MMOs are the evident future of videogaming, everything else is a step back

[Cael]

there's almost no need to reply to this. It's just misconceptions caused by a few bad games. Self explanatory, too, since Ultima Online had nothing of what you mention, nor did Star Wars Galaxies during its golden age.

Sure. It is all a biiiiiiiiigggggg misunderstanding. We get it. We get it.

He called U7 a MMO. 'Nuff said. Just back away slowly, guys. Don't make any sudden moves. Nice and easy now.

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

But, sure, go ahead and talk about these little backed by players games. Just, don't speak ill of the MMO genre, cause it's not all WoW and themepark.

the point was: more game of a certain genre are produced lower is the quality.

in 20-25 years of mmorpg mass production we only obtained 2-300 clones of everquest,wow and lineage 1
(and now we get also the mobile versions)

increase the numbers of game produced and you only obtain more trash that kill and hide the good one but we don’t get more good one.

that's so true. And for years i struggled to tell ppl that there's more to online virtual worlds than everquest clones.

But it's so UNFAIR to condemn something as generic as "a vitual persistant online world" because of particular games that, affecting it, ruined it. There was a fictional story about some god who saved the city of Sodoma because two good persons were still living there.

So why condemn the whole "species" of "virtual online worlds"?

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

there's almost no need to reply to this. It's just misconceptions caused by a few bad games. Self explanatory, too, since Ultima Online had nothing of what you mention, nor did Star Wars Galaxies during its golden age.

Sure. It is all a biiiiiiiiigggggg misunderstanding. We get it. We get it.

He called U7 a MMO. 'Nuff said. Just back away slowly, guys. Don't make any sudden moves. Nice and easy now.

I did not, it would be like calling an ape a man because it'll become one.

I just pointed out the link with UO. And that's the creator of both

 

[Durwyn]

If I'd want to meet thousands of sad fucks doing exactly the same thing as I do, I would just get out of my basement into RL. Simulating life is not the purpose of Video Games - Fun is. There is a reason why it's a branch of entertainment industry.

OP => dumbfuck tag

Thread => retardo land

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

oh yes like with MOBA and mmorpg right?

what's wrong with mmos? Personally i am for progress as fundamental axiom. I despise conservatorism. MMo's are the evident future of videogaming. Everything else is a step back. They're real time, complete fictional life simulations, and that means i must be able to interact in a complete way with the environment, so combining point&click verbs with combat, rpg char progression, everything. It's the future, all genres combined, finally, for the final utopia of interactivity.

Garriott invented crpgs, ultima 7 is a game that wants to be a mmo, simple as that. Ultima Online's only fault was that it was too precocious. Virtual worlds are an horizon, life in a fictional world, transferring of minds... but let's not go too far or i'll say that videogaming is an obsolete term for something biblical!

So regarding this planescape. Who cares, cause it is the same old garbage that's not a simulation.

Something is wrong with you. I suggest hospitatorism.

Fixed that for you

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

And besides: Star Citizen is coming. If it has enuff depth and freedom of interactivity, you guys WILL play it and realize the truth.

 

[Kitchen Utensil]

The thing is:

Would I be hyped to try and immerse myself in something like Otherland's Net? Probably.
Would I want that thing to replace all conventional games of every genre? Hell no.

Besides: It will be a while before something even remotely close will be made.

Edit: Ah, Star Citizen... okay, have fun!

 

[Cael]

And besides: Star Citizen is coming. If it has enuff depth and freedom of interactivity, you guys WILL play it and realize the truth.

Ah-HAH! And so we now know the true reason behind the thread.

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

If I'd want to meet thousands of sad fucks doing exactly the same thing as I do, I would just get out of my basement into RL. Simulating life is not the purpose of Video Games - Fun is. There is a reason why it's a branch of entertainment industry.

OP => dumbfuck tag

Thread => retardo land

Alright. That's at least some motivation, not just you mindlessly grunting and spitting insults. Finally you managed an opinion, what an honor.

It's a good point. Games must be fun, it's true. Let's say, Left 4 Dead, a game i sincerely hate for its shallow simplicity but many like BECAUSE of it.

I don't find simplicity fun. i find it fun for a day, then stupid, repetitive, intoxicatingly mind numbing, stupefying like drugs.

but that doesn't proove anything, right? that's just me. well then complexity and simulation is an imperative for the good of the medium, no? Maybe not, because some simple games can be artistic and in a way promote videogames, besides, FUN is self-explanatory and self-sufficient.

Almost selfish. There, fun is selfish, and you're selfish. Fun games give a bad name to videogames, but you don't care because it's important that you have fun.

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

The thing is:

Would I be hyped to try and immerse myself in something like Otherland's Net? Probably.
Would I want that thing to replace all conventional games of every genre? Hell no.

Besides: It will be a while before something even remotely close will be made.

Edit: Ah, Star Citizen... okay, have fun!

It's a good point, finally. What an honor thou bestowest me (along with the other majesty over there).

I don't want complexity to replace and kill simple games. I think i'd miss them too if all games were like Fallout, U7 and Deus Ex. I don't reason in B&W

Problem is, the "question" for immersivity is not even asked. Immersive sims aren't even near replacing conventional games, they're not even a thing.

So if you're afraid of endagering those, i'm wondering why we don't even want ONE simulation, we don't ask for complexity, let alone them replacing all games.

If you're free to fear for conventional fun games, and you can do it now that there's now not even a remote chance of their extinction, can i be free to fear for complexity not even existing as a thing, maybe disappearing AS WE SPEAK?

 

[theSavant]

There was a fictional story about some god who saved the city of Sodoma because two good persons were still living there.

So why condemn the whole "species" of "virtual online worlds"?

Uhm... the city was not saved. Neither does the MMO thing need to be saved.

However I'm sure many people wanted to play Oblivion or Skyrim with friends. But that would be COOP (in fact I've recently seen news about a Coop mode in Skyrim, but which is delayed, because Bethesda didn't allow Steam integration). Even if many codexers don't like Skyrim they would probably rather play this than TES Online, a typical bland MMO. Imo it is impossible to create depth in a MMO. Coop-yes, but MMO-no.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Wow, all games are bad if they're not MMOs. Really?

Games shouldn't strive toward homogenization. That's completely retarded. There are different genres because there are different people who enjoy different things.

So why condemn the whole "species" of "virtual online worlds"?

Oh yeah, it makes much more sense to condemn everything else because it doesn't try to be a "simulation".

Kill yourself. You're retarded.

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

There was a fictional story about some god who saved the city of Sodoma because two good persons were still living there.

So why condemn the whole "species" of "virtual online worlds"?

Uhm... the city was not saved. Neither does the MMO thing need to be saved.

However I'm sure many people wanted to play Oblivion or Skyrim with friends. But that would be COOP (in fact I've recently seen news about a Coop mode in Skyrim, but which is delayed, because Bethesda didn't allow Steam integration). Even if many codexers don't like Skyrim they would probably rather play this than TES Online, a typical bland MMO. Imo it is impossible to create depth in a MMO. Coop-yes, but MMO-no.

i'm sorry, i failed church school. Then that god saved humanity, for just two good persons among many.

Tes online was just another clone, coming from two bad games with fake simulative gameplay. The ability to roam an open world doesn't necessarily mean you can interact with it.

You don't need an open world, you don't need an MMO: Deus Ex wasn't an open world wasn't online, but still the perfect immersive sim i'm referring to.

How can it not be possible, though? Being MMO doesn't have limits, it's just a virtual world that is persistant and alive. It's limitless.

 

[Cael]

i'm sorry, i failed church school. Then that god saved humanity, for just two good persons among many.

You failed school and so you try to quote what you failed to learn from school here. Why? In order to make yourself look more knowledgeable? All you have done is prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that you failed school for a very good reason.

Your latest offering, quoted in this post, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in context of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

At least do your research before trying to sound intelligent.

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

Wow, all games are bad if they're not MMOs. Really?

Games shouldn't strive toward homogenization. That's completely retarded. There are different genres because there are different people who enjoy different things.

So why condemn the whole "species" of "virtual online worlds"?

Oh yeah, it makes much more sense to condemn everything else because it doesn't try to be a "simulation".

Kill yourself. You're retarded.

The thing is:

Would I be hyped to try and immerse myself in something like Otherland's Net? Probably.
Would I want that thing to replace all conventional games of every genre? Hell no.

Besides: It will be a while before something even remotely close will be made.

Edit: Ah, Star Citizen... okay, have fun!

It's a good point, finally. What an honor thou bestowest me (along with the other majesty over there).

I don't want complexity to replace and kill simple games. I think i'd miss them too if all games were like Fallout, U7 and Deus Ex. I don't reason in B&W

Problem is, the "question" for immersivity is not even asked. Immersive sims aren't even near replacing conventional games, they're not even a thing.

So if you're afraid of endagering those, i'm wondering why we don't even want ONE simulation, we don't ask for complexity, let alone them replacing all games.

If you're free to fear for conventional fun games, and you can do it now that there's now not even a remote chance of their extinction, can i be free to fear for complexity not even existing as a thing, maybe disappearing AS WE SPEAK?

There was a fictional story about some god who saved the city of Sodoma because two good persons were still living there.

So why condemn the whole "species" of "virtual online worlds"?

Uhm... the city was not saved. Neither does the MMO thing need to be saved.

However I'm sure many people wanted to play Oblivion or Skyrim with friends. But that would be COOP (in fact I've recently seen news about a Coop mode in Skyrim, but which is delayed, because Bethesda didn't allow Steam integration). Even if many codexers don't like Skyrim they would probably rather play this than TES Online, a typical bland MMO. Imo it is impossible to create depth in a MMO. Coop-yes, but MMO-no.

i'm sorry, i failed church school. Then that god saved humanity, for just two good persons among many.

Tes online was just another clone, coming from two bad games with fake simulative gameplay. The ability to roam an open world doesn't necessarily mean you can interact with it.

You don't need an open world, you don't need an MMO: Deus Ex wasn't an open world wasn't online, but still the perfect immersive sim i'm referring to.

How can it not be possible, though? Being MMO doesn't have limits, it's just a virtual world that is persistant and alive. It's limitless.

to clarify once and for all: i don't think MMO is the only way to have an immersive experience. It's the most obvious, clear way for the future, but Deus Ex, Fallout and U7 proove that there can be complexity even offline.

But: Being in a virtual world, that is persistant, that is "real", breathing with its economy, is the "promised land" of compelxity. It's evident

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

i'm sorry, i failed church school. Then that god saved humanity, for just two good persons among many.

You failed school and so you try to quote what you failed to learn from school here. Why? In order to make yourself look more knowledgeable? All you ahve done is prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that you failed school for a very good reason.

Your latest offering quote in this post makes absolutely no sense whatsoever when contrasted with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

At least do your research before trying to sound intelligent.

you must have failed the eye test tho, i said church school.

oh no, i've lost credibility for a biblical mistake, i'm doomed!

 

[Orobis]

Nice avatar, faggot.

 

[FeelTheRads]

How can it not be possible, though? Being MMO doesn't have limits, it's just a virtual world that is persistant and alive. It's limitless.

The basic premise of the game is that the players are supplied with a huge amount of nothing, which they are supposed to pretend is actually something, thus creating the ultimate Role Playing experience.

That's exactly what you want your "simulations" to be.

Also, claiming that EVERYTHING has to be a simulation is a sign of a severe mental illness. There's absolutely no logic behind such a claim. Claiming it's inherently superior (like that would make it a good argument) to other genres also makes no sense. Based on what fucking demented reasons is simulation superior? Where's the universal law that states games are meant to be fictional life simulations?

And please don't re-quote your past retardations as answers. You keep yapping about how simulations are inherently better and more complex than anything else. That's retarded and you have no basis for anything you say.

 

[Cael]

you must have failed the eye test tho, i said church school.

oh no, i've lost credibility for a biblical mistake, i'm doomed!

If that is the level of your logical thought processes, I'd say "doomed" is a pretty accurate summation of your future prospects and your ability to convince anyone that you actually have a point to make, rather then just a lot of grandiose opinions badly disguised as facts.

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

How can it not be possible, though? Being MMO doesn't have limits, it's just a virtual world that is persistant and alive. It's limitless.

The basic premise of the game is that the players are supplied with a huge amount of nothing, which they are supposed to pretend is actually something, thus creating the ultimate Role Playing experience.

That's exactly what you want your "simulations" to be.

Also, claiming that EVERYTHING has to be a simulation is a sign of a severe mental illness. There's absolutely no logic behind such a claim. Claiming it's inherently superior (like that would make it a good argument) to other genres also makes no sense. Based on what fucking demented reasons is simulation superior? Where's the universal law that states games are meant to be fictional life simulations?

And please don't re-quote your past retardations as answers. You keep yapping about how simulations are inherently better and more complex than anything else. That's retarded and you have no basis for anything you say.

Yes, it's EVIDENTLY and inherently superior, a simulation. A simulation is a more complex experience, because it simulates many aspects of life and interaction, right?

So more complexity. An organism more complex than others is that of humans compared to dogs. Are you saying you're not superior to a DOG?

A game that simulates aspects of emotions and lets you interact with objects like you have opposable thumbs is just that, a game for humans. Action games, are still fun, but they're games that let you interact like an ape!

But again, i'm not saying dogs should be extinct! i'm just saying that for now, complexity isn't even A THING nobody even knows it's good, let alone obliterate and cancel everything else!

you boys don't really seem to get the point. but i know that most of you are awesome and smart.

 

[FeelTheRads]

A game that simulates opposable thumbs is a game for the physically and possibly mentally disabled.
That's not complexity. It's bloat. It doesn't, in any way, make for a good game.

And there's nothing "superior" in copying what you see. Since you like your philosophical bullshit then surely inventing a new form of interaction is superior to durr simulating opposubale thambs!!
Also, it might be complex to DEVELOP a good simulation, but that hardly translates into complexity in playing it. And it certainly does not translate into playability. If you need to interact with objects in a game as if you had thumbs you're probably severely autistic.

No, you're not saying dogs should be extinct, you're saying they should all strive to be simulations, because you have seen the face of the universe and written on it stood "ALL GAMES SHOULD ASPIRE TO BE SIMULATIONS OF THE HUMAN LIFE!".

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

Nice avatar, faggot.

haha, i just got it. nice.

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

A game that simulates opposable thumbs is a game for the physically and possibly mentally disabled.
That's not complexity. It's bloat. It doesn't, in any way, make for a good game.

And there's nothing "superior" in copying what you see. Since you like your philosophical bullshit then surely inventing a new form of interaction is superior to durr simulating opposubale thambs!!
Also, it might be complex to DEVELOP a good simulation, but that hardly translates into complexity in playing it. And it certainly does not translate into playability. If you need to interact with objects in a game as if you had thumbs you're probably severely autistic.

No, you're not saying dogs should be extinct, you're saying they should all strive to be simulations, because you have seen the face of the universe and written on it stood "ALL GAMES SHOULD ASPIRE TO BE SIMULATIONS OF THE HUMAN LIFE!".

ok now i know you don't get me. Opposubal thomb is just a symbolism for... aw what's the point.

for the rest, tho, yes, you got it. but i restate that i don't want all games to be simulations or MMO'S... just more than zero, which is what we have. And before someone points out a possible contradiction in an earlier post, well, c'mon, that's just the fervor of an opening post, ok? and the thread, with the (scarce) points made makes you develop your thought.

But the word simulation is too misleading. I don't want all games to simulate farms.

So let me reformulate once and for all

ALL GAMES SHOULD ASPIRE TO BE LIKE WARREN SPECTOR WANTS. in this topic here, btw

http://www.pcgamer.com/the-designer...-stories-about-making-pcs-most-complex-games/

go against me? go against Mr. Spector. yes i just washed my hands becoming a referrer of thought, not a responsible of thought, oh no im despicable.

boy i haven't had this fun in forums in years :D

 

[HeatEXTEND]

action arcade games

Explain to me why those are bad. The good ones don't rot your brain and waste your life like MMO's do.
Sure I'd play UO for a couple hundred years if I was immortal. But guess what.
MMO's are gaming's opiates. Now consider gaming is an opiate all on it's own. Yes, they are That bad.

That’s very unfair to opiates, which serve a useful purpose in addition to spreading joy, good cheer, and constipation. MMOs are more like crack: no real value, and the main thing it does is make you want more crack.

Oh yeah ? Well

Spoiler

that would be a better analogy

 

[Cael]

go against me? go against Mr. Spector. yes i just washed my hands becoming a referrer of thought, not a responsible of thought, oh no im despicable.

No. You are just badly misinformed, ignorant and downright retarded, and I say this with all due apologies to retards.

Spector is no God nor is he even the best thinker. He views on economics and social justice (or rather class warfare) is pretty much "down with the upper class, the oppressors of the poor!"

Yeah, I'd happily go against Spector if he brings up his stupid "oh woe is the lower classes" crap again.