Are/Did Developers take MMORPG's in the wrong direction?

mikecackle · October 2012

Back in the day, the player(s) of a MMORPG were living their own experience, creating their own story as they played in a massive persistant online universe. Well, that persistant world doesnt seem to exist anymore. Sure, its somewhat alive and moving. But all in all, every player is walking down the same exact paths when they select the same race/character. The fix was to mix it up by adding new races, and a new storyline. Same game though...

I mean, we are in MMORPG land right? Don't you remember typing in a biography of what your youth was, that others could see. You use to roleplay that attitude in the game along with others in their own characters... I'm pretty sure thats where the term role play came from right? What ever the hell happened to that?

Today now we have these cheesy storylines laid out for us in a boring path to unlock the mysteries of the writer, and when thats done... Well it seems game over, right?

Is this whats wrong with MMO's today? Did we as entertainment devouring humans finally find that this is a stale breed of development that we no longer wish to nibble on? Do you enjoy the experience of a tale already created for you layed out with everyone experiecing the same steps, in a linear boring grindy ass fashion? What I find amazing is this develpment style is just like most single player games are? Hey we are playing single player games online! And as Jenna Marbles would say.. WTF?!?!

Is this where the boredom starts coming from?

If everyone is experiencing the same thing, and we have been here before, is it losing its sustaining power of entertainment? I know a lot of developers cater to making the player feel like a superhero, so they can "fantasize" about being this amazing character. But if everyone is the same following the exact same path, aint that dream and feeling lost? Not too mention, the games themselves seem to cater to one on one combat with death.. That don't feel very superheroish to me, especially when im getting beat up by a angry wolfman or desert mesquito. Anyhoo...

While I believe this is all true of where boredome comes from, I don't believe at all that this is the only reason games today suck. What other reasons do you have on why games are becoming "unsubscribable" so quickly?

ShakyMo · October 2012

biggest problem, to detriment of mmos imo is INSTANCING

instanced dungeons, tupperware pvp, solo story phases, multiple shards of the same world zone

these things are killing MMOS, they stop them being massive and multiplayer

im not against zoning for performance reasons, providing thoose zones are singular and persistent. but i am against instancing.

MumboJumbo · October 2012

Maybe over-designed ? Freedom + interaction are the key things mmorpgs should cater to. But when you design a ton of content that "should" be interacted in a specific way, and when it comes down to it, players just take path of least resistance and cut through the immersion qualities to the mechanics to level up etc?

mikecackle · October 2012

Good responses, but ShakyMo.. What is tupperware pvp?

Souldrainer · October 2012

Originally posted by Vardahoth
Originally posted by mikecackle
Good responses, but ShakyMo.. What is tupperware pvp?

I would use the term instanced pvp. I remember Lineage 2 (2003 - 2006) and being involved in clan wars. Deaths meant losing exp (and gear if you were red from pking an unflagged player) which gave the wars meaning. It forced you as a player to be a part of a group in order to survive in the world of players. There were no instances in this game and it was completely community driven. There were sieges, open raid bosses with 8hr - 1week respawn times (depending on the type of raid boss it was). openworld dungeons usually took a party to help the player get down to the spot to exp at and it took about 20-40 mins to get there. There was plenty of crafting, buying and selling from player shops, and other things to do. There was over 40 classes and you chose your roll in the game and the type of people you wanted to play with. It also wasn't faction based. Clans formed their own alliances to control exp spots and castles to put tax rates on npc's in towns. I really miss those times.

The example you cite here is lame and unimaginative. Negative reinforcement doesn't force people to group. It forces people to not play the game, at all.

Big companies aren't very imaginative though. Therein lies the problem. Most MMOs are huge, big-budget affairs. When you have that, you lose innovation in lieu of sales and propaganda. Team Meat, for example, was a team of two people. They were quoted as saying that Call of Duty and Halo were shitty games. Then, they came out with an action platformer which nailed one of the highest Metacritic scores in recent years and is one of the top selling indie games, ever.

But to make the game, they had to sacrifice a lot. It took them years, and they had to program and test day and night. One guy's wife complained that she never saw anything but the back of his chair, even though he programmed the game with her in the same room.

If you want a painting on your wall to just EXIST, buying one from Big Lots is fine, but if you need a painting to be AMAZING, you might want to start buying from actual artists. If games are ever to become art, we need to stop supporting the large mass-producing companies as much, and start buying from smaller starving artists.

Don't get me wrong. Tastes will vary, but by and large, these mass-produced games are lacking in imagination.

ShakyMo · October 2012

Yeah ghettoed off small team vs small team matches in a box.

Doesnt belong in a mmo, what's the point you have moba for that.

ShakyMo · October 2012

Also didn't know team meat hated cod and halo, something else I agree with them on then, I hate consoley shooters.

SaintPhilip · October 2012

Originally posted by Souldrainer
Originally posted by Vardahoth
Originally posted by mikecackle
Good responses, but ShakyMo.. What is tupperware pvp?

I would use the term instanced pvp. I remember Lineage 2 (2003 - 2006) and being involved in clan wars. Deaths meant losing exp (and gear if you were red from pking an unflagged player) which gave the wars meaning. It forced you as a player to be a part of a group in order to survive in the world of players. There were no instances in this game and it was completely community driven. There were sieges, open raid bosses with 8hr - 1week respawn times (depending on the type of raid boss it was). openworld dungeons usually took a party to help the player get down to the spot to exp at and it took about 20-40 mins to get there. There was plenty of crafting, buying and selling from player shops, and other things to do. There was over 40 classes and you chose your roll in the game and the type of people you wanted to play with. It also wasn't faction based. Clans formed their own alliances to control exp spots and castles to put tax rates on npc's in towns. I really miss those times.

The example you cite here is lame and unimaginative. Negative reinforcement doesn't force people to group. It forces people to not play the game, at all.

Big companies aren't very imaginative though. Therein lies the problem. Most MMOs are huge, big-budget affairs. When you have that, you lose innovation in lieu of sales and propaganda. Team Meat, for example, was a team of two people. They were quoted as saying that Call of Duty and Halo were shitty games. Then, they came out with an action platformer which nailed one of the highest Metacritic scores in recent years and is one of the top selling indie games, ever.

But to make the game, they had to sacrifice a lot. It took them years, and they had to program and test day and night. One guy's wife complained that she never saw anything but the back of his chair, even though he programmed the game with her in the same room.

If you want a painting on your wall to just EXIST, buying one from Big Lots is fine, but if you need a painting to be AMAZING, you might want to start buying from actual artists. If games are ever to become art, we need to stop supporting the large mass-producing companies as much, and start buying from smaller starving artists.

Don't get me wrong. Tastes will vary, but by and large, these mass-produced games are lacking in imagination.

Damn brother- very well said. Truley a superb reponse.

Zylaxx · October 2012

Originally posted by SaintPhilip
Originally posted by Souldrainer
Originally posted by Vardahoth
Originally posted by mikecackle
Good responses, but ShakyMo.. What is tupperware pvp?

I would use the term instanced pvp. I remember Lineage 2 (2003 - 2006) and being involved in clan wars. Deaths meant losing exp (and gear if you were red from pking an unflagged player) which gave the wars meaning. It forced you as a player to be a part of a group in order to survive in the world of players. There were no instances in this game and it was completely community driven. There were sieges, open raid bosses with 8hr - 1week respawn times (depending on the type of raid boss it was). openworld dungeons usually took a party to help the player get down to the spot to exp at and it took about 20-40 mins to get there. There was plenty of crafting, buying and selling from player shops, and other things to do. There was over 40 classes and you chose your roll in the game and the type of people you wanted to play with. It also wasn't faction based. Clans formed their own alliances to control exp spots and castles to put tax rates on npc's in towns. I really miss those times.

The example you cite here is lame and unimaginative. Negative reinforcement doesn't force people to group. It forces people to not play the game, at all.

Big companies aren't very imaginative though. Therein lies the problem. Most MMOs are huge, big-budget affairs. When you have that, you lose innovation in lieu of sales and propaganda. Team Meat, for example, was a team of two people. They were quoted as saying that Call of Duty and Halo were shitty games. Then, they came out with an action platformer which nailed one of the highest Metacritic scores in recent years and is one of the top selling indie games, ever.

But to make the game, they had to sacrifice a lot. It took them years, and they had to program and test day and night. One guy's wife complained that she never saw anything but the back of his chair, even though he programmed the game with her in the same room.

If you want a painting on your wall to just EXIST, buying one from Big Lots is fine, but if you need a painting to be AMAZING, you might want to start buying from actual artists. If games are ever to become art, we need to stop supporting the large mass-producing companies as much, and start buying from smaller starving artists.

Don't get me wrong. Tastes will vary, but by and large, these mass-produced games are lacking in imagination.

Damn brother- very well said. Truley a superb reponse.

Disagree because 99% of all innovation come from the big boys and not from starving artists.

Name me one successful indie MMO? NONE, cause they are all F2P crap, only the good stuff comes from well named studios.

SaintPhilip · October 2012

Originally posted by Zylaxx
Originally posted by SaintPhilip
Originally posted by Souldrainer
Originally posted by Vardahoth
Originally posted by mikecackle
Good responses, but ShakyMo.. What is tupperware pvp?

I would use the term instanced pvp. I remember Lineage 2 (2003 - 2006) and being involved in clan wars. Deaths meant losing exp (and gear if you were red from pking an unflagged player) which gave the wars meaning. It forced you as a player to be a part of a group in order to survive in the world of players. There were no instances in this game and it was completely community driven. There were sieges, open raid bosses with 8hr - 1week respawn times (depending on the type of raid boss it was). openworld dungeons usually took a party to help the player get down to the spot to exp at and it took about 20-40 mins to get there. There was plenty of crafting, buying and selling from player shops, and other things to do. There was over 40 classes and you chose your roll in the game and the type of people you wanted to play with. It also wasn't faction based. Clans formed their own alliances to control exp spots and castles to put tax rates on npc's in towns. I really miss those times.

The example you cite here is lame and unimaginative. Negative reinforcement doesn't force people to group. It forces people to not play the game, at all.

Big companies aren't very imaginative though. Therein lies the problem. Most MMOs are huge, big-budget affairs. When you have that, you lose innovation in lieu of sales and propaganda. Team Meat, for example, was a team of two people. They were quoted as saying that Call of Duty and Halo were shitty games. Then, they came out with an action platformer which nailed one of the highest Metacritic scores in recent years and is one of the top selling indie games, ever.

But to make the game, they had to sacrifice a lot. It took them years, and they had to program and test day and night. One guy's wife complained that she never saw anything but the back of his chair, even though he programmed the game with her in the same room.

If you want a painting on your wall to just EXIST, buying one from Big Lots is fine, but if you need a painting to be AMAZING, you might want to start buying from actual artists. If games are ever to become art, we need to stop supporting the large mass-producing companies as much, and start buying from smaller starving artists.

Don't get me wrong. Tastes will vary, but by and large, these mass-produced games are lacking in imagination.

Damn brother- very well said. Truley a superb reponse.

Disagree because 99% of all innovation come from the big boys and not from starving artists.

Name me one successful indie MMO? NONE, cause they are all F2P crap, only the good stuff comes from well named studios.

-All the real innovation has totally been indie/garage based. I will provide a link to a book called the complete history of video games and also another book (have to look up the title)- I will update this post later with links (have to actually move and fire up the Kindle to see the actual titles/authors)

-Right now I would agree that most indie (MMORPGs) are terrible in terms od development, innovation and quality- But that is a direct effect of an oversaturated market and WILL likely change- Look at Minecraft for instance, not an MMO exactly but very much an innovative game.

EDIT- We also cannot confuse success and innovation/quality. These are two seperate entities... For instance,look at the most succesful; "Artists" in Music Today...Nuff said =P

Ambros123 · October 2012

Developers did absolutely not take MMOs in the wrong direction, it's the trend in the populace that did, companies followed what they beleived the consumers wanted. Companies follow what the trend is and what people want. Those who bitch that MMOs are not what they used to be compared to the "good old days" are the minority. And these minority are not what the direction MMOs will take, they might find their home in a nitche MMO but by no means the majority. The demographics of the MMO consumer has changed dramatically compared to the "good old day" and more and more you have your avg consumer playing an MMO.

Also all games makes the player a "superhero" as that goes hand in hand with an engaging story. You will not find an engaging story with "average Joe."

People always reminicent in the "good old days" which are always viewed in biased glasses and will "forget" all the negatives those days had.

Yamota · October 2012

Yes, Yes and Yes. MMORPGs were always created by dedicated developers who were fans of MMORPGs for fans of MMORPGs and back in those days MMORPGs was about virtual worlds.

Then WoW came with its solo-questing leveling, general casual gameplay with no death penalties, instancing, PvP battlegrounds and what not and just ruined everything. WoW was altogether a bad thing for MMORPGs as it transformed it from virtual worlds to virtual themeparks.

Now finally the market seem to be getting saturated with these throw-away ThemeParks, with GW 2 hopefully being the last, and maybe we can see some forward movement in this stale genre.

Yamota · October 2012

Originally posted by SaintPhilip
Originally posted by Zylaxx
Originally posted by SaintPhilip
Originally posted by Souldrainer
Originally posted by Vardahoth
Originally posted by mikecackle
Good responses, but ShakyMo.. What is tupperware pvp?

I would use the term instanced pvp. I remember Lineage 2 (2003 - 2006) and being involved in clan wars. Deaths meant losing exp (and gear if you were red from pking an unflagged player) which gave the wars meaning. It forced you as a player to be a part of a group in order to survive in the world of players. There were no instances in this game and it was completely community driven. There were sieges, open raid bosses with 8hr - 1week respawn times (depending on the type of raid boss it was). openworld dungeons usually took a party to help the player get down to the spot to exp at and it took about 20-40 mins to get there. There was plenty of crafting, buying and selling from player shops, and other things to do. There was over 40 classes and you chose your roll in the game and the type of people you wanted to play with. It also wasn't faction based. Clans formed their own alliances to control exp spots and castles to put tax rates on npc's in towns. I really miss those times.

The example you cite here is lame and unimaginative. Negative reinforcement doesn't force people to group. It forces people to not play the game, at all.

Big companies aren't very imaginative though. Therein lies the problem. Most MMOs are huge, big-budget affairs. When you have that, you lose innovation in lieu of sales and propaganda. Team Meat, for example, was a team of two people. They were quoted as saying that Call of Duty and Halo were shitty games. Then, they came out with an action platformer which nailed one of the highest Metacritic scores in recent years and is one of the top selling indie games, ever.

But to make the game, they had to sacrifice a lot. It took them years, and they had to program and test day and night. One guy's wife complained that she never saw anything but the back of his chair, even though he programmed the game with her in the same room.

If you want a painting on your wall to just EXIST, buying one from Big Lots is fine, but if you need a painting to be AMAZING, you might want to start buying from actual artists. If games are ever to become art, we need to stop supporting the large mass-producing companies as much, and start buying from smaller starving artists.

Don't get me wrong. Tastes will vary, but by and large, these mass-produced games are lacking in imagination.

Damn brother- very well said. Truley a superb reponse.

Disagree because 99% of all innovation come from the big boys and not from starving artists.

Name me one successful indie MMO? NONE, cause they are all F2P crap, only the good stuff comes from well named studios.

-All the real innovation has totally been indie/garage based. I will provide a link to a book called the complete history of video games and also another book (have to look up the title)- I will update this post later with links (have to actually move and fire up the Kindle to see the actual titles/authors)

-Right now I would agree that most indie (MMORPGs) are terrible in terms od development, innovation and quality- But that is a direct effect of an oversaturated market and WILL likely change- Look at Minecraft for instance, not an MMO exactly but very much an innovative game.

EDIT- We also cannot confuse success and innovation/quality. These are two seperate entities... For instance,look at the most succesful; "Artists" in Music Today...Nuff said =P

Invalid comparison, games should be compared to movies rather than art because both movies and games require a lot of money to create and need skilled people. Art is something abstract and all you need it some paint and colors, rest comes from talent. Game development is not like that. You need artists yes but you also need UI experts, developers, testers, managers and producers to fund all that.

The only indy MMO which is successful is Eve. All others are mediocre at best and if you compare a game like GW 2 to Darkfall you will see the huge difference in quality from everything ranging from UI to sound. You NEED money to develop a commercial MMO, it is not an option. It is not enough to have money, but that is another question entirely.

Thane · October 2012

main problem, "modern day gamers" want the perfect game, giving everything from sandbox to guided questing, open world pvp and the abillity to quest in peace whenever they want.... and they want it for free.

they want to be the cool minority not playing the "big games" (like wow, who actually offers quite the storry for your chars, if you cba to actually read), but on the other hand they want players online on every time with short queues and instant invites to their beloved dungeons.

mmos entered the spotlight some time ago, obviously the devs go for the mechanics that are likely to make money. shocking news, people dont work for free.. including devs.

imo there are alot of good mmos out there. you just need to know what you want. if you do not know what you want, you will keep posting about "good ol days", only remembering a half blurred version of the max 2k players online servers imo.

just to mention a few examples

you want pve? play wow, rift, gw2, tor, TSW, ...

you want pvp? play planetside, gw2, APB, .... (or actually. just play shooters....)

you want a cheater free world? play on deticated server. with 10 players online who can be controlled (yes, there will always be cheaters)

YOUR perfect game, fitting YOU 120% will not be released, unless you develop it, but then again... it will only fit you 120% and not automatically the rest of the world

for real, "back in the good old times", we actually just wanted to play games. we didnt care if they were perfect. that'S why we like em so much

ShakyMo · October 2012

Zylax
Successful indie mmos.
Uo - ea bought them later
Daoc - ea bought them later
EQ - Sony bought them later
Eve - still is
Wow - blizzard were independent at the time.

SomeOldBloke · October 2012

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Zylax
Successful indie mmos.
Uo - ea bought them later
Daoc - ea bought them later
EQ - Sony bought them later
Eve - still is
Wow - blizzard were independent at the time.

These developers released MMOs when the the marketplace was different... where's yout list of inde mmo's released in the last 2 years.

I agree with whoever said that inovation comes from inde developers but their lack of fund means a great idea goes nowhere. AAAs just look at $$$ in profit, which is reasonable as they are a business.

xAPOCx · October 2012

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Zylax
Successful indie mmos.
Uo - ea bought them later
Daoc - ea bought them later
EQ - Sony bought them later
Eve - still is
Wow - blizzard were independent at the time.

Loktofeit · October 2012

Developers listened to gamers and made the games based on their feedback. Whether they did that because they are diehard gamers making games for fellow gamers or they are lazy, greedy monsters is immaterial. They made games that most people want to play. How could that be the wrong direction?

Few here would realize there have been many MMOs that have gone in the right direction because of their hypocritical stance of wanting innovation and fresh ideas but rejecting anything that falls outside of their personal definition of what an MMO 'should be'.

Lineage 2
Maple Story
Travian
Habbo Hotel
Club Penguin
DOFUS
Flyff
A Tale in the Desert
ACE Online
Wizard 101
Vindictus
Mabinogi
Free Realms
Ikariam/Evony/Grepolis/etc
Perfect World International
Atlantica Online
Clone Wars Adventures
Hello Kitty Online
Marvel Super Hero Squad
Eden Eternal
Dragonica

How many of those are considered 'the right direction' by people here?

"that's just a korean grinder"
"those are kids games"
"that's not a real MMO"

If anything, the right direction seems to be to designing an MMO for the people that don't have a preconcieved notion of what an MMO should be and are just looking for a massively multiplayer online game. Maybe that's why there are a lot of games there that cater to parents and kids. They judge the game on the entertainment and fun it delivers. They approach each game for what it is, not for what category it fits in.

I don't think there will ever be an MMO in 'the right direction' for most of the gamers that would specifically identify with being an MMORPGer. In the past few years a lot of devs have realized that, which is why we don't have many traditional MMORPGs in development right now. There's simply too much baggage that goes with it.

f0dell54 · October 2012

Originally posted by Zylaxx
Originally posted by SaintPhilip
Originally posted by Souldrainer
Originally posted by Vardahoth
Originally posted by mikecackle
Good responses, but ShakyMo.. What is tupperware pvp?

I would use the term instanced pvp. I remember Lineage 2 (2003 - 2006) and being involved in clan wars. Deaths meant losing exp (and gear if you were red from pking an unflagged player) which gave the wars meaning. It forced you as a player to be a part of a group in order to survive in the world of players. There were no instances in this game and it was completely community driven. There were sieges, open raid bosses with 8hr - 1week respawn times (depending on the type of raid boss it was). openworld dungeons usually took a party to help the player get down to the spot to exp at and it took about 20-40 mins to get there. There was plenty of crafting, buying and selling from player shops, and other things to do. There was over 40 classes and you chose your roll in the game and the type of people you wanted to play with. It also wasn't faction based. Clans formed their own alliances to control exp spots and castles to put tax rates on npc's in towns. I really miss those times.

The example you cite here is lame and unimaginative. Negative reinforcement doesn't force people to group. It forces people to not play the game, at all.

Big companies aren't very imaginative though. Therein lies the problem. Most MMOs are huge, big-budget affairs. When you have that, you lose innovation in lieu of sales and propaganda. Team Meat, for example, was a team of two people. They were quoted as saying that Call of Duty and Halo were shitty games. Then, they came out with an action platformer which nailed one of the highest Metacritic scores in recent years and is one of the top selling indie games, ever.

But to make the game, they had to sacrifice a lot. It took them years, and they had to program and test day and night. One guy's wife complained that she never saw anything but the back of his chair, even though he programmed the game with her in the same room.

If you want a painting on your wall to just EXIST, buying one from Big Lots is fine, but if you need a painting to be AMAZING, you might want to start buying from actual artists. If games are ever to become art, we need to stop supporting the large mass-producing companies as much, and start buying from smaller starving artists.

Don't get me wrong. Tastes will vary, but by and large, these mass-produced games are lacking in imagination.

Damn brother- very well said. Truley a superb reponse.

Disagree because 99% of all innovation come from the big boys and not from starving artists.

Name me one successful indie MMO? NONE, cause they are all F2P crap, only the good stuff comes from well named studios.

Eve Online

A indie company can make a good game just as good as any AAA company as long as they have a devoted player base.

Loktofeit · October 2012

Originally posted by mbd1968
I agree with whoever said that inovation comes from inde developers but their lack of fund means a great idea goes nowhere. AAAs just look at $$$ in profit, which is reasonable as they are a business.

A great idea is often indistinguishable from a completely atrocious idea until it is actually functioning in its designated environment, surrounded by every other mechanic and ruleset that will affect it.

Loktofeit · October 2012

Originally posted by Zylaxx
Name me one successful indie MMO? NONE, cause they are all F2P crap, only the good stuff comes from well named studios.

Puzzle Pirates
EVE Online
Wizard 101
A Tale in the Desert
Saga

Now, I am fully aware that you won't consider those successful, but that's fine. It's further reinforcement of my earlier post.

negativf4kk · October 2012

Its not devs it players who took mmo in a wrong direction. Look at old days, your charecter meant something to you. You cared about its reputation its development. You played by the rules of the game. Now most players dont gove a sh*t about their charecter, they use cheats, buy gold etc. Charecter means nothing in modern MMO u can always start from scrach and get to top end fairly quickly.

Arglebargle · October 2012

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Zylax
Successful indie mmos.
Uo - ea bought them later
Daoc - ea bought them later
EQ - Sony bought them later
Eve - still is
Wow - blizzard were independent at the time.

According to this list, 'Independant' seems to mean, 'Not the largest game company in existance at the time'.

Most of those games were developed by major gaming companies 'at the time'.

Papadam · October 2012

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Zylax
Successful indie mmos.
Uo - ea bought them later
Daoc - ea bought them later
EQ - Sony bought them later
Eve - still is
Wow - blizzard were independent at the time.

Blizzard wasnt independent at the time. Became a part of Vivendi in 1998.

LotrO is a better example of an indie MMO

SaintPhilip · October 2012

Originally posted by Papadam
Originally posted by ShakyMo
Zylax
Successful indie mmos.
Uo - ea bought them later
Daoc - ea bought them later
EQ - Sony bought them later
Eve - still is
Wow - blizzard were independent at the time.

Blizzard wasnt independent at the time. Became a part of Vivendi in 1998.

LotrO is a better example of an indie MMO

This was discussed in detail in http://www.overstock.com/Books-Movies-Music-Games/The-Ultimate-History-of-Video-Games/168155/product.html?cid=202290&kid=9553000357392&track=pspla&kw={keyword}&adtype=pla and also in the book (cant remember the name) written by the EQ Dev.

Now, I cannot remember the exact story but WOW WAS in fact more of an idie project- Was never expected to be a "success" and even had placed an Artist on the job who was a writer for Blizz (I think he was a writer- he worked for them but not as an artist)- it was concieved and put together by a "small team" and was expected to be a failure...It was an EXPERIMENT with no goals of making huge money but a "practice run" if I recall correctly.

-There is more to it (wish I had time to refresh the old memory) but many books cover this.,..

negativf4kk · October 2012

Originally posted by Vardahoth
Originally posted by Loktofeit

Some of those titles used to be good games. The problem is they have all been re-vamped to appease the WoW Generation. It's great for 12-21 year olds now, but for an older generation (i'm 29, and we like our games that take time, effort, and making you think on how to build your character, all the while giving you the choice to decide your characters development, story, and reputation) it just leaves us dissappointed with a game we once loved and watched it turn into $h!t.

Yeah I know, "well it's a way for companys to make money, and when you come down to it, the company would rather do whatever it takes (even if it makes it into an "everybody wins a trophey" game). It is a business." Fine if mmorpg's are nothing more than "a business" instead of a game to enjoy, then I want no part of it.

That how i feel about all modern MMO.

Still waiting for ONE.

Howdy, Stranger!

Are/Did Developers take MMORPG's in the wrong direction?

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Are/Did Developers take MMORPG's in the wrong direction?

Comments