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.
Yes. So? So the game content ends and people move on. Why the duration needs to be extended? It is not like there is a lack of games to move onto.
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?
Fun fact, before they started messing with the economy, runescape had 8 million active accounts (around 2 million members), even if we assume that half of them were bots, which they probably were, it is still quite interesting considering that that particular game is one of the more off-putting ones, being it the grind or outdated graphics even in 2000.
Just because you notice only your own corner of the world, with the shining beacon of wow clouding most of the horizon, it does not mean the rest of the world is not there.
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?
That's a rather unrealistic expectation unless you come from some unique society where everyone knows each other and welcomes new people into the fold with open arms. Every community is made up of smaller ones, and each of those smaller groups have various overlaps in different areas. 2,500 different people in a room doesn't make a community. The social groups that form within that random collection of entities are communities.
Community is more than just a crowd. It is a group of people with a common interest or common goal. Even within a community you have smaller circles, dependent on one's engagement in the community, dependency on it or contribution to it.
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
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".
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
They don't whine and complain. They cancel and move on to the next game. Consistently.
Then there's the other group that consistantly post 'I Quit' or the usual 'failed promises' posts which often is based on the very thing we are discussing. Oh yes there's whining. I'm quite sure some silently move on but forums are filled with these people complaining. I'll make you aware next time I see it
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.
Yes. So? So the game content ends and people move on. Why the duration needs to be extended? It is not like there is a lack of games to move onto.
MMO's are too expensive for developers to build and relase, and for consumers to buy and play, just to move on after a few months.
You're argument is fine for single player games with multiplayer modes, where you buy the game and maybe an expansion or two. That isn't an MMO.
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.
Yes. So? So the game content ends and people move on. Why the duration needs to be extended? It is not like there is a lack of games to move onto.
MMO's are too expensive for developers to build and relase, and for consumers to buy and play, just to move on after a few months.
You're argument is fine for single player games with multiplayer modes, where you buy the game and maybe an expansion or two. That isn't an MMO.
Many MMOs are F2P. If when you say they are too expensive .. well, they are being released .. aren't they? So they are not being "too expensive".
And as a consumer, i move on whenever i like. I owe deverlopers nothing. Devs are the ones who has to figure out how to make the business works. And if you look at the market, it seems that they do.
That's a rather unrealistic expectation unless you come from some unique society where everyone knows each other and welcomes new people into the fold with open arms. Every community is made up of smaller ones, and each of those smaller groups have various overlaps in different areas. 2,500 different people in a room doesn't make a community. The social groups that form within that random collection of entities are communities.
Community is more than just a crowd. It is a group of people with a common interest or common goal. Even within a community you have smaller circles, dependent on one's engagement in the community, dependency on it or contribution to it.
Furthermore, people obsess too much about the all mighty "community". Community is just a bunch of people to play with. You are not going to make 10M friends if you play WOW.
I doubt many have this obsession about a "MMO community". I would much prefer to group with another i want, and not be constrained by game nor server they are on.
MMO's are too expensive for developers to build and relase, and for consumers to buy and play, just to move on after a few months.
You're argument is fine for single player games with multiplayer modes, where you buy the game and maybe an expansion or two. That isn't an MMO.
Many MMOs are F2P. If when you say they are too expensive .. well, they are being released .. aren't they? So they are not being "too expensive".
And as a consumer, i move on whenever i like. I owe deverlopers nothing. Devs are the ones who has to figure out how to make the business works. And if you look at the market, it seems that they do.
Pretty much every MMO that is F2P is only because they've finally decided it's the only way to possibly make money since they can't compete as a sub with WoW.
As for many being release, yes you are right. They are also mostly low-quality MMO's either pumped out quickly through an Asian shop, or by an understaffed indie shop trying to jump on the sandbox bandwagon.
So yeah, if you have a short attention span and are prone to hopping from game to game, then I can see how the current MMO landscape suits your needs. However, the MMO market was founded on the idea of playing a longterm character(s) in a persistent world populated by many other players. You don't get that when the market is flooded by large numbers of multiplayer cash shop games calling themselves MMO's.
Pretty much every MMO that is F2P is only because they've finally decided it's the only way to possibly make money since they can't compete as a sub with WoW.
As for many being release, yes you are right. They are also mostly low-quality MMO's either pumped out quickly through an Asian shop, or by an understaffed indie shop trying to jump on the sandbox bandwagon.
So yeah, if you have a short attention span and are prone to hopping from game to game, then I can see how the current MMO landscape suits your needs. However, the MMO market was founded on the idea of playing a longterm character(s) in a persistent world populated by many other players. You don't get that when the market is flooded by large numbers of multiplayer cash shop games calling themselves MMO's.
What a market is founded on, and what it is now, are too different things. Market changes. Most MMOs are not played as persistent world ANYWAY.
Did you notice the play style of using a MMO like a lobby? And long term character don't need a persistent world. Diablo has very long term characters, and no persistent world.
I am certainly no longer need games to last for years. I will play one for a long time if it is fun. But there is no commitment to do so .. and god forbid i will play other games whenever i feel like. This notion of just playing one game is ... not very entertaining to me.
They don't whine and complain. They cancel and move on to the next game. Consistently.
Well, he is partly correct; given the recent example of WoW players vs GW2.
The thing is; they began the 'lack of endgame' "whine and complain" well b-e-f-o-r-e the game opened. They (and everyone else) knew that GW2 was simply not going to be the game for them.
But not all of them were "locusts". The first week of fresh-80 arrivals, maybe, two-percenters. The next several months? Just people with insufficient barriers in front of them, after being trained for most of a decade to level alts at full speed ahead. The player base from consoles, even more so.
The blame game began. The finger pointing started. And a pretty fair number of people were disappointed--not that they "locusted" through it, but that it was (predictably, as advertised) not another WoW. Also, not another EQ. Also, not another MUD from the 90s. Also, not another PnP game.
On the other side? Masses of players with offended sensibilities. *sniff* in my day, we grinded our way to the cap, and it took years buddy. That's just how games *should be* played, face to the grindstone! Jogging for 80 levels. Plenty of time sink. Sloooow.
The same guys who've been at war with the two-percenters since before the dawn of MMOs, yes? Hell, it's still the same war.
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.
Pretty much every MMO that is F2P is only because they've finally decided it's the only way to possibly make money since they can't compete as a sub with WoW.
As for many being release, yes you are right. They are also mostly low-quality MMO's either pumped out quickly through an Asian shop, or by an understaffed indie shop trying to jump on the sandbox bandwagon.
So yeah, if you have a short attention span and are prone to hopping from game to game, then I can see how the current MMO landscape suits your needs. However, the MMO market was founded on the idea of playing a longterm character(s) in a persistent world populated by many other players. You don't get that when the market is flooded by large numbers of multiplayer cash shop games calling themselves MMO's.
What a market is founded on, and what it is now, are too different things. Market changes. Most MMOs are not played as persistent world ANYWAY.
Did you notice the play style of using a MMO like a lobby? And long term character don't need a persistent world. Diablo has very long term characters, and no persistent world.
I am certainly no longer need games to last for years. I will play one for a long time if it is fun. But there is no commitment to do so .. and god forbid i will play other games whenever i feel like. This notion of just playing one game is ... not very entertaining to me.
Well obviously developers and other players disagree with you, because the market is in really bad shape right now. Developers aren't releasing games that people stick around for, and players aren't happy constantly jumping from game to game. If they were, there wouldn't be so many complaints.
So again, I'm glad you like the current landscape, but not many others agree with you. Repeating your same opinion over and over isn't changing that.
Over the past few months, the advice / things I've seen are that more businesses accept that most players will leave their MMO wihtin 6 months after launch.
Make the investment back on box sales and any subs after that is mostly profit. If the game has staying power, great! Expansion packs for more $$$.
People are treating MMOs like what they are, an entertainment product.
Players certainly do so why can't game makers?
My question is, why is this a 'bad' thing?
Game makers make more MMOs, more players play them and after awhile players / game makers move on to their next game.
I bought every Civilization / SimCity game that came out. I don't play the previous ones once I buy the current one though. Why can't MMOs be treated this way?
As long as the game makers make smart business decisions, I don't see a down side.
More MMOs for players to play and more game makers make money.
Someone may want an MMO that they'll play for years, but they are the minority.
There is one major flaw in what you just typed , and that's the fact that the MMORPG world isn't attracting a whole lot of new blood. Civilization and Sim city are games you play for a few hours at your own pace and do whatever you want , even cheat , and it won't bother anyone how slow or fast you progress. Now take a MMORPG , the equation doesn't add up. So yes you got 20 MMOs releasing within the year , but if it's the same players cycling around those 20 MMOs without attracting new people into the genre , most of those games will die off. Now if players are stupid enough into believing that GW2 was worth the 60$ at launch , that's their own fault and good job on the Devs. Now from this point on I hope those naive players will wake the hell up and actually compare gameplays of future releases to current 200 releases. They all look exactly the same , so please spare me on how this MMORPG innovate this and how this MMORPG has amazing graphics , it's all the same bull.
MMO's are too expensive for developers to build and relase, and for consumers to buy and play, just to move on after a few months.
You're argument is fine for single player games with multiplayer modes, where you buy the game and maybe an expansion or two. That isn't an MMO.
Many MMOs are F2P. If when you say they are too expensive .. well, they are being released .. aren't they? So they are not being "too expensive".
And as a consumer, i move on whenever i like. I owe deverlopers nothing. Devs are the ones who has to figure out how to make the business works. And if you look at the market, it seems that they do.
Pretty much every MMO that is F2P is only because they've finally decided it's the only way to possibly make money since they can't compete as a sub with WoW.
As for many being release, yes you are right. They are also mostly low-quality MMO's either pumped out quickly through an Asian shop, or by an understaffed indie shop trying to jump on the sandbox bandwagon.
So yeah, if you have a short attention span and are prone to hopping from game to game, then I can see how the current MMO landscape suits your needs. However, the MMO market was founded on the idea of playing a longterm character(s) in a persistent world populated by many other players. You don't get that when the market is flooded by large numbers of multiplayer cash shop games calling themselves MMO's.
Exactly. Sometimes I forget that not everyone has a clear idea of what sets this genre appart from FPS or other more casual online games.
The roots of MMOs are MUDS and RPGs and all of those have table-top D&D as a common ancestor. In those ancient days (35-40 years ago) a lot of hard-core table-top players played the same character for years. Those games required some commitment and players understood that the more you put into it, the more you get out of it. Yes, the idea was "worlds" ...not self-indulgent little quickies for people with tiny attention spans.
These days all you have to do is tack on on-line play to essentially a single player game, sprinkle a few more or less irrelevant online interactions (e,g, an auction house) in there and it'll get its own forum here-- ie. Diablo3... Then there's a large FPS free for all in a persistent map and you get Planetside 2 with it's own forum here too... give me a frigging break.
This site should just drop the "RPG" from the name so people don't get confused about wtf they're discussing.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
....stupid enough... their own fault...naive players...wake the hell up...
S'ok Supes, that's not judgemental at all.
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.
Exactly. Sometimes I forget that not everyone has a clear idea of what sets this genre appart from FPS or other more casual online games.
The roots of MMOs are MUDS and RPGs and all of those have table-top D&D as a common ancestor. In those ancient days (35-40 years ago) a lot of hard-core table-top players played the same character for years. Those games required some commitment and players understood that the more you put into it, the more you get out of it. Yes, the idea was "worlds" ...not self-indulgent little quickies for people with tiny attention spans.
These days all you have to do is tack on on-line play to essentially a single player game, sprinkle a few more or less irrelevant online interactions (e,g, an auction house) in there and it'll get its own forum here-- ie. Diablo3... Then there's a large FPS free for all in a persistent map and you get Planetside 2 with it's own forum here too... give me a frigging break.
This site should just drop the "RPG" from the name so people don't get confused about wtf they're discussing.
You're trying to define a genre or group by the behaviour of its 'hardcore' players. They are the extreme. They are the minority. They are not indicative of the norm, a group that, by your words above, you seem to look down on for how they currently play these games and, despite what you might want to contend, how they have been playing them for the past 35-40 years.
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
Exactly. Sometimes I forget that not everyone has a clear idea of what sets this genre appart from FPS or other more casual online games.
The roots of MMOs are MUDS and RPGs and all of those have table-top D&D as a common ancestor. In those ancient days (35-40 years ago) a lot of hard-core table-top players played the same character for years. Those games required some commitment and players understood that the more you put into it, the more you get out of it. Yes, the idea was "worlds" ...not self-indulgent little quickies for people with tiny attention spans.
These days all you have to do is tack on on-line play to essentially a single player game, sprinkle a few more or less irrelevant online interactions (e,g, an auction house) in there and it'll get its own forum here-- ie. Diablo3... Then there's a large FPS free for all in a persistent map and you get Planetside 2 with it's own forum here too... give me a frigging break.
This site should just drop the "RPG" from the name so people don't get confused about wtf they're discussing.
You're trying to define a genre or group by the behaviour of its 'hardcore' players. They are the extreme. They are the minority. They are not indicative of the norm, a group that, by your words above, you seem to look down on for how they currently play these games and, despite what you might want to contend, how they have been playing them for the past 35-40 years.
Change "hardcore" to "purist" and I can almost agree with that. There's a reason why people here daily bring up UO, EQ, AC, SWG, DAoC and EVE as "gold standards": they're real MMORPGs. And all of those had their own version of hard-core and casual but there wasn't any confusion about whether they were meant to be played for 3 months or 3 years. We all knew going in it was the later.
You could play them any way you wished but that didn't change the fact that they were meant for the long haul.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Oh god, there's that word again. All yours Lok. Good luck.
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.
Oh boy, oh boy! Tell us again what "real MMORPGs" are, huh, will ya? Gee mister, did you have to walk to school in six feet of snow and uphill both ways?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
... Someone may want an MMO that they'll play for years, but they are the minority.
I don't know one MMO player IRL that doesn't look for that in an MMO.
Older games had this because it took more work to achieve anything in those days. Levels came slower, death had consequences, corpse runs, ammo count, item selling took place in chat, etc.
These days it's expected that you shouldn't even really have to log in to buy or sell items in your favorite game. One of FFXIV's largest failing was a trade setup that required that you go find a relevant sales person (which I always found funny given that FFXI was one of the first "auction house" games)
Relevant conversation tends to be kept to a minimum on servers and the average median age of players is closer to 16 than the 26 it used to be 10+ years ago... At least it would appear so given the nature of what does go on in most area chats.
I personally think it's just fine to be a content locust provided that you don't blame the game for your game hopping. Anyone willing to blow through content truly had no interest in the journey but only in getting to the ending.
Persoanlly, If it was me, I'd save myself the money by reminding myself that the good guys win and the hero gets the girl (or kid, exonerated, the treasure, etc) in almost every fantasy story.
How come all of you are posting on these forums tonight and not playing your favorite games? Me, I'm stuck at the mall watching my wife shop for Christmas. Ugh!
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Actually, put the book down for a while, had dinner, etc.
Enough mud-wrestling for one night, I supposes.
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.
Oh boy, oh boy! Tell us again what "real MMORPGs" are, huh, will ya? Gee mister, did you have to walk to school in six feet of snow and uphill both ways?
It's something like your beloved GW but not something like D3... if that doesn't do it for you you can always try wikipedia or the urban dictionary... shrug.
But then, I guess you had to do a lot of defending of the original GW's status as a real MMORPG back in the day didn't you? Tha probably gave you some idea.
PS. GW made my cut, but just barely... GW2? No question.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Originally posted by Kyleran How come all of you are posting on these forums tonight and not playing your favorite games? Me, I'm stuck at the mall watching my wife shop for Christmas. Ugh!
It never ceases to amuse me when the guy with 15000+ posts wonders why the people with a few hundred posts are posting and not playing.
Thanks for the laugh.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Originally posted by Kyleran How come all of you are posting on these forums tonight and not playing your favorite games? Me, I'm stuck at the mall watching my wife shop for Christmas. Ugh!
I wish i am playing (still have D3 farmign to run, and COD campaign to go over). However, I am working right now, and posting in-between analysis run.
Comments
Yes. So? So the game content ends and people move on. Why the duration needs to be extended? It is not like there is a lack of games to move onto.
Fun fact, before they started messing with the economy, runescape had 8 million active accounts (around 2 million members), even if we assume that half of them were bots, which they probably were, it is still quite interesting considering that that particular game is one of the more off-putting ones, being it the grind or outdated graphics even in 2000.
Just because you notice only your own corner of the world, with the shining beacon of wow clouding most of the horizon, it does not mean the rest of the world is not there.
Flame on!
That's a rather unrealistic expectation unless you come from some unique society where everyone knows each other and welcomes new people into the fold with open arms. Every community is made up of smaller ones, and each of those smaller groups have various overlaps in different areas. 2,500 different people in a room doesn't make a community. The social groups that form within that random collection of entities are communities.
Community is more than just a crowd. It is a group of people with a common interest or common goal. Even within a community you have smaller circles, dependent on one's engagement in the community, dependency on it or contribution to it.
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
Then there's the other group that consistantly post 'I Quit' or the usual 'failed promises' posts which often is based on the very thing we are discussing. Oh yes there's whining. I'm quite sure some silently move on but forums are filled with these people complaining. I'll make you aware next time I see it
MMO's are too expensive for developers to build and relase, and for consumers to buy and play, just to move on after a few months.
You're argument is fine for single player games with multiplayer modes, where you buy the game and maybe an expansion or two. That isn't an MMO.
You make me like charity
Many MMOs are F2P. If when you say they are too expensive .. well, they are being released .. aren't they? So they are not being "too expensive".
And as a consumer, i move on whenever i like. I owe deverlopers nothing. Devs are the ones who has to figure out how to make the business works. And if you look at the market, it seems that they do.
Furthermore, people obsess too much about the all mighty "community". Community is just a bunch of people to play with. You are not going to make 10M friends if you play WOW.
I doubt many have this obsession about a "MMO community". I would much prefer to group with another i want, and not be constrained by game nor server they are on.
Pretty much every MMO that is F2P is only because they've finally decided it's the only way to possibly make money since they can't compete as a sub with WoW.
As for many being release, yes you are right. They are also mostly low-quality MMO's either pumped out quickly through an Asian shop, or by an understaffed indie shop trying to jump on the sandbox bandwagon.
So yeah, if you have a short attention span and are prone to hopping from game to game, then I can see how the current MMO landscape suits your needs. However, the MMO market was founded on the idea of playing a longterm character(s) in a persistent world populated by many other players. You don't get that when the market is flooded by large numbers of multiplayer cash shop games calling themselves MMO's.
You make me like charity
What a market is founded on, and what it is now, are too different things. Market changes. Most MMOs are not played as persistent world ANYWAY.
Did you notice the play style of using a MMO like a lobby? And long term character don't need a persistent world. Diablo has very long term characters, and no persistent world.
I am certainly no longer need games to last for years. I will play one for a long time if it is fun. But there is no commitment to do so .. and god forbid i will play other games whenever i feel like. This notion of just playing one game is ... not very entertaining to me.
Well, he is partly correct; given the recent example of WoW players vs GW2.
The thing is; they began the 'lack of endgame' "whine and complain" well b-e-f-o-r-e the game opened. They (and everyone else) knew that GW2 was simply not going to be the game for them.
But not all of them were "locusts". The first week of fresh-80 arrivals, maybe, two-percenters. The next several months? Just people with insufficient barriers in front of them, after being trained for most of a decade to level alts at full speed ahead. The player base from consoles, even more so.
The blame game began. The finger pointing started. And a pretty fair number of people were disappointed--not that they "locusted" through it, but that it was (predictably, as advertised) not another WoW. Also, not another EQ. Also, not another MUD from the 90s. Also, not another PnP game.
On the other side? Masses of players with offended sensibilities. *sniff* in my day, we grinded our way to the cap, and it took years buddy. That's just how games *should be* played, face to the grindstone! Jogging for 80 levels. Plenty of time sink. Sloooow.
The same guys who've been at war with the two-percenters since before the dawn of MMOs, yes? Hell, it's still the same war.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.
Well obviously developers and other players disagree with you, because the market is in really bad shape right now. Developers aren't releasing games that people stick around for, and players aren't happy constantly jumping from game to game. If they were, there wouldn't be so many complaints.
So again, I'm glad you like the current landscape, but not many others agree with you. Repeating your same opinion over and over isn't changing that.
You make me like charity
There is one major flaw in what you just typed , and that's the fact that the MMORPG world isn't attracting a whole lot of new blood. Civilization and Sim city are games you play for a few hours at your own pace and do whatever you want , even cheat , and it won't bother anyone how slow or fast you progress. Now take a MMORPG , the equation doesn't add up. So yes you got 20 MMOs releasing within the year , but if it's the same players cycling around those 20 MMOs without attracting new people into the genre , most of those games will die off. Now if players are stupid enough into believing that GW2 was worth the 60$ at launch , that's their own fault and good job on the Devs. Now from this point on I hope those naive players will wake the hell up and actually compare gameplays of future releases to current 200 releases. They all look exactly the same , so please spare me on how this MMORPG innovate this and how this MMORPG has amazing graphics , it's all the same bull.
Exactly. Sometimes I forget that not everyone has a clear idea of what sets this genre appart from FPS or other more casual online games.
The roots of MMOs are MUDS and RPGs and all of those have table-top D&D as a common ancestor. In those ancient days (35-40 years ago) a lot of hard-core table-top players played the same character for years. Those games required some commitment and players understood that the more you put into it, the more you get out of it. Yes, the idea was "worlds" ...not self-indulgent little quickies for people with tiny attention spans.
These days all you have to do is tack on on-line play to essentially a single player game, sprinkle a few more or less irrelevant online interactions (e,g, an auction house) in there and it'll get its own forum here-- ie. Diablo3... Then there's a large FPS free for all in a persistent map and you get Planetside 2 with it's own forum here too... give me a frigging break.
This site should just drop the "RPG" from the name so people don't get confused about wtf they're discussing.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
S'ok Supes, that's not judgemental at all.
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.
You're trying to define a genre or group by the behaviour of its 'hardcore' players. They are the extreme. They are the minority. They are not indicative of the norm, a group that, by your words above, you seem to look down on for how they currently play these games and, despite what you might want to contend, how they have been playing them for the past 35-40 years.
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
Change "hardcore" to "purist" and I can almost agree with that. There's a reason why people here daily bring up UO, EQ, AC, SWG, DAoC and EVE as "gold standards": they're real MMORPGs. And all of those had their own version of hard-core and casual but there wasn't any confusion about whether they were meant to be played for 3 months or 3 years. We all knew going in it was the later.
You could play them any way you wished but that didn't change the fact that they were meant for the long haul.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Oh god, there's that word again. All yours Lok. Good luck.
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.
Oh boy, oh boy! Tell us again what "real MMORPGs" are, huh, will ya? Gee mister, did you have to walk to school in six feet of snow and uphill both ways?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I don't know one MMO player IRL that doesn't look for that in an MMO.
Older games had this because it took more work to achieve anything in those days. Levels came slower, death had consequences, corpse runs, ammo count, item selling took place in chat, etc.
These days it's expected that you shouldn't even really have to log in to buy or sell items in your favorite game. One of FFXIV's largest failing was a trade setup that required that you go find a relevant sales person (which I always found funny given that FFXI was one of the first "auction house" games)
Relevant conversation tends to be kept to a minimum on servers and the average median age of players is closer to 16 than the 26 it used to be 10+ years ago... At least it would appear so given the nature of what does go on in most area chats.
I personally think it's just fine to be a content locust provided that you don't blame the game for your game hopping. Anyone willing to blow through content truly had no interest in the journey but only in getting to the ending.
Persoanlly, If it was me, I'd save myself the money by reminding myself that the good guys win and the hero gets the girl (or kid, exonerated, the treasure, etc) in almost every fantasy story.
Me? I enjoy the journey.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Actually, put the book down for a while, had dinner, etc.
Enough mud-wrestling for one night, I supposes.
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.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
It's something like your beloved GW but not something like D3... if that doesn't do it for you you can always try wikipedia or the urban dictionary... shrug.
But then, I guess you had to do a lot of defending of the original GW's status as a real MMORPG back in the day didn't you? Tha probably gave you some idea.
PS. GW made my cut, but just barely... GW2? No question.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
It never ceases to amuse me when the guy with 15000+ posts wonders why the people with a few hundred posts are posting and not playing.
Thanks for the laugh.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I wish i am playing (still have D3 farmign to run, and COD campaign to go over). However, I am working right now, and posting in-between analysis run.