| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Wildefire
General Goods Vendor
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Posts: 1
Location: USA |
| Editorial: A New Way To Help Casual Players? @ Gamasutra |
|
Gamasutra is running an editorial that proposes a <a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060208/langendoen_01.shtml" target="_blank">novel way that MMORPGs could better accomodate the busy lives of casual players</a> without alienating the hardcore audience.
<br><blockquote><em>To be fair, game designers and developers have certainly been asking themselves the question, “How can we keep a 5 hour/week player engaged in a game while the 40+ hour player is running laps around them?”
<br>
<br>The venerable UO had the Power Hour, where bonus experience could be earned during set intervals. World of Warcraft provides an experience bonus if your character rests at an inn (the bonus earned when you play the next time). But these don't go far enough.
<br>
<br>Here's what I'd like to see: instead of Vanille Ice and all the millions of unused characters sitting on their collective tookuses, why not imagine that each day they venture forth and do some low-level crime fighting (orc slaying, etc.) just to, you know, “stay in shape”. Now this workout wouldn't actually happen in any way visible to players logged on, but these characters would earn nominal amounts of experience each day. And in three months time, presto, a new level.
<br><a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060208/langendoen_01.shtml" target="_blank">More...</a></em></blockquote> |
Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:16 pm |
|
|
Loremaster
Village Leader
Joined: 31 Mar 2002
Posts: 88
Location: Hampshire, England |
It's a nonsensical idea in my view.
"Give them a reason to hit the ‘Next' button."
The reason should be a desire to play the game. If you don't have that desire sufficiently to be bothered to play the game then why would you expect to advance in it? |
|
Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:21 pm |
|
|
Kepler
Keeper of the Gates
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 109
|
Mind boggling logic in that there piece of exquisite journalistic fare. |
|
Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:50 pm |
|
|
Loremaster
Village Leader
Joined: 31 Mar 2002
Posts: 88
Location: Hampshire, England |
I understand your time constraints, rheric, but the simple truth is that if you can't commit sufficient time to playing a MMORPG in order to make what you would consider to be meaningful progress (I personally find I can make quite good progress in any MMORPG in half an hour or so - I got 10% of a level in not much over that earlier this evening in EQ2, for example) then perhaps it's the wrong genre for you.
I simply have a problem with today's "something for nothing" culture, and it extends to those who want to advance in a game while not actually playing it!
Although I'm a keen player of both WoW and EQ2 I hate their xp bonus systems, they "force" players to play a character of the developer's choice rather than one of the player's choice because one will be more "efficient" than the other.
Although I haven't played Eve Online, isn't that a game where your skills even advance while you're not playing? That's even crazier.
Games should provide for the character to be advanced by being played. I'm all for games making it easy to achieve meaningful progress in a short game session, or in a few short game sessions per week, and the gods know that Blizzard have allowed just that in WoW, while SOE even allow you to buy high-level characters with their blessing, but I can't support the principle of a character advancing while out of the game.
What next, the developer pays you $15 a month not to play  ? |
|
Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:57 pm |
|
|
abbaon
Head Merchant
Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 64
|
quote:
Originally posted by rheric
It's not that we can't be "bothered" with the game. It's that we want to feel that we've accomplished something, and are able to accomplish something, with the limited time that we have for this particular hobby which we love so much. This is our play time and we want it to be fun.
Fair enough. A new game will probably come along to fill that niche sooner or later. You shouldn't expect the mainstream level mills to go too far in that direction, thouh. Catering to casual gamers necessarily devalues competitive, obsessive play. They'd have to trade obsessive gamers for casual gamers, hoping to come out ahead. And why would Blizzard take that gamble? |
|
Tue Feb 14, 2006 5:34 am |
|
|
Loremaster
Village Leader
Joined: 31 Mar 2002
Posts: 88
Location: Hampshire, England |
quote:
Originally posted by rheric
So you're saying that because I don't have 30+ hours to commit to the game like the slew of college/high schoolers on mommy and daddy's credit card, I shouldn't play?
That's a tad insulting to those of us not in that category. I'm 55 and have my own credit card !
Ultimately it all comes down to what we each define as worthwhile progress. At say a middle point level-wise in most MMORPGs I would be able to level a character once a week by playing no more than an hour a day including the same rate at the weekend. If 7 hours a week is not possible then I stick to the view that the player may be better suited to other genres. That's not telling anyone what to do, just stating the obvious - like suggesting to a golfer who only has half an hour available that a different sport might be more suited as you can't get round a course in that time. Time was in EQ1 when a level a week would have seemed miraculous, but again we now live in not just a "something for nothing" society but also one in which everything must be achieved NOW! I'd be perfectly happy with that rate of progress on such a casual play time, as it is I probably play something around 20 hours a week but it varies.
quote:
quote:
Although I'm a keen player of both WoW and EQ2 I hate their xp bonus systems, they "force" players to play a character of the developer's choice rather than one of the player's choice because one will be more "efficient" than the other.
I disagree, but this is very interesting point. Can you expand somewhat? I'm just not clear on how those systems "force" anyone to play certain character types.
Hence my using inverted commas for the word "force". If I have two characters one of whom has full xp bonus and the other has none, then whilst I have absolute freedom to play the latter if I want, I'll be getting half the xp I'd be getting if I played the former (and while playing the former the latter will be "recharging" so that's another incentive to play the former). In that sense the game "forces" me to play the character with the xp bonus even if I'm in the mood to play the one without it. It isn't really forcing me to do so, I have total freedom of choice, but it makes me lean towards the more efficient character - especially so for those with so little time that they have to make the most of it. I'd just rather have a reasonable compromise rate of xp gain across the board and remove the whole system of xp bonuses.
quote:
You should try EVE.
Pure PvP as I understand it, and no leaving the spaceship. Both factors put me off. Now give me a decent PvE sci-fi MMORPG in which the space flight/combat/trading is coupled with decent planetary exploration, crafting and adventuring and I'll subscribe. Sadly neither Earth and Beyond, Eve, nor SWG has delivered that combined style of game yet. Star Trek Online is vaporware and I'll admit to knowing nothing about it yet. |
|
Tue Feb 14, 2006 4:50 pm |
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 10:05 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
