Big companies would have marketing panels and professional marketers who's sole job is to find out what their market wants.
.
I'll go with that idea rather than they code blindly, just hoping for a hit.
Precisely. I think there are people around here who think, just because they want something, everyone else ought to want it too. They vastly over-estimate the market for their particular niche interests and then they don't consider that these companies have to make money to stay in business, so catering to every tiny niche audience with their own personal game simply isn't going to happen.
Then again, I think there's a huge number of people out there who are convinced that just because they want something, someone owes it to them.
These people are in for a big surprise in the real world.
The real world? Think about the wants and desires of the people complaining the most...you know the ones asking for big budget virtual worlds where you can bake cakes, sleep, eat and poop in your own little cabin? You think they're interested in the real world at all, hehe.
Big companies would have marketing panels and professional marketers who's sole job is to find out what their market wants.
.
I'll go with that idea rather than they code blindly, just hoping for a hit.
Precisely. I think there are people around here who think, just because they want something, everyone else ought to want it too. They vastly over-estimate the market for their particular niche interests and then they don't consider that these companies have to make money to stay in business, so catering to every tiny niche audience with their own personal game simply isn't going to happen.
Then again, I think there's a huge number of people out there who are convinced that just because they want something, someone owes it to them.
These people are in for a big surprise in the real world.
Again, show me the hard data showing what the majority wants. What I read is you telling everyone else they are in the minority and then saying that you are with the majority. This all comes from your made up statistics. Funny, I underlined what you typed where you should take your own advice.
Again, show me the hard data showing what the majority wants. What I read is you telling everyone else they are in the minority and then saying that you are with the majority. This all comes from your made up statistics. Funny, I underlined what you typed where you should take your own advice.
Where have I ever said that I was with the majority? I don't play *ANY* MMOs because they don't make any for me! I'm probably with a smaller minority than you are, I just recognize the fact that I'm not going to get catered to because I am such a minority and I accept it.
[b][quote]The fact is, it's likely that the current state of MMOs matches the desires of the majority of players. It's only a very tiny minority, no matter how vocal, that doesn't like the way things are going.
[/b][/quote]
I got to agree with this part.
.
Big companies would have marketing panels and professional marketers who's sole job is to find out what their market wants.
.
I'll go with that idea rather than they code blindly, just hoping for a hit.
Big companies in charge of finding out what the market wants... so that's why all the WoW clones are doing so well, right?
AoC imploded and most companies involved went bankrupt, and they downsized their staff. WAR isn't doing too much better. And LotRO is being kept afloat by its IP.
If the majority of people want more WoW clones, how come they aren't selling well?
Because WoW players play WoW and won't leave it for a game exactly like it. They aren't MMO players. WoW didn't bring the market into the mainstream, it brought WoW into the mainstream. Sooner the companies realize this the better.
Also, the "niche" of oldschool MMO players is between 200-600k. That's bigger than most MMOs right now.
When it comes to old games I have no illusions. I admit I had a really good time playing some of them, some I would say were even profound experiences (these would exclusively be adventure games and RPGs)... But I would play very few of them today. I do the odd exception with Blade Runner or The Longest Journey or Planescape: Torment (all of which I load up and play once every few years), but you cannot make me go back to old MMOs.
As far as MMOs go, I did not exactly love them to start with, they always felt like amateurishly done RPGs to me. Of course, it was all about the social experience, which was fresh, so we were willing to overlook the shortcomings in the game mechanics themselves. The genre's very existence, which was new and exciting back then, was enought reason to play, but it's taken for granted now.
So to me it's not so much that the new games are worse (I believe they're better!), but the genre as a whole is not exactly delivering on the expectations. We expected so many great, innovative magical things, few of which have materialized. I'm beginning to think we set our expectations too high then, and the genre has settled into its conventionalist pace.
I suspect you are right that most wow players will not leave wow for a game that is nearly identical, but it is hard to say that based on past offerings. Lotro played like a travel sized version of wow that lacked many of wows features and the other games were just a terrible mess at release.
It is very possible that people have had so much of wow they might just play a reskinned clone IF it was done well enough. However I think most companies would do better emulating what made wow a success and not emulating wow itself. Take the popular game model and imporve upon that. Listen to what players are asking for and find solutions to that.
I suspect you are right that most wow players will not leave wow for a game that is nearly identical, but it is hard to say that based on past offerings. Lotro played like a travel sized version of wow that lacked many of wows features and the other games were just a terrible mess at release.
It is very possible that people have had so much of wow they might just play a reskinned clone IF it was done well enough. However I think most companies would do better emulating what made wow a success and not emulating wow itself. Take the popular game model and imporve upon that. Listen to what players are asking for and find solutions to that.
That's already what WoW did with EverQuest. They took what made it money and then dumbed it down for mass appeal. Games are gonna have to start doing something different.
It is very possible that people have had so much of wow they might just play a reskinned clone IF it was done well enough. However I think most companies would do better emulating what made wow a success and not emulating wow itself. Take the popular game model and imporve upon that. Listen to what players are asking for and find solutions to that.
I agree with the sentiment, though I'm beginning to fear just the same approach might not be enough today. When WOW launched, let's admit it, the MMO genre was a non-factor as far the "world at large" was concerned. A minority even knew about it. WOW was many people's first step into the genre, and they came to love what the genre had to offer through WOW.
Now the genre has been exposed, most people have at least some idea about it. And people that haven't bought into the genre yet, obviously see no attraction as far as the currently leading design paradigms go.
So I'm thinking if developers want to really bring in new people (or even move massive numbers from other games), they have to show more innovation than Blizzard did with WOW.
I suspect you are right that most wow players will not leave wow for a game that is nearly identical, but it is hard to say that based on past offerings. Lotro played like a travel sized version of wow that lacked many of wows features and the other games were just a terrible mess at release.
It is very possible that people have had so much of wow they might just play a reskinned clone IF it was done well enough. However I think most companies would do better emulating what made wow a success and not emulating wow itself. Take the popular game model and imporve upon that. Listen to what players are asking for and find solutions to that.
That's already what WoW did with EverQuest. They took what made it money and then dumbed it down for mass appeal. Can't really dumb it down any further than WoW already has. There's nowhere lower to go. Games are gonna have to start doing something different.
People didn't flock to EQ, because more people did not find it entertaining to sit around for 15 hours straight only to have 15 minutes of entertainment. Once you get past the ridiculous time sinks put into the game, EQ wasn't any harder than current mmos and I would argue that current mechanics and encounters are way more difficult.
Time is not a measurement of skill or intelligence. It does little more than challenge a players tollerance.
EQ never captured the mass market, because it was the first of its kind and loaded with problems and mechanics that prevented it from attracting masses of people. There was a ton of areas that needed improvement and the results are clear.
EQ was a lot of fun but more unforgiving than other MMO's, and it didn't cater to the instant-gratification crowd as much as a number of current MMO's. Whether that's a good or bad thing is a matter of taste: yes, you could lose XP when you died up to even a few hours of playtime, but it made you more aware of what you could lose when you died in battle and it made hard won victories that much more satisfying. And yes, you had long travel times but it made you appreciate more the landscape you were traveling through and contributed to the feeling of vastness of the world in EQ.
The whole tank-healer-dps trinity emerged and became popular in EQ just as a number of other tactics like the pulling, kiting and cc that have since then become standard combat tactics in other MMO's. I can't say for sure if UO had it, but raiding definitely made its mark first in EQ.
So, a lot of things that originated from EQ and that made it the fun it was. Maybe not to everyone who played it, but that applies to any MMO. Combat was definitely tougher in EQ than in WoW, Lotro and a number of the other current MMO's around.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Fact is, you can play EQ or UO right now. Why aren't you? Experience the tedium for yourself.
There are a large number of reasons, and they've been stated already. The "its still there" excuse is so weak and pointless.
We don't play the games anymore because the companies that made them have killed them with expansions/patches changing the direction of the game entirely (Dark Age of Camelot, SWG, Ultima Online)
or they aren't supported by the parent company anymore, who have moved on to try their best at making WoW clones (DAoC)
and the two above reasons has resulted in the population not being strong enough to support the game the way it used to be.
Did you honestly not think of these reasons before you posted?
What made it great is gone, and the community that made it even better is gone too.
Some people just have to scorn the good memories others have when it's not about a game they know or love. Well, whatever *shrug*
Doom, Command & Conquer, Starcraft, Quake and a lot of toher games were good in their days too. That the game scene has moved on and that I don't play those anymore doesn't mean I can't sum up the things that were to be liked and admired of those games. if you can't understand such a thing, then that's your loss, not really my problem.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Fact is, you can play EQ or UO right now. Why aren't you? Experience the tedium for yourself.
"Oh, because it's not the same, they've dumbed the games down!"
Typical excuse. These people want to live in the early 1990s.
Why do you have a vendetta against people who want old style MMORPGs with tons of innovation and deep gameplay mechanics? (in before LOLOLOLOL TIME SINKS trolling attempt)
EQ was a lot of fun but more unforgiving than other MMO's, and it didn't cater to the instant-gratification crowd as much as a number of current MMO's. Whether that's a good or bad thing is a matter of taste: yes, you could lose XP when you died up to even a few hours of playtime, but it made you more aware of what you could lose when you died in battle and it made hard won victories that much more satisfying. And yes, you had long travel times but it made you appreciate more the landscape you were traveling through and contributed to the feeling of vastness of the world in EQ.
The whole tank-healer-dps trinity emerged and became popular in EQ just as a number of other tactics like the pulling, kiting and cc that have since then become standard combat tactics in other MMO's. I can't say for sure if UO had it, but raiding definitely made its mark first in EQ.
So, a lot of things that originated from EQ and that made it the fun it was. Maybe not to everyone who played it, but that applies to any MMO. Combat was definitely tougher in EQ than in WoW, Lotro and a number of the other current MMO's around.
Don't get me wrong, I have a ton of fun in EQ. It was a different time when the internet was just taking off and gamers coming together online instead of in basements. EQ wasn't really catering to anyone, because it was uncharted waters. They simply put in what they thought would work and that was to punish and restrict players. The mindset being the longer it took to do something the longer people would stat subscribers. That is why the access quests got so out of hand.
Other things had a negative effect on the ability for EQ to draw in masses other than the time sinks, xp loss and travel. Over expanding left huge areas of the game dead, but still required players to grind through it to catch up to the rest of the pack. The forced grouping only compounded the effect of to much terrain and not enough players. The barrier to entry for the game grew with the first expansion and didn't stop until it was much much to late.
UO and muds had most of the features you mentioned, but not always to the same degree you mention.
I am curious though, what you think made EQ combat so much harder than current mmos? Fewer skills, abilities and mechanics came into play and honestly the majority of fights were nothing but tank and spank encounters. There was so little in the way of tactics, reaction or things of that nature. Auto attacking did most of the work with an ability sprinkled in every 5-10 seconds followed by 5-10 seconds more empty time.
I will concede that soloing today is easy, but that is because players naturally take things to a certain sweet spot where success is almost always a guarentee. Soloing would be much more difficult if people fought monsters a few levels highers, but the risk/reward just isn't there and a constant flow of ensured kills is better. Just like grouping in EQ was. People would find a nice comfortable spot to camp and pull just enough mobs to the group that it was never really a threat, but a nice safe steady flow of xp. Those classes that could solo did and often did so with multiple creatures at a time.
(textwall alert; only noticed after I was done typing how large the post had become :-/)
I think if Everquest would be released in this day and age it wouldn't do as well as it did back then: MMO's have evolved, and likewise gameplay mechanics have progressed in several ways. You're right that it wasn't so much as catering to the "hardcore" crowd what they did, but more pioneering new fields what UO and Everquest did. There were a lot of things that Verant hit right with Everquest. If you could say that one of Blizzard's core philiosophies was that their MMO should be a "fun ride" from the start, then "risk vs reward" was one of Verant's/SOE's with Everquest, the higher the reward, the larger the risk.
I agree with a number of things you say, it was a different time back then, we had different expectations of MMO's or went in it blank and I think that EQ until Shadows of Luclin could be compared to WoW vanilla: after Velious the game seemed to change from its base and a number of the fun elements that were there the first few years seemed to vanish when a large part of the still existing playerbase went to the high end content of the growing list of expansions and the world became larger but emptier and harder to form groups in.
Now, what made the combat more challenging? Keep in mind, this is just my own personal experience, it can be different for everyone. I like to compare it with going on vacation, some will go the tourist way in another country, following the tourguide and guided excursions and such, where others follow their own way, go to villages and places outside the tourist routes and whose goal is to get to know the local culture and hang out with the local people in their vacation. There is no "right" or "wrong" here, as long as you had fun it doesn't matter what activities you were looking for as holiday entertainment abroad.
I think that the things that made the most difference between Everquest and MMO's I played afterwards, was the threat of death and the feel that we were all actually pioneering, in a gaming genre that was still very new, with combat and gameplay mechanics that most of us had no experience with before EQ. It was in EQ that such things were picked up first by most of us and finetuned: I already mentioned the pulling tactics and kiting, and next to that you had the several ways of crowd control. But also such things as the aggro management and the pet control were pretty new. For a pioneering experiment Everquest hit a lot of things right the first time.
But next to that, there was the high risk of death: besides that most of the combat tactics were still fresh and evolving, it was the (healthy) fear of death that made you more aware of your environment when exploring and more alert in combat. In contrast to some other current MMO's there was less room to mess up: the higher you became in level, the more mobs that could only be taken on in groups, effective groups, for example when your enchanter went down and crowd control went out the door your fights became a lot crazier and hectic, and your mana management and your timing when you used a spell could be the difference between success or defeat. And failure gained you more 'punishment' than other games: a long journey back to where you all died, considerable XP loss, several minutes downtime. In general, fights in EQ were on average harder and needed more smart play than in other MMO's I have played.
That was the upside: forced grouping stimulated socializing and social behaviour - I had great fun and made good friends in pikc up groups - and the death threat and tough mobs especially in the medium to high levels made the combat more challenging and victories sweeter. The downside was that looking for a group could become very frustrating if you didn't find one since from the medium levels onward mobs became increasingly tougher to beat solo, and when miscalculated the fight or if you were in a less effective group, several times dying with many hours of lost XP could be very irritating.
Looking back, not that I didn't like combat in other MMO's that I played, but the fact that death has become meaningless with little loss, has made fights also less challenging and victories on average less sweet.
After Everquest, I've been able to basically use the same standard tactics that we were confronted with first in Everquest, with some changes here and there depending upon the MMO. The only major innovations and feel of experimentations I encountered after EQ was with Guild Wars: the wide range of creative and innovating tactics I've seen in GW very often made my jaw hit the floor. I've played Magic: the Gathering and that was what the multitude of different creative team combat in GW often reminded me of. Tactics I've only seen in GW and that couldn't be used in any other MMO.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Fact is, you can play EQ or UO right now. Why aren't you? Experience the tedium for yourself.
"Oh, because it's not the same, they've dumbed the games down!"
Typical excuse. These people want to live in the early 1990s.
Why do you have a vendetta against people who want old style MMORPGs with tons of innovation and deep gameplay mechanics? (in before LOLOLOLOL TIME SINKS trolling attempt)
What innovation? Most of these games were among the first in their genre, everything they did was innovative by definition. Today, however, not so much. The "deep gameplay mechanics" that most of them are so impressed by *ARE* the time sinks, etc. Sitting around waiting for a boat that only comes along every 30 minutes, only to take another 20 minutes to cross, that's not a deep gameplay mechanic, sorry. Waiting for hours for a boss to respawn, surrounded by dozens of other people who are similarly waiting, is not a deep gameplay mechanic. Ganking everyone in sight is not a deep gameplay mechanic. I played these old school games too and I didn't think they were particularly deep back in the day. Absurd difficulty is not the same as deep.
Where is this mythical deep gameplay mechanics of which you speak?
I suspect you are right that most wow players will not leave wow for a game that is nearly identical, but it is hard to say that based on past offerings. Lotro played like a travel sized version of wow that lacked many of wows features and the other games were just a terrible mess at release.
It is very possible that people have had so much of wow they might just play a reskinned clone IF it was done well enough. However I think most companies would do better emulating what made wow a success and not emulating wow itself. Take the popular game model and imporve upon that. Listen to what players are asking for and find solutions to that.
That's already what WoW did with EverQuest. They took what made it money and then dumbed it down for mass appeal. Can't really dumb it down any further than WoW already has. There's nowhere lower to go. Games are gonna have to start doing something different.
People didn't flock to EQ, because more people did not find it entertaining to sit around for 15 hours straight only to have 15 minutes of entertainment. Once you get past the ridiculous time sinks put into the game, EQ wasn't any harder than current mmos and I would argue that current mechanics and encounters are way more difficult.
Time is not a measurement of skill or intelligence. It does little more than challenge a players tollerance.
EQ never captured the mass market, because it was the first of its kind and loaded with problems and mechanics that prevented it from attracting masses of people. There was a ton of areas that needed improvement and the results are clear.
EQ did have the mass market for it's time in MMO history. It was a different time in 1999, PCs were more expensive and bandwidth was low. Also MMOs were still a pretty new thing. EQ was a hit because EQ was a great MMO. Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean alot did not. I remember when EQ even was mentioned in the news because it was such a big thing. You must have not been old enough to remember EQ or just wasn't into online games then.
EQ was fun. Did it take an extemely long time to level in EQ? Sure it did. I didn't say I agree with everything about what EQ was. What I do find funny though is why is everyone in a rush to finish an online game they pay monthly for? I want my online games to take a very long time to level as long as there is content to go with it. I would love a game to take a long time to level if it had a great many dungeons to do at every level and other meaningful activities.
Only thing it shows when a game makes leveling trivial is, the game doesn't have much to content. End game doesn't have to be the focal point. I say if leveling is meant to be trivial as all devs seem to think now, lets remove it then . There is no point having levels if they mean nothing.
Fact is, you can play EQ or UO right now. Why aren't you? Experience the tedium for yourself.
If you are smart you would realize the games of the past don't exist. What exist is a mutation of once great games and this includes WoW. I will admit the original WoW was fun, now it is so dumbed down it's trivial and boring.
Fact is, you can play EQ or UO right now. Why aren't you? Experience the tedium for yourself.
"Oh, because it's not the same, they've dumbed the games down!"
Typical excuse. These people want to live in the early 1990s.
Pathetic response given because you have nothing real to offer. I still play Final Fantasy VII becaue it is still the great game it was. MMOs don't exist anymore in the original stated that made them a hit in the first place. They are all mutated garbage of features mangled together with their direction changed at least 15 times. Even WoW was a good game in 2004, the current babyfied version is awful. The original game had crowd control and tactics in dungeons .. not just smashing your face on the keyboard ADD running through as fast as you can with no chance of death. I find a lack of challenge not fun.
Fact is, you can play EQ or UO right now. Why aren't you? Experience the tedium for yourself.
If you are smart you would realize the games of the past don't exist. What exist is a mutation of once great games and this includes WoW. I will admit the original WoW was fun, now it is so dumbed down it's trivial and boring.
Well said. Fact is, even the classic games are hollow shells of what made them great, DAOC is a joke today compared to its glory days, which is why I won't play it.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Fact is, you can play EQ or UO right now. Why aren't you? Experience the tedium for yourself.
"Oh, because it's not the same, they've dumbed the games down!"
Typical excuse. These people want to live in the early 1990s.
Why do you have a vendetta against people who want old style MMORPGs with tons of innovation and deep gameplay mechanics? (in before LOLOLOLOL TIME SINKS trolling attempt)
Because he may have been one of the people that was unable to get groups. You had to be social and friendly to level in EQ
Some people just cannot let go and move on. I played all of those games back in their heyday and while I had great times, I'd rather remember them they way they were and not try to revisit them today.
I've tried to go back to UO and DAoC, but its just not the same. The games have changed and so have I.
Im sorry, new member to MMORPG.com, is that you have a new account cause youve pissed people off with your old account or are you new to MMO gaming?
Did you even play any of these older games? Most of the people who talk smack about, "people not being able to let go" are people who in fact never played these games.
It has nothing to do with letting go, it has to do with playing games that are somewhat a challenege, with real consequence. All you new school gamers who entered an industry of clear "pussification" and all you cry babies who don't like to loose your "shiney" new weapon clearly ruined this industry.
What the industry isn't ruined? Games like WoW have millions of subs? Yes youre right, from a business standpoint the industry is doing just fine, but from a challenging game standpoint it clearly sucks. Hell now its so farking easy we have mods that time down to tell us when a boss mob is going to do its special ability? Seriosuly gaming is so easy these days its not even worth playing. Yes... lets all go hold our peckers and mash buttons so just maybe we can get a single piece of gear if we're lucky, and if we're not we'll do it over and over again till we get our full set of poorly designed low poly count gear. Ohhhh even better!!! There will be a new patch next month with even better gear, so we can go grind and grind again to get that even better gear... It all makes alot of sense, like hamsters on a wheel.
Maybe you should check out my profile next time to avoid the taste of feet in your mouth. I'm over 50 -- I was playing D&D before you were born, genius.
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. -Winston Churchill
MMO games evolve and there isn't thing you can do about that. It's a new genre and no one really knows what makes it tick yet. There is no formula for success yet so they will all continue to change.
IMHO, it's the players who fail to adapt in some cases. Sure, looking back is always fun but at it's core it isn't about the mechanics, it's about the experience with the environment and other players.
Comments
The real world? Think about the wants and desires of the people complaining the most...you know the ones asking for big budget virtual worlds where you can bake cakes, sleep, eat and poop in your own little cabin? You think they're interested in the real world at all, hehe.
Again, show me the hard data showing what the majority wants. What I read is you telling everyone else they are in the minority and then saying that you are with the majority. This all comes from your made up statistics. Funny, I underlined what you typed where you should take your own advice.
Where have I ever said that I was with the majority? I don't play *ANY* MMOs because they don't make any for me! I'm probably with a smaller minority than you are, I just recognize the fact that I'm not going to get catered to because I am such a minority and I accept it.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Big companies in charge of finding out what the market wants... so that's why all the WoW clones are doing so well, right?
AoC imploded and most companies involved went bankrupt, and they downsized their staff. WAR isn't doing too much better. And LotRO is being kept afloat by its IP.
If the majority of people want more WoW clones, how come they aren't selling well?
Because WoW players play WoW and won't leave it for a game exactly like it. They aren't MMO players. WoW didn't bring the market into the mainstream, it brought WoW into the mainstream. Sooner the companies realize this the better.
Also, the "niche" of oldschool MMO players is between 200-600k. That's bigger than most MMOs right now.
When it comes to old games I have no illusions. I admit I had a really good time playing some of them, some I would say were even profound experiences (these would exclusively be adventure games and RPGs)... But I would play very few of them today. I do the odd exception with Blade Runner or The Longest Journey or Planescape: Torment (all of which I load up and play once every few years), but you cannot make me go back to old MMOs.
As far as MMOs go, I did not exactly love them to start with, they always felt like amateurishly done RPGs to me. Of course, it was all about the social experience, which was fresh, so we were willing to overlook the shortcomings in the game mechanics themselves. The genre's very existence, which was new and exciting back then, was enought reason to play, but it's taken for granted now.
So to me it's not so much that the new games are worse (I believe they're better!), but the genre as a whole is not exactly delivering on the expectations. We expected so many great, innovative magical things, few of which have materialized. I'm beginning to think we set our expectations too high then, and the genre has settled into its conventionalist pace.
So it's a long time till the morning...
I suspect you are right that most wow players will not leave wow for a game that is nearly identical, but it is hard to say that based on past offerings. Lotro played like a travel sized version of wow that lacked many of wows features and the other games were just a terrible mess at release.
It is very possible that people have had so much of wow they might just play a reskinned clone IF it was done well enough. However I think most companies would do better emulating what made wow a success and not emulating wow itself. Take the popular game model and imporve upon that. Listen to what players are asking for and find solutions to that.
That's already what WoW did with EverQuest. They took what made it money and then dumbed it down for mass appeal. Games are gonna have to start doing something different.
[Mod Edit]
I agree with the sentiment, though I'm beginning to fear just the same approach might not be enough today. When WOW launched, let's admit it, the MMO genre was a non-factor as far the "world at large" was concerned. A minority even knew about it. WOW was many people's first step into the genre, and they came to love what the genre had to offer through WOW.
Now the genre has been exposed, most people have at least some idea about it. And people that haven't bought into the genre yet, obviously see no attraction as far as the currently leading design paradigms go.
So I'm thinking if developers want to really bring in new people (or even move massive numbers from other games), they have to show more innovation than Blizzard did with WOW.
People didn't flock to EQ, because more people did not find it entertaining to sit around for 15 hours straight only to have 15 minutes of entertainment. Once you get past the ridiculous time sinks put into the game, EQ wasn't any harder than current mmos and I would argue that current mechanics and encounters are way more difficult.
Time is not a measurement of skill or intelligence. It does little more than challenge a players tollerance.
EQ never captured the mass market, because it was the first of its kind and loaded with problems and mechanics that prevented it from attracting masses of people. There was a ton of areas that needed improvement and the results are clear.
EQ was a lot of fun but more unforgiving than other MMO's, and it didn't cater to the instant-gratification crowd as much as a number of current MMO's. Whether that's a good or bad thing is a matter of taste: yes, you could lose XP when you died up to even a few hours of playtime, but it made you more aware of what you could lose when you died in battle and it made hard won victories that much more satisfying. And yes, you had long travel times but it made you appreciate more the landscape you were traveling through and contributed to the feeling of vastness of the world in EQ.
The whole tank-healer-dps trinity emerged and became popular in EQ just as a number of other tactics like the pulling, kiting and cc that have since then become standard combat tactics in other MMO's. I can't say for sure if UO had it, but raiding definitely made its mark first in EQ.
So, a lot of things that originated from EQ and that made it the fun it was. Maybe not to everyone who played it, but that applies to any MMO. Combat was definitely tougher in EQ than in WoW, Lotro and a number of the other current MMO's around.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Lots of nostalgia going on in this topic.
.
Fact is, you can play EQ or UO right now. Why aren't you? Experience the tedium for yourself.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
"Oh, because it's not the same, they've dumbed the games down!"
Typical excuse. These people want to live in the early 1990s.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
There are a large number of reasons, and they've been stated already. The "its still there" excuse is so weak and pointless.
We don't play the games anymore because the companies that made them have killed them with expansions/patches changing the direction of the game entirely (Dark Age of Camelot, SWG, Ultima Online)
or they aren't supported by the parent company anymore, who have moved on to try their best at making WoW clones (DAoC)
and the two above reasons has resulted in the population not being strong enough to support the game the way it used to be.
Did you honestly not think of these reasons before you posted?
What made it great is gone, and the community that made it even better is gone too.
Some people just have to scorn the good memories others have when it's not about a game they know or love. Well, whatever *shrug*
Doom, Command & Conquer, Starcraft, Quake and a lot of toher games were good in their days too. That the game scene has moved on and that I don't play those anymore doesn't mean I can't sum up the things that were to be liked and admired of those games. if you can't understand such a thing, then that's your loss, not really my problem.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Why do you have a vendetta against people who want old style MMORPGs with tons of innovation and deep gameplay mechanics? (in before LOLOLOLOL TIME SINKS trolling attempt)
Don't get me wrong, I have a ton of fun in EQ. It was a different time when the internet was just taking off and gamers coming together online instead of in basements. EQ wasn't really catering to anyone, because it was uncharted waters. They simply put in what they thought would work and that was to punish and restrict players. The mindset being the longer it took to do something the longer people would stat subscribers. That is why the access quests got so out of hand.
Other things had a negative effect on the ability for EQ to draw in masses other than the time sinks, xp loss and travel. Over expanding left huge areas of the game dead, but still required players to grind through it to catch up to the rest of the pack. The forced grouping only compounded the effect of to much terrain and not enough players. The barrier to entry for the game grew with the first expansion and didn't stop until it was much much to late.
UO and muds had most of the features you mentioned, but not always to the same degree you mention.
I am curious though, what you think made EQ combat so much harder than current mmos? Fewer skills, abilities and mechanics came into play and honestly the majority of fights were nothing but tank and spank encounters. There was so little in the way of tactics, reaction or things of that nature. Auto attacking did most of the work with an ability sprinkled in every 5-10 seconds followed by 5-10 seconds more empty time.
I will concede that soloing today is easy, but that is because players naturally take things to a certain sweet spot where success is almost always a guarentee. Soloing would be much more difficult if people fought monsters a few levels highers, but the risk/reward just isn't there and a constant flow of ensured kills is better. Just like grouping in EQ was. People would find a nice comfortable spot to camp and pull just enough mobs to the group that it was never really a threat, but a nice safe steady flow of xp. Those classes that could solo did and often did so with multiple creatures at a time.
(textwall alert; only noticed after I was done typing how large the post had become :-/)
I think if Everquest would be released in this day and age it wouldn't do as well as it did back then: MMO's have evolved, and likewise gameplay mechanics have progressed in several ways. You're right that it wasn't so much as catering to the "hardcore" crowd what they did, but more pioneering new fields what UO and Everquest did. There were a lot of things that Verant hit right with Everquest. If you could say that one of Blizzard's core philiosophies was that their MMO should be a "fun ride" from the start, then "risk vs reward" was one of Verant's/SOE's with Everquest, the higher the reward, the larger the risk.
I agree with a number of things you say, it was a different time back then, we had different expectations of MMO's or went in it blank and I think that EQ until Shadows of Luclin could be compared to WoW vanilla: after Velious the game seemed to change from its base and a number of the fun elements that were there the first few years seemed to vanish when a large part of the still existing playerbase went to the high end content of the growing list of expansions and the world became larger but emptier and harder to form groups in.
Now, what made the combat more challenging? Keep in mind, this is just my own personal experience, it can be different for everyone. I like to compare it with going on vacation, some will go the tourist way in another country, following the tourguide and guided excursions and such, where others follow their own way, go to villages and places outside the tourist routes and whose goal is to get to know the local culture and hang out with the local people in their vacation. There is no "right" or "wrong" here, as long as you had fun it doesn't matter what activities you were looking for as holiday entertainment abroad.
I think that the things that made the most difference between Everquest and MMO's I played afterwards, was the threat of death and the feel that we were all actually pioneering, in a gaming genre that was still very new, with combat and gameplay mechanics that most of us had no experience with before EQ. It was in EQ that such things were picked up first by most of us and finetuned: I already mentioned the pulling tactics and kiting, and next to that you had the several ways of crowd control. But also such things as the aggro management and the pet control were pretty new. For a pioneering experiment Everquest hit a lot of things right the first time.
But next to that, there was the high risk of death: besides that most of the combat tactics were still fresh and evolving, it was the (healthy) fear of death that made you more aware of your environment when exploring and more alert in combat. In contrast to some other current MMO's there was less room to mess up: the higher you became in level, the more mobs that could only be taken on in groups, effective groups, for example when your enchanter went down and crowd control went out the door your fights became a lot crazier and hectic, and your mana management and your timing when you used a spell could be the difference between success or defeat. And failure gained you more 'punishment' than other games: a long journey back to where you all died, considerable XP loss, several minutes downtime. In general, fights in EQ were on average harder and needed more smart play than in other MMO's I have played.
That was the upside: forced grouping stimulated socializing and social behaviour - I had great fun and made good friends in pikc up groups - and the death threat and tough mobs especially in the medium to high levels made the combat more challenging and victories sweeter. The downside was that looking for a group could become very frustrating if you didn't find one since from the medium levels onward mobs became increasingly tougher to beat solo, and when miscalculated the fight or if you were in a less effective group, several times dying with many hours of lost XP could be very irritating.
Looking back, not that I didn't like combat in other MMO's that I played, but the fact that death has become meaningless with little loss, has made fights also less challenging and victories on average less sweet.
After Everquest, I've been able to basically use the same standard tactics that we were confronted with first in Everquest, with some changes here and there depending upon the MMO. The only major innovations and feel of experimentations I encountered after EQ was with Guild Wars: the wide range of creative and innovating tactics I've seen in GW very often made my jaw hit the floor. I've played Magic: the Gathering and that was what the multitude of different creative team combat in GW often reminded me of. Tactics I've only seen in GW and that couldn't be used in any other MMO.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
What innovation? Most of these games were among the first in their genre, everything they did was innovative by definition. Today, however, not so much. The "deep gameplay mechanics" that most of them are so impressed by *ARE* the time sinks, etc. Sitting around waiting for a boat that only comes along every 30 minutes, only to take another 20 minutes to cross, that's not a deep gameplay mechanic, sorry. Waiting for hours for a boss to respawn, surrounded by dozens of other people who are similarly waiting, is not a deep gameplay mechanic. Ganking everyone in sight is not a deep gameplay mechanic. I played these old school games too and I didn't think they were particularly deep back in the day. Absurd difficulty is not the same as deep.
Where is this mythical deep gameplay mechanics of which you speak?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
EQ did have the mass market for it's time in MMO history. It was a different time in 1999, PCs were more expensive and bandwidth was low. Also MMOs were still a pretty new thing. EQ was a hit because EQ was a great MMO. Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean alot did not. I remember when EQ even was mentioned in the news because it was such a big thing. You must have not been old enough to remember EQ or just wasn't into online games then.
EQ was fun. Did it take an extemely long time to level in EQ? Sure it did. I didn't say I agree with everything about what EQ was. What I do find funny though is why is everyone in a rush to finish an online game they pay monthly for? I want my online games to take a very long time to level as long as there is content to go with it. I would love a game to take a long time to level if it had a great many dungeons to do at every level and other meaningful activities.
Only thing it shows when a game makes leveling trivial is, the game doesn't have much to content. End game doesn't have to be the focal point. I say if leveling is meant to be trivial as all devs seem to think now, lets remove it then . There is no point having levels if they mean nothing.
If you are smart you would realize the games of the past don't exist. What exist is a mutation of once great games and this includes WoW. I will admit the original WoW was fun, now it is so dumbed down it's trivial and boring.
Pathetic response given because you have nothing real to offer. I still play Final Fantasy VII becaue it is still the great game it was. MMOs don't exist anymore in the original stated that made them a hit in the first place. They are all mutated garbage of features mangled together with their direction changed at least 15 times. Even WoW was a good game in 2004, the current babyfied version is awful. The original game had crowd control and tactics in dungeons .. not just smashing your face on the keyboard ADD running through as fast as you can with no chance of death. I find a lack of challenge not fun.
Well said. Fact is, even the classic games are hollow shells of what made them great, DAOC is a joke today compared to its glory days, which is why I won't play it.
Has very little to do with nostalgia.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Because he may have been one of the people that was unable to get groups. You had to be social and friendly to level in EQ
Maybe you should check out my profile next time to avoid the taste of feet in your mouth. I'm over 50 -- I was playing D&D before you were born, genius.
MMO games evolve and there isn't thing you can do about that. It's a new genre and no one really knows what makes it tick yet. There is no formula for success yet so they will all continue to change.
IMHO, it's the players who fail to adapt in some cases. Sure, looking back is always fun but at it's core it isn't about the mechanics, it's about the experience with the environment and other players.