Incentive To Keep Playing MMORPGs? 56
Thanks to RPGDot for their opinion piece discussing why gamers would want to continue playing MMORPGs over long periods of time. The piece asks: "What is the best way to keep a player in an MMORPG? Reward their effort? Players will never have enough rewards to satisfy them for long periods of time. Remove all advancement limits? Players will complain that there is no goal. Reward their patience? Sure, but the gameplay has to be pretty engaging, if skills are gained through time instead of effort", but concludes without a definitive answer, begging the question - is there one?
Ask Slashdot -- What is the meaning of life? (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah... (Score:1, Funny)
Re:that would be "raises the question" - fucktard (Score:3, Informative)
like this (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, in AC1, there was a period during which these shadowy beings began to invade. over a couple of months, these creepy floating fortresses started appearing outside towns, strange new monsters appeared, and new dungeons opened up. Over the coming months, quests and events precedeing the resurection of a demon-god began to appear. Some players swore to help revive the god, and others tried to defend the shirnes and prevent it. One server actually held back the march of darkness most of the month but finally fell and the entire world was assaulted by this devil.
I am simplfying it a lot but you get the idea. I had a lot of friends that started playing the game more than ever when this event was going on, and I think something like thisis the key to keeping your customers.
The "sandbox model" in which players are just let loose in a static world to kill respawning mobs over and over isn't appealing to about 90% of the potential MMORPG players (that is anyone that plays RPGs) If they want to grab that market, they need to make the game as interesting as a brandnew epic RPG every month. "new content every month? that will cost a fortune!" you say. But I say "whoever figures out a way to do it without breaking the bank or hiking subscription costs will be the one that comes out on top"
Re:like this (Score:1)
I agree. The problem with the current market is that these games are too balanced and too static, and no developer will come close to taking a risk. They're all terrified that they'll only keep subscribers with predictability.
I won't play an MMORPG again until I can have an effect on the world around me. I want to play a game with a giant war that can be won, no
Re:like this (Score:4, Funny)
I won't play a MMORPG until the rallying cry sounds something different than "SCHLONGMASTERS GUILD RALLY NOW, PHAT L00T @ SPAWN 153.62. NO ONE < LEV20, FUKN NEWBS"
Re:like this (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:like this (Score:1)
Re:like this (Score:2)
The sad thing is that they managed to KEEP the worst bugs for AC2. I played AC1 on Frostfel
EVE Online - Getting there (Score:2)
Things are kind of light on the content/events side at the moment since CCP is working on fleshing out lots of post-release bugs, but as the game shapes up and gets more stable, CCP has started kicking off occasional events and content, which should start becoming more frequent over the next months.
incentive? addiction (Score:3, Insightful)
In My Experience... (Score:5, Interesting)
Now I have never played Lineage myself but from what I've read about it this is a good example of game that has such a scale. Once you have gotten a strong character you still have other things too look forward to, mostly Guilds. Once you have found a guild you can build your guild and capture castles.
Now these high up players may eventually own one of these castles but this still gives them many things to do; for example they must defend their castle, they must manage it, and perhaps they eventually get bored with this and go to capture a second castle?
Games should not have a definete ending for the players. The best online games I've seen are the ones that let the players fight against each other and put in balances so that no one power can ever overwhelm another.
How about any game? (Score:2, Interesting)
Real life? (Score:3, Insightful)
Like previously mentioned, content is a wonderful, albeit expensive way, to keep people interest, coming back, and enjoying their online lives. But then, that's like reading a book. The game, like mentioned, has to be interactive. I believe this needs to be taken a full step further, to full interactivity.
MMORPGs can allow people to become things they can't be in real life (like real jackals
Another invention into interactivity is communication. Letting people interact with each other in brand new ways. I personally can't wait until they reach such a level that most any act is possible, that there is a graphical version of
The final thing, which is hard to balance between no consequence, is risk. There has to be some risk of loss. A game is no fun if it's too easy. There have to be ways you can end up where you began, with only the experience you've gained (RL kind, not ingame kind
Games need to emulate the openness of life without the consequences. They can be a person's release from the govt., from taxes, from the DMCA, from weird slashdot modders modding their great posts offtopic, from horrible cubicle life, from anything that has to exist in real life but they can't stand.
Is all this possible? No. You can't code life, yet. But you can make damn sure you come close, and if you do, people will want to escape into your world.
Re:Real life? (Score:2)
If there is, and it is sufficiently popular... (Score:3, Funny)
a) the person that discovers it will become very wealthy for a while
b) everyone will be playing the game and not working/farming/eating/reproducing and the human race will die out!
So if anyone knows the answer- do your duty to mankind and keep your mouth shut! Being very rich doesn't help if there's no food to buy, and no babes/bros to impress!
Re:If there is, and it is sufficiently popular... (Score:3, Funny)
No, you miss out on the bigger picture. After a while stop charging money, ask the users to do "favours" such as farming, manufacturing, etc in exchange for game time. In fact, make these "favours" a part of the game! If they farm wheat and bake some bread, their character gets food. If they help you manufacture guns (as your unholy army will need them), their character will get weapons. When they help build a temple in your honor, their characters will gain magical powers. ...and with wearable computers, t
Let players contribute to worlds and run servers (Score:5, Insightful)
This is generally where I'd like to see online gaming/entertainment go, maybe a mixture of free and commercial software, but with low barriers on people who want to run servers. This is how the Web happened
reed
Re:Let players contribute to worlds and run server (Score:1)
Re:Let players contribute to worlds and run server (Score:2)
What's really sweet is, after you get up a few levels, you get a realtime python interpreter, so if I want to make up stuff on the fly, I can. There's nothing cooler than casting a spell by literally making it up as you go along, althou
Re:Let players contribute to worlds and run server (Score:1)
I doubt they will be happy to give up this system, unless they can safely say they are missing out on something huge by sticking to it.
... begging the question - is there one? (Score:1)
Depends... (Score:3, Interesting)
However, I argue that the main purpose of those games is still to have fun. Back in the days of MUDs, we were really roleplaying. I really was Ishap, the bastard son of a knight and on my way to become an evil paladin (my orcish half didn't allow me otherwise). However, those were times when only the truly dedicated people played on-line roleplaying games. Now you have all those casual gamers who are more interested talking about the Palestinian conflict or the newest comic hero hitting the big screen than playing the game, and most MMORPGs became glorified chat rooms.
I personally feel that there is no way to rescue MMORPGs. They will never become engaging enough for people to keep playing. Hardcore gamers will still use MUDs for their out-of-this-world experience, and the rest will keep chatting in Everquest and other games. Game designers may make these games more engrossing by creating a linear storyline on a mass scale. Sony had the chance to do so with Star Wars Galaxies - they could've written a script for the next three real-time years of the game, which would include plenty of hard-coded events that would push the gamer forward. For example, an attack on a planet would send all gamers from there to other planets, as refugees, forcing them to start from scratch (but with more experience already, making it easier to work themselves up in the new society). Or a rising status of a planet (new spaceport, for example) would increase job opportunities, tourism, etc. Players could vote to join the Republic or the Trade Federation or choose a despotic planet where the game designers would choose for them. To make a long story short, players would keep being entertained if there was a dynamic world. Instead, all you get are very static worlds, where all the players can do is to join the queue to kill another monster or clean 100 bowls to achieve a higher level as a potential cook.
Re:Depends... (Score:1, Interesting)
I'd add, however, that the way out of this may be to abandon the centralized server-client model of current MMORPGs.
I think I saw two of the most disappointing CRPG releases this year--disappointing only because they both were excellent games that could have been even more tremendous if they had what the other lacked: Neverwinter Nights and Morrowind. Neverwinter Nights is a great game because of the emphasis on community module design, Morrowind because of the depth of charact
Re:Depends... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not the game, it's those you PLAY WITH (Score:3, Interesting)
However, I played EverQuest for about two years religiously, and have been playing SWG for the past two months almost 3-4 hours a night, and I don't see that stopping any time soon.
Why?
Because of the community of people I play the game WITH. THAT is my incentive. If I didn't have the people in the player city [vagabondsrest.com] I'm in to play with, I probably would have dropped SWG about a month ago. But, I've found a great group of people (met them in EQ back in 1999) to latch on to and to play the game WITH, and THAT has given the three MMOG's I've been with them in (EQ, AO, SWG) the desire to keep coming back. I stuck it out in AO for 6 months during it's launch phase because of the people I was playing with, instead of throwing it away the first week like many others did.
These games are social, and if you tap into the right social buttons, then you will come back for more and more. These days, I hardly find myself doing anything to advance any of my exp bars (I'm already a Master Musician and Master Entertainer, and the Entertainer skill set is primarily a SOCIAL one...see the correlation?) but I am hanging around our city and other cantinas to be social with others.
Heck, we just moved our city to a better location, and it looks like a city now. There's streets and intersections, and people in those intersections...It feels like home. Only a great group of players can pull that off.
PVP (Score:3, Interesting)
But my opinion is bias because my ideal PVP situation would simply be the early days of UO when the level treadmill meant nothing because you could script yourself a nice macro to max your characters in a week, then go out and kill everything in sight. Sure you have your overwhelming influx of people who will complain about PKers and macroers, but if an MMORPG came out that encouraged this kind of behavior, the complainers would simply be told to stfu and find a new game.
Re:PVP (Score:1, Interesting)
Did you read the question? how do you keep players not drive them off in droves. You are hitting on one of the problems though.
People have different tastes, and people don't all want a challenge, challenge being the important element. A lot of people play EQ for super-human lengths of time. I can not, there is nothing that keeps my interest that long with the game but for
Re:PVP (Score:2)
Did you read my post?
Wrong wrong wrong. The reason the hardcore PVPers (such as myself) left UO a long time ago is because they have defaced what PVP meant to us. It's not mindless monster killing but full of skill and human interaction. You kill people, you loot them, they reequip and kill you, and before you know it you've made a new friend.
The REAL way to get people to stay. (Score:2)
Re:The REAL way to get people to stay. (Score:3, Interesting)
Nothing bores me more than gambling. I once went to a casino and bought ten dollars in quarters for a slot machine. I couldn't wait for the quarters to run out...in fact, I was slightly annoyed when it gave me back a few more (although I would have been quite happy if it had dropped twenty dollars in q
Roleplay (Score:3, Insightful)
Think about it..what is the difference between an MMORPG, and a game you play on your console at home? The thounsands of other people that make up the "world" you play in online combined with the immersive experience of playing in that world. That is what should be a MAIN attraction in online gaming. Of course, the content provider cannot dictate the quality of those playing the game, but they can help with:
*Limitless ammounts of clothing and items to make you unique in a crowded world
*Countless communication options (from chat, to emotes, etc) to allow for meaningful conversation and roleplay.
Of course there is always a tactical and gameplay component to these games, and to some this is the only reason for playing. But that will not keep people coming back alone, or else you are out of the game as soon as a better action packed game comes along, or the current one gets old (and it will sometime).
In my opinion, the social atmosphere is the only reason to continue to play MMORPGs for an extended period of time. I think many roleplayers would agree!
A few thoughts on keeping players around (Score:5, Interesting)
In other words, player-generated content allowed the MUD to sustain its popularity. In the MMORPG world, it seems that many of the attempts to give players such "powers" have backfired, usually due to disgruntled players.
So I've been thinking... what if the game had "quest points". These could be earned by participating in a quest (not just by "winning" the quest, players would quickly tire). Players could then use these quest points in one of two ways.
First: expend quest points to create a quest of their own. Use a fairly high starting cost to make sure that players doing this have participated in enough quests to understand what they are doing in running one. That gets the player setup with a basic gofer quest (unique item is dropped somewhere in a given dungeon, find the item and win). More points can be spent to get special items created, special monsters created, or for enough points, a major plot inserted. (All of these are created by the player, and perhaps edited by the staff). Some restriction should be in place on # of simultaneous quests.
Second: after participating in a quest, a player can choose to donate quest points back to the player who created the quest. This will create a feedback system and allow the popular creators to host quests more often. To prevent people from hoarding quest points, establish limits where if they don't donate quest points to hosts, they will receive fewer and fewer points.
You could use donated quest points to establish a ranking scheme, where "newbie" hosts can only create certain types of quests until enough people have donated points to them for them to try for bigger quests.
Aside from this idea... the "Hero" idea from my MUD was pretty good incentive to keep playing and exploring. When you reached a high enough level you became a Hero and were given a few extra powers. However, as you gained levels, monsters would give less and less XP, discouraging people from fighting forever in one place, and requiring them to explore the area to learn more about it.
Incentive To Start Playing MMORPGs? (Score:2, Interesting)
Keeping players is very important if server/game owners can't find new ones. I have no incentive to play an MMORPG. I'm not sure which one to try or how much network bandwith it uses; it seems too expensive; it probably requires Microsoft Windows; I probably don't have time to play, as I browse Slashdot too much...
Answer: (Score:1)
The answer is easy... (Score:1)
Its like when you were the first person to get a SNES on the block, you ran out into the street and shouted out "Yes!!" (ok so maybe you didn't but you get the idea.) But if you look, relatively, closely at MMO communities there are always a few players who get put down in that game's history as "first person to reach the highest level", "first person to kill X uber-monster" or "X player who owns the largest and most valuable house". Or something along those lines.
Different Strokes for Different Folks (Score:2, Insightful)
For power gamer types, you can have a really difficult server where they will find many more people just like them. They will have no restrictions on how much they can play or do, but getting to the top will take tons of effort and time.
For more casual gamers, the kind that may get frustrated by how much time and effort it takes to do anything (WHAT?? I have to kill 300 Rats to get to level 2????), you should ha
How to keep players around? (Score:1)
There's certainly more than one way about it. You could...
Encourage players to build. That element keeps people around on MUDs, and also explains why some people actually still play Quake 1!
Constantly revise. Even if players aren't building, the developer/admin can do little things to keep the challenges up. I could cite Diablo II here. I was burned out on it until I started playing with the 1.10s patch. The synergy bonuses really changed my approach to how I build my chars in the game.
Community! That's
Games, The Story, and why a game is not a book (Score:2)
Was it ever the graphics? The elitist in me wants to say "No", but that's not really true. The better looking the game the more likely I was to give it a try. However if a friend says "It sux like Gigli" I wouldn't buy it. Similarly if a friend recommended a game with comparitively ugly graphics, I'd buy the game he recommended.
Re:Sorry, but it has to be said (Score:1)
Storyline is not the issue (Score:2)
Keeping your players interested if not loyal... (Score:1)
The balance issue is not- "How can I keep my community balanced and viable?" or "Are my quests interesting and challenging enough to players?" or even "Do I have sufficiently easy/hard/numerous goals so that even the most dedicated players will always have a horizion to shoot for?"
The issues at stake are "Which g
keep it new (Score:1)
three things keep players interested in MMORPGS (Score:2)
There are so many things that keep players interested in playing MMORPGs, I'll start with the cooler ones and work back to the basics:
1. An evolving epic story line: The assumption that MMORPGs are static is terribly flawed. There is no reason for MMORPGs to be static. A successful MMORPG will generate huge revenue, and some of this revenue should be employed for continual content production. In general this has failed in the marketplace, because of a lack of workable tools for content production, and a qu
In short... (Score:1)
And in long... (please, hear me out)
These hybridised D&D/Chainmail-based combat systems need to go. They were fine 30 years ago, for a couple guys crowded around a card table eating pizza and drinking beer, with a DM who could change the rules on the fly. All current MMOGs do is show the limitations and oversights of such a system, especially when it's run under a DM as unforgiving as a computer.
Take, for e
The conundrum of content (Score:2)
It's just so much harder to create original, inventive content than it is to enjoy it...
Instead these companies should focus upon providing the base content, content creation tools, and infrastructure. Then enable and empower their users to create, alter, delete as they wish (in a controlled fashion - trust ratings and staff moderation).
People are hard to amuse, but gen
Ultima X (Score:2, Interesting)
Once your second character ascends, you create a new disciple that gets special abilities from your first to characters, and so on...
Sounds pretty neat to me - I have only pla
The Answer is Simple (Score:2)
Every gamer wants to have fun in the game. Many MMO's still are basic treadmills just to level. In Asheron's Call I spent a lot of time on what we all called Coral Beach becuase the golems that spawned there gave the best XP. Of course it was the only one in the game so it was constantly fought over and macro'd.
Asheron's Call 2 hit the nail on the head with advancement rates but they forgot to provide a endgame or high level conte