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!

Could a MMO with very high minimum hardware specs be successful?

24

Comments

  • MibletMiblet BognerPosts: 333Member

    As people have said why would you limit your market considerably?

    Given most people don't have a high end rig (bear in mind you are on a gaming enthusiast site and the population here is far more likely to have higher end machines, same as going to a PC enthuasit site will not generate a realistic picture of how the average persons PC specs are), it would be hard to imagine it becoming a runaway success.  Also friends would be stopped from playing together if one of their group didn't have such a rig.

    That not even factoring in that this is a time where a lot of people are watching the purse strings.

    Even if it were to become successful it would almost be guaranteed it could be MORE successful with lower minimum specs.

     

    By the way I have a high end machine so it wouldn't bother me at all (nothing stressed my computer so far without being heavily modded graphically), but I know it won't happen.  EQ2 had such high requirements when it launched compaed to the average user...

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member

    Better title, I think:

    "Didn't we learn anything from Vanguard?"

    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.

  • LeiloniLeiloni None of your beeswax, ALPosts: 432Member Uncommon

    I would not be able to play since I only have 8GB RAM and not 16 although the rest of my specs are high end. But I don't think it would work for a few reasons. Not enough players own those kinds of machines or are willing to upgrade to get them.

    Secondly, I don't want to imagine what a somewhat populated area would be like. Standing around in the main city would be hell, let alone trying to have some sort of gameplay with more than 5 people. Yea graphics are great and I personally put that high on my list when looking at new games, but I don't think it currently would make for a fun multiplayer experience if the graphics were that high quality.

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

    I would not be able to play since I only have 8GB RAM and not 16 although the rest of my specs are high end. But I don't think it would work for a few reasons. Not enough players own those kinds of machines or are willing to upgrade to get them.

    Secondly, I don't want to imagine what a somewhat populated area would be like. Standing around in the main city would be hell, let alone trying to have some sort of gameplay with more than 5 people. Yea graphics are great and I personally put that hig on my list when looking at new games, but I don't think it currently would mean for a fun multiplayer experience if the graphics were that high quality.

    "Lookit, my GPU can play this thing! Tada!!" (The same motivator that's been driving GPU "upgrades" since GeForce 256)

    vs.

    Only a handful of people to pose for... "Hey, where did everybody go? Damn, my unstable 1.0 driver blue-screened again."

    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.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,778Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Icewhite

    Better title, I think:

    "Didn't we learn anything from Vanguard?"

    Vanguard's problem at launch was not that it required high end hardware.  Vanguard's problem was that it required hardware that didn't even exist.

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,474Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bugmeno

    I wonder if a MMO which would natively run on 64-Bit client, minimum 16 GIG ram and GTX 580 be successul?

    Think about what would be possible with these minimum specs. Seamless worlds, super-high res textures, realistic worlds...

    Ultra setting could require SLI setup.

    Would you be able/think about upgrading your PC to play?

     Consider how many mmorpg failures we have had.  Now you want to reduce the number of potential clients to a small precentage of that.  Given the costs to product a game, this would be very doubt full.

  • eye_meye_m Notta Chance, ABPosts: 3,133Member Uncommon
    it could be successful but you wouldn't want your primary revenue to only be box sales, subscriptions, and cash shop.

    All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.

    I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.

    I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,255Member Uncommon
    As graphics gone up, gameplay has gone down. Prove me wrong. Talking about this genre only.

    image

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,474Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOExposed
    As graphics gone up, gameplay has gone down. Prove me wrong. Talking about this genre only.

     I don't think I can because I feel you are correct. Sure some little changes have been made, but the mmorpg isn't where I thought it would be when it first started.  AKA, virtual worlds.

  • ReizlaReizla AlkmaarPosts: 3,300Member Uncommon

    Think I would play it since my HW is able to match your requirements. That is if I would like the game to start with...

    Would it be succesfull..? Just look at World of Warcraft and Age of Conan / The Secret World. The former has very low minimum specs and still is able to keep players around (partly because of the low specs). While the latter 2 have very steep specs and a lot of players at release found out that their system could barely (or not at all) run these games and gave up on them (and they're now F2P/B2P).

    So I guess extremely high system specs for a MMORPG are a no-go. An utter failure..? Not really, since there's more to a MMORPG than just the minimum system specs required ;-)

    AsRock 990FX Extreme3
    AMD Phenom II 1090T ~3.2Ghz
    GEiL 16Gb DDR3 1600Mhz
    ASUS GTX970 3x HD monitor 1920x1080

  • fivorothfivoroth LondonPosts: 3,661Member Uncommon
    I will not play it of course. I play on my laptop which I use mostly for other things. I am not getting a PC just for one game. I think there is a reason why MMOs or any game for that matter dont go for such crazy system requirements. Because no one will play it :D I think people with high end PC are the in the minority but I might be wrong.

    Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,778Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOExposed
    As graphics gone up, gameplay has gone down. Prove me wrong. Talking about this genre only.

    There were plenty of awful games 10 years ago, too, but they're mostly forgotten.  If you compare random games today with the best games from some other era, that's likely to make the other era look artificially better.

  • falconhandfalconhand ZuidbroekPosts: 47Member Uncommon
    Since a mmorpg takes time to develop I allways check for what games are in the pipeline and if there is a game I really like I upgrade or buy a new pc to play that game on high settings. Ok it did not work good on release of age of conan but I still could play it a highest setting and because of that I did stay longer at that game then if I not had upgrade my pc. So yes I like if new games uses very high minimum hardware specs to play.
  • XthosXthos Columbus, OHPosts: 2,628Member
    Originally posted by Icewhite

    Better title, I think:

    "Didn't we learn anything from Vanguard?"

    I actually only had some stutter in VG when near a city, and panning, but I did buy a brand new top of the line rig and got it the week before VG came out.  I hardly had any of the problems other people had, which made the game very enjoyable for me, verse I probably wouldn't of had as good a time if I had a lot of the other problems people had.  They eventually coded it a little better, and reduced the polygon count a lot to cut a lot of the stutter out, when that happend I had zero problems, while other people still did from seeing posts.  So my VG time seemed to be different than a lot of peoples.  I left when they stopped PvP support and the server became a ghost town, and people left for AoC.  I still liked the game, but SoE didn't do the relaunch way back then that they promised, and it seemed they lost interest in the game (which ended up being right for a long time).

     

    Also, EQ2 had these problems, people couldn't run it the way they wanted to run it.

     

    I think a game can succeed, but it would have to be more niche imo, when you cut out a lot of potential customers with computer requirements its hard to succeed.  Subs and cost of a game are low, when compared to updating or replacing.  Also, nothing in the past 6 years has been worth getting a new rig for imo.  MMOs seem moe throwaway now, for the most part. 

     

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon
    MMOs with very high minimum hardware specs can be successful. It was called FFXI. However, it's not ideal, and it will obviously alienate a large potential playerbase because of it.
  • HorusraHorusra maryland, MDPosts: 2,579Member Uncommon
    I look at WoW vs EQ2 when they came out.  EQ2 tanked while WoW became a giant and I personally think the hardware requirements are partially the reason why that happened. 
  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Horusra
    I look at WoW vs EQ2 when they came out.  EQ2 tanked while WoW became a giant and I personally think the hardware requirements are partially the reason why that happened. 

    Nah, hardware reqs had barely anything to do w/ that honestly.

    I was there for that as well, and basically what happened was the Halo effect. WoW brought in this massive new market into a pre-established (though niche) genre. Because of this, a lot of people's friends now started to play MMOs, who had previously mocked the genre as 'lame, nerdy, or stupid'.

    Most of my friends from EQ2 actually felt EQ2 was a much better game (myself included), but WoW had all their friends, and the potential to grow into something better. Eventually they all went to WoW, because WoW had the massive new player base. I eventually followed suit, but it was due to SOE's horribly obvious cash-grab business model, trying to milk their remaining players for every last dime they could get.

    - In short, WoW had the players because it was a Blizzard title that attracted an outside audience. People went to what was popular.

  • GarkanGarkan BirminghamPosts: 552Member
    It would depend on the game, my PC could run a game with those specs sure but I wouldnt play a game just because it looked shiny. A shiny game that was a good game and a game I was interested in would be great, shinies alone wouldnt attract me to it though.

    Currently playing:

    EVE online (Ruining low sec one hotdrop at a time)

    Gravity Rush,
    Dishonoured: The Knife of Dunwall.

    (Waiting for) Metro: Last Light,
    Company of Heroes II.

  • HorusraHorusra maryland, MDPosts: 2,579Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by Horusra
    I look at WoW vs EQ2 when they came out.  EQ2 tanked while WoW became a giant and I personally think the hardware requirements are partially the reason why that happened. 

    Nah, hardware reqs had barely anything to do w/ that honestly.

    I was there for that as well, and basically what happened was the Halo effect. WoW brought in this massive new market into a pre-established (though niche) genre. Because of this, a lot of people's friends now started to play MMOs, who had previously mocked the genre as 'lame, nerdy, or stupid'.

    Most of my friends from EQ2 actually felt EQ2 was a much better game (myself included), but WoW had all their friends, and the potential to grow into something better. Eventually they all went to WoW, because WoW had the massive new player base. I eventually followed suit, but it was due to SOE's horribly obvious cash-grab business model, trying to milk their remaining players for every last dime they could get.

    - In short, WoW had the players because it was a Blizzard title that attracted an outside audience. People went to what was popular.

    I had exactly the opposite experience...friends could not play EQ2 to a level that it did not look like paper dolls on a screen and WoW looked and moved great on piece of crap pc's that most of my non tech friends had.

  • HorusraHorusra maryland, MDPosts: 2,579Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aesperus
    MMOs with very high minimum hardware specs can be successful. It was called FFXI. However, it's not ideal, and it will obviously alienate a large potential playerbase because of it.

    Depends on what you call successful.

  • atticusbcatticusbc Posts: 1,068Member Uncommon
    you forgot "i could play, but wouldn't"
  • KanethKaneth Posts: 1,924Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Horusra
    I look at WoW vs EQ2 when they came out.  EQ2 tanked while WoW became a giant and I personally think the hardware requirements are partially the reason why that happened. 

    I agree. Everquest had a name and a fanbase, much like Blizzard. The main difference was that Blizzard did not have previous mmo experience, on paper, EQ2 should have been the clear winner. Blizzard has always attempted to allow as many people to play their games as possible, and while not every single game has been a gem, every single game has sold very well.

    A game is more than the graphics behind it, yes awesome graphics are a bonus, but not at the cost of gameplay. It's been fairly rare that a high spec game has also had deep and rich features behind it. For me, Minecraft will always be the ultimate example of how little graphics truly mean when you have near limitless potential in gameplay. Minecraft literally went from a small idea to this mega successful game that has sold millions of units spanning PC, Xbox 360, and iOS/Android. Again, not everyone likes Minecraft, but it has proven to be successful enough to make it an important game and a good example for other indie developers.

  • H0urg1assH0urg1ass Austin, TXPosts: 510Member Uncommon

    Can Apple release a new iPhone every year and have thousands of people line up to buy them until they run out of stock?

    If you make it well, then people will play it.  You can pretty much ignore the whining and crying in this thread.  They'll find the money to upgrade if it's a good enough game to upgrade for.

  • kjempffkjempff AarhusPosts: 883Member Uncommon

    Problem is fancy graphics and stuff is expensive to make, so it will affect the game quality. I would much rather have a decent looking good game than a good looking poor game. I think alot are thirsty for a good game, just one or two and then we can start talking about graphics after that.

    Anyways, apart from that I guess a very high minimum spec requirement would rule out anything but PC's and of that any non gaming rigs and so called gaming-laptops, and from that people who play mmorpgs and then put the competition on top. I am not sure if there are enough customers for it, but that is purely a guess.

     

    About eq2, its problem was it had too many poligons for the hardware available at that time, and the quality at lower settings were rather poor. Eq2 was released way too early and they used the next year to get stuff working and optimized, but then it started getting better. Vanguard had similar problems and was virtually unplayable at launch even at lowest setting, even the nastiest dual gforce machines could only just run it on medium. Vanguard was a case of release now or close the project, and it took years to get it optimized to decent performance. Vanguard was 5+ years ahead of its time regarding graphics, and if you ask me it was just too ambitious in that regard.

  • VigilianceVigiliance Sacramento, CAPosts: 213Member
    Originally posted by Wickedjelly

    I'm not going to upgrade my hardware just for one video game. So no for me...

    Neither would my friends so even less reason for me to consider the choice or care about the game.

    This, the fact is no matter how good the graphics are on any piece of media you become accustom to them and ambivalent to them.

    A a new MMO with ground breaking graphics can be a good sales pitch for a new successful MMO. However it wouldn't be the most influential thing to the MMO's success.

    A new MMO has to have entertaining gameplay, some novelty/originality, and new or better features that current successful MMO's have.

    I'd say for me graphics place probably 4th or 5th on a top ten list for the most important aspects of what a new successful mmo needs. It doesn't even have to be "high end graphics" or "ground breaking" but that the art is appealing and fits the game world.

Sign In or Register to comment.