Howdy, Stranger!

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

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

The Golden Age of MMOs, What Do You Miss Most?

12346

Comments

  • ObiClownobiObiClownobi CoruscantPosts: 186Member
    Originally posted by Hrimnir
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    2. Buffing. Stupid mechanic, imo. Needlessly creates dependencies. Long term buffs should be permanent (meaning no long term buffs) and buffs more tactical in general. All removable by offensive abilites ofcourse.
    3. See number 1.
    4. Meaningful is entirely subjective. I don't find any meaning in fighting over a virtual castle. It is pointless. I'd much rather play for ladder rankings and tournaments.

     

    Why not just get rid of actually having to click ability buttons.  I mean, thats clearly too much effort.  We should just have to walk up to a mob and our character should know how to kill it himself.  You know, even that seems like too much.  Why should we have to actually walk up to the mobs, we should just be able to click a point on the ground and the mobs start spawning in front of us only as fast as our character can kill them.

    Personally, I stopped playing, I found my simplicity in just watching the youtube vids, when I get bored of one I jump to another one, they are all free to play too.

    image
    "It's a sandbox, if you are not willing to create a castle then all you have is sand" - jtcgs

  • ZairuZairu Portland, ORPosts: 469Member
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by Bathnor

    What do i miss about old school games?

    1. Dungeons that aren't instanced. And groups lined up 10 deep to tag and kill the one mob you were really after that only spawned once every 90 minutes....much bickering and name-calling ensued...
    2. Zones that aren't instanced. Easy to do with flat barren landscapes with the occasional brown rectangle + green triangle tree.
    3. Gameplay that didn't begin at endgame but rather began as one played. AKA... mothing to do at level 50 other than grief
    4. Trains across the zone!! Yeah! Griefing! Right up there with food-fights and streaking
    5. Games with no LFG tool, had to know the people ya grouped with. Noobs need not apply.
    6. No quest hubs and giant exclamation points. And very little to do.. (see trains and end-game above)
    7. Worlds that felt like worlds. They never did, although we do communicate mostly in chat-boxes now IN RL...it's getting closer?
    8. Slower leveling. Three cheers for player-retention through forced grinding! Hip, hip...
    *Waves cane in the air* Give me a MMO with an old school feel for the old school gamers!!

     Someone had to be the image advocate. I nominated myself.

    +1

  • ZairuZairu Portland, ORPosts: 469Member
    Originally posted by Bathnor

    What do i miss about old school games?

    1. Dungeons that aren't instanced.
    2. Zones that aren't instanced.
    3. Gameplay that didn't begin at endgame but rather began as one played.
    4. Trains across the zone!!
    5. Games with no LFG tool, had to know the people ya grouped with.
    6. No quest hubs and giant exclamation points.
    7. Worlds that felt like worlds.
    8. Slower leveling.
    *Waves cane in the air* Give me a MMO with an old school feel for the old school gamers!!

     

    yes. because it would be so easy to please all the old school gamers in ONE single game. I mean, if a game company gave YOU everything you wanted, ALL of the old gamers would auto-join, because you and only you have the insight that it requires to create a good game, and you obviously are the voice of your generation. everyone else is just wasting our time and money.

     

    oh wait, I looked at your profile. please stop speaking for me.

  • CecropiaCecropia Posts: 3,472Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ObiClownobi
    Originally posted by Hrimnir

    Why not just get rid of actually having to click ability buttons.  I mean, thats clearly too much effort.  We should just have to walk up to a mob and our character should know how to kill it himself.  You know, even that seems like too much.  Why should we have to actually walk up to the mobs, we should just be able to click a point on the ground and the mobs start spawning in front of us only as fast as our character can kill them.

    Personally, I stopped playing, I found my simplicity in just watching the youtube vids, when I get bored of one I jump to another one, they are all free to play too.

    LOL.

    Ah, the ultimate evolution of the modern MMO player. What a fascinating creature to behold. You make some of the specimens 'round here seem like ancient fossils. Now, back to your true F2P youtube gaming image

     

    "Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by Bathnor

    What do i miss about old school games?

    1. Dungeons that aren't instanced. And groups lined up 10 deep to tag and kill the one mob you were really after that only spawned once every 90 minutes....much bickering and name-calling ensued...
    2. Zones that aren't instanced. Easy to do with flat barren landscapes with the occasional brown rectangle + green triangle tree.
    3. Gameplay that didn't begin at endgame but rather began as one played. AKA... mothing to do at level 50 other than grief
    4. Trains across the zone!! Yeah! Griefing! Right up there with food-fights and streaking
    5. Games with no LFG tool, had to know the people ya grouped with. Noobs need not apply.
    6. No quest hubs and giant exclamation points. And very little to do.. (see trains and end-game above)
    7. Worlds that felt like worlds. They never did, although we do communicate mostly in chat-boxes now IN RL...it's getting closer?
    8. Slower leveling. Three cheers for player-retention through forced grinding! Hip, hip...
    *Waves cane in the air* Give me a MMO with an old school feel for the old school gamers!!

     Someone had to be the image advocate. I nominated myself.

    Ding ding ding ding!  We have a winner!

    Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
    Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
    Now Playing: None
    Hope: None

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,669Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ObiClownobi
    Originally posted by Hrimnir
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    2. Buffing. Stupid mechanic, imo. Needlessly creates dependencies. Long term buffs should be permanent (meaning no long term buffs) and buffs more tactical in general. All removable by offensive abilites ofcourse.
    3. See number 1.
    4. Meaningful is entirely subjective. I don't find any meaning in fighting over a virtual castle. It is pointless. I'd much rather play for ladder rankings and tournaments.

     

    Why not just get rid of actually having to click ability buttons.  I mean, thats clearly too much effort.  We should just have to walk up to a mob and our character should know how to kill it himself.  You know, even that seems like too much.  Why should we have to actually walk up to the mobs, we should just be able to click a point on the ground and the mobs start spawning in front of us only as fast as our character can kill them.

    Personally, I stopped playing, I found my simplicity in just watching the youtube vids, when I get bored of one I jump to another one, they are all free to play too.

    Have you checked out ProgressQuest? :)

    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

  • YukmarcYukmarc Fresno, CAPosts: 104Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    2. Buffing. Stupid mechanic, imo. Needlessly creates dependencies. Long term buffs should be permanent (meaning no long term buffs) and buffs more tactical in general. All removable by offensive abilites ofcourse.
    3. See number 1.
    4. Meaningful is entirely subjective. I don't find any meaning in fighting over a virtual castle. It is pointless. I'd much rather play for ladder rankings and tournaments.

     

    Come back after you do a relic raid or two and tell us that it didn't mean anything.... It may have been a video game, but doing something that effected your entire realm was very meaningful. Much more meaningful than bunny hopping in a circle until you kill someone.

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Yukmarc
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    Come back after you do a relic raid or two and tell us that it didn't mean anything.... It may have been a video game, but doing something that effected your entire realm was very meaningful. Much more meaningful than bunny hopping in a circle until you kill someone.

    I see your relic run and raise you this: Come back once you've won an all-expenses-paid trip to a international tournament with cash prizes.

    The prize pool in competitive gaming is in millions of dollars.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • ignore_meignore_me Apple Valley, CAPosts: 1,987Member
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Yukmarc
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    Come back after you do a relic raid or two and tell us that it didn't mean anything.... It may have been a video game, but doing something that effected your entire realm was very meaningful. Much more meaningful than bunny hopping in a circle until you kill someone.

    I see your relic run and raise you this: Come back once you've won an all-expenses-paid trip to a international tournament with cash prizes.

    The prize pool in competitive gaming is in millions of dollars.

    Thank you for that last post. Explains a lot.

    Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011

  • rommellorommello calgary, ABPosts: 185Member

    there was a golden age? really?

    ?_?

    hallo ~_~

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,669Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by grimfall
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by grimfall
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     Reply to Response: I never played these games, but I was 11 when they came out, so therefore an expert on everything.

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    Yes, the genre was really hindered as it exploded 1000 fold in popularity with the addition of group and raid-centric games.

     

    1. EQ had forced dependency.
    2. MMOs as a whole got really popular.
    3. Forming a group therefore wasn't a hindrance to popularity.

    That's not only a ridiculous leap of logic but for the past ten years has proven historically false. The most notable example is the reduction in raid size from EQ 'golden age'  to present making content more accessible. Hell, even during those early years (2003 and earlier), most of the MMOs didn't require grouping.

    Group or crawl

    • EQ
    • DAoC

     

    Solo and Group content

    • Furcadia
    • Tibia
    • Kesmia
    • Graal
    • Ultima Online
    • Asheron's Call
    • There
    • Planet Entropia
    • Runescape
    • EVE Online
    • Second Life
    • Puzzle Pirates
    • Neocron
    • Anarchy Online
     
    The EQers seem to think that EQ defined the way MMOs were at the time. Your 'golden age' encompassed a lot more than just the masochistic monotony of EQ, but acknowledging that would shatter your illusions of The Way It Was.

     

    There are two reasons that MMORPG's are as popular as they are today.  The first is Everquest, and the second is World of Warcraft.  I didn't play all of those games you mentioned, but Ultima Online sure as hell had forced grouping...

    I stopped there. I doubt anything after that would be any less ridiculous.

    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

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Yukmarc
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    2. Buffing. Stupid mechanic, imo. Needlessly creates dependencies. Long term buffs should be permanent (meaning no long term buffs) and buffs more tactical in general. All removable by offensive abilites ofcourse.
    3. See number 1.
    4. Meaningful is entirely subjective. I don't find any meaning in fighting over a virtual castle. It is pointless. I'd much rather play for ladder rankings and tournaments.

     

    Come back after you do a relic raid or two and tell us that it didn't mean anything.... It may have been a video game, but doing something that effected your entire realm was very meaningful. Much more meaningful than bunny hopping in a circle until you kill someone.

    "very meaningful" .. you sound like you are curing cancer. It is just an illusion of an achievement. All you did was playing a game with a bunch of people .. and kill some monsters.

    You find affected a make-belief world "very meaningful" ... well ... that is sad.

     

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,945Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by grimfall
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by grimfall
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     Reply to Response: I never played these games, but I was 11 when they came out, so therefore an expert on everything.

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    Yes, the genre was really hindered as it exploded 1000 fold in popularity with the addition of group and raid-centric games.

     

    1. EQ had forced dependency.
    2. MMOs as a whole got really popular.
    3. Forming a group therefore wasn't a hindrance to popularity.

    That's not only a ridiculous leap of logic but for the past ten years has proven historically false. The most notable example is the reduction in raid size from EQ 'golden age'  to present making content more accessible. Hell, even during those early years (2003 and earlier), most of the MMOs didn't require grouping.

    Group or crawl

    • EQ
    • DAoC

     

    Solo and Group content

    • Furcadia
    • Tibia
    • Kesmia
    • Graal
    • Ultima Online
    • Asheron's Call
    • There
    • Planet Entropia
    • Runescape
    • EVE Online
    • Second Life
    • Puzzle Pirates
    • Neocron
    • Anarchy Online
     
    The EQers seem to think that EQ defined the way MMOs were at the time. Your 'golden age' encompassed a lot more than just the masochistic monotony of EQ, but acknowledging that would shatter your illusions of The Way It Was.

     

    There are two reasons that MMORPG's are as popular as they are today.  The first is Everquest, and the second is World of Warcraft.  I didn't play all of those games you mentioned, but Ultima Online sure as hell had forced grouping...

    I stopped there. I doubt anything after that would be any less ridiculous.

    I also did not see original SWG on that list, where player interdependency and group play were at the core of the game. And crafting even more so.

    The first incarnation of SWG had the most need for other people, and by population metrics, was the version people enjoyed most.

     

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,669Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by grimfall

    There are two reasons that MMORPG's are as popular as they are today.  The first is Everquest, and the second is World of Warcraft.  I didn't play all of those games you mentioned, but Ultima Online sure as hell had forced grouping...

    I stopped there. I doubt anything after that would be any less ridiculous.

    I also did not see original SWG on that list, where player interdependency and group play were at the core of the game. And crafting even more so.

    The first incarnation of SWG had the most need for other people, and by population metrics, was the version people enjoyed most.

     

    Early SWG is a great example of mechanics that promote collaboration vs the current state of necessary contrived groups to achieve a goal. In SWG there were reasons to work together. You did not need to be tethered to 5 other people in order to achieve an objective. The group activity was a tier beyond the individual activities, allowing people to work either together or solo to accomplish group goals.

    The biggest advantage to that is it allows people to contribute within their comfort levels of interaction and socializing. It allows people to contribute within their personal time constraints and not mandatory raid hours or some other conflicting schedule.

     

    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

  • Ramonski7Ramonski7 Aurora, ILPosts: 2,656Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by grimfall
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by grimfall
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     Reply to Response: I never played these games, but I was 11 when they came out, so therefore an expert on everything.

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    Yes, the genre was really hindered as it exploded 1000 fold in popularity with the addition of group and raid-centric games.

     

    1. EQ had forced dependency.
    2. MMOs as a whole got really popular.
    3. Forming a group therefore wasn't a hindrance to popularity.

    That's not only a ridiculous leap of logic but for the past ten years has proven historically false. The most notable example is the reduction in raid size from EQ 'golden age'  to present making content more accessible. Hell, even during those early years (2003 and earlier), most of the MMOs didn't require grouping.

    Group or crawl

    • EQ
    • DAoC

     

    Solo and Group content

    • Furcadia
    • Tibia
    • Kesmia
    • Graal
    • Ultima Online
    • Asheron's Call
    • There
    • Planet Entropia
    • Runescape
    • EVE Online
    • Second Life
    • Puzzle Pirates
    • Neocron
    • Anarchy Online
     
    The EQers seem to think that EQ defined the way MMOs were at the time. Your 'golden age' encompassed a lot more than just the masochistic monotony of EQ, but acknowledging that would shatter your illusions of The Way It Was.

     

    There are two reasons that MMORPG's are as popular as they are today.  The first is Everquest, and the second is World of Warcraft.  I didn't play all of those games you mentioned, but Ultima Online sure as hell had forced grouping...

    I stopped there. I doubt anything after that would be any less ridiculous.

    Yeah I stop posting after I saw that. There are no words to describe my disbelief in that statement. It's no wonder devs are continuing to make these so call group oriented pigeon-holed endgames. Forcing descent mmo gamers to deal with players who don't even understand what grouping means in the first place. They seem to think the only time to group with people is when a game deems it necessary to do so.  Oh how wrong they are...

    image
    "Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,945Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by grimfall

    There are two reasons that MMORPG's are as popular as they are today.  The first is Everquest, and the second is World of Warcraft.  I didn't play all of those games you mentioned, but Ultima Online sure as hell had forced grouping...

    I stopped there. I doubt anything after that would be any less ridiculous.

    I also did not see original SWG on that list, where player interdependency and group play were at the core of the game. And crafting even more so.

    The first incarnation of SWG had the most need for other people, and by population metrics, was the version people enjoyed most.

     

    Early SWG is a great example of mechanics that promote collaboration vs the current state of necessary contrived groups to achieve a goal. In SWG there were reasons to work together. You did not need to be tethered to 5 other people in order to achieve an objective. The group activity was a tier beyond the individual activities, allowing people to work either together or solo to accomplish group goals.

    The biggest advantage to that is it allows people to contribute within their comfort levels of interaction and socializing. It allows people to contribute within their personal time constraints and not mandatory raid hours or some other conflicting schedule.

     

    Yup.

    Good example: In order to found a guild in original SWG, you needed a guildhall (that was where the guild management terminal was found). When the game first came out, you had to literally hand sample the ore and other materials, because there were no harvesters yet, to make all the components and the guildhall itself.

    Well, because there was no other way to do it, we had a group of 30+ standing around and running around handsampling everything until we were able to build a guildhall and get guild functionality. And it took about a week of collective effort to get that stuff together, and learn along the way what we were doing wrong, plus at the very beginning the materials were all respawning every day, and we could not figure out why the were different each day (they fixed that bug in the second week).

    At the end though, everyone was excited to join the guild and that all that collective effort allowed that to happen. And it got people investing in the game from the beginning.

     

    Nothing like that happens these days.

     

  • loulakiloulaki PatrasPosts: 918Member

    all these mentions the OP is nto about the program (game) but the users (players) if the users become bad the program become bad

     

    everyone became selfish, they make groups only if there is a profit ... whatever game they offer it will become the same .

     

    you mention en era. were the majority of mmo gamers were pc addicts members of an almost closed society, nowdays mmo gamers are casual guys who carry with them all the symptoms of a fallen society : )

    image

  • krevrakrevra Kissimmee, FLPosts: 31Member
    Golden age of mmos? We are still extremely early in the early stages of games in general much earlier for mmos.
  • c0existc0exist Round Rock, TXPosts: 192Member
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    2. Buffing. Stupid mechanic, imo. Needlessly creates dependencies. Long term buffs should be permanent (meaning no long term buffs) and buffs more tactical in general. All removable by offensive abilites ofcourse.
    3. See number 1.
    4. Meaningful is entirely subjective. I don't find any meaning in fighting over a virtual castle. It is pointless. I'd much rather play for ladder rankings and tournaments.

     

    And this is exactly why those games died, gamers with this mentality.  These thoughts although just fine because we all want different things in games are for single player games.  For example Skyrim, no group needed, no dependencies because you can buff yourself, ranking through achievements.  People with this point of view shouldnt play mmo's because they get everything they want through single player games.  MMO's are about grouping and working together otherwise why even play with others?  They are supposed to devote some time and effort.  Not all your time but a good amount or whatever you can fit in.  

  • Goatgod76Goatgod76 Stow, OHPosts: 1,214Member
    Originally posted by c0exist
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    2. Buffing. Stupid mechanic, imo. Needlessly creates dependencies. Long term buffs should be permanent (meaning no long term buffs) and buffs more tactical in general. All removable by offensive abilites ofcourse.
    3. See number 1.
    4. Meaningful is entirely subjective. I don't find any meaning in fighting over a virtual castle. It is pointless. I'd much rather play for ladder rankings and tournaments.

     

    And this is exactly why those games died, gamers with this mentality.  These thoughts although just fine because we all want different things in games are for single player games.  For example Skyrim, no group needed, no dependencies because you can buff yourself, ranking through achievements.  People with this point of view shouldnt play mmo's because they get everything they want through single player games.  MMO's are about grouping and working together otherwise why even play with others?  They are supposed to devote some time and effort.  Not all your time but a good amount or whatever you can fit in.  

    Don't waste your time. He either doesn't get it, or doesn't WANT to get it. I am highly doubting he's played MMO's pior to WoW despite he says he has. And I'm not saying that because it's the "popular" rebuttal...but IDK otherwise how you could say what he does without understanding MMORPG's from their birth up until now...or just being selfish and wanting what is conveinient for him no matter how it cripples the genre for others.

    It would be like if FPS games were a niche genre, then suddenly had one major FPS release with tons of advertising bringing in droves of new players who have never heard of, or never played FPS games (Let's say they are from the MMORPG genre). Then as time went on these new players started griping how they think the FPS should be slowed down and allow for more player interaction outside of fighting...giving lobby rooms to chat. How certain guns should be nerfed because they are too powerful and take away the feeling of fair competition, how all players should start with a bunch of buffs and achievements should be harder to get, etc, etc.

    Do you think these FPS die-hard's who had been playing them for years would stand for such a thing? Having their games changed by those who have little concept of how they began and what seperates them from the MMORPG genre? Think about that when making comments about whining. It's a protest of ignorance.

    Sure, there are features from newer MMORPG's that can definitely improve the genre and should be added to them and are in many cases. But it's gotten out of control and MMORPG's today have lost their core features that make them a seperate genre from console gaming in the process. I don't see why there can't be comprimise.

  • KingJigglyKingJiggly Simpsonville, SCPosts: 777Member
    Originally posted by Goatgod76
    Originally posted by c0exist
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    2. Buffing. Stupid mechanic, imo. Needlessly creates dependencies. Long term buffs should be permanent (meaning no long term buffs) and buffs more tactical in general. All removable by offensive abilites ofcourse.
    3. See number 1.
    4. Meaningful is entirely subjective. I don't find any meaning in fighting over a virtual castle. It is pointless. I'd much rather play for ladder rankings and tournaments.

     

    And this is exactly why those games died, gamers with this mentality.  These thoughts although just fine because we all want different things in games are for single player games.  For example Skyrim, no group needed, no dependencies because you can buff yourself, ranking through achievements.  People with this point of view shouldnt play mmo's because they get everything they want through single player games.  MMO's are about grouping and working together otherwise why even play with others?  They are supposed to devote some time and effort.  Not all your time but a good amount or whatever you can fit in.  

    Don't waste your time. He either doesn't get it, or doesn't WANT to get it. I am highly doubting he's played MMO's pior to WoW despite he says he has. And I'm not saying that because it's the "popular" rebuttal...but IDK otherwise how you could say what he does without understanding MMORPG's from their birth up until now...or just being selfish and wanting what is conveinient for him no matter how it cripples the genre for others.

    It would be like if FPS games were a niche genre, then suddenly had one major FPS release with tons of advertising bringing in droves of new players who have never heard of, or never played FPS games (Let's say they are from the MMORPG genre). Then as time went on these new players started griping how they think the FPS should be slowed down and allow for more player interaction outside of fighting...giving lobby rooms to chat. How certain guns should be nerfed because they are too powerful and take away the feeling of fair competition, how all players should start with a bunch of buffs and achievements shoudl be harder to get, etc, etc.

    Do you think these FPS die-hard's who had been playing them for years would stand for such a thing? Having their games changed by those who have little concept of how they began and what seperates them from the MMORPG genre? Think about that when making comments abotu whining. It's a protest of ignorance.

    Sure, there are features from newer MMORPG's that can definitely improve the genre and should be added to them and are in many cases. But it's gotten out of control and MMORPG's today have lost their core features that make them a seperate genre from console gaming in the process. I don't see why there can't be comprimise.

    The reason games fail is because they have something wrong with them. The majority of mmos released have those features from the so called "golden age" of mmos, and a majority failed. Casual themeparks are the future, gw2 being a prime example and simply the beggining. 

  • Goatgod76Goatgod76 Stow, OHPosts: 1,214Member
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    Originally posted by Goatgod76
    Originally posted by c0exist
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Reply to the topic: Less whine about the "good ol' days".

     

    1. Need to form a group? Huge inconvenience. Probably one of the biggest hinderances of the genre.
    2. Buffing. Stupid mechanic, imo. Needlessly creates dependencies. Long term buffs should be permanent (meaning no long term buffs) and buffs more tactical in general. All removable by offensive abilites ofcourse.
    3. See number 1.
    4. Meaningful is entirely subjective. I don't find any meaning in fighting over a virtual castle. It is pointless. I'd much rather play for ladder rankings and tournaments.

     

    And this is exactly why those games died, gamers with this mentality.  These thoughts although just fine because we all want different things in games are for single player games.  For example Skyrim, no group needed, no dependencies because you can buff yourself, ranking through achievements.  People with this point of view shouldnt play mmo's because they get everything they want through single player games.  MMO's are about grouping and working together otherwise why even play with others?  They are supposed to devote some time and effort.  Not all your time but a good amount or whatever you can fit in.  

    Don't waste your time. He either doesn't get it, or doesn't WANT to get it. I am highly doubting he's played MMO's pior to WoW despite he says he has. And I'm not saying that because it's the "popular" rebuttal...but IDK otherwise how you could say what he does without understanding MMORPG's from their birth up until now...or just being selfish and wanting what is conveinient for him no matter how it cripples the genre for others.

    It would be like if FPS games were a niche genre, then suddenly had one major FPS release with tons of advertising bringing in droves of new players who have never heard of, or never played FPS games (Let's say they are from the MMORPG genre). Then as time went on these new players started griping how they think the FPS should be slowed down and allow for more player interaction outside of fighting...giving lobby rooms to chat. How certain guns should be nerfed because they are too powerful and take away the feeling of fair competition, how all players should start with a bunch of buffs and achievements shoudl be harder to get, etc, etc.

    Do you think these FPS die-hard's who had been playing them for years would stand for such a thing? Having their games changed by those who have little concept of how they began and what seperates them from the MMORPG genre? Think about that when making comments abotu whining. It's a protest of ignorance.

    Sure, there are features from newer MMORPG's that can definitely improve the genre and should be added to them and are in many cases. But it's gotten out of control and MMORPG's today have lost their core features that make them a seperate genre from console gaming in the process. I don't see why there can't be comprimise.

    The reason games fail is because they have something wrong with them. The majority of mmos released have those features from the so called "golden age" of mmos, and a majority failed. Casual themeparks are the future, gw2 being a prime example and simply the beggining. 

    Those features...which I didn't list, but that were the core of MMORPG's at one time (IMO through years of playing them prior to 2004) are COMMUNITY structure, chain quests that led you to multiple zones and took time to do with greater reward than what you get in most of them today (usually items you've already out leveled the use of making it vendor trash) ....because everything wasn't uber. Meaningful crafting, large open seamless worlds, depth, much more character customization, and LOTS of content that nearly never ended.

    You are saying most MMORPG's today have these things? Maybe a few...but the larger majority of them do not.

    Seeing as you can solo to cap in almost all of them (And in a month or less to boot) and have server-wide auction houses...there goes COMMUNITY, as well as the need for world travel. Crafting is an after thought in nealry all of them. Character customization is very limited...making for tons of clones. Even limited class selections and ways to effectively set up those classes (Coining the term cookie cutter classes). The worlds are far from open...they are funneled...either through tons fo invisible walls, or from one quest hub to the next in order of level.

    I don't see how you say Themeparks are the future...because that's all they've been for a decade now....enough to keep attention for a few months tops. Sad state.

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Goatgod76
    Originally posted by c0exist
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    And this is exactly why those games died, gamers with this mentality.  These thoughts although just fine because we all want different things in games are for single player games.  For example Skyrim, no group needed, no dependencies because you can buff yourself, ranking through achievements.  People with this point of view shouldnt play mmo's because they get everything they want through single player games.  MMO's are about grouping and working together otherwise why even play with others?  They are supposed to devote some time and effort.  Not all your time but a good amount or whatever you can fit in.  

    Don't waste your time. He either doesn't get it, or doesn't WANT to get it. I am highly doubting he's played MMO's pior to WoW despite he says he has. And I'm not saying that because it's the "popular" rebuttal...but IDK otherwise how you could say what he does without understanding MMORPG's from their birth up until now...or just being selfish and wanting what is conveinient for him no matter how it cripples the genre for others.

    It would be like if FPS games were a niche genre, then suddenly had one major FPS release with tons of advertising bringing in droves of new players who have never heard of, or never played FPS games (Let's say they are from the MMORPG genre). Then as time went on these new players started griping how they think the FPS should be slowed down and allow for more player interaction outside of fighting...giving lobby rooms to chat. How certain guns should be nerfed because they are too powerful and take away the feeling of fair competition, how all players should start with a bunch of buffs and achievements should be harder to get, etc, etc.

    Do you think these FPS die-hard's who had been playing them for years would stand for such a thing? Having their games changed by those who have little concept of how they began and what seperates them from the MMORPG genre? Think about that when making comments about whining. It's a protest of ignorance.

    Sure, there are features from newer MMORPG's that can definitely improve the genre and should be added to them and are in many cases. But it's gotten out of control and MMORPG's today have lost their core features that make them a seperate genre from console gaming in the process. I don't see why there can't be comprimise.

    Heh, only reason I can disagree with you is because there's something wrong with me it seems. When you yourself offer so little understanding or empathy it is very hard to give you any. I am not in the least bit of selfish. All I do is explain how things are and why they are that way. You're the one wondering why things don't go the way you want and you're the one who wants things to go the way you want. You are selfish.

    When I said there's no virtue to having learning skills in Eve, the fans attacked me then. They said: "That would be like dumbing down Eve", but its not. There was no value in learning skills. Learning skills should be learned early on. Anything else is more or less gimping yourself for the long term. They created a weeks long period for new players where they saw no tangible advancement in the game, and it is easy to lose interest when this happens. Something bad for nothing good. It was good that CCP got rid of them. But some fans still wailed its dumbing down the game. Morons...

    I get the same response every time I bring up an old mechanic. Just like the aforementioned long term buffs. What you create with them is dependencies and inconveniences. You have to weigh if the good is worth the bad and are there other methods of getting the good. Most fans are against removing them only because its what they're used to, and "it has worked so far, hasn't it?" - a very poor excuse to retain an arcaic mechanic.

    As a hopefully soon-to-be-graduated usability and software engineer, I see no value doing something with three clicks, when you can do it with one, or better yet, automatically. Gameplay shouldn't be about artificially creating inconveniences and dependencies, it should be about enabling and allowing players to do stuff. You see where I'm going here? Sure, there are some elements which create gameplay for some and inconveniences for others, and I'm fairly certain the net sum benefits from long term buffs is negative, but I digress: This topic should be reserved for another thread if you like.

    Can't you see that the best way to get the biggest possible audience is to allow players play the game like they want to? This includes being solo friendly. I get that you feel your playstyle is being threatened but try to look at this objectively for once. The usual hinderances to group play comes from poor quest and encounter design, where objectives are not shared, and despite being in a group, members have to complete the quest like they are playing solo. You see, its not because they allow you to solo, they just need to fix few things for groups.

    Groups of players are naturally more powerful than solo players or even a group of solo players. They don't need an artificial buff. And the easier it is to form a group or play together, the more people do it. This is what GW2 tried to do. This is what WoW tried to do. Can't you see that? They're trying to solve problems which have plagued the genre for ages!

    Same with instances. People love to do instances. Most don't want to fight for loot, or spawns, they only want to go in a dungeon and have an adventure. There are many advantages to instances, some related to performance, some to world and encounter design. You see them as an anti-christ and never admit any value in having them.

    You should think more why things are done the way they are, and how they could be made better, instead of being a purist. I have said this a thousand times before: most people don't play MMOs because theyr'e MMOs, they play them because they're fun. Therefore the first objective for any developer should be "how to make this game fun" and not "how to make this game an MMO".

    Its not your genre. You are not invested to anything and you are not entitled to anything. So stop acting like you are. If you don't like it, leave. No one is forcing you to play. In any case, you are not doing your side any credit for bashing everyone and everything. Half the time you're only spreading hate without much point anyway. You are a buzzkill and you rarely offer anything valuable to the discussions in which you partake. So man up and try to act like the social, sensible and rational human being you claim to be.

    It is childish to imply that someone is stupid only because he disagrees with you.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • redcappredcapp brook, NYPosts: 722Member
    The community.  When MMOs catered and appealed to GAMERS, they were good.  Now that gaming has gone mainstream, the marketing teams have drawn in crowds of idiots I would never associate with IRL. 
  • brad31781brad31781 Charlotte, NCPosts: 54Member

    Feeling: This won't ever happen again in MMOs at least. My first MMO was Anarchy Online and the feeling I got playing, some kinda excited/sense of unknown, will just never happen again. I think databases like WoWhead have ruined a lot of it, but I see why they are there. But figuring out something that no one else has, at least that you know of, is amazing.

    Think and calculate: Trying to fit on new weapons/armor was crazy in Anarchy Online and took a lot of other people and farming/buying some unique items you probably didn't have.

    Leveling: It is too streamlined and these games are about the destination and not the journey. There was a soft-cap in vanilla Anarchy Online that most players never got past. And getting to max level, 200 at that time, was almost thought as impossible for awhile and I don't know how many years after release it took until someone finally hit that milestone. These days people are max level in a few days if they have no other obligations and have the drive/knowledge to do so.

    Thanks for making me feel sad thinking back to the fun I had and that I no longer feel.

Sign In or Register to comment.