Crafters are the most important forces in older MMORPG. In EVE-online, the game even cannot move on without crafters because most of items are crafted. Even in Lineage II, crafters are money-making machine which every player should have one.
During the early years crafting in DAoC was very important, in part because of the absolutely junk drops. In it's current state Dark Age of Camelot does not need crafting, it is helpful but not absolutely necessary and many gear drops are much better than what a crafter can make, unfortunately.
In DAoC today Alchemy is probably THE single craft that would be missed most because of the many different kind of pots crafted, from under water breathing potion to health potion and everything in between.
Through the leveling process [including champion levels and master levels], and gear drops, underwater breathing can be picked up, even as a cast for an entire group to benefit, and better gear have protective abilities.
However, even today, after all of these years, players both craft and purchase potions.
Molvik is a level 35 through 39 battlegrounds [PvP - for as many as want to pile onto the map]. For those that love Molvik crafted gear is very important. At that level Mythic has locked out many of the high level items, actually you can use the gear, you just do not get any magic benefits, making it worthless to lower and mid level players.
I agree Swing,
If you played DAOC during Shrouded Isles, it was in my opinion, the best MMO's experience that I've ever had. Why many might ask? The game was community run.....let me get a bit nostalgic and list some awesome stuff that has been lost in current MMO's.
Crafters - You went to a town, and in Broadcast, people peddling their wares, crafters taking orders on consignment. Buying selling goods, it was electric. If you were in need of a new set of armor, sword, shield, bow, ARROWS, you went to Diogel, (if you're and Alb). I loved it.
Customization - If you spent the time to get the cash to buy a full MP (Masterpiece) suit, with weapons, etc. You could go after the "Holy Grail" of DAOC, the perfect Template. Spellcrafting, and the Template were great ideas. Only ruined by TOA gear, not TOA itself. I loved it because you could play your toon your way. If you wanted more hits, you could get more hits, more str, more dex, whatever. But it worked, and it was great, legendary IMO.
The use of drops - SI DAOC, had Caer Sidi Dungeon, and Avalon City, and some other nice One time Drops, Jewels, etc. These were worked into templates, for further customization etc. Also a bit of praggin rights. I remeber, being one of two scouts for the longest time on Guin with the fabled "Heart of the North" Maybe it wasn't the best bow, but I sure as hell used the heck out of it............a good many RR's worth of kills, and it looked good too boot. Was a nice part of my template for sure.
The guild - Remeber you went into a dungeon as a huge group, sure there were no "TOOLS" or "RAID GROUPS" but I can remember doing huge raid runs as alliance groups or big pickups, or as guild groups. There was no DKP, there was no peking order, there was simply a /random 100. I should restate this topic as honesty. Something that is certainly missing now. Now it's all about progression. To me as a guild, you need to work together. If the guild progresses so do you.
But anyway, that's some of the great things, about old MMO's well one in particular. Honestly, some day's I wonder, if we all love the old games soo much, why is it we don't play them anylonger? One day, I'll have that answer!
Vack FF XIV - the single worse game to cross my hard drive, ever.
You make a lot of good points. However, there is one huge problem here that I will point out in defense of the many arguments that have been made in opposition to your points regarding what older mmo's offered.
You spent 75 days in Norrath.
No offense...but most people who would assess the above...would consider you a n00blet sir.
Most of these articles are spot on. The only way you could defend the newer games is if you've never played the older games and you're a blind fanatic. In which case, it's hard to even have an opinion due to the fact that you don't know what the older games were like.
The only issue I've had thus far is in this article, Crafting being the topic. In old games, I will admit that crafting was a little harder to get into due to the fact that the UI and game world were a little more harsh when compared to todays games. However, In many games like Ultima Online, crafting was the end-all..be-all. Almost everything was player made. It was a true supply and demand, player run economy. Name a game released in the past 5 years that can even pretend to hang with what UO offered and still does. Mortal Online? Too bad that game was designed by amatuers.
Today, crafting is nothing more than an afterthought of gameplay. It's a money and time-sink. There is very limited use for anything crafted by players and the majority of it is never made again because of the level progression system. Not only that, you have to level up in todays games in order to craft more complex items. In games like UO, you didn't have to fight a single day of your life in order to become a GM blacksmith for instance.
There's biased. Then there is truth. If you don't have any experience with older games, keep your mouth shut because your opinion is invalid. Older games were all about content. Newer games is all about the almighty dollar. It's a shame, but that's just how it is.
More players does not equal better game. But the multitude of titles out right now with similar subscription numbers as the original games shows that yes, there is a market for the newer MMORPGs. And it's thriving.
But this article doesn't address any of the issues properly. The poster makes it quite clear that they have played a very limited number of MMORPGs extensively. With such limited experience in the various "new games" that are out, I find his observations in an overall sense laughable at best.
What vast experience do you need with what seems like 90% of the NEW MMOS being WoW clones? In most cases now if you played one you have seemingly played 40 others just like it.
The MMO market right now is flooded and saturated with a bunch of cheap knockoffs. Lets take the F2P MMOs and group almost all of them together. They are so similar that I have found myself trying to remember if the game I am trying now(RoM) has the named wolf or was that Gates of Andaron or Earth Something or other. Way too many games right now are pathetically unoriginal and BORING. I am so tired of the Fed-Ex Quest System(take this here and deliver a letter to the guy 8 feet away from me) or the Kill X number of Y and bring me their anuses or whatever other body part is needed to make your next piece of armor.
Fed-Ex quests happened in EQ and DAoC as well. No difference there. And certainly a lot of people found EQ boring at times.
Speaking of subscription numbers where are you getting yours? Almost no company reveals their numbers since most are privately owned. Sure WoW touts theirs but as the king of the mountain financially that is to be expected. The rest of these companies all try and hide their numbers, usually that is a sign of the numbers not being as good as hoped since you rarely feel the need to hide success. Case in point, DDO they never discussed money or subs until they went F2P and the numbers went up so much they felt the need to tell everyone about it. Until then they were silent because their numbers were obviously not brag worthy.
On 29 July 2002, Sony announced that there were "...over 430,000..."
Stuff in red is opinion that I disagree with.
I know a lot of new games that are either at those numbers or above them. And those are peak numbers for the older games.
Cool, you think the old school was so much better. I don't. I think that people tend to have overly fond memories of those games. I played them. I've gone back and played them since. They are not the excellent experiences I remembered them to be.
What the article needed was a LOT less bias. Taking a realistic approach to most of these subjects instead of taking a nostalgic one would have been nice. The author shows a lack of perspective in my opinion.
What new games are at those numbers? A link and proof would help a little.
This is the first part where I feel that the author is obviously letting his personal feelings impact his view of things.
In parts 1 and 2 there were some points about his generalizations that I took issue with, but he at least acknowledged that there were exceptions that did better than how he characterized the the group as a whole. This was fair and honest.
In This part we see an expose on nostalgia and not reality when he talks about Guilds. In many of the new MMOs they are still vital and just as neccisary as he made them out to be in the past. Also in most of the older MMOs if the new player educattion was better many of the needs for guilds would be diminished.
I think that the guild rating probably should have been ommitted or have been a more honest 5/10 or 6/10 tie if he wanted to keep the catagory.
A similar bias is seen when he talks about Difficukty/Time Sink. The author stongly beleives what is a minority view of the consumers in that the trip to End Game is the most important part. In many ways I agree, because I will not play a game when getting to the End Game is not fun and interesting. But big problems that his old school games has was player retention. If getting to the End Game was too difficult players left in frustration. If they get to end game and there is nothing to do, players left in frustration. The modern MMORPG player seems to disagree with his premise that the trip to End Game is all that MMMOs are about. The industry numbers seem to indicate that the adjustment that newer games have made in the trip to the End Game is what the vast majority of Consumers want.
I will admit that many of the New MMORPGs are in the same situation that the Old MMORPGs suffer from. That is that they have not learned how to make the End Game fun and enjoyable. I feel that with his bias removed the Old MMOs wouild have scored worse and the new ones marginally better. I would have given Old a 6/7 mostly because they have had hears to incorporate an End Game and New a 5/7 since in general their trip to end game is faster but less amusing and many still need a lot of work on their end game.
The crafting section returns to is fair assesment.
There are some New MMOs where crafted items are the best avaliable and fill a critical aspect of the game. There are some older MMOs where crafting is a game all to itself. But in both cases there are plenty of the older MMOs that have a bad crafting system and plenty of new MMOs that have an even worse one. There are exceptions but I feel that his overall industry ratings are correct here.
I know a lot of new games that are either at those numbers or above them. And those are peak numbers for the older games.
Cool, you think the old school was so much better. I don't. I think that people tend to have overly fond memories of those games. I played them. I've gone back and played them since. They are not the excellent experiences I remembered them to be.
What the article needed was a LOT less bias. Taking a realistic approach to most of these subjects instead of taking a nostalgic one would have been nice. The author shows a lack of perspective in my opinion.
What new games are at those numbers? A link and proof would help a little.
Oh, I don't actually care about the numbers of the newer games. It's common knowledge that current MMOs reach these peak numbers all the time.
Remember this saying ALWAYS when you go on a nostalgia trip.
Star Wars Galaxies was a good game. WAS. It no longer IS. No I am not talking about the NGE, I am talking about the passage of time.
We moved on. The days when people enjoyed finding quest objectives with no clue whatsoever are gone. It turns out most people WANT the quest text to actually give a direction... but ONCE you start on that road, you have to deal with a LOT of people who can't read maps mod edit. It is all very well saying "Find the cave north of the city" but when people don't understand "city" or don't know where north is, what do you do?
Then you indicate it on the map, or give them a glowing trail (Lotro/AoC and EQ2) but then you only encourage those who do not read the quest and if nobody reads the quest but a handful of die hards, why bother with complex quests descriptions anymore?
Full crafting economy? How are you going to cater for the socially challenged who can't work together with other people? You can't have both a loot and crafting economy. Lotro proves that much. But do one and you upset the other. The old games could do one because nobody knew that these games were utter failures. That is right. Everquest was a dismal failure. UO? Disaster! Why? Because if they were ANY good at all, THEY would have been the WoW and gotten the 10 million+ players YEARS earlier.
Sure sure, you can blame 56k modems, but these games IF they had been better should have broken a million. They didn't.
I still think there is a room for a really well done "hardcore" mmorpg BUT I can only make it work by CHARGING more to a SMALLER audience. And that just doesn't sell well to investors.
But I also realize that in any design for a new hardcore MMO, the likes of SWG you need to accept that the old games were not perfect. Looking back with to much nostalgia will just result in yet another MMO launch that dies on launch date.
Originally posted by sfc1971 ONCE you start on that road, you have to deal with a LOT of people who can't read maps (women) or English (Americans). It is all very well saying "Find the cave north of the city" but when people don't understand "city" or don't know where north is, what do you do?
*rude gesture*
Many of us read maps and English just fine thank you for very much for your lame stereotypes on both accounts. Sorry I couldn't really read the rest of your post after that insulting bit.
As far as numbers go, ya have to keep in mind, not every tom, dick, and harry had a computer, let alone the internet, in the EQ, even the DAOC days. Since then gaming has become much more mainstream in this country, then it was say in 1998 - 2001ish. I remember not telling anyone I gamed at all, yes afraid of ridicule, because let's face it, gaming wasn't looked upon favorably, and truthfully it still isn't totally accepted in Western Society. I tell my Canadian friends all the time, how much I envy the acceptance that exsists in Canada, as compared to the U.S. however is has gotten leaps and bounds better. Heck even my boss at work knows what WoW is, and is cool with it, and he's totally old school.
So 250K subscriptions in 1999 is just as good if not better than 1 million today. The internet issue is huge as well. Broadband was unheard of unless you had money to burn. So, I don't think a numbers arguement is even remotely valid on this topic at all. It's kinda like saying, hey I bought a Shelby Mustang in 1967 for 4,500.00, and today they are 50,000.00!! It's apples and oranges, both fruit, yet totally different.
Vack FF XIV - the single worse game to cross my hard drive, ever.
So 250K The internet draw back is huge as well. Broadband was unheard of unless you had money to burn.
So true! When I first started playing EQ, cable internet wasn't available in my city so I was stuck dealing with extremely slow and unstable dialup or spending $300 a month on ISDN. My wife has never been a gamer, but I think she was more excited than I was when we were invited to beta test this new thing called "broadband" for roadrunner.
I disagree slightly about the crafting but otherwise just wanted to say that I love this series so far and agree with almost everything the author is saying. I feel the same way about today's MMO's and what they have lost.
Well after reading (well skimming in the latter 2) the first three parts of this article, I have decided that it is the largest, biased, subjective, useless and dumb wall of text I have ever seen.
I know a lot of new games that are either at those numbers or above them. And those are peak numbers for the older games.
Cool, you think the old school was so much better. I don't. I think that people tend to have overly fond memories of those games. I played them. I've gone back and played them since. They are not the excellent experiences I remembered them to be.
What the article needed was a LOT less bias. Taking a realistic approach to most of these subjects instead of taking a nostalgic one would have been nice. The author shows a lack of perspective in my opinion.
What new games are at those numbers? A link and proof would help a little.
Oh, I don't actually care about the numbers of the newer games. It's common knowledge that current MMOs reach these peak numbers all the time.
Really? Are you talking about free to play games with an item shop? Those are not subscriptions. Your debate is falling apart very fast. How can something very few companies release be common knowledge?
I know a lot of new games that are either at those numbers or above them. And those are peak numbers for the older games.
Cool, you think the old school was so much better. I don't. I think that people tend to have overly fond memories of those games. I played them. I've gone back and played them since. They are not the excellent experiences I remembered them to be.
What the article needed was a LOT less bias. Taking a realistic approach to most of these subjects instead of taking a nostalgic one would have been nice. The author shows a lack of perspective in my opinion.
What new games are at those numbers? A link and proof would help a little.
Oh, I don't actually care about the numbers of the newer games. It's common knowledge that current MMOs reach these peak numbers all the time.
Really? Are you talking about free to play games with an item shop? Those are not subscriptions. Your debate is falling apart very fast. How can something very few companies release be common knowledge?
I know a lot of new games that are either at those numbers or above them. And those are peak numbers for the older games.
Cool, you think the old school was so much better. I don't. I think that people tend to have overly fond memories of those games. I played them. I've gone back and played them since. They are not the excellent experiences I remembered them to be.
What the article needed was a LOT less bias. Taking a realistic approach to most of these subjects instead of taking a nostalgic one would have been nice. The author shows a lack of perspective in my opinion.
What new games are at those numbers? A link and proof would help a little.
Oh, I don't actually care about the numbers of the newer games. It's common knowledge that current MMOs reach these peak numbers all the time.
Really? Are you talking about free to play games with an item shop? Those are not subscriptions. Your debate is falling apart very fast. How can something very few companies release be common knowledge?
Keep reaching there buddy.
I can see asking you for facts and reality is a waste of time. This discussion has reached its obvious conclusion. Instead of answering you dodge because you have nothing to back it up, with that i wish you a good day and good bye.
I know a lot of new games that are either at those numbers or above them. And those are peak numbers for the older games.
Cool, you think the old school was so much better. I don't. I think that people tend to have overly fond memories of those games. I played them. I've gone back and played them since. They are not the excellent experiences I remembered them to be.
What the article needed was a LOT less bias. Taking a realistic approach to most of these subjects instead of taking a nostalgic one would have been nice. The author shows a lack of perspective in my opinion.
What new games are at those numbers? A link and proof would help a little.
Oh, I don't actually care about the numbers of the newer games. It's common knowledge that current MMOs reach these peak numbers all the time.
Really? Are you talking about free to play games with an item shop? Those are not subscriptions. Your debate is falling apart very fast. How can something very few companies release be common knowledge?
Keep reaching there buddy.
I can see asking you for facts and reality is a waste of time. This discussion has reached its obvious conclusion. Instead of answering you dodge because you have nothing to back it up, with that i wish you a good day and good bye.
You are saying that you think older games had a higher population than MMOs that come out today.
I'm saying that plenty of MMOs that came out 2004 or later match or exceed the subscription numbers of MMOs before 2004. Specifically, EQ and UO.
This discussion has nothing to do with the fact that the authors analysis of new mmos vs old mmos is highly stooped in nostalgia and bias and does not properly address almost every issue that is brought forward. Even his reasoning for the numbers is very obviously biased and based not in reality, but on rose colored memories of younger days.
I know a lot of new games that are either at those numbers or above them. And those are peak numbers for the older games.
Cool, you think the old school was so much better. I don't. I think that people tend to have overly fond memories of those games. I played them. I've gone back and played them since. They are not the excellent experiences I remembered them to be.
What the article needed was a LOT less bias. Taking a realistic approach to most of these subjects instead of taking a nostalgic one would have been nice. The author shows a lack of perspective in my opinion.
What new games are at those numbers? A link and proof would help a little.
Oh, I don't actually care about the numbers of the newer games. It's common knowledge that current MMOs reach these peak numbers all the time.
Really? Are you talking about free to play games with an item shop? Those are not subscriptions. Your debate is falling apart very fast. How can something very few companies release be common knowledge?
Keep reaching there buddy.
I can see asking you for facts and reality is a waste of time. This discussion has reached its obvious conclusion. Instead of answering you dodge because you have nothing to back it up, with that i wish you a good day and good bye.
You are saying that you think older games had a higher population than MMOs that come out today.
I'm saying that plenty of MMOs that came out 2004 or later match or exceed the subscription numbers of MMOs before 2004. Specifically, EQ and UO.
This discussion has nothing to do with the fact that the authors analysis of new mmos vs old mmos is highly stooped in nostalgia and bias and does not properly address almost every issue that is brought forward. Even his reasoning for the numbers is very obviously biased and based not in reality, but on rose colored memories of younger days.
I never said older games had a higher population. I said tell me all these new games that are hitting those numbers. The facts are the market is saturated with the same old games over and over, but the number of potential gamers is millions more then it was when MMOs came out just based on the number of people who now have internet access. So there should be plenty of games hitting 250k subs, yet I have not seen this list you seem to claim is common knowledge. Common knowledge is usually used when someone lacks the facts that are asked for so instead claims everyone already knows. It is usually not true.
The number of cancelled games the last few years that failed to reach a break even population tells you that the games hitting 250k subs is few and far between. People trying free games do not count.
Wow!!!! I'm going to disagree big time with you when it comes to crafting in older mmos.
Crafting was everything, the older games basically revolved around crafting.
Crafting in todays games are a side mini game while in older games crafting was the life blood!
I honestly think the OP did that on purpose for a reaction even the old school mmo haters know how important crafting was in those games.
After reading that I've honestly lost all interest in the rest of this series...
Edit: Man... I'm generally pissed at this dudes opinion. I just feel really strongly about crafting in older games. From UO to EVE crafting has been much more indepth and generally important game wide than in todays offerings. Only two games could make a case for half decent crafting. Vanguard & Fallen Earth other than that crafting has been worthless imo.
Lotro's crafting isn't bad.
To me, crafting isn't a mini-game but it isn't super hard either today. Crafting, in reality, is basically a job. To make it in-depth/made in detail with tons of steps would definitely suck. A lot of people don't play MMORPGs to have another job to do.
Aion tried to put it a bit deep, you having to constantly run around for materials and trying to crit on what you're crafting. It really did feel like a job and people didn't like it. Vanguard crafting people say was fun and the best but I also heard people say it was just too much.
I think this article is putting out what would work better now, the older MMO crafting wouldn't work out too well today. As the article also said, there wasn't that great of rewards in the older crafting, I don't believe the article said all of the older MMOs did that though.
I can see asking you for facts and reality is a waste of time. This discussion has reached its obvious conclusion. Instead of answering you dodge because you have nothing to back it up, with that i wish you a good day and good bye.
You are saying that you think older games had a higher population than MMOs that come out today.
I'm saying that plenty of MMOs that came out 2004 or later match or exceed the subscription numbers of MMOs before 2004. Specifically, EQ and UO.
This discussion has nothing to do with the fact that the authors analysis of new mmos vs old mmos is highly stooped in nostalgia and bias and does not properly address almost every issue that is brought forward. Even his reasoning for the numbers is very obviously biased and based not in reality, but on rose colored memories of younger days.
I never said older games had a higher population. I said tell me all these new games that are hitting those numbers. The facts are the market is saturated with the same old games over and over, but the number of potential gamers is millions more then it was when MMOs came out just based on the number of people who now have internet access. So there should be plenty of games hitting 250k subs, yet I have not seen this list you seem to claim is common knowledge. Common knowledge is usually used when someone lacks the facts that are asked for so instead claims everyone already knows. It is usually not true.
The number of cancelled games the last few years that failed to reach a break even population tells you that the games hitting 250k subs is few and far between. People trying free games do not count.
Cool. Here. So that you can end your crusade to save your precious old games.
I can see asking you for facts and reality is a waste of time. This discussion has reached its obvious conclusion. Instead of answering you dodge because you have nothing to back it up, with that i wish you a good day and good bye.
You are saying that you think older games had a higher population than MMOs that come out today.
I'm saying that plenty of MMOs that came out 2004 or later match or exceed the subscription numbers of MMOs before 2004. Specifically, EQ and UO.
This discussion has nothing to do with the fact that the authors analysis of new mmos vs old mmos is highly stooped in nostalgia and bias and does not properly address almost every issue that is brought forward. Even his reasoning for the numbers is very obviously biased and based not in reality, but on rose colored memories of younger days.
I never said older games had a higher population. I said tell me all these new games that are hitting those numbers. The facts are the market is saturated with the same old games over and over, but the number of potential gamers is millions more then it was when MMOs came out just based on the number of people who now have internet access. So there should be plenty of games hitting 250k subs, yet I have not seen this list you seem to claim is common knowledge. Common knowledge is usually used when someone lacks the facts that are asked for so instead claims everyone already knows. It is usually not true.
The number of cancelled games the last few years that failed to reach a break even population tells you that the games hitting 250k subs is few and far between. People trying free games do not count.
Cool. Here. So that you can end your crusade to save your precious old games.
Thank you for missing the point. Guild wars has no subscription. I thought I made it pretty clear we were discussing SUBSCRIPTION based games. Thank you for proving my point repeatedly.
I went to your charts, you might want to recheck your so called COMMON KNOWLEDGE. The number of games according to that chart that have ever been past UOs peak was 9 or 10. That works out to one game a year. Sorry but your argument gets weaker everytime you try.
You are obviously angry about something, I will guess it is because you make biased unknowledgable claims, sounds like what you accused the author of this with doing.
If you want to continue this discussion I do suggest getting more familiar with the subject you think you know so much about.
I can see asking you for facts and reality is a waste of time. This discussion has reached its obvious conclusion. Instead of answering you dodge because you have nothing to back it up, with that i wish you a good day and good bye.
You are saying that you think older games had a higher population than MMOs that come out today.
I'm saying that plenty of MMOs that came out 2004 or later match or exceed the subscription numbers of MMOs before 2004. Specifically, EQ and UO.
This discussion has nothing to do with the fact that the authors analysis of new mmos vs old mmos is highly stooped in nostalgia and bias and does not properly address almost every issue that is brought forward. Even his reasoning for the numbers is very obviously biased and based not in reality, but on rose colored memories of younger days.
I never said older games had a higher population. I said tell me all these new games that are hitting those numbers. The facts are the market is saturated with the same old games over and over, but the number of potential gamers is millions more then it was when MMOs came out just based on the number of people who now have internet access. So there should be plenty of games hitting 250k subs, yet I have not seen this list you seem to claim is common knowledge. Common knowledge is usually used when someone lacks the facts that are asked for so instead claims everyone already knows. It is usually not true.
The number of cancelled games the last few years that failed to reach a break even population tells you that the games hitting 250k subs is few and far between. People trying free games do not count.
Cool. Here. So that you can end your crusade to save your precious old games.
Thank you for missing the point. Guild wars has no subscription. I thought I made it pretty clear we were discussing SUBSCRIPTION based games. Thank you for proving my point repeatedly.
I went to your charts, you might want to recheck your so called COMMON KNOWLEDGE. The number of games according to that chart that have ever been past UOs peak was 9 or 10. That works out to one game a year. Sorry but your argument gets weaker everytime you try.
You are obviously angry about something, I will guess it is because you make biased unknowledgable claims, sounds like what you accused the author of this with doing.
If you want to continue this discussion I do suggest getting more familiar with the subject you think you know so much about.
So now nine or ten games don't count. Ah well, at least you tried.
I can see asking you for facts and reality is a waste of time. This discussion has reached its obvious conclusion. Instead of answering you dodge because you have nothing to back it up, with that i wish you a good day and good bye.
You are saying that you think older games had a higher population than MMOs that come out today.
I'm saying that plenty of MMOs that came out 2004 or later match or exceed the subscription numbers of MMOs before 2004. Specifically, EQ and UO.
This discussion has nothing to do with the fact that the authors analysis of new mmos vs old mmos is highly stooped in nostalgia and bias and does not properly address almost every issue that is brought forward. Even his reasoning for the numbers is very obviously biased and based not in reality, but on rose colored memories of younger days.
I never said older games had a higher population. I said tell me all these new games that are hitting those numbers. The facts are the market is saturated with the same old games over and over, but the number of potential gamers is millions more then it was when MMOs came out just based on the number of people who now have internet access. So there should be plenty of games hitting 250k subs, yet I have not seen this list you seem to claim is common knowledge. Common knowledge is usually used when someone lacks the facts that are asked for so instead claims everyone already knows. It is usually not true.
The number of cancelled games the last few years that failed to reach a break even population tells you that the games hitting 250k subs is few and far between. People trying free games do not count.
Cool. Here. So that you can end your crusade to save your precious old games.
Thank you for missing the point. Guild wars has no subscription. I thought I made it pretty clear we were discussing SUBSCRIPTION based games. Thank you for proving my point repeatedly.
I went to your charts, you might want to recheck your so called COMMON KNOWLEDGE. The number of games according to that chart that have ever been past UOs peak was 9 or 10. That works out to one game a year. Sorry but your argument gets weaker everytime you try.
You are obviously angry about something, I will guess it is because you make biased unknowledgable claims, sounds like what you accused the author of this with doing.
If you want to continue this discussion I do suggest getting more familiar with the subject you think you know so much about.
So now nine or ten games don't count. Ah well, at least you tried.
In a way you make it sound as though you like crafting so much that it would be a game unto itself ... Farmville?
I feel that crafting should be easy to perform and early crafting should be inexpensive. I do not like to run around finding ten thousand flowers or whatever to level up, plus the time spent in actual crafting. Also, crafting should be completely spelled out in a game. How can people know where parts A, B, and C are if they do not have a clue?
Also, crafted items SHOULD be among the best items in the game, otherwise, why make people kill thousands of mobs, to get drops, then skin or salvage, rinse and repeat, thousands of times to get at the top or your craft?
Most people do not seem to appreciate how much time someone spends crafting. They need rewared in some manner, so, do not try to give them 85 gold when something cost 750 gold to make. And, don't expect them to stop what they are doing and make you a full set of armor, a shield, and sword, spellcraft it [or whatever the name is in different games], and use alchemy skill to polish it off.
I do not look at crafting as fun, I look at it as a necessary evil of games. At the same time, game creators should reward crafters with outstanding gear.
Now, if someone loves Farmville, buys an MMO, and only wants to craft, I see nothing wrong with that. However, sooner or later he or she might pull his or her head out of the ground and see what the game really has to offer [hopefully].
Ok you dont seem to get why crafters craft in mmos and how they enrich the mmo community. Because people were happy to just farm resorces and develope or discover tecniques to crafting unique items for other players to use. They created their own community hubs where they would chat to and become friends with their regular customers and other crafters or just chat with passers by. They would gain renown for this and other players that focused their game time on the adventuring side of the game would feel that sence of pride when they really wanted to talk about the cool vendor/crafter they found that made them this awsome item. now the pride is only in bragging about the fact that they have had to run the same dungeon 200 times over in the hope of the rare item dropping and then having to wait inline for the next time it droped because they were out bid on dkp for it.
You are right however on the part of the significance of the items that they create. it seems that the crafting items in the wow model crafting systems cater heavely on consuables that fule the pre raid buff parrade and items rearly last 2 levels after the newest expantion has been lanched
Im not saying that there arnt any good crafting models in mmos anymore. Its just that there seems to be a greater number of them that apply a similer crafting model to the WoW crafting system. As apposed to pre 2004
This is a list of games that Ive played that had something that i liked about the crafting system
Older Games
Ultima Online - good crafting requring dedicated crafters to get the best gear.
Daoc - some worthwile gear created, but the method of crafting was tedious.
Anarchy Online - good crafting system that allowd you to make your character feel unique, allthough you could generaly get better items simply by adveturing.
SWG - Awsome crafting system that alowed players to craft pritty much everything to a higher standard than anything you could get from adventuring although it has been recently supperceeded by the items you can get fron the TCG, game purchace item bundles, and vet rewards.
EvE online - You can make everything and you have to spend time developing your character to beable to make the stuff (ive put this into older games list as it has been around for a while and the crafting priciples have largley remaned intact)
New Games
Everquest 2 - Actualy had quests to gain further crafting knowlage and you actualy had to pay attention when trying to craft an item or it could all go horrably wrong.
Vanguard - you could allocate stats into crafting and had a quest arc from lvl 1 till cap
Fallen Earth - the items that you crafte are generic but you can make pritty much everything(not found anything yet that i cant make other than paper >.<) this game seems to activly encourage players to craft as its part of the nuts and bolts of making your character work.
Comments
I agree Swing,
If you played DAOC during Shrouded Isles, it was in my opinion, the best MMO's experience that I've ever had. Why many might ask? The game was community run.....let me get a bit nostalgic and list some awesome stuff that has been lost in current MMO's.
Crafters - You went to a town, and in Broadcast, people peddling their wares, crafters taking orders on consignment. Buying selling goods, it was electric. If you were in need of a new set of armor, sword, shield, bow, ARROWS, you went to Diogel, (if you're and Alb). I loved it.
Customization - If you spent the time to get the cash to buy a full MP (Masterpiece) suit, with weapons, etc. You could go after the "Holy Grail" of DAOC, the perfect Template. Spellcrafting, and the Template were great ideas. Only ruined by TOA gear, not TOA itself. I loved it because you could play your toon your way. If you wanted more hits, you could get more hits, more str, more dex, whatever. But it worked, and it was great, legendary IMO.
The use of drops - SI DAOC, had Caer Sidi Dungeon, and Avalon City, and some other nice One time Drops, Jewels, etc. These were worked into templates, for further customization etc. Also a bit of praggin rights. I remeber, being one of two scouts for the longest time on Guin with the fabled "Heart of the North" Maybe it wasn't the best bow, but I sure as hell used the heck out of it............a good many RR's worth of kills, and it looked good too boot. Was a nice part of my template for sure.
The guild - Remeber you went into a dungeon as a huge group, sure there were no "TOOLS" or "RAID GROUPS" but I can remember doing huge raid runs as alliance groups or big pickups, or as guild groups. There was no DKP, there was no peking order, there was simply a /random 100. I should restate this topic as honesty. Something that is certainly missing now. Now it's all about progression. To me as a guild, you need to work together. If the guild progresses so do you.
But anyway, that's some of the great things, about old MMO's well one in particular. Honestly, some day's I wonder, if we all love the old games soo much, why is it we don't play them anylonger? One day, I'll have that answer!
Vack
FF XIV - the single worse game to cross my hard drive, ever.
You make a lot of good points. However, there is one huge problem here that I will point out in defense of the many arguments that have been made in opposition to your points regarding what older mmo's offered.
You spent 75 days in Norrath.
No offense...but most people who would assess the above...would consider you a n00blet sir.
Thanks,
K
Most of these articles are spot on. The only way you could defend the newer games is if you've never played the older games and you're a blind fanatic. In which case, it's hard to even have an opinion due to the fact that you don't know what the older games were like.
The only issue I've had thus far is in this article, Crafting being the topic. In old games, I will admit that crafting was a little harder to get into due to the fact that the UI and game world were a little more harsh when compared to todays games. However, In many games like Ultima Online, crafting was the end-all..be-all. Almost everything was player made. It was a true supply and demand, player run economy. Name a game released in the past 5 years that can even pretend to hang with what UO offered and still does. Mortal Online? Too bad that game was designed by amatuers.
Today, crafting is nothing more than an afterthought of gameplay. It's a money and time-sink. There is very limited use for anything crafted by players and the majority of it is never made again because of the level progression system. Not only that, you have to level up in todays games in order to craft more complex items. In games like UO, you didn't have to fight a single day of your life in order to become a GM blacksmith for instance.
There's biased. Then there is truth. If you don't have any experience with older games, keep your mouth shut because your opinion is invalid. Older games were all about content. Newer games is all about the almighty dollar. It's a shame, but that's just how it is.
What new games are at those numbers? A link and proof would help a little.
This is the first part where I feel that the author is obviously letting his personal feelings impact his view of things.
In parts 1 and 2 there were some points about his generalizations that I took issue with, but he at least acknowledged that there were exceptions that did better than how he characterized the the group as a whole. This was fair and honest.
In This part we see an expose on nostalgia and not reality when he talks about Guilds. In many of the new MMOs they are still vital and just as neccisary as he made them out to be in the past. Also in most of the older MMOs if the new player educattion was better many of the needs for guilds would be diminished.
I think that the guild rating probably should have been ommitted or have been a more honest 5/10 or 6/10 tie if he wanted to keep the catagory.
A similar bias is seen when he talks about Difficukty/Time Sink. The author stongly beleives what is a minority view of the consumers in that the trip to End Game is the most important part. In many ways I agree, because I will not play a game when getting to the End Game is not fun and interesting. But big problems that his old school games has was player retention. If getting to the End Game was too difficult players left in frustration. If they get to end game and there is nothing to do, players left in frustration. The modern MMORPG player seems to disagree with his premise that the trip to End Game is all that MMMOs are about. The industry numbers seem to indicate that the adjustment that newer games have made in the trip to the End Game is what the vast majority of Consumers want.
I will admit that many of the New MMORPGs are in the same situation that the Old MMORPGs suffer from. That is that they have not learned how to make the End Game fun and enjoyable. I feel that with his bias removed the Old MMOs wouild have scored worse and the new ones marginally better. I would have given Old a 6/7 mostly because they have had hears to incorporate an End Game and New a 5/7 since in general their trip to end game is faster but less amusing and many still need a lot of work on their end game.
The crafting section returns to is fair assesment.
There are some New MMOs where crafted items are the best avaliable and fill a critical aspect of the game. There are some older MMOs where crafting is a game all to itself. But in both cases there are plenty of the older MMOs that have a bad crafting system and plenty of new MMOs that have an even worse one. There are exceptions but I feel that his overall industry ratings are correct here.
Oh, I don't actually care about the numbers of the newer games. It's common knowledge that current MMOs reach these peak numbers all the time.
You can never go back
Remember this saying ALWAYS when you go on a nostalgia trip.
Star Wars Galaxies was a good game. WAS. It no longer IS. No I am not talking about the NGE, I am talking about the passage of time.
We moved on. The days when people enjoyed finding quest objectives with no clue whatsoever are gone. It turns out most people WANT the quest text to actually give a direction... but ONCE you start on that road, you have to deal with a LOT of people who can't read maps mod edit. It is all very well saying "Find the cave north of the city" but when people don't understand "city" or don't know where north is, what do you do?
Then you indicate it on the map, or give them a glowing trail (Lotro/AoC and EQ2) but then you only encourage those who do not read the quest and if nobody reads the quest but a handful of die hards, why bother with complex quests descriptions anymore?
Full crafting economy? How are you going to cater for the socially challenged who can't work together with other people? You can't have both a loot and crafting economy. Lotro proves that much. But do one and you upset the other. The old games could do one because nobody knew that these games were utter failures. That is right. Everquest was a dismal failure. UO? Disaster! Why? Because if they were ANY good at all, THEY would have been the WoW and gotten the 10 million+ players YEARS earlier.
Sure sure, you can blame 56k modems, but these games IF they had been better should have broken a million. They didn't.
I still think there is a room for a really well done "hardcore" mmorpg BUT I can only make it work by CHARGING more to a SMALLER audience. And that just doesn't sell well to investors.
But I also realize that in any design for a new hardcore MMO, the likes of SWG you need to accept that the old games were not perfect. Looking back with to much nostalgia will just result in yet another MMO launch that dies on launch date.
*rude gesture*
Many of us read maps and English just fine thank you for very much for your lame stereotypes on both accounts. Sorry I couldn't really read the rest of your post after that insulting bit.
As far as numbers go, ya have to keep in mind, not every tom, dick, and harry had a computer, let alone the internet, in the EQ, even the DAOC days. Since then gaming has become much more mainstream in this country, then it was say in 1998 - 2001ish. I remember not telling anyone I gamed at all, yes afraid of ridicule, because let's face it, gaming wasn't looked upon favorably, and truthfully it still isn't totally accepted in Western Society. I tell my Canadian friends all the time, how much I envy the acceptance that exsists in Canada, as compared to the U.S. however is has gotten leaps and bounds better. Heck even my boss at work knows what WoW is, and is cool with it, and he's totally old school.
So 250K subscriptions in 1999 is just as good if not better than 1 million today. The internet issue is huge as well. Broadband was unheard of unless you had money to burn. So, I don't think a numbers arguement is even remotely valid on this topic at all. It's kinda like saying, hey I bought a Shelby Mustang in 1967 for 4,500.00, and today they are 50,000.00!! It's apples and oranges, both fruit, yet totally different.
Vack
FF XIV - the single worse game to cross my hard drive, ever.
So true! When I first started playing EQ, cable internet wasn't available in my city so I was stuck dealing with extremely slow and unstable dialup or spending $300 a month on ISDN. My wife has never been a gamer, but I think she was more excited than I was when we were invited to beta test this new thing called "broadband" for roadrunner.
I disagree slightly about the crafting but otherwise just wanted to say that I love this series so far and agree with almost everything the author is saying. I feel the same way about today's MMO's and what they have lost.
heh,
Well after reading (well skimming in the latter 2) the first three parts of this article, I have decided that it is the largest, biased, subjective, useless and dumb wall of text I have ever seen.
mod edit
Hrrrrmmmmm Arghhh
If Ya Ain't Dyin, Ya Ain't Tryin
Some wise words there my friend.
Really? Are you talking about free to play games with an item shop? Those are not subscriptions. Your debate is falling apart very fast. How can something very few companies release be common knowledge?
Keep reaching there buddy.
I can see asking you for facts and reality is a waste of time. This discussion has reached its obvious conclusion. Instead of answering you dodge because you have nothing to back it up, with that i wish you a good day and good bye.
You are saying that you think older games had a higher population than MMOs that come out today.
I'm saying that plenty of MMOs that came out 2004 or later match or exceed the subscription numbers of MMOs before 2004. Specifically, EQ and UO.
This discussion has nothing to do with the fact that the authors analysis of new mmos vs old mmos is highly stooped in nostalgia and bias and does not properly address almost every issue that is brought forward. Even his reasoning for the numbers is very obviously biased and based not in reality, but on rose colored memories of younger days.
I never said older games had a higher population. I said tell me all these new games that are hitting those numbers. The facts are the market is saturated with the same old games over and over, but the number of potential gamers is millions more then it was when MMOs came out just based on the number of people who now have internet access. So there should be plenty of games hitting 250k subs, yet I have not seen this list you seem to claim is common knowledge. Common knowledge is usually used when someone lacks the facts that are asked for so instead claims everyone already knows. It is usually not true.
The number of cancelled games the last few years that failed to reach a break even population tells you that the games hitting 250k subs is few and far between. People trying free games do not count.
Lotro's crafting isn't bad.
To me, crafting isn't a mini-game but it isn't super hard either today. Crafting, in reality, is basically a job. To make it in-depth/made in detail with tons of steps would definitely suck. A lot of people don't play MMORPGs to have another job to do.
Aion tried to put it a bit deep, you having to constantly run around for materials and trying to crit on what you're crafting. It really did feel like a job and people didn't like it. Vanguard crafting people say was fun and the best but I also heard people say it was just too much.
I think this article is putting out what would work better now, the older MMO crafting wouldn't work out too well today. As the article also said, there wasn't that great of rewards in the older crafting, I don't believe the article said all of the older MMOs did that though.
The cake is still a lie.
Cool. Here. So that you can end your crusade to save your precious old games.
http://www.slashgear.com/guild-wars-hits-5-million-subscribers-2710470/
http://www.videogamer.com/news/world_of_warcraft_passes_10_million_subscriptions.html
This should help you look at some more recent numbers for many titles. Not completely foolproof, but it gets the point across.
http://mmodata.net/
Imo cool beans. thank you for your post
Thank you for missing the point. Guild wars has no subscription. I thought I made it pretty clear we were discussing SUBSCRIPTION based games. Thank you for proving my point repeatedly.
I went to your charts, you might want to recheck your so called COMMON KNOWLEDGE. The number of games according to that chart that have ever been past UOs peak was 9 or 10. That works out to one game a year. Sorry but your argument gets weaker everytime you try.
You are obviously angry about something, I will guess it is because you make biased unknowledgable claims, sounds like what you accused the author of this with doing.
If you want to continue this discussion I do suggest getting more familiar with the subject you think you know so much about.
So now nine or ten games don't count. Ah well, at least you tried.
mod edit
keep it civil please.
Ok you dont seem to get why crafters craft in mmos and how they enrich the mmo community. Because people were happy to just farm resorces and develope or discover tecniques to crafting unique items for other players to use. They created their own community hubs where they would chat to and become friends with their regular customers and other crafters or just chat with passers by. They would gain renown for this and other players that focused their game time on the adventuring side of the game would feel that sence of pride when they really wanted to talk about the cool vendor/crafter they found that made them this awsome item. now the pride is only in bragging about the fact that they have had to run the same dungeon 200 times over in the hope of the rare item dropping and then having to wait inline for the next time it droped because they were out bid on dkp for it.
You are right however on the part of the significance of the items that they create. it seems that the crafting items in the wow model crafting systems cater heavely on consuables that fule the pre raid buff parrade and items rearly last 2 levels after the newest expantion has been lanched
Im not saying that there arnt any good crafting models in mmos anymore. Its just that there seems to be a greater number of them that apply a similer crafting model to the WoW crafting system. As apposed to pre 2004
This is a list of games that Ive played that had something that i liked about the crafting system
Older Games
Ultima Online - good crafting requring dedicated crafters to get the best gear.
Daoc - some worthwile gear created, but the method of crafting was tedious.
Anarchy Online - good crafting system that allowd you to make your character feel unique, allthough you could generaly get better items simply by adveturing.
SWG - Awsome crafting system that alowed players to craft pritty much everything to a higher standard than anything you could get from adventuring although it has been recently supperceeded by the items you can get fron the TCG, game purchace item bundles, and vet rewards.
EvE online - You can make everything and you have to spend time developing your character to beable to make the stuff (ive put this into older games list as it has been around for a while and the crafting priciples have largley remaned intact)
New Games
Everquest 2 - Actualy had quests to gain further crafting knowlage and you actualy had to pay attention when trying to craft an item or it could all go horrably wrong.
Vanguard - you could allocate stats into crafting and had a quest arc from lvl 1 till cap
Fallen Earth - the items that you crafte are generic but you can make pritty much everything(not found anything yet that i cant make other than paper >.<) this game seems to activly encourage players to craft as its part of the nuts and bolts of making your character work.