What's your primary motivation

[mkreku]

I enjoy exploring worlds, both inner and outer. It's fun to be able to play a murderer, a doctor, a soldier, a F1 driver or whatever I can get my hands on. I also like to feel like Christopher Columbus, taking his first strides on an entirely new continent.

 

For some reason, I also enjoy taking a complete loser and leveling him up to become a divine creature. Well, not really, but that's how dumb most RPG's are. If I got to choose, I'd level a poor, weak nerd to become a rich, athletic professor.

[Kaftan Barlast]

I prefer singleplayer games with a strong mature story and lots of character interraction. But when it comes to having fun wih my friends then its shooters all the way (while yelling obscenities and throwing random objects around).

 

 

 

As you all know by now, I strongly dislike MMO's. And I give you again the Hypothesis of Kaftan:

• You cant have a story where the protagonists outnumber every villain and supporting act by 100:1
   
  
• You cant change a world that has to appear the same to a million players
   
  
• Without a story or a world they can change, the player is stuck with performing trivial tasks that have no effect on the world around them.
   
  
• Since performing trivial tasks and being unable to actually accomplish anything is boring, MMO's are boring*
  

[astr0creep]

A game needs to keep my interest.

 

This happens with surprises and/or constant progression.

 

RPGs work well for this because the character is always gaining something, wether it's loot or exp and the story can keep me surprised.

 

Also, if a game doesn't hook me in the first 30 minutes of playing, I'll stop and probably never play again.

 

Controls are also very important to me. If I input the command to go right, my guy better turn right right away, without any lag, jitter or whatever.

What I can do with the controls, the innovation of using the device is also important. For example, I loved the way we switched weapons in MGS. It was simple, fast and smart.

 

I don't mind grinding and/or random encounters if the combat is fun from the start. If my only option from lvl 1 to 10 is hacking a sword, I'll get bored very quickly. If I can, gradually and from the start, acquire moves and powers that I can use right away(and effectively-I'm looking at you FF12!) in combat(again, constant progression) the game will hook me right away.

I don't need a Sleep spell that doesn't connect because my magic level isn't high enough. If I spend AP points(or whatever) to get a spell, I expect to be able to use it right away as this is a strategy I wish to try/use right away.

If I've been grinding for 2 hours to get the 100 APs I need for the spell, get it and then it fails to connect on basic encounters, I'll get p1ssed and drop the game.

 

Of course the publisher already has my money so who cares but you know what I mean.

Edited March 22, 2007 by astr0creep

[Calax]

I prefer singleplayer games with a strong mature story and lots of character interraction. But when it comes to having fun wih my friends then its shooters all the way (while yelling obscenities and throwing random objects around).

 

 

 

As you all know by now, I strongly dislike MMO's. And I give you again the Hypothesis of Kaftan:

• You cant have a story where the protagonists outnumber every villain and supporting act by 100:1
   
  
• You cant change a world that has to appear the same to a million players
   
  
• Without a story or a world they can change, the player is stuck with performing trivial tasks that have no effect on the world around them.
   
  
• Since performing trivial tasks and being unable to actually accomplish anything is boring, MMO's are boring*
  

actually kafty, Blizzard made at least one event that would change the world by openining a certain dungeon.

[Tale]

I would call killing ancient gods "performing trivial tasks." Sure, they respawn, but they do the same when you start a new save in a single player RPG, doesn't mean the last playthrough was trivial.

 

As for actually accomplishing anything, you can accomplish quite a deal in the sandbox games.

How's this for accomplishing something?

Not just EVE, but when SWG was in its prime there was much to accomplish. Names to make for yourself, player enemies to vanguish and crush beneath your heel.

Edited March 22, 2007 by Tale

[Shadowstrider]

• You cant have a story where the protagonists outnumber every villain and supporting act by 100:1
   
  
• You cant change a world that has to appear the same to a million players
   
  
• Without a story or a world they can change, the player is stuck with performing trivial tasks that have no effect on the world around them.
   
  
• Since performing trivial tasks and being unable to actually accomplish anything is boring, MMO's are boring*
  

 

I'd almost, ALMOST forgotten how naive you were.

 

I can't think of any MMO where the "protagonists" outnumber villains by 100:1. Have you ever played an MMO?

 

You can very much change a world that has to appear "the same" to players. Contested zones, rewards, etc... WoW did a pretty good job with Ahn'Qiraj. You have to complete tasks to prepare the war effort, and then gather supplies before going to war.

 

All MMOs have some semblance of story, and they can be used well, or not. As with everything, it's in the delivery. Some instances are better than others.

 

Your last point is moot, since "trivial" tasks are subjective. I consider killing monsters trivial, where others love it. Boring, in and of itself, is subjective.

 

What you hate is Guild Wars, which is hardly an MMO.

 

WTB valid arguments against MMOs. There are tons, but these aren't them.

[astr0creep]

What you hate is Guild Wars, which is hardly an MMO.

 

Finally!

 

I've been waiting to read something from someone on GW.

 

So then you're saying it's a great game?

[Azarkon]

The best argument against MMOs is that they are like Skinner boxes.

[Sand]

As much as I hate MMOs... Guild Wars in how they set that game up is the best of the bunch. At some point I do plan on getting the expansions.

[LadyCrimson]

Tinkering with items, skills, units or formulas to see "what happens" and "what I can do." Alchemy in some games is an example, creating weapons is another, and creating 20 different mages to try different skillsets/builds is yet another. I'll spend hours/days/weeks on those and forget that there even is a "plot."

 

Combat is only fun in the sense that I want to see all that stuff I'm tinkering with in action/see results. Thus most shooters bore me because there's no tinkering regarding combat; you find a gun, equip it, shoot. Zzzzz. Shooter has to have a great atmosphere/environment, or puzzles/maps ala tombraider, for me to get very far playing it.

 

I'm a mad scientist, essentially. Everything else is secondary or unnoticed. But don't get me wrong - if story/characters really stands out, I do notice, assuming I ever get past the tinkering parts.

 

I love 'god' strategy games with frantic action and multi-tasking of controlling 100 things at once. Grinding doesn't bother me as long I feel like I'm still tinkering in some fashion (ie grinding to get ingrediants for my alchemy to make something).

I like games with a sense of humor, whether off to the "side" (gravestone text to read if you click on 'em) or direct (character dialogue).

 

A small cuteness factor here and there never hurts. T3 was soooooo cute.

[Jorian Drake]

What you hate is Guild Wars, which is hardly an MMO.

 

Finally!

 

I've been waiting to read something from someone on GW.

 

So then you're saying it's a great game?

It's an online single player game, where you need some aid from others against the most harder enemies

[karka]

Now, this is interesting...

 

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/hellgatelon...tml?sid=6167915