It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Starpower The problem isn't content locusts but the complaining and whining that follows their wake. They cannot be 100% catered to because of their unrealistic demands. If these people accepted the fact, no game can provide them content fast enough and settled for the fact games will only last a month or two for them, then no problem. The fact is they don't. They expect new content faster than it's possible to produce
Have you ever noticed that the majority of the complaining comes from places other than the 'locusts"?
Generally, it's from players whose offended sensibilities tell them that other players shouldn't be allowed to play 'wrong' like that.
"Console Kiddies", we like to call them, waving our canes. But their play style doesn't bother themselves; it just bothers Mrs. Grundy. Mrs. Grundy knows how MMOs should be properly played, and if it weren't for this horrible school system, she'd have them whipped into shape in no time.
Busybodies are most concerned with how other people should be playing. Mrs. Grundy is miserable when other people are having fun doing it "wrong".
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Originally posted by Icewhite Originally posted by Starpower The problem isn't content locusts but the complaining and whining that follows their wake. They cannot be 100% catered to because of their unrealistic demands. If these people accepted the fact, no game can provide them content fast enough and settled for the fact games will only last a month or two for them, then no problem. The fact is they don't. They expect new content faster than it's possible to produce
Have you ever noticed that the majority of the complaining comes from places other than the 'locusts'?
Busybodies are most concerned with how other people should be playing.
hahah .. yeah.
I would play a MMO like a lobby game and some will blow a gasket here reading about it. I wonder why. It does not bother me there are those who wants to go to meetings when they play Eve or whatever high commitment MMOs. In fact, it is kind of fun to discuss it.
Originally posted by nariusseldon
high commitment MMOs.
I'm glad that they still exist, but somewhat concerned that their business model may be what's killing them off.
Still, the market seems to be adapting to "flash bang here and gone waves of players". Could be that what I preferred isn't what works best for corporate thinking.
Could be that chasing these surly old coots out of your player base is the only possible way to advance to more efficient models. Play by mail games died out. Pay per hour games are gone too. Tabletop...pretty close to dead, except for my nephew. PnP...ghost still clinging maybe, but not what they were. Arcade games, pffft.
Seems reasonable that some day the last MMO may close shop too.
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by Scot Because the OP and others on here do not realise that this is making the industry eating itself. Solo game profitability are based on a couple of months play. MMO’s are not. Without assured long term profit, funding for MMO’s must come into question. Gaming companies have tried to ensure profit by making their games more polished at launch. But that comes with a price, less time is spent on end game. The MMO game format is becoming more like the solo game format with each MMO release. As I have said on here before, I like solo games, but why can’t we have long term sustainable MMO’s as well? I am happy to have both types of games, why are you advocating only one kind? Gaming as a form of entertainment is better with more types of games and gameplay. Why do you want to straightjacket MMO’s into the streamlined easyMMO version?
YOu can .. but if play style is such that players will play a few month and move on, the dev needs to design as such.
Why do you want to straightjacket MMOs into the long term commited version? There is no reason why people should not play MMOs as short term game. They are already doing so, whether you like it or not.
I am sure the 400k EvE players might have something to say about that. as they are not. You have to allow for the possibility that a good sizable chunk of people do not want to play a new mmo every month. Enough people in fact to sustain a long term game whether you like it or not, and you evidently do not like that fact as you run around the forums arguing with anyone who doesn't like throwaway f2p 1 month cashshop mmos. Do you not have a credit card or something?
Originally posted by Icewhite Originally posted by nariusseldon
high commitment MMOs.
Or what you prefer is not what many other players prefer. I don't like high commitment games. Entertainment should be on MY schedule, not i on theirs.
Traditional MMOs may as well be going away (although there is always a niche ... just like there are a few still make/play text adventures), but more assessible, faster pace ones are not going to be all gone anytime soon.
Originally posted by RoyalPhunk Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by Scot Because the OP and others on here do not realise that this is making the industry eating itself. Solo game profitability are based on a couple of months play. MMO’s are not. Without assured long term profit, funding for MMO’s must come into question. Gaming companies have tried to ensure profit by making their games more polished at launch. But that comes with a price, less time is spent on end game. The MMO game format is becoming more like the solo game format with each MMO release. As I have said on here before, I like solo games, but why can’t we have long term sustainable MMO’s as well? I am happy to have both types of games, why are you advocating only one kind? Gaming as a form of entertainment is better with more types of games and gameplay. Why do you want to straightjacket MMO’s into the streamlined easyMMO version?
You just made my point. Only 400k Eve players, and that is the biggest. Even TOR has >2M at one point. And those 2M are hopping out of TOR.
And don't ask what i want .. just look at the market. I thought you guys are the ones who point out themepark MMOs don't last long. How many themeparks get huge numbers (much bigger than Eve), then the players move on?
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
What's wrong with being a content locust? Just ask any content locust. They're usually miserable. They spend all their time bitching on forums about too little content. It's just not realistic that these companies can make a game that will make someone happy who plays a game for 6-10 hours a day... Even if I had that kind if time, I just couldn't do it..
To each their own though. I love being a casual gamer as too little content had never been an issue for me lol.
Originally posted by Fuggly contenet locusts....................i think the whole point to the OP making this thread was to throw his snazzy lil catch phrase out there and garner some attention.
He didn't coin it. First time I heard it from from a writer from this site.
Originally posted by jpnz Originally posted by Scot Because the OP and others on here do not realise that this is making the industry eating itself. Solo game profitability are based on a couple of months play. MMO’s are not. Without assured long term profit, funding for MMO’s must come into question. Gaming companies have tried to ensure profit by making their games more polished at launch. But that comes with a price, less time is spent on end game. The MMO game format is becoming more like the solo game format with each MMO release. As I have said on here before, I like solo games, but why can’t we have long term sustainable MMO’s as well? I am happy to have both types of games, why are you advocating only one kind? Gaming as a form of entertainment is better with more types of games and gameplay. Why do you want to straightjacket MMO’s into the streamlined easyMMO version?
How is the industry eating itself?
It is making more money than ever before and it has more people playing than ever before.
I'm not advocating anything, just looking at what people are buying / behaving and seeing the industry reaction to it.
If lots of people suddenly buy chocolate ice cream, we'll see the ice cream industry react to that trend. Doesn't mean it is good or bad, just that there is a reaction and how you personally feel about it.
To stay with your example. If the number of people that buy chocolate ice cream increases drastically then there will be a point where there is not enough cocoa to satisfy this demand. Producers of chocolate ice cream will then have to resort to means to substitute cocoa, but they will continue to advertise their ice cream as "chocolate ice cream".
Why still clinge to the old label MMORPG when what most players (especially the content locusts) really want is an OG (online game)? If games were labeled properly there would be less confusion.
Originally posted by Fdzzaigl Nothing. If you don't complain about devs not putting out enough content at the insane rate that you're going through it (and usually skip a lot of it) that is.
Exactly. And why should people complain? They can very easily obtain new content by moving to another game.
Originally posted by madazz Originally posted by Kyleran Originally posted by funyahns They won't make games this way for long. Why bother spending all that money on building the game and systems just to be abandoned. Pretty soon you will just get a room where you can purchase crafts and wait in que for a dungeon without anything else to do. because the design of empty space is a waste
Here is a question for you.... we have had defined genres for so many years now.
Multiplayer pretty much covered 8+ players, maybe ended around 64, perhaps a bit higher (all at the same time)
Co-op, that is 2-4 players (all at the same time).
Massive, which used to mean hundreds of characters (all at the same time).
But now massive means 10 players?
So what do I use to describe hundreds of players now that MMO stands for 2 to infinity?
MMMO Massive Massive Multiplayer Online or RMMO Really Massive multiplayer online or YRPWALOPIOMGWT You Really Play With A Lot Of Poeple Istead Of MetaGaming With Them
Originally posted by jpnz Originally posted by Iselin
Because that's part of creating a virtual life in a virtual world? ... we are both talking about MMORPGs here aren't we?
You're really reaching here bud.
You seem to have a very strange definition on what is a 'community'.
So if I get a bunch of people from SA and play WoW together with them, that's not a community? lolwut?
My definition of community is very simple and mainstream. You're either just not getting it for some strange reason or you are (more likely here at MMORPG.COM) deliberately pretending to not get it because doing so would hurt your argument.
When people talk about Rift having a good community, they're not talking about the 5 friends they play Rift with in their tiny little guild. They're talking about how the people they run into playing Rift behave toward each other. In other more "sandboxy" games they're even talking about the things they create and do together--which is why typically sandbox games have more cooperative and interactive communities.
The Rift community is made up of the people who play Rift...it's that simple. What you and the other guy are talking about is something smaller... your personal cricle, you xfire buds, your steam friends...whatever. You're talking about something totally different and calling that the community.
I'm talking about what people have called the (insert MMO name here) community since MMOs have existed. That plain enough for you...lolwut?
Originally posted by sanshi44 Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Originally posted by wordiz Originally posted by aWRAY Are the players to blame for blowing through the content too quickly? Or is it the developers fault for making the games too easy? Or maybe, just maybe, the MMO genre as a whole hasn't blossomed into its full potential yet.
The devs are the ones responsible. They rushed out some half finished games over the last few years and pissed off the players and community. It's a vicious cycle at this point because players are hesitant to invest time and money into new MMO's and afterwards will murder them in the forums if they're let down. This is making it extremely difficult to get proper financing behind new MMO projects, which leads to more crappy games, which leads to more pissed off, sceptical players...and it goes and goes.
I'd like to think the genre hasn't reached it's full potential, but judging that earlier MMOs were more advanced than most modern ones; I don't think it's the case.
Hmm I don't actually think so. I think most of the MMO releases in the past 5-6 years have had more content at release than really any of the original MMO's and most of the ones preceding them (them being any MMO since basically WoW).
I also don't believe that the old MMO's were more advanced. A couple games had more features but not most of them. Most of them IMO have less features than current ones.
I just think the mindset of the community as a whole has changed. There is just a much greater percentage of people looking for fast paced content and end-game type play while the ones that want to do things slower are either fading out or being drowned out.
three games ive played, picked them as a early game (EQ), mid game (WoW) later game (rift) ive choose these cause there 3 games ive played so i know a reasonable amount of info on them all.
EQ = 75-100 somewhere between there
WoW = about 34 zones+ 15 dunguens
Rift = 11
Each of these zones were roughtly the same size.
EQ = 12 races each with there own starter city xcept for half elfs which either started with the wod elfs or humans, (humans also had 2 cities and ranger had a special starter zone they could choose)
WoW = 8 with 6 cities to choose from
Rift = 8 aswell but only 2 cities
Rift = 4 roll each with 8 classes each whcih you could mix and match skill between the 3 classes
EQ = Way Way tomany to count and every faction you could change by killing different mobs one city has atleast 8 different factions in. And you could eventualy work your faction up so an darkelf can go into human cities (sworn enemies and vice versa or human can become Kill on sight of there own cities if they kill their own guards) http://www.therunes.net/faction.htm (a little on how it works)
WoW = somewhere round 12-20
Rift = 2 whcih you couldnt change your alignment with at all
EQ = Landbased, (open world)land dunguen and completly underwater one (which is like a 3d maze sometimes, Kedge keep ><)
WoW = Landbased, (instanced)land dunguens
Rift = Landbased, (instanced)land Dunguens
Everquest also had a skill based system aswell each weapon skil had a skill lvl same with spell castiong had 5 or so, then u had general ones such as language skill and sense heading, class skill such as tracking for rangers, harmtouch for shadownights, layonhands for paladins. But had less in the way of combat skills that u see nowadays but that allowed you to socialise while fighting since it was groupbased game.
Seems to me older games had alot more stuff on release and as we get to new game such as rift if drops down substantaly (although rift had more classes option they had least of everything else)
I wasn't talking about zones, I don't consider each seperate zone to be seperate content. That is largely just a graphical difference. I am talking about ways to level and play.
EQ you could quest and mob grind and that was it, crafting I can't consider to be a way to level up because you couldn't even get material for crafting with mob grinding, that is true even today. WoW I can level by gathering, pvp, quests, mobs, and dungeons. Therefore wow provides more choice in how I play that EQ.
Classes not much difference. Typical archetypal all: Tank Healer, Dpd. EQ also had CC so they win on that one. But having 3 different types of tanks is not significant IMO (That goes for WoW as well as EQ)
EQ released with 71 (if I counted right) zones (this includes dungeons, check out EQatlas), Wow released with 42 (not zones but seperate areas - http://www.wowwiki.com/Zones_by_level (not including dungeons)
And while EQ did have more zones, IMO again zones can and often are a graphcial difference as you are doing the same thing in each so again IMO doesn't really count as varied gameplay or offering more choice in how to level.
Yes EQ did have skills but the health, cap limits... increased with level, and since most people practiced using different weapons every single person in that class was identical to eveyone else. At least Wow has/had three different builds that were pretty usefull. so IMO again WoW beats EQ on diversity wihtin the class.
So overall the only thing EQ had more variation of was classes - they had crowd control. WoW has more diveristy within the class and more ways to get to level cap. Therefore WoW offers more choice in how to level.
The socialization in EQ was largely due to it being very slow to level up solo, and the fights were much slower. Casters had 8 abilities all on cool down, fighters had 3-4 all on cool down. E.G MOnk - auto attack, kick/punch, auto, auto, auto, auto, kick punch. Mend every 6 minutes, auto.... FD if in trouble.
Originally posted by Iselin Originally posted by jpnz Originally posted by Iselin
And you totally limit yourself not to look at the larger gaming community. Or online game community. There are a lot of people who play Rift, and WOW, and Diablo 3, and many other games.
Xfire is much bigger than Rift since it has many more games.
What is wrong with meeting someone on Rift, and later want to play Diablo together?
Cause I feel like all my MMO software is missing the "Made in China" sticker.
MMOs should build worlds to live for a while rather then be a blip on a radar map.
Originally posted by zekeofev Cause I feel like all my MMO software is missing the "Made in China" sticker. MMOs should build worlds to live for a while rather then be a blip on a radar map.
NOt anymore. MMOs should entertain as games. Duration is purely depending on how fun the game is.
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by Iselin Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by Iselin The communities I'm talking about were self-contained within a specific MMO and available only there. They had a life of their own and only made sense in that context. We made plans there... such as all the pre-invasion preparations we made in DAoC... scheduled meetings at certain times...as when we executed the raid into the enemy's territory and went after their keeps as we had planned... and played together for hours sometimes when we had a tough fight on our hands.
That is very limiting. Why settle for a community that is constraint by a single game (and server) when you can have a larger community across many games and server?
I thought you LIKE interacting with more people.
No. We are talking about MMORPG ... G stands for GAME. MMORPGs are games, entertainment products. I am certainly NOT living a virtual life in a virtual world. I am playing online games that happens to have many people.
MMORPGs can evolve. There is no 3D graphics when i first started to game. There is no reason why a MMO has to limit everything inside ONE virtual world, on one server.
Look at Xfire, Battlenet, and many gaming services that connect players to multiple games. Who says a guild cannot play multiple games. In fact, many do. You are being left behind if you don't adapt.
I suppose people who are used to UO and Eve cannot be open to new ideas and new style of play. However, not even you play only one game, right? Most of my guildies in WOW also play D3. It is a GOOD thing i have them on cross-game friend list. If you don't like it, you don't have to use the function, and limit yourself to one game one server.
I won't be so limiting in my entertainment.
Look dude. I could give less of crap how you spend your gaming money nor, more specifically how you treat or consume the MMOs you buy--it's your prerogative.
And you can be part of just as many communities as you want to be in... your town's community, your church's, your class of '83 community...whatever. You may even game in MMOs with some of the people from your other communities.
But what exactly does that have to do with the "Rift Community" or the "WOW community" or the community of whatever game you play in? Those have their own little community too. You may not be aware of them if you do nothing but play with your tiny group of guild mates and turn off all the chat channels (some people choose to play that way) but it's there anyway. And in it, specially these days, there are a whole shit-ton of strangers.
Now back in the old days, when people stuck around an individual MMO, just by chance if no other reason, you got to know many more people you ran into day after day... in other words, you actually made new friends to add to your own unique Joe Blow community (or social network if you prefer FB-speak.)
I'm not saying that doesn't happen any more--it does and most sociable people do make new friends in each new MMO. But just like when you work at a job for 3 months you may make a friend or two if you're lucky, when you work somewhere for 3 years, you're almost guaranteed to make more friends than in the 3-month job.
So... to make it as simple as I can your "3-month-job community" is likely more casual and less permanent than your "3-year-job community." Some people have even been known to stick with a job they would otherwise leave because they like their work mates of many years... apply that concept to your MMO gaming, with a small or capital G--makes no difference and you've got it...capice?
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by Iselin Originally posted by jpnz Originally posted by Iselin
Who says that I don't? It just has nothing to do with a discussion about an MMO community.
I have 6 or 7 old WOW friends who happen to live in the same city as me--one of them I even work with every day. In the last year I've played SWTOR, Tera and GW2 with them... I haven't gone back to WOW like they did with MOP (and I hear about it every day, lol)... that's just my circle of close MMO friends but it isn't the SWTOR, Tera nor GW2 community.
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by zekeofev Cause I feel like all my MMO software is missing the "Made in China" sticker. MMOs should build worlds to live for a while rather then be a blip on a radar map.
Yes but if the entertainment is in the consumption of content then the duration will always be limited by it. Someone will always be able to put out more content for another game and what happens then? People there for the content leave.
Rather if you have systems that create interesting worlds, the duration can be extended.
The newage MMO player plays MMOs like a single player game with a chat lobby. I am not saying that is a wrong way to play a game, especially the way some games have been designed. Rather, the games are less like MMOs and more like single player games.
What is the difference between playing Swotor versus Dark Souls or TF2 for a console? The differences are narrowing and THAT is what is wrong with the picture.
Can't say I agree to that. I've seen it time and time again. A new MMO comes out. X guild races to the finish line and complete whatever endgame content the game was released with all within the first month, then whine and complain the game lacks endgame content afterwards. Then subsequently complains endgame content isn't released fast enough. It happens every time with no fail.
So I have to make my point again. It wouldn't be a problem if said group of people accepted the fact no MMO will be released with months worth of endgame content to keep them occupied.
It's not about playing a game right or the wrong way. It's about being realistic
I agree. A long time ago a friend of mine made the statement that people's dissapoint comes from unmet expectations which is largely a result of unrealistic expectations (not always but IMO largely)
Originally posted by nariusseldon Well, personally i refuse to buy into the idea that having online and/or game friends playing different games and interacting with each other as new and revolutionary idea, i have those since 1995, especially if it comes as excuse for the particular games becoming shoddy, shallow and unimaginative. Because that is in the end the main argument here, you say "wee, arcade/lobby gameplay, progress, fun!!!", i say "oh crap, arcade/lobby gameplay, we are back to the 90's and it has half the features". As for game, the definition is not as straightforward as you would like, it incorporates everything from tic tac toe trough sport up to military wargames, including virtual reality and simulations. Flame on!
Back to 90s? What online service have cross game chat, and access to friend list like Battle net in the 90s? You can refuse to believe it.
But people like to play different games, with the same group of friends. I am surprise you can't see that. How many people you know play only ONE game?
So once again, new or old, like it or not, you think players should play only one game in only one world with their friends? I think you are sadly wrong. How many guilds move from one game to another?
And if that is the case, why don't dev give people tools to do that better?
A telephone is cross-game chat, a telnet chat program is cross-game chat, shouting to the next flat is cross game chat, heck shouting in a room in dorms is cross game chat
You got my point wrong, i was not arguing that people SHOULD play a single or just one game, i was arguing that there is no reason for the games to be more simple, shoddy or bland, just because we now CAN play multitude of games with no effort required to stay in touch with friends. That it is a excuse, not progress.
Originally posted by Starpower Originally posted by Icewhite Originally posted by Starpower The problem isn't content locusts but the complaining and whining that follows their wake. They cannot be 100% catered to because of their unrealistic demands. If these people accepted the fact, no game can provide them content fast enough and settled for the fact games will only last a month or two for them, then no problem. The fact is they don't. They expect new content faster than it's possible to produce
They don't whine and complain. They cancel and move on to the next game. Consistently.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre