Originally Posted by Zarthaine
I don't get it I guess, in order for some people to be entertained there needs to be the ability to sit in chairs and socialize? You don't enjoy the game world because there are things to do in it and you would prefer to spend a couple weeks playing and then sit in a town with a bunch of people and talk while running in game businesses so it does not mimic real life?
I don't think I would enjoy a game very much if all the adventure was narrowed down to a few weeks and the rest was just some animated chat room.
While I respect your opinion, that's not content. I'm sure the game developers would love it if they only had to focus on providing a few weeks of content and then reaping in the big bucks with animated chat rooms that people pay $15 a month for.
Maybe I just lack imagination because the best friends I have met in online games usually came out of some challenge that we could not handle alone so we grouped and enjoyed the added company and capability and looked forward to trying even more difficult content.
Oki, I am sorry if I dont come accross very clearly here, english is not my first language.
However, let me attempt to reply to your points which are valid too.
I think, there have been two models in the history of MMO design because there are two types of players.
No everyone likes a playground type of game, and not everyone likes a themepark. And this has nothing to do with personal immagination, it is simply a matter of taste in relation to one's entertainment.
At the same time, I think people's tastes also change and evolve with time. So maybe some originally did not like a playground game while after some years of playing MMORPG's they stuble upon one that now they like, and vice versa.
Combined with this player taste there is the various business models that drive the financial interests behind any MMO.
So there is several forces pulling from different directions in any MMO design, which define the final implementation.
For instance, personally I see both WoW and Lineage II being two diametrically opposite implementations within the EQ model. One is "easy" the other is not, one is quest based, the other is a grind fest. nevertheless, they are both part of the EQ model, in that they are Themeparks, with lots of content, and what differs is the mechanisms governing character evolution.
Of cource being able to sit in a chair, is not a priority for all players, but it is a priority for some players.
Now, both those that dont see it as a priority and those that do, have some points in common.
As Loampounder said (btw Loam we agree actually)
"To flesh out the game, additions like marketplaces, better interactions, more city life, and other details need to be built. More theme parks would just be more of the same."
Both want a busy world, busy towns, filled with activity and interaction.
So the fact that some like to sit in chairs will make it so that these players will be actually having fun in towns, while those that dont mind siting in chairs will be thrilled to see the town busy when they come back to it for suplies after a session adventuring.
In that sence, wither it is a priority for you or not, it actually helps all, to have elements in the game that promote social interaction. it makes the atmosphere of the game to be seen as full of Life, since there will always be someone at any given time, siting somewhere with friends chatting their hearts out.
And that is a good thing, a livelly game has to appeal to a broad range of tastes.
The point being that even a small detail like that can have a huge impact on how the virtual world of a given game is perceived.