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!

Fluff and housing is lost

1246712

Comments

  • Felheart5Felheart5 OsloPosts: 35Member

    I agree that a lack of "fluff" is one of the reasons why new MMO's are struggeling to retain players today. Which also ties into my other great worry that is the increasing linearity of most MMO's. They really feel more and more like single player RPG's alongside other players rather than "living, breathing" online worlds. No wonder people leave the game if there is nothing to keep them there once the primary PvE content is done.

    Fluff doesn't need to be meaningless, just look at WoW. Say what you will about that game, but it's had tons of fluff added throughout its lifespan and it probably did wonders keeping people continously engaged. The real kicker being that a lot of these fluff elements actually carry benefits and bragging rights, some just as desirable as those who could be found in an end game raid. Genius way to pull people out of their regular dungeon habits from time to time, if lack relevance is what you are arguing.

    I guess what I really miss in todays crop of MMORPGS is some choice and variety sprinkled on top of everything, as I said, it's all getting very linear and stale. 

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Alberel
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Alberel
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    No, we don't need fluff, housing or other stuff not involving killing. Devoting as much time to them as "the killing part" is mad, because those features are nowhere near as popular. The killing stuff sells - fluff & housing does not.

    Combat might sell boxes but alone it's clearly done an abysmal job of retaining players. Giving players alternatives to constantly fighting makes them much less likely to burn out on the game, and systems like housing are open ended meaning that once they're in it takes very few developer resources to keep it fresh (just need to add a few new housing objects every now and then).

    Your post sounds more like an 'I don't like it so no one else can have it' attitude. Judging by the slew of games on the way featuring housing I think it could be argued that devs actually think it will sell now.

    Combat does not retain players? Ok, now you're talking out of your arse.

    You're aware that one of the biggest problems with the genre at the moment is that most players typically leave after 1-3 months right? Since MMOs went entirely combat-centric they have struggled to retain players at all. Older MMOs held players for years at a time, and guess what, they all had heavy amounts of fluff content.

    No, the biggest problem of the genre is that the mechanics havne't changed all that much in so many years. We have pretty much the same content that we used to have, only it is streamlined and polished. Still thought, we are doing the same thing we did 10 years ago. The novelty has worn off somewhat.

    Old MMOs were largely driven by the novelty and the lack of competition. The fact that fluff and housing are the secret ingredient of a succesful MMO is complete and utter nonsense.

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

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    I don't know about you .. but i would much prefer to play a new game, then stay in an old one because of fluff.

    But Devs look to sell their games to more than the narrowest possible audience. :shrug: That's really all there is to it.

    That means a lot of variety of systems for a lot of different gamers.

    The alternative is Darkfall.

    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.

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,235Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Alberel
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    No, we don't need fluff, housing or other stuff not involving killing. Devoting as much time to them as "the killing part" is mad, because those features are nowhere near as popular. The killing stuff sells - fluff & housing does not.

    Combat might sell boxes but alone it's clearly done an abysmal job of retaining players. Giving players alternatives to constantly fighting makes them much less likely to burn out on the game, and systems like housing are open ended meaning that once they're in it takes very few developer resources to keep it fresh (just need to add a few new housing objects every now and then).

    Your post sounds more like an 'I don't like it so no one else can have it' attitude. Judging by the slew of games on the way featuring housing I think it could be argued that devs actually think it will sell now.

    Combat does not retain players? Ok, now you're talking out of your arse.

    I don't think it does.  The subscription retention numbers of nearly every post-WoW MMO kind of shows it.  You get a massive spike at launch, and when people figure out the combat, they max out and leave.  Every.  Time.

    An expansion of more combat content to consume might get them back for a month or two.  Once that's done, they'll leave again.  And they'll leave even faster than they left initially.

    Combat gets boring.  It cannot help but get boring, and spending a lot of time to make it more 'exciting' isn't going to make a difference in the end.  Once players develop a pattern of what the combat is like, the first steps towards boredom take root. 

    And once the most visceral thing the devs have in their box of attention getting techniques--combat--becomes routine, the developers really don't have anywhere to go to get the thrill back.  And it will become routine, no matter how hard they try to make it 'innovative' or 'exciting.'

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • madazzmadazz A town, ONPosts: 1,564Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Alberel
     

    You're aware that one of the biggest problems with the genre at the moment is that most players typically leave after 1-3 months right? Since MMOs went entirely combat-centric they have struggled to retain players at all. Older MMOs held players for years at a time, and guess what, they all had heavy amounts of fluff content.

    Why look at that as a problem? Devs should adjust their investment to this new reality as opposed trying to "solve" it.

    There are so many games, and so many new experiences that i see having huge number of players playing just one game day-in and day-out to be less and less likely.

    I don't know about you .. but i would much prefer to play a new game, then stay in an old one because of fluff.

    See the thing is, people aren't leaving because these games are literally meant to only last 2-3 months, they are leaving because the Dev's just plain and simple aren't doing it right. They are TRYING to keep people, they dont want the whole 2-3 month crowd, they don't want to HAVE to shutdown. This is what's happening because they are ridiculous and keep doing the same thing over and over, copying one another.

  • AeolynAeolyn Langley, BCPosts: 216Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    No, the biggest problem of the genre is that the mechanics havne't changed all that much in so many years. We have pretty much the same content that we used to have, only it is streamlined and polished. Still thought, we are doing the same thing we did 10 years ago. The novelty has worn off somewhat.

    Old MMOs were largely driven by the novelty and the lack of competition. The fact that fluff and housing are the secret ingredient of a succesful MMO is complete and utter nonsense.

    Perhaps, just perhaps players are tired of the sci-fi and war themes and would like something with a mix of fantasy and medieval with a full fleshed out world to live in like UO and AC, once again.   With updated graphics and more user friendly ui's of course.  Kinda what ArcheAge is touting, sans the bikini parties and modern machinery(hang gliders etc.). 

     

    When it comes down to it, you can only kill stuff in so many ways before it all becomes repetitive no matter how flashy the spells or fighting animations.  It's the community and the game lore/setting that helps set a game apart and if a game has no community(crafters, cooks, fishers, hunters, warriors, mages, houses to build, decorate, live, craft and  sell your goods from, towns, prisons, rebel camps etc) then that game will become just a game to win and move on from instead of a virtual world that you want to live in, help build, and make your own stamp on and maybe even be proud enough of your role in to want your friends and family to join you in.

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,235Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aeolyn
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    No, the biggest problem of the genre is that the mechanics havne't changed all that much in so many years. We have pretty much the same content that we used to have, only it is streamlined and polished. Still thought, we are doing the same thing we did 10 years ago. The novelty has worn off somewhat.

    Old MMOs were largely driven by the novelty and the lack of competition. The fact that fluff and housing are the secret ingredient of a succesful MMO is complete and utter nonsense.

    Perhaps, just perhaps players are tired of the sci-fi and war themes and would like something with a mix of fantasy and medieval with a full fleshed out world to live in like UO and AC, once again.   With updated graphics and more user friendly ui's of course.  Kinda what ArcheAge is touting, sans the bikini parties and modern machinery(hang gliders etc.). 

     

    When it comes down to it, you can only kill stuff in so many ways before it all becomes repetitive no matter how flashy the spells or fighting animations.  It's the community and the game lore/setting that helps set a game apart and if a game has no community(crafters, cooks, fishers, hunters, warriors, mages, houses to build, decorate, live, craft and  sell your goods from, towns, prisons, rebel camps etc) then that game will become just a game to win and move on from instead of a virtual world that you want to live in, help build, and make your own stamp on and maybe even be proud enough of your role in to want your friends and family to join you in.

    Exactly.

    See, I don't think it has dawned on the FPS/powertwink/combat crowd that they are no longer so important to this industry as they once were.  There once was a time when we could say, "combat players are the target audience, everyone else can STFU," but those days are over.

    The thing that made me realize this is when my mother, at the tender age of 60, became a hardcore MMO junkie on Frontierville.  She dropped some serious cash on horseshoes...far more than I would spend at any item store.  And for what?  Nothing to make her pwn.  Not for any access to content that takes millions of dollars in development costs.  She did it to get some extra space and make her homestead look nice.

    Fluff is what, quite frankly, funds our games these days.  It's that way because the combat crowd forced it to be that way, with its "I don't care what you sell in the store, just as long as it doesn't help you pwn."  As a result, the extra money coming into the games is being disproportionately shouldered by the roleplayers and immersion junkies.  And now they sit here in this thread and say, "we don't need no foofoo housing and fluff?"

    Fluff junkies pay more, and so they ought to get more, systems they enjoy for a change.

    The combat crowd does its part, but they are also really expensive to please, and really fickle.  When we consider the amount of time, money and effort it takes to satisfy the combat beast, incessently, as it ravages through content mere days after its released (and complains so much), wouldn't it be better to foster a more easily satisfied (and lucrative) clientele?

    It's the people who buy fluff and (more importantly) buy into the "fluffy" mechanics like costumes, housing and so on that are paying the way in this industry today.  Developers would be stupid not to spend some time and money giving them things they might enjoy.  Because they don't need much, they have more money to spend than the combat wonks, and they cause a lot less trouble.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    Combat gets boring.  It cannot help but get boring, and spending a lot of time to make it more 'exciting' isn't going to make a difference in the end.  Once players develop a pattern of what the combat is like, the first steps towards boredom take root. 

     

    Where do you get that? Combat is the core of gaming. How many hours do people play COD .. nothing but shooting.

    How many hours do people play D3? 99% is mowing down monsters.

    Take any popular game .. how many is nothing but non-stop combat (plus some stories)? Halo, GoW, .....

    Take the successful online games in the last 2 years .. LOL, WOT ... what is the gameplay in them? You guess it .. combat.

    Don't think that if it is boring to you, it is boring to everyone.

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,235Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    Combat gets boring.  It cannot help but get boring, and spending a lot of time to make it more 'exciting' isn't going to make a difference in the end.  Once players develop a pattern of what the combat is like, the first steps towards boredom take root. 

     

    Where do you get that? Combat is the core of gaming. How many hours do people play COD .. nothing but shooting.

    How many hours do people play D3? 99% is mowing down monsters.

    Take any popular game .. how many is nothing but non-stop combat (plus some stories)? Halo, GoW, .....

    Take the successful online games in the last 2 years .. LOL, WOT ... what is the gameplay in them? You guess it .. combat.

    Don't think that if it is boring to you, it is boring to everyone.

    I never said combat is boring.

    I said combat gets boring.

    And the more a game rests on combat to carry the entire experience, the quicker the combat becomes boring.  Diablo 3 is a good example.  Most of the people I know played through it once, and don't touch it much anymore.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Beatnik59
     

    I never said combat is boring.

    I said combat gets boring.

    And the more a game rests on combat to carry the entire experience, the quicker the combat becomes boring.  Diablo 3 is a good example.  Most of the people I know played through it once, and don't touch it much anymore.

    Then the solution is even easier. When it gets boring, switch game.

    Secondly, D3 is still top 10 on xfire. Go check the players on diabloprogress.com. I bet way more than the number of your friends have L60, and dump hundreds of hours into the game.

    Hint: boring for you & friends != boring for others. In fact, few games, like D3, have legs and still are top 10 on xfire after so many months.

     

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    I don't think it does.  The subscription retention numbers of nearly every post-WoW MMO kind of shows it.  You get a massive spike at launch, and when people figure out the combat, they max out and leave.  Every.  Time.

    An expansion of more combat content to consume might get them back for a month or two.  Once that's done, they'll leave again.  And they'll leave even faster than they left initially.

    Combat gets boring.  It cannot help but get boring, and spending a lot of time to make it more 'exciting' isn't going to make a difference in the end.  Once players develop a pattern of what the combat is like, the first steps towards boredom take root. 

    And once the most visceral thing the devs have in their box of attention getting techniques--combat--becomes routine, the developers really don't have anywhere to go to get the thrill back.  And it will become routine, no matter how hard they try to make it 'innovative' or 'exciting.'

    Everything gets boring eventually if there is no change. Everything. To think that non-combat activities are somehow immune to this is ludicrous.

    People played Doom for years. People played Quake for years. -Counter Strike, Battlefield, Call of Duty, Dune, Command & Conquer, Warcraft, Starcraft, DotA, Mortal Kombat, Tekken, Street Fighter... They are entirely about combat.

    How on earth can you make a point that longevity comes from fluff when you look at those games?

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

  • HedeonHedeon GraestedPosts: 954Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    Everything gets boring eventually if there is no change. Everything. To think that non-combat activities are somehow immune to this is ludicrous.

    People played Doom for years. People played Quake for years. -Counter Strike, Battlefield, Call of Duty, Dune, Command & Conquer, Warcraft, Starcraft, DotA, Mortal Kombat, Tekken, Street Fighter... They are entirely about combat.

    How on earth can you make a point that longevity comes from fluff when you look at those games?

    because fluff promote social interaction, social interaction is what make MMOs long lasting, even a game like counter strike only last this long because people have build a sort of team spirit around that game, not because it is some over the top amazing cant be done better game - even if I m certain some would claim it is.

    also combat in MMOs always were terrible imo, ofc that a personal taste, but combat is the last thing that made me keep playing MMOs.

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Hedeon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    Everything gets boring eventually if there is no change. Everything. To think that non-combat activities are somehow immune to this is ludicrous.

    People played Doom for years. People played Quake for years. -Counter Strike, Battlefield, Call of Duty, Dune, Command & Conquer, Warcraft, Starcraft, DotA, Mortal Kombat, Tekken, Street Fighter... They are entirely about combat.

    How on earth can you make a point that longevity comes from fluff when you look at those games?

    because fluff promote social interaction, social interaction is what make MMOs long lasting, even a game like counter strike only last this long because people have build a sort of team spirit around that game, not because it is some over the top amazing cant be done better game - even if I m certain some would claim it is.

    also combat in MMOs always were terrible imo, ofc that a personal taste, but combat is the last thing that made me keep playing MMOs.

    I never "kept playing MMOs". I thought old MMOs were horrible - horrible as games. No amount of social pressure or friends will ever make me play a game I think is bad or I'm not interested in anymore.

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

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,235Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    I don't think it does.  The subscription retention numbers of nearly every post-WoW MMO kind of shows it.  You get a massive spike at launch, and when people figure out the combat, they max out and leave.  Every.  Time.

    An expansion of more combat content to consume might get them back for a month or two.  Once that's done, they'll leave again.  And they'll leave even faster than they left initially.

    Combat gets boring.  It cannot help but get boring, and spending a lot of time to make it more 'exciting' isn't going to make a difference in the end.  Once players develop a pattern of what the combat is like, the first steps towards boredom take root. 

    And once the most visceral thing the devs have in their box of attention getting techniques--combat--becomes routine, the developers really don't have anywhere to go to get the thrill back.  And it will become routine, no matter how hard they try to make it 'innovative' or 'exciting.'

    Everything gets boring eventually if there is no change. Everything. To think that non-combat activities are somehow immune to this is ludicrous.

    People played Doom for years. People played Quake for years. -Counter Strike, Battlefield, Call of Duty, Dune, Command & Conquer, Warcraft, Starcraft, DotA, Mortal Kombat, Tekken, Street Fighter... They are entirely about combat.

    How on earth can you make a point that longevity comes from fluff when you look at those games?

    Because none of those games you choose are games like MMOs are.  They are games you pick up with a couple friends, play for a half an hour, and leave them alone for awhile.

    Besides, people have played Sim City for years too.  Skyrim and Oblivion has a whole subculture of building associated with it.  Heck, we even have a whole underground movement of Freespace 2 open modders who are creating new story arcs alongside figting in them.

    See, a lot of the reason those old games are still around is because they have an entire subculture that builds the games, turning them into platforms of personal expression.  Counterstrike especially would be dead and buried without the modders who use the platform to create new skins and new mods.  If it didn't afford itself as a platform for creativity, it would be toast, alongside all of the other, better and more advanced FPS games that came out around the same time.

    I am of the opinion that games which are better platforms for creativity have more longevity than games which are not.  And since MMOs are not "moddable" in the same sense as the other games, it has to become a platform for creativity through features.

     

     

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • TorgrimTorgrim GothenburgPosts: 2,088Member

    I see several people in this thread thinking fluff,housing ect is pointless only combat matters.

    Well to be honest that's the supidest thing I have ever heard.

    For a MMO to last more than one month people NEED to have something else to do, more choices how to play and enjoy the game besides combat or the game gets repeative and boring because you only do basicly one thing, no wonder some people "beats" the game within a month then whine on the forums that there is nothing else to do.

    Have you guys ever noticed when a new MMO pops up on the radar there are always a topic on that forums labled "Are there fishing in this game?" or something like that, that tells a lot.

    Just because YOU don't enjoy fluff and housing dosen't mean everyone else feels the same way.

    A MMO can retain a lot more gamers by giving them choices how to play it, not funnel you down on a combat path that ultimate ends at a raid dungeon door..

     

    If it's not broken, you are not innovating.

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

    I see several people in this thread thinking fluff,housing ect is pointless only combat matters.

    Well to be honest that's the supidest thing I have ever heard.

    For a MMO to last more than one month people NEED to have something else to do, more choices how to play and enjoy the game besides combat or the game gets repeative and boring because you only do basicly one thing, no wonder some people "beats" the game within a month then whine on the forums that there is nothing else to do.

    Have you guys ever noticed when a new MMO pops up on the radar there are always a topic on that forums labled "Are there fishing in this game?" or something like that, that tells a lot.

    Just because YOU don't enjoy fluff and housing dosen't mean everyone else feels the same way.

    A MMO can retain a lot more gamers by giving them choices how to play it, not funnel you down on a combat path that ultimate ends at a raid dungeon door..

     

    You're building up a strawman. Nobody said combat is the only thing that matters. Only thing I've said is that combat is far more important than what you propose. There are numerous examples where games have enjoyed longevity purely by having excellent combat.

    You're searching for a silver bullet. Now I'm going to tell you: THERE IS NO SILVER BULLET! So do us a favor and stop looking for one. The notion that fluff and non-combat activities are somehow mandatory for longevity is silly. Give it up.

    Attaining longevity is surely more complicated than that. It is certainly not something you can just sum up in a sentence. One thing is for sure: It is closely tied to game depth. But since well over a third of the posters here seemingly don't understand what depth means (not in any useful sense anyway) and another third confuse depth with complexity, it would be painful to even start discussing what attaining longevity really requires.

    Right now, this thread is filled with people who are using simple post hoc ergo propter hoc-logic to found their claims. The connection and contrast they make between the games back then and games now could be entirely coincidental. And only proof they bring to the table is that "I used to play more, nowadays not so much". Then they proceed to blame the first thing they notice that is different now.

    I also think it is also very naive to think that going back would fix anything. The times are different, the market is different.

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

  • AntiquatedAntiquated Oak Brook, MIPosts: 673Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    You're searching for a silver bullet. Now I'm going to tell you: THERE IS NO SILVER BULLET! So do us a favor and stop looking for one. The notion that fluff and non-combat activities are somehow mandatory for longevity is silly. Give it up.

    One True Answer isn''t any more true for either side.

    This is a pretty enormously complicated puzzle. Discarding "fluff" may be discarding one part of that hellishly complicated 3400 moving parts jet engine, without which it cannot run.

    As far as I'm concerned, the more parts we can cram under the hood of this theoretical mmo, the fewer people have to grumble and go hunt elsewhere to look for a game for them.

    He's wrong, yes. But telling him to shut up and go away? So are you.

    The hyper-specialized games, in case you have not noticed, aren't doing any better at player retention either.

  • mrrshann618mrrshann618 Waseca, MNPosts: 227Member Uncommon

    I played FFXI, and did I spend lots of hours messing with my house? Yep, because your house was tied to your backpack not because I though flowers looked nice over there.

    Housing has never been, nor ever will be, an attraction to me. I own a house. If I want something nice and tidy I can go and clean that, or rearrange that for hours on end.

    For people that really want to play with housing, Pirate/Wizard 101 have a large ammount of customization when it comes to houses. I know, my daughter spends hours with her house arranging furniture. The biggest problem is that TRUE RPer's are hard to come by. ANY online game can become a RPer's paradise however people have to RP. Now if you look at what most games offer, Combat and Time sinks (such as fishing) Personally I'm not one for fishing, If I want to sit there and watch a bobber on my screen... guess what... Yup I can go fishing by just grabbing my gear and walk about 20 mins. I'd rather not do time sinks as to me it is the same as simply watching TV.

     

    Fluff on the other hand IS what attracts me to games. SWTOR has great storylines, I've played through the game several times JUST to learn the story. I don't care how bad everyone else thinks the game plays as I make huge exception if I like the story. I go to MMOs to escape from the world and do things I normally cannot. I do not go to the MMO universe to go fishing or to rearrange my house. I can do all that here if I choose and I will actually get something tangible from either activitiy in the real world compared to an epeen for catching the largest digital fish.

    Play what you Like. I like SWOTR, Have a referral to get you going!
    -->  http://www.swtor.com/r/nBndbs  <--
    Several Unlocks and a few days game time to make the F2P considerably easier
  • TorgrimTorgrim GothenburgPosts: 2,088Member
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Torgrim

    I see several people in this thread thinking fluff,housing ect is pointless only combat matters.

    Well to be honest that's the supidest thing I have ever heard.

    For a MMO to last more than one month people NEED to have something else to do, more choices how to play and enjoy the game besides combat or the game gets repeative and boring because you only do basicly one thing, no wonder some people "beats" the game within a month then whine on the forums that there is nothing else to do.

    Have you guys ever noticed when a new MMO pops up on the radar there are always a topic on that forums labled "Are there fishing in this game?" or something like that, that tells a lot.

    Just because YOU don't enjoy fluff and housing dosen't mean everyone else feels the same way.

    A MMO can retain a lot more gamers by giving them choices how to play it, not funnel you down on a combat path that ultimate ends at a raid dungeon door..

     

    You're building up a strawman. Nobody said combat is the only thing that matters. Only thing I've said is that combat is far more important than what you propose. There are numerous examples where games have enjoyed longevity purely by having excellent combat.

    You're searching for a silver bullet. Now I'm going to tell you: THERE IS NO SILVER BULLET! So do us a favor and stop looking for one. The notion that fluff and non-combat activities are somehow mandatory for longevity is silly. Give it up.

    Attaining longevity is surely more complicated than that. It is certainly not something you can just sum up in a sentence. One thing is for sure: It is closely tied to game depth. But since well over a third of the posters here seemingly don't understand what depth means (not in any useful sense anyway) and another third confuse depth with complexity, it would be painful to even start discussing what attaining longevity really requires.

    Right now, this thread is filled with people who are using simple post hoc ergo propter hoc-logic to found their claims. The connection and contrast they make between the games back then and games now could be entirely coincidental. And only proof they bring to the table is that "I used to play more, nowadays not so much". Then they proceed to blame the first thing they notice that is different now.

    I also think it is also very naive to think that going back would fix anything. The times are different, the market is different.

     

    So your opinion is facts then huh?

    Please.

    If it's not broken, you are not innovating.

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

    You're searching for a silver bullet. Now I'm going to tell you: THERE IS NO SILVER BULLET! So do us a favor and stop looking for one. The notion that fluff and non-combat activities are somehow mandatory for longevity is silly. Give it up.

    One True Answer isn''t any more true for either side.

    This is a pretty enormously complicated puzzle. Discarding "fluff" may be discarding one part of that hellishly complicated 3400 moving parts jet engine, without which it cannot run.

    As far as I'm concerned, the more parts we can cram under the hood of this theoretical mmo, the fewer people have to grumble and go hunt elsewhere to look for a game for them.

    He's wrong, yes. But telling him to shut up and go away? So are you.

    The hyper-specialized games, in case you have not noticed, aren't doing any better at player retention either.

    No they're not. I never said they were. But the specialized games usually do that one thing right whereas games which try to do little bit of everything often end up doing none of them very well. If you can't attract customers in the first place you don't have to worry about retention either. For small obscure games, the only way is up. For big behemoths, growing is a lot harder.

    Losing customers overtime is natural over the life cycle of any product. No game can grow forever and no game was meant to be played forever. All this doom & gloom over losing subs or one game stagnating is silly. Overall though, the market has grown continuouslyl so far. And even that growth wont last forever. The market will become saturated eventually and there won't be anything special about that either.

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

  • CalerxesCalerxes LondonPosts: 1,630Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Beatnik59
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Alberel
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    No, we don't need fluff, housing or other stuff not involving killing. Devoting as much time to them as "the killing part" is mad, because those features are nowhere near as popular. The killing stuff sells - fluff & housing does not.

    Combat might sell boxes but alone it's clearly done an abysmal job of retaining players. Giving players alternatives to constantly fighting makes them much less likely to burn out on the game, and systems like housing are open ended meaning that once they're in it takes very few developer resources to keep it fresh (just need to add a few new housing objects every now and then).

    Your post sounds more like an 'I don't like it so no one else can have it' attitude. Judging by the slew of games on the way featuring housing I think it could be argued that devs actually think it will sell now.

    Combat does not retain players? Ok, now you're talking out of your arse.

    I don't think it does.  The subscription retention numbers of nearly every post-WoW MMO kind of shows it.  You get a massive spike at launch, and when people figure out the combat, they max out and leave.  Every.  Time.

    An expansion of more combat content to consume might get them back for a month or two.  Once that's done, they'll leave again.  And they'll leave even faster than they left initially.

    Combat gets boring.  It cannot help but get boring, and spending a lot of time to make it more 'exciting' isn't going to make a difference in the end.  Once players develop a pattern of what the combat is like, the first steps towards boredom take root. 

    And once the most visceral thing the devs have in their box of attention getting techniques--combat--becomes routine, the developers really don't have anywhere to go to get the thrill back.  And it will become routine, no matter how hard they try to make it 'innovative' or 'exciting.'

     

    Players are leaving because they finish the content that is all, you cannot pop a load of mobs in a field and artificially extend the xp needed to level and add a death penalty and expect players to just grind anymore. So you have to put in actual content and that takes much longer to do, so as a project manager you have to allocate resources to the most valued content and that is still combat, fluff has a much less priority and I can imagine that the devs have all the relevant data from years of experience as to what players engage in most.

    Now I'll say this again... many players still play MMO's long term but instead of them playing from a selection of 6 to 10 they now have the choice of 100 so they are spread thinly, there is more choice now. MMO's have had their day in the limelight and will never hold WoW numbers again so I would say to posters here, get it out of your head that the genre is failing it isn't its just spread much thinner than it used to be and adding in more fluff or simulation effects to MMO's is not going to alter player retention one bit.

    This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up™ the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.

  • CalerxesCalerxes LondonPosts: 1,630Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Torgrim

    I see several people in this thread thinking fluff,housing ect is pointless only combat matters.

    Well to be honest that's the supidest thing I have ever heard.

    For a MMO to last more than one month people NEED to have something else to do, more choices how to play and enjoy the game besides combat or the game gets repeative and boring because you only do basicly one thing, no wonder some people "beats" the game within a month then whine on the forums that there is nothing else to do.

    Have you guys ever noticed when a new MMO pops up on the radar there are always a topic on that forums labled "Are there fishing in this game?" or something like that, that tells a lot.

    Just because YOU don't enjoy fluff and housing dosen't mean everyone else feels the same way.

    A MMO can retain a lot more gamers by giving them choices how to play it, not funnel you down on a combat path that ultimate ends at a raid dungeon door..

     

    You're building up a strawman. Nobody said combat is the only thing that matters. Only thing I've said is that combat is far more important than what you propose. There are numerous examples where games have enjoyed longevity purely by having excellent combat.

    You're searching for a silver bullet. Now I'm going to tell you: THERE IS NO SILVER BULLET! So do us a favor and stop looking for one. The notion that fluff and non-combat activities are somehow mandatory for longevity is silly. Give it up.

    Attaining longevity is surely more complicated than that. It is certainly not something you can just sum up in a sentence. One thing is for sure: It is closely tied to game depth. But since well over a third of the posters here seemingly don't understand what depth means (not in any useful sense anyway) and another third confuse depth with complexity, it would be painful to even start discussing what attaining longevity really requires.

    Right now, this thread is filled with people who are using simple post hoc ergo propter hoc-logic to found their claims. The connection and contrast they make between the games back then and games now could be entirely coincidental. And only proof they bring to the table is that "I used to play more, nowadays not so much". Then they proceed to blame the first thing they notice that is different now.

    I also think it is also very naive to think that going back would fix anything. The times are different, the market is different.

     

    See Quirhid the premise that Torgrim and others are coming from is that modern MMO's are failures because they either don't keep the initial 1/2/3 million players from launch, that no MMO since WoW has grown in population and that they have gone F2P and this is the strawman under the whole add fluff and games will succeed argument. Inorder for this to be true modern MMO's have to be failing and there are no longer longterm players and that is patently false. The market is evolving and we are in transitional period where payment plans are being revised. Companies that started building games 5/6 years ago were building them in a time where there was only one payment plan now that is not the case so they've had to adapt and adapt quickly as there are more options for the consumer out there. Its a highly competitive market now and that force companies to think about how they charge their customers, SOE have finally realised their F2P system is not great and have relaxed it and this will happen with all the big publishers.  All in all it comes down to more choice for the consumer meaning that the playerbase gets spread much thinner that it did in the beginning.

    This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up™ the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.

  • AntiquatedAntiquated Oak Brook, MIPosts: 673Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Calerxes

    Players are leaving because they finish the content that is all.

    I've always sort of assumed there just isn't much to say about a vast herd of players that's (effectively) seen and done it all, exhausted all of the potential of mmos on an individual basis.

    But everyone in the world has their own ideas about why, exactly,  players are unhappy.

    The only thing you can safely observe about it? Simple answers are rarely (never?) sufficient to explain it. Simple answers are for EA to throw money away on image

  • ZarriyaZarriya Long Island, NYPosts: 288Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Calerxes
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Torgrim

    I see several people in this thread thinking fluff,housing ect is pointless only combat matters.

    Well to be honest that's the supidest thing I have ever heard.

    For a MMO to last more than one month people NEED to have something else to do, more choices how to play and enjoy the game besides combat or the game gets repeative and boring because you only do basicly one thing, no wonder some people "beats" the game within a month then whine on the forums that there is nothing else to do.

    Have you guys ever noticed when a new MMO pops up on the radar there are always a topic on that forums labled "Are there fishing in this game?" or something like that, that tells a lot.

    Just because YOU don't enjoy fluff and housing dosen't mean everyone else feels the same way.

    A MMO can retain a lot more gamers by giving them choices how to play it, not funnel you down on a combat path that ultimate ends at a raid dungeon door..

     

    You're building up a strawman. Nobody said combat is the only thing that matters. Only thing I've said is that combat is far more important than what you propose. There are numerous examples where games have enjoyed longevity purely by having excellent combat.

    You're searching for a silver bullet. Now I'm going to tell you: THERE IS NO SILVER BULLET! So do us a favor and stop looking for one. The notion that fluff and non-combat activities are somehow mandatory for longevity is silly. Give it up.

    Attaining longevity is surely more complicated than that. It is certainly not something you can just sum up in a sentence. One thing is for sure: It is closely tied to game depth. But since well over a third of the posters here seemingly don't understand what depth means (not in any useful sense anyway) and another third confuse depth with complexity, it would be painful to even start discussing what attaining longevity really requires.

    Right now, this thread is filled with people who are using simple post hoc ergo propter hoc-logic to found their claims. The connection and contrast they make between the games back then and games now could be entirely coincidental. And only proof they bring to the table is that "I used to play more, nowadays not so much". Then they proceed to blame the first thing they notice that is different now.

    I also think it is also very naive to think that going back would fix anything. The times are different, the market is different.

     

    See Quirhid the premise that Torgrim and others are coming from is that modern MMO's are failures because they either don't keep the initial 1/2/3 million players from launch, that no MMO since WoW has grown in population and that they have gone F2P and this is the strawman under the whole add fluff and games will succeed argument. Inorder for this to be true modern MMO's have to be failing and there are no longer longterm players and that is patently false. The market is evolving and we are in transitional period where payment plans are being revised. Companies that started building games 5/6 years ago were building them in a time where there was only one payment plan now that is not the case so they've had to adapt and adapt quickly as there are more options for the consumer out there. Its a highly competitive market now and that force companies to think about how they charge their customers, SOE have finally realised their F2P system is not great and have relaxed it and this will happen with all the big publishers.  All in all it comes down to more choice for the consumer meaning that the playerbase gets spread much thinner that it did in the beginning.

    Eve has grown in population steadily from launch.

    I agree with this thread, that the MMO i would like to play needs more fluff (or become more rounded).  I still go back to WOW and EQ2 because there are so many things i can do in those games.

  • ClaudeSuamOramClaudeSuamOram Hartville, OHPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by Torgrim

    Most older MMOs had pretty much fluff and pretty advance form of housing such as UO, SWG and alike.

    How come these things are not important anymore as it used to be?

    Endgame for some are raids for pretty snowflakes while others treasure a nice looking home decorated from floor to sealing with a nice looking garden with trophies collected during your travels.

    I am talking about games that is new not old ones like Vanguard,EQ2 and alike and yes I know about RIFT effort in doing it and I do find that fun that some tries to breath some light to this forgotten aspect in a game.

    Look at NWN,TESO,GW2,TOR(yes tor has some of it not all)

    We need more fluff, housing,cloathing,games, fishing, hunting, anything that will not include killing mobs.

     

    Because the majority cannot find the time to play MMORPG's with the time they do have and feel accomplishement...even if it's gaining half a level of xp, or traveling to the next town unscathed and instead ask for everything to be given faster so they feel they are progressing.

    So what makes you think they want to take the time to relax and enjoy building a home, or make the in-game cash to buy a home and appreciate it more...and take the time to decorate it? That's why. No patience, and not a function that allows for fast paced fun...which is the new "in" thing in MMORPG's.

     

    Plus they need to figure out functions for the House. No real point to them but the feeling of accomplishment in building or buying one and decorating it how you want...which personally is enough for me. But they should allow for players to do other things with them, like build onto it as they see fit, plant gardens, hold parties within that may give the players attending some type of beneficial buffs for a set amount of time. Dig out basements to store loot. Add hidden rooms and secret passages. Anything to spicen it up and make it more attractive as a feature.

     

    Other fluff is still there. Just sadly in most MMORPG's you have to go to a cash shop to get it. =/

Sign In or Register to comment.