Is the MMO the pinnacle of gaming?

[Spyre2000]

Actually I think the cry for games to become MMO by some fans is because of the general perception that MMO are "better" then single player games. But before I go any further let me define what I mean by "better". Because they are multiplayer people can play them with their friends which is a common thread in gaming these days because despite what uninformed parents think most gaming is a "social" activity.

Next in terms of "better" is the longevity of the games. Unlike most single player games which seem to be getting shorter and shorter, personally I'm getting tired of buying games and beating them in a single night so I stopped buying and started renting. MMO often have massive amounts of game play that takes several months to go through all the content. While most single player games you can easily finish in under a week as a casual player. I remember one developer almost bragging their game has 10-12 hours of gameplay and I thought that's a single weekend worth of gaming.

Also I suppose it could be a third thing but it's tied to longevity in that most MMO get constant support and have updates and new content on a semi regular basis. This means a steady stream of new material and not having to wait years hoping a squeal comes out so you can get new content/gameplay in your favorite franchise.

But overall I think it is these two main things, the ability to play with others and larger amount of content, that make players call for a MMO of their favorite franchise. The problem though is not a lot of games are well suited for the MMO format. Like of the two you mentioned above I think Link would make a horrible MMO because it's always been heavily story driven and focused around you as link so it wouldn't really work since MMO tend to have a fairly static stories the players don't truly effect. On the other hand I think Pokemon would probably be a hugely successful MMO if done correctly. People would capture, trade, and battle their pokemon as well as have huge tournaments. As I recall the DS already uses it's Wifi to connect online so players can trade/battle their pokemon over the web so a MMO only seems like the next logical step for that so people can't cheat like they can with DS hacks.

 

[gigastrike]

First I was gonna say "no", but now that I think about it, MMOs cram a ton of features into themselves and don't really have to be RPGs. MMOs can really be pretty much any type of game as long as they allow you to play with a bunch of other people simultaniously. Or, you could just play alone in the same game if you're anti-social.

 

[keptsimple]

MMORPGs sound great in theory. Back before the days of online gaming, I'm sure I wasn't the only person who thought that RPGs would be a lot cooler if you were interacting with real people, rather than pre-programmed NPCs who just repeat the same two lines.

In practice, however, I think MMORPGs are a huge disappointment. Most of the people you interact with are either dull or obnoxious. And the missions, rather than being enhanced by the participation of others, are just repetitive "Go to X location and kill Y number of Z monsters."

 

[clem]

I'm waiting for some WoW/Eve/LotR:O fanboys to come on this thread and attempt to re-educate me...there were plenty of them around for the 'March Madness'...I wonder where they are now?

I'd expect that most of us are reading and posting in other threads, or maybe still playing genre wars.

I've not heard many claims that MMO "apples" are better than the "oranges" of other game types, but each own strengths and weaknesses, blah, blah. I play differnt types of games for different reasons, though I play an MMO more regularly than others, simply because I like the environment the best. It's all personal preferences

My wife is completely uninterested in even trying an MMO, and I'm not going to beg her or tell her she's dumb for it. It's her tastes, and her choice. And she's dumb for plenty of other reasons .

I will say that each MMO is different though. I've had, and heard of completely different experiences between them, and for whatever reason most of the folks that I play DDO with are not or are no longer WoW players, so there must be some significant differences in preferences amongst members of the class. Many of them also don't like one of Turbine's other games, LoTRO, and wouldn't play it but are regular players of DDO, or Asheron's Call.

There's no way to convince someone who doesn't like WoW or any other specific MMO that they "should" like it, but you can suggest that they try a different game because you believe it is significantly better and different.

I don't expect any game to hold my interest forever, and one problem with MMO's is keeping fresh content and avoiding a grind requirement. But I've been playing DDO for two years and still like it, and will probably have a couple years left if Turbine can keep it reasonably fresh.

So there's no re-education to be done, and all anyone can ever really say about a game that they like to someone else is, "Try it and see if you like it." Well, I guess then you can also say, "No, wait, you didn't give it enough time, try it some more!" And of course you can finally say, "Well, that's because you're stupid anyway, 'cause if you weren't you'd think just like me."

 

[JMeganSnow]

GOOD GOD, NO.

Of course, you could say the same about any type of game. Are single-player games the "pinnacle" of gaming? No. It depends on why you game. Personally, I think that pen-and-paper RPG's are the "pinnacle" of gaming and cRPG's are a poor substitute for when you can't get the real thing, with pretty graphics making up for lack of depth and complex options.

 

[Spyre2000]

MMORPGs sound great in theory. Back before the days of online gaming, I'm sure I wasn't the only person who thought that RPGs would be a lot cooler if you were interacting with real people, rather than pre-programmed NPCs who just repeat the same two lines.

In practice, however, I think MMORPGs are a huge disappointment. Most of the people you interact with are either dull or obnoxious. And the missions, rather than being enhanced by the participation of others, are just repetitive "Go to X location and kill Y number of Z monsters."

Actually RPGs with other people rather then NPC are a lot cooler. And before there was MMORPGs there was simply Multiplayer RPGs. Things like MUDS, MUSHES, and etc were actually pretty popular and they usually had under 200 people on them. This created a much tighter community where most of the people actually knew the other people or at least had heard of them so they knew what was going on in the world. Plus they not only felt like they could really make a difference they actually could.

For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about imagine if you will a large guild in a typical MMORPG since they tend to be around 100-200 if not larger it seems. Now that guild has it's very own server where only they reside and they are given much more freedom then is allowed in any MMORPG theses days to actually shape and change the world. Now of course in these games not everyone was on the same side so there was still strife as people tried to advance their own goals. And I guess another comparable example would be private servers using some current MMORPG client which are out there.

The problem as it were is like so many things a lot of these ideas went corporate so they went bigger and supposedly better. Now though things are too big so people feel they can't really make a difference in the world. They are still confined to their own small social groups in this huge massive world and even as a group they often can't make any true difference. Aside from self proclaimed victories such as first guild on server to clear a new raid, first guild to get full set of new raid gear, or whatever fits that particular MMORPG. But even then those accomplishments are fairly hollow as most aren't aware of them or even care really.

 

[iggyus]

MMOs tend to kill good series of games. WoW was a good decision for the Warcraft series but for Knights of the Old Republic... well that just raped everything for me

 

[300lb. Samoan]

I think MMOs are more than just a market trend, it's a trend in the population towards a certain kind of social behavior. We all sit here and balk at the huge amount of "grinding" involved with playing your typical MMO but the people most involved and engaged in playing them tell you that it's all about playing with other people. These people aren't playing a game, they're living a Second Life (pun intended but not humorous) because the immersion level of these games is so deep that it's more compelling to do grinding tasks with friends in the world of warcraft than it is to do the exact same thing in real life. what the fuck is up with that?

 

[Marv21]

In a pokemon Mmo, there would be only 1 class....HUNTERS!!!

 

[jboking]

Online play is the pinnacle of gaming, not necessarily MMO's but any type of online play. It gives the game infinite re-playability and, through the wonders of the internet, provides us with DLC. If we really wanted to we could continue to play one online game for the rest of our lives and be happy(should the developers see fit to constantly add new content). While MMO's do these things, they are not necessarily the pinnacle of gaming because many of them lack the one thing gaming needs. Entertainment. Of course that is opinion, so...yeah...grain of salt and all that.

 

[Leorex]

more like the sewer of gameing

 

[keptsimple]

Actually RPGs with other people rather then NPC are a lot cooler.

That's a subjective statement. In my experience, I find RPGs populated with people (i.e. MMORPGs) to be dull. Rather than being the center of the story like in a single player RPG, you're just one of a bunch of people trying to level up and find loot. There generally isn't much of a story to speak of.

 

[Danyavich]

Personally, I don't think current MMO's are the pinnacle of gaming; the IDEAL of these games are. The intent of an mmo is the same as any other RPG; immerse yourself in a world where you're someone completely different, usually doing something you can only dream about in the real world. That's all RPGs. The MMO, in my mind, is attempting to make it even MORE encompassing by giving the feeling that you're in a real world, and not the limited landscape of a single player RPG. My dream game is basically a STALKER MMO, executed correctly. Gimme the globe to wander, however I like, professions that are performed semi-realistically, the ability to do whatever I want, when I want, and add some sort of mythological/sci-fi edge to keep it from being second life with good graphics. Stalker, in my mind, is one of the best executed sandbox games in existance. You basically wander around the areas doing whatever you want, in a setting that is VERY engrossing, with attachment to the world because of the achievements you've made. Imagine a post-apoc. world where you could do anything from being a scavenger trying to get money together to get yourself out of the hellhole you live in, to being the merchant buying those junk items in the hope of a semi-stable life where you're at? Or, even being the guy who shoots the scavengers who come into your territory because you want their goods, or just because you're paranoid and scarred from past experiences

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

no clue. I'm yet to play one with a good combat system. Even WoW which is supposedly the "best" sucks 'nards. Plus, no game is worth 15 bucks a month

 

[willard3]

I have never played one (except Diablo 2...

Diablo 2 isn't an MMO, lol, a maximum of 8 players doesn't constitute "massively multiplayer"

I still sort of consider it in the neighborhood. It just doesn't have the "massively" part, but it's pretty similar to an MMO, if what I hear is correct.

Yeah, so if it doesn't have the "massively" part that makes it a "multiplayer online" game. In other words, a game. Lol.

You completely missed the point. I consider D2 one of the granddaddies of MMOs...it had the basic concept of MMOs, just not the massively multiplayer aspect. Make WoW singleplayer, and you'd have something like D2.

 

[Delicious]

Not until they get a better control scheme. Why can't MMO's be like Mount and Blade or any of the thousands of shooters in existence?

The "click on enemy once to fight" thing, along with the hideous interfaces, need to get the hell out if the genre has any chance of advancing to the point where it will become fun for people who like gameplay rather than grindplay.

 

[Valiance]

MMOs tend to kill good series of games. WoW was a good decision for the Warcraft series but for Knights of the Old Republic... well that just raped everything for me

You haven't even played it yet.

 

[willard3]

Not until they get a better control scheme. Why can't MMO's be like Mount and Blade or any of the thousands of shooters in existence?

"because then it wouldn't be an MMO." :/

...is the answer you'd invariably get. Just like the retro gamer purists who insist that the only true Metroid is 2D and with 16-bit graphics.

The "click on enemy once to fight" thing, along with the hideous interfaces, need to get the hell out if the genre has any chance of advancing to the point where it will become fun for people who like gameplay rather than grindplay.

Agree. All I need is to see screenshots of the horrendous interfaces to be completely turned off.

 

[mikemart]

ive played a alot of MMOs just to talk with people and to play a videogame

alot of times id quit a MMO when my best friends became inactive.

Gamers r looked down upon in my school so im considered wierd and addicted to videogames in my school. People dont exactly like me and the fact i cant talk doesnt help.

Im pretty much a MMO player sterio type... ... q.q