Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Who wants the old school to come back?

1101113151619

Comments

  • DaywolfDaywolf Winchester, CAPosts: 749Member

    Originally posted by Moaky07

     

     No there isnt anyway to know about a present full feature MMO sandbox....but those of ya that keep spouting on about games like SWG sure indeed were the niche before WOW.

     

    The biggest sandbox to date is EVE with ~350k....and it still doesnt top EQ1 sub numbers from 04 era which stood at 450k.

     

    You guys belong to the virtual reality/sims clubs of America....which wasnt popular among us longtime video-gamers back then. Well before MMOs went mainstream, bringing in a mulititude of newer gamers which joined in the WOW phase.

     

    That's right it was a niche, where were these "longtime video-gamers" when many of us were playing MUD's before we developed them into what is now called old school mmorpg's? Most of the pioneers of the old school mmorpg's were mud developers, and old school mmorpg's reflected that.



    See, I don't care about WoW, I played it for a bit and it's not the experience the niche has been playing for years. If people want to play WoW, that's fine, but when they go to all the other game sites and say we want this and we want that and the devs listen to them because of their numbers, well it destroys that niche, especially in the end when they wind up not playing those games and they are left for ghost towns.

    M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demo’s & indie alpha's.

  • thorwoodthorwood MayfieldPosts: 485Member

    Originally posted by Daywolf

    Boat travel was awesome in EQ, a lot of people were upset when they quit running. Even WoW has some slow travel... like with the subway (though that no one there uses as it's pointless). It was great in EQ when you had to take an actual journey to get to another place, made the game world feel more cohesive, sometimes even challenging so you traveled in a group. There were faster modes of travel though, like the spires or Drui's, good if you had to go far or recover a corpse. SWG had slow travel too, a lot of people would meet up at the starport. I think an old school game today needs it, it builds community.

    I loved the Butcher Block to Freeport boat trip too the first time I did it.  I do not recall anyone saying in game that they enjoyed repeating the boat trip experience multiple times.  On top of the 20 minute boat trip, you also had to add up to a 30 minute wait before the next boat departed.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member

    Originally posted by Daywolf

    Originally posted by Moaky07


     

     No there isnt anyway to know about a present full feature MMO sandbox....but those of ya that keep spouting on about games like SWG sure indeed were the niche before WOW.

     

    The biggest sandbox to date is EVE with ~350k....and it still doesnt top EQ1 sub numbers from 04 era which stood at 450k.

     

    You guys belong to the virtual reality/sims clubs of America....which wasnt popular among us longtime video-gamers back then. Well before MMOs went mainstream, bringing in a mulititude of newer gamers which joined in the WOW phase.

     

    That's right it was a niche, where were these "longtime video-gamers" when many of us were playing MUD's before we developed them into what is now called old school mmorpg's? Most of the pioneers of the old school mmorpg's were mud developers, and old school mmorpg's reflected that.



    See, I don't care about WoW, I played it for a bit and it's not the experience the niche has been playing for years. If people want to play WoW, that's fine, but when they go to all the other game sites and say we want this and we want that and the devs listen to them because of their numbers, well it destroys that niche, especially in the end when they wind up not playing those games and they are left for ghost towns.

     

    Well, you can't really blame developers to listen to their customers. Niches are being destroyed everyday in the business world. Corner independent bookstore is giving way to B&N, Borders & Amazon. There is no going back. Ditto for MMORPGs.

    If you don't want to move forward with the genre, be left behind and play niche games.

    Plus, "they" have as much right to go to game sites and state what THEY want as you.

  • DaywolfDaywolf Winchester, CAPosts: 749Member

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Well, you can't really blame developers to listen to their customers.

    Who's customers? Maybe you missed what I wrote...

     


    Originally posted by thorwood

     

    I loved the Butcher Block to Freeport boat trip too the first time I did it.  I do not recall anyone saying in game that they enjoyed repeating the boat trip experience multiple times.  On top of the 20 minute boat trip, you also had to add up to a 30 minute wait before the next boat departed.

    A lot of people use to dive off of the boat. The zones had lots of population. After the boats stopped, that dried up, was much harder to get to.

    M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demo’s & indie alpha's.

  • KhalathwyrKhalathwyr Denton, TXPosts: 3,138Member

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Daywolf


    Originally posted by Moaky07


     

     No there isnt anyway to know about a present full feature MMO sandbox....but those of ya that keep spouting on about games like SWG sure indeed were the niche before WOW.

     

    The biggest sandbox to date is EVE with ~350k....and it still doesnt top EQ1 sub numbers from 04 era which stood at 450k.

     

    You guys belong to the virtual reality/sims clubs of America....which wasnt popular among us longtime video-gamers back then. Well before MMOs went mainstream, bringing in a mulititude of newer gamers which joined in the WOW phase.

     

    That's right it was a niche, where were these "longtime video-gamers" when many of us were playing MUD's before we developed them into what is now called old school mmorpg's? Most of the pioneers of the old school mmorpg's were mud developers, and old school mmorpg's reflected that.



    See, I don't care about WoW, I played it for a bit and it's not the experience the niche has been playing for years. If people want to play WoW, that's fine, but when they go to all the other game sites and say we want this and we want that and the devs listen to them because of their numbers, well it destroys that niche, especially in the end when they wind up not playing those games and they are left for ghost towns.

     

    Well, you can't really blame developers to listen to their customers. Niches are being destroyed everyday in the business world. Corner independent bookstore is giving way to B&N, Borders & Amazon. There is no going back. Ditto for MMORPGs.

    If you don't want to move forward with the genre, be left behind and play niche games.

    Plus, "they" have as much right to go to game sites and state what THEY want as you.

    Which is cool. It's just more often than not the "THEY" you refer to get down right beligerent with the "they" that I guess you'd put me into for even mentioning some of the things I'd like. Outright attack mode. Evidence here on these forums and on the TOR forums if it is required. Rarely do I see those coming from my side of the table (not all of whom I agree with on every little feature) launch a nuclear verbal attack on another for liking a certain style of gameplay. I can count, for certain, 3-4 individuals in this thread who have and if they had addressed me in the real world, face to face, in this manner they'd be on their way to a hospital (or worse) and I'd be on my way to county or federal.

    I still just don't see why it's so terrible to have AAA versions that appeal to both sides. Currently AAA means around 300K to 500K subscriptions. A goal which both types can achieve.

    "Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."

    Kickstarter 2 / Naysayers 0

  • whisperwyndwhisperwynd montreal, QCPosts: 1,479Member

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr

    Which is cool. It's just more often than not the "THEY" you refer to get down right beligerent with the "they" that I guess you'd put me into for even mentioning some of the things I'd like. Outright attack mode. Evidence here on these forums and on the TOR forums if it is required. Rarely do I see those coming from my side of the table (not all of whom I agree with on every little feature) launch a nuclear verbal attack on another for liking a certain style of gameplay. I can count, for certain, 3-4 individuals in this thread who have and if they had addressed me in the real world, face to face, in this manner they'd be on their way to a hospital (or worse) and I'd be on my way to county or federal.

    I still just don't see why it's so terrible to have AAA versions that appeal to both sides. Currently AAA means around 300K to 500K subscriptions. A goal which both types can achieve.

    image

      What is it in what we are saying that erupts such vileness and a need to belittle our 'wants' and hopes. Sure there are alot of WoW bashers and haters, they aren't necessarily those of us wishing for a more 'retro' view of mmos.

    Things invariably change, and gaming will too. Where it goes only time will reveal, but where's the harm for us in wanting something different than what is presently available?

  • DaywolfDaywolf Winchester, CAPosts: 749Member

    Well I don’t nuke WoW players. I give them a hard time sometimes, but in a challenging way to bring out deeper discussions. They can have their game, I’m not in hopes of it failing. The only true gripe I have with a deal of many WoW players is that they have an army of people that go to game development forums and demand WoW type features, get their wish and then stick with WoW leaving those actual game communities in shambles. It’s all they will ever really play imo, until Blizzard releases something else at least.  Maybe I explained it more directly that time?

    M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demo’s & indie alpha's.

  • pojungpojung Central, FLPosts: 810Member

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr

     

    I still just don't see why it's so terrible to have AAA versions that appeal to both sides. Currently AAA means around 300K to 500K subscriptions. A goal which both types can achieve.

    Well put. There is plenty of room in the MMORPG genre for quality. A 'common denominator' can be anything so long as it draws a crowd. No need to set the common denom where the crowd is presently convened. More selection means better gameplay in the end, and isn't that a rallying cry everyone can subscribe to?

    That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc.
    We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be.
    So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away.
    - MMO_Doubter

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,001Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by pojung

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr

    I still just don't see why it's so terrible to have AAA versions that appeal to both sides. Currently AAA means around 300K to 500K subscriptions. A goal which both types can achieve.

    Well put. There is plenty of room in the MMORPG genre for quality. A 'common denominator' can be anything so long as it draws a crowd. No need to set the common denom where the crowd is presently convened. More selection means better gameplay in the end, and isn't that a rallying cry everyone can subscribe to?

    Agreed even if the actual number of subs and the quality of the game isn't perfectly linked.

    But make a fun game and you will get enough subs to run the game and a little extra too (unless you do a Vanguard and release in such horrible shape that few people ever touch it after it but that is another story).

    I think there is room for a few different kinds of MMOs and there is the possibility to mix newer and older styles and adding very different things to the mix.

    There are many different ways to handle the mechanics of a MMO instead of the old systems that EQ and UO used. I loved to see a version of Runequest or a game that uses the rules from GWs old Warhammer fantasy RPG. Palladiums mix of levels and skills would also make a somewhat different experience.

    You could also make a MMO without XP with only gear and achivements (to gain access and stuff), the possibilities are limitless but most people only see the regular system or in some cases that plus UOs system.

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr

    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    And those people will be right. There is a reason why old schools is OLD.

    If you want some game with "featuers" like long down-time and take-a-number and camp for hours ... don't get your hopes up. They won't be back.

    Oh, and then OP you have posts like this that assume they know what features you're talking about and cherry pick the negative ones and try to use them as "arguing points". They must have their way rule with an iron fist and anyone else be damned. There is noone elese's way but their way and everyone else needs to hush.

    But these are the features that keep being brought up by the pro-old-school camp!  They specifically want the long down-time because it "forces people to socialize"!  They want the camping because they don't want instances!  It isn't someone cherry picking bad features that nobody wants, it's just listening to the old-schoolers describing exactly what they do want!

    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

  • SweetZoidSweetZoid HindPosts: 437Member

    The old school exists,play Daoc,EQ or Ultima. Its time for the new games to step up like GW2,SW:TOR,RIFT and those games.

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member

    Originally posted by SweetZoid

    The old school exists,play Daoc,EQ or Ultima. Its time for the new games to step up like GW2,SW:TOR,RIFT and those games.

    Oh no, those games aren't exactly the same as they were back in the mythical "good old days"!  They've changed!  Yeah, the only reason they still exist at all today is because they changed, otherwise they'd be long dead and gone because there is no audience for old school games that could keep them afloat in the current market.

    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

  • nfefxnfefx Chunchula, ALPosts: 29Member

    Originally posted by Cephus404

    Originally posted by SweetZoid

    The old school exists,play Daoc,EQ or Ultima. Its time for the new games to step up like GW2,SW:TOR,RIFT and those games.

    Oh no, those games aren't exactly the same as they were back in the mythical "good old days"!  They've changed!  Yeah, the only reason they still exist at all today is because they changed, otherwise they'd be long dead and gone because there is no audience for old school games that could keep them afloat in the current market.

    No, the only reason they exist today is the hardcore fanboys that have been playing the game for a decade and won't quit until they take the servers down. It doesn't take many people to keep an MMO online, and these games aren't pulling new players.

  • DaywolfDaywolf Winchester, CAPosts: 749Member

    Originally posted by nfefx

    Originally posted by Cephus404


    Originally posted by SweetZoid

    The old school exists,play Daoc,EQ or Ultima. Its time for the new games to step up like GW2,SW:TOR,RIFT and those games.

    Oh no, those games aren't exactly the same as they were back in the mythical "good old days"!  They've changed!  Yeah, the only reason they still exist at all today is because they changed, otherwise they'd be long dead and gone because there is no audience for old school games that could keep them afloat in the current market.

    No, the only reason they exist today is the hardcore fanboys that have been playing the game for a decade and won't quit until they take the servers down. It doesn't take many people to keep an MMO online, and these games aren't pulling new players.

    Yep, they are not that expensive anylonger to keep running. I've played many of these games when the changes happened, and watched each one turn into a ghost town as a result, or close enough to it. It's a no brainer.

    M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demo’s & indie alpha's.

  • KhalathwyrKhalathwyr Denton, TXPosts: 3,138Member

    Originally posted by Cephus404

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr


    Originally posted by nariusseldon



    And those people will be right. There is a reason why old schools is OLD.

    If you want some game with "featuers" like long down-time and take-a-number and camp for hours ... don't get your hopes up. They won't be back.

    Oh, and then OP you have posts like this that assume they know what features you're talking about and cherry pick the negative ones and try to use them as "arguing points". They must have their way rule with an iron fist and anyone else be damned. There is noone elese's way but their way and everyone else needs to hush.

    But these are the features that keep being brought up by the pro-old-school camp!  They specifically want the long down-time because it "forces people to socialize"!  They want the camping because they don't want instances!  It isn't someone cherry picking bad features that nobody wants, it's just listening to the old-schoolers describing exactly what they do want!

    Even for those in which your comment is true am I to sit here and to believe that the possibility totally escapes your mind that an inherent "but adjusted" variable is also in play here? Or do they have to specifiy it to you with each feature they mention? Sure, I think I could be on board with ditching instances and going back to camping mobs? I also think that each mob should be evaluated as to whether it is a high traffic quest mob or a rare item quest mob, and that the game should look at how many people are in the area with that quest and adjust up or down the spawn times.

     

    I doubt that anyone really wants to wait 30 minutes on a a boat, for example. That said, I see nothing wrong with a 5 or 10 minutes wait. If anything it'll give those with ADD who cower at that little bit of time a chance to go to the bathroom, get a drink/smoke or go check on their kids/check facebook/make pub plans (for those who complain that they don't want downtime because they "have a life").

     

    That's the problem (as I see it and I'm certainly not suggesting you you see it). Those older systems haven't seen subsequent iterations. They instead were dumped sum total for something totally else and the people that loved them but knew they could do with a little tweaking here or there were left hanging in the wind. And those aren't the only features that get brought up. As I said before, those are just the ones some folks keep focusing on because of the possible shock value they can get out of them in a counter argument. Especially when they don't even acknowledge that time variable of those, which seems to be causing all the fuss, can be pared down a little to not be as extreme as before but not be so insignificant.

     

    And ultimately, I haven't seen one single person who likes the old school style demanding that all future games be made in that manner such that everyone has to play those type games. They're just looking for one modern made game to capture those things made by a company who has the money to even be in this business in the first place.

    "Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."

    Kickstarter 2 / Naysayers 0

  • Garvon3Garvon3 Worcester, MAPosts: 2,898Member

    Originally posted by Cephus404

    Originally posted by SweetZoid

    The old school exists,play Daoc,EQ or Ultima. Its time for the new games to step up like GW2,SW:TOR,RIFT and those games.

    Oh no, those games aren't exactly the same as they were back in the mythical "good old days"!  They've changed!  Yeah, the only reason they still exist at all today is because they changed, otherwise they'd be long dead and gone because there is no audience for old school games that could keep them afloat in the current market.

    Listen kid, you keep spamming this everywhere, but go look up some MMO charts.

     

    Games like DAoC weren't losing numbers and then changed to survive. 

    They changed, and then started losing numbers in large chunks. 

    Theres 3 solid reasons that DAoC is almost dead right now, and its nothing to do with it being outdated and "not fun". So until you play those games, please stop spreading your lies around.

    1. /level 20 for all accounts with a level 50, killed the incoming noob population because there was no vets to group with/show people the ropes.

    2. Trials of Atlantis expansion made the game all about grinding for PvE loot in order to compete in PvP. Changed the entire philosophy of the game and people didn't like that. They left by the hundred thousands. 

    3. EA bought Mythic and put them to work on Warhammer, so no further expansions/work was being done on DAoC. 

     

    And now you know, so stop posting your slander.

     

  • Garvon3Garvon3 Worcester, MAPosts: 2,898Member

    Originally posted by Cephus404

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr


    Originally posted by nariusseldon



    And those people will be right. There is a reason why old schools is OLD.

    If you want some game with "featuers" like long down-time and take-a-number and camp for hours ... don't get your hopes up. They won't be back.

    Oh, and then OP you have posts like this that assume they know what features you're talking about and cherry pick the negative ones and try to use them as "arguing points". They must have their way rule with an iron fist and anyone else be damned. There is noone elese's way but their way and everyone else needs to hush.

    But these are the features that keep being brought up by the pro-old-school camp!  They specifically want the long down-time because it "forces people to socialize"!  They want the camping because they don't want instances!  It isn't someone cherry picking bad features that nobody wants, it's just listening to the old-schoolers describing exactly what they do want!

    We didn't say LONG downtime, ANY downtime, or  any social dynamics at all, gives people a chance to socialize. When the fastest way to level or do anything is to solo, theres no social aspect to a game. 

    And having no instances does not mean there will be camping. Only if your game is a simple one trick pony like WoW, where the only point is to get gear, would there be spawn camping. 

  • qombiqombi Unknown, LAPosts: 1,180Member

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr

    Originally posted by Cephus404


    Originally posted by Khalathwyr


    Originally posted by nariusseldon



    And those people will be right. There is a reason why old schools is OLD.

    If you want some game with "featuers" like long down-time and take-a-number and camp for hours ... don't get your hopes up. They won't be back.

    Oh, and then OP you have posts like this that assume they know what features you're talking about and cherry pick the negative ones and try to use them as "arguing points". They must have their way rule with an iron fist and anyone else be damned. There is noone elese's way but their way and everyone else needs to hush.

    But these are the features that keep being brought up by the pro-old-school camp!  They specifically want the long down-time because it "forces people to socialize"!  They want the camping because they don't want instances!  It isn't someone cherry picking bad features that nobody wants, it's just listening to the old-schoolers describing exactly what they do want!

    Even for those in which your comment is true am I to sit here and to believe that the possibility totally escapes your mind that an inherent "but adjusted" variable is also in play here? Or do they have to specifiy it to you with each feature they mention? Sure, I think I could be on board with ditching instances and going back to camping mobs? I also think that each mob should be evaluated as to whether it is a high traffic quest mob or a rare item quest mob, and that the game should look at how many people are in the area with that quest and adjust up or down the spawn times.

     

    I doubt that anyone really wants to wait 30 minutes on a a boat, for example. That said, I see nothing wrong with a 5 or 10 minutes wait. If anything it'll give those with ADD who cower at that little bit of time a chance to go to the bathroom, get a drink/smoke or go check on their kids/check facebook/make pub plans (for those who complain that they don't want downtime because they "have a life").

     

    That's the problem (as I see it and I'm certainly not suggesting you you see it). Those older systems haven't seen subsequent iterations. They instead were dumped sum total for something totally else and the people that loved them but knew they could do with a little tweaking here or there were left hanging in the wind. And those aren't the only features that get brought up. As I said before, those are just the ones some folks keep focusing on because of the possible shock value they can get out of them in a counter argument. Especially when they don't even acknowledge that time variable of those, which seems to be causing all the fuss, can be pared down a little to not be as extreme as before but not be so insignificant.

     

    And ultimately, I haven't seen one single person who likes the old school style demanding that all future games be made in that manner such that everyone has to play those type games. They're just looking for one modern made game to capture those things made by a company who has the money to even be in this business in the first place.

    Exactly! I would also like to add I miss having alot of factions that mean something in MMOs. In Everquest there were many towns and not every race/class was liked everywhere. I also like the distinct towns for each race. The world felt alive and different where ever you went. There was freedoms I miss, such as being able to give items to NPCs and they would equip it, cast beneficial spells on NPCs, attack any NPC you wanted, drop things on the ground. I like the realisms removed, weight of stuff mattered, you had to keep food and drink. I miss the codependency and differences of each class, you needed druids or wizards to travel quickly around the world, melee needed casters to bind, classes had very unique buffs and abilities that formed a well oiled group. Now days, to make sure everything is equal classes are blan and all feel the same. They really have very little to offer each other than what they already have.

  • DaywolfDaywolf Winchester, CAPosts: 749Member

    Originally posted by Cephus404

     

    But these are the features that keep being brought up by the pro-old-school camp!  They specifically want the long down-time because it "forces people to socialize"!  They want the camping because they don't want instances!  It isn't someone cherry picking bad features that nobody wants, it's just listening to the old-schoolers describing exactly what they do want!

    Lets just pretend for a moment, just pretend, those are the two main issues that the old-school-players want in their game. If they want them, how come you say “no one wants them”? Are they no one?



    Ok, lits fix that:



    But these are the features that keep being brought up by no one!  No one specifically wants the long down-time because it "forces no one to socialize"!  No one wants the camping because everyone and their dog wants instances in every single game, trust me!  It isn't someone cherry picking bad features that nobody wants, it's just listening to no one describing exactly what no one wants!



    Isn’t it a great world where everyone and all games are the same?!

    (it's what they teach in public schools these days)

    M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demo’s & indie alpha's.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member

    We didn't say LONG downtime, ANY downtime, or  any social dynamics at all, gives people a chance to socialize. When the fastest way to level or do anything is to solo, theres no social aspect to a game.

    "gives people a chance to socialize" is NOT the same as forcing them to chat because there is nothing to do.

    Having a GAME with periods of "nothing to do" is a BAD idea. People don't play games just to chat. You can always chat up people in any MMOs, including WOW. If you think there is no socialization in WOW, you are mistaken. Where are all the guild and guild chat comes from?

    You do NOT need down-time .. any down-time .. to have a chance to socialize.

  • PedrobPedrob Fort Worth, FLPosts: 172Member

    I miss the timesi n DAoC when we had to sit on the pad with our medallion on, waiting on the NPC to come down to port us to the enemy frontier, all the chatting, joking and regular siege check was actually quite good, met some of my good online friends in that pad!

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr

    Even for those in which your comment is true am I to sit here and to believe that the possibility totally escapes your mind that an inherent "but adjusted" variable is also in play here? Or do they have to specifiy it to you with each feature they mention? Sure, I think I could be on board with ditching instances and going back to camping mobs? I also think that each mob should be evaluated as to whether it is a high traffic quest mob or a rare item quest mob, and that the game should look at how many people are in the area with that quest and adjust up or down the spawn times.

     That won't help with high-end characters who are camping the boss for the rare drop so they can sell it or give it to lower-level toons.  That happens all the time, I've seen groups of top-end characters camping rare drop mobs for weeks or months at a time, 24/7.  Every time it respawns, they kill it, they get the drop, they get to set the prices on the sales because they're the only ones who can get the item.  Making it respawn faster won't help, it'll just make those characters richer.

    Besides, even if you're going to modify the old-school elements, you'd have to modify them so dramatically in most  cases that the old-schoolers wouldn't want to play.  It's a matter of financial stability vs. minority desires.  There was a discusison around here not too long ago about scaling mobs.  They get harder and act differently depending on whether a soloer is playing or a group, therefore everyone gets a challenge and the game doesn't cater to one gameplay style over another.  The groupers hated it, they wanted mobs to *ONLY* work for groupers, they wanted it to be absurdly hard so that no soloer ould ever do the content and they'd be forced to group.  That's exactly the same thing that I foresee with modifying old-school content.  Either it stays primarily old-school, which will drive away the majority mainstream players, or it changes so much that the old-school players keep complaining.  I'm not seeing a middle ground.

    I doubt that anyone really wants to wait 30 minutes on a a boat, for example. That said, I see nothing wrong with a 5 or 10 minutes wait. If anything it'll give those with ADD who cower at that little bit of time a chance to go to the bathroom, get a drink/smoke or go check on their kids/check facebook/make pub plans (for those who complain that they don't want downtime because they "have a life").

     Funny, people were saying they liked it in this very thread.  They hailed the downtime as forced socialization  because you really had nothing else to do and if people weren't talking, at least they could be beating each other's brains out.  I'd have a problem with a 5 or 10 minute wait because my playtime is limited and valuable.  I'm playing to have a good time, to be entertained.  I'd no more sit around waiting for a boat in a game that I'm paying for than I would go to a movie and sit around for 10 minutes watching a blank screen in the middle.

    That's the problem (as I see it and I'm certainly not suggesting you you see it). Those older systems haven't seen subsequent iterations. They instead were dumped sum total for something totally else and the people that loved them but knew they could do with a little tweaking here or there were left hanging in the wind. And those aren't the only features that get brought up. As I said before, those are just the ones some folks keep focusing on because of the possible shock value they can get out of them in a counter argument. Especially when they don't even acknowledge that time variable of those, which seems to be causing all the fuss, can be pared down a little to not be as extreme as before but not be so insignificant.

     They were dumped because they didn't make the cut.  They were evolutionary dead ends.  The majority of people who liked them moved on to WoW-style games, as well as the millions of mainstream players who would never have played UO or EQ to  begin with.  The marketplace changed, you have to deal with it.

    You're missing the point that to many, perhaps most players, *ANY* time variable will be too extreme and these are the people who pay the bills of MMO developers.  I don't want to wait 30 minutes to have fun.  I don't want to wait 10 minutes to have fun.  I want to have fun right now.  That's what I'm paying for.  I'll bet you anything that if you gated off an area with a 10 minute boat ride, that area would die a slow, lingering death.  People just wouldn't do it and if they had to, they'd complain long and loud about how long it took.  That's the MMO marketplace today and they have a lot more money than your group does, by several orders of magnitude.  Who do you think will get catered to?

    And ultimately, I haven't seen one single person who likes the old school style demanding that all future games be made in that manner such that everyone has to play those type games. They're just looking for one modern made game to capture those things made by a company who has the money to even be in this business in the first place.

    What you miss is that every  game out there has to make money.  All of them.  So you can't ask that some company throw away their financial future and millions of dollars in investor money to make your tiny little niche group happy.  The companies who have money have it because they make intelligent business decisions.  They know who their audience is and what their audience wants.  Unfortunately for you, the vast majority of MMO players do not want what you want.  It would be a crapshoot to even try to modify old-school mechanics into a new-school game for the reasons I outlined above. There's no guarantee that *ANYONE* would like it and that's millions of dollars and years of development down the drain if they're wrong.

    So yes, it is too much to ask for a single game to cater to your minority playstyle, at least unless you can demonstrate that such a game has as much potential to make as much money as a modern day game would.  But every time I bring that up, old-schoolers whine "It's not our job!"  Of course it is.  You want the game, you have to show it's financially viable.  Of course, I think the old-schoolers know that it isn't, which is why they don't even try.  It's easier to whine about something you know is wrong than to try and prove it and have everyone else know it's wrong too.

    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

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member

    Originally posted by Daywolf

    Lets just pretend for a moment, just pretend, those are the two main issues that the old-school-players want in their game. If they want them, how come you say “no one wants them”? Are they no one?

    As a financial force, no they are not.  Just because one guy somewhere wants some bizarre game mechanic doesn't mean their desire is worth taking into consideration.  Games are all about making money.  Either you bring a large contingent of people to the table that can pay enough to make the game mechanic worthwhile (while not having a mechanic that drives away other paying players) or you're not going to get what you want.

    Nor should you.

    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


  • Originally posted by Pedrob

    I miss the timesi n DAoC when we had to sit on the pad with our medallion on, waiting on the NPC to come down to port us to the enemy frontier, all the chatting, joking and regular siege check was actually quite good, met some of my good online friends in that pad!

    That is fine for you.  But if you force me to do this I will do mean things to you, since you are trying to torture me and waste my time. 

     

    Many people want to force everyone into this or they feel that the mechanic itself won't work.  Well that is fine for you because you clearly value one benefit over the other penalty.  But if anyone tries to play the petty tyrant against me like that they will a gigantic "FUCK YOU". 

     

    Realize this, these sorts of constraints are chains you are putting on other people.  This may or may not be a good idea.  But whenever you do this you better be really careful.  People are not stupid, they often act stupid but are not actually stupid, they can smell this stuff a mile away and they will only tolerate it for a VERY good reason especially the NA market.  I hate to bring culture into this but culture is extremely important because in essence that is what we are taking about; the laws and procedures of a community.

     

    Anyone from a country that has a high amount of beuracracy foisted upon the common person will be more likely to tolerate this sort of stuff, simply because to them that will be the way of the world.  A few rare individuals will hate it even more than someone from an NA market, but by and large the population of a highly regulated and controling country will react very differently.

     

    But in the end you are sitting on your high seat getting to decide what I will be forced to tolerate?  No think again.  I am not your bitch.  Everytime you envision games trying to do this you need to ask yourself "Will people be my bitch in exchange for the benefit?  Do I really want to make people my bitch anyway, maybe there is a better way to get the same effect?"

  • KhalathwyrKhalathwyr Denton, TXPosts: 3,138Member

    Originally posted by Cephus404

    Originally posted by Khalathwyr



    Even for those in which your comment is true am I to sit here and to believe that the possibility totally escapes your mind that an inherent "but adjusted" variable is also in play here? Or do they have to specifiy it to you with each feature they mention? Sure, I think I could be on board with ditching instances and going back to camping mobs? I also think that each mob should be evaluated as to whether it is a high traffic quest mob or a rare item quest mob, and that the game should look at how many people are in the area with that quest and adjust up or down the spawn times.

     That won't help with high-end characters who are camping the boss for the rare drop so they can sell it or give it to lower-level toons.  That happens all the time, I've seen groups of top-end characters camping rare drop mobs for weeks or months at a time, 24/7.  Every time it respawns, they kill it, they get the drop, they get to set the prices on the sales because they're the only ones who can get the item.  Making it respawn faster won't help, it'll just make those characters richer.

    Besides, even if you're going to modify the old-school elements, you'd have to modify them so dramatically in most  cases that the old-schoolers wouldn't want to play.  It's a matter of financial stability vs. minority desires.  There was a discusison around here not too long ago about scaling mobs.  They get harder and act differently depending on whether a soloer is playing or a group, therefore everyone gets a challenge and the game doesn't cater to one gameplay style over another.  The groupers hated it, they wanted mobs to *ONLY* work for groupers, they wanted it to be absurdly hard so that no soloer ould ever do the content and they'd be forced to group.  That's exactly the same thing that I foresee with modifying old-school content.  Either it stays primarily old-school, which will drive away the majority mainstream players, or it changes so much that the old-school players keep complaining.  I'm not seeing a middle ground.

    I doubt that anyone really wants to wait 30 minutes on a a boat, for example. That said, I see nothing wrong with a 5 or 10 minutes wait. If anything it'll give those with ADD who cower at that little bit of time a chance to go to the bathroom, get a drink/smoke or go check on their kids/check facebook/make pub plans (for those who complain that they don't want downtime because they "have a life").

     Funny, people were saying they liked it in this very thread.  They hailed the downtime as forced socialization  because you really had nothing else to do and if people weren't talking, at least they could be beating each other's brains out.  I'd have a problem with a 5 or 10 minute wait because my playtime is limited and valuable.  I'm playing to have a good time, to be entertained.  I'd no more sit around waiting for a boat in a game that I'm paying for than I would go to a movie and sit around for 10 minutes watching a blank screen in the middle.

    That's the problem (as I see it and I'm certainly not suggesting you you see it). Those older systems haven't seen subsequent iterations. They instead were dumped sum total for something totally else and the people that loved them but knew they could do with a little tweaking here or there were left hanging in the wind. And those aren't the only features that get brought up. As I said before, those are just the ones some folks keep focusing on because of the possible shock value they can get out of them in a counter argument. Especially when they don't even acknowledge that time variable of those, which seems to be causing all the fuss, can be pared down a little to not be as extreme as before but not be so insignificant.

     They were dumped because they didn't make the cut.  They were evolutionary dead ends.  The majority of people who liked them moved on to WoW-style games, as well as the millions of mainstream players who would never have played UO or EQ to  begin with.  The marketplace changed, you have to deal with it.

    You're missing the point that to many, perhaps most players, *ANY* time variable will be too extreme and these are the people who pay the bills of MMO developers.  I don't want to wait 30 minutes to have fun.  I don't want to wait 10 minutes to have fun.  I want to have fun right now.  That's what I'm paying for.  I'll bet you anything that if you gated off an area with a 10 minute boat ride, that area would die a slow, lingering death.  People just wouldn't do it and if they had to, they'd complain long and loud about how long it took.  That's the MMO marketplace today and they have a lot more money than your group does, by several orders of magnitude.  Who do you think will get catered to?

    And ultimately, I haven't seen one single person who likes the old school style demanding that all future games be made in that manner such that everyone has to play those type games. They're just looking for one modern made game to capture those things made by a company who has the money to even be in this business in the first place.

    What you miss is that every  game out there has to make money.  All of them.  So you can't ask that some company throw away their financial future and millions of dollars in investor money to make your tiny little niche group happy.  The companies who have money have it because they make intelligent business decisions.  They know who their audience is and what their audience wants.  Unfortunately for you, the vast majority of MMO players do not want what you want.  It would be a crapshoot to even try to modify old-school mechanics into a new-school game for the reasons I outlined above. There's no guarantee that *ANYONE* would like it and that's millions of dollars and years of development down the drain if they're wrong.

    So yes, it is too much to ask for a single game to cater to your minority playstyle, at least unless you can demonstrate that such a game has as much potential to make as much money as a modern day game would.  But every time I bring that up, old-schoolers whine "It's not our job!"  Of course it is.  You want the game, you have to show it's financially viable.  Of course, I think the old-schoolers know that it isn't, which is why they don't even try.  It's easier to whine about something you know is wrong than to try and prove it and have everyone else know it's wrong too.

    And you have to deal with the point that there are more people out there than you want that like old school style games. No matter how much you try to trivialize it. As others have said those features ar slowly creeping their way back in because your current style of games aren't making the cut and getting the WoW numbers. And your claims of "minor playstyle" are utter rubbish when considered that the freakish variable of WoW, whose numbers are greatly composed of "social and hip" people who play because Paris Hilton says "it's hot (tm)" and Mr. T. says to get a Nightelf Mohawk, yeah, marketing genious I'll give them that but it disqulifies it to be used in these talks. Heh, yeah, "your group" has alot more money, and you turn around and keep putting it back into WoW. That should tell investors something right there: You ain't leaving WoW for something that mirrors it (which has been tried multiple times) so try something very different.

    That said, comparing Eve to other themeparks whos subs are more toward the norm, there is a sizeable market. We're just going to have to look at CCP as the only AAA old schooler company out there and if they maintain that with World of Darkness Online continue to support them. Eve continues to grow (at 350K+ now) and considering its hindrance (no avatars and it's been proven people prefer to play with avatars) it's doing quite well.

    Now, that's not to say that you have to like it or even admit to it (which I doubt you ever would). But I've demonstrated to you that an old-school type game (Eve) has that money making potential. Yet I still don't understand why you and others champion so much trying to shout down anyone who says they'd like to see more of this variety. The only thing I can conclude is that you want every single AAA game that comes out to be made for you.

    "Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."

    Kickstarter 2 / Naysayers 0

Sign In or Register to comment.