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 problem with MMOs these days is developers are making games and not virtual worlds.

145791014

Comments

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by DavisFlight Originally posted by koboldfodder When SWG tanked and WOW was massive, any sane executive would not spend a single dime on a sandbox type game.   
    The funny thing, SWG tanked only after becoming a WoW clone. Any sane executive would have dug deep into how the market works instead of just shitting out WoW clones. Sadly, no AAA MMOs have been run by sane executives.
     Others say SWG was tanking and bleeding badly before it switched and was the reason for the switch.  I couldn't say, I only lasted a few months in it and found it really quite dull.


    It just never lived up to the expectations of Sony executives and it was also outperformed by other games that released during its lifetime. The other games were more theme park games so it certainly looks like developers have taken the idea to heart that sandbox games are not as successful commercial as their theme park counterparts.

    I don't think it's true that sandbox = world and game = theme park though. Skyrim is very much an open world theme park. It's very successful and the open world development is a big part of why it's successful. WoW is very successful too, and while it doesn't have an open world that the player can impact, it does have a very detailed virtual world for the player to run around in. It just so happens that both of those games also have well developed game play. WoW may or may not fall into that category any longer, I haven't played in a very long time, but when I played, the game play was top notch.

    I think while it's true that you can have a project focused on the 'game', with a minimal 'world' and still be successful, I think games that manage to do both, whether they are sandbox or not are the games that reach a much broader audience and have much more appeal to many players. Limiting a game to just a very well developed world will limit the audience and the success of the game.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • PhelcherPhelcher Boston, MAPosts: 1,053Member
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Phelcher 

    Odd, now that you claim experience in the field, you've changed your idealogy..?

     Preproduction cost millions...  if you design a game to have zones walls and zoning, you cannot later make the decision to make it Open World (& have all the benifits that go with it). You are off your rocker if you think so. 

    So when you are in PREPRODUCTION, is when you decide if your game is going to be a premium game, charging premium dollars to keep your Open World up...  or, free to play, keeping your inexpensive zones/themepark game open.

    It is 100% directly related to your severs what game you intend on offering to the people. What server you design in beta, is the same server limitation that will exist 2 years later. That is the limitation of the developer, is his budget.

    How can u not understand this.. u think each dev given $40 million uses it as wisely?  That they all chose open world servers, instead of cash cow instancing? That is why it is sooooo easy to make a MMO today and why there are so many... even you with 12 years claimed experience, you don't think Des take the $40million and use it cheaply for higher upfront profits, instead over the year revenues? 

    Lastly, Server technology/net-code has gotten so cheap, that any premium game can use Open World design, yet greedy dev's keep going the 1999 route of zones & instancing..  thus themepark...   just cash cows using instancing to make millions off arcade players.

    I don't think your capable of breaking down pre-production, production and release of a MMORPG... and all that goes into it.

    1. Maybe you'll clarify how I "changed my ideology" later.

    2. A zoned themepark is still an open world game.  It's a more popular, thus more profitable, type of open world game than a virtual world (which is light on the gameplay, and thus light on players.)

    3. Instances are used for a similar reason: instanced gameplay is more fun, and since these devs earn money based on whether they're providing a fun experience to players they're interested in providing that type of gameplay in addition to the open world gameplay.  Some instance-only games exist (and are profitable for the same reasons,) but we're not talking about those because we're talking about MMORPGs (which implies players in a large shared space.)

    4. Devs are "greedy" insofar as they see like 10 major game companies going out of business these last 12 months and are interested in continuing to eat.  Thus, they try to make busines decisions which make them money.  One such decision is that when you're in the game business you sell fun games.  Without fun, your product has nothing and you starve.

     

    Lulz..^  u playing games?

     

    Open World means: zoneless...      without zones walls, a developer cannat make 2 cities right next to each other, then make a zone wall+ forest, so it takes 20 minutes to walk around..

     

    You are mistaken seamless, to mean zoneless.. (?) they is different alltogether. You claim to be part of the industry, yet you (again) illustrate you know very little of the basic types of games and their outlaying technology.

    "No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


    -Nariusseldon

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by WW4BW
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by WW4BW

    But you have no basis for saying that.

     

    If we don't have basis for stating something excessively obvious like, "People don't want to buy a game and then be forced to stare at a spellbook for 10 minutes of non-gameplay," what the hell can we say?

     

    Of ocuse there is a basis of saying that. EQ got rid of the "staring at spell book for 10 min" .. didn't it? You think they did that randomly? You don't think people complained? I complained.

    And if you believe there is a market for players to "stare at spell book for 10 min" as gameplay, feel free to invest your money and/or your career into it. I highly doubt even you (WW4BW) would do that.

    What I was getting at was that I certainly never had to stare at my spell book for 10 minutes.

    And that I never had more than 2 groups ahead of mine for anything and that was rare.

    I could be wrong about the 10 minutes. It was a long time ago and I was probably too busy chatting  to notice it if it was 10 minutes. I've tried looking it up, but I couldnt find any info on it other than "a while".

    I far more vividly remember how long it took me to figure out the layout of Kelethin Or how happy I was when I got some "magic" boots so I could atleast kick a will'o'wisp.

    Anyways, I like it when thing arent just handed to me. 

    You are wrong about the 10 min. I was there. The wait was horrible. I remembered. Horrible game design and if you also remember, they took it AWAY. If they change it, you know why ... and certainly NOT because it is popular.

    Other horrible stuff ... long boring boat rides (from the Erudite island to Qeynos .. anyone remembers). How about camping for 6 hours when you get to kill the boss 3 times?

    Figuring things out? You don't know about those EQ map & strategy sites? They are as prevalent in EQ time as today.

  • PhelcherPhelcher Boston, MAPosts: 1,053Member

    [mod edit]

    He doesn't understand how wrong he is...   bcuz of choice... he had to stair at a spell book for 10m. It was by his OWN choice.  Then, he complains about the path he took.. 

    "No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


    -Nariusseldon

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

     


    Originally posted by Phelcher
    [mod edit]

     

    He doesn't understand how wrong he is...   bcuz of choice... he had to stair at a spell book for 10m. It was by his OWN choice.  Then, he complains about the path he took.. 


    He's making note of developers noticing that players don't want to hurry up and wait. He wasn't the only player, otherwise it never would have changed. The players knew that what they were doing was stretching out the time it took to get things done, and therefore stretch out the amount of time players would pay for the game.

    In comparison, Skyrim has a very open and dynamic world. How much time was spent staring at the screen waiting for something to complete, where there was nothing else happening? I would be willing to bet there was little or no equivalent to staring at a progress meter, yet Skyrim seems to have a well developed virtual world. Most waiting in MMOs is just that, waiting for the clock to tick by so developers can charge a little more money. It isn't necessary for the virtual world to be well done.

     

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaPosts: 8,444Member Uncommon

    Did you know that a game has no predictable outcome?These pieces of software code do,they are very predictable,the only thing that is unpredicatable is you the gamer.

    They setup a roller coaster ride with very few twists and curves,mostly straight ahead with a definite predictable ending.

    Then they expand that ride,call it expansions,the cost is just slightly less than the full ride but takes 1/10th the effort to add those few extra rails.

    The hook is not fun,the hook is that it is very easy to get on that ride,but once you have invested a lot of time,you feel compelled to continue that ride.You soon ask yourself why,why am i still coming to  this same ride with a few extra rails.I think for most of us ,we really don't know,it becomes habit,perhaps boredom,anything is better than nothing right?

    Then we become defensive,protecting the idiocy .We understand the flaws of our passion for these games,yet we ridicule others for pointing them out to us.

    Step back,remind yourself that the real world can never be replaced by a virtual world,nothing inside of games is important.

     


    Samoan Diamond

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


    In comparison, Skyrim has a very open and dynamic world. How much time was spent staring at the screen waiting for something to complete, where there was nothing else happening? I would be willing to bet there was little or no equivalent to staring at a progress meter, yet Skyrim seems to have a well developed virtual world. Most waiting in MMOs is just that, waiting for the clock to tick by so developers can charge a little more money. It isn't necessary for the virtual world to be well done.

     

    Zero. If you visit a place before, click on a button and you telepor there. If there is a shop closed, click a button and time advances.

    Waiting and nothing happens is bad game design, and not entertaining. Back in EQ days, that is what you have to endure if you want to play an online RPG with your friend (unless you want to play UO, which is worse).

    It is great that no devs will go that path again. And if some niche devs happen to try again, i am glad there are plenty of alternatives and i can just ignore them.

  • PhelcherPhelcher Boston, MAPosts: 1,053Member
    Originally posted by Morcotulcon

    I agree with the OP, but also with some of the things other people say in this thread.

    I'm not very active in this site as I used to, but reading this post I felt the need to give my opinion.

     

    Although I totally agree with the problem of giving too many rewards to players, and although I also agree that MMOs today are more of a Game and less then a Virtual World, I think MMORPGs were stale for so long that all the changes right now are the main reasons why players feel so "lost" in the genre. They don't know what MMORPG's stand for anymore, at least in terms of what to expect in their gameplay experience.

    The genre is growing steadily with much more players than it had before, in many more games than before, but along with this there are more and more games looking to give motivational and rewarding experiences, because those are the ones that attract the new players each day - yes, I said "day", because games are now on a competitive level where each day might represent the gain and loss of players to the direct competition, and if only 1 day can be a problem to the game itself with a downtime service, a week or a month might be the end of the success of many goals they devs had in mind by giving the wrong updates.

    The problem with this is, with so many motivational experiences and rewards, people start getting tired of them and don't know what to do with them all. Many of those rewards become things with no value and the real valuable ones are only possible if you are "a true hardcore" (aka have no life or spend real money) or if you have A LOT OF LUCK.

    They also try to give many experiences in terms of different gameplay, but then they create even more rewards and motivational experiences that in less then a month will become "meh" in the middle of so many things to do and get.

    In the end, there are so many MMOs creating so many features while looking for the "special one" that motivates all their player base, that all of them end up having the same things over and over again with different skins and with an excessive amount of rewards with no value at all.

     

    The Virtual Worlds the OP talked about is something many MMORPGs are trying to do right now, but it just gets past players when they see the giant list of things to do and get. With so many features, missions, rewards, etc., the players forget all about the Virtual World and start thinking about the Game - to have fun and become good player - and after a while they forget about the Game and start to become focused in best rewards and in beeing the best. When that happens, the MMO is not fun anymore, it's just a "job" (or a filler) untill the next MMO comes again.

    And then, the cycle repeats itself.

     

    But It seems we are getting somewhere. To me, it seems each new game is trying to get both of those concepts, a Virtual World and a Game, and with this we might see a final change in the genre in terms of definition.

    I don't know if the gerne should be separated in 2 or 3 genres, but to me it seems games will get to a place where the games are finally labelled in the correct genre again, like they were before as MMORPGs.

     

    Thank you for taking your time to write that..    (Kinder words than mine.)

    "No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


    -Nariusseldon

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

    Open World means: zoneless...      without zones walls, a developer cannat make 2 cities right next to each other, then make a zone wall+ forest, so it takes 20 minutes to walk around..

     

    You are mistaken seamless, to mean zoneless.. (?) they is different alltogether. You claim to be part of the industry, yet you (again) illustrate you know very little of the basic types of games and their outlaying technology.

    Ok, lets get one thing straight: Zoning is the industry standard technique to handle players and loading assets. Pretty much all MMOs use them regardless of being entirely open world or not. World of Warcraft is zoned. Vanguard is zoned. Eve Online is zoned.

    People use the term "seamless" when they refer to the fact that you can move through these zones "seamlessly" i.e. without a loading screen.

    I think Quizzical would be happy to explain the technology further, or maybe you should look up some of the threads where he has explained how and why the stuff works the way it works.

    Point is, you're wrong or you're intentionally disruptive.

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

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,666Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Phelcher 

    Odd, now that you claim experience in the field, you've changed your idealogy..?

     Preproduction cost millions...  if you design a game to have zones walls and zoning, you cannot later make the decision to make it Open World (& have all the benifits that go with it). You are off your rocker if you think so. 

    So when you are in PREPRODUCTION, is when you decide if your game is going to be a premium game, charging premium dollars to keep your Open World up...  or, free to play, keeping your inexpensive zones/themepark game open.

    It is 100% directly related to your severs what game you intend on offering to the people. What server you design in beta, is the same server limitation that will exist 2 years later. That is the limitation of the developer, is his budget.

    How can u not understand this.. u think each dev given $40 million uses it as wisely?  That they all chose open world servers, instead of cash cow instancing? That is why it is sooooo easy to make a MMO today and why there are so many... even you with 12 years claimed experience, you don't think Des take the $40million and use it cheaply for higher upfront profits, instead over the year revenues? 

    Lastly, Server technology/net-code has gotten so cheap, that any premium game can use Open World design, yet greedy dev's keep going the 1999 route of zones & instancing..  thus themepark...   just cash cows using instancing to make millions off arcade players.

    I don't think your capable of breaking down pre-production, production and release of a MMORPG... and all that goes into it.

    1. Maybe you'll clarify how I "changed my ideology" later.

    2. A zoned themepark is still an open world game.  It's a more popular, thus more profitable, type of open world game than a virtual world (which is light on the gameplay, and thus light on players.)

    3. Instances are used for a similar reason: instanced gameplay is more fun, and since these devs earn money based on whether they're providing a fun experience to players they're interested in providing that type of gameplay in addition to the open world gameplay.  Some instance-only games exist (and are profitable for the same reasons,) but we're not talking about those because we're talking about MMORPGs (which implies players in a large shared space.)

    4. Devs are "greedy" insofar as they see like 10 major game companies going out of business these last 12 months and are interested in continuing to eat.  Thus, they try to make busines decisions which make them money.  One such decision is that when you're in the game business you sell fun games.  Without fun, your product has nothing and you starve.

    Lulz..^  u playing games?

    Open World means: zoneless...      without zones walls, a developer cannat make 2 cities right next to each other, then make a zone wall+ forest, so it takes 20 minutes to walk around..

    You are mistaken seamless, to mean zoneless.. (?) they is different alltogether. You claim to be part of the industry, yet you (again) illustrate you know very little of the basic types of games and their outlaying technology.

    Phelch, I don't know if Axe works in the industry or not, but I do know he is making a lot of sense. Actually, he often does. Take a break and then come back and re-read his posts. It seems that at this point you're just arguing to argue and that's not helping either you or the discussion. 

    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

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,762Member Uncommon

    Zones and instances were what we used to talk about, when we had more open worlds and a reason to have them. Today we have MMO's which lead you on a path about 200ft across with the occassional more open area. Yet we still have zones and instances.

    You do get the feeling MMO's could become games where we run along a path 20 feet across and we would still have zones and instances. :D

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,474Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Originally posted by Axehilt
     

    Open World means: zoneless...      without zones walls, a developer cannat make 2 cities right next to each other, then make a zone wall+ forest, so it takes 20 minutes to walk around..

     

    You are mistaken seamless, to mean zoneless.. (?) they is different alltogether. You claim to be part of the industry, yet you (again) illustrate you know very little of the basic types of games and their outlaying technology.

    Ok, lets get one thing straight: Zoning is the industry standard technique to handle players and loading assets. Pretty much all MMOs use them regardless of being entirely open world or not. World of Warcraft is zoned. Vanguard is zoned. Eve Online is zoned.

    People use the term "seamless" when they refer to the fact that you can move through these zones "seamlessly" i.e. without a loading screen.

    I think Quizzical would be happy to explain the technology further, or maybe you should look up some of the threads where he has explained how and why the stuff works the way it works.

    Point is, you're wrong or you're intentionally disruptive.

     this is correct.

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

    Zones and instances were what we used to talk about, when we had more open worlds and a reason to have them. Today we have MMO's which lead you on a path about 200ft across with the occassional more open area. Yet we still have zones and instances.

    You do get the feeling MMO's could become games where we run along a path 20 feet across and we would still have zones and instances. :D

    Yeh. Because there is less and less reason to have a virtual world. Look at highly acclaimed games like PoE .. it is like a public zone, and instanced gameplay.

    While it may not be a MMO by your definition, the "proper" MMOs are competing with games like that.

  • H0urg1assH0urg1ass Austin, TXPosts: 510Member Uncommon

    I basically want an open world such as Skryim that's about ten times as big, and I can play it with my friends.  

    -Crafting based.

    -Single Shard.

    -Minimal Zoning.  

    -Extremely minimal instancing.  

    -Full looting.  

    -Full PVP.  

    -Stiff criminal system.

    -Player built cities.

    -No levels.

    -Deep skill system with hundreds of skills.

    -Skills can only be raised by using them, and degrade if unused.  They won't degrade to zero, but they will deteriorate with no use.

    -Subtle magic system based on enchanting, buffing/debuffing, illusion, healing.... but no direct damage such as slinging fireballs at each other.

     

    I could go on for a long time.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    Isn't that almost exactly Darkfall? except the criminal system.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • PhelcherPhelcher Boston, MAPosts: 1,053Member
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Originally posted by Axehilt
     

    Open World means: zoneless...      without zones walls, a developer cannat make 2 cities right next to each other, then make a zone wall+ forest, so it takes 20 minutes to walk around..

     

    You are mistaken seamless, to mean zoneless.. (?) they is different alltogether. You claim to be part of the industry, yet you (again) illustrate you know very little of the basic types of games and their outlaying technology.

    Ok, lets get one thing straight: Zoning is the industry standard technique to handle players and loading assets. Pretty much all MMOs use them regardless of being entirely open world or not. World of Warcraft is zoned. Vanguard is zoned. Eve Online is zoned.

    People use the term "seamless" when they refer to the fact that you can move through these zones "seamlessly" i.e. without a loading screen.

    I think Quizzical would be happy to explain the technology further, or maybe you should look up some of the threads where he has explained how and why the stuff works the way it works.

    Point is, you're wrong or you're intentionally disruptive.

     

    I've been reading quizzical's posts for years.  But you are incoorect in your assumptions.

     

    Zoning use to be the only way in which you could load assests, now they can be streamed on-the-fly..    The ideal of hitting a zone and loading all those assets before you can continue is a very old server technology. That form of server is so cheap, that me and you can make a WoW clone and do exactly that... very easily.

    Zone games (ie: themeparks) are technically easy to make...

     

     

    WoW is zoned...

    It has fake zones walls and a peicemeal Continents.  Vanguard is seamless open world...  though it has "chunks" which are used to load/stream in assets as the players moves about their gameworld. But there are no zones in the game...   If you see a mountain, you can travel, or fly to it. No zones walls. World of Warcraft is all zones, with zones walls.

    There is a clear line drawn and one that makes a gameworld super expensive, & thus costing your customers more.

     

     

    understand, Seamless has a dual meaning...     no zone walls..   & (or) the crossing of zones is seamless without the player's knowledge. 

    For instance, even though DOAC had zones, transfering between them was seamless...  

     

    "No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


    -Nariusseldon

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Originally posted by Axehilt
     

    Open World means: zoneless...      without zones walls, a developer cannat make 2 cities right next to each other, then make a zone wall+ forest, so it takes 20 minutes to walk around..

     

    You are mistaken seamless, to mean zoneless.. (?) they is different alltogether. You claim to be part of the industry, yet you (again) illustrate you know very little of the basic types of games and their outlaying technology.

    Ok, lets get one thing straight: Zoning is the industry standard technique to handle players and loading assets. Pretty much all MMOs use them regardless of being entirely open world or not. World of Warcraft is zoned. Vanguard is zoned. Eve Online is zoned.

    People use the term "seamless" when they refer to the fact that you can move through these zones "seamlessly" i.e. without a loading screen.

    I think Quizzical would be happy to explain the technology further, or maybe you should look up some of the threads where he has explained how and why the stuff works the way it works.

    Point is, you're wrong or you're intentionally disruptive.

     

    I've been reading quizzical's posts for years.  But you are incoorect in your assumptions.

     

    Zoning use to be the only way in which you could load assests, now they can be streamed on-the-fly..    The ideal of hitting a zone and loading all those assets before you can continue is a very old server technology. That form of server is so cheap, that me and you can make a WoW clone and do exactly that... very easily.

    Zone games (ie: themeparks) are technically easy to make...

     

     

    WoW is zoned...

    It has fake zones walls and a peicemeal Continents.  Vanguard is seamless open world...  though it has "chunks" which are used to load/stream in assets as the players moves about their gameworld. But there are no zones in the game...   If you see a mountain, you can travel, or fly to it. No zones walls. World of Warcraft is all zones, with zones walls.

    There is a clear line drawn and one that makes a gameworld super expensive, & thus costing your customers more.

     

     

    understand, Seamless has a dual meaning...     no zone walls..   & (or) the crossing of zones is seamless without the player's knowledge. 

    For instance, even though DOAC had zones, transfering between them was seamless...  

     

    Vangaurd is not seamless.  It has zone walls, you are right they are called chunk lines but they do the same thing.  They are not physical barriers like a mountain but they do have a pause in game play to load up assets, just like a zone wall.

    Yes it is open world as in you can go anywhere but it is not seamless. 

    All they did was do away with a loading screen.  Crossing them, depending on the performance at the time, is a few seconds to several minutes.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • fantasyfreak112fantasyfreak112 Orange County, CAPosts: 499Member

    I agree with the OP but you can't use EQ2(at any time) as an example of a virtual world. One of the reasons that game is hated over EQ1 is because it was made into a game over a world. You click bells to teleport across the world, no racial starting cities, button spaming solo centered game. In the beginning you even picked up group xp debt from across the world if your party member died.

    There was nothing immersive about it at all, in fact, EQ2 launch was one of the first signs of MMO's going to crap.

  • Mors.MagneMors.Magne LondonPosts: 1,420Member

    I agree with the OP up to a point - Eve (and Darkfall) try to be worlds, which is fantastic.

     

    However, both examples are flawed worlds because everything in them is combat focused, in some way or another.

     

    There should be more to a world than combat. 

     

    SWG when it was released may have come close (I believe there were activities that had nothing to do with combat), but unfortunately I never had the pleasure of playing it.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by fantasyfreak112

     

    There was nothing immersive about it at all, in fact, EQ2 launch was one of the first signs of MMO's going to crap.

    Crap for you. Great for many.

    It is the first sign that finally devs realize that they are selling entertainment software, not worlds.

  • RefMinorRefMinor MyTownPosts: 3,452Member
    Originally posted by Mors.Magne

    I agree with the OP up to a point - Eve (and Darkfall) try to be worlds, which is fantastic.

     

    However, both examples are flawed worlds because everything in them is combat focused, in some way or another.

     

    There should be more to a world than combat. 

     

    SWG when it was released may have come close, but unfortunately I never had the pleasure of playing it.

    For SWG, think EvE where someone in game makes and designs the clothes for your avatar and someone builds captains quarters. The rest was combat centered.

    Without combat being central you lose the game aspect, in which case you are playing an economic or social sim like entropia/second life or ATITD.

  • bopice12bopice12 winon, MNPosts: 20Member
    Originally posted by koboldfodder

    If they re-released original Everquest (and all it's expansions) with a massive updated graphics engine it would be (yet again) a smash hit.

     

    There is a reason for that.

    I agree.   eq + kunark , velious.    

     

    EQ classic is the most fun addictive mmo by far.    I still play it . on eq mac.

     

    reasons...  no questing to level..................................................... no level reqs on items.  ............  challenge....... risk...... shit gets scary.... etc etc....  traveling mattered........... factions that mattered........ i could go on and on.  Loot that mattered.....  rare named with rare drops . ..........OPEN dungeons........ etc etc.  everyone wasn't the same.....

    eqoa is the 2nd best mmo.     <  isle of dread zone.... best zone ever in a mmo.

    wow 3rd. < used to feel more like a world.  was something new. after soe changed eq1 into a Entirely different game in 2002. i complained about the quest grind of wow . 2 weeks after launch though.  first 50 on my server<<

    gw2 4th.  very fun combat.  more like a action game.  

     

     

    come to eq mac or p1999 if you want to play in the only true mmorpg left.   14 years of mmo'ing .   games are all about money now.   eq 1999 was made for the love of bringing DD to and onine world. not mainly for money.  They slept under their desks for months when they weremaking it..!!!!

     

  • ArclanArclan Chicago, ILPosts: 1,494Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by fantasyfreak112
    ...There was nothing immersive about (EQ2) at all, in fact, EQ2 launch was one of the first signs of MMO's going to crap.

    Same here. I finally tried EQ2 a few years ago. Facade game world; hated the voice acting, and felt no challenge whatsoever before I heard my first few dings. Uninstalled and never went back.



    Originally posted by bopice12
    ...come to eq mac or p1999 if you want to play in the only true mmorpg left.
    EpicEmu launched this month and solved problems plaguing p1999 for years.


    Originally posted by bopice12
    ...p1999. They slept under their desks for months when they were making it..!!!!
    And their personalities show it; which is the second reason I stopped playing on that server. First reason being everything at high level is permacamped by alts. Powerleveling is a real problem too.

    Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
    In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by bopice12
    Originally posted by koboldfodder

    If they re-released original Everquest (and all it's expansions) with a massive updated graphics engine it would be (yet again) a smash hit.

     

    There is a reason for that.

    I agree.   eq + kunark , velious.    

     

    EQ classic is the most fun addictive mmo by far.    I still play it . on eq mac.

     

    reasons...  no questing to level..................................................... no level reqs on items.  ............  challenge....... risk...... shit gets scary.... etc etc....  traveling mattered........... factions that mattered........ i could go on and on.  Loot that mattered.....  rare named with rare drops . ..........OPEN dungeons........ etc etc.  everyone wasn't the same.....

    eqoa is the 2nd best mmo.     <  isle of dread zone.... best zone ever in a mmo.

    wow 3rd. < used to feel more like a world.  was something new. after soe changed eq1 into a Entirely different game in 2002. i complained about the quest grind of wow . 2 weeks after launch though.  first 50 on my server<<

    gw2 4th.  very fun combat.  more like a action game.  

     

     

    come to eq mac or p1999 if you want to play in the only true mmorpg left.   14 years of mmo'ing .   games are all about money now.   eq 1999 was made for the love of bringing DD to and onine world. not mainly for money.  They slept under their desks for months when they weremaking it..!!!!

     

    "true" MMORPG? Why would i care if it is not a fun game to me?

  • fantasyfreak112fantasyfreak112 Orange County, CAPosts: 499Member

    Crap for you. Great for many.

    It is the first sign that finally devs realize that they are selling entertainment software, not worlds.

    Label it however you want, the net result is the same. Creating games over virtual worlds.

145791014
This discussion has been closed.