🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 22:19:36 -0700, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net>
wrote:

>On 3/17/2012 5:05 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 16:22:10 -0700, John Slade<hhitman86@pacbell.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/16/2012 3:46 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Might be good stuff if they find a way to keep what's good about
>>>> existing Elder Scrolls games separate about what makes WoW and similar
>>>> games so tiresome.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.tomsguide.com/us/ZeniMax-Bethesda-Elder-Scrolls-Online-MMO,news-14481.html
>>>
>>>        I hope this is a lie, if not, then say goodbye to a great
>>> series. All good things...
>>
>> A few other sources have reported this and to the best of my
>> knowledge, it is fact, not rumor.
>>
>> However, I'm not sure why everyone is talking like it would be the end
>> of the existing single player series.  The article says the entire
>> timeline is meant to predate the existing series.
>
>      Star Wars the Old Republic is an example. They moved 
>totally to online play and they scrapped plans to make KOTOR 3. 
>Since too many game companies want to be the next World of 
>Warcraft, they're moving franchises from single player to MMO 
>only. 

> Not everyone wants to play RPGs online. They want to play 
>a game with a campaign, good gameplay and a good story. 

Well some do and some don't.  While I agree not everyone wants an
online RPG, the same is true that not everyone wants an RPG that takes
place in a silo of one either.  While I personally am not really into
MMORPGs, I do prefer multiplayer gaming in general and would like to
see middle ground.  Some social interaction without dealing with mass
idiots.  I'm not sure if it what I have in mind is even achievable in
a series like TES, but I also recognize when it may not matter if one
category of gamers (those who like MMORPGs) are willing to cast their
votes with their wallets (i.e. pay for such a service).  To me, gaming
in a silo has a lifespan of maybe a couple of weeks at best.  It
doesn't matter how many square feet the world is or how many weapon
variations or crafting possibilities there are, if what I experience
is limited to computer AI, I am going to get bored sooner rather than
later, therefore I like the idea of joining forces with a few others
(and being the competitive sort, using those joined relationships to
compete against others).  I recognize not everyone is like me.  I also
recognize the best way to shape the gaming landscape I want is to
spend money on games that suit me and ignore those that don't.

>Also by 
>making games multiplayer, it seems they want to put the burden 
>on the user to produce the content rather than making a great AI 
>system. Game companies are becoming like everything else in 
>America. They want to charge as much as possible and give you as 
>little as possible. They want to expend the least amount of 
>effort. Thank goodness for some small, independent game makers 
>that are putting out old style RPGs.

Unfortunately from a business standpoint, the subscription nature of
MMORPGs may offer monetary temptation that can affect the shape of
gaming in ways we might not like.  If that's your preference don't pay
for them.  Likewise, when a game comes out that does support your
gaming preferences, vote in favor of it by purchasing it WHILE THE
ORIGINAL DEVELOPERS STILL HAVE JOBS.  If you wait five years because
you only by bargain basement games for a fraction of the original
price, its too late because the game team you wanted to support is
probably defunct, laid off, and moved on to another company/project.
If the only projects that offer stable are MMORPG related, guess where
they will go?

Your right to your gaming opinion is in competition with others that
are throwing dollars at what they like.  Brooding about what you don't
like will not change things in your favor.