It would be nice in theory, but is practically impossible to properly police RP for multiple reasons.
1. The only real action I've seen on so-called RP servers, at least since 2004-ish is enforcement of naming conventions. This is the easiest thing to police and often the only thing policed, although in an extremely lax manner.
The issue with this is that not everyone will even what good RP names are. Does the name have to be the character's given first name? What if the character name is the family name, or the character's nickname? Most people will agree that Gokuvegita and Sephirothxxx are pretty lousy names, but there are some pretty ambiguous names which might seem bad at first glance but really aren't.
For example, a paladin named "Crabface" may seem to be an RP violation because it is a "silly" name, but the character's player may have a detailed back story as to why the character is called that as a nickname.
2. Enforcement of actual RP itself is even harder, because not everyone will agree what "good" RP is and if RP should be enforced in all aspects of the game (including raiding, and so forth). The best you can do is try to keep public chat channels free of Chuck Norris jokes and leetspeak.
Mary Sues are a generally considered bad RP, but not not technically a violation. Likewise, someone who claims their character is an alien who crash landed in Middle-Earth would technically still count as RP.
3. It is difficult to enforce RP when the game's developers don't even take their own lore very seriously, and when there are little to no features within the game that support RP. World of Warcraft comes to mind, but just about every theme park is guilty to some degree.
I guess I can't really say an opinion is wrong, but...
Your kidding. Your kidding, right?
The game certainly has its own charm, and I give it credit for that. I'd much rather play it than many games (especially anything crapped out by Perfect World) but the best MMO ever released? That's a very big stretch from my point of view.
No, people are merely pointing out that SOE is being highly deceptive when they use the term "Free to Play."
It is exceedingly clear that the whole point of the so-called F2P conversion is really to act as a glorified trial, which serves to get people to try the game out thinking it is free only to feel like second class citizens next to the subscribers. Ironically SOE's goal is to get more people to pay $14.99 a month in order to fully enjoy the game, which is the same sub as WoW, RIFT, and TOR.
Still, people are calling SOE out for this because deceptive terminology has been employed.
Seriously, I think that Sony could probably have done better by slashing the sub for their 13 year old game to something like $7.50. I might even be interested in subbing at that price just to relive the good old days. But that's just me.
Mixed feelings about this, if it ends up being true. It seems a bit odd considering how many times Bethesda has denied they'd ever want to make an Elder Scrolls MMO.
Elder Scrolls is about an open world, exploration, and non-linearity. It is also about making meaningful choices which cannot be taken back. I do believe that most of this can, theoretically, be transferred into MMO space if the developer puts a lot of care and time into the game.
If done correctly, a theoretical Elder Scrolls MMO could be the ultimate "sandpark" MMO. It could be the MMO that many of us have been waiting for, in fact. I relish the idea of an Elder Scrolls MMO at its full potential.
BUT, If done poorly... it would be horrible. It'd be yet another WoW clone which makes a mockery of everything the Elder Scrolls has stood for up until this point. The last thing I want is to see Wrathbabies and jacktards running around Tamriel, turning the whole affair into a joke.
Now I'm sure that most of the apologists here will reply stating that this is a bad example of the F2P model, and it may well be for now. But I'm sure that some of the recent converts like SOE and Turbine are drooling over the prospect of bait-and-switching over to the Asian Pay to Win models.
It is no wonder they think they can make more money nickel and diming gamers with "F2P" (the term itself is a lie) versus subs. They think all American gamers are idiot brogamers.
1. MMOs nowadays are super solo friendly from 1 to level cap and suddenly shift to favoring group content at cap. This can be a jarring transition for players who were doing fine soloing but now have to get used to playing in a group.
2. Often times people who have been at cap for some time forget what it is like to be a fresh player at cap with no gear and little group experience. They expect everyone in their group to be as geared and seasoned as they are, and have no tolerance even when it is abundantly clear that a group mate may have just hit the cap. This problem is magnified in PUGs and especially "dungeon finder" type groups. This leads to the newer player getting talked down to, raged at, and possibly votekicked.
This scenario may lead some players not wanting to group, especially if they experience this multiple times. Some will even quit the game if there is nothing meaningful that can be done at cap while soloing, and they do not want to deal with grouping.
Now, clearly not every player impacted. Some people have thicker skins and will put up with the nonsense long enough to gear up. Also, not everyone is going to be a royal jerk to newer players.
What can developers do about this?
- They can try to train newer players sooner on how to group up. - They can give people who prefer to solo more meaningful content at cap. - They could try to do a better job trying to match people in the random queuing systems with others who are more similar in gear and skill level. However this is more difficult than it sounds because they also need to make queue times minimal. - They could try to make it so that damage and healing numbers from other players are not visible in a random group. So you cannot tell what other people's DPS/HPS are. - They could artificially boost the lower geared player in random dungeon groups somehow (i.e. normalize everyone's stats from gear to a certain iLvl), but this might diminish the perceived value of gear in the game.
None of these solutions are really trivial, but perhaps they could be explored by MMO developers in more detail to see if they are feasible.
After several years of playing MMOs, I can see why some people may like to avoid grouping in certain scenarios. When grouping up often means having to deal with elitists, jacktards, etc. it is easy to see why many prefer to solo.
I think that currently RIFT does a decent job of trying to give the solo-inclined player some options. Yes, sometimes you'll need to join a public group, but this is typically for tasks that require little actual group coordination. Even then, one will never have access to the best gear or the most challenging content in the game by soloing. Even joining a PUG for a raid rift is a far cry from Hammerknell.
Soloing should be an option, but at the same time MMOs should encourage grouping. I think players forming social bonds with others is the best for long term sub numbers. People are less inclined to jump ship for a new game if there are people they want to play with in the current one.
However, I feel that most current games do a very poor job properly training players for grouping. In fact, it is often a burden to group up with others while leveling these days, especially with people you don't know. As others have alluded to, it seems kind of wonky that most games these days can easily soloed to cap, but then suddenly the entire dynamic switches to heavily favor group content.
I honestly am beginning to think that the concept of instanced content is beginning to outlive its purpose. While it was thought up to resolve some problems with the fully open world models of first gen MMOs, it has lead to a new set of problems (arguably worse problems, depending on your point of view).
The Daily Grind: Do you expect a roleplaying server to be policed?
Mar 18th 2012 10:43AM (Massively)1. The only real action I've seen on so-called RP servers, at least since 2004-ish is enforcement of naming conventions. This is the easiest thing to police and often the only thing policed, although in an extremely lax manner.
The issue with this is that not everyone will even what good RP names are. Does the name have to be the character's given first name? What if the character name is the family name, or the character's nickname? Most people will agree that Gokuvegita and Sephirothxxx are pretty lousy names, but there are some pretty ambiguous names which might seem bad at first glance but really aren't.
For example, a paladin named "Crabface" may seem to be an RP violation because it is a "silly" name, but the character's player may have a detailed back story as to why the character is called that as a nickname.
2. Enforcement of actual RP itself is even harder, because not everyone will agree what "good" RP is and if RP should be enforced in all aspects of the game (including raiding, and so forth). The best you can do is try to keep public chat channels free of Chuck Norris jokes and leetspeak.
Mary Sues are a generally considered bad RP, but not not technically a violation. Likewise, someone who claims their character is an alien who crash landed in Middle-Earth would technically still count as RP.
3. It is difficult to enforce RP when the game's developers don't even take their own lore very seriously, and when there are little to no features within the game that support RP. World of Warcraft comes to mind, but just about every theme park is guilty to some degree.
The Mog Log: Point two one
Mar 18th 2012 1:03AM (Massively)I guess I can't really say an opinion is wrong, but...
Your kidding.
Your kidding, right?
The game certainly has its own charm, and I give it credit for that. I'd much rather play it than many games (especially anything crapped out by Perfect World) but the best MMO ever released? That's a very big stretch from my point of view.
Star Wars: The Old Republic answers questions on 1.2 and priorities
Mar 17th 2012 4:39PM (Massively)I'm actually quite surprised that nobody has released a game exactly like this yet, not that I would play it.
Terrazas talks EverQuest F2P launch and anniversary celebration
Mar 17th 2012 12:28AM (Massively)No, people are merely pointing out that SOE is being highly deceptive when they use the term "Free to Play."
It is exceedingly clear that the whole point of the so-called F2P conversion is really to act as a glorified trial, which serves to get people to try the game out thinking it is free only to feel like second class citizens next to the subscribers. Ironically SOE's goal is to get more people to pay $14.99 a month in order to fully enjoy the game, which is the same sub as WoW, RIFT, and TOR.
Still, people are calling SOE out for this because deceptive terminology has been employed.
Seriously, I think that Sony could probably have done better by slashing the sub for their 13 year old game to something like $7.50. I might even be interested in subbing at that price just to relive the good old days. But that's just me.
Rumor: Elder Scrolls MMO to be announced in May
Mar 16th 2012 1:50AM (Massively)Which is different than playing on any compulsory PvP server in any MMO how?
Rumor: Elder Scrolls MMO to be announced in May
Mar 15th 2012 11:38PM (Massively)Elder Scrolls is about an open world, exploration, and non-linearity. It is also about making meaningful choices which cannot be taken back. I do believe that most of this can, theoretically, be transferred into MMO space if the developer puts a lot of care and time into the game.
If done correctly, a theoretical Elder Scrolls MMO could be the ultimate "sandpark" MMO. It could be the MMO that many of us have been waiting for, in fact. I relish the idea of an Elder Scrolls MMO at its full potential.
BUT, If done poorly... it would be horrible. It'd be yet another WoW clone which makes a mockery of everything the Elder Scrolls has stood for up until this point. The last thing I want is to see Wrathbabies and jacktards running around Tamriel, turning the whole affair into a joke.
GDC 2012: Publishing heavies weigh in on F2P conversions
Mar 11th 2012 6:34PM (Massively)Here's a fun little topic from the Wakfu forums about how scammy some F2P titles really are.
http://www.wakfu.com/na/forum/127-general-discussions/28889-why-don-people-understand-free-play-generally-scam
Now I'm sure that most of the apologists here will reply stating that this is a bad example of the F2P model, and it may well be for now. But I'm sure that some of the recent converts like SOE and Turbine are drooling over the prospect of bait-and-switching over to the Asian Pay to Win models.
GDC 2012: Publishing heavies weigh in on F2P conversions
Mar 11th 2012 5:52PM (Massively)It is no wonder they think they can make more money nickel and diming gamers with "F2P" (the term itself is a lie) versus subs. They think all American gamers are idiot brogamers.
The Daily Grind: How much grouping should be required in a game?
Mar 11th 2012 12:53PM (Massively)This demonstrates a few problems.
1. MMOs nowadays are super solo friendly from 1 to level cap and suddenly shift to favoring group content at cap. This can be a jarring transition for players who were doing fine soloing but now have to get used to playing in a group.
2. Often times people who have been at cap for some time forget what it is like to be a fresh player at cap with no gear and little group experience. They expect everyone in their group to be as geared and seasoned as they are, and have no tolerance even when it is abundantly clear that a group mate may have just hit the cap. This problem is magnified in PUGs and especially "dungeon finder" type groups. This leads to the newer player getting talked down to, raged at, and possibly votekicked.
This scenario may lead some players not wanting to group, especially if they experience this multiple times. Some will even quit the game if there is nothing meaningful that can be done at cap while soloing, and they do not want to deal with grouping.
Now, clearly not every player impacted. Some people have thicker skins and will put up with the nonsense long enough to gear up. Also, not everyone is going to be a royal jerk to newer players.
What can developers do about this?
- They can try to train newer players sooner on how to group up.
- They can give people who prefer to solo more meaningful content at cap.
- They could try to do a better job trying to match people in the random queuing systems with others who are more similar in gear and skill level. However this is more difficult than it sounds because they also need to make queue times minimal.
- They could try to make it so that damage and healing numbers from other players are not visible in a random group. So you cannot tell what other people's DPS/HPS are.
- They could artificially boost the lower geared player in random dungeon groups somehow (i.e. normalize everyone's stats from gear to a certain iLvl), but this might diminish the perceived value of gear in the game.
None of these solutions are really trivial, but perhaps they could be explored by MMO developers in more detail to see if they are feasible.
The Daily Grind: How much grouping should be required in a game?
Mar 11th 2012 10:22AM (Massively)I think that currently RIFT does a decent job of trying to give the solo-inclined player some options. Yes, sometimes you'll need to join a public group, but this is typically for tasks that require little actual group coordination. Even then, one will never have access to the best gear or the most challenging content in the game by soloing. Even joining a PUG for a raid rift is a far cry from Hammerknell.
Soloing should be an option, but at the same time MMOs should encourage grouping. I think players forming social bonds with others is the best for long term sub numbers. People are less inclined to jump ship for a new game if there are people they want to play with in the current one.
However, I feel that most current games do a very poor job properly training players for grouping. In fact, it is often a burden to group up with others while leveling these days, especially with people you don't know. As others have alluded to, it seems kind of wonky that most games these days can easily soloed to cap, but then suddenly the entire dynamic switches to heavily favor group content.
I honestly am beginning to think that the concept of instanced content is beginning to outlive its purpose. While it was thought up to resolve some problems with the fully open world models of first gen MMOs, it has lead to a new set of problems (arguably worse problems, depending on your point of view).