|
What it says on the can. I like playing, but I've been a casual gamer more out of necessity than desire for a long time. I haven't seriously played in a MMORPG before. I did look around Ryzom when it was in open playtest (it looked like fun, but couldn't think to subscribe), and I checked out D&D Online at the request of a friend earlier in the year. That's it.
That said, the whole idea of a MMORPG seems interesting to me, but I'm not sure I'd know what to do in it. Unfortunately, I'm at the point where I don't know enough to know what to ask about. I don't know EVE from WoW, a sandbox from a theme park, any of it. So I don't even know what I'd like or what to look for.
How could I find out if PFO is something that would interest me, or not?
Try City of Heroes. The first three slots are free and you can go all the way to level 50 with them. I spent 5 years playing CoH, so it is a fun game. OTOH, it is more of a theme park game than a sandbox game.
InVinoVeritas,
what games do you usually play?
|
|
InVinoVeritas,
what games do you usually play?
Lots of offline games (D&D, PF, board, card, etc.). For computer games, I play turn-based strategy, casual puzzle games, and adventure and RPGs. I usually end up a couple years behind in my game choices, but play them for years--I still fire up Morrowind regularly!
Games I've played lately: Civilization IV and V, Morrowind, Oblivion, Galactic Civilizations II, and casual games like Chocolatier and Tradewinds.
My skill is fair, my twitch ability is low. FPS isn't that interesting to me, and I find RTS impossible. Another factor that limits my choices is that I need to play games that I can near-instantly put down. As long as I can save and put the game down at any moment, that's okay, but Fable's inability to save in a middle of a quest was a problem.
Goblin Squad Member
|
InVinoVeritas,
what games do you usually play?Lots of offline games (D&D, PF, board, card, etc.). For computer games, I play turn-based strategy, casual puzzle games, and adventure and RPGs. I usually end up a couple years behind in my game choices, but play them for years--I still fire up Morrowind regularly!
Games I've played lately: Civilization IV and V, Morrowind, Oblivion, Galactic Civilizations II, and casual games like Chocolatier and Tradewinds.
My skill is fair, my twitch ability is low. FPS isn't that interesting to me, and I find RTS impossible. Another factor that limits my choices is that I need to play games that I can near-instantly put down. As long as I can save and put the game down at any moment, that's okay, but Fable's inability to save in a middle of a quest was a problem.
Well the put down at a moments notice is going to be a killing blow for pretty much any MMORPG, beyond ones that are so solo focused that they shouldn't be considered MMORPGs really. Generally pretty much any MMO is going to involve working with teams, and quitting in the middle of a raid, battle, instance etc... generally builds up a bad reputation that makes people not want to team with you again. So with that pre-req I would say MMO's are not the genre for you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
Generally pretty much any MMO is going to involve working with teams, and quitting in the middle of a raid, battle, instance etc... generally builds up a bad reputation that makes people not want to team with you again. So with that pre-req I would say MMO's are not the genre for you.
depends on game, really. there are MMO that are extremely forgiving, and there are MMO that allow multitude of playstyles. even EVE allows for casual play, when one knows what they are doing. also, there are very diverse communities; some are hardcore and have high demands; others are casual and have simple requirements (like say hi when you come online and talk in chat now and then).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My skill is fair, my twitch ability is low. FPS isn't that interesting to me, and I find RTS impossible. Another factor that limits my choices is that I need to play games that I can near-instantly put down. As long as I can save and put the game down at any moment, that's okay, but Fable's inability to save in a middle of a quest was a problem.
Saving is not an issue; MMORPG worlds are typically persistent, so everything you do is "saved" as soon as you do it. You can log out at any point, and you won't lose any of the progress you've made.
However, the game will probably feature group play to a significant degree, and ditching a group in the middle of an activity is poor form. If you think you might be tempted to stop playing with very little notice, it would be best to stick to solo play. Hopefully, Pathfinder Online will allow you to experience the game to a satisfying extent without being required to group up with other players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Does adventuring require group play? Or is crafting the only way for solo play to work?
MMORPGs largely vary from title to title and it would be difficult to say.
Sandbox titles have typically offered such a range of gameplay as to allow you to play solo if you would prefer. It is more typical of themepark games to feature instanced content which would pit you in a 'forced' team. In case you are not aware, instanced content is an area or dungeon in a persistent game world which is effectively enclosed and recreated for each participating group. You are given your own personal dungeon to complete.
Alternatively, even WoW (king of themepark games) does give you the opportunity to experience most of the game as a single player, although you will fall short of end game content as this is largely group based.
Should Pathfinder Online remain true to sandbox principals, daily gameplay will be less of a linear adventure and very much like a persistent world in which you may choose your level of participation. I've been part of many guilds or clans with largely casual players who have contributed to the group, albeit through solo means and in their own time. The MMORPG genre allows for a great deal of flexibility, as does the functioning of everyday guilds.
I'd definitely give it a try :) If an MMORPG was ever going to offer you flexibility and accessibility, it would be a sandbox like PFO. Past sandbox MMORPGs have offered me such rich environments that I've spent many hours not really doing anything that could be prescribed as a conventional progression, more just doing what I want to do and at a pace which suits me. WoW or other themeparks are not so welcoming as progression is very linear and may not be so enjoyable as, unless you have the time to apply, rewards are few and far between as you cannot so readily choose your own gameplay objectives which would more easily reward your time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For me, my guilds are always close RL friends. I have made some in my many years in MMOs. So, the guild is the sole reason for me to play MMOs over a single player game...because I like spending time with my friends.
I think it is definitely possible for an MMO to be designed in a way that would allow single player play, we do not yet know enough about PFO to know if it will be one of these. The devs have said they are using EVE as a model and I have played EVE both solo and in clans, and I enjoyed the play both ways (although my playgound was a bit smaller when playing solo, I tended to stay in high-sec space).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Does adventuring require group play?
No, you'll be able to adventure without a group. You may be limited in what sort of adventuring you can do (for instance, a dragon's lair might require a group to clear out), but you'll be able to do something. It's tough to say anything beyond that this early in the development process.
|
|
So I started exploring Ryzom again. I've found I definitely enjoy the harvesting and crafting bits more than the fighting (and don't particularly like beasts that attack when they've taken notice; I'd be interested in more stealth). I haven't really gotten involved with playing or talking to others in game, yet, and just focus on the quests (and harvesting and crafting on my own) right now.
So I'm not sure. What I've seen is fun, but it's still not quite something I'd spend money on--especially not monthly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So I started exploring Ryzom again. I've found I definitely enjoy the harvesting and crafting bits more than the fighting (and don't particularly like beasts that attack when they've taken notice; I'd be interested in more stealth). I haven't really gotten involved with playing or talking to others in game, yet, and just focus on the quests (and harvesting and crafting on my own) right now.
So I'm not sure. What I've seen is fun, but it's still not quite something I'd spend money on--especially not monthly.
Yeah, I play for a few months and take a few months off...it is an old game and I hope PFO is nor Ryzom as there are obvious weaknesses. But, there are strengths as well, things that are different than any other game out there and that could be learned/borrowed from. And the game only gets better as you progress because you have more freedom and options (and your actions become more efficient).
And yes, Ryzom has the most to contribute to the genre in the harvesting and crafting I think.
Since you are still doing missions I must assume you are still in the starter lands, once you get to the mainland, there are no missions and if you do not play with others, there are no causes no goals but your own...as most everything is player driven. Oh, I was just reminded, there are many missions now, but they are for faction rep...not for experience like most games.