Many people here are claiming the OP is just being nostalgic and not really remembering everything the way it really was. and there may be some measure of "Rose colored glasses" he's looking back through. But I think there is also some truth to what he is saying.
1. Today's MMOs are clearly aiming for greater mass appeal. This means catering to the lowest common denominator. Quality has suffered.
2. Far too much shift towards single player experience. To the point where the MMO aspect has been lost and we now have single player games where other people are playing their single player games in the same world. ESO's Emperor title? Really? What's that saying about too many chiefs and no braves? So now we have MMOs trying to compete in the single player experience and totally fail because the SP games blow MMOs away for that.
3. Ultimately, I think the proof is in the pudding. Keeping ratios even.....That is, accounting for the larger populations from then to today, mostly due to the mass-appeal thing I mentioned above . The older game's while smaller in overall populations had a much higher long term retention percentage of their players. Meaning, those games delivered more of what their target audience was looking for than games today. Today, we have totaling sales in and around the millions with MASSIVE drop-offs after 30 days. If that isn't an indication of a target market that is not getting what it's been promised, I don't know what is.
Yet we look at these games because they manage to still make profits after that and say that's a success and that the drop-offs are just to be expected. I say, that's not true. I say that's clearly a tremendous failure within the genre and indicated a much larger sense of disappointment from the players who are searching for an experience.
Although, most of them are probably trying to re capture their experience from the 1st 4-6 years of WoW, I suppose you can even add that time frame to the OP's list since that experience is gone too.
As for SWG...People love to look at it as an example of failure. Well, it had problems, huge problems. But it's ultimate failure was due to mismanagement and not poor design.
So to sum up and translate your arguments:
1. I believe games are made for idiots today (they aren't, different tastes does not equal lower denomination, Scarlet Blade is made for people who are lower denominators and even then there are some who play that game not for the cheap sex appeal, fucked up I know but it shoots holes in your gross generalization);
2. I believe players should play how I WANT THEM TO not how they wish ( MMOs means massively multiplayer online, nowhere,nowhere, does it imply forced grouping, your tastes do not dictate a genre and there are plenty of games that have both SP and MP activities within the MMO genre like say EVE-Online, WoW, etc, and believe it or not EVE with all its scary scammers, vile griefers and whatnot has one of the best most helpful communities currently in existence);
3. I believe correlation = causality. Seriously dude...proof is in the pudding?... how many players did SWG lose? 100%? How many did WoW lose in its years of existence? How many did UO? Meridian? EQ 1 and 2? Stop trying to pass off pseudo-facts (your own beliefs) as anything other than what they are because anyone with a high-school diploma can see the holes in your arguments (most MMOs tend to lose most of their playerbases and if you want we can talk about the scores of failed MMOs from the "good old days when devs weren't basically lawyers").
@The Moderator that checks this post after he reports it: Pointing out how he tries to inflame others who like modern games, for whatever reason, is not against the rules and if he chooses to take offense it is not my fault as it is not my intent.
Many people here are claiming the OP is just being nostalgic and not really remembering everything the way it really was. and there may be some measure of "Rose colored glasses" he's looking back through. But I think there is also some truth to what he is saying.
1. Today's MMOs are clearly aiming for greater mass appeal. This means catering to the lowest common denominator. Quality has suffered.
2. Far too much shift towards single player experience. To the point where the MMO aspect has been lost and we now have single player games where other people are playing their single player games in the same world. ESO's Emperor title? Really? What's that saying about too many chiefs and no braves? So now we have MMOs trying to compete in the single player experience and totally fail because the SP games blow MMOs away for that.
3. Ultimately, I think the proof is in the pudding. Keeping ratios even.....That is, accounting for the larger populations from then to today, mostly due to the mass-appeal thing I mentioned above . The older game's while smaller in overall populations had a much higher long term retention percentage of their players. Meaning, those games delivered more of what their target audience was looking for than games today. Today, we have totaling sales in and around the millions with MASSIVE drop-offs after 30 days. If that isn't an indication of a target market that is not getting what it's been promised, I don't know what is.
Yet we look at these games because they manage to still make profits after that and say that's a success and that the drop-offs are just to be expected. I say, that's not true. I say that's clearly a tremendous failure within the genre and indicated a much larger sense of disappointment from the players who are searching for an experience.
Although, most of them are probably trying to re capture their experience from the 1st 4-6 years of WoW, I suppose you can even add that time frame to the OP's list since that experience is gone too.
As for SWG...People love to look at it as an example of failure. Well, it had problems, huge problems. But it's ultimate failure was due to mismanagement and not poor design.
So to sum up and translate your arguments:
1. I believe games are made for idiots today (they aren't, different tastes does not equal lower denomination, Scarlet Blade is made for people who are lower denominators and even then there are some who play that game not for the cheap sex appeal, fucked up I know but it shoots holes in your gross generalization);
2. I believe players should play how I WANT THEM TO not how they wish ( MMOs means massively multiplayer online, nowhere,nowhere, does it imply forced grouping, your tastes do not dictate a genre and there are plenty of games that have both SP and MP activities within the MMO genre like say EVE-Online, WoW, etc, and believe it or not EVE with all its scary scammers, vile griefers and whatnot has one of the best most helpful communities currently in existence);
3. I believe correlation = causality. Seriously dude...proof is in the pudding?... how many players did SWG lose? 100%? How many did WoW lose in its years of existence? How many did UO? Meridian? EQ 1 and 2? Stop trying to pass off pseudo-facts (your own beliefs) as anything other than what they are because anyone with a high-school diploma can see the holes in your arguments (most MMOs tend to lose most of their playerbases and if you want we can talk about the scores of failed MMOs from the "good old days when devs weren't basically lawyers").
@The Moderator that checks this post after he reports it: Pointing out how he tries to inflame others who like modern games, for whatever reason, is not against the rules and if he chooses to take offense it is not my fault as it is not my intent.
So to sum up your post......
Let me re-word what this poster said to something I wanted him to say so that I can more easily attack his post with points he really didn't make.
You made that up all by yourself.........and then proceeded ridicule your own points.
LOL, so, did you win that argument?
P.S. I love how you throw terms like "Pseudo-facts" out there when you don't bring any facts at all. You can't even properly quote people.
And your note to the moderator is evidence of your intention with your post.
Many people here are claiming the OP is just being nostalgic and not really remembering everything the way it really was. and there may be some measure of "Rose colored glasses" he's looking back through. But I think there is also some truth to what he is saying.
1. Today's MMOs are clearly aiming for greater mass appeal. This means catering to the lowest common denominator. Quality has suffered.
2. Far too much shift towards single player experience. To the point where the MMO aspect has been lost and we now have single player games where other people are playing their single player games in the same world. ESO's Emperor title? Really? What's that saying about too many chiefs and no braves? So now we have MMOs trying to compete in the single player experience and totally fail because the SP games blow MMOs away for that.
3. Ultimately, I think the proof is in the pudding. Keeping ratios even.....That is, accounting for the larger populations from then to today, mostly due to the mass-appeal thing I mentioned above . The older game's while smaller in overall populations had a much higher long term retention percentage of their players. Meaning, those games delivered more of what their target audience was looking for than games today. Today, we have totaling sales in and around the millions with MASSIVE drop-offs after 30 days. If that isn't an indication of a target market that is not getting what it's been promised, I don't know what is.
Yet we look at these games because they manage to still make profits after that and say that's a success and that the drop-offs are just to be expected. I say, that's not true. I say that's clearly a tremendous failure within the genre and indicated a much larger sense of disappointment from the players who are searching for an experience.
Although, most of them are probably trying to re capture their experience from the 1st 4-6 years of WoW, I suppose you can even add that time frame to the OP's list since that experience is gone too.
As for SWG...People love to look at it as an example of failure. Well, it had problems, huge problems. But it's ultimate failure was due to mismanagement and not poor design.
So to sum up and translate your arguments:
1. I believe games are made for idiots today (they aren't, different tastes does not equal lower denomination, Scarlet Blade is made for people who are lower denominators and even then there are some who play that game not for the cheap sex appeal, fucked up I know but it shoots holes in your gross generalization);
2. I believe players should play how I WANT THEM TO not how they wish ( MMOs means massively multiplayer online, nowhere,nowhere, does it imply forced grouping, your tastes do not dictate a genre and there are plenty of games that have both SP and MP activities within the MMO genre like say EVE-Online, WoW, etc, and believe it or not EVE with all its scary scammers, vile griefers and whatnot has one of the best most helpful communities currently in existence);
3. I believe correlation = causality. Seriously dude...proof is in the pudding?... how many players did SWG lose? 100%? How many did WoW lose in its years of existence? How many did UO? Meridian? EQ 1 and 2? Stop trying to pass off pseudo-facts (your own beliefs) as anything other than what they are because anyone with a high-school diploma can see the holes in your arguments (most MMOs tend to lose most of their playerbases and if you want we can talk about the scores of failed MMOs from the "good old days when devs weren't basically lawyers").
@The Moderator that checks this post after he reports it: Pointing out how he tries to inflame others who like modern games, for whatever reason, is not against the rules and if he chooses to take offense it is not my fault as it is not my intent.
So to sum up your post......
Let me re-word what this poster said to something I wanted him to say so that I can more easily attack his post with points he really didn't make.
Not one of the things you said I said was actually said by me. You made those up all by yourself.........and then proceeded ridicule your own points.
LOL, so, did you win that argument?
Yes, I made everything up, as can clearly be seen in the underlined bits above. I do love it when someone plays the innocent game but does everything to prove MMOs aren't the sort of games he/she should be playing ( not too sure which though considering... Counterstrike 1.6 may be a fit for your 2nd point quite nicely as you die horribly when you try to play alone, it is deeper than it looks so 1 is satisfied, most people rage quit it and it does have quite the retention on par with MMOs of the "good old days" considering it is still a pro game after around 2 decades).
Do us all a favor and stop creating strawmen before accusing others of doing it.
Many people here are claiming the OP is just being nostalgic and not really remembering everything the way it really was. and there may be some measure of "Rose colored glasses" he's looking back through. But I think there is also some truth to what he is saying.
1. Today's MMOs are clearly aiming for greater mass appeal. This means catering to the lowest common denominator. Quality has suffered.
2. Far too much shift towards single player experience. To the point where the MMO aspect has been lost and we now have single player games where other people are playing their single player games in the same world. ESO's Emperor title? Really? What's that saying about too many chiefs and no braves? So now we have MMOs trying to compete in the single player experience and totally fail because the SP games blow MMOs away for that.
3. Ultimately, I think the proof is in the pudding. Keeping ratios even.....That is, accounting for the larger populations from then to today, mostly due to the mass-appeal thing I mentioned above . The older game's while smaller in overall populations had a much higher long term retention percentage of their players. Meaning, those games delivered more of what their target audience was looking for than games today. Today, we have totaling sales in and around the millions with MASSIVE drop-offs after 30 days. If that isn't an indication of a target market that is not getting what it's been promised, I don't know what is.
Yet we look at these games because they manage to still make profits after that and say that's a success and that the drop-offs are just to be expected. I say, that's not true. I say that's clearly a tremendous failure within the genre and indicated a much larger sense of disappointment from the players who are searching for an experience.
Although, most of them are probably trying to re capture their experience from the 1st 4-6 years of WoW, I suppose you can even add that time frame to the OP's list since that experience is gone too.
As for SWG...People love to look at it as an example of failure. Well, it had problems, huge problems. But it's ultimate failure was due to mismanagement and not poor design.
So to sum up and translate your arguments:
1. I believe games are made for idiots today (they aren't, different tastes does not equal lower denomination, Scarlet Blade is made for people who are lower denominators and even then there are some who play that game not for the cheap sex appeal, fucked up I know but it shoots holes in your gross generalization);
2. I believe players should play how I WANT THEM TO not how they wish ( MMOs means massively multiplayer online, nowhere,nowhere, does it imply forced grouping, your tastes do not dictate a genre and there are plenty of games that have both SP and MP activities within the MMO genre like say EVE-Online, WoW, etc, and believe it or not EVE with all its scary scammers, vile griefers and whatnot has one of the best most helpful communities currently in existence);
3. I believe correlation = causality. Seriously dude...proof is in the pudding?... how many players did SWG lose? 100%? How many did WoW lose in its years of existence? How many did UO? Meridian? EQ 1 and 2? Stop trying to pass off pseudo-facts (your own beliefs) as anything other than what they are because anyone with a high-school diploma can see the holes in your arguments (most MMOs tend to lose most of their playerbases and if you want we can talk about the scores of failed MMOs from the "good old days when devs weren't basically lawyers").
@The Moderator that checks this post after he reports it: Pointing out how he tries to inflame others who like modern games, for whatever reason, is not against the rules and if he chooses to take offense it is not my fault as it is not my intent.
So to sum up your post......
Let me re-word what this poster said to something I wanted him to say so that I can more easily attack his post with points he really didn't make.
Not one of the things you said I said was actually said by me. You made those up all by yourself.........and then proceeded ridicule your own points.
LOL, so, did you win that argument?
Yes, I made everything up, as can clearly be seen in the underlined bits above. I do love it when someone plays the innocent game but does everything to prove MMOs aren't the sort of games he/she should be playing ( not too sure which though considering... Counterstrike 1.6 may be a fit for your 2nd point quite nicely as you die horribly when you try to play alone, it is deeper than it looks so 1 is satisfied, most people rage quit it and it does have quite the retention on par with MMOs of the "good old days" considering it is still a pro game after around 2 decades).
Do us all a favor and stop creating strawmen before accusing others of doing it.
Isn't it wnderful when you can change things out of context?
Catering to lowest common denominator has to do with preferences and tastes. Not being idiots. I didn't call anyone an idiot. You made that up.
Saying MMOs shouldn't focus on single player aspects because single player games do it better, has little or nothing to do with me wanting anyone to play how I want them to. That's where you made that up.
As for your 3rd part, You are trying to imply that SWG lost more players than I want to believe.....Yet you can't say how many players it lost and why or when, While I don't have any numbers it's been pretty much accepted that Whatever retention the game had, took a huge nosedive because the game was re-designed.
You accuse me of psuedo facts and yet what are you doing? But your references are intentionally vague and only serve to try to throw my statements in a bad light.
Do you even know what a Strawman is? It's when you intentionally misrepresent what someone says to strengthen your own argument. You did that....Not me.
And again, your pre-emptive statement to the moderators in your previous post is clear evidence of your intention to troll me.
Many people here are claiming the OP is just being nostalgic and not really remembering everything the way it really was. and there may be some measure of "Rose colored glasses" he's looking back through. But I think there is also some truth to what he is saying.
1. Today's MMOs are clearly aiming for greater mass appeal. This means catering to the lowest common denominator. Quality has suffered.
2. Far too much shift towards single player experience. To the point where the MMO aspect has been lost and we now have single player games where other people are playing their single player games in the same world. ESO's Emperor title? Really? What's that saying about too many chiefs and no braves? So now we have MMOs trying to compete in the single player experience and totally fail because the SP games blow MMOs away for that.
3. Ultimately, I think the proof is in the pudding. Keeping ratios even.....That is, accounting for the larger populations from then to today, mostly due to the mass-appeal thing I mentioned above . The older game's while smaller in overall populations had a much higher long term retention percentage of their players. Meaning, those games delivered more of what their target audience was looking for than games today. Today, we have totaling sales in and around the millions with MASSIVE drop-offs after 30 days. If that isn't an indication of a target market that is not getting what it's been promised, I don't know what is.
Yet we look at these games because they manage to still make profits after that and say that's a success and that the drop-offs are just to be expected. I say, that's not true. I say that's clearly a tremendous failure within the genre and indicated a much larger sense of disappointment from the players who are searching for an experience.
Although, most of them are probably trying to re capture their experience from the 1st 4-6 years of WoW, I suppose you can even add that time frame to the OP's list since that experience is gone too.
As for SWG...People love to look at it as an example of failure. Well, it had problems, huge problems. But it's ultimate failure was due to mismanagement and not poor design.
So to sum up and translate your arguments:
1. I believe games are made for idiots today (they aren't, different tastes does not equal lower denomination, Scarlet Blade is made for people who are lower denominators and even then there are some who play that game not for the cheap sex appeal, fucked up I know but it shoots holes in your gross generalization);
2. I believe players should play how I WANT THEM TO not how they wish ( MMOs means massively multiplayer online, nowhere,nowhere, does it imply forced grouping, your tastes do not dictate a genre and there are plenty of games that have both SP and MP activities within the MMO genre like say EVE-Online, WoW, etc, and believe it or not EVE with all its scary scammers, vile griefers and whatnot has one of the best most helpful communities currently in existence);
3. I believe correlation = causality. Seriously dude...proof is in the pudding?... how many players did SWG lose? 100%? How many did WoW lose in its years of existence? How many did UO? Meridian? EQ 1 and 2? Stop trying to pass off pseudo-facts (your own beliefs) as anything other than what they are because anyone with a high-school diploma can see the holes in your arguments (most MMOs tend to lose most of their playerbases and if you want we can talk about the scores of failed MMOs from the "good old days when devs weren't basically lawyers").
@The Moderator that checks this post after he reports it: Pointing out how he tries to inflame others who like modern games, for whatever reason, is not against the rules and if he chooses to take offense it is not my fault as it is not my intent.
So to sum up your post......
Let me re-word what this poster said to something I wanted him to say so that I can more easily attack his post with points he really didn't make.
Not one of the things you said I said was actually said by me. You made those up all by yourself.........and then proceeded ridicule your own points.
LOL, so, did you win that argument?
Yes, I made everything up, as can clearly be seen in the underlined bits above. I do love it when someone plays the innocent game but does everything to prove MMOs aren't the sort of games he/she should be playing ( not too sure which though considering... Counterstrike 1.6 may be a fit for your 2nd point quite nicely as you die horribly when you try to play alone, it is deeper than it looks so 1 is satisfied, most people rage quit it and it does have quite the retention on par with MMOs of the "good old days" considering it is still a pro game after around 2 decades).
Do us all a favor and stop creating strawmen before accusing others of doing it.
Isn't it wnderful when you can change things out of context?
Catering to lowest common denominator has to do with preferences and tastes. Not being idiots. I didn't call anyone an idiot. You made that up.
Saying MMOs shouldn't focus on single player aspects because single player games do it better, has little or nothing to do with me wanting anyone to play how I want them to. That's where you made that up.
As for your 3rd part, You are trying to imply that SWG lost more players than I want to believe.....Yet you can't say how many players it lost and why or when, While I don't have any numbers it's been pretty much accepted that Whatever retention the game had, took a huge nosedive because the game was re-designed.
You accuse me of psuedo facts and yet what are you doing? But your references are intentionally vague and only serve to try to throw my statements in a bad light.
Do you even know what a Strawman is? It's when you intentionally misrepresent what someone says to strengthen your own argument. You did that....Not me.
And again, your pre-emptive statement to the moderators in your previous post is clear evidence of your intention to troll me.
MMOs have always catered to solo players as well as group orientated players and even in EQ there were so called "solo friendly" classes. The only, only, difference between current MMOs and "ye oldy" ones is that people these days can choose to be solo as easily as grouped, no longer is one option gimped so people with a acute lack of empathy for any playstyle other than their own feel like they were "correct".
In pure percentages SWG lost as many players as all the other failed MMOs ever. The retention rates, believe it or not, for anything other than WoW (which is an interesting case study) is roughly the same regardless of genre, age or sophistication.
Can also be a misrepresentation of facts to suit an agenda not only words. Example: Fox News' regular schlock.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
It's all nostalgia and first love. There is no validation in the OP's post when it comes to actual gaming. I still think The Realm Online and Knight Online are the two greatest MMORPG's I have ever played. Are they actually? Hell no. World of Warcraft is probably the greatest MMORPG ever made and I haven't even played it past the 10 day free trial, mainly because I'm a Guild Wars 2 fan.
People just can't get over their first love in an MMORPG and you want that feeling back, but it is never going to happen. Ever. Enjoy the games we have because in reality they are 100x better than those old games, you just don't see it that way because of your lust for those old times.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
The only thing in this post I care to reply to is this.
It is a baseless, unfounded, untrue "ad-hom" accusation against me. You have no evidence of who I have or have not reported ever. Yet one more statement you simply made up. Did you ever consider the possibility that someone else may have taken issue with your posts or do you truly believe your behavior is that justifiable? It's so obvious, you are just intentionally trolling me. I wasn't even going to respond to you anymore, but that statement was just over the top and uncalled for.
I don't mind nostalgia. There is nothing wrong with remembering good times. However what I can't stand is the constant revisionist history that goes on in the guise of nostalgia.
When SWG came out I was playing DAoC. Two or three people from my guild left to play SWG. Within a week they were back claiming that SWG was buggy to the point of being unplayable and that PvP was pointless due to debilitating lag. One guy stuck it out and gave us constant reports right up until he quit because of the complete overhaul Sony did on the game. Basically everything now cited as "right" with the game was "wrong" back then. Each of his reports started with something like, "Well, they just missed on "XYZ" feature. If they'd only have done "ABC" it would have been great."
Now I'm going to go away from SWG because I didn't experience it personally. I did experience the glory days of DAoC and it's funny how the things everyone bitched and moaned about have now become the things that were great about "ye olde timey games." I suspect that what goes for DAoC goes for SWG as well.
1) Forced Grouping - Everyone today raves about forced grouping. However back in the day I heard nothing but rants about how it took half an hour of gaming time just to find a group to get started. How many remember putting your name on a list to get into a group camping a specific leveling area? Finlaiths anyone?
2) Down time/Teleport Padding to the different frontiers - Today everyone waxes poetic about down times in the game such as medding up health/mana and sitting on the teleporting pad for 10 minutes waiting for the mages to come down and beam you to the other frontiers. Oh what a wonderful time to talk to your realm mates and make merry. Horseapples. Those times were universal smoke/bathroom breaks and the ones that got back first did nothing but complain about having to wait. And how about waiting an extra ten minutes for those that went AFK and forgot to put on their teleporting necklaces and had to wait for the next port? Twenty minutes of game time sitting on your virtual arse waiting for something to happen so something else could happen and then maybe you could play the game. Oooooo fun! No wonder people actually roleplayed back then. You had to do something to kill the time while waiting for an opportunity to actually play the game.
3) In depth crafting systems - Well back in my day it took 237 days /played to make junior appretice crafter and we had to walk uphill both ways to the forge carrying huge piles of crafting materials and we were damn glad to get them. We were all a huge happy group of people sitting around the forge singing songs and swapping tales of adventure. Now-a-days these spoiled kids make master crafter in 30 minutes and they do it via a pet while they continue to quest! Folks, crafting back in the day was an absolute bitch. It took as long to level your crafting as it did to level your character. There were frequent dead spots in the leveling where you had to go out and farm up the cash to move up to the next level. All I ever heard was people complaining about how much they hated sitting there pushing one button and watching a green bar move across the screen, only to do it again and again and again. The only laughter I heard was maniacal hysteria when someone went through a marathon crafting session of several hours only to find out they still weren't high enough level to make ANYTHING that anyone wanted to buy. Remember having to find a leather crafter with high enough skills to make the leather linings you needed to make any kind of metal armor? And if you didn't want to wait around you could roll an alt and spend a thousand hours leveling leather crafting up to the sufficient level! How about having to level up woodworking so you could make handles for the swords you were trying to smith up? Oh, what fun! If you want crafting that realistic, get a job in a factory in real life.
4) Meaningful PvP - I have to be honest; I'm not sure what the hell this means. I think people mean that there was an element of risk to PvP and/or a system of risks and rewards for winning and losing in PvP. So then I look at a game like chess. Chess has been around for centuries and for those centuries (with the exception of war or gladitorial combat) chess has been the very definition of mano y mano contests. Its PvP in it's purest form. However there is no inherent risk or rewards system for winning and losing. You don't get to raid the other guy's wallet simply because you beat him at chess. You don't get to take his dog home because you check-mated him. You might lose some money if you bet, but you don't have to bet to play. Yet people have played chess avidly for centuries without any semblence of risk/reward.
By the by when did it become mandatory that someone get "rewarded" or "punished" for participating in PvP? Yea brother, we must slay that vile person who dared to roll the other faction and pilfer his meager purse and then hold up our bloody prize and scream our cyber victory to the gods! A MANLY type of PvP for MANLY MEN such as we! Piffle. I think people who believe this are in their 30s and still want a lollipop from the barber when they get their hair cut because they held still like a good boy while the barber cut their hair. If you want to PvP, don't wait for a reason. Just go out and do it. Kill for the sheer joy of it and play pool with your victim's eyeballs like a good virtual serial killer. When they ask you why you killed them don't say things like "LMAO" or "L2P Newbist!". Say something creative like, "well, my new armor was too tight in the crotch and its chaffing and that puts me in a really FOUL mood and when I'm in a foul mood I kill everyone in range. Now, hush up while I write my name on the ground in your blood!" Or how about finding a line of people and just killing the last person in line while shouting, "THOSE WHO ARE TARDY DO NOT GET FRUIT CUP!" The truth is if you do this you'll get to be a kind of cult anti-hero of the kind people will remember meeting. Thus not only did you make a good memory for you, but a good memory for them as well.
The point of this wall of text plus the bonus rant at the end is that "fun" is up to you. Anything can be "fun" if you go in with the idea of making your own fun. It doesn't matter if the game was made in 2014 or 414. If you wait for the game to make your fun you're going to be disappointed. Your fun is your responsibility and if the game isn't fun, then make it fun or quit and try something else.
Edits : Punctuation. Thanks Weird Al.
Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
The only thing in this post I care to reply to is this.
It is a baseless, unfounded, untrue "ad-hom" accusation against me. You have no evidence of who I have or have not reported ever. Yet one more statement you simply made up.
It's so obvious, you are just intentionally trolling me believing yourself to be justified in doing so.
I wasn't even going to respond to you anymore, but that statement was just over the top and uncalled for.
The fact you call gamers who are happy with modern MMOs as "lowest common denominators" which if you didn't know means they are either idiots or simple (they have access to the internet thus you cannot claim lack of information to form and evolve tastes beyond the most basic level) when compared to their 2003 era counterparts says everything that needs to be said especially considering you only felt like replying to the retort I gave to you attempting to call me a troll to discredit me.
When I saw the title header I thought this was another WoW fag fest post. I have to agree with the OP it is still the best mmo ever made.
And for the guy saying every thing else had been done already, wtf are you talking about mate this game came out in 2003 so exactly what had been done already because I never played any mmo post 2003 that was like swg. It was way ahead of its time.
The people talking about bugs this and bugs that, what game have you played that did not have bugs. I played swg for about 9 years and did not once come across a bug that broke the game for me or upset me enough to want to stop playing like most mmos that come out today which are full of bugs that publishers just outright ignore.
The only reason SWG shut down was because of that fucking stupid NGE patch, it was like runescape loosing the wild and player trade it just killed the game for a large amount of the player base.
Oh yea there was that other tiny reason they may have shut down,,,,, Fear of SWTOR......But if they had only kept there servers up for a little while longer I think they would have noticed there was nothing to worry about because SWTOR did not even come close to what swg had to offer.
SWG emu is a project (private server) started many many years ago and is only now starting to resemble what the actual game had to offer, I wish swg emu all the best and hope those guys at Disney do not try to shut them down as they did have a deal with SOE as far as im aware.
When I saw the title header I thought this was another WoW fag fest post. I have to agree with the OP it is still the best mmo ever made.
And for the guy saying every thing else had been done already, wtf are you talking about mate this game came out in 2003 so exactly what had been done already because I never played any mmo post 2003 that was like swg. It was way ahead of its time.
The people talking about bugs this and bugs that, what game have you played that did not have bugs. I played swg for about 9 years and did not once come across a bug that broke the game for me or upset me enough to want to stop playing like most mmos that come out today which are full of bugs that publishers just outright ignore.
The only reason SWG shut down was because of that fucking stupid NGE patch, it was like runescape loosing the wild and player trade it just killed the game for a large amount of the player base.
Oh yea there was that other tiny reason they may have shut down,,,,, Fear of SWTOR......But if they had only kept there servers up for a little while longer I think they would have noticed there was nothing to worry about because SWTOR did not even come close to what swg had to offer.
SWG emu is a project (private server) started many many years ago and is only now starting to resemble what the actual game had to offer, I wish swg emu all the best and hope those guys at Disney do not try to shut them down as they did have a deal with SOE as far as im aware.
It was not fear of SWTOR but the IP contract getting pulled.
Check the previous page for examples of what has been done since SWG... you would be surprised wtf I am talking about.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
The only thing in this post I care to reply to is this.
It is a baseless, unfounded, untrue "ad-hom" accusation against me. You have no evidence of who I have or have not reported ever. Yet one more statement you simply made up.
It's so obvious, you are just intentionally trolling me believing yourself to be justified in doing so.
I wasn't even going to respond to you anymore, but that statement was just over the top and uncalled for.
The fact you call gamers who are happy with modern MMOs as "lowest common denominators" which if you didn't know means they are either idiots or simple (they have access to the internet thus you cannot claim lack of information to form and evolve tastes beyond the most basic level) when compared to their 2003 era counterparts says everything that needs to be said especially considering you only felt like replying to the retort I gave to you attempting to call me a troll to discredit me.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
The only thing in this post I care to reply to is this.
It is a baseless, unfounded, untrue "ad-hom" accusation against me. You have no evidence of who I have or have not reported ever. Yet one more statement you simply made up.
It's so obvious, you are just intentionally trolling me believing yourself to be justified in doing so.
I wasn't even going to respond to you anymore, but that statement was just over the top and uncalled for.
The fact you call gamers who are happy with modern MMOs as "lowest common denominators" which if you didn't know means they are either idiots or simple (they have access to the internet thus you cannot claim lack of information to form and evolve tastes beyond the most basic level) when compared to their 2003 era counterparts says everything that needs to be said especially considering you only felt like replying to the retort I gave to you attempting to call me a troll to discredit me.
Haha, this argument was hilarious.
Except that what he's calling a "fact" that I said was in fact not what I said. He's making stuff up so that he can argue with it. What he's really doing is arguing with himself.
Developers making games that appeal to the biggest possible demographic they can hit with a single game has nothing to do with his above statement.
He hasn't even considered the possibility that just because he likes something, As it is, that it could be even better had the developers designed a game with even more focus around his particular demographic. But that possibility doesn't fit within his frame of reference since he is looking for a reason to take offence.
I'm not responding to him because he cannot deal with anything actual, or work with direct quotes keeping in context. He can only respond to posts after he has "rephrased" them to suit his own arguments. It's pointless now.
You can't have an argument on the internet because it's one sided... they only see what they want to see...
Not much unlike the old Pink Panther cartoons in which the dog is locked outside barking it's head off trying to warn it's master of an intruder inside but all you see is a dog jumping up and down mouthing a bark with absolutely no sound at all. It's quite hilarious to watch actually.
You cant discus swg because it always becomes the game was an 11/10 vrs everyone else. Even if you liked the game but saw its flaws for what they were you're the enemy
I think people miss their experiences within a certain game (especially their first of a type of genre) moreso than the game itself. FFXI was my first MMORPG and there were certain things it did for me that I don't think I'll ever get out of another MMORPG, but for me I feel the social experience outweighs the game features in some instances. I'm much more likely to stay with a game that I can find some imperfections with if I'm surrounded by people I want to play it with. I'm pretty sure this was the only reason I stuck around and played FFXIV 1.0.
Originally posted by Greymantle4 I feel your pain. I have not found a home since 2005 when the NGE hit and I left SWG for good.
Why can't you all move on? I moved on to GW2 and Rift and Champions of Regnum.
that was a big jump from what I originally played.
Please explain to us, for the non SWG players, what exactly you all want in a MMO, that wouldn't also be a dent in a developer's pocket to make!
i am listening ...
Never found a home since SWG counts for me aswell. Doesn't mean I am not enjoying other MMORPG's or have moved on.
I judge them for what they are and not in how I would have liked them.
Sure I love thinking back at the diversity we had back then but it was both the gamemechanics that made that magic with a strong community of people. Those who sticked with the game for years where dedicated to it's world and were part of it's worlds. You had player run shops, player city's. People actually traveled to meet certain well known crafters or gone mall shopping. People made museums, zoo's and players traveled to them just to see. And that was in a near seamless world, unlike RIFT where you get a big window to select which dimension you want to visit. Pretty cool never the less but miles apart of the feeling of just traveling around and bump onto it.
Never the less I know what the majority seems to want and it aint the type of SWG game, people want more GAME clear and simple. Nothing wrong with that. The only thing I keep saying is there is room enough to have diverse MMORPG's. So far we have to look at indie games or accept that most are openworld PVP.
Besides that I enjoy plenty of Themepark-ish MMORPG's. Currently enjoying ESO.
And I know I am a niche gamer when it comes to my wants and needs and have accepted and even enjoy today's games because I judge them on what they deliver and not on what I hoped for or made up in my mind it should have been. Made my gaming experiance allot more pleasant. And I just don't think a game like SWG would make it with today's majority of gamers. Which is also the reason why when looking at ArcheAge is looking like they understand that. You can't trow sandbox BAM! into a players face. Sure you will have you niche who accepts it but if your a A-Tittle gaming company your target is somewhat bigger so you need way's to introduce it's sandbox in a slower way then we oldschool'rs might been used to.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
The only thing in this post I care to reply to is this.
It is a baseless, unfounded, untrue "ad-hom" accusation against me. You have no evidence of who I have or have not reported ever. Yet one more statement you simply made up.
It's so obvious, you are just intentionally trolling me believing yourself to be justified in doing so.
I wasn't even going to respond to you anymore, but that statement was just over the top and uncalled for.
The fact you call gamers who are happy with modern MMOs as "lowest common denominators" which if you didn't know means they are either idiots or simple (they have access to the internet thus you cannot claim lack of information to form and evolve tastes beyond the most basic level) when compared to their 2003 era counterparts says everything that needs to be said especially considering you only felt like replying to the retort I gave to you attempting to call me a troll to discredit me.
Haha, this argument was hilarious.
Except that what he's calling a "fact" that I said was in fact not what I said. He's making stuff up so that he can argue with it. What he's really doing is arguing with himself.
Developers making games that appeal to the biggest possible demographic they can hit with a single game has nothing to do with his above statement.
He hasn't even considered the possibility that just because he likes something, As it is, that it could be even better had the developers designed a game with even more focus around his particular demographic. But that possibility doesn't fit within his frame of reference since he is looking for a reason to take offence.
I'm not responding to him because he cannot deal with anything actual, or work with direct quotes keeping in context. He can only respond to posts after he has "rephrased" them to suit his own arguments. It's pointless now.
Biggest demographic=/=lowest common denominator. Get that computed already.
Btw what I like or dislike isn't the issue (never even brought up really), the fact you feel like describing anyone not subscribed to your mentality as intellectually inferior is. Try reading those two links in the whole post you deemed "not worth answering" besides to try and save face by countering the green paragraph to see how far you blew out of proportion the us vs them logic your whole diatribe is based on. Instead of seeking to accept gamers you either use terms you do not fully comprehend the impact of (I can start using pictures so you can understand what a person who is the lowest common denominator of a population looks like) or are purposefully divisive.
Continue not responding while sideswiping, it just proves how disruptive your posts actually are to any actual discourse let alone debate.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
The only thing in this post I care to reply to is this.
It is a baseless, unfounded, untrue "ad-hom" accusation against me. You have no evidence of who I have or have not reported ever. Yet one more statement you simply made up.
It's so obvious, you are just intentionally trolling me believing yourself to be justified in doing so.
I wasn't even going to respond to you anymore, but that statement was just over the top and uncalled for.
The fact you call gamers who are happy with modern MMOs as "lowest common denominators" which if you didn't know means they are either idiots or simple (they have access to the internet thus you cannot claim lack of information to form and evolve tastes beyond the most basic level) when compared to their 2003 era counterparts says everything that needs to be said especially considering you only felt like replying to the retort I gave to you attempting to call me a troll to discredit me.
Haha, this argument was hilarious.
Except that what he's calling a "fact" that I said was in fact not what I said. He's making stuff up so that he can argue with it. What he's really doing is arguing with himself.
Developers making games that appeal to the biggest possible demographic they can hit with a single game has nothing to do with his above statement.
He hasn't even considered the possibility that just because he likes something, As it is, that it could be even better had the developers designed a game with even more focus around his particular demographic. But that possibility doesn't fit within his frame of reference since he is looking for a reason to take offence.
I'm not responding to him because he cannot deal with anything actual, or work with direct quotes keeping in context. He can only respond to posts after he has "rephrased" them to suit his own arguments. It's pointless now.
Biggest demographic=/=lowest common denominator. Get that computed already.
Btw what I like or dislike isn't the issue (never even brought up really), the fact you feel like describing anyone not subscribed to your mentality as intellectually inferior is. Try reading those two links in the whole post you deemed "not worth answering" besides to try and save face by countering the green paragraph to see how far you blew out of proportion the us vs them logic your whole diatribe is based on. Instead of seeking to accept gamers you either use terms you do not fully comprehend the impact of (I can start using pictures so you can understand what a person who is the lowest common denominator of a population looks like) or are purposefully divisive.
Continue not responding while sideswiping, it just proves how disruptive your posts actually are to any actual discourse let alone debate.
I would like to take personal credit for that kicking off again. No need to thank me.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
The only thing in this post I care to reply to is this.
It is a baseless, unfounded, untrue "ad-hom" accusation against me. You have no evidence of who I have or have not reported ever. Yet one more statement you simply made up.
It's so obvious, you are just intentionally trolling me believing yourself to be justified in doing so.
I wasn't even going to respond to you anymore, but that statement was just over the top and uncalled for.
The fact you call gamers who are happy with modern MMOs as "lowest common denominators" which if you didn't know means they are either idiots or simple (they have access to the internet thus you cannot claim lack of information to form and evolve tastes beyond the most basic level) when compared to their 2003 era counterparts says everything that needs to be said especially considering you only felt like replying to the retort I gave to you attempting to call me a troll to discredit me.
Haha, this argument was hilarious.
Except that what he's calling a "fact" that I said was in fact not what I said. He's making stuff up so that he can argue with it. What he's really doing is arguing with himself.
Developers making games that appeal to the biggest possible demographic they can hit with a single game has nothing to do with his above statement.
He hasn't even considered the possibility that just because he likes something, As it is, that it could be even better had the developers designed a game with even more focus around his particular demographic. But that possibility doesn't fit within his frame of reference since he is looking for a reason to take offence.
I'm not responding to him because he cannot deal with anything actual, or work with direct quotes keeping in context. He can only respond to posts after he has "rephrased" them to suit his own arguments. It's pointless now.
Biggest demographic=/=lowest common denominator. Get that computed already.
Btw what I like or dislike isn't the issue (never even brought up really), the fact you feel like describing anyone not subscribed to your mentality as intellectually inferior is. Try reading those two links in the whole post you deemed "not worth answering" besides to try and save face by countering the green paragraph to see how far you blew out of proportion the us vs them logic your whole diatribe is based on. Instead of seeking to accept gamers you either use terms you do not fully comprehend the impact of (I can start using pictures so you can understand what a person who is the lowest common denominator of a population looks like) or are purposefully divisive.
Continue not responding while sideswiping, it just proves how disruptive your posts actually are to any actual discourse let alone debate.
How many pages has this gone on and you haven't even used 1 single direct quote I made? I've made no such statements and made no such claims. You are continuing to lie about what I said and it needs to stop. And you also need to stop referring to your personal subjectivity as "fact". They aren't
You want to play the BEST mmo ever? Scenery with such a living prowess it sometimes can be breath stealing. Physics that are so dynamic you can spend hours on end testing them. Bikes, cars, tanks planes and more! Want weapons? You name it it is there. Some are just hard as hell to obtain. Crafting so diverse your imagination is the mere limit! You can even build your own house! Fully dynamic daily's you never know what will happen. All this and its free! just stand up! Turn around. And open your front door!
Originally posted by GeezerGameris frame of reference since he is looking for a reason to take offence.
How many pages has this gone on and you haven't even used 1 single direct quote I made? I've made no such statements and made no such claims. You are continuing to lie about what I said and it needs to stop. And you also need to stop referring to your personal subjectivity as "fact". They aren't
I believe Dihoru is contending that your usage of the term 'Lowest common denominator' can be construed as implying that those games aimed at that group are 'dumbasses' as per a definition found in the Urban Dictionary.
Comments
So to sum up and translate your arguments:
1. I believe games are made for idiots today (they aren't, different tastes does not equal lower denomination, Scarlet Blade is made for people who are lower denominators and even then there are some who play that game not for the cheap sex appeal, fucked up I know but it shoots holes in your gross generalization);
2. I believe players should play how I WANT THEM TO not how they wish ( MMOs means massively multiplayer online, nowhere,nowhere, does it imply forced grouping, your tastes do not dictate a genre and there are plenty of games that have both SP and MP activities within the MMO genre like say EVE-Online, WoW, etc, and believe it or not EVE with all its scary scammers, vile griefers and whatnot has one of the best most helpful communities currently in existence);
3. I believe correlation = causality. Seriously dude...proof is in the pudding?... how many players did SWG lose? 100%? How many did WoW lose in its years of existence? How many did UO? Meridian? EQ 1 and 2? Stop trying to pass off pseudo-facts (your own beliefs) as anything other than what they are because anyone with a high-school diploma can see the holes in your arguments (most MMOs tend to lose most of their playerbases and if you want we can talk about the scores of failed MMOs from the "good old days when devs weren't basically lawyers").
@The Moderator that checks this post after he reports it: Pointing out how he tries to inflame others who like modern games, for whatever reason, is not against the rules and if he chooses to take offense it is not my fault as it is not my intent.
So to sum up your post......
Let me re-word what this poster said to something I wanted him to say so that I can more easily attack his post with points he really didn't make.
You made that up all by yourself.........and then proceeded ridicule your own points.
LOL, so, did you win that argument?
P.S. I love how you throw terms like "Pseudo-facts" out there when you don't bring any facts at all. You can't even properly quote people.
And your note to the moderator is evidence of your intention with your post.
Yes, I made everything up, as can clearly be seen in the underlined bits above. I do love it when someone plays the innocent game but does everything to prove MMOs aren't the sort of games he/she should be playing ( not too sure which though considering... Counterstrike 1.6 may be a fit for your 2nd point quite nicely as you die horribly when you try to play alone, it is deeper than it looks so 1 is satisfied, most people rage quit it and it does have quite the retention on par with MMOs of the "good old days" considering it is still a pro game after around 2 decades).
Do us all a favor and stop creating strawmen before accusing others of doing it.
Isn't it wnderful when you can change things out of context?
Catering to lowest common denominator has to do with preferences and tastes. Not being idiots. I didn't call anyone an idiot. You made that up.
Saying MMOs shouldn't focus on single player aspects because single player games do it better, has little or nothing to do with me wanting anyone to play how I want them to. That's where you made that up.
As for your 3rd part, You are trying to imply that SWG lost more players than I want to believe.....Yet you can't say how many players it lost and why or when, While I don't have any numbers it's been pretty much accepted that Whatever retention the game had, took a huge nosedive because the game was re-designed.
You accuse me of psuedo facts and yet what are you doing? But your references are intentionally vague and only serve to try to throw my statements in a bad light.
Do you even know what a Strawman is? It's when you intentionally misrepresent what someone says to strengthen your own argument. You did that....Not me.
And again, your pre-emptive statement to the moderators in your previous post is clear evidence of your intention to troll me.
With that, Have a good day sir.
You should learn the meaning of words then:
http://ro.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lowest+Common+Denominator
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lowest+common+denominator
MMOs have always catered to solo players as well as group orientated players and even in EQ there were so called "solo friendly" classes. The only, only, difference between current MMOs and "ye oldy" ones is that people these days can choose to be solo as easily as grouped, no longer is one option gimped so people with a acute lack of empathy for any playstyle other than their own feel like they were "correct".
In pure percentages SWG lost as many players as all the other failed MMOs ever. The retention rates, believe it or not, for anything other than WoW (which is an interesting case study) is roughly the same regardless of genre, age or sophistication.
Can also be a misrepresentation of facts to suit an agenda not only words. Example: Fox News' regular schlock.
Nope, pre-emptive it was because you report anything that you dislike, which usually means anything you cannot vehemently attack, and has even a passing chance of being deleted.
It's all nostalgia and first love. There is no validation in the OP's post when it comes to actual gaming. I still think The Realm Online and Knight Online are the two greatest MMORPG's I have ever played. Are they actually? Hell no. World of Warcraft is probably the greatest MMORPG ever made and I haven't even played it past the 10 day free trial, mainly because I'm a Guild Wars 2 fan.
People just can't get over their first love in an MMORPG and you want that feeling back, but it is never going to happen. Ever. Enjoy the games we have because in reality they are 100x better than those old games, you just don't see it that way because of your lust for those old times.
The only thing in this post I care to reply to is this.
It is a baseless, unfounded, untrue "ad-hom" accusation against me. You have no evidence of who I have or have not reported ever. Yet one more statement you simply made up. Did you ever consider the possibility that someone else may have taken issue with your posts or do you truly believe your behavior is that justifiable? It's so obvious, you are just intentionally trolling me. I wasn't even going to respond to you anymore, but that statement was just over the top and uncalled for.
I don't mind nostalgia. There is nothing wrong with remembering good times. However what I can't stand is the constant revisionist history that goes on in the guise of nostalgia.
When SWG came out I was playing DAoC. Two or three people from my guild left to play SWG. Within a week they were back claiming that SWG was buggy to the point of being unplayable and that PvP was pointless due to debilitating lag. One guy stuck it out and gave us constant reports right up until he quit because of the complete overhaul Sony did on the game. Basically everything now cited as "right" with the game was "wrong" back then. Each of his reports started with something like, "Well, they just missed on "XYZ" feature. If they'd only have done "ABC" it would have been great."
Now I'm going to go away from SWG because I didn't experience it personally. I did experience the glory days of DAoC and it's funny how the things everyone bitched and moaned about have now become the things that were great about "ye olde timey games." I suspect that what goes for DAoC goes for SWG as well.
1) Forced Grouping - Everyone today raves about forced grouping. However back in the day I heard nothing but rants about how it took half an hour of gaming time just to find a group to get started. How many remember putting your name on a list to get into a group camping a specific leveling area? Finlaiths anyone?
2) Down time/Teleport Padding to the different frontiers - Today everyone waxes poetic about down times in the game such as medding up health/mana and sitting on the teleporting pad for 10 minutes waiting for the mages to come down and beam you to the other frontiers. Oh what a wonderful time to talk to your realm mates and make merry. Horseapples. Those times were universal smoke/bathroom breaks and the ones that got back first did nothing but complain about having to wait. And how about waiting an extra ten minutes for those that went AFK and forgot to put on their teleporting necklaces and had to wait for the next port? Twenty minutes of game time sitting on your virtual arse waiting for something to happen so something else could happen and then maybe you could play the game. Oooooo fun! No wonder people actually roleplayed back then. You had to do something to kill the time while waiting for an opportunity to actually play the game.
3) In depth crafting systems - Well back in my day it took 237 days /played to make junior appretice crafter and we had to walk uphill both ways to the forge carrying huge piles of crafting materials and we were damn glad to get them. We were all a huge happy group of people sitting around the forge singing songs and swapping tales of adventure. Now-a-days these spoiled kids make master crafter in 30 minutes and they do it via a pet while they continue to quest! Folks, crafting back in the day was an absolute bitch. It took as long to level your crafting as it did to level your character. There were frequent dead spots in the leveling where you had to go out and farm up the cash to move up to the next level. All I ever heard was people complaining about how much they hated sitting there pushing one button and watching a green bar move across the screen, only to do it again and again and again. The only laughter I heard was maniacal hysteria when someone went through a marathon crafting session of several hours only to find out they still weren't high enough level to make ANYTHING that anyone wanted to buy. Remember having to find a leather crafter with high enough skills to make the leather linings you needed to make any kind of metal armor? And if you didn't want to wait around you could roll an alt and spend a thousand hours leveling leather crafting up to the sufficient level! How about having to level up woodworking so you could make handles for the swords you were trying to smith up? Oh, what fun! If you want crafting that realistic, get a job in a factory in real life.
4) Meaningful PvP - I have to be honest; I'm not sure what the hell this means. I think people mean that there was an element of risk to PvP and/or a system of risks and rewards for winning and losing in PvP. So then I look at a game like chess. Chess has been around for centuries and for those centuries (with the exception of war or gladitorial combat) chess has been the very definition of mano y mano contests. Its PvP in it's purest form. However there is no inherent risk or rewards system for winning and losing. You don't get to raid the other guy's wallet simply because you beat him at chess. You don't get to take his dog home because you check-mated him. You might lose some money if you bet, but you don't have to bet to play. Yet people have played chess avidly for centuries without any semblence of risk/reward.
By the by when did it become mandatory that someone get "rewarded" or "punished" for participating in PvP? Yea brother, we must slay that vile person who dared to roll the other faction and pilfer his meager purse and then hold up our bloody prize and scream our cyber victory to the gods! A MANLY type of PvP for MANLY MEN such as we! Piffle. I think people who believe this are in their 30s and still want a lollipop from the barber when they get their hair cut because they held still like a good boy while the barber cut their hair. If you want to PvP, don't wait for a reason. Just go out and do it. Kill for the sheer joy of it and play pool with your victim's eyeballs like a good virtual serial killer. When they ask you why you killed them don't say things like "LMAO" or "L2P Newbist!". Say something creative like, "well, my new armor was too tight in the crotch and its chaffing and that puts me in a really FOUL mood and when I'm in a foul mood I kill everyone in range. Now, hush up while I write my name on the ground in your blood!" Or how about finding a line of people and just killing the last person in line while shouting, "THOSE WHO ARE TARDY DO NOT GET FRUIT CUP!" The truth is if you do this you'll get to be a kind of cult anti-hero of the kind people will remember meeting. Thus not only did you make a good memory for you, but a good memory for them as well.
The point of this wall of text plus the bonus rant at the end is that "fun" is up to you. Anything can be "fun" if you go in with the idea of making your own fun. It doesn't matter if the game was made in 2014 or 414. If you wait for the game to make your fun you're going to be disappointed. Your fun is your responsibility and if the game isn't fun, then make it fun or quit and try something else.
Edits : Punctuation. Thanks Weird Al.
Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.
The fact you call gamers who are happy with modern MMOs as "lowest common denominators" which if you didn't know means they are either idiots or simple (they have access to the internet thus you cannot claim lack of information to form and evolve tastes beyond the most basic level) when compared to their 2003 era counterparts says everything that needs to be said especially considering you only felt like replying to the retort I gave to you attempting to call me a troll to discredit me.
well, to be fair, i stopped playing SWG for a reason, and that reason was called WoW.
come out with your candle down!
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
When I saw the title header I thought this was another WoW fag fest post. I have to agree with the OP it is still the best mmo ever made.
And for the guy saying every thing else had been done already, wtf are you talking about mate this game came out in 2003 so exactly what had been done already because I never played any mmo post 2003 that was like swg. It was way ahead of its time.
The people talking about bugs this and bugs that, what game have you played that did not have bugs. I played swg for about 9 years and did not once come across a bug that broke the game for me or upset me enough to want to stop playing like most mmos that come out today which are full of bugs that publishers just outright ignore.
The only reason SWG shut down was because of that fucking stupid NGE patch, it was like runescape loosing the wild and player trade it just killed the game for a large amount of the player base.
Oh yea there was that other tiny reason they may have shut down,,,,, Fear of SWTOR......But if they had only kept there servers up for a little while longer I think they would have noticed there was nothing to worry about because SWTOR did not even come close to what swg had to offer.
SWG emu is a project (private server) started many many years ago and is only now starting to resemble what the actual game had to offer, I wish swg emu all the best and hope those guys at Disney do not try to shut them down as they did have a deal with SOE as far as im aware.
It was not fear of SWTOR but the IP contract getting pulled.
Check the previous page for examples of what has been done since SWG... you would be surprised wtf I am talking about.
Haha, this argument was hilarious.
Except that what he's calling a "fact" that I said was in fact not what I said. He's making stuff up so that he can argue with it. What he's really doing is arguing with himself.
Developers making games that appeal to the biggest possible demographic they can hit with a single game has nothing to do with his above statement.
He hasn't even considered the possibility that just because he likes something, As it is, that it could be even better had the developers designed a game with even more focus around his particular demographic. But that possibility doesn't fit within his frame of reference since he is looking for a reason to take offence.
I'm not responding to him because he cannot deal with anything actual, or work with direct quotes keeping in context. He can only respond to posts after he has "rephrased" them to suit his own arguments. It's pointless now.
You can't have an argument on the internet because it's one sided... they only see what they want to see...
Not much unlike the old Pink Panther cartoons in which the dog is locked outside barking it's head off trying to warn it's master of an intruder inside but all you see is a dog jumping up and down mouthing a bark with absolutely no sound at all. It's quite hilarious to watch actually.
Never found a home since SWG counts for me aswell. Doesn't mean I am not enjoying other MMORPG's or have moved on.
I judge them for what they are and not in how I would have liked them.
Sure I love thinking back at the diversity we had back then but it was both the gamemechanics that made that magic with a strong community of people. Those who sticked with the game for years where dedicated to it's world and were part of it's worlds. You had player run shops, player city's. People actually traveled to meet certain well known crafters or gone mall shopping. People made museums, zoo's and players traveled to them just to see. And that was in a near seamless world, unlike RIFT where you get a big window to select which dimension you want to visit. Pretty cool never the less but miles apart of the feeling of just traveling around and bump onto it.
Never the less I know what the majority seems to want and it aint the type of SWG game, people want more GAME clear and simple. Nothing wrong with that. The only thing I keep saying is there is room enough to have diverse MMORPG's. So far we have to look at indie games or accept that most are openworld PVP.
Besides that I enjoy plenty of Themepark-ish MMORPG's. Currently enjoying ESO.
And I know I am a niche gamer when it comes to my wants and needs and have accepted and even enjoy today's games because I judge them on what they deliver and not on what I hoped for or made up in my mind it should have been. Made my gaming experiance allot more pleasant. And I just don't think a game like SWG would make it with today's majority of gamers. Which is also the reason why when looking at ArcheAge is looking like they understand that. You can't trow sandbox BAM! into a players face. Sure you will have you niche who accepts it but if your a A-Tittle gaming company your target is somewhat bigger so you need way's to introduce it's sandbox in a slower way then we oldschool'rs might been used to.
Biggest demographic=/=lowest common denominator. Get that computed already.
Btw what I like or dislike isn't the issue (never even brought up really), the fact you feel like describing anyone not subscribed to your mentality as intellectually inferior is. Try reading those two links in the whole post you deemed "not worth answering" besides to try and save face by countering the green paragraph to see how far you blew out of proportion the us vs them logic your whole diatribe is based on. Instead of seeking to accept gamers you either use terms you do not fully comprehend the impact of (I can start using pictures so you can understand what a person who is the lowest common denominator of a population looks like) or are purposefully divisive.
Continue not responding while sideswiping, it just proves how disruptive your posts actually are to any actual discourse let alone debate.
I would like to take personal credit for that kicking off again. No need to thank me.
How many pages has this gone on and you haven't even used 1 single direct quote I made? I've made no such statements and made no such claims. You are continuing to lie about what I said and it needs to stop. And you also need to stop referring to your personal subjectivity as "fact". They aren't
Game, set, match.
Edit: Page 8 I believe or wherever your first post in this thread was.
You want to play the BEST mmo ever?
Scenery with such a living prowess it sometimes can be breath stealing.
Physics that are so dynamic you can spend hours on end testing them.
Bikes, cars, tanks planes and more!
Want weapons? You name it it is there. Some are just hard as hell to obtain.
Crafting so diverse your imagination is the mere limit! You can even build your own house!
Fully dynamic daily's you never know what will happen.
All this and its free!
just stand up!
Turn around.
And open your front door!
I believe Dihoru is contending that your usage of the term 'Lowest common denominator' can be construed as implying that those games aimed at that group are 'dumbasses' as per a definition found in the Urban Dictionary.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lowest+Common+Denominator
If it's not what you meant then this has transgressed quite longer than necessary.