Diablo in "Hardcore" mode (that's actually what its called) after I beat it a couple of times, because I didn't feel that the rewards had as much interest to me unless there was also punishment. (FYI hardcore mode is where when you die your character is deleted.)

Maybe its like recieving praise from someone. If they are always handing out praise you begin to value it less and less over time, but if someone is generally highly critical then when you do recieve praise it is worth much much more. Think Simon Cowell. In game terms think of Ninja Gaiden. That game is the most brutally punishing game out there, but if you do well at it you feel an incredible sense of accomplishment unlike anything you would feel playing an easier game.

 

[KEM]

Hm. Immersion. I think defining that term is important before we move on, because I think we have different definitions. For me Immersion is about the completeness and complexity of the world I am presented with, which is something I think WoW and its clones fails tremendously at. I think your concept of immersion has to do with sensory input (visual/audio/control). Take for instance Dwarf Fortress. I think that is one of the most highly immersive games around, and its at best a tiled game, at worst its all ASCII.

OK, there are a number of faults to be found in WoW, but a lack of "completeness and complexity of the world" is absolutely not one of them. While the world does not physically change as you play through the game, due to the Massively Multi-player aspect of the game, they still manage to impart a significant amount of story detail as you level up. Not to mention the vast reams of background that is available through the game and through books and comics.

 

[Chibibar]

Immersion can be different aspect of the game. You can have good story, good gameplay, good graphics, good sound, and any other factor. The problem with "not cool" graphic is that people who really appreciate older games (like me) are very small crowd. The company wants to cater to as many people as possible so will have to go with the "cool graphics"

Storyline is another one. Necro might think that WoW is not "completeness or complex" but if you read all the stories and game, it is pretty detail. There are people who even make fanfic off it.

Gameplay - this is probably one of the hardest thing IMO. Control scheme is hard to "get away" from your traditional control. Also if you want to "lure" players from one system (like WoW) to yours, your control have to be similar and intuitive. Complex control system can really scare away new players.

 

[KEM]

In single player game, the skinner system does work, but probably get boring for some people in a long while. Single Player RPG, what is the carrot? items, level, cooler powers, and, achievements.

There's one important aspect you leave out here and that is story. Story can simply be the main story or quest-line, but also the other storylines that are often present (the side-quests, if you will) and honestly to the characters and evironment (is this a place I want to explore/hang out in). Story can be as much a motivating factor to keep people playing as much as anything else.

Diablo was a simple version of this. You just play the same 4 areas over and over and over again to get that rare "gold" item drop. raise levels, get powers, repeat.

MMO does add another factor into this. People. AI can only do so much with current technology. Live Players can change the dynamic of a game. Can you imagine playing TF2 with a team of live players VS AI? It can get boring REAL quick. but PvP does bring a nice change of pace and "unexpected" variable into a game.

MMO's also add an environment to interact in as well as a narrative to share, at least a good MMO does. This goes well beyond PvP. Games like L4D show that players playing co-operatively against the game can be fun.

The problem with current game system (any system) in order to keep a person keep pressing that control button, mouse button, or analog stick button is "loot" the full immersion experience doesn't exist yet. Wii came out with the Wii-mote and it did expand into non-gamers' home.

The new Natal and PS3 technology might bring player to experience MORE of the game rather than the carrot (i.e. levels or powers)

The Holodeck type RPG would change the world of gaming and it will be fun to play for the story than just "getting the next level"

The extent to which things like Natal will have an effect on immersion will have more to do with removing the barrier of the control scheme between the player and the world. I don't think they will have any real effect beyond that.

The biggest effect on immersion will continue to be the quality of the world/environment that we're being asked to enter: is it a place I want to be/explore/experience/share?

 

[Necronic]

Hm. Immersion. I think defining that term is important before we move on, because I think we have different definitions. For me Immersion is about the completeness and complexity of the world I am presented with, which is something I think WoW and its clones fails tremendously at. I think your concept of immersion has to do with sensory input (visual/audio/control). Take for instance Dwarf Fortress. I think that is one of the most highly immersive games around, and its at best a tiled game, at worst its all ASCII.

OK, there are a number of faults to be found in WoW, but a lack of "completeness and complexity of the world" is absolutely not one of them. While the world does not physically change as you play through the game, due to the Massively Multi-player aspect of the game, they still manage to impart a significant amount of story detail as you level up. Not to mention the vast reams of background that is available through the game and through books and comics.[/QUOTE]

Lore in WoW requires massive suspension of disbelief. Lvl 40 you kill a god. Lvl 60 you kill another god. Lvl whatever you kill another god. Then you kill a lvl 80 orc grunt. Who is stronger than all of those gods you killed. The strength of your enemies according to lore has no correlation to the real strength of them in game. Requiring that suspension of disbelief for the world to work isn't what I would call complete or complex, that's exactly what I was talking about with the Starcraft thing.

 

[ScytheRexx]

Lore in WoW requires massive suspension of disbelief. Lvl 40 you kill a god. Lvl 60 you kill another god. Lvl whatever you kill another god. Then you kill a lvl 80 orc grunt. Who is stronger than all of those gods you killed. The strength of your enemies according to lore has no correlation to the real strength of them in game. Requiring that suspension of disbelief for the world to work isn't what I would call complete or complex, that's exactly what I was talking about with the Starcraft thing.

Not sure what you are talking about Necronic. The lowest level you kill a "God" like entity is 60, and even those are not really "Gods" in the unlimited, omnipotent sense. Only one "God" exists in WarCraft, Elune, while all the other forces are often spirits, demi-gods, or demons, even the Titans are not considered "Gods", they are called Eternals, but a few people worship them like "Gods".

Also, you don't really have to suspend much disbelief. The quests and "levels" are seen as the life of a character more then the general actual "strength" of your character as some now god-like super being. Not many of us think of fantasy MMOs like DBZ.

 

[Necronic]

Lore in WoW requires massive suspension of disbelief. Lvl 40 you kill a god. Lvl 60 you kill another god. Lvl whatever you kill another god. Then you kill a lvl 80 orc grunt. Who is stronger than all of those gods you killed. The strength of your enemies according to lore has no correlation to the real strength of them in game. Requiring that suspension of disbelief for the world to work isn't what I would call complete or complex, that's exactly what I was talking about with the Starcraft thing.

Not sure what you are talking about Necronic. The lowest level you kill a "God" like entity is 60, and even those are not really "Gods" in the unlimited, omnipotent sense. Only one "God" exists in WarCraft, Elune, while all the other forces are often spirits, demi-gods, or demons, even the Titans are not considered "Gods", they are called Eternals, but a few people worship them like "Gods".

Also, you don't really have to suspend much disbelief. The quests and "levels" are seen as the life of a character more then the general actual "strength" of your character as some now god-like super being. Not many of us think of fantasy MMOs like DBZ.[/QUOTE]

Ah, you're right. I could have sworn Ragnaros and that Stone Mother thing (can't remember the name. Is in that lvl 40-ish dungeon.) C'thun is a god though, and apparently weaker than lvl 75 elites. I'm not sure I understand the second part of your statement. If the in game strength of your character isn't considered the strength of your character, that seems like the suspension of disbelief thing again. And also, my Tauren was definitely over 5000. hp.

 

[Shegokigo]

Whether you kill an NPC in game or not, does not affect the lore at all. EX: Nefarion is still alive in Cata, C'Thun is still alive and in the Emerald Dream. Etc.

 

[SpecialKO]

Whether you kill an NPC in game or not, does not affect the lore at all. EX: Nefarion is still alive in Cata, C'Thun is still alive and in the Emerald Dream. Etc.

Well, yes and no. C'Thun's body was officially destroyed via a quest in AQ40 in classic, but will be resurrected in the Cata lore by the leader of the Twilight Hammer who is using his own body as a nesting ground for C'Thun's spirit. Similarly, Nefarion was confirmed by word of God to be dead when AQ opened, and Blizz has simply not explained how his re-appearance will be achieved in Cata.

It would be more accurate to say that it doesn't affect the gameplay at all.