When EQ was released in 1999, I was 28 years old. I had been out of school and working full time for a decade. I had a wife, a son, and a house. With all these responsibilities, my play time was limited. Most of my spare time to play was on the weekends. I enjoyed playing EQ for many years but was never in the hunt for server firsts or even ahead of the curve. Over the years, I've belonged to some guilds where most of the members were around my age and they also played EQ in its earlier days, so I know I'm not unique. I did occasionally feel some jealousy watching those that had so much more play time get to experience things long before me, but most of the time I was having too much fun to think about it.
Over the last few years of popping in and out of these forums, I've continued to see posts of people saying they aren't kids anymore, so they don't have all that spare time to play. It's an argument that I struggle to understand as many of us played EQ back in the day without being a child with tons of free time. The only thing I can think of is that back then they were pushing for server firsts or at the very least ahead of the crowd and on the cutting edge. Are they concerned that now they’ll be lagging behind and don’t find that acceptable, or do they actually think that a game like EQ can’t be played with more limited time? Modern MMOs tend to have fast leveling so even if you have less time, you will be max level and raiding not far behind the people with tons of free time. How will that generation handle playing behind the new youth? Will they be able to accept playing far behind the top players because they don't have as much play time now? I’m really interested to hear from that generation to see if they’ve given any thought to how they’d feel about players experiencing things perhaps a month or 2 before them.
I think its more about how early EQ was.
Leveling in early EQ was like the tutorial. The game didnt really start until you were max level and raiding everyday with a guild (from Kunark and beyond at least). That is where raiding as it is known in the genre today started. That is what a ton of the content in those early expansions was dedicated to.
People who didnt experience that often don't realize what a large chunk of the game they missed. The way EQ was implemented, unless you comitted a ton of time to it you barely scratched the surface of the game. It wasnt even about being the best or the top players. It was just what was required to experience everything it had to offer.
The difference is, I don't expect Pantheon to require anywhere close to as much time. VR is very conscious of this. They want the player to feel like they can accomplish something in only a 2 hour play session. We will see how that ends up playing out.
The amount of play time a player can commit to Pantheon won't be an issue like it was in EQ. That has been addressed repeatedly.
I'm not sure it is a generational thing? I'm 4 years younger than you. I was in my early 20s when EQ released. I dedicated a lot of play time to it back then and, if pantheon releases, I expect to dedicate a lot of play time to it now.
I'm sure there will be a variety of play times from a variety of age groups. We do know that play time wont be nearly the factor that it was back then when you needed a ton of time just to experience all of the content.
I was 15 when I started playing Eq kunark, and between the school, homework, early sleep and shared computer there is litteraly no way I would have less time to play than back then.
There are probably people more involved now than when they were in their youth, but that's a minimal portion of players. There is no "overall rule" that made adults work more in 2020 than 21 years ago, if anything we have more comfort and easeness than in 1999/2000 and I'm pretty sure everyone can schedule their time better.
Let's be honest, thoses who had time to poospsock/batphone back then, were either jobless, failing their studies or something in that tennet.
I don't think I'm unique at all in that I have been a gamer since the early 80s and it has always been something I have found time for because I love it. I was 'into computers' when most people didn't even know what they were.
I also loved pen and paper RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons, so when MMORPGs came about on home computers it was a dream come true.
As for EQ, even though I played the end-game in big guilds with raids lasting many hours and even spanning days, the most fun to be had, for me, was in group play with RL friends and in pick-up groups, just like my days with pen and paper RPGs with RL friends and in clubs with like-minded, but previously unknown, people.
I have never felt the 'best' experience was the 'end-game' (in computer MMORPGs or in pen-and-paper RPGs) and will even say some of the worst experiences and things that put me off EQ and similar games is the 'hardcore' 'end-game'. The 'casual' low- and mid-level game is much more fun, interesting and more pleasant to me.
To relate this to the OP: I think the kind of people that are always pushing for server firsts and raiding dominance as the ones that are missing the best of these games. They may well not be able to dedicate as much time as *they feel* is necessary to do what they used to do.
My advice to them is to not do that, then. Take it easy. Kick back. Enjoy everything the game has to offer and don't treat it like some kind of race or competition.
Having said that, whilst I appreciate VR's efforts to make sure everyont can feel they can make 'meaningful progress' in 2/3 hours sessions, I would not be against there being content that requires - or at least rewards - greater 'endurance' and 'commitment'. It was never something you *had* to do in EQ. If you wanted your epic, you might need to do a dozen multi-hour camps, but it's not like you needed to do that all in one week - it took me a couple of years to get epics on a couple of characters - so what?
If VR manage to make Pantheon greatly challenging *and* split up into 'short' sessions (relative to some old-school games) then great, but I wouldn't want them to degrade the level of challenge and variety of types of challenge just to enable those that feel they *must* achieve the 'pinnacle' of Pantheon to do so in limited session times.
I know I'm giving a mixed message there, but I hope it makes sense. Whilst I am what I consider a 'casual' gamer, I don't think VR should design the game for 'casual' gamers. Nor do I think they should design it for hardcore gamers. It's already niche enough without designing for, and biasing toward, a sub-niche that may well turn off the rest and anyway, like EQ, I believe they can please both. I had a great time in EQ grouping with friends and in PUGs. I found the end-game 'scene' somewhat tedious and frustating.
I get that some found it the other way around. I have confidence that VR can remove frustrations in both areas for both groups and still give a challenging, old-school experience.
I am pretty much in the same position as disposalist and more or less of the same view.
I remember when DAOC introduced its infamous Trials of Atlantis expansion - so bad that they had to release DAOC classic servers long before other games took similar approaches. The core of the expansion was long raids that had to be done in one session with limited ability to go afk even for fairly short periods. Most players absolutely hated them. Even with a spouse that also was a gamer and no children it wasn't easy for me to do many of them - this four letter word called work got in the way too often and too unpredictably.
More than most of us I am a strong believer in not having much content that *requires* more than a few hours of uninterrupted time, and just as strongly a believer in having soloable content that can be done when even an hour or two with no interruptions isn't a possibility. Not separate but equal as in a full solo quest series but some groupings of mobs and some quests that a solo player at any level can get some value from. Not nearly the value as from grouping. so it won't incent people to just play on their own when they *do* have time to group.
I was middle aged when EQ came out. I loved EQ. I played EQ steady for 10 years, but never more than 2-3 hours at a time. As such I probably only saw 75% of the game in my second tier family type guild. It was enough, I had so much fun. I never had the time many had to play the game. Family and work came first. Now I'm retired and the world of Terminus is my oyster. The 2-3 hour slot will still be my norm and I'm still a casual player. I'm not real interested in solo adventuring, but I do like trade skills when I'm not feeling sociable.
disposalist said:To relate this to the OP: I think the kind of people that are always pushing for server firsts and raiding dominance as the ones that are missing the best of these games. They may well not be able to dedicate as much time as *they feel* is necessary to do what they used to do.
My advice to them is to not do that, then. Take it easy. Kick back. Enjoy everything the game has to offer and don't treat it like some kind of race or competition.
--------
I know I'm giving a mixed message there, but I hope it makes sense. Whilst I am what I consider a 'casual' gamer, I don't think VR should design the game for 'casual' gamers. Nor do I think they should design it for hardcore gamers. It's already niche enough without designing for, and biasing toward, a sub-niche that may well turn off the rest and anyway, like EQ, I believe they can please both. I had a great time in EQ grouping with friends and in PUGs. I found the end-game 'scene' somewhat tedious and frustating.
I get that some found it the other way around. I have confidence that VR can remove frustrations in both areas for both groups and still give a challenging, old-school experience.
Like we used to say on the SOE forums back in the day - QFT.
Games of the last 15 years have emphasized achievement and progression at the expense of socialization and immersion. As flawed as it was, the EverQuest of 1999 really did attempt to present Norrath as a fully fledged virtual world with many different places to go and adventures to have - at all levels. However, once we players came into contact with that, we twisted that vision. Over time, we made the game all about getting to the end. We focused on the raiding, on the epics, and on the race to be first or best and we stopped asking for fun and engaging experiences along the way. Everything before 50 was just a grind. Then 60. Then 70. SOE's devs obliged us, because they wanted to keep us playing (and paying). Each successive expansion became more and more about the raiding "endgame". Each new competitor that launched followed the same trend over time. Is it any wonder that the last generation of MMOs has been designed to speed up progression and streamline the player to the raiding game at the end? After all, that's what all of us said we wanted, right?
Even today, when at least some of us have realized that too much of a good thing turns into a bad thing, I still see people in this community who haven't really changed their outlook. We all talk about challenge, and having a big world, and meaningful content and choices. But then the subject eventually turns into raiding, and how many raids there will be at max level, and how contested they will be, and how good the loot will be compared to other things. We skip right over the journey and go straight to the destination because at least for many of us, it seems to be the only thing that actually matters. Or at least, the only portion of the game we're not taking for granted.
In 1999, I was 23 years old. I was a full-time student and had a part-time job. I wasn't the best student, but I typically only got in 2-3 hours of gaming time on a weeknight, and maybe 6 or so each day on weekends.
Today, I'm 44. I have a full-time job, and I'm putting in 10-20 hours a week towards an MBA. As a single homeowner I have plenty of other real-world responsibilities as well. And yet - I typically get 2-3 hours of gaming time in on a weeknight, and maybe 6 or so each day on the weekends.
What has changed for me though is that I now care FAR more about the journey in these games than I do about racing to the end. I am, quite honestly, tired of MMORPGs that are all about completing things as fast as possible and joining the rat race at endgame. I, personally, would be much happier if Terminus is a place where people are so busy just exploring and experiencing things that the word "endgame" doesn't make any sense anymore. I feel like that, more than anything, would take us back to the social, cooperative experience that we all have missed. This isn't an age thing for me and it's not that I've "grown up" or anything - it's simply that I've had over 20 years of playing these games to realize that back in the early 2000s, most of us had the wrong outlook, and that's what led us to the steaming piles of garbage that we call MMORPGs today.
Sadly, I think I'm in the minority on that realization. Most people seem to want to blame "the kids" rather than take responsibility for what they created through their own actions and influence on developers.
/rant off.
I didn't disagree much with Brad on his philosophy for Pantheon, but you are right about this and this is something where I strayed from Brad. He would say that people who played EQ are grown up now and don't have time to play like they used to.
Sure, EQ was 20 years ago, but who's to say that only people that played EQ at 15 are going to play Pantheon? Are there not 15 year old’s today that would like we did with EQ?
What if people who played EQ were 45 then and 65 now? Maybe they have MORE free time to play than 20 years ago.
Maybe they had kids 10 years ago and their children are old enough now to not want to hang out at home and the parents have more time?
There are many factors that go into how much playtime you have or want to have.
As a casual EQ player for just over a decade, I can attest to the fact that not everybody was an end game raider. I played with people that I considered rl friends. One of my friends called EQ a chat room with pretty pictures. I played that way. We did raid, but D and I were talking rl during heal chains. I loved grouping with people. I regularly grouped with a woman from Germany and sometimes a guy that lived in Alexandria Egypt. I was amazed at the breadth of EQ. Fun times. I'm hoping for more times like that with Pantheon.
Nephele said:disposalist said:To relate this to the OP: I think the kind of people that are always pushing for server firsts and raiding dominance as the ones that are missing the best of these games. They may well not be able to dedicate as much time as *they feel* is necessary to do what they used to do.
My advice to them is to not do that, then. Take it easy. Kick back. Enjoy everything the game has to offer and don't treat it like some kind of race or competition.
--------
I know I'm giving a mixed message there, but I hope it makes sense. Whilst I am what I consider a 'casual' gamer, I don't think VR should design the game for 'casual' gamers. Nor do I think they should design it for hardcore gamers. It's already niche enough without designing for, and biasing toward, a sub-niche that may well turn off the rest and anyway, like EQ, I believe they can please both. I had a great time in EQ grouping with friends and in PUGs. I found the end-game 'scene' somewhat tedious and frustating.
I get that some found it the other way around. I have confidence that VR can remove frustrations in both areas for both groups and still give a challenging, old-school experience.
Like we used to say on the SOE forums back in the day - QFT.
Games of the last 15 years have emphasized achievement and progression at the expense of socialization and immersion. As flawed as it was, the EverQuest of 1999 really did attempt to present Norrath as a fully fledged virtual world with many different places to go and adventures to have - at all levels. However, once we players came into contact with that, we twisted that vision. Over time, we made the game all about getting to the end. We focused on the raiding, on the epics, and on the race to be first or best and we stopped asking for fun and engaging experiences along the way. Everything before 50 was just a grind. Then 60. Then 70. SOE's devs obliged us, because they wanted to keep us playing (and paying). Each successive expansion became more and more about the raiding "endgame". Each new competitor that launched followed the same trend over time. Is it any wonder that the last generation of MMOs has been designed to speed up progression and streamline the player to the raiding game at the end? After all, that's what all of us said we wanted, right?
Even today, when at least some of us have realized that too much of a good thing turns into a bad thing, I still see people in this community who haven't really changed their outlook. We all talk about challenge, and having a big world, and meaningful content and choices. But then the subject eventually turns into raiding, and how many raids there will be at max level, and how contested they will be, and how good the loot will be compared to other things. We skip right over the journey and go straight to the destination because at least for many of us, it seems to be the only thing that actually matters. Or at least, the only portion of the game we're not taking for granted.
In 1999, I was 23 years old. I was a full-time student and had a part-time job. I wasn't the best student, but I typically only got in 2-3 hours of gaming time on a weeknight, and maybe 6 or so each day on weekends.
Today, I'm 44. I have a full-time job, and I'm putting in 10-20 hours a week towards an MBA. As a single homeowner I have plenty of other real-world responsibilities as well. And yet - I typically get 2-3 hours of gaming time in on a weeknight, and maybe 6 or so each day on the weekends.
What has changed for me though is that I now care FAR more about the journey in these games than I do about racing to the end. I am, quite honestly, tired of MMORPGs that are all about completing things as fast as possible and joining the rat race at endgame. I, personally, would be much happier if Terminus is a place where people are so busy just exploring and experiencing things that the word "endgame" doesn't make any sense anymore. I feel like that, more than anything, would take us back to the social, cooperative experience that we all have missed. This isn't an age thing for me and it's not that I've "grown up" or anything - it's simply that I've had over 20 years of playing these games to realize that back in the early 2000s, most of us had the wrong outlook, and that's what led us to the steaming piles of garbage that we call MMORPGs today.
Sadly, I think I'm in the minority on that realization. Most people seem to want to blame "the kids" rather than take responsibility for what they created through their own actions and influence on developers.
/rant off.
I do agree, Neph, that 'the kids' and 'modern' gaming gets the blame when the change in emphasis has, in large part, I believe, been down to the 'extreme' players that have convinced developers that they are the ones that need to be pleased for a game to be successful. Ignoring completely, of course, the majority of players having a casual good time and ignoring that that majority of players *do* get to enjoy the high-end game, but not with the same competitive, voratious pace that the extreme players do.
'Casual' players get blamed for introduction of 'convenience' features, when those same features are what 'extreme' players have asked for in order to get to max level quicker and to make perceived inconveniences like crafting and character interdependence more 'streamlined'.
I really don't mean it to be any kind of 'attack' - I really want there to be raiding and long camps, but I want them to not be *the focus* that some do and I want them to not be pushed to even further extremes just because a minority of extreme gamers consume them so quickly or find them too easy.
It happens in other genres too. In the Battlefield franchise, it is the eSport pro-wannabes that make most noise about what the game 'should be like' and, so, it has become something that most players find frustrating and dull. When they actually started making a separate version of the game that was designed specifically for competitive play, guess what? It didn't get many players interested, but they still are persuaded to tailor the normal game with competitive aspects and emphasis.
Again, I don't mean this as an 'attack' - I think the 'competitive' scene around FPS games is great and I wouldn't want it removed - it is simply an utterly different experience than the vast majority of players actually want, so to have impact the main game is a bad idea.
Part of the problem comes from this 'pro' gameplay being considered 'better' or more 'skilled'. Players are persuaded they should aspire to it and that anything else is 'lesser'. I say the definition of 'skill' becomes very narrow in competitive play. There is always a successful 'metagame' that is a much reduced and diminished version of the main experience and, with that narrowed focus and metagame, I would say no matter the apparent skill or challenge, the experience is lesser - the fun diminished.
TL;DR: I'm waffling now - hopefully you get the point. If VR aim to satisfy the extreme minmaxer, uber-guild, competitive players then they risk leaving the vast majority of players dissatisfied. If they put too much emphasis on end game and make it really difficult so extreme players find it a challenge, they will push away more casual players that would have got there eventually and would have enjoyed it at a normal pace, but, because it's been set at 'extreme' will just find it frustrating or unatainable.
It would be great if they can find a way to satisfy both and I hope they can, but I also hope that, if that isn't possible, they don't target the niche within a niche when this whole game is already a niche.
If that all sounds dramatic, I'm just discussing here, because that's what we do. I'm actually pretty confident that VR are very aware of this. Like most issues - they appear to have thought things through and be very considerate of their audience - but it's worth expressing our concerns and dicussing them isn't it? ;)
Finally, again, to relate it back to the OP: Brad had it right, though perhaps in making certain succinct statements over-simplified the message. It's not just about making the game accessible to those with reduced contiguous time availability - though that is possibly the most pivotal consideration for many - it's about making less of the game only accessible to those extreme playstyles that EQ did more and more as time went by (and as other games did from the get-go). It's about recognising that content can be challenging and fun without having elitist requirements to even attempt them. I'm confident Brad got it and that Joppa gets it too.
This post has been highlighted as part of my CM content! Please continue following the guidelines and enjoy the discussion :)
"Hot Topic - Children of EQ are the old guys of Pantheon - Have your say in this official forum thread https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/12253/children-of-eq-are-the-old-guys-of-pantheon #MMORPG #CommunityMatters"
I was into my 30s when EQ came out and loved it and I always found time to play (mostly). Now that I am of an age where I am considering whether retirement is a valid option or not, I plan to play Panthoen often (although I doubt I will have the stamina to survive hours and hour of play I used to do in EQ, and also doubt my backside could cope with that either!).
I wont be judging how I am doing against others progression or worry about firsts and discoveries, this is not what I am playing for. I will be exploring as much as I can and taking my time over this one. Finding new places and appreciating the beauty and level of detail put into the game. Everything I have read thus far is leading me to believe (and hope) that fast progression is not a pre-requisite of fun or content. I trust that their vision saying that the game doesnt start at max level is kept firmly in their sites and that every level will be where the fun is. I have had it with fast progression just to have the end game content. It really seems pointless to me. I want the entire journey to matter, not just max level.
I hope and feel that people will be able to enjoy the game, no matter how limited their time is and not just base it on whether they levelled or not.
I'm a couple years older than the OP.
My best friend got me into EQ. I was mostly playing Diablo and other co-op online games with my then 12 year old son. My friend said "There's this game, it's like D&D in 3D".
So I logged on and played, eventually got my son to play, told him not to reveal his age. Funny because years later I had guild members ask how old I have a son in his 20's when I'm only in my 30's, they were quite surprised to hear how young he was, bevause he didn't act like a kid in game.
Anyway, my buddy was all into the next best sword, armor the raids etc, so we eventually went seperate ways in game. I tended to stick to 6 man groups, just enjoying the time with people chatting, playing, trying things slightly beyond our groups ability.
I also tended to get my characters into their 40's and low 50's then start playing ALTs more. It seemed to me that the high level I got the more "work" the game bacame and the less fun I had, so I'd start over and repeat.
I mean I'm 27 and I don't think I'm an old guy just yet. I do believe though, that no matter what age you are you make time for the things that you enjoy.
I do understand that not everyone can or wants to dedicate 6+ hours a day to play a game to remain cutting edge, however, I don't think that a game needs to experienced this way or that for most cases it should. I think that a lot of the time this desire to be cutting edge leads to a great deal of burnout within the community and can lead to a player resenting the game they are playing vs enjoying it. I think that the whole concept of rushing to max level needs to be addressed in today's modern games, and the desire which some companies have to turn their games into E-sports needs to be done away with. MMORPGs were meant to be experienced and played with others not rushed through, and they most certainly weren't meant to be turned into E-sport competitions at a high level of gameplay.
Getting back on topic though I don't think that it is an unfair request for players to want shorter play sessions and to feel fulfilled by coming out of it feeling like they have experienced something fun and meaningful. I think that all games should be designed in an immersive and captivating way that in two hours time it really feels like you have done something meaningful be that completing a quest chain, exploring a dungeon (or part of a dungeon) and encountering a boss(es), or be that some secondary or alternate character progression. However, when it comes to making this a reality a game shouldn't trade in its difficulty level or challenge level to accommodate this goal.
I'll likely IRL hit level 50 by the time the game is out, I have never been a worlds first kind of player. Sure, it was cool to see people do it, good for them. I just like to enjoy the game as it goes.
I remember just wandering the world of EQ, so many fond memories from that game that no other has really provided. Memorable and distinct memories. Likely this is due to it being the first MMO I truly got into and enjoyed thouroughly. There was UO before it but that was never really something I felt truly immersed in.
I keep hoping for the next great MMO love of my life, and maybe it will be Patheon, but not in the same way EQ was. Pantheon will be great for it's own reasons, but after the many years and many MMOs/games I have realized that the "first time" doesn't really happen again.
The open-world / contested-resource dynamic is essential if we want the "Journey" to matter. No game has harnessed this realization quite like FFXI did; players were viewed as a precious resource rather than a commodity and were rightfully embraced as part of the environment. True social constructs emerged that saw players governing the spirit of the game and when I reflect on what that ultimately ended up looking like ... it was the pinnacle of cooperation and community. Competition for resources goes hand in hand with stickiness and retention. Brad had a deep understanding of this correlation and his explanations resonate very deeply.
"Stickiness. Retention. By eliminating or severely reducing competition, player advancement accelerates – access to items that help you advance your player are not limited by other players seeking them as well, either legitimately or by griefing. By making items easier to get, human nature dictates that at least a lot (most?) of people will find they value these items less, that their sense of accomplishment and attachment to a virtual character or item is diminished. People tend to value things they had to work for more than things they obtained more easily, or for no real effort. Yes, even in a game that’s purpose is to entertain – that doesn’t get you out of having to deal with and acknowledge (and if possible, even harness) human nature. And you can like or dislike this aspect of human nature, but I submit it’s not going away any time soon (see Lenin, Stalin, and other’s attempts at truly changing what makes us tick – not so successful, to say the least). What you can choose, however, and with more choices every day, is which MMOG you want to play relative to how much it fights against or, on the other hand, embraces human nature. Yeah, that’s a provocative way to put it, but I think it’s accurate. Some people want human nature in entertainment, while others play games to escape aspects of humanity they’d rather not deal with. To some virtual worlds are a great way to study humanity – to others, they are to be avoided at all costs."
"Then let me touch on a controversial topic that is definitely related: entitlement to content vs. opportunity to experience content. This is hotly debated, has been, and will be. Because, really, nobody is right except when speaking for only them. The reality is there are, in this case, two types of people: those who want to play a game where they are entitled to experience everything, obtain everything, etc. merely because they pay the fee and put some time in, though it had better be time in allotments and at a frequency that works with the rest of their lives. And then there are those who want more of a challenge and don’t mind indirect competition and finite resources and realize, that unless they really try hard, they’re not going to achieve everything, or see everything – but they also think that’s fine – in fact, arguably, it makes the world more real – you can’t see every square foot of the real world, after all – and you always need something to dream about, or another goal to head towards.
In any case, to the former group, the entitlement group, Instancing used in this manner is very attractive. It truly is a mechanism that, if implemented correctly, should give you the same opportunity as anyone else to obtain that item, or skill, or title, or whatever is being used to measure and add to character development.
Now, for me, and only speaking for me, entitlement to content doesn’t equate to a sense of accomplishment and what creates pride deep within. But that’s just me, and that’s why there are thankfully more than one MMOG out there, and there will be even more in the future, so people can play what they choose to and for as long as it manages to hold their attention."
I think it's important to separate the open-world / contested resource dynamic from the word "hardcore." You don't have to be hardcore to appreciate the concept of shared space and finite resources in a persistent virtual world. You don't have to be hardcore to appreciate that extra layer of challenge, that extra layer of dynamic risk-vs-reward, that extra layer of decision-making. You don't have to be extreme to appreciate a more meaningful sense of accomplishment. I don't blame "casual" players for sapping this extra sense of meaning out of our virtual worlds ... I blame the "entitled" players. Competition is literally hardwired into our genes and the idea that it could/should be eliminated or severely reduced is immersion-breaking to my DNA. There are plenty of options available for people that want to avoid human nature in their gaming and I genuinely hope that Pantheon emerges as a title that embraces it.
If players pursue things of value in a social space, whether cooperatively or competitively (especially both at the same time), it's completely natural to expect them to produce differential outcome. At the end of the day, it's extremely important to avoid infantilization. Sports are a great example of competition where the best players usually win. Whether you're the fastest player, the strongest player, the most accurate player, or the coach that comes up with the best strategies. All of these layers play an important role in the competition and all players are encouraged to continue training, continue refining their tactics, and continue working as a team to gain an edge over the competition. This is legitimate competition where players can enjoy the "Spirit of the Game" -- there is no utopian dream that seeks equality of outcome. Not in real sports or real competition. This is what I'm talking about with modern infantilization ... we shouldn't thwart competition and hand out participation trophies. We shouldn't stunt the growth and expansion of players, we should be encouraging them to continue pushing forward and challenging them to elevate.
It doesn't matter whether you win or lose ... it matters how you play the game. I think people get too caught up in the idea of each and every contest counting as a game in and of itself where there is a winner and a loser. The reality is that the "game" in the context of a persistent online MMO world stretches way beyond these chance encounters and interactions with other players. Whatever happened to good sportsmanship? It's absolutely inevitable that players are going to lose battles from time to time but it's important to play the game with heart, passion, and conviction. If players lose a battle they need to be reminded that it's no time to whine and complain. You don't sit there and vilify the other team. If you end up losing out on a spawn it's not the end of the world.
Players need to reconceptualize what fun/healthy competition means in an MMO and understand that it's not about winning or losing. It's about being a fun person to be around in social spaces. Sometimes you'll win and sometimes you'll lose ... but it's all about how your character is perceived in these social interactions. If you're a sore loser then other people aren't going to want to play with you. If you show good sportsmanship then you'll be an attractive candidate as a friend and be able to participate in more games, and thus get more satisfaction and fulfillment out of playing the game with others. It's really telling that adding a fun/healthy competitive element to the "Spirit of the Game" is such a fleeting concept in MMO's. We all saw what happened with the instance boom. It caught on just like participation trophies did but I think it's about time to put an end to infantilization in our gaming.
Hey forums, long time no see.
I've had big changes but something that has not changed is how I feel about classic MMORPGs
I think this thread is touching on
*The developers final say on how fast a character should level
*thoughts on EZ-leveling 'modern' mmo's
*What we remember EQ felt like
*What does it mean to not have enough time as a reason for changing the speed of leveling.
How I feel about it
I play WoW classic and enjoy it immensly (I did leave EQ for WoW in 2004) and I enjoy the difficulty and leveling experience. I think the final say for developers on the speed of leveling is to try and make something difficult and rewarding.
-----Death Penalty* I personally found EQ's death penalty and corpse retrieval to be too punishing or annoying, it was a big reason I left. I found WoW's death penalty to be expensive, but I would grind money to afford those deaths (and if I didn't die I'd have money).
An example of something a WoW player would go through upon death----
In World of Warcraft I would die, lose money from repairs, and upon finding my body could not ressurrect or I would be killed again. Sometimes getting to your body and ressurecting is simply ressurecting, dying while running away and hoping you ran far enough away that you could rez without being killed again which would lose you more money for repairs. Each time you die you have a debt to repay for your gear being damaged)
(not trying to devolve to talking about death penalty) --My point is leveling up happened for me MORE in World of Warcraft because the death penalty didn't pacify me the way EQs did. (in eq I had 22 characters, only 1 above lvl 40 and none max-I started EQ in 1999, left in 2004). The amount of xp mobs drop was different as well but nothing like modern mmo's of today. WoW leveled faster and smoother for me. I felt like as the game went through expansions the speed of leveling became something they didn't care about---now WoW-live is a trivial game.
In all honesty this thread kind of intimidates me. I feel because I liked any iteration of WoW I could be targeted as 'not the right audience' and expelled. The type of people who like this game, and the type of people on this forum have said quite negatively charged things to one another. I can't deal with it anymore just like I can't deal with the intergenerational trauma passed down in the USA.
There is a book by Leslie Marmon Silko called 'Ceremony' that I am remembering right now. I am thinking of it because when I played WoW classic again upon its re-release, it was the action of actually playing it ... going through the act of playing, experiencing it, that made me feel connected. That 'yea, this is the right feeling.'. that slow simmer in an immersive world.
This is to suggest that when Pantheon finally arrives whatever anxiety people have about the experience may just melt away from going through the game and experiencing it. Maybe it isn't the speed of leveling that we are focused about but the speed at which us the player can navigate (not conquer) a carefully crafted and dangerously fun world.
@Disposalist - (Take it easy. Kick back. Enjoy everything the game has to offer and don't treat it like some kind of race or competition.) your quote is perfect and I feel the same way.
stay safe everyone.
*hugs*
-Todd
I, actually, have more time than I did in 1999 when I was playing EQ. I was 32 at the time and a single parent, yes, I'm male, and still "rising" in my career. I am now almost 53 and fairly stable in my career. The only path I have left to take is a management path, which I'm not particularly interested in. Both of my kids are grown and moved out at this point in my life.
I am well aware that I am, most likely, in the extreme minority however.
I'll keep this short. I was very young when I started playing EQ and MMOs in general, I was 12. By 16 I was a master of min/max and raiding in a #1 WW guild. The hardest thing for me was finding the time to play when I also had to make time for my girlfriend, other social activities, school, and tons of homework. That being said, I made it work. I stayed up late at night to finish off a flag quest for access, I woke up early with a cup of coffee to get in some more exp before school, I took care of my other responsibilities outside of my raid time, etc.. It's all about making time for the things you want. When you're a truly competitive player, you'll make time for the game to give you a little edge. If you don't, then the people who do should be farther along than you. That's just how it is in life. When you invest more time and energy into something, you will yield greater results. I'm 31 now and my stance on this hasn't changed. I intend to make time for Pantheon just as I did when I was younger. If someone does this to a greater extent than I do, than they deserve to be farther along than me.
I have a medical condition called Osteogenesis Imperfecta, which equates to genetic bone imperfection. Brittle bones, for short.
A year, or so, before EQ was released, I was in a road traffic accident, I suffered a broken neck in three places (C7, C6 & C5), a broken thumb, three broken ribs, a fractured skull, whiplash, concussion, a dislocated shoulder, life-long vertigo and tinnitus (due to damage to the balance system within my ears from the impact). As a result, I wasn't able to work for a long period of time, but equally, I wasn't able to play EQ for extended periods without feeling very unwell (predominantly due to the vertigo and tinnitus, which I still suffer with 20+ years later). However, I was able to dedicate more time to playing the game than most, but I still never got to experience a large proportion of it, predominantly the raiding aspects, but I didn't care due to the fun I was having. EQ literally helped me remain sane at an incredibly dark, and difficult time in my life, and I genuinely have a fondness / appreciation for it that greatly transcends simple entertainment, or a hobby / past-time. I'm more than ready to dedicate large portions of my free time to Pantheon, but that free time will still be limited due to work, family and all manner of other obligations I have as an adult.
I have to be honest and state that, I liked the difficulty in gaining levels / XP in EQ, it genuinely felt like an achievement to reach max level, but I've come to realise that, there was a ton of experiences I never got to have, purely because the level grind was just so tough. I wanted to play many other classes, but I never did due to the time investment required to experience them properly, so even though I wasn't initially fond of the reduced requirements to level your characters in Pantheon, being worried that it was a sign of the infamous 'instant gratification' pandemic that's slowly destroying the games industry, I'm actually happy for Pantheon to have a slightly easier level curve as I really want to 'fully' experience more than one or two classes over the years.
My Son has the same medical condition I have, he's currently in a cast for the second spiral fracture he's endured in his right tibia in less than six months, so games are already a way for him to escape his reality, and he's barely seven years of age. Some of us say games saved our lives at times, I am testament to that, or maybe we say that, games are a 'way of life'. These statements shouldn't be considered in the context of the stigma attached to gaming, they are a genuine way to escape the reality that hinders many of us in real life, whether that's physical, or mental / psychological.
I will take my Son to every corner of Terminus, he, and I, will play every class we want to, and I will not / do not care what others have to say about it.
Old school and new school, as long as it's challenging, fun and social, I think it's safe to say we'll all have fun along the way.