What’s the point of an MMO if you don’t like people?

Nils has got a new post up about Skyrim. If you haven’t been checking out Nils’ blog then you should get your butt over there as he’s writing some really good stuff lately. Anyway, his post is about some of the things an MMO could take from Skyrim and be more successful. I haven’t played Skyrim yet, but I can still empathise with most of the points. Syl from Raging Monkeys has a reply to the post, and this is the point for what I am writing here. With both of their permission I will repost that comment:

I’ll tell you why I personally wouldn’t want a “Skyrim MMO” Nils; I think a world like that could work perfectly online, I can see a Skyrim co-op where friends simply meet up to travel together, do a few quests cooperatively, craft a little, decorate their houses etc.

…but I’d never want the beautiful world of Skyrim overrun by hundreds of people – ever. I wouldn’t play it.
even less would I want to share that world with the type of “where are the raids? the achievements? the loots?”-players, asking for auction houses and PvP and whatnot because any online game needs to be like WoW.

I understand Syl’s point here, I really do. But it betrays the hidden bugbear waiting in the gaming community. Namely that you cannot ever successfully play an MMO if you don’t want to share it with other people. Because that is what MMOs are about. That’s what makes them unique. And if we take this attitude a step further it means that you’ll only play an MMO that you don’t really like that much, seeing as you wouldn’t want to share a good one. Which is kind of masochistic when you think about it.

And perhaps the big companies who make these games worked this out a long time ago. And meanwhile we’re all furiously writing diatribes on our blogs about how this game could be better, and how the hell could they make that change what on earth were they thinking?? And they’re just nodding away to themselves and thinking, yeah whatever. They make games that appeal to the lowest common denominator because that’s the only type of game we’d be prepared to share with them. Is this true? I don’t know, but it sure is food for thought.

About these ads

Azuriel Says:

November 23, 2011 at 1:27 am

I am a proponent of Single-Player MMOs, and think they would work via Show & Tell. I love(d) playing Minecraft, for example, but abhor the thought of people being able to ruin my shit, steal my mats, or otherwise lessen the experience in any way on multiplayer servers. Even the sense of exploration is lessened a bit when I know someone has already seen that awesome mountain/cave/valley/etc before (and possibly built a house on it).

And yet I want nothing more than to be able to show off my castle (etc) to people able to appreciate the vision/work it took to make it. Show & Tell.

MMOs may have originally been about communities and guilds and whatnot, but it’s a pretty weak and ultimately irrelevant argument that the term cannot evolve and/or get appropriated by a new genre (see also: RPG). And the funny thing about the sanctity of “what MMOs are about” is that that was decided on before the designers realized exactly what would happen once all the morons showed up. MMOs were undoubted cool when the community consisted on a fairly homogenous group of hardcore players. e.g. early adopters. The community at large, just like the masses at large, is significantly less fun to hang out with.

Adam Says:

November 25, 2011 at 1:06 am
Undoubtedly the original old school gamers were a lot better as a whole to interact with. When the floodgates were opened and all the droolers showed up then things took a turn for the worse. But companies discovered that the droolers are almost limitless in number and they pay the same as the old school gamers to play the game.

I think that the only options are single player games such as Skyrim, niche games before they hit the mainstream, or being prepared to pay a lot more to play a good MMO. Would the droolers pay a $50 per month subscription? And would old school gamers be prepared to pay that to get the game they want?

Gank Says:

November 23, 2011 at 10:37 pm

Link back thingy..

http://gankalicious.blogspot.com/2011/11/whats-point-reply-to-rogue.html

Ahtchu Says:

November 23, 2011 at 10:39 pm

The Short: the implied response is correct. There is none.

The Long: if I don’t want interaction but just warm bodies around me, why any script monkey could write you a 5line code that will perfectly randomize the movements and behaviors of NPCs. If I don’t want anyone to influence/tarnish my work, my experience, I’ll get my inspiration from places that offer it as a primary venue: youtube, vaults or museums. Guided tours even, to be sure I didn’t miss some painstaking detail (that couldn’t shine on its own merit, blagh).
The key assets of MMORPGs are the players. This means shaping and allowing others to shape a shared environment. When MMORPG companies (other than CCP) comes to terms with this, we’ll see true potential realized. Everything else is a single player game with ‘multi’ tacked on for marketing. A shame, a damn, crying shame for polluting the genre with misconceptions.

Adam Says:

November 25, 2011 at 1:07 am
I’m trying to work out what the over/under would be on getting the potential realised.

1. Ahtchu Says:
  
  November 25, 2011 at 11:24 pm
  I’m assuming you’re referring to finances here?

Nils Says:

November 24, 2011 at 1:34 am

Thanks for the praise.

This is a very interesting point, really. But I wouldn’t go so far to claim that it’s impossible to create a MMORPG with a fine simulation just due to the presence of other players. Players can be formed by the game and its community. I still remember 2006/7. My server back then, while not focused on RP, was very much interested in keeping some feeling of the simulation intact.

People with stupid names or too much jumping in the capital were seriously disadvantaged in raiding and even PvP (before battlegrounds became cross-server). A community of up to 300 players can easily regulate itself. Just like any village of this size can.

Adam Says:

November 25, 2011 at 1:09 am
Interesting point. Could Blizzard introduce restricted servers with no cross server elements for a slightly higher price? And would the old school gamers go there?

Syl Says:

November 24, 2011 at 12:16 pm

I dare say you took my own thought a little further here and made it more interesting! now I wonder if I really meant to not ever share a game like Skyrim with many, or rather that I wouldn’t want to share it with a certain type of player which happens to be abundant out there.

Skyrim definitely appeals in terms of scale and solitude; I don’t think every MMO needs to be over-crowded though. Take a world like Skyrim and expand it in scale, control the amount of players. maybe even go as far as adapting FPS concepts where people run their own servers (and server rules). couldn’t that work for an MMO too?

if I think along such terms, I would give Skyrim online a go. but I would leave the second it starts appealing to the achievement crowd. I love Skyrim for its classic RPG feeling and it appears that among MMO players I am not alone in that. so maybe there’s hope.