WoW - biggest flaw

thrasher

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2004
40
0
18,530
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

I think this is self evident, but what is about to kill the game for
me is that fact that there are about 30 people on a 4 day old server
who have hit the level cap, and more hit the cap every few minutes. I
started on a new server because the game has been out months and I
wanted to start on a level playing field. I don't know why 10% of game
players wanted to be so much higher in level than everyone else... I
don't know why 10% of game players want to hit the end of an online
game in 3 days... I don't know why, and I don't care why. What I care
about is that Blizzard hasn't fixed whatever flaw in game mechanics
allows people to level THAT fast... I understand they cannot take away
levels from people on existing servers, but why open up new servers
with such an obvious problem?

It *is* a small percentage of people. I'd just suggest that they
automatically log people who are 3 times or more the average server
level into an instance of uberness so that they could play their game
and the rest of us could play ours. But I guess that would be
discrimination. In any case, it's a damned shame that Blizzard has
shipped a game that has potential to be pretty good, with such massive
flaws in it. I know how these guys are hitting high levels so fast,
I've seen them doing it, and it's pretty obvious. Anybody could do it,
you don't have to be uber. You just have to care more about making
levels than playing the game as it was meant to be played. A game with
such huge exp rewards for quests (I sometimes get half a level of exp
for a quest that takes 10 minutes, solo) and that allows people to
"share" quests with eachother, and then gives everyone the reward for
quests that were designed as a solo challenge, is just asking to be
exploited. I know it wasn't *meant* to be exploited, it was *meant* to
encourage group play and questing, but what it IS, is an
auto-levelling machine. Net effect is that people are getting
experience about 5 to 10 times faster than they should be, and since
quest exp rewards are based on the quest level, it never stops. It
never slows down.

Damn. Blizzard just wrote a new book on bad design. Really. Bad. The
levelling in EQ2 was too fast, but at least everyone had to go through
teh same things to get ahead. The fastest people were *maybe* twice as
fast as the slowest, and the quest rewards were MUCH smaller. And I
thought people hitting 30 in a few weeks was bad in EQ2. I thought 30
should be a few MONTHS, like it was when Everquest was a new game. It
takes 1 day to hit 30 in WoW, on a brand new server.

This is an un-fixable problem. Of course, some people will not view it
as a problem, but rather as a feature. And that's the group of people
who will be griefing eachother and anyone else who logs in, 6 months
from now. Because what else can they do, after 6 months, when they hit
the end game in 3 days?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> once tried to test me with:

> I think this is self evident, but what is about to kill the game for
> me is that fact that there are about 30 people on a 4 day old server
> who have hit the level cap, and more hit the cap every few minutes. I
> started on a new server because the game has been out months and I
> wanted to start on a level playing field. I don't know why 10% of game
> players wanted to be so much higher in level than everyone else... I
> don't know why 10% of game players want to hit the end of an online
> game in 3 days... I don't know why, and I don't care why. What I care
> about is that Blizzard hasn't fixed whatever flaw in game mechanics
> allows people to level THAT fast... I understand they cannot take away
> levels from people on existing servers, but why open up new servers
> with such an obvious problem?

What's the big deal? So there's a few idiots who blow through the game as
fast as possible, how does that affect you?

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 6 Mar 2005 03:14:52 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:

>
>What's the big deal? So there's a few idiots who blow through the game as
>fast as possible, how does that affect you?

I've never understood this attitude from players - it's like they get
offended at someone else doing things faster than them, as if they're
personally affected by it.

--

Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes !
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses !
And what's with all the carrots ?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway ?
Bunnies ! Bunnies ! It must be BUNNIES !
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thrasher wrote:
> This is an un-fixable problem. Of course, some people will not view it
> as a problem, but rather as a feature. And that's the group of people
> who will be griefing eachother and anyone else who logs in, 6 months
> from now. Because what else can they do, after 6 months, when they hit
> the end game in 3 days?

This is pretty much exactly why I quit playing. If the munchkins either
wouldn't or couldn't grief, WoW would be a great game for a most everybody
else. And even though it's only a very small percentage of people doing
this stuff, it only takes a very small percentage to ruin the game for a lot
of other people.

K37 says by quitting I let the griefers win, but he's wrong. It's Blizzard
who let the griefers win. Of course with their D/D2 track record, that
shouldn't be much of a surprise.
--
chainbreaker
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Knight37 wrote:
> What's the big deal? So there's a few idiots who blow through the
> game as fast as possible, how does that affect you?

Oh, come on. It affects, or will affect him the same way it did me.

--
chainbreaker
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thrasher wrote:
> I think this is self evident, but what is about to kill the game for
> me is that fact that there are about 30 people on a 4 day old server
> who have hit the level cap, and more hit the cap every few minutes.

*boggle*

I was around level 12 after four days of spending a reasonable amount of
time playing - a few hours a day.

I wonder how many hours per day the people who hit max level in four
days put in. I started when the game was first released, and my main is
up to 40.

The number of max-level people doesn't really bother me that much,
though. I toddle along at my own pace, group with my friends when
they're on, and have a good time.

Cheers,
Grant
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Grant Anderson wrote:
> Thrasher wrote:
>> I think this is self evident, but what is about to kill the game for
>> me is that fact that there are about 30 people on a 4 day old server
>> who have hit the level cap, and more hit the cap every few minutes.
>
> *boggle*
>
> I was around level 12 after four days of spending a reasonable amount of
> time playing - a few hours a day.
>
> I wonder how many hours per day the people who hit max level in four
> days put in. I started when the game was first released, and my main is
> up to 40.

I shudder to think what speed people are levelling at on Thrasher's
server. If you've played through all the content several times already
(as many people obviously have, between Beta and Release); and you
create a character on one of the new servers they just opened up with
the express intent of being the first to uber-hood there; and you have a
few fellows sharing that goal; and Thottbot handy to refresh your memory
- well, you're going level orders of magnitude faster than the first-timers.

Cheers!
David...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 10:46:10 +1300, Grant Anderson
<gpsanderson@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Thrasher wrote:
>> I think this is self evident, but what is about to kill the game for
>> me is that fact that there are about 30 people on a 4 day old server
>> who have hit the level cap, and more hit the cap every few minutes.
>
>*boggle*
>
>I was around level 12 after four days of spending a reasonable amount of
>time playing - a few hours a day.
>

Those like Thrash neither have a job(probably) nor a life (away from
the computer). Fortunately that does not represent the majority of
MMORPG players, who are far more like you. So, as long as Blizzard
ensures that the normal game-player is minimally inconvenienced
by these dudes, all is fine. The game is there for all normal players
to enjoy the environment, questing etc, not as a level-up
pi**ing-match, followed by the expected level-up complaints
from the same marginal few.

>I wonder how many hours per day the people who hit max level in four
>days put in. I started when the game was first released, and my main is
>up to 40.
>
>The number of max-level people doesn't really bother me that much,
>though. I toddle along at my own pace, group with my friends when
>they're on, and have a good time.

Sure, of course. On-line RPG/adventuring games are essentially a
social pursuit... anybody that plays them exclusively macho-style is
missing the whole rationale. My sons play both AC1 and Wow with their
friends and have a great time. Sure they level-up periodically, but
the questing, battles and the social interaction is where they have
most fun.

John Lewis

>
>Cheers,
>Grant
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

John Lewis wrote:
> Those like Thrash neither have a job(probably) nor a life (away from
> the computer). Fortunately that does not represent the majority of
> MMORPG players, who are far more like you. So, as long as Blizzard
> ensures that the normal game-player is minimally inconvenienced
> by these dudes, all is fine. The game is there for all normal players
> to enjoy the environment, questing etc, not as a level-up
> pi**ing-match, followed by the expected level-up complaints
> from the same marginal few.
>

The problem is that so far at least, Blizzard is *not* ensuring the normal
game player is inconvenienced by these dudes. You'll notice I didn't quote
your "mimimally", because in my book the only acceptable minimum is "zero".
--
chainbreaker
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> writes:

> I think this is self evident, but what is about to kill the game for
> me is that fact that there are about 30 people on a 4 day old server
> who have hit the level cap, and more hit the cap every few minutes.

Basing the impressions of a game on powerlevelers is like reading a
review of a movie written by someone who fast-forwarded through it.
These players have min-maxed exp gain - probably by hunting and
farming - and haven't done quests, explored the lands etc.

It's not the game's fault that some players don't want to be
entertained by the content but play just to watch the precious numbers
go up.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

I think...

People who leveled as fast as you claim actually know the content of the
game. They already have a level 60 on their initial server. They know what
to do and how to get there fast. And the reason why they move is probably
to start a guild of their own. It is hard to start an elite group to
compete with other elite guilds on the server. Unless you're guild is there
first. Many of the top guilds on the server has seniority.

Disclaimer: This is just my speculation.


"Thrasher" <spectre911@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:js5k21p21r04k405k0nol632pela86eqgs@4ax.com...
> I think this is self evident, but what is about to kill the game for
> me is that fact that there are about 30 people on a 4 day old server
> who have hit the level cap, and more hit the cap every few minutes. I
> started on a new server because the game has been out months and I
> wanted to start on a level playing field. I don't know why 10% of game
> players wanted to be so much higher in level than everyone else... I
> don't know why 10% of game players want to hit the end of an online
> game in 3 days... I don't know why, and I don't care why. What I care
> about is that Blizzard hasn't fixed whatever flaw in game mechanics
> allows people to level THAT fast... I understand they cannot take away
> levels from people on existing servers, but why open up new servers
> with such an obvious problem?
>
> It *is* a small percentage of people. I'd just suggest that they
> automatically log people who are 3 times or more the average server
> level into an instance of uberness so that they could play their game
> and the rest of us could play ours. But I guess that would be
> discrimination. In any case, it's a damned shame that Blizzard has
> shipped a game that has potential to be pretty good, with such massive
> flaws in it. I know how these guys are hitting high levels so fast,
> I've seen them doing it, and it's pretty obvious. Anybody could do it,
> you don't have to be uber. You just have to care more about making
> levels than playing the game as it was meant to be played. A game with
> such huge exp rewards for quests (I sometimes get half a level of exp
> for a quest that takes 10 minutes, solo) and that allows people to
> "share" quests with eachother, and then gives everyone the reward for
> quests that were designed as a solo challenge, is just asking to be
> exploited. I know it wasn't *meant* to be exploited, it was *meant* to
> encourage group play and questing, but what it IS, is an
> auto-levelling machine. Net effect is that people are getting
> experience about 5 to 10 times faster than they should be, and since
> quest exp rewards are based on the quest level, it never stops. It
> never slows down.
>
> Damn. Blizzard just wrote a new book on bad design. Really. Bad. The
> levelling in EQ2 was too fast, but at least everyone had to go through
> teh same things to get ahead. The fastest people were *maybe* twice as
> fast as the slowest, and the quest rewards were MUCH smaller. And I
> thought people hitting 30 in a few weeks was bad in EQ2. I thought 30
> should be a few MONTHS, like it was when Everquest was a new game. It
> takes 1 day to hit 30 in WoW, on a brand new server.
>
> This is an un-fixable problem. Of course, some people will not view it
> as a problem, but rather as a feature. And that's the group of people
> who will be griefing eachother and anyone else who logs in, 6 months
> from now. Because what else can they do, after 6 months, when they hit
> the end game in 3 days?
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thusly Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com> Spake Unto All:

>>What's the big deal? So there's a few idiots who blow through the game as
>>fast as possible, how does that affect you?
>
>I've never understood this attitude from players - it's like they get
>offended at someone else doing things faster than them, as if they're
>personally affected by it.

He _IS_ on a PvP server you know.

--
"Forgive Russia. Ignore Germany. Punish France."
-- Condoleezza Rice, at the time National Security Adviser, on how to deal
with european opposition to the war in Iraq. 2003.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thusly Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> Spake Unto All:

>I think this is self evident, but what is about to kill the game for
>me is that fact that there are about 30 people on a 4 day old server
>who have hit the level cap, and more hit the cap every few minutes.
---
>A game with
>such huge exp rewards for quests (I sometimes get half a level of exp
>for a quest that takes 10 minutes, solo) and that allows people to
>"share" quests with eachother, and then gives everyone the reward for
>quests that were designed as a solo challenge, is just asking to be
>exploited.

Is it really possible to reach lvl 60 in three days by grouping and
running quests?!

If so, I agree with Thrasher that that is amazingly bad game design.


--
"Forgive Russia. Ignore Germany. Punish France."
-- Condoleezza Rice, at the time National Security Adviser, on how to deal
with european opposition to the war in Iraq. 2003.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Mean_Chlorine wrote:
> Thusly Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com> Spake Unto All:
>
>>> What's the big deal? So there's a few idiots who blow through the
>>> game as fast as possible, how does that affect you?
>>
>> I've never understood this attitude from players - it's like they get
>> offended at someone else doing things faster than them, as if they're
>> personally affected by it.
>
> He _IS_ on a PvP server you know.

With what Thrash is talking about, it doesn't much matter what kind of
server you're on. Griefers will grief, and WoW's game design sets up a
hotbed for it.

--
chainbreaker
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Mean_Chlorine wrote:
> Is it really possible to reach lvl 60 in three days by grouping and
> running quests?!
>
> If so, I agree with Thrasher that that is amazingly bad game design.

I'd say that it's probably pretty close to the mark. I wouldn't have
believed it until I started playing myself, but game map/quest familiarity
gives a player a tremendous leg up. Quest rewards/exp are so great that
about all you have to do is hit the big payoffs efficiently, then watch the
levels rack up.

--
chainbreaker
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Mean_Chlorine" <mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:eek:12m21ha0pvubfi3bpuc7023hnjvkoq6v4@4ax.com...
> Thusly Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> Spake Unto All:
>
>
> Is it really possible to reach lvl 60 in three days by grouping and
> running quests?!
>
> If so, I agree with Thrasher that that is amazingly bad game design.
>

Don't ever, ever, EVER, agree with Thrasher. That said, he's hardly an
authority on a game he just discovered. The rest of us, who have been
playing since day one, would all agree that 60 level in three days is
absurd.

The record I believe is lvl 60 in 10 days, but likely required 24hrs/day of
shift-work questing. Cut that down to a full time job of 8hrs/day, and you
will need about a month; that's excluding any and all fun things, like
interacting with fellow players.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 14:47:29 +0100, Mean_Chlorine
<mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Thusly Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com> Spake Unto All:
>
>>>What's the big deal? So there's a few idiots who blow through the game as
>>>fast as possible, how does that affect you?
>>
>>I've never understood this attitude from players - it's like they get
>>offended at someone else doing things faster than them, as if they're
>>personally affected by it.
>
>He _IS_ on a PvP server you know.

Then he REALLY can't complain, IMO.

--

Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes !
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses !
And what's with all the carrots ?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway ?
Bunnies ! Bunnies ! It must be BUNNIES !
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:422a9c31.40920131@news.verizon.net...

> Sure, of course. On-line RPG/adventuring games are essentially a
> social pursuit... anybody that plays them exclusively macho-style is
> missing the whole rationale. My sons play both AC1 and Wow with their
> friends and have a great time. Sure they level-up periodically, but
> the questing, battles and the social interaction is where they have
> most fun.

Just curious John. You say your sons play AC1 and WoW, two very
"life-stealing" games if ever I saw one. Do you limit their time playing
these online games? Or do you think that those social interactions you
mentioned are going to be enough for your sons in the real world?

Please don't interpret that as a dig or anything by the way! I apologise if
it came across like one. The reason I asked is while eating breakfast my
girlfriend pointed out an add from the dating section of the paper, and I
wanted to share it and get other gamers opinions. A 18yo boy was looking for
friends, his interests included: playing computer games. I laughed, and then
felt sorry for the kid. Too many young guys today {im only 26 mind you, so
I'm talking about teens and pre-teen :)} are living their lives online,
their social interaction being limited to IRC, MSN, and the latest MMORPG.
GenX is currently nurturing a generation of socially retarded adults who may
have difficulty interacting with todays society. Does that worry anyone? Or
are we all content in knowing that its natures way of slowing population
growth?

Ceo-
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"chainbreaker" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:d0f6qp02fli@news1.newsguy.com...
> Mean_Chlorine wrote:
>> Thusly Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com> Spake Unto All:
>>
>>>> What's the big deal? So there's a few idiots who blow through the
>>>> game as fast as possible, how does that affect you?
>>>
>>> I've never understood this attitude from players - it's like they get
>>> offended at someone else doing things faster than them, as if they're
>>> personally affected by it.
>>
>> He _IS_ on a PvP server you know.
>
> With what Thrash is talking about, it doesn't much matter what kind of
> server you're on. Griefers will grief, and WoW's game design sets up a
> hotbed for it.
>

There is nothing to be gained from griefing, and nothing lost, except for
the 1-2 minutes it takes you to run back to your corpse from the nearest
gravesite, of which there are many. Even the armour damage is negligible.
The griefer gets no gains at all, no xp, no loot, no verbal reaction or
trash talk from his victim (since you can't communicate between
alliance/horde). WoW has the best anti-griefing design of any pvp game. I
would go in the other direction and say that the PvP is actually a joke,
since you gain/lose nothing from it, except 2 minutes of inconvenience.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Grackle wrote:
> communicate between alliance/horde). WoW has the best anti-griefing
> design of any pvp game. I would go in the other direction and say
> that the PvP is actually a joke, since you gain/lose nothing from it,
> except 2 minutes of inconvenience.

I don't know why the mindset seems to be that griefing is synonymous with
pk'ing. High level griefers can make life plenty miserable for others
without ever popping the first cap on them.
--
chainbreaker
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Tor Iver Wilhelmsen wrote:
> It's not the game's fault that some players don't want to be
> entertained by the content but play just to watch the precious numbers
> go up.

I'm pretty sure you'll find that anyone who has made it to 60 in three
days on a new server has already been entertained by the content several
times over in the course of the last 5+ months.

Cheers!
David...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"chainbreaker" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:d0gepk02j8e@news3.newsguy.com...
> Grackle wrote:
>> communicate between alliance/horde). WoW has the best anti-griefing
>> design of any pvp game. I would go in the other direction and say
>> that the PvP is actually a joke, since you gain/lose nothing from it,
>> except 2 minutes of inconvenience.
>
> I don't know why the mindset seems to be that griefing is synonymous with
> pk'ing. High level griefers can make life plenty miserable for others
> without ever popping the first cap on them.

As for me, I'm wondering why some people (including Blizzard, if some of the
secondhand postings here are accurate) think that people need to gain
something from griefing in order to grief.

Griefing is its own reward.

Although Grackle's description gives me the impression that there's no sense
at all in engaging in any PvP ingame, even in the Blizzard-approved manner,
because, as he notes, there's nothing the winner will gain, and there's
nothing the loser will lose from it. Sounds like any point to be made by
killing your enemies would be lost because your enemies won't actually
suffer from it.

C
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Thrasher" <spectre911@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:js5k21p21r04k405k0nol632pela86eqgs@4ax.com...

> Damn. Blizzard just wrote a new book on bad design. Really. Bad. The
> levelling in EQ2 was too fast, but at least everyone had to go through
> teh same things to get ahead. The fastest people were *maybe* twice as
> fast as the slowest, and the quest rewards were MUCH smaller. And I
> thought people hitting 30 in a few weeks was bad in EQ2. I thought 30
> should be a few MONTHS, like it was when Everquest was a new game. It
> takes 1 day to hit 30 in WoW, on a brand new server.

I agree with your general sentiment about the ease of leveling in WoW but I
don't think I share your characterization of the EQ or EQ2 experience. They
were tougher, but devs ALWAYS underestimate the determinaion of those who
will power level their way to the top. In general, you're right, EQ was much
harder, with the tough experience loss hits you faced, the hell levels, and
the rigidly enforced grouping requirements. Still, the first guy to 50 did
it in a couple of months (Kalaran, Rogue in May of 1999). I've been playing
since release (November 9, 2004) and I'm just now breaking 40 in EQ2.

--
Redbeard, the Treasure Hunter
<Veritas>
Dwarven Mystic and Alchemist
Loyal Citizen of the Antonia Bayle
Current resident of the Willow Wood, City of Qeynos
http://veritas.everquest2guilds.com

Descendant of the Elder Winterfury Thunderwolf
<Resolution, Retired>
Barbarian Prophet of The Tribunal
Retired Citizen of Firiona Vie
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:31:26 +0800, "Ceowulf" <ceo@NOSPAMii.ATALLnet>
wrote:

>"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:422a9c31.40920131@news.verizon.net...
>
>> Sure, of course. On-line RPG/adventuring games are essentially a
>> social pursuit... anybody that plays them exclusively macho-style is
>> missing the whole rationale. My sons play both AC1 and Wow with their
>> friends and have a great time. Sure they level-up periodically, but
>> the questing, battles and the social interaction is where they have
>> most fun.
>
>Just curious John. You say your sons play AC1 and WoW, two very
>"life-stealing" games if ever I saw one. Do you limit their time playing
>these online games? Or do you think that those social interactions you
>mentioned are going to be enough for your sons in the real world?
>

Nope.

On-line game-play has to be time limited. Highly addictive otherwise.
Too long continuously-on produces distinct anti-social behavior in the
real world. Addiction withdrawal symptoms... It WILL adversely affect
school grades if not controlled, preferably by instilling
self-discipline in the player.. but many teenagers that enjoy
on-line play are not that way inclined... so the parent(s) HAVE
to be involved in ensuring that balance is maintained.

However, both of my sons have developed accurate multi-fingered
speed-typing skills (without any Mavis Beacon...) which is essential
in today's work-world for many jobs, ( and in college ) so the
experience is not totally negative. Also, in our case, on-line play
frequently includes real-life friends - for instance our two sons
frequenly play as a team and include other school-friends, if they
are on-line.


>Please don't interpret that as a dig or anything by the way! I apologise if
>it came across like one. The reason I asked is while eating breakfast my
>girlfriend pointed out an add from the dating section of the paper, and I
>wanted to share it and get other gamers opinions. A 18yo boy was looking for
>friends, his interests included: playing computer games. I laughed, and then
>felt sorry for the kid. Too many young guys today {im only 26 mind you, so
>I'm talking about teens and pre-teen :)} are living their lives online,
>their social interaction being limited to IRC, MSN, and the latest MMORPG.
>GenX is currently nurturing a generation of socially retarded adults who may
>have difficulty interacting with todays society. Does that worry anyone? Or
>are we all content in knowing that its natures way of slowing population
>growth?
>

Excellent observations.
It will be interesting to see other responses.

John Lewis

>Ceo-
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

>
>
>>"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>news:422a9c31.40920131@news.verizon.net...
>>Please don't interpret that as a dig or anything by the way! I apologise if
>>it came across like one. The reason I asked is while eating breakfast my
>>girlfriend pointed out an add from the dating section of the paper, and I
>>wanted to share it and get other gamers opinions. A 18yo boy was looking for
>>friends, his interests included: playing computer games. I laughed, and then
>>felt sorry for the kid. Too many young guys today {im only 26 mind you, so
>>I'm talking about teens and pre-teen :)} are living their lives online,
>>their social interaction being limited to IRC, MSN, and the latest MMORPG.
>>GenX is currently nurturing a generation of socially retarded adults who may
>>have difficulty interacting with todays society. Does that worry anyone? Or
>>are we all content in knowing that its natures way of slowing population
>>growth?
>>
>

I'm not worried at all.

According to educational theory, you should learn certain skills by a
certain age. In practice, you learn what you need when you need it. You
are right. These kids aren't learning the socials skill that they will
need. When the time comes and they NEED these skills, most will learn
them. Some won't. That's no worse than life outside of computers, where
some kids really learn their social skills, while others don't.

In fact, I find that the kids today have better social skill then when I
was in school. I am envious at how well spoke, social, and gifted most
of them are.

CH