I think clearly some degrees of 'emotional connection' are less healthy than others.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I guess I have found it to be somewhat different in my MMO career. Im here still in the gaming world and Im near 40 now. I started with console games and moved my way over to Ultima Online. Since Ultima, I have only tried to replicate that experience in every other game. I have experienced a few great experiences (mostly social with Guilds) and for the most part, I become bored or tired of the game. I guess the closest relation would be drugs. You have that first high and always try to seek out that same high with each new experience, but it is just never the same.
I have actually started playing Ultima Forever to bring back that love and I can tell you Im having a blast again. It isnt the same without all the friends I made in UO, but its still wicked fun compared to anything out there.
I guess I fell in love with UO and until theres a game that captures that much inside of one game, I will feel the same. Rare Hunting, Taming Dragons, Choas/Order, Factions, Guild Warfare, Stealing, PvP, PKing, housing and decorations, etc. It was just a friggin wicked time and no game has compared ever since. SWG was my second favorite.. and after that it's all been garbage WoW like games and not a virtual world. I dont know, I guess I enjoyed the virtual worlds.
If the games have to die, because "that's life," why not enjoy more of life instead of wasting it in a game?
Game cancelation is the #1 reason why I don't play much anymore. Why throw so much time and money into something that'll just go *poof* whenever a producer feels like it?
It's like saying: "Why eat this delicious cake, when it will be gone after you've eaten it?". Living with thinking of the future is a bad habit, because we should enjoy what we do for the moment! I am the opposite, because I want to enjoy some good mmorpgs before they are gone, like Everquest 2, LOTRO, Vanguard and so on!
I can never see the bad thing with "wasting time in a game", because it is something we enjoy doing. Others like to paint, taking a beer at a bar, watching a movie, reading a book and so forth. Those are things that we enjoy with our sences, so why is "A" better than "B"? Because someone told you that? As long as it do not turn into a bad habit or ruin your life in a way, I can't see this problem....
It's one thing to enjoy a cake. It's another thing to start enjoying a cake, until the baker comes to take it away before you're done.
I agree with practically everything that Beatnik59 has said in this thread.
There is not enough time to enjoy everything, and even cakes or foods/drinks I like even stop being made, and no doubt there is loads of other stuff that I did not try that I would have liked more, but went out of production before getting the chance.
With games there are way more selection. The shutting down of MMOs, does not force you try other MMOs, but makes single player games more attractive again.
I was gutted with the Matrix, Auto Assault, Tabula Rasa, RF Online because I bought them and they shut down before I had a chance to play them, although got a bit more play time in with the Matrix
I was gutted with SWG and poured tonnes of time and money into it.
I was gutted with CoH as invested in a 6 month sub following SOE shutting out EU players from playing DC Universe with sub par company Prosieben, and then CoH shuts down only 2 weeks after buying the 6 month sub, and had no time to get anything serious going. I played bits before 2012 but most of my time was spent on SWG
Also in 2012 EQOA and Phantasy Star Universe got shut down too, making 4 MMOs shut down within 1 year.
The ironic thing is that MMOs usually cost more money than single player games with multiplayer modes, but yet the latter seem to stay active longer, unless they are EA games.
The latest Sim City would have sold more if it was single player / offline friendly
That is basically why I won't play a NCSoft game. You never know when they are going to pull the plug.
The odd thing is that even today, the 3 oldest commercially available MMO's(UO, EQ and AC1) are still there. They will eventually go off line someday. Even Wow will someday close their servers. I just move on these days, there are so many games out there now and you only have so much casual time to play them. I keep hoping one of the new games will actually entertain me like these games or SWG did . Of the newer games only Wow, Eve, Lotro and SWTOR have found any longevity of play and I really have not played two of them lately.
I try most of the new games, but rarely find one that lasts more than a couple months. These new games don't have the staying power of the older ones.
The closing of City Of Heroes hit me and it's community of players very hard. A vast gaming culture as a source of entertainment, creativity and camaraderie pinched out of existence in a heartbeat.
Originally posted by Burntvet It is one thing for a game to close down. It is another thing when a game closes down AND there is nothing even similar to take its place. I don't think many care when a "clone" or F2P grinder gets the axe, because there are plenty to choose from with similar game play. But for something like original SWG or Auto Assault (to a lesser extent), there was nothing even close for players to migrate to. So, when an original game goes under, yeah, people feel it more.
People need to be open to the possibility that they may enjoy another game. It doesn't have to be the very same thing. They can enjoy a different game for different reasons if they stop focusing on one specific idea. In short, they need to get over it and move on.
Most people do, and try other games and have tried other games. But when everything "new" is just a recycled version of something else with a twist, that doesn't leave much. And thus being miss the game they actually did like.
I don't reminisce about good times. Thinking about good times only makes me angry because of how things suck now. Life just gets shittier every year.
Every once in a while, something will remind me of some aspect or trigger a memory of city of heroes, and I don't know how to describe the emotion. Depressive? Sad? It's more complex than that. Melancholy maybe. Just not good. Almost makes me wish that it was like in Eternal Sunshine of the spotless mind, and I could erase my memory of a game so that I'd have one less source of sad thoughts.
After SWG I learned my lesson to never get to comfortable in a game or type of experience. Not that it was exceptionally hard to move on, I just simply loaded up another game. Most of the people I met are still easy to find that's all that matters.
Like others have said it's just a game, something easily replaceable, as long as you can broaden your tastes a bit.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I think many of us have that emotional connection, I have met some great people in MMO’s who are friends in real life. We don’t meet all the time as we live so far apart, but there are a few meet ups each year.
The only silver lining about a MMO dying is that the technology that powers MMO’s must move on. You can do some visual upgrades that make a real difference; I remember one from Lotro a couple of years back. But they start to look outdated and getting new players in becomes very difficult.
But that’s not a good thing, it is a sad reality.
I would also like to point out the lie to this: “dying MMOs allow us to have beautiful moments with games, which we can then reminisce on fondly.”
Maybe this used to happen, but most players leave after two months these days. I really doubt they can remember any “beautiful moments”, even only couple of years later.
I understand the emotional Connection well. Back when the game was worth playing i played Face of Mankind religiously, however the community slowly destroyed the game. Those who kept things going left, and over eager CoD Players replaced them turning the game into a Deathmatch Sim with bad combat. If FoM returned to its roots Pre Mile Stone 1 or even just after. i would gladly give up all connections to the games i have (including TSW for those who know me on this site) and charge back to it. Fully willing to pay a sub just for access itself. The game left that strong a impression on me in its early days.
Because i can. I'm Hopeful For Every Game, Until the Fan Boys Attack My Games. Then the Knives Come Out. Logic every gamers worst enemy.
Originally posted by cration Dude. Its just a game.
True but players after many years of playing and putting effort into it can miss the game it was long term routine. No it is not like death of friend or pet but there is no reason person can be sad when company announces the shut down and miss it month after or even years later. Thats great thing about console game or other non-online games can always go back. When your favorite mmo is shut down it's gone forever. You have to understand how long term routine from object that makes you feel good effects the body to really understand. Will i miss game i played month no but mmo i play for several years i grown to love yeah i'm gonna miss it.
That is basically why I won't play a NCSoft game. You never know when they are going to pull the plug.
The odd thing is that even today, the 3 oldest commercially available MMO's(UO, EQ and AC1) are still there. They will eventually go off line someday. Even Wow will someday close their servers. I just move on these days, there are so many games out there now and you only have so much casual time to play them. I keep hoping one of the new games will actually entertain me like these games or SWG did . Of the newer games only Wow, Eve, Lotro and SWTOR have found any longevity of play and I really have not played two of them lately.
I try most of the new games, but rarely find one that lasts more than a couple months. These new games don't have the staying power of the older ones.
There is nothing odd about those three games still being around and highlight the article nicely. They are still around because of the emotional attachment players have to those original MMO's they cannot give it up, coupled with the fact they are good games. But It is this emotional attachment that make players compare every new game to their first love and it spoils their enjoyment of modern MMO's. Its the source of many arguments on MMORPG.com as a result of this comparison. In the real world if you compared every girlfriend/boyfriend to your first love and as a result you fail to have a new deep relationship it'd be considered irrational behavior but in game circles it is considered OK and normal by some.
The best example of this is SWG vets, ever since I've played MMO's and been around MMO boards I've seen these players pine, whine and reminisce constantly like it was "during the war..." they seem to find it hard to grieve for a lost one and it clouds their judgment on modern games. You need to either separate your emotions from a game or learn that nothing lasts forever and grieve the death of a beloved game or you'll be lost in world of nostalgia and cynicism which plagues modern gamers (ones online that is) and sets of many a circular debate about the quality of modern games and not just MMO's.
Through destruction comes creation.
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.
Originally posted by cration Dude. Its just a game.
Vile Heretic!! ^^
Yes, it is "just a game". But its a matter of personal connection to many people. Given the insanity of much of the reality that many of us deal with on a daily basis, escape into a world that has rules that make sense, and allows us to deal with less complex problems is refreshing.
I started these games in UO. I have thousands upon thousands of screen shots from various games I've played over the years. Many of them remind me of people, and places, now gone. Many good times, that will remain in my memory, for a long, long time.
The problem with "accepting MMO death" is that it is portrayed by the MMO industry and its media patsys like it is an inevitable reality of nature, like biological death.
But it's not. Every MMO that has ever been closed was done so as an act of will, not of necessity. You have plenty of online services, many of them free or near free, that easily cover their operating expenses because the technology to keep them afloat has become cheaper over time, not more expensive.
Technology is at the point that, if a publisher wants to keep a title alive, they could. You can't tell me that people who are as smart as these publishers claim to be can't find some way, either through licensing or maintenance, to keep these worlds alive. It has never been easier to do so, and we have examples of this all around internet gaming.
People make the choice to kill MMOs. It is not an act of nature. Nobody forced NCSoft to close down five MMOs any more than Funcom was forced to keep Anarchy Online open. It all boils down to whether it's important for the publisher to keep the games running; it all boils down to whether the publishers really care about the fans who invest good time and money into this hobby.
When you place time and money into something, it's only natural to get emotionally invested. And with greater emotional investment, you tend to put in more time and money. If this wasn't rational, natural, or exploitable, we wouldn't have an industry at all, since every MMO exploits this facet of human beings.
So when the games get canceled (and I want to stress canceled, because it was an active choice, unlike death, which is not a choice), it is only natural for people who have invested big time and big money into them to be upset. Indeed, I would be surprised if someone wasn't upset. Because it's one thing to accept a loss that was inevitable. It's another thing to accept a loss because the owner gets bored with you.
What is the best way for we, as MMO gamers, to handle the "lack of persistence" of persistent worlds? I would caution against vesting the titles with a "living" quality, to believe that "MMOs die," and "MMO death is part of a natural cycle of life and death." Vesting these games with that sort of poetic meaning only makes the games seem like something they aren't. These are not living things, they are works of human engineering that don't have to die; they are canceled because someone wants to take them away from you.
I would rather us see these games for what they are: things that are engineered to separate you from your money, not unlike a casino. The imagery and mechanisms they use to accomplish that end are powerful, and they prey on the people with low impulse control, addictive personalities, and a kind of futurist naiivete about the promise of this genre as a "virtual community" or a "utopian experiment."
When we feel hurt and anger when these things close, it is a sign that the producers and publishers accomplished their mission: they used us well, exploited us to the fullest, and are now laughing their way to the bank. But the best way to handle these feelings is not to "get over it" as if it never happened. That's like saying "thank you sir, may I have another?" after you get whacked upside the head.
The best way to handle it is not to "get over it," but to learn from it and not get taken for a ride next time, to get good and angry--real angry--at the way these producers think of you. Only then can we learn. Only then can this industry change.
/endRant
__________________________ "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
GameByNightHardware and Technology EditorMMORPG.COM Staff, MemberRarePosts: 793
Originally posted by Thenextbigthing Why have you used a screen shot from lotro for an article about mmo death? This site really is the pits in slipshod writing and reporting.
Because it headed a section on emotional connection. Perhaps it's a game Victor enjoyed and signifies his point.
Originally posted by Livnthedream I find this article is bad for a couple of reasons. By op's logic every dm ever should be forced to keep their campaign going because a player does not want it to end. How unreasonable is that? Also, what about the changes wrought in mmo's? I played WoW at release and no longer do partially because I no longer see the character I originally made in the game. Games and people change, things die, this is called life. Whether you want to get angry or deal with it is pointless, as it is the way it is and there is simply no changing it.
The flaw in this logic is that a DM is a part of a group of (ostensibly) friends who collaborate, so the campaign continues or does not by a sort of mutual consent. An MMO continues or does not by brutal corporate dictates, more often than not. At the recent PAXEast, you had a panel of six heavies in the game and MMO field say unanimously that there is no reason for an MMO to ever end.
Worse is the trend toward "always on" DRM, or whatever EA is calling it this week. I will not buy certain games, now, because I will suddenly be unable to play a single-player game while my ISP is working through its monthly midday network failure.
I would definetly play an old mmo re-mastered to todays technology over a new mmo. Game manufactures say the old pay model is no longer accepted....that's just an excuse to make cheap free to play games. Real mmorpg's are hard work and a bigger risk.
The problem with "accepting MMO death" is that it is portrayed by the MMO industry and its media patsys like it is an inevitable reality of nature, like biological death.
But it's not. Every MMO that has ever been closed was done so as an act of will, not of necessity. You have plenty of online services, many of them free or near free, that easily cover their operating expenses because the technology to keep them afloat has become cheaper over time, not more expensive.
Technology is at the point that, if a publisher wants to keep a title alive, they could. You can't tell me that people who are as smart as these publishers claim to be can't find some way, either through licensing or maintenance, to keep these worlds alive. It has never been easier to do so, and we have examples of this all around internet gaming.
People make the choice to kill MMOs. It is not an act of nature. Nobody forced NCSoft to close down five MMOs any more than Funcom was forced to keep Anarchy Online open. It all boils down to whether it's important for the publisher to keep the games running; it all boils down to whether the publishers really care about the fans who invest good time and money into this hobby.
When you place time and money into something, it's only natural to get emotionally invested. And with greater emotional investment, you tend to put in more time and money. If this wasn't rational, natural, or exploitable, we wouldn't have an industry at all, since every MMO exploits this facet of human beings.
So when the games get canceled (and I want to stress canceled, because it was an active choice, unlike death, which is not a choice), it is only natural for people who have invested big time and big money into them to be upset. Indeed, I would be surprised if someone wasn't upset. Because it's one thing to accept a loss that was inevitable. It's another thing to accept a loss because the owner gets bored with you.
What is the best way for we, as MMO gamers, to handle the "lack of persistence" of persistent worlds? I would caution against vesting the titles with a "living" quality, to believe that "MMOs die," and "MMO death is part of a natural cycle of life and death." Vesting these games with that sort of poetic meaning only makes the games seem like something they aren't. These are not living things, they are works of human engineering that don't have to die; they are canceled because someone wants to take them away from you.
I would rather us see these games for what they are: things that are engineered to separate you from your money, not unlike a casino. The imagery and mechanisms they use to accomplish that end are powerful, and they prey on the people with low impulse control, addictive personalities, and a kind of futurist naiivete about the promise of this genre as a "virtual community" or a "utopian experiment."
When we feel hurt and anger when these things close, it is a sign that the producers and publishers accomplished their mission: they used us well, exploited us to the fullest, and are now laughing their way to the bank. But the best way to handle these feelings is not to "get over it" as if it never happened. That's like saying "thank you sir, may I have another?" after you get whacked upside the head.
The best way to handle it is not to "get over it," but to learn from it and not get taken for a ride next time, to get good and angry--real angry--at the way these producers think of you. Only then can we learn. Only then can this industry change.
/endRant
No different than your favorite TV show that just does not have the viewership to continue to produce new episodes. MMO's, no matter how much you want to whine and complain to the contrary, are extremely expensive when it comes to upkeep. Even discounting developing new content, support and server upkeep costs are not insignificant. When it comes to developing new content even a small team of 10 will run you upwards of $100,000 per month. Keeping a title on perpetual life support is a losing proposition, as your playerbase WILL eventually dwindle until you are either forced to run the game at a loss, or pull the plug anyway.
Originally posted by dwturducken
The flaw in this logic is that a DM is a part of a group of (ostensibly) friends who collaborate, so the campaign continues or does not by a sort of mutual consent.
False. I have had 2 campaigns essentially cancelled on me, both for different reasons. One of them we got a last hurrah, but the conclusion was far from satisfactory.
An MMO continues or does not by brutal corporate dictates, more often than not. At the recent PAXEast, you had a panel of six heavies in the game and MMO field say unanimously that there is no reason for an MMO to ever end.
Yeah, and that came off almost entirely as pr speak. I watched the panel, and was actually rather disappointed because instead of an honest look, I got 6 people in a veritable pissing contest trying to please the fans at all costs.
Worse is the trend toward "always on" DRM, or whatever EA is calling it this week. I will not buy certain games, now, because I will suddenly be unable to play a single-player game while my ISP is working through its monthly midday network failure.
I for one would rather pay that as a small price versus some of the other alternatives that have been proposed. People look at EA pulling $1b revenue quarters and then bitch about EA being greedy without actually looking at how much of that is profit. Have you looked at just how much it costs to make a game? Even if 10% of that is actual profit, that is rather on the low side in comparison to many other markets when it comes to roi. As such its getting harder for some of these companies to come up with the investment capital required. This is why we see so many studios crumbling, and more and more companies turning to Kickstarter, even though it realistically provides fractions of the amount needed to create AAA titles.
No different than your favorite TV show that just does not have the viewership to continue to produce new episodes. MMO's, no matter how much you want to whine and complain to the contrary, are extremely expensive when it comes to upkeep. Even discounting developing new content, support and server upkeep costs are not insignificant. When it comes to developing new content even a small team of 10 will run you upwards of $100,000 per month. Keeping a title on perpetual life support is a losing proposition, as your playerbase WILL eventually dwindle until you are either forced to run the game at a loss, or pull the plug anyway.
Way different than a favorite TV show. A TV show is far, far more expensive to produce. TV shows don't disappear when the producer gets bored of them. They go into syndication. They are available on DVD. Nor are they kept afloat by the audience's cash; an audience that invests money in the things they want to enjoy. They are paid for through sponsorship money.
Now we can wax hypothetical about a situation where the costs to keep server access outweigh the revenue coming in. But, to my knowledge, there has never been an MMO that couldn't pay for server access with their given playerbase. We've got so many examples of small playerbase MMOs that are still running, you've got to believe that it's not that hard. After all, if the game is already mature, they already have a lot of content. It's because they don't want to pay for server access, because they don't want to make the games available, that the games close down.
Take any one of the games that closed down, you can maintain it and make a bit of money by offering a small service fee, or licensing. But they don't want to do that, because it isn't what they want, which is not always the same as what we want. They don't want us satisfied with the things we enjoy. They want us clamoring for the new all the time, because they can make more money that way.
This MMO business likes the power to determine what we should enjoy, when we should enjoy it, and why we should enjoy it. And when they are done with us, they have no compunction with throwing us out with the garbage, like the old used up junkies we are.
In the end, I really don't think it is a matter of ability to keep a game alive. It's more a matter of desire; they have to want to keep the games going. They have to be interested in creating a plan to keep the games going. Right now, they have no interest in this. So, since I don't want to throw good money after bad on producer promises, I'm not too interested in what they are "selling."
__________________________ "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
Way different than a favorite TV show. A TV show is far, far more expensive to produce. TV shows don't disappear when the producer gets bored of them. They go into syndication. They are available on DVD. Nor are they kept afloat by the audience's cash; an audience that invests money in the things they want to enjoy. They are paid for through sponsorship money.[/quote]
Not quite. Games generally have a much higher upfront cost, with a lower operating cost. This is a lot of the reason why even if a game is not doing well it will be held onto if the profit margin is there just to get that roi. Generally though tv/movie media is many times easier to make money on. For high profile shows for example its not unknown to sell 30 sec spots for upwards of $250k. Games just do not see those sorts of revenue numbers. That is also a large part of the reason why syndication rarely happens unless a significant number of episodes have been achieved, its just not worth it.
Now we can wax hypothetical about a situation where the costs to keep server access outweigh the revenue coming in. But, to my knowledge, there has never been an MMO that couldn't pay for server access with their given playerbase. We've got so many examples of small playerbase MMOs that are still running, you've got to believe that it's not that hard. After all, if the game is already mature, they already have a lot of content. It's because they don't want to pay for server access, because they don't want to make the games available, that the games close down.
Not at all. Especially when you look at larger publishers. You keep as many games bundled together out of one center as possible, its many times cheaper to run it that way. While a game may be providing enough to cover its own operating costs, it must be balanced across what is needed by the company as a whole. ie Why spend $100k on new servers when you can retask them for another game that will make more money. But thats just the money side. Series get old and tired. Look at The Simpsons. Can you honestly say that it should still be running? How bout Supernatural? It most certainly should have ended with season 5. Running a series into the ground is generally seen as a rather large negative by the community itself. Though they generally complain about the producer/writer/creater "ruining" it instead of realizing that they are in fact there own worst enemy.
Take any one of the games that closed down, you can maintain it and make a bit of money by offering a small service fee, or licensing. But they don't want to do that, because it isn't what they want, which is not always the same as what we want. They don't want us satisfied with the things we enjoy. They want us clamoring for the new all the time, because they can make more money that way.
This MMO business likes the power to determine what we should enjoy, when we should enjoy it, and why we should enjoy it. And when they are done with us, they have no compunction with throwing us out with the garbage, like the old used up junkies we are.
You need to watch less Alex Jones. Seriously. They are not out to piss in your Cheerios or to see just what they can concoct today to ruin the day of Joe Schmoe. You seemingly missing that the number one asked for thing when it comes to any mmo is "new/more content" means you must be blind and deaf. Not only is more content expensive, but not all creators are up to the task. Some authors for example only have one book in them. Continuing to create mediocre work just because a fanbase begs them to is folly. I really wish more creators actually worked similar to how the BBC does tv. They do a fairly large number of mini series that are absolutely brilliant. This idea that "more is better" is a fallacy that America in general needs to get over. Look at what Starz did with Torchwood and Miracle Day as another example. They went through the outline and added 4 episodes that did not need to be there. What should have been a great little mini series they turned into a full season that just dragged on forever, and in turn spoiled the flow something horrible.
They are not out to piss in your Cheerios or to see just what they can concoct today to ruin the day of Joe Schmoe.
They may not have been out to piss in my Cheerios, but there is an awfully pissy taste in my Cheerios, and Joe Schmoe's Cheerios, nevertheless.
Now if we open up a box of Cheerios and it tastes like piss, a good way to prevent eating piss in the future is to stop buying Cheerios. That's what a reasonable person would do.
But, apparently, in MMO land, if we eat pissy Cheerios, we ought to "get over it," "embrace the new" and go buy another box of Cheerios expecting things will be different this time around.
There will be some that say that the producer had to relieve himself in our Cheerios so he could give us a newer and better Cheerios that we should enjoy instead.
There will be others that say that the piss in our Cheerios was all in our minds; that somehow we 'wanted' pissy Cheerios, and we ought to have known that the Cheerios we were buying were piss flavored.
There are others who would say that the Cheerios tasted fine; that we just imagined the Cheerios tasted like piss, because the vast majority of people who ate the same Cheerios claim there was no piss.
But any way you slice it, when the Cheerios they serve us taste bad, like it does when someone closes down something we like and pay good money into, the people who are angry ought not to expect things will be better next time. They ought to learn and not make the same mistake that made them so miserable. They ought to refrain from getting into something until they have better assurances. Isn't that fair?
__________________________ "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
Originally posted by Beatnik59 But, apparently, in MMO land, if we eat pissy Cheerios, we ought to "get over it," "embrace the new" and go buy another box of Cheerios expecting things will be different this time around.
"Why don't corporations take us and our 'emotional investment' more seriously?" questions the op.
The answer provided, outlined, in the first couple of pages of responses.
Comments
I think clearly some degrees of 'emotional connection' are less healthy than others.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I guess I have found it to be somewhat different in my MMO career. Im here still in the gaming world and Im near 40 now. I started with console games and moved my way over to Ultima Online. Since Ultima, I have only tried to replicate that experience in every other game. I have experienced a few great experiences (mostly social with Guilds) and for the most part, I become bored or tired of the game. I guess the closest relation would be drugs. You have that first high and always try to seek out that same high with each new experience, but it is just never the same.
I have actually started playing Ultima Forever to bring back that love and I can tell you Im having a blast again. It isnt the same without all the friends I made in UO, but its still wicked fun compared to anything out there.
I guess I fell in love with UO and until theres a game that captures that much inside of one game, I will feel the same. Rare Hunting, Taming Dragons, Choas/Order, Factions, Guild Warfare, Stealing, PvP, PKing, housing and decorations, etc. It was just a friggin wicked time and no game has compared ever since. SWG was my second favorite.. and after that it's all been garbage WoW like games and not a virtual world. I dont know, I guess I enjoyed the virtual worlds.
I agree with practically everything that Beatnik59 has said in this thread.
There is not enough time to enjoy everything, and even cakes or foods/drinks I like even stop being made, and no doubt there is loads of other stuff that I did not try that I would have liked more, but went out of production before getting the chance.
With games there are way more selection. The shutting down of MMOs, does not force you try other MMOs, but makes single player games more attractive again.
I was gutted with the Matrix, Auto Assault, Tabula Rasa, RF Online because I bought them and they shut down before I had a chance to play them, although got a bit more play time in with the Matrix
I was gutted with SWG and poured tonnes of time and money into it.
I was gutted with CoH as invested in a 6 month sub following SOE shutting out EU players from playing DC Universe with sub par company Prosieben, and then CoH shuts down only 2 weeks after buying the 6 month sub, and had no time to get anything serious going. I played bits before 2012 but most of my time was spent on SWG
Also in 2012 EQOA and Phantasy Star Universe got shut down too, making 4 MMOs shut down within 1 year.
The ironic thing is that MMOs usually cost more money than single player games with multiplayer modes, but yet the latter seem to stay active longer, unless they are EA games.
The latest Sim City would have sold more if it was single player / offline friendly
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
That is basically why I won't play a NCSoft game. You never know when they are going to pull the plug.
The odd thing is that even today, the 3 oldest commercially available MMO's(UO, EQ and AC1) are still there. They will eventually go off line someday. Even Wow will someday close their servers. I just move on these days, there are so many games out there now and you only have so much casual time to play them. I keep hoping one of the new games will actually entertain me like these games or SWG did . Of the newer games only Wow, Eve, Lotro and SWTOR have found any longevity of play and I really have not played two of them lately.
I try most of the new games, but rarely find one that lasts more than a couple months. These new games don't have the staying power of the older ones.
People need to be open to the possibility that they may enjoy another game. It doesn't have to be the very same thing. They can enjoy a different game for different reasons if they stop focusing on one specific idea. In short, they need to get over it and move on.
Most people do, and try other games and have tried other games. But when everything "new" is just a recycled version of something else with a twist, that doesn't leave much. And thus being miss the game they actually did like.I don't reminisce about good times. Thinking about good times only makes me angry because of how things suck now. Life just gets shittier every year.
Every once in a while, something will remind me of some aspect or trigger a memory of city of heroes, and I don't know how to describe the emotion. Depressive? Sad? It's more complex than that. Melancholy maybe. Just not good. Almost makes me wish that it was like in Eternal Sunshine of the spotless mind, and I could erase my memory of a game so that I'd have one less source of sad thoughts.
After SWG I learned my lesson to never get to comfortable in a game or type of experience. Not that it was exceptionally hard to move on, I just simply loaded up another game. Most of the people I met are still easy to find that's all that matters.
Like others have said it's just a game, something easily replaceable, as long as you can broaden your tastes a bit.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I think many of us have that emotional connection, I have met some great people in MMO’s who are friends in real life. We don’t meet all the time as we live so far apart, but there are a few meet ups each year.
The only silver lining about a MMO dying is that the technology that powers MMO’s must move on. You can do some visual upgrades that make a real difference; I remember one from Lotro a couple of years back. But they start to look outdated and getting new players in becomes very difficult.
But that’s not a good thing, it is a sad reality.
I would also like to point out the lie to this: “dying MMOs allow us to have beautiful moments with games, which we can then reminisce on fondly.”
Maybe this used to happen, but most players leave after two months these days. I really doubt they can remember any “beautiful moments”, even only couple of years later.
Because i can.
I'm Hopeful For Every Game, Until the Fan Boys Attack My Games. Then the Knives Come Out.
Logic every gamers worst enemy.
True but players after many years of playing and putting effort into it can miss the game it was long term routine. No it is not like death of friend or pet but there is no reason person can be sad when company announces the shut down and miss it month after or even years later. Thats great thing about console game or other non-online games can always go back. When your favorite mmo is shut down it's gone forever. You have to understand how long term routine from object that makes you feel good effects the body to really understand. Will i miss game i played month no but mmo i play for several years i grown to love yeah i'm gonna miss it.
Op needs some bereavement counseling.
Other people, it seems, did not marry their mmos.
Its just a case of not wanting to climb out of their parents basement and shave their neckbeards like normal people :P
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
There is nothing odd about those three games still being around and highlight the article nicely. They are still around because of the emotional attachment players have to those original MMO's they cannot give it up, coupled with the fact they are good games. But It is this emotional attachment that make players compare every new game to their first love and it spoils their enjoyment of modern MMO's. Its the source of many arguments on MMORPG.com as a result of this comparison. In the real world if you compared every girlfriend/boyfriend to your first love and as a result you fail to have a new deep relationship it'd be considered irrational behavior but in game circles it is considered OK and normal by some.
The best example of this is SWG vets, ever since I've played MMO's and been around MMO boards I've seen these players pine, whine and reminisce constantly like it was "during the war..." they seem to find it hard to grieve for a lost one and it clouds their judgment on modern games. You need to either separate your emotions from a game or learn that nothing lasts forever and grieve the death of a beloved game or you'll be lost in world of nostalgia and cynicism which plagues modern gamers (ones online that is) and sets of many a circular debate about the quality of modern games and not just MMO's.
Through destruction comes creation.
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.
Vile Heretic!! ^^
Yes, it is "just a game". But its a matter of personal connection to many people. Given the insanity of much of the reality that many of us deal with on a daily basis, escape into a world that has rules that make sense, and allows us to deal with less complex problems is refreshing.
I started these games in UO. I have thousands upon thousands of screen shots from various games I've played over the years. Many of them remind me of people, and places, now gone. Many good times, that will remain in my memory, for a long, long time.
The problem with "accepting MMO death" is that it is portrayed by the MMO industry and its media patsys like it is an inevitable reality of nature, like biological death.
But it's not. Every MMO that has ever been closed was done so as an act of will, not of necessity. You have plenty of online services, many of them free or near free, that easily cover their operating expenses because the technology to keep them afloat has become cheaper over time, not more expensive.
Technology is at the point that, if a publisher wants to keep a title alive, they could. You can't tell me that people who are as smart as these publishers claim to be can't find some way, either through licensing or maintenance, to keep these worlds alive. It has never been easier to do so, and we have examples of this all around internet gaming.
People make the choice to kill MMOs. It is not an act of nature. Nobody forced NCSoft to close down five MMOs any more than Funcom was forced to keep Anarchy Online open. It all boils down to whether it's important for the publisher to keep the games running; it all boils down to whether the publishers really care about the fans who invest good time and money into this hobby.
When you place time and money into something, it's only natural to get emotionally invested. And with greater emotional investment, you tend to put in more time and money. If this wasn't rational, natural, or exploitable, we wouldn't have an industry at all, since every MMO exploits this facet of human beings.
So when the games get canceled (and I want to stress canceled, because it was an active choice, unlike death, which is not a choice), it is only natural for people who have invested big time and big money into them to be upset. Indeed, I would be surprised if someone wasn't upset. Because it's one thing to accept a loss that was inevitable. It's another thing to accept a loss because the owner gets bored with you.
What is the best way for we, as MMO gamers, to handle the "lack of persistence" of persistent worlds? I would caution against vesting the titles with a "living" quality, to believe that "MMOs die," and "MMO death is part of a natural cycle of life and death." Vesting these games with that sort of poetic meaning only makes the games seem like something they aren't. These are not living things, they are works of human engineering that don't have to die; they are canceled because someone wants to take them away from you.
I would rather us see these games for what they are: things that are engineered to separate you from your money, not unlike a casino. The imagery and mechanisms they use to accomplish that end are powerful, and they prey on the people with low impulse control, addictive personalities, and a kind of futurist naiivete about the promise of this genre as a "virtual community" or a "utopian experiment."
When we feel hurt and anger when these things close, it is a sign that the producers and publishers accomplished their mission: they used us well, exploited us to the fullest, and are now laughing their way to the bank. But the best way to handle these feelings is not to "get over it" as if it never happened. That's like saying "thank you sir, may I have another?" after you get whacked upside the head.
The best way to handle it is not to "get over it," but to learn from it and not get taken for a ride next time, to get good and angry--real angry--at the way these producers think of you. Only then can we learn. Only then can this industry change.
/endRant
__________________________
"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
Because it headed a section on emotional connection. Perhaps it's a game Victor enjoyed and signifies his point.
The flaw in this logic is that a DM is a part of a group of (ostensibly) friends who collaborate, so the campaign continues or does not by a sort of mutual consent. An MMO continues or does not by brutal corporate dictates, more often than not. At the recent PAXEast, you had a panel of six heavies in the game and MMO field say unanimously that there is no reason for an MMO to ever end.
Worse is the trend toward "always on" DRM, or whatever EA is calling it this week. I will not buy certain games, now, because I will suddenly be unable to play a single-player game while my ISP is working through its monthly midday network failure.
No different than your favorite TV show that just does not have the viewership to continue to produce new episodes. MMO's, no matter how much you want to whine and complain to the contrary, are extremely expensive when it comes to upkeep. Even discounting developing new content, support and server upkeep costs are not insignificant. When it comes to developing new content even a small team of 10 will run you upwards of $100,000 per month. Keeping a title on perpetual life support is a losing proposition, as your playerbase WILL eventually dwindle until you are either forced to run the game at a loss, or pull the plug anyway.
False. I have had 2 campaigns essentially cancelled on me, both for different reasons. One of them we got a last hurrah, but the conclusion was far from satisfactory.
Yeah, and that came off almost entirely as pr speak. I watched the panel, and was actually rather disappointed because instead of an honest look, I got 6 people in a veritable pissing contest trying to please the fans at all costs.
I for one would rather pay that as a small price versus some of the other alternatives that have been proposed. People look at EA pulling $1b revenue quarters and then bitch about EA being greedy without actually looking at how much of that is profit. Have you looked at just how much it costs to make a game? Even if 10% of that is actual profit, that is rather on the low side in comparison to many other markets when it comes to roi. As such its getting harder for some of these companies to come up with the investment capital required. This is why we see so many studios crumbling, and more and more companies turning to Kickstarter, even though it realistically provides fractions of the amount needed to create AAA titles.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
Way different than a favorite TV show. A TV show is far, far more expensive to produce. TV shows don't disappear when the producer gets bored of them. They go into syndication. They are available on DVD. Nor are they kept afloat by the audience's cash; an audience that invests money in the things they want to enjoy. They are paid for through sponsorship money.
Now we can wax hypothetical about a situation where the costs to keep server access outweigh the revenue coming in. But, to my knowledge, there has never been an MMO that couldn't pay for server access with their given playerbase. We've got so many examples of small playerbase MMOs that are still running, you've got to believe that it's not that hard. After all, if the game is already mature, they already have a lot of content. It's because they don't want to pay for server access, because they don't want to make the games available, that the games close down.
Take any one of the games that closed down, you can maintain it and make a bit of money by offering a small service fee, or licensing. But they don't want to do that, because it isn't what they want, which is not always the same as what we want. They don't want us satisfied with the things we enjoy. They want us clamoring for the new all the time, because they can make more money that way.
This MMO business likes the power to determine what we should enjoy, when we should enjoy it, and why we should enjoy it. And when they are done with us, they have no compunction with throwing us out with the garbage, like the old used up junkies we are.
In the end, I really don't think it is a matter of ability to keep a game alive. It's more a matter of desire; they have to want to keep the games going. They have to be interested in creating a plan to keep the games going. Right now, they have no interest in this. So, since I don't want to throw good money after bad on producer promises, I'm not too interested in what they are "selling."
__________________________
"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
Not quite. Games generally have a much higher upfront cost, with a lower operating cost. This is a lot of the reason why even if a game is not doing well it will be held onto if the profit margin is there just to get that roi. Generally though tv/movie media is many times easier to make money on. For high profile shows for example its not unknown to sell 30 sec spots for upwards of $250k. Games just do not see those sorts of revenue numbers. That is also a large part of the reason why syndication rarely happens unless a significant number of episodes have been achieved, its just not worth it.
Not at all. Especially when you look at larger publishers. You keep as many games bundled together out of one center as possible, its many times cheaper to run it that way. While a game may be providing enough to cover its own operating costs, it must be balanced across what is needed by the company as a whole. ie Why spend $100k on new servers when you can retask them for another game that will make more money. But thats just the money side. Series get old and tired. Look at The Simpsons. Can you honestly say that it should still be running? How bout Supernatural? It most certainly should have ended with season 5. Running a series into the ground is generally seen as a rather large negative by the community itself. Though they generally complain about the producer/writer/creater "ruining" it instead of realizing that they are in fact there own worst enemy.
You need to watch less Alex Jones. Seriously. They are not out to piss in your Cheerios or to see just what they can concoct today to ruin the day of Joe Schmoe. You seemingly missing that the number one asked for thing when it comes to any mmo is "new/more content" means you must be blind and deaf. Not only is more content expensive, but not all creators are up to the task. Some authors for example only have one book in them. Continuing to create mediocre work just because a fanbase begs them to is folly. I really wish more creators actually worked similar to how the BBC does tv. They do a fairly large number of mini series that are absolutely brilliant. This idea that "more is better" is a fallacy that America in general needs to get over. Look at what Starz did with Torchwood and Miracle Day as another example. They went through the outline and added 4 episodes that did not need to be there. What should have been a great little mini series they turned into a full season that just dragged on forever, and in turn spoiled the flow something horrible.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
They may not have been out to piss in my Cheerios, but there is an awfully pissy taste in my Cheerios, and Joe Schmoe's Cheerios, nevertheless.
Now if we open up a box of Cheerios and it tastes like piss, a good way to prevent eating piss in the future is to stop buying Cheerios. That's what a reasonable person would do.
But, apparently, in MMO land, if we eat pissy Cheerios, we ought to "get over it," "embrace the new" and go buy another box of Cheerios expecting things will be different this time around.
There will be some that say that the producer had to relieve himself in our Cheerios so he could give us a newer and better Cheerios that we should enjoy instead.
There will be others that say that the piss in our Cheerios was all in our minds; that somehow we 'wanted' pissy Cheerios, and we ought to have known that the Cheerios we were buying were piss flavored.
There are others who would say that the Cheerios tasted fine; that we just imagined the Cheerios tasted like piss, because the vast majority of people who ate the same Cheerios claim there was no piss.
But any way you slice it, when the Cheerios they serve us taste bad, like it does when someone closes down something we like and pay good money into, the people who are angry ought not to expect things will be better next time. They ought to learn and not make the same mistake that made them so miserable. They ought to refrain from getting into something until they have better assurances. Isn't that fair?
__________________________
"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
The answer provided, outlined, in the first couple of pages of responses.
As a parent, do you take tantrums seriously?