Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Keep the notion that an MMO is online social experience first and a game second, that is important.

vhbeninvhbenin Member
edited July 2020 in General Discussion
Well... To start with, I've been playing mmos for over 20 years and in the meantime with so many games that you end up playing you notice what ends up ruining a mmo and in my experience in these 20 years the answer is: when a mmo stops being a social experience.

Not in the big mechanics, but in the little things that make a mmo game incredible. The small details tell the experience.


Having said that, I have two suggestions for the team, as an example. From there the team can think of ideas to add to the game world social functions that aggregate to why the mmo is a collective social experience.

1. Using WoW guild creation system as example, you need to buy a contract item from a vendor, get 5 unique players signatures. And then the guild creation process is concluded. ( Handing the item to each individual player to sign, creating a social interaction via the playable avatar).

Something similiar could happen here on guild creations.




- Using guild creations as a concept, i hope the developers get the general picture of what i'm trying to say about making an mmo a social experience and implement similar concepts in different mechanics of the game, for example the loot mechanic that i will use as an example as follows:


2.Looting: one thing wow did wrong, both in the original version and the modern game, is the looting system. Classic wow suffered from loot robbers and modern wow, sadly, chose personal loot to fix the problem¹, which in my opinion made everything worse because it deviated from the core principle of an mmo being a social game. (Alongside activity finder, unlimited and abundant fast travel - which diminished the portal skill functionality - and other things, things that destroyed the social components of world of warcraft)


The solution, imho, to this problem: an integrated voting system for each item on the loot table of the monster or boss killed. The party or raid would vote on each important unique item, to what player it should belong to. Obviously, generic and repeatable items would be excluded from this voting system and could be distributed via existant means ( master loot, round-robin, need before greed, group loot, ffa, etc)

¹I know legacy loot mode exist, however, it's mechanics are not changed, and the solution presented fix the social issue.



The why: Most people here played mmos in their lives, more than one mmo actually, and they know that the most memorable moments for them were not created via game mechanics or gameplay but interaction with other players, interactions created through meaningful tools inside the game.


I hope the devs read this,

From a loving fan of the genre to another,

Thank you!
«1

Comments

  • AardvarkAardvark Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited July 2020
    Negative it is for fun first and to interact 2nd as if you just want to interact that is what real friends are for.
    And even if you hate wow it’s one of the most successful games in history.
  • vhbeninvhbenin Member
    edited July 2020
    Aardvark wrote: »
    Negative it is for fun first and to interact 2nd as if you just want to interact that is what real friends are for.
    And even if you hate wow it’s one of the most successful games in history.

    yet it is dying, never reaching its peak player base since the introduction of the dungeon finder in wrath of the lich king, 40 mans raids dont exist anymore and when you play no one has any incentive to TALK to you. IN AN MMO.
  • AardvarkAardvark Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    vhbenin wrote: »
    Aardvark wrote: »
    Negative it is for fun first and to interact 2nd as if you just want to interact that is what real friends are for.
    And even if you hate wow it’s one of the most successful games in history.

    yet it is dying, never reaching its peak player base since the introduction of the dungeon finder in wrath of the lich king, 40 mans raids dont exist anymore and when you play no one has any incentive to TALK to you. IN AN MMO.

    Yet still one of the most successful and profitable games in history
  • vhbeninvhbenin Member
    edited July 2020
    Aardvark wrote: »
    vhbenin wrote: »
    Aardvark wrote: »
    Negative it is for fun first and to interact 2nd as if you just want to interact that is what real friends are for.
    And even if you hate wow it’s one of the most successful games in history.

    yet it is dying, never reaching its peak player base since the introduction of the dungeon finder in wrath of the lich king, 40 mans raids dont exist anymore and when you play no one has any incentive to TALK to you. IN AN MMO.

    Yet still one of the most successful and profitable games in history



    i get where u are coming from but the point i'm trying to make is that there's is a reason beyond nostalgia that people went back and played classic wow.


  • BobbyBickBobbyBick Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Experienced this recently playing ESO. All of the solo/storyline stuff is completely braindead easy then queuing up for group dungeons has just been everyone plowing ahead and spamming abilities and winning. Every 3rd or 4th dungeon someone MIGHT say "gg ty for run" at the very end but that's it.

    I think in a 1hr session in a group in EQ1 I'll get more social interaction than a month in most modern MMOs, at least as far as pugging is concerned.
  • Thank you for your response! I hope the devs give their opinion on this kind of systems...
  • YuyukoyayYuyukoyay Member
    edited August 2020
    I think it matters a lot more that the game is fun than anything else in the game. WoW ruled the MMO market for so long solely because it had the best combat for a long time. No other game felt as fun in combat as it for at least like 10 years.

    So I would say the opposite is true. Game first and Social Experience second. If they did put Social Experience first it'd turn into Hello Kitty Adventure. Also in practice PL has more social interaction in the system. When ML did exist in WoW the game was teetering between dead or completely socially barren. Ever since it's been gone people actually interact a lot more than they used to.

    Not positively but that has more to do with all of the players people actually want to play with moving to FF14.
    zZJyoEK.gif

    U.S. East
  • Yuyukoyay wrote: »
    I think it matters a lot more that the game is fun than anything else in the game. WoW ruled the MMO market for so long solely because it had the best combat for a long time.


    And their extremely well designed raids. That along with their combat fluidity, is why it is the most popular MMO to date. FF14's combat is not even close to as good as WoW's, even if its PvE content is equally challenging.
  • MalcMalc Member
    There needs to be a fine balance between the two; there won't be an elongated social experience if the game draws away a large number of players by being unfun to play. But I agree that there needs to be a much higher focus on the social element which has felt lost over the last few MMO releases.
    kNfIFH6.gif
  • Malc wrote: »
    There needs to be a fine balance between the two; there won't be an elongated social experience if the game draws away a large number of players by being unfun to play. But I agree that there needs to be a much higher focus on the social element which has felt lost over the last few MMO releases.

    Agreed. I already see IS attempt to improve the social side with no over-abundant flying mounts, no fast travel, no DPS meters, and the intrinsic interdependance as far as professions go. They got to be strong in their goals because people will generally try to distort Steven's vision; they need to let substantial changes for a bit later (in the first year range), if they're ever necessary.
    "Magic is not a tool, little one. It is a river that unites us in its current."

    I heard a bird ♫
  • Aardvark wrote: »
    vhbenin wrote: »
    Aardvark wrote: »
    Negative it is for fun first and to interact 2nd as if you just want to interact that is what real friends are for.
    And even if you hate wow it’s one of the most successful games in history.

    yet it is dying, never reaching its peak player base since the introduction of the dungeon finder in wrath of the lich king, 40 mans raids dont exist anymore and when you play no one has any incentive to TALK to you. IN AN MMO.

    Yet still one of the most successful and profitable games in history

    Profitable != Fun. I get your point but it's not OP's point.
    OP it literally saying to keep the game pure as an MMO. Which WoW did not do and even had to go back by making WoW Classic, in hopes they can revitalise the MMO experience they once had.

    I agree with you OP. But we do need a balance. Sometimes trying so hard to solve one problem creates an intended bigger problem ^^.
  • ShoelidShoelid Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    On the WoW topic: Sure it's the most successful MMO in history, but when I think of what I was doing as a casual retail player, almost none of it was social. I log in and run around doing my dailies, none of which are challenging enough to warrant a group. For the grindier ones maybe I'll open group finder and finish faster with a few randos, send a "ty for group" and leave. Any strategy for the dungeon is handled by addons, reducing any interaction in your group to "Everybody have X addon?"

    When classic WoW launched last year it had me grouping with randos for almost a day at a time for tons of random stuff. I remember grouping with 4 other people to finish a quest for a trinket. You have to kill four different elite mobs 20 times in a densely packed area, making teamwork a necessity.

    When we first started, we were all optimistic and friendly with each other. When we were almost done hours later, we were so exhausted that we were all at each other's throats for every mistake. But we all got our trinket and parted ways with a "Thanks for the help, hope I never see you again".
    I had this experience several times, which just made finding the perfect group all that more magical; When you start running dungeons with a bunch of strangers, but six hours later they're your friends and you're planning more runs for tomorrow.

    TLDR:I remember retail WoW as a game, but classic WoW as a social experience. I've also made more memories with Classic, despite playing it less.
  • Aardvark wrote: »
    vhbenin wrote: »
    Aardvark wrote: »
    Negative it is for fun first and to interact 2nd as if you just want to interact that is what real friends are for.
    And even if you hate wow it’s one of the most successful games in history.

    yet it is dying, never reaching its peak player base since the introduction of the dungeon finder in wrath of the lich king, 40 mans raids dont exist anymore and when you play no one has any incentive to TALK to you. IN AN MMO.

    Yet still one of the most successful and profitable games in history

    Profitable != Fun. I get your point but it's not OP's point.
    OP it literally saying to keep the game pure as an MMO. Which WoW did not do and even had to go back by making WoW Classic, in hopes they can revitalise the MMO experience they once had.

    I agree with you OP. But we do need a balance. Sometimes trying so hard to solve one problem creates an intended bigger problem ^^.

    i agree with you, balance is needed! I made my point valid, these kind of tools enhance the social aspect of an mmo.

    Shoelid wrote: »
    On the WoW topic: Sure it's the most successful MMO in history, but when I think of what I was doing as a casual retail player, almost none of it was social. I log in and run around doing my dailies, none of which are challenging enough to warrant a group. For the grindier ones maybe I'll open group finder and finish faster with a few randos, send a "ty for group" and leave. Any strategy for the dungeon is handled by addons, reducing any interaction in your group to "Everybody have X addon?"

    When classic WoW launched last year it had me grouping with randos for almost a day at a time for tons of random stuff. I remember grouping with 4 other people to finish a quest for a trinket. You have to kill four different elite mobs 20 times in a densely packed area, making teamwork a necessity.

    When we first started, we were all optimistic and friendly with each other. When we were almost done hours later, we were so exhausted that we were all at each other's throats for every mistake. But we all got our trinket and parted ways with a "Thanks for the help, hope I never see you again".
    I had this experience several times, which just made finding the perfect group all that more magical; When you start running dungeons with a bunch of strangers, but six hours later they're your friends and you're planning more runs for tomorrow.

    TLDR:I remember retail WoW as a game, but classic WoW as a social experience. I've also made more memories with Classic, despite playing it less.

    and that is the reason why i raised this topic for discussion. This story right here is an example of why these things are important in an mmo.
  • nidriksnidriks Member, Warrior of Old, Kickstarter
    From the moment I first heard of Ashes I saw in it a return to the social MMOs, such as Everquest.

    I still believe that will be true. I echo the Op.
  • nidriksnidriks Member, Warrior of Old, Kickstarter
    Malc wrote: »
    There needs to be a fine balance between the two; there won't be an elongated social experience if the game draws away a large number of players by being unfun to play. But I agree that there needs to be a much higher focus on the social element which has felt lost over the last few MMO releases.

    Personally I'd rather a social experience and less population than anything like the MMOs of the last 10 years with a huge population.

    I had a better social experience, creating more good memories, in one session of EQ than I had in 3 months of ESO, GW2 or Wildstar, two name three recent games.
  • Malc wrote: »
    There needs to be a fine balance between the two; .... But I agree that there needs to be a much higher focus on the social element which has felt lost over the last few MMO releases.

    Yeah, we need to reclaim some of that ground we've lost the last decade, though the gameplay should not become secular, just to reclaiming that space.
    UncomfortableDangerousBarracuda-size_restricted.gif
  • nidriks wrote: »
    Malc wrote: »
    There needs to be a fine balance between the two; there won't be an elongated social experience if the game draws away a large number of players by being unfun to play. But I agree that there needs to be a much higher focus on the social element which has felt lost over the last few MMO releases.

    Personally I'd rather a social experience and less population than anything like the MMOs of the last 10 years with a huge population.

    I had a better social experience, creating more good memories, in one session of EQ than I had in 3 months of ESO, GW2 or Wildstar, two name three recent games.

    I agree completely, my first MMO was Ultima Online and that game was crazy social. The bank became a big meeting place for all sorts of activities and trade and if someone PKd you you could run into town ask for help and bounty hunters would swarm out to chase down the murderer. EVE online is another example with a small but incredibly stable player base that requires you to interact with others to really get anywhere.

    I hate to always point to WoW as an example but the early days of that game were also incredibly social, you'd get to know the names of decent and trustworthy players and if you were an ass or a ninja looter word would soon spread about it. People were frustrated when they couldn't find groups and the various LFG tools were added, which enabled easy grouping but destroyed most of that the awesome social side of the game. I've often said to my friends LFG tool took away way more than it added.

    I want a reason to talk to people outside my guild again.
  • @nidriks I envy you, my friend, I experimented all the games you mentioned plus Priston Tale and Allods Online. These lesser known games held incomparable memories to me. So, I wholeheartedly agree, I'd rather have a lower population with great memories than a huge playerbase full of toxicity. Games should be fun, they should offer an unreal life where we can share fun moments together and maybe create long lasting friendships.
    "Magic is not a tool, little one. It is a river that unites us in its current."

    I heard a bird ♫
  • YuyukoyayYuyukoyay Member
    edited August 2020
    I would say the problem had to do with how they implemented LFG than it being just flat out bad. Like they could have made it more complicated so you could form the exact comp of party you wanted. Then you would have to chat and make people aware of what you want to do so they won't quit. In the Early days of WoW there was no real meta for party comps. People just kind of figured that you needed 1 tank and at least 1 healer. A lot of Vanilla parties actually had a healer and a off healer. It didn't have to be just a menu that teleported you to the Dungeon either. I think they should have made you run to the dungeon at least.

    That said implementing a crappy version of a system has a lot more extreme repercussions than just not implementing the system at all. The argument people use against bad LFG is the same argument I use against Master Looter. When the downsides get so big it ruins the game then the system is just not good.

    I think they should implement a pug system for all modes of play though. I think that if you don't want to join a guild then you shouldn't have to. They should make some kind of lobby only joinable by people who aren't in a guild to facilitate this. This would probably bind the community together socially a lot more than other games do because it would be more inviting to the solo centric players. It also wouldn't alienate them so that it will be easier to join a guild in the event they change their mind.

    They really need to pay attention to the UI of their chat. I like to watch like 3 to 5 of them at once and would like that not to take up half the screen.
    zZJyoEK.gif

    U.S. East
  • OrcLuckOrcLuck Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    hard pass

    its a social game, not a social hangout. None of the social hubs for playstation ever really stayed relevant
  • we facebook now boys!
  • I do like the Playstation achievements though. They are fun to collect. Do they count as social? xD
    zZJyoEK.gif

    U.S. East
  • nidriks wrote: »
    From the moment I first heard of Ashes I saw in it a return to the social MMOs, such as Everquest.

    I still believe that will be true. I echo the Op.

    i had the same feelings.

    What i see, as of now, is that the team behind aoc wants to bring the good things from oldschools mmo back with a modernized combat system.

    And the fact that they are listening to the community keeps me hopeful...

    it can't get better than this honestly.

  • ElistriellElistriell Member
    edited August 2020
    I echo the OP as well. Let's be honest: Lord of the Rings Online has not aged spectacularly, it costs a lot of money, and back-end issues in recent years have been annoying as hell. But people still play--and they play like their lives depend on it--because of the community. Almost every day in World chat or on Reddit there are posts from new players that are shocked by how kind and patiently they've been treated as they blundered through mistakes, expecting the toxic environment they came from in other games. Veteran players echo that the mature community is what keeps them there. The game wouldn't still be afloat if not for that.

    That game is my wheelhouse, so that's where I pull my experience from, but my point (I hope) still stands. Community can make or break a game. There's no reason why, even in a game with a considerable PvP focus, we can't give each other the benefit of the doubt and seek to educate rather than insult. To forgive rather than hold a grudge. To pay it forward. Call me a "carebear" or whatever the term is these days. I just mean that positive experiences bring people back again and again. This can *be* a game that people will one day look back on with nostalgia if we, as a community, focus on friendship more than stats.
  • nidriksnidriks Member, Warrior of Old, Kickstarter
    Elistriell wrote: »
    I echo the OP as well. Let's be honest: Lord of the Rings Online has not aged spectacularly, it costs a lot of money, and back-end issues in recent years have been annoying as hell. But people still play--and they play like their lives depend on it--because of the community. Almost every day in World chat or on Reddit there are posts from new players that are shocked by how kind and patiently they've been treated as they blundered through mistakes, expecting the toxic environment they came from in other games. Veteran players echo that the mature community is what keeps them there. The game wouldn't still be afloat if not for that.

    Sadly, I joined LotRO too late and it was more a solo experience by then. But what I do recall is that it was indeed very friendly.

    Beautiful game at the time, too.
  • I agree with the sentiment here, though I'm not sure what the recipe is. Community creates memories. Content aimed at the entire audience creates community. Content created for the elite creates negativity toward new players though it is necessary as well
  • People are going to find their fun in something in the game. The social aspect is how they stay. That said there are examples of meaningful social systems and plain annoyances.
    zZJyoEK.gif

    U.S. East
  • nidriksnidriks Member, Warrior of Old, Kickstarter
    I do worry that the game will change to suit the influx. Since the influx of people and the hype associated with Peon's video and Asmongold's interview I have started to follow Ashes much more closely again.

    I do worry that there is a much more vocalised section of the community now that don't want so strong a sense of community, or at least don't care about it as much. At least not to the level that was so prevalent in games like EQ and SWG.

    I started listening to the Pathfinder podcast at work and was really shocked by the latest episode. They were talking about buying a bow and the worry that they would end up taking hours to buy a bow they wanted.

    Call me mad, but that doesn't scare me, even if I don't think it will happen. I remember SWG well, and even though the game didn't have an auction house I found buying stuff to be enjoyable, even when I had to travel from city to city trying to find a merchant I needed (it happened - I remember the day).

    SWG didn't have an auction house, but it did have terminals that allowed you to find people who sold the things you wanted.

    EQ2 was similar, but simplified up a little. In that game you could search for what you wanted on a database but then went to the seller's house to purchase it. I loved that because I could wander people's houses and see what they had done with them.

    I'm hoping for Ashes to be a mix of both. I see city message boards taking the place of the SWG terminals, allowing artisans to advertise their services. I then hope we get to travel to an artisan's business to buy what we want, so inputting the EQ2 bit.

    I personally have no objection to some sort of marketplace that allows players to search for items, but I don't think it should be as simple as collecting what you buy through the mail. Make travelling the world mean something, or making it as real as possible is wasted.

    I am actually hoping the nature of the nodes results in a world where people know crafters and will go to certain people to get what they need. Make reputation mean something and have crafters need to do good business to earn that reputation.

    It still worried me to hear the lead guy on a podcast team so worried about a system that I believe will make the game a more engrossing. Is that the attitude that will become prevalent with the numbers influx? Will the nature of this game, as I saw it from day one, slowly be eroded, or will Intrepid stick to their guns?

    The Pathfinder guys are still very passionate about this game, and I enjoy their podcast, so hopefully this was a small thing. They were right about one thing being bad. Some guy that wanted toilet mechanics. That may just be too far.
  • Social is pretty important to me. One thing I haven't seen any indication of, is if there will be chat channels in world.. Like a map chat? A node chat? Local chat? Anything besides the most likely guild chat and whisper/IM? I'm sort of a peanut gallery person, and shy away from large guilds. Map chat type communication has always been an entertaining thing for me, and I never feel alone.
  • nidriksnidriks Member, Warrior of Old, Kickstarter
    Daiska wrote: »
    Social is pretty important to me. One thing I haven't seen any indication of, is if there will be chat channels in world.. Like a map chat? A node chat? Local chat? Anything besides the most likely guild chat and whisper/IM? I'm sort of a peanut gallery person, and shy away from large guilds. Map chat type communication has always been an entertaining thing for me, and I never feel alone.

    I can't imagine why there wouldn't be those sorts of channels for nodes. Whether there will be a universal world channel is a different matter.

    The fact that Steven has said he doesn't want universal auction houses or fast travel, in an effort to make the world larger, makes me think we won't see world chat.

    World chat just makes it easier for people to know what is going on anywhere and cuts the need to socialise in settlements.

    Don't quote me though.
Sign In or Register to comment.