Why is Online Gaming considered Second Class?

[Dannyalcatraz]

I sympathize with those whose friends have moved away- it's happened to us all- but usually, I was the one moving who had to find a new group.

See, I was an Army Brat, and moved every few years. Combine that with chasing an education, and I've gamed in 3 states, 5 cities, and I don't know how many different groups.

I was also fortunate to find a group of guys with whom to play since the mid-1980s...during summer breaks and vacations when we were all going to school.

 

[Walking Dad]

Mostly, I dislike the lack of personal interaction. Oh, you can claim it's a social event, but really, it's just faces on a screen, or text on a board.

Only for RPG? Just curious, because you answer in an online forum. Online gaming is no social event for me, but the only way I can possibly game right now.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Only for RPG? Just curious, because you answer in an online forum.

I can't answer for him, but for ME? Yeah, pretty much. I come here to talk RPGs, etc.

And this comprises 80% of my social online life. I don't do Facebook, Twitter, or any of that stuff. For me, the social online world is ENWorld, email, and a couple of guitar sites.

The rest? No, thank you.

 

[Hussar]

I sympathize with those whose friends have moved away- it's happened to us all- but usually, I was the one moving who had to find a new group.

See, I was an Army Brat, and moved every few years. Combine that with chasing an education, and I've gamed in 3 states, 5 cities, and I don't know how many different groups.

I was also fortunate to find a group of guys with whom to play since the mid-1980s...during summer breaks and vacations when we were all going to school.

Note how you said that though DannyA - 5 cities. Makes it much easier to find a group. Imagine trying to find a group now if you moved to a small town in (pulling a name out of my butt) Arkansas. I can't imagine it's all that easy. And, even if you do manage to find a group, there's no guarantee that it's people who share your tastes.

Heck, look at all the agony aunt style posts around complaining about how people would like to game but just can't find a group. It's hardly rare.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Now, for me, I don't want what you're calling a 3rd generation table. One that is more video game than tabletop game. For one, that sort of thing puts a HUGE crimp in DMing - a 3d environment, for example, would be virtually (heh) impossible for me to create on my own. I'd be stuck using the prepackaged stuff and would hate it.

I love the fact that a VTT is what it says on the box - a virtual tabletop. Non system specific, and often fairly simple to use - although some of the advanced features can be a bear. I just spent the last year hopping through about half a dozen different systems, so, a VTT that is designed for one game is not something I have any interest in.

I'm not suggesting a video game--far from it. That's just going the opposite extreme. It's almost a mental block in any kind of early software. Let's see, we've got people roleplaying around a table, so we'll try to emulate that exactly (current VTT). Or, we'll go whole hog and make the computer do everything (video game). And then eventually, it occurs to someone that things are done the way they are in table top and video games because those things work in those mediums.And only then does someone design a game from the ground up to get the best out of multiple people sitting around their computers playing a game run by one (or more) of those people.

As for working for only one game, I agree. I'm just taking a longer view. Design a game as I'm suggesting, and there will be other games designed using similar philosophies. You'll get to where you can play multiples of those games on such a system.

One of the reasons Neverwinter Nights largely failed in its (ambitious adoption) goals was that the designers couldn't bridge that conceptual divide--though I'm not sure the audience could have then bridged it either. For example, the designers assumed that the graphics had to be such that people walking through it got more emphasis than ease of DMs using the set or people constructing new tiles. Given the audience, that might have even been a correct assessment. But it's not a good assessment for a VTT where people sit at their computers and roleplay with a live DM.

 

[WizarDru]

Heck, look at all the agony aunt style posts around complaining about how people would like to game but just can't find a group. It's hardly rare.

Well now you're in a question of priorities; how important is gaming to that particular person? As someone in his forties, gaming is no longer something that just happens. It's an effort, often that requires considerable planning. We have jobs, we have kids and we have social lives beyond gaming. Adjustments are made. I no longer can assume 5 players every Friday night or Saturday afternoon for 6-8 hour sessions. If we get a solid four hours in, it's a long game.

But we make it a priority to play.

Is it harder to find a group in a more sparsely populated area? Sure it is. But it can be done. Arkansas has gaming groups just like anybody else, with game days. And even when you can't find groups, you can find local gaming conventions or to game stores. To say nothing of scanning the boards here and elsewhere to find games to join. If someone wants to play, he can...he may need to drive or he may need to play less frequently than he likes, but he can play. Not to mention he could create or help create new players.

This is not to say it will work for everyone and it's not to say that online gaming is not a good thing. But it's kind of an excuse to say that you can't find a game if you really want to play...it's just a question of how much effort you want to expend. If online gaming is far better return on your time and effort, then do so. But when most people say they can't find a group, what they really mean is that it's more work than it's worth to them to try and organize a group for them, which is OK, but different from 'can't', IMHO.

 

[tenkar]

Online gaming just seems completely unappealing to me. If I didn't have real groups to game with, I'd just stop gaming.

To me,the only way to play is at a table, surrounded by my fellow humans. I'd rather eat glass than "game" online. It seems like the opposite of fun. Computers kill the mood. And if you can't hear the verbal inflections on what your fellow players are saying, and look them in the eye while you respond, you're missing all the good stuff.

I don't consider online RPGs to even be RPGs. If I'm having a conversation with people about RPGs (which happens a lot since I work at a game store) & they reveal that they play online only, then I kind of tune what they're saying out. I just smile and nod until I get a chance to politely disengage from the conversation. It's not that i want to be rude or anything, I just don't consider what they do to actually be gaming.

I think you are confusing MMORPGs like WoW, EQ2, WAR and the like with playing D&D or WoD or some such over a Virtual Table Top.

Playing over a VTT can come fairly close to scratching the RPG itch if you don't have access to a face to face group. I'd prefer face to face given the choice, but work and family obligations (and the dispersal of my old gaming group due to the same issues) has made playing via a Virtual Table Top a satisfactory solution at the moment.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Note how you said that though DannyA - 5 cities. Makes it much easier to find a group. Imagine trying to find a group now if you moved to a small town in (pulling a name out of my butt) Arkansas. I can't imagine it's all that easy. And, even if you do manage to find a group, there's no guarantee that it's people who share your tastes.

Heck, look at all the agony aunt style posts around complaining about how people would like to game but just can't find a group. It's hardly rare.

My experience may be a distinct minority, but it is certainly counter to this suggestion. I've been about a 50/50 split of rural areas versus small cities in my gaming. The pool of people that I was interested in having at my table has always been about the same in both. The pool of people gaming is bigger in the cities, but not the pool of people gaming in ways that I find interesting.

Maybe I'm just lucky in that my preferred style is something that is solidly represented. Maybe its because I've recruited so many new gamers, and they like the style they find themselves in. Maybe its because I spent the first 6 years in a rural area, and had to develop a style that fit the demographic. But my problem has always been having to turn people away, not finding them.

 

[Aeolius]

Maybe I'm just lucky in that my preferred style is something that is solidly represented.

You mean I might have trouble finding players for an undersea Cerulean Seas (Pathfinder) game in my town of 7,000 folks?

I still can't figure out a time of day that I could play/DM offline, that would not be disruptive to my family (8 kids, here). Granted, my situation may differ from that of everyone else.

 

[Hussar]

8 kids. WOW. Sir, you have the constitution of a whale. I've got two wee ones and run a small business, and I have a heck of a time finding time to play. Hats off sir.

BTW, the Arkansas example was just that. But, WizardDru, your point is taken. Is there a difference though. I can't find a group and Finding a group is too difficult/too much work for me aren't really all that different at the end of the day. You're still not playing because there is no one to play with.

For me, gaming offline would be impossible. My schedule just would not allow it. As I said, I play Tuesday mornings 9 am to 12 pm. There's no way I'd find a face to face group in that time slot.