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!

General: 5 Gaming Concepts for the Future

SBFordSBFord Associate Editor - News ManagerThe Land of AZPosts: 16,572MMORPG.COM Staff Uncommon

In a genre that seems to have hit a stagnation point lately, there is a lot of potential for new ideas and innovations. Devs are always looking! In The List today, we take a look at five concepts we think will breathe new life into the MMO space over the next decade. Check it out!

As we get into 2012 there are some trends in the online industry that continue to move forward and take shape. These ideas impact us more than you might realize. Developers are constantly looking at new game mechanics to improve on how we play. When a new design comes forward it then takes shape in other games. Look at the Public Quest system in Warhammer Online and how it now has taken root in other MMOs: soon this idea will become the norm. It is these mechanics we want to highlight in today’s list.

Read more Garrett Fuller's The List: 5 Gaming Concepts for the Future.


image

Associate Editor: MMORPG.com
Follow me on Twitter: @MMORPGMom

image
«1

Comments

  • mnemic666mnemic666 asdf, CAPosts: 157Member Uncommon

    What? FPS on the market now aren't MMO's...That's like calling Counter-Strike an MMO, which is wrong. They just have multiplayer features. They lack the hallmarks of any MMO (persistent world, central hubs for player interaction ect.). The overwhelming majority of shooters are staying in the traditional lobby multiplayer format because it's simple/cheap to develop and it works very well. Sure you have a few games here and there like Dust 514, but the CoD's and BF's will just keep their lobby multiplayer format.

  • Rambo621Rambo621 McKinney, TXPosts: 28Member
    This article is pointless and uninteresting. Shooters becoming mmorpg's? Yeah right, they're the same as they've always been... multiplayer shooters. Everything else in this article is just stating the obvious: multiplayer games will be on your phone! Yeah and they're all garbage.

    image

  • PyrateLVPyrateLV Las Vegas, NVPosts: 1,096Member Common

    Originally posted by mnemic666

    What? FPS on the market now aren't MMO's...That's like calling Counter-Strike an MMO, which is wrong. They just have multiplayer features. They lack the hallmarks of any MMO (persistent world, central hubs for player interaction ect.). The overwhelming majority of shooters are staying in the traditional lobby multiplayer format because it's simple/cheap to develop and it works very well. Sure you have a few games here and there like Dust 514, but the CoD's and BF's will just keep their lobby multiplayer format.

    If SWTOR can be called a MMO, then I dont see why CS/CoD/BF/etc cant be called MMOs either

    Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
    Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
    Playing: Skyrim
    Following: The Repopulation
    I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
    ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)

  • soulmirrorsoulmirror Jax, FLPosts: 112Member

    If SWTOR can be called a MMO, then I dont see why CS/CoD/BF/etc cant be called MMOs either

     

       That is the point all the games mentioned are single player games with MMO ELEMENTS thrown in...  That and if you accept them being MMO's then that is what they are to you, they are not to me.

    The Trinity, for all the forum bashing, was a good thing, it meant you needed a team to complete things in the MMO.  Cooperation was a good thing then, it was part of the greater community, something lacking today. 

    As for casual games gaining depth, it will still be a casual game, when a game gets too hard today they either eventually add RMT to make it easy or just patch it in a few months to make it accessable by all.

  • XasapisXasapis VolosPosts: 5,561Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by PyrateLV

    Originally posted by mnemic666

    What? FPS on the market now aren't MMO's...That's like calling Counter-Strike an MMO, which is wrong. They just have multiplayer features. They lack the hallmarks of any MMO (persistent world, central hubs for player interaction ect.). The overwhelming majority of shooters are staying in the traditional lobby multiplayer format because it's simple/cheap to develop and it works very well. Sure you have a few games here and there like Dust 514, but the CoD's and BF's will just keep their lobby multiplayer format.

    If SWTOR can be called a MMO, then I dont see why CS/CoD/BF/etc cant be called MMOs either

    Well, in all honesty SW:TOR is not an MMO, just a CORPG like the original GW was.

    I agree with the OP that gaming will evolve in even more platforms and that casual games will start becoming more widespread. Also agree that plenty of old MMORPG elements are repolished and presented in a fresher format.

    I don't agree that every game wil become an MMO. They may gain an online community, but playing in a persistent world is another thing. Maybe the BF3 and COD will adopt the Planetside 2 design though, who knows. We're still far from that kind of technology though, best so far is 32vs32 on a single persistent map.

    I also don't agree on the OPs remark on holy trinity. It is hardly an outdated feature, it's just a flavor. It's like saying that factions will disappear now that a factionless game is launching. Or that quests will disappear now that we have dynamic events (which is another form of questing btw). We did have an abundance of holy trinity based MMOs, and that might change. Also the lack of holy trinity is not something new, in fact MMORPGs started without one (UO).

  • D_I_BD_I_B PiastPosts: 43Member

    @PyrateLV

    Amen to that brother!

    Particulary anything with multiplayer character progression are named mmo these days!



     

  • OzmodanOzmodan Hilliard, OHPosts: 7,181Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by soulmirror

    If SWTOR can be called a MMO, then I dont see why CS/CoD/BF/etc cant be called MMOs either

     

       That is the point all the games mentioned are single player games with MMO ELEMENTS thrown in...  That and if you accept them being MMO's then that is what they are to you, they are not to me.

    The Trinity, for all the forum bashing, was a good thing, it meant you needed a team to complete things in the MMO.  Cooperation was a good thing then, it was part of the greater community, something lacking today. 

    As for casual games gaining depth, it will still be a casual game, when a game gets too hard today they either eventually add RMT to make it easy or just patch it in a few months to make it accessable by all.

    Oh so all the group fun I had in UO and Asheron's Call did not need a team?  I beg to differ.  Neither of those games had anything close to the holy trinity, that was derived from D&D and EQ.  Needing a team to do things in a MMO is not limited to a holy trinity format.  You are looking at MMO's in a very narrow way if you think that, basically all the D&D, EQ derived games.  Expand your horizons, you just might find things are just as fun using different methods.

    As to the future, hand held devices will severly limit what you can do on them for the near future, hence any game on them will be primitive compared to what you find on full PC/console MMO's.

  • AG-VukAG-Vuk Phoenix, AZPosts: 823Member Uncommon

    Planetside , Halo while I wouldn't categorize them as MMO's they had huge active social communities that one easily see being turned into MMO's . Planetside 2  eventual release may morph into this . Just look at Global Agenda's attempt . It won't be long, the article is correct.

    image
  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo LondonPosts: 3,221Member

    Good article mmorpg.com.

    1st: I agree with the multi-platform development. The power in those small devices is crazy + eg 4G 100mps. Most ppl will have an additional portable device with the potential at least for online games. If the UI or screen is an issue, that's where I'd like to see  some innovation in these mmorpgs for mobiles, here.

    2nd: I'm wondering how online communities will interact/develop, down the line. One of the problems with mmo games atm is the immigration/emmigration of swathes of players for any one game at launch of new game + leave after a month + repeat.

    Seems a lot of gamers like a fresh game each month: Quick + finite model? I think that is almost antithetical to mmorpgs being a game that you start off with a longer term intention. There's all the other games for the former imo but if mmorpgs are designed around that idea or fail at it (repeating old gameplay too obviously + timesink?) then could be an area for devs to rethink altogether. No idea how that will resolve/if it is even a tractable consideration either. But it's at the heart of what makes mmorpgs distinguished from other genres becoming mmoified, I guess?

     

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Err.....

    Planetside is a mmo, so is its sequel

    I agree cod, bf3, halo etc.. are not mmos though.
  • SamhaelSamhael Huntsville, ALPosts: 696Member Uncommon

    I agree with #5 but that's about it. Of course, I guess I'm one of the few that actually likes defined roles in a game (even if the Holy Trinity is rather bland).  I suspect if MMOs trend towards the way of 1-4, I will be passing on many/most of them.

  • HonnerHonner SydneyPosts: 504Member

    Originally posted by Samhael

    I agree with #5 but that's about it. Of course, I guess I'm one of the few that actually likes defined roles in a game (even if the Holy Trinity is rather bland).  I suspect if MMOs trend towards the way of 1-4, I will be passing on many/most of them.




     

    WoW will be there for all who love roles...

  • KonfessKonfess Dallas, TXPosts: 949Member Uncommon

    5. GW2 is derived from Diablo with comes from Nethack.  Old is new agian, is what GW is founded on.

    4. I think that the Trinity fills the criteria spelled out by the Bartle Archetypes. To deny the Trinity is to deny the K.E.A.S., and any MMO that does that will fail as an MMO.

    3. I personally feel that the F2P market is just that, compleX casual games, and the author failed to recognize the fact.

    2. This was written on the wall back in the days of Doom and Warcraft 1.

    1. Why travel if you can't play WoW at 30,000 feet?  But on a 2 inch screen?

    Pardon any spelling errors
    Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven
    Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
    Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
    As if it could exist, without being payed for.
    F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.

  • KonfessKonfess Dallas, TXPosts: 949Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Honner



    Originally posted by Samhael



    I agree with #5 but that's about it. Of course, I guess I'm one of the few that actually likes defined roles in a game (even if the Holy Trinity is rather bland).  I suspect if MMOs trend towards the way of 1-4, I will be passing on many/most of them.










     

    WoW will be there for all who love roles...

    And playing WoW is where everyone will be.  Enjoy playing GhostTown Online, server population all time high of 1.  Please read the KILLERS V. KILLERS section for a better understanding.

    Pardon any spelling errors
    Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven
    Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
    Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
    As if it could exist, without being payed for.
    F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.

  • DrakxiiDrakxii Waxahachie, TXPosts: 594Member

    5.  We can only hope.

     

    4.  I will believe when I see it.  I have yet to se a game do non trinity right.  What companies should be going for is expanding the trinity not make everyone the same.  Which would fall under 5 as the older games had controllers, buffers, doters and debuffers in attiontion to healers, dps and tanks.

     

    3.  We can only hope.  Specially as current non casual game are more shallow then puddle in my yard.

     

    2.  MMOs are DEFINED by a presistant WORLD not characters.  Battlefield was never an MMO,  Diablos were never an MMO, GW was not an MMO.   Any game with shards or battle maps is NOT an MMO.

     

    1.  It will be interesting but I really doubt it will be "amazing"  any time more soon,  Probably just another quick way for devs to ruin their game by letting everyone get cheap money or loot without anyone's help.

     

    I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.

  • chirpechirpe , NYPosts: 3Member

    Let's all be frank, no one truly cares what they call a game as long as it's fun. x-x; MMO's, RPG's, FPS's, MMOG, MMOTBG and etc.

  • AIMonsterAIMonster Apopka, FLPosts: 2,059Member

    5.  I think we'll see a lot more triple A looking back and bringing some of the better features of pre-WoW era MMOs too.  Not only that, but expect to see lots of improvements on these old features that make them even better now that technology allows it.

    4.  People are still stuck in the old trinity mentality and refuse to change.  It's going to take a lot of convincing otherwise.  Hopefully GW2 is a step in the right direction.

    3.  Well, if a casual game gains too much depth it probably can't be called a casual game anymore.  If you mean there will be games with more depth across previous casual gaming platforms (like facebook apps, flash/unity games, other browser games, and mobile games) beyond the do your daily clickfests they are currently then we can only hope so.  I don't think the market is quite there yet and people are going to keep churning out the clickfests because of companies like Zynga's successes.

    2.  You are going to see a lot more genres become MMOs.  Technology is finally catching up to the point where we can handle a persistent world having many players in an area at once with powerful collision detection.  I'm still hoping for the first true Fighting Game MMO and we're seeing a lot more FPSMMOs too.

    However....  there will always be room for single player and mutliplayer lobby based games.  Not everyone wants to play games in a persistent world with other people.  Some games are always going to be better in a solo atmosphere or smaller scale multiplayer atmosphere.

    1.  The main problem here is how tablets and mobile devices are made.  There is very little support to turn the iPhone into a gaming platform.  Touchscreens are absolutely horrendous control devices for any serious game, and for a mobile phone the alternative is to take up a huge amount of screen real estate (which you can't afford on such a small screen).  These games are simply going to continue to fall into the casual realm till we find some way to allow for a more accessible natural control scheme and to compensate for the small screen sizes.  Tablets of course are better in this department, but the only way I see mobile devices (that aren't specifically designed for gaming such as the PS Vita and DS) able to be considered serious gaming platforms for non-casual gamers is to find some way to include a better control scheme and still let the device fit into your pocket.  Holographic projections maybe?



     

    image

    Raptr link because it's the cool new trend:
    image

  • HonnerHonner SydneyPosts: 504Member

    Originally posted by Konfess

    Originally posted by Honner




    Originally posted by Samhael



    I agree with #5 but that's about it. Of course, I guess I'm one of the few that actually likes defined roles in a game (even if the Holy Trinity is rather bland).  I suspect if MMOs trend towards the way of 1-4, I will be passing on many/most of them.










     

    WoW will be there for all who love roles...

    And playing WoW is where everyone will be.  Enjoy playing GhostTown Online, server population all time high of 1.  Please read the KILLERS V. KILLERS section for a better understanding.


     

    I'm not gonna be playing WoW because I want to play something different, but I know a lot of people who still enjoying WoW and they love the trinity and all that stuff, just saying...

  • r3zs1ckn3ssr3zs1ckn3ss Wauwatosa, WIPosts: 360Member Uncommon
    If its Online, is Multiplayer, then being on multiple platforms with a Massive amount of people playing makes it an MMO for me. Some games may not be primarily as an MMO, but as long as the element is there then so is the title or sub title at the very least.

    New build in progress.
    Stay tuned!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • NewHorizonNewHorizon Tucson, AZPosts: 18Member

    2. Every Game Will Become an MMO

    Thanks mnemic666 for noticing, and saying, what others seem to not understand, not the poor mislead people, but the industry. The writer of this article themself said "Every game will become an MMO," however, in the very first sentence says "Launching with a PvP arena." This is matchmaking (Convenience to not know, or type somones IP) and dates all the way back to the first epic games like Unreal and Halflife, so now what? You dont see a million servers and its done automatically, so what. So in this respect Halflife and Unreal are responsible for starting the MMO movement, right? But you see, this is the problem, the people running the show need to learn how to make a distinction between a Massive Matchmaking(MM) and Openworld MMO, maybe OMMO? Has a nice ring. Or start calling areana games MASSIVE MATCHMAKING (MM).

    I am sick and tierd of sorting through the complex lists of non-OMMO's on MMORPG.com listed as MMO. Am I having a stroke?

  • joonkp1976joonkp1976 seoulPosts: 93Member

    I once upon a time had idea for lineage 3 with open skills and spells system and class pledge system which gives bonus to, if you pledge to certain class, certain skills and spells.  I was thinking more of this-ish on this feature article not this on any device crap...  Thanks for reading and good gaming, people~!

  • xKingdomxxKingdomx SydneyPosts: 1,541Member

    Originally posted by chirpe

    Let's all be frank, no one truly cares what they call a game as long as it's fun. x-x; MMO's, RPG's, FPS's, MMOG, MMOTBG and etc.




     

    You sir, should win this thread.

    A good game is a good game, you shouldn't restrict yourself to just MMO or singleplayer, pre-conceived bias is what prevents a lot of players from finding a potential great game for them.

     

    Plus reply to the whole trinity promotes group combat thing,

    If you make content that is unable to be completed solo unless one player is god amazing in its gameplay, you have promoted groupplay already. Players in an MMO will inheritently ask for other players to help if they are stuck in some content. Plus you created a challenge for the daredevils who wants to have a challenge.

    Current tab target combat and trinity prevents this from happening. You HAVE to have a group to complete group content, you HAVE to have a healer in a group, you HAVE to have a tank in a group. You can't bend the rules to your liking.

    How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
    As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.

  • thekid1thekid1 GroningenPosts: 789Member

    2. Every Game Will Become an MMO

    This has already started to happen with almost every FPS game on the market now launching with a PvP area.

     

    What? This doesn't make any sense at all.

  • GardavsshadeGardavsshade Cedar Springs, MIPosts: 754Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by NewHorizon

    2. Every Game Will Become an MMO

    Thanks mnemic666 for noticing, and saying, what others seem to not understand, not the poor mislead people, but the industry. The writer of this article themself said "Every game will become an MMO," however, in the very first sentence says "Launching with a PvP arena." This is matchmaking (Convenience to not know, or type somones IP) and dates all the way back to the first epic games like Unreal and Halflife, so now what? You dont see a million servers and its done automatically, so what. So in this respect Halflife and Unreal are responsible for starting the MMO movement, right? But you see, this is the problem, the people running the show need to learn how to make a distinction between a Massive Matchmaking(MM) and Openworld MMO, maybe OMMO? Has a nice ring. Or start calling areana games MASSIVE MATCHMAKING (MM).

    I am sick and tierd of sorting through the complex lists of non-OMMO's on MMORPG.com listed as MMO. Am I having a stroke?

    No you are not having a stroke. Game Publishers and Marketers use the MMO label to sell their products because WoW advertizes itself as a MMO and has done quite well. The term MMO is now just market speak. It is word or term that has lost it's value from my own point of view, it defines almost nothing.

    I also agree with you on your comment about whether some of the IVGs on this site are MMOs... Most are not MMOs in my opinion. mmorpg.com has really dropped the ball.

    You are right... we need a new name for a real MMO.... Openworld MMO or OMMO seems good to me as well.

  • AntiocheAntioche Grand Rapids, MIPosts: 132Member

    I agree on all points, particularly the last one, which I have felt is the eventual future of gaming for the past 10 years honestly. Ever since mmorpgs came into existence. My first online gaming experience were with MUDs, then to fps shooters like quake, rts like warcraft, and rpgs like diablo. The progression towards more realistic graphical representations of reality in online games as well as literature and film depicting true virtual reality like Tad Williams Otherland series and the Wachowski's Matrix films has imho given us the endpoint well in advance even while we slowly progress toward such sophisticated real-world technologies. Advancing mobile tech is just another way in which we see the virtual pervading the real. Hopefully I'll be around to witness this, but in some ways I will probably be disgusted by it all.

    Also, regarding the abuse of the term mmo. It should only refer to those games that have persistent worlds that a player can log into to play a character that has been saved on that server for the purpose of developing said character. The fact that the author blatantly uses it in a way that makes match-making services and fps game servers sound like mmos is odd to me, but I stopped caring. Clearly the concept of a persistent world is now considered one type of mmo among a variety. 

    Another thing that I think will be more common for persistent worlds, is that they will diverge into two very distinct types. We have already seen this to some degree, but currently the "game" world is by far the most common type. There are very few sandbox persistent worlds, and those that do exist still incorporate popular "game" world systems. I believe that this separation will become more starkly contrasted in the years ahead within the mmorpg genre. Shallow game mechanics with poor reward vs time spent will be pitted against worlds that are more like simulations of "a reality". Whether that be a sci-fi reality of a fantasy reality or whathaveyou. Anyway, that's my two cents.

    It is pathos we lack, and this lack of pathos makes the worlds we explore quite stale.

    http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/Antioche

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.