Apr 4th 2012 3:55AM @(Unverified)
"They don't want to log on and wipe for five hours, they want rewards essentially just for logging in and performing menial tasks (not that there's anything wrong with that)"
You're presenting a false dichotomy there. There is a wide range of activity possible between "five hours of wiping" and "performing some menial tasks."
I think one of the biggest presumptions that is not necessarily true is that casual players are always demanding some sort of "reward" above and beyond having fun playing the game. I don't think that's always, or even often, the case.
I am most definitely a casual player. I don't play any game every day, and I only have maybe 8-10 hours a week at most to play. The difference between me and a hardcore player is that I do not play for any rewards at all, it's completely for fun and relaxation. If I get some sort of a reward during my play session then yay, bonus, but I do not demand or expect a reward of some item for my playtime. For me the aim is just to have a fun time and escape to a different world for an hour or two. I do not demand any rewards, nor do I care if I receive them. I would be perfectly happy just questing for a while or fiddling around with crafting or exploring or whatever the activity I am doing might be.
If there is a reward I would like, I am perfectly happy to put in the time and effortt required to get it so long as I am able to put that time in small chunks rather than requiring me to spend four+ hours at one time, which I don't have to spend.
Mar 27th 2012 5:35PM @Resurge
I think part of the point of the articles suggestions, though are to provide alternate ways of playing besides just killing 100 million things. Some people get tired of repeatedly killing things, and even throwing a veneer of story on it gets old after a while.
For people who are really looking for a "virtual world" to live in, providing alternate means of leveling that are actually fun would be a major deal. If I could go into a game and play it and have a good time without killing a thing, I would do it in a heartbeat. The problem is, since, as you say in most games, killing monsters is 95% of gameplay, there's not enough resources left over to put into making other activities truly fun, and that's too bad.
For people who want to kill monsters, there is ... every game ever. For people who want to live in a virtual world with a variety of options for how to spend their time, there's not much that's truly fun.
Mar 23rd 2012 5:05PM I don't think it's necessarily true, though, that just because we have ordinary lives we need to be "the hero" in an MMO. Single player games do a good job of letting you play as the hero. I think the role of MMOs is letting you play someone who's life is very different than yours, even if you're not the star hero of the world.
For example, I work at a desk all day and go home to normal chores, etc. Getting to play a character that lives off the land, or sneaks, steals and even murders to get by is far enough removed and interesting enough that it doesn't really matter if I am one of many equals in a world. What matters is how interesting that life is.
Frankly the focus now seems to be less on "how interesting is this character's life" and more on "how powerful are the clothes this character has collected" and that's why people aren't satisfied with being one of many, because the mechanics don't make living that alternate life interesting enough in itself, it's more about who's wearing the best stuff and running through the hardest content. That's fine for those enjoy that game, but it's not really much in the way of roleplaying.
Feb 6th 2012 9:56PM @Gaugamela
I don't actually think that's the issue, though. The Chronicle of Attunement is described as being for one player, but the other ones are described as being for two players. Most people (myself included) read that and assume that the content is created for more than one person to play. That is not the type of "solo content" most players who want it are looking for. Most players who want solo content available want content that is actually created for one person to complete. It can be challenging, but I shouldn't have to create some special cookie-cutter character with certain gear and builds that can survive two-person content just to do. Every character should have a fighting chance on their own, even if it is challenging, in order to truly be "solo content."
The gear/level dependency of MMOs is what keeps people playing (progression) but it is also what makes accessibility so difficult. A large part of the playerbase are people who don't have time or the schedule to raid so there are a lot of people at max level looking for something to do with their available time. The people who have max level/max raiding gear will find most stuff to be a "faceroll" if it's tuned for normally geared players, but if the people who don't have the time to raid can't participate in any of the content because it's all tuned for people with raid gear, then most of the playerbase is going to be left with nothing more to do after they hit max level.
The key is to provide content for both groups of people that is an appropriate challenge, and for the people in EACH group to accept that not 100% of content is for them alone.
Jan 26th 2012 4:00AM @Masync9
This the "Free for All" column about Free-to-Play gaming so ... the articles are gonna be about free-to-play games. This may not be the column for you if you don't want to hear about them.
Jan 2nd 2012 3:40PM @madcartoonist
Agree completely. It always weirds me out that whenever there's an article about Apple something, people go out of their way to insult not just the product but anyone who would use the product. I have never in my life cared if people wanted to use a PC or Linux system. Yay, good for them, let's all use what we like best. The more people a product is available to, the more successful it will be. *shrug*
Jan 2nd 2012 3:36PM @emperorzeroxx
I dunno ... I wonder if it's a coincidence that by far the most successful MMO runs both PC and Mac. It's the first MMO I played and the only one I played for years because it was the only thing I could play on my Mac. Just as for many years the only computer games I played were the Baldur's Gate games and The Sims. I finally relented and bought a gaming PC laptop, but I want to chuck it out the window regularly with all of the updating and crashes and popups and other complications. I just don't like the Windows OS very much. It's a matter of personal taste. Wish I could play games on the OS I prefer, but such is life. Hopefully with cloud technology eventually everyone can play on any computer seamlessly.
Dec 30th 2011 2:10PM I want to be more focused and less ADD, since I don't have much gaming time. I have a tendency to try to play everything at once and I never get anywhere in any of them. I want to focus on one game at a time and get the most out of it.
At the same time, I don't want to stick to a game when I'm more enthusiastic about something else. As long as I've gotten my money's worth I don't have to stick with a game I'm less interested in just because I haven't "finished" it yet. I can move onto something I'm more excited about. I can always come back to older games when I have nothing else I'm into at the moment.
Dec 2nd 2011 4:54PM @SnarlingWolf
I think the reason they are calling it beta is that they will not leave access to the game open to everyone while they are in this updating phase. From what I understand, they want to make these changes with a limited amount of players in the game so access to the game will go back to being existing players + those they invite as it was in beta.
Nov 5th 2011 6:57PM @Kalex716
Because there are a lot of cases where people are wrongfully convicted. If you are cool with murdering innocent people as a byproduct of murdering guilty people, then okay. But a lot of people are not cool with that possibility.
As of 2010, The Innocence Project had exonerated 278 people who were wrongfully convicted. 15 of those people were on death row. These are the lucky people for whom DNA evidence was available for testing to exonerate them, and there are probably far more wrongfully convicted people out there.
Right now, the evidence we rely on to get convictions is really, really flawed and most of the time is based on human memory (eyewitnesses) which is extremely unreliable. You can more at (http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Facts_on_PostConviction_DNA_Exonerations.php).