Science solved motivation (fun) in 1985: social identity, intensity and memorability of choice, and skill expression. And they're correlative. You can imagine how much more fun it is playing a high skill game in front of your peers. Realizing this, you can see how much more potential MMOs have than games of other genres. They're any game but with thousands of simultaneous players. So, an MMO should be the most played game when we're all playing games together and the design is on point. What are your predictions and insights?
Motivation getting all three holes filled, that's so hot. I'm gonna freaking jerk off
•2D < 3D.•SP < MP.•Lobby gaming < a persistent world.•QA testers are awful at defining fun until they're briefed with scientific definitions.I don't think SP or AI are ever going to match the hype of real opponents and friendlies.
>>750192028>QA testers are awful at defining fun until they're briefed with scientific definitions.I think this is what happened with WoW. People do a few dungeons and think, "Wow, this is fun," and suddenly the whole game is designed around repeating instances for 1 ilvl per week. Surely there's not a higher up that says, "This is what I want to do all day, every day," and no one criticizes the audacity of having one (combat) activity matter, and that's it. Leveling too. It's fun for the small amount of time that QA has with it, and then Classic releases to 800k level 60s in 6 years (IcyVeins).
>>750193359>then Classic releases to 800k level 60s in 6 yearsWoW needs to stop it with layering. It ruined Classic, and it will ruin Classic+.
>>750194501Either way, I don't think people will want to level for 150-200 hours per class. It's cooked.
What's the most fun Classic class to play?
>>750191878My insight is that you're ESL and either a bot or autistic because you've been making these threads for years and you never sound natural in them.My prediction is that you'll ignore everything posted in this thread and make a new one later or tomorrow as if nothing's changed, because that's what you always do.But I'm bored so I'll humor you.>And they're correlativeBut people have real lives outside of video games which meet those desires to varying degrees. People who play co-op games do so because they can't socialize as much as they'd like to in real life. RPGs are attractive to people who feel helpless in their real life. Someone who's wealthy and accomplished will find challenging games boring because they don't need to add "Immortal in Dota" to their resume, they're already a realized talent in real life. Everyone's different and will seek out different things for these reasons. Someone who's exhausted by people in their daily life isn't playing a multiplayer game, they're sick of people.>You can imagine how much more fun it is playing a high skill game in front of your peersThat's you letting your own bias slip in and trying to use a real study to justify it. MMOs are supposed to be casual co-op games and part of the reason they died is due to developers catering to tryhards: the people who only play a multiplayer game to show off how much better they are than others, and when people tell them to stop bragging they call them noobs until they end up in a game with no players and start making threads like these pretending to not know why everyone quit. MMOs were originally intended to add the multiplayer aspect of TTRPGs that had been missing and researchers used to classify them the same as sims: games that are not about winning or losing but enjoying the process.>you can see how much more potential MMOs have than games of other genresNot if you want to feel like #1>They're any game but with thousands of simultaneous playersThat's Roblox
>>750200113Solo private server.
>>750201220What Roblox game has thousands of simultaneous players in one world?
You can have around 700 active players on your screen in Albion Online. No phasing. All in one zone.Which MMO can beat that?
