Except you bought it, in large quantities. Which tells the developers that people like it and want more.
That is a common mistake made by both people looking from outside and the companies as well. Things are not always a hit because they are good or demanded a lot. Lets say Movie A was a hit. Was it a hit because of the lead actor? the story? the production values? the marketing? The timing? Very good and high demanded products fail all the time because of outside factors, and very bad products can be a hit because of outside factors. I would argue WOW is largely not a hit because of game mechanics that are demanded, it was the right product at the right time. Why did GW2 sell so many copies, hype which has nothing to do with a game at all. Thus buying large quantities of something doesn't mean its wanted more. How did Jurassic park 2 do? Blair witch 2? Success of a product is a specific set of circumstances reached at a very specific time which often cannot be recaptured, and high sales do not always indicate approving the product or wanting more of similar. Just because I feel like a candy cane today doesn't mean I want everything to always taste minty, perhaps it was just a passing whim or perhaps I regret that purchase (GW2 I'm looking at you).
I agree that just because people are buying something it doesn't mean that is what they want. If I'm at a crappy food market and I'm starving and there are 30 vendors selling different food, just because I buy something to satisfy my hunger doesn't mean that is what I would choose to eat if I had other options. What I'm willing to tolerate and what I want are different things.
I also agree that there are other factors, you mentioned hype which I think is a good example. To use the same analogy I've seen food that was described in a very appealing way on a menu that I was disappointed in. Or pictures on a billboard and the real thing looked and tasted nothing like I expected. Just because I bought it doesn't mean that is what I wanted.
The idea that just because people buy something means that they got what they wanted is simply wrong. All we can do is try and learn from our mistakes and not fall for it again because as wrong as the idea is, suits won't give a shit if enough people keep making the same mistakes and lining their pockets in the process. They will just look at the statistics and agree with all the fools who are argue that the market is speaking because it is buying what is available. Not much risk in agreeing with them in the short term.
Originally posted by Xsonic Idk about you guys, but I am enjoying my MMO pretty much xD.
Lots of people who never had the misfortune to discover forums do.
There are even some instances of folks who didn't fall victim to the Church of Negativity.
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.
Originally posted by Xsonic Idk about you guys, but I am enjoying my MMO pretty much xD.
Lots of people who never had the misfortune to discover forums do.
There are even some instances of folks who didn't fall victim to the Church of Negativity.
i cant deny that but i live a bitter depressed life.
also if i am a part of the church of negativity can i do negative level damage on my attacks please
Unfortunately, to get positive-enegy flares, you have to go with some sort of Paladin weapon. :sad music: Never much liked playing paladins.
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.
my answer is simple, when you ahve a set price, like B2P or P2P and most SP are B2P, then you go off the number of people who buy it, and the numbers of people who continue to play it.
when you go off of F2P the method changes, and you go purely off of what makes the most money, and this is where things start getting borked, with most modern MMOs being F2P devs have lost thier ability to judge game quality due to a simple fact, whales are always going to pore large amounts of money into a game whether it be good or crap.
I don't quite follow the logic behind your reasoning, and I'm inclined to say your conclusion is more the result of a personal bias than anything else.
If anything, the a la carte nature of F2P, combined with game metrics, allows the devs to pinpoint exactly what parts of the game players like and what parts they don't like, whereas only the game metrics exists at that level for a subscription game. When it comes to added content, the sale of the expansion, much like the sale of the initial retail box, is heavily skewed by marketing. In a F2P game, players only buy the new content that they want, when they want it, giving a clearer picture (when combined with game metrics) of the interest and demand for each component of the new content.
Let's say a company offers five services in their facility. You can pay a flat fee and get all five services. The company can see which services consumers use over time, but they would have to go beyond use data to discern which are the ones people are paying to use and which they are using simply because they are perceived a free part of the package.
Another company offers the same five services in their facility, but they charge a separate fee for each. The company can now see exactly which services people are paying to use and which services need to be improved. The ones that people are buying can be expanded on. The ones that need to be improved can now be made more compelling for people to see them as worth the service fee. The company can improve overall quality by identifying where demand is and where quality needs to be improved.
F2P devs have just as good, if not better, info and ability to judge the game quality. I know this crowd is fixated on whales, but they exist in almost every entertainment industry - they're well-accommodated but they aren't the entire focus of the service. The VIP room gets built around the guys that buy the Dom, not the whole club.
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
why does the general gaming public seem more forgiving towards the flaws of MMOs?
More forgiving?
Bwuhaha-haha
We MMO players are the least forgiving bunch on the planet, we are the toughest crowd imaginable.
If a game developer does A -> half of us rage quit
If a game developer does B -> the other half rage quits
Mind you, we are also likely to take time off our busy schedules to spread venom and vitriol on external forums (like this one) just to make sure we inflict some harm on the evil company who pleased the other half of their players instead of our half.
F2P devs have just as good, if not better, info and ability to judge the game quality. I know this crowd is fixated on whales, but they exist in almost every entertainment industry - they're well-accommodated but they aren't the entire focus of the service. The VIP room gets built around the guys that buy the Dom, not the whole club.
And then we shift the analogy to the NFL and Corporate-Priced Skyboxes. And it breaks down fast.
Just sayin'. You can fund the whole club that way. F2P is still in it's infancy.
Trion is working on it, give 'em time.
(Personally, I would have bet on Blizzard to come out on top of the Marketing world, eventually--but they do need that new title before they can take the next big step in monetizing.)
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.
We MMO players are the least forgiving bunch on the planet, we are the toughest crowd imaginable.
If a game developer does A -> half of us rage quit
If a game developer does B -> the other half rage quits
Mind you, we are also likely to take time off our busy schedules to spread venom and vitriol on external forums (like this one) just to make sure we inflict some harm on the evil company who pleased the other half of their players instead of our half.
Yes that would never happen for single player games made by say EA, say for example Mass Effect or Sim City. Nope never heard about any complaints on forums about single player games.
We MMO players are the least forgiving bunch on the planet, we are the toughest crowd imaginable.
If a game developer does A -> half of us rage quit
If a game developer does B -> the other half rage quits
Mind you, we are also likely to take time off our busy schedules to spread venom and vitriol on external forums (like this one) just to make sure we inflict some harm on the evil company who pleased the other half of their players instead of our half.
Yes that would never happen for single player games made by say EA, say for example Mass Effect or Sim City. Nope never heard about any complaints on forums about single player games.
Next step, imagine if Sim City was an MMO.... *run and hide*
F2P devs have just as good, if not better, info and ability to judge the game quality. I know this crowd is fixated on whales, but they exist in almost every entertainment industry - they're well-accommodated but they aren't the entire focus of the service. The VIP room gets built around the guys that buy the Dom, not the whole club.
And then we shift the analogy to the NFL and Corporate-Priced Skyboxes. And it breaks down fast.
Just sayin'. You can fund the whole club that way. F2P is still in it's infancy.
Trion is working on it, give 'em time.
(Personally, I would have bet on Blizzard to come out on top of the Marketing world, eventually--but they do need that new title before they can take the next big step in monetizing.)
I was fearing that by adding that last line we'd devolve into loosely related analogies, but to address that and hope we can move on without getting into steaks, fast food and cars...
I don't think anyone says you can't fund the majority of the game that way, however, like with the NFL, the separate pricing of all the individual items (stadium seats, souvenirs, concessions stands, PPV, live streams, etc) helps them assess which components have the most appeal and the most value. Lackluster or decreasing adoption of any one component helps to identify which need more work, which are unappealing and which the consumer wants more of. If the beer, seat and swag were all included in one price that would make it harder to identify where the various consumer interests rest.
The poster I was responding to said that "F2P devs have lost their ability to judge game quality due to a simple fact, whales are always going to pore large amounts of money into a game whether it be good or crap." I was addressing that point and that point only.
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
I think it's because MMOs offer an experience that just isn't available in other games. Running around in a virtual world with other people doing stuff around you. This is something that is missing from every other type of game, and it's something that people miss when they don't have it. Players are willing to put up with more to get that feeling.
What do you think?
that's exactly it.
i hate traditional MMORPG combat and level grinding. i always have. even in my early days (EQ1, the 1st day of release 1999) i couldn't stand the "gameplay".
but exploring another world populated with intelligent lifeforms with their own agency/goals is very compelling in and of itself. they married the worst possible genre and mechanics to MMOs, and yet they were STILL compelling, despite the fundamentally terrible choices.
F2P devs have just as good, if not better, info and ability to judge the game quality. I know this crowd is fixated on whales, but they exist in almost every entertainment industry - they're well-accommodated but they aren't the entire focus of the service. The VIP room gets built around the guys that buy the Dom, not the whole club.
And then we shift the analogy to the NFL and Corporate-Priced Skyboxes. And it breaks down fast.
Just sayin'. You can fund the whole club that way. F2P is still in it's infancy.
Trion is working on it, give 'em time.
(Personally, I would have bet on Blizzard to come out on top of the Marketing world, eventually--but they do need that new title before they can take the next big step in monetizing.)
I was fearing that by adding that last line we'd devolve into loosely related analogies, but to address that and hope we can move on without getting into steaks, fast food and cars...
I don't think anyone says you can't fund the majority of the game that way, however, like with the NFL, the separate pricing of all the individual items (stadium seats, souvenirs, concessions stands, PPV, live streams, etc) helps them assess which components have the most appeal and the most value. Lackluster or decreasing adoption of any one component helps to identify which need more work, which are unappealing and which the consumer wants more of. If the beer, seat and swag were all included in one price that would make it harder to identify where the various consumer interests rest.
The poster I was responding to said that "F2P devs have lost their ability to judge game quality due to a simple fact, whales are always going to pore large amounts of money into a game whether it be good or crap." I was addressing that point and that point only.
Relax, yo.
Whales aren't the 'wave of the future', just saying you shouldn't really discount Premium Pricing schemes and Exclusive Access so easily. Rich people always pay big bucks to 'keep out the masses'.
Television contracts, maybe. Or whatever Kotick's got up his sleeve next.
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.
F2P devs have just as good, if not better, info and ability to judge the game quality. I know this crowd is fixated on whales, but they exist in almost every entertainment industry - they're well-accommodated but they aren't the entire focus of the service. The VIP room gets built around the guys that buy the Dom, not the whole club.
And then we shift the analogy to the NFL and Corporate-Priced Skyboxes. And it breaks down fast.
Just sayin'. You can fund the whole club that way. F2P is still in it's infancy.
Trion is working on it, give 'em time.
(Personally, I would have bet on Blizzard to come out on top of the Marketing world, eventually--but they do need that new title before they can take the next big step in monetizing.)
I was fearing that by adding that last line we'd devolve into loosely related analogies, but to address that and hope we can move on without getting into steaks, fast food and cars...
I don't think anyone says you can't fund the majority of the game that way, however, like with the NFL, the separate pricing of all the individual items (stadium seats, souvenirs, concessions stands, PPV, live streams, etc) helps them assess which components have the most appeal and the most value. Lackluster or decreasing adoption of any one component helps to identify which need more work, which are unappealing and which the consumer wants more of. If the beer, seat and swag were all included in one price that would make it harder to identify where the various consumer interests rest.
The poster I was responding to said that "F2P devs have lost their ability to judge game quality due to a simple fact, whales are always going to pore large amounts of money into a game whether it be good or crap." I was addressing that point and that point only.
Relax, yo.
Whales aren't the 'wave of the future', just saying you shouldn't really discount Premium Pricing schemes and Exclusive Access so easily. Rich people always pay big bucks to 'keep out the masses'.
Television contracts, maybe. Or whatever Kotick's got up his sleeve next.
I don't know where you are getting that I am discounting the whale or premium pricing, especially since we both agree entire sections of an entertainment service are often dedicated solely to them.
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
Untill the internet can stream data more efficiently mmo game image qaulity will remain inferior to offline games....
Think about.. More qaulity means bigger files which means more data to move..
This means it would take days to download rather than hours. People simply wouldnt play them.. It may be why wow is fwindling.. That game is massive and piss poor qaulity.. Installing fresh takes ages and isnt worth the wait.
Originally posted by Bjelar Originally posted by dgarbiniOriginally posted by BjelarMore forgiving?Bwuhaha-haha We MMO players are the least forgiving bunch on the planet, we are the toughest crowd imaginable.If a game developer does A -> half of us rage quitIf a game developer does B -> the other half rage quitsMind you, we are also likely to take time off our busy schedules to spread venom and vitriol on external forums (like this one) just to make sure we inflict some harm on the evil company who pleased the other half of their players instead of our half.
Yes that would never happen for single player games made by say EA, say for example Mass Effect or Sim City. Nope never heard about any complaints on forums about single player games.Next step, imagine if Sim City was an MMO.... *run and hide*
They tried and it didn't go well. It was an example of a company both not understanding MMOs and not understanding their core audience.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Sorry to say this but we all know that the companies have done their due diligence and run their market research to know what to do and what not to do. They realize that very few player actually read the quests and lore beyond level 5; they know that difficult quest-lines turn off many subscribers; they surely know that the the new target market is the ADHD crowd which needs instant satisfaction and god-like abilities out of the box. And the developers no longer care about the 30+ year old crowd. It's the 8 to 15 year old gamers that are in the cross-hairs now. Sorry.
Originally posted by Bjelar Originally posted by lizardbones why does the general gaming public seem more forgiving towards the flaws of MMOs?
More forgiving?
Bwuhaha-haha
We MMO players are the least forgiving bunch on the planet, we are the toughest crowd imaginable.
If a game developer does A -> half of us rage quit
If a game developer does B -> the other half rage quits
Mind you, we are also likely to take time off our busy schedules to spread venom and vitriol on external forums (like this one) just to make sure we inflict some harm on the evil company who pleased the other half of their players instead of our half.
There is certainly a vocal minority on forums, but that's not the entire group of people who play MMOs. There are even some pretty pleasant areas on MMO forums, where there aren't that many negative people. It's weird, but I don't think the negative and positive groups on forums mix much.
In general though, MMOs are expanding, not contracting. More games are incorporating MMO elements, even if they do it poorly. Players in general play MMOs longer than they play other types of games and they are starting to spend more money on MMOs than they spend on other types of games.
MMOs can't be as bad as the vocal minority say they are, or they would have no customers and the MMO market wouldn't be expanding. On the other hand, they aren't all teacups and roses either. Which begs the question, what are MMOs offering that other types of games are missing out on? Even if the production values and quality are exactly the same, is it enough that there are other people running around in a virtual world that makes playing an MMO "better"?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky Reading this thread reminds of the qualifiers we many times place on compliments. "You throw pretty well, for a girl." "That's a really nice drawing, for an 8 year old." "You write really well, for an amateur."And the winner is... "This is a pretty good game, for an MMO."Does it come down to "expectations?" Do we, as players, expect less from our MMOs than our other computer games? If we do, should we?
The first highlighted point is exactly what we get now a days. My response to the second: WE SHOULD DEMAND MOAR!!!lol. Seriously though, I know I'm not the only MMO gamers years ago that had so much more in mind when it came to the future of MMOs. I don't know what the hell happened.
I was in that boat, too When I thought of the improvements MMORPGs could have made in the past, it was nothing like what has become reality...
<sadface>
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I was in that boat, too When I thought of the improvements MMORPGs could have made in the past, it was nothing like what has become reality...
Compare a feature list from 1997 to one from 2012. Follow the patch notes of a single title.
It's ok to not perceive any progress (or rather, not acknowledge any).. But that doesn't mean that none took place.
All that really remains is the other type of dismissal, all of this new stuff, but it's all useless and worthless and (rant).
This is the Gamer Eternal Defeatist Literary Style, it's been established (on this site certainly) for as long as this site's existed.
It's cool; we get that the glass will always be half-empty for some folks; it's the nature of angst.
But it leads to a distorted only-on-forums world picture that doesn't have much relation to actual, you know, world.
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.
MMO gamers are addicts. That's also why kickstarter, founders, lifetime subs is or have been popular. People will accept buggy products because it's been the norm for so long, and also because of addictive game systems making up for glaring faults the games have
Originally posted by AlBQuirky I was in that boat, too When I thought of the improvements MMORPGs could have made in the past, it was nothing like what has become reality...
Compare a feature list from 1997 to one from 2012. Follow the patch notes of a single title.It's ok to not perceive any progress (or rather, not acknowledge any).. But that doesn't mean that none took place.All that really remains is the other type of dismissal, all of this new stuff, but it's all useless and worthless and (rant).This is the Gamer Eternal Defeatist Literary Style, it's been established (on this site certainly) for as long as this site's existed.It's cool; we get that the glass will always be half-empty for some folks; it's the nature of angst.But it leads to a distorted only-on-forums world picture that doesn't have much relation to actual, you know, world.
You make the assumption that ALL progress is good. No matter what. I disagree. Progress equals change. MMOs have most certainly changed, therefor progressed. Does that mean they are better quality (thread title)?
Progress is, for sure, up to the individual. What one player sees as progress may not be such to another player. Mileages may vary.
Wal-Mart may be seen as "progress" for millions of Americans (lower prices and convenience), yet seen as a bane to individual, locally owned stores. Perspective.
For those players who did not enjoy MMORPGs in the beginning, they have certainly "progressed" for them. For those players who actually enjoyed (believe it or not, some players actually did) their time in older MMORPGs, they surely have not. Perspective.
I was originally going to list the patch notes from Ultima Onine's 09/28/1997 patch and maybe GW2's 05/14/2013 release notes from "The Secret of the Southsun" update or Rift's 02/27/2013 release notes from their "Carnival of the Ascended" release. They were not fair comparisons as UO was actually a patch release and the other 2 were actual new content releases. As one peruses the notes, they decide if there is progress or not for them. Perspective.
You see my "doom and gloom" as some kind of teenage angst, simply because you disagree, so I MUST be wrong, aka: Teenage Angst. Can you truly say MMORPGs are better than they were? In some ways, I agree they technology-wise are. In most ways, and the most important ones to *me*, no they have not progressed. They have become combat centric games that have lost what MMORPGs were about in the first place, for me. Because of this "progression", they have attracted a new horde of players that have further "regressed" (in my opinion) the genre further into a single-minded genre (MMO-F/TPS). Perspective.
Is this "progress" good for the industry? I do not know. If their number one goal so to make money, I believe so. They have grown the playerbase exponentially. If their number one goal is to make good games and experiences, than I disagree that MMORPGs have "progressed." Perspective.
It used to be an old adage, "Make a good product (or service) and the people will buy it." This has been lost in today's consumer market where hype (in every category of consumerism) has overshadowed "good" many times over.
Or are you of the opinion that the masses are always right? More players are enjoying MMOs now, so they must be "progressing."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Comments
I agree that just because people are buying something it doesn't mean that is what they want. If I'm at a crappy food market and I'm starving and there are 30 vendors selling different food, just because I buy something to satisfy my hunger doesn't mean that is what I would choose to eat if I had other options. What I'm willing to tolerate and what I want are different things.
I also agree that there are other factors, you mentioned hype which I think is a good example. To use the same analogy I've seen food that was described in a very appealing way on a menu that I was disappointed in. Or pictures on a billboard and the real thing looked and tasted nothing like I expected. Just because I bought it doesn't mean that is what I wanted.
The idea that just because people buy something means that they got what they wanted is simply wrong. All we can do is try and learn from our mistakes and not fall for it again because as wrong as the idea is, suits won't give a shit if enough people keep making the same mistakes and lining their pockets in the process. They will just look at the statistics and agree with all the fools who are argue that the market is speaking because it is buying what is available. Not much risk in agreeing with them in the short term.
Lots of people who never had the misfortune to discover forums do.
There are even some instances of folks who didn't fall victim to the Church of Negativity.
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 cant deny that but i live a bitter depressed life.
also if i am a part of the church of negativity can i do negative level damage on my attacks please
F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to
Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.
Unfortunately, to get positive-enegy flares, you have to go with some sort of Paladin weapon. :sad music: Never much liked playing paladins.
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 don't quite follow the logic behind your reasoning, and I'm inclined to say your conclusion is more the result of a personal bias than anything else.
If anything, the a la carte nature of F2P, combined with game metrics, allows the devs to pinpoint exactly what parts of the game players like and what parts they don't like, whereas only the game metrics exists at that level for a subscription game. When it comes to added content, the sale of the expansion, much like the sale of the initial retail box, is heavily skewed by marketing. In a F2P game, players only buy the new content that they want, when they want it, giving a clearer picture (when combined with game metrics) of the interest and demand for each component of the new content.
Let's say a company offers five services in their facility. You can pay a flat fee and get all five services. The company can see which services consumers use over time, but they would have to go beyond use data to discern which are the ones people are paying to use and which they are using simply because they are perceived a free part of the package.
Another company offers the same five services in their facility, but they charge a separate fee for each. The company can now see exactly which services people are paying to use and which services need to be improved. The ones that people are buying can be expanded on. The ones that need to be improved can now be made more compelling for people to see them as worth the service fee. The company can improve overall quality by identifying where demand is and where quality needs to be improved.
F2P devs have just as good, if not better, info and ability to judge the game quality. I know this crowd is fixated on whales, but they exist in almost every entertainment industry - they're well-accommodated but they aren't the entire focus of the service. The VIP room gets built around the guys that buy the Dom, not the whole club.
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
More forgiving?
Bwuhaha-haha
We MMO players are the least forgiving bunch on the planet, we are the toughest crowd imaginable.
If a game developer does A -> half of us rage quit
If a game developer does B -> the other half rage quits
Mind you, we are also likely to take time off our busy schedules to spread venom and vitriol on external forums (like this one) just to make sure we inflict some harm on the evil company who pleased the other half of their players instead of our half.
And then we shift the analogy to the NFL and Corporate-Priced Skyboxes. And it breaks down fast.
Just sayin'. You can fund the whole club that way. F2P is still in it's infancy.
Trion is working on it, give 'em time.
(Personally, I would have bet on Blizzard to come out on top of the Marketing world, eventually--but they do need that new title before they can take the next big step in monetizing.)
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.
Yes that would never happen for single player games made by say EA, say for example Mass Effect or Sim City. Nope never heard about any complaints on forums about single player games.
Next step, imagine if Sim City was an MMO.... *run and hide*
I was fearing that by adding that last line we'd devolve into loosely related analogies, but to address that and hope we can move on without getting into steaks, fast food and cars...
I don't think anyone says you can't fund the majority of the game that way, however, like with the NFL, the separate pricing of all the individual items (stadium seats, souvenirs, concessions stands, PPV, live streams, etc) helps them assess which components have the most appeal and the most value. Lackluster or decreasing adoption of any one component helps to identify which need more work, which are unappealing and which the consumer wants more of. If the beer, seat and swag were all included in one price that would make it harder to identify where the various consumer interests rest.
The poster I was responding to said that "F2P devs have lost their ability to judge game quality due to a simple fact, whales are always going to pore large amounts of money into a game whether it be good or crap." I was addressing that point and that point only.
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
that's exactly it.
i hate traditional MMORPG combat and level grinding. i always have. even in my early days (EQ1, the 1st day of release 1999) i couldn't stand the "gameplay".
but exploring another world populated with intelligent lifeforms with their own agency/goals is very compelling in and of itself. they married the worst possible genre and mechanics to MMOs, and yet they were STILL compelling, despite the fundamentally terrible choices.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
Relax, yo.
Whales aren't the 'wave of the future', just saying you shouldn't really discount Premium Pricing schemes and Exclusive Access so easily. Rich people always pay big bucks to 'keep out the masses'.
Television contracts, maybe. Or whatever Kotick's got up his sleeve next.
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 don't know where you are getting that I am discounting the whale or premium pricing, especially since we both agree entire sections of an entertainment service are often dedicated solely to them.
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
I dont.
If theres nothing out there to play - I have other hobbies.
Ill make it easy..
Untill the internet can stream data more efficiently mmo game image qaulity will remain inferior to offline games....
Think about.. More qaulity means bigger files which means more data to move..
This means it would take days to download rather than hours. People simply wouldnt play them.. It may be why wow is fwindling.. That game is massive and piss poor qaulity.. Installing fresh takes ages and isnt worth the wait.
Next step, imagine if Sim City was an MMO.... *run and hide*
They tried and it didn't go well. It was an example of a company both not understanding MMOs and not understanding their core audience.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Lower quality graphics = more computers that can handle game
More cartoon like game = more kids can play with mommy's credit card
Less reading of lore and quests = more players
Simpler combat = more players
Player Rarely Dies = more players
Instant gratification = more players
__________________________________________________
Sorry to say this but we all know that the companies have done their due diligence and run their market research to know what to do and what not to do. They realize that very few player actually read the quests and lore beyond level 5; they know that difficult quest-lines turn off many subscribers; they surely know that the the new target market is the ADHD crowd which needs instant satisfaction and god-like abilities out of the box. And the developers no longer care about the 30+ year old crowd. It's the 8 to 15 year old gamers that are in the cross-hairs now. Sorry.
Bwuhaha-haha
We MMO players are the least forgiving bunch on the planet, we are the toughest crowd imaginable.
If a game developer does A -> half of us rage quit
If a game developer does B -> the other half rage quits
Mind you, we are also likely to take time off our busy schedules to spread venom and vitriol on external forums (like this one) just to make sure we inflict some harm on the evil company who pleased the other half of their players instead of our half.
There is certainly a vocal minority on forums, but that's not the entire group of people who play MMOs. There are even some pretty pleasant areas on MMO forums, where there aren't that many negative people. It's weird, but I don't think the negative and positive groups on forums mix much.
In general though, MMOs are expanding, not contracting. More games are incorporating MMO elements, even if they do it poorly. Players in general play MMOs longer than they play other types of games and they are starting to spend more money on MMOs than they spend on other types of games.
MMOs can't be as bad as the vocal minority say they are, or they would have no customers and the MMO market wouldn't be expanding. On the other hand, they aren't all teacups and roses either. Which begs the question, what are MMOs offering that other types of games are missing out on? Even if the production values and quality are exactly the same, is it enough that there are other people running around in a virtual world that makes playing an MMO "better"?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
<sadface>
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Compare a feature list from 1997 to one from 2012. Follow the patch notes of a single title.
It's ok to not perceive any progress (or rather, not acknowledge any).. But that doesn't mean that none took place.
All that really remains is the other type of dismissal, all of this new stuff, but it's all useless and worthless and (rant).
This is the Gamer Eternal Defeatist Literary Style, it's been established (on this site certainly) for as long as this site's existed.
It's cool; we get that the glass will always be half-empty for some folks; it's the nature of angst.
But it leads to a distorted only-on-forums world picture that doesn't have much relation to actual, you know, world.
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.
The answer is simple.
MMO gamers are addicts. That's also why kickstarter, founders, lifetime subs is or have been popular. People will accept buggy products because it's been the norm for so long, and also because of addictive game systems making up for glaring faults the games have
Progress is, for sure, up to the individual. What one player sees as progress may not be such to another player. Mileages may vary.
Wal-Mart may be seen as "progress" for millions of Americans (lower prices and convenience), yet seen as a bane to individual, locally owned stores. Perspective.
For those players who did not enjoy MMORPGs in the beginning, they have certainly "progressed" for them. For those players who actually enjoyed (believe it or not, some players actually did) their time in older MMORPGs, they surely have not. Perspective.
I was originally going to list the patch notes from Ultima Onine's 09/28/1997 patch and maybe GW2's 05/14/2013 release notes from "The Secret of the Southsun" update or Rift's 02/27/2013 release notes from their "Carnival of the Ascended" release. They were not fair comparisons as UO was actually a patch release and the other 2 were actual new content releases. As one peruses the notes, they decide if there is progress or not for them. Perspective.
You see my "doom and gloom" as some kind of teenage angst, simply because you disagree, so I MUST be wrong, aka: Teenage Angst. Can you truly say MMORPGs are better than they were? In some ways, I agree they technology-wise are. In most ways, and the most important ones to *me*, no they have not progressed. They have become combat centric games that have lost what MMORPGs were about in the first place, for me. Because of this "progression", they have attracted a new horde of players that have further "regressed" (in my opinion) the genre further into a single-minded genre (MMO-F/TPS). Perspective.
Is this "progress" good for the industry? I do not know. If their number one goal so to make money, I believe so. They have grown the playerbase exponentially. If their number one goal is to make good games and experiences, than I disagree that MMORPGs have "progressed." Perspective.
It used to be an old adage, "Make a good product (or service) and the people will buy it." This has been lost in today's consumer market where hype (in every category of consumerism) has overshadowed "good" many times over.
Or are you of the opinion that the masses are always right? More players are enjoying MMOs now, so they must be "progressing."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR