Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

What size a MMORPG should have to keep player play it for a year ?

iixviiiixiixviiiix GSPosts: 836Member Uncommon

i just finish another 1 month contents MMORPG , i start to feel that MMORPG nowadays are too small.

In older game , because of heavy grind , game last longer. But now , MMORPGs are too short to feel like a MMORPG

 

Most MMORPG nowadays give us 50 to 60 level at they launch , with it , we will get  around 10 big maps and 5 to 15 instances

around 500 to 1000 quests with most of them are minor worthless quests.

 

But it are too little to feed our empty "stomach"

and before we know , game ready end

 

I'm don't want to back to heavy grind time , i don't have much time now

i think i ready become "fat" and need more of game contents to fill my "stomach"

 

I think a good mmorpg should big enough for player to keep play it for a year

So

What size it should be to worth a year gaming ?

50 maps 100 instances and 10000 quests 10 battlefield and 7 castles to siege ?

More or lest.

 

 

«1

Comments

  • XiaokiXiaoki White Pigeon, MIPosts: 2,607Member Uncommon

    No MMO is going to have a year's worth of content at launch.

    And the amount of content you want(50 zones, 100 instances, 10,000 quests) is pretty much impossible if you want the MMO to be released within your lifetime.


    Player's burn through content much faster these days. Player's are more focused and information is more readily available. So, even if an MMO did launch with 100 instances players would still burn through them and demand more in a few months.


    Also, the amount of content is meaningless if its bad. Quality over quantity. Yeah, we arent exactly getting much quality these days but MMOs definitely wont get any better if they prioritize quantity.

  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member
    It really depends on the person. If you have a job and a life outside gaming the content in games doesn't go all the quick.
  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common

    For a powergamer like myself, I would need an impossible amount of content; and the quality and polish it would need to keep me interested for a whole year...

    Yeah... impossible.

    Good PvP keeps me playing. Or when there's nothing better around.

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

  • JimmyYOJimmyYO Columbus, OHPosts: 520Member

    It's not the size it's how you use it.

    Seriously though games need to be alot more top heavy if they want to avoid the mmo graveyard. Almost every game in the past decade has been extremely bottom heavy.

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

    For a powergamer like myself, I would need an impossible amount of content; and the quality and polish it would need to keep me interested for a whole year...

    Yeah... impossible.

    Good PvP keeps me playing. Or when there's nothing better around.

    Impossible, really?  Historical, maybe?

    The first necessity is opening with game without six (or more) months of Beta Testing. That means no Wikis open before the game is, no websites chock full of maps and data, and no "Oh, I know this boss, this guy's easy."

    You've just extended the working 'lifetime' of your content by several months, longer with "complete x before y becomes available" gating.

    Of course, without that "free preview" your game won't have the hype buildup necessary for a sizable launch, either. And the expected howling about bugs...well, cover your ears.

    Be aware that some players will gas-pedal all the way the cap, and conclude they're "done" the moment it's finished. That implies leveling curves with more in common to EQ1 circa 2001 than WoW circa 2013.

    (And indirectly, implies kissing all of those dolllars goodbye)

    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.

  • Stuka1000Stuka1000 Posts: 873Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by iixviiiix

    i just finish another 1 month contents MMORPG , i start to feel that MMORPG nowadays are too small.

    In older game , because of heavy grind , game last longer. But now , MMORPGs are too short to feel like a MMORPG

     

    Most MMORPG nowadays give us 50 to 60 level at they launch , with it , we will get  around 10 big maps and 5 to 15 instances

    around 500 to 1000 quests with most of them are minor worthless quests.

     

    But it are too little to feed our empty "stomach"

    and before we know , game ready end

     

    I'm don't want to back to heavy grind time , i don't have much time now

    i think i ready become "fat" and need more of game contents to fill my "stomach"

     

    I think a good mmorpg should big enough for player to keep play it for a year

    So

    What size it should be to worth a year gaming ?

    50 maps 100 instances and 10000 quests 10 battlefield and 7 castles to siege ?

    More or lest.

     

     

    No themepark will ever have that amount of content at launch.  If you want an MMO with longevity then the systems must be in place for the community to create it's own content.  For that you need an open world, persistent sandbox like Eve.  Themeparks are slowly dying out now as everyone is sick of the same old formula so expect more sandbox games on the horizon.

  • pieholepiehole KlippanPosts: 43Member
    Yep, the key to longlivety is more playerbased and driven content. Luckely more and more devs are realising that. 1 exaple is old EQ2 with its playermade dungeons and playermade gears.
  • aleosaleos na, INPosts: 1,863Member Uncommon

    A reason to log on

    Huge non linear world or worlds

    Themepark quest line (optional)

    player made quests

    no main story

    character customization

    weapon customization

    armor customization

    clothing customization

    vehicle customization

    item decay

    equipment slots - ears, nose, lips, chin, eyebrows, forehead, cheeks, neck, shoulders, arms, bicep, tricep, forearms, hands, knuckles, fingers (10 fingers so 10 slots), hips, legs, thighs, quadriceps, knee, calf, ankles, feet.

    All equipment slots visible. player chooses what can and cant be seen.

    rewards must come from the game. not the shop.

     

    other things i cant think of.. cuz im tired

     

    i guess just imagine spending money to go to a theme park every month that only has one ride.. with no variety in every visit. This theme park sucks

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • JemcrystalJemcrystal Champaign, ILPosts: 1,554Member Uncommon

    Good sizes:  FFXI, EQII, Vindictus, WoW.  

     

    Rift had nice realistic landscape that was easy to cover - no invisible walls.   I really wish they had made it bigger.  I would have stayed much longer if they'd had more to explore.  Rift had decent quests.  Size does matter if you have made a great game.  Final Fantasy kept adding zones.  I thought that was how all games worked but I found out otherwise. Why?  Would it really hurt them to plot out more growth?  Gives me the feeling the game designers and artists are asking for to big a pay check.

     

    DDO really needed a hell of a lot more for the high level free players.  They got obsessed with making money by taking away zones from the free to play crowd.  That was a stupid gun shot to the foot.  If they had just run a normal cash shop with potions and pets they would never have lost their momentum.

  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaPosts: 8,461Member Uncommon

    Well you need grind but as long as you keep the game fun to play,grind is never a factor.For myself the linear questing is what bored me to death,i really don't like waddling back n forth between npc's.I prefer to setup camp and enjoy the real reason i am playing,that is combat and enjoying my character and all the mechanics that go into both.

    When i waddle between quests ,i am spending countless hours clicking menus i really don't care about and clicking through text i don't care about.Also whilst i am waddling between npc's i am doing nothing but opening and closing maps looking for markers.

    I also do not like the way devs have designed questing ,you know some how my Warrior is a more experienced Warrior just because i ran an errand.

    so i think i made it clear,i don't want questing as my content,i want creative ideas like FFXI Besieged or Campaign or the many other ideas a game like FFXI offers.How about ideas liek RIFTS or ARKfalls anything different than questing.I cannot fathom how some developer way back when decided that a person's dream to Role play would involve being an errand boy and then every developer afterwards said "hey brilliant idea,we all want to be errand boys".../sigh.

    Point is if you make the game fun to play it can have tons of grind and still keep players coming back.What we are seeing is really cheap,boring,generic,cost effective game development.I would be happy with 30 levels and taking a year to get level max,it would actually allow me to enjoy that rare piece of equipment i got at level 1 without  having to replace it 10 minutes later.

     


    Samoan Diamond

  • nerovipus32nerovipus32 dublinPosts: 2,735Member
    Make it less game and more  virtual world, boom.... content problem solved.
  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 20,008Member Uncommon

    You don't need more content, you need longer lasting and more addictive "hooks" to keep you playing.

    CCP does this in EVE with its real time training, probably no other game like it where people literally keep paying sub fees to keep their training going, sometimes while playing other MMORPG's.  Add in a skill tree that would take almost 28 years to fully train and you've got a formula for locking in players for durations even WOW can't really rival. (and really encourages players to purchase multiple accounts)

    Add in it's sandbox playstyle, deep meta game, and real consequences and rewards for your actions, and the fact you can actually lead a literal stellar empire crushing all in your path makes for gameplay unrivaled anywhere else in the MMORPG world that I can think of.

    DAOC did it well back in the day, as it really didn't have that much content.  First, the leveling curve was tough, esp from levels 40-50, and it took me well over 3 months of heavy playing to get my first level 50. 

    Next, each class was very unique, and far beyond the trinity with roles of cc, buffer, buff shearer and solid hybrids to fill in between so you were greatly encouraged to roll outs to try out the different playstyles, I've had about ten 50's over the years.

    More hooks, an arduous, tedious crafting system that added real value to your gear templates, most people did one or more again,spending more time in game not only to level, but to actually do the crafting, getting a full set of 100% gear or gems took real time, could easily blow an entire play session trying to do it. (and a ton of money)

    Another hook, the RVR end game, which not only let you take keeps but also control Darkness fall, arguably the best money making spot in the game if your realm controlled it, and a really fun source of conflict when the entrance changed hands.

    Additionally, RVR gave you access to Realm abilitys, a 2nd tier of character abilities that could help you be a better RVR or PVE player, and it had steep curve in the beginning. 

    All of this (not including TOA with many people are split over) meant the title had a huge longevity, and it wasn't uncommon for people to stick with it for several years. (I have 3 years myself, and am currently playing a form of it today)

    These hooks I've mentioned are described by others as "Time-sinks" but without them MMORPG's have devolved into very short term playing experiences that people quickly leave once they burn through the quests/stories/dungeon content the developers have provided.

     

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • delete5230delete5230 Posts: 2,963Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nerovipus32
    Make it less game and more  virtual world, boom.... content problem solved.

    +1

  • GrailerGrailer HamiltonPosts: 876Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by delete5230
    Originally posted by nerovipus32
    Make it less game and more  virtual world, boom.... content problem solved.

    +1

    +1

     

    What you want Is a sandbox .  Those type of games last for years.  For example Ultima Online was a sandbox and I played that for 3 years non stop .  

    I would've probably played even longer but they ruined PvP to cater for carebears . Pretty dumb really they could've made PvE servers but instead forced me to quit game .

     

     

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,769Member Uncommon
    Here today gone tomorrow might as well be the industries catch phrase.
  • GeekieDaveGeekieDave Blackduck, MNPosts: 41Member

    When we look at how immersive the worlds of MMORPG's compared to games like World Of Warcraft are pretty small. The reason why we have so much in games like Warcraft is because the years of expansions and content that were added. Rift is another example of having a large world that we can dive into. There's not only enough content for us to go through and enjoy but the quality of the world is pretty darn good as well!

    I just think that developers need to work more on the world and less on the amount of content. I'd like for them to create enough just for us to hit max level but have a large enough world that will be something we want to go out and explore. An example would be taking a break from the questing and going to explore the world that is around

    Be sure to subscribe to Worlds Edge Gaming:
    www.youtube.com/worldsedgegaming

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,672Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by iixviiiix

    I think a good mmorpg should big enough for player to keep play it for a year

    So

    What size it should be to worth a year gaming ?

    50 maps 100 instances and 10000 quests 10 battlefield and 7 castles to siege ?

    More or lest.

    The size of the world and the number of quests are immaterial to how long a player stays.

    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

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,672Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Grailer
    Originally posted by delete5230
    Originally posted by nerovipus32
    Make it less game and more  virtual world, boom.... content problem solved.

    +1

    +1

    What you want Is a sandbox .  Those type of games last for years.  For example Ultima Online was a sandbox and I played that for 3 years non stop .  

    I would've probably played even longer but they ruined PvP to cater for carebears . Pretty dumb really they could've made PvE servers but instead forced me to quit game .

    Actually, it was an accidentally brilliant solution. Although a band-aid to the problem, it identified that of the people interested in an FFA PVP virtual world, only about 20% are going to actively PVP. The rest like the option to be able to participate in it if they want to (without having to roll/level a new character on a different server with no gear/gold) or just simply know it is there.

    This is something that EVE seized and capitalized on, but few devs since have actually acknowledged it. It's why most FFA MMOs fail miserably. Those 'carebears' you complain about are doing the PvE stuff so that you don't have to. As long as they can continue to, with relatively low risk, bake buff cakes and craft the machines of war, you are free to PvP and throw money at then for the stuff you need. They keep you from having to do the stuff you don't want to do in an RPG, freeing you up to enjoy the carnage on the battlefield with minimal, if any, downtime to do tasks you probably rather not do.

     

    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

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

    I think a good mmorpg should big enough for player to keep play it for a year

    So

    What size it should be to worth a year gaming ?

    50 maps 100 instances and 10000 quests 10 battlefield and 7 castles to siege ?

    More or lest.

    The size of the world and the number of quests are immaterial to how long a player stays.

    So does "it needs to be a sandbox". Game style is immaterial to its ability to engross and immerse players.

    Sorry, that's really a response to something several posts higher up, I guess.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Xiaoki

    No MMO is going to have a year's worth of content at launch.

    Correction, no linear WoW clones are going to have a year's worth of content at launch.

     

    Games like EQ or DAoC or sandbox games, absolutely did.

  • BoardwalkerBoardwalker Austin, TXPosts: 384Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    You don't need more content, you need longer lasting and more addictive "hooks" to keep you playing.

    CCP does this in EVE... DAOC did it well back in the day

    These hooks I've mentioned are described by others as "Time-sinks" but without them MMORPG's have devolved into very short term playing experiences that people quickly leave once they burn through the quests/stories/dungeon content the developers have provided.

     

    Agree with everything you said. I play three MMOs in a roundtable format: DAoC, EVE, and WoW. Each has excellent, and different, progression schemes that keep me invested in improving my character. 

     

    A lot of people on these boards tend to use the word "grind" or "time sinks" "carrot on a stick" to describe the mechanisms that companies employ to retain players. I prefer the words "progression", "goals", and "continual improvement" to describe these mechanisms.  I don't want everything handed to me on a silver platter or given to me just because I log on. I want to work toward a goal. I want to continually improve my character in meaningful ways.

     

    Games like EVE, DAoC, and WoW do that, and that's why I continue to play them.

     

     

    They can adjust a game all day, but they can't help the issue between the keyboard and the chair.
    Played: UO, DAoC, AC, WoW, EVE, TR, WAR, Aion, Rift, SWTOR, GW2, TSW, ESO, Elite:D
    Play EVE for free for 21 days

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,672Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Boardwalker
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    You don't need more content, you need longer lasting and more addictive "hooks" to keep you playing.

    CCP does this in EVE... DAOC did it well back in the day

    These hooks I've mentioned are described by others as "Time-sinks" but without them MMORPG's have devolved into very short term playing experiences that people quickly leave once they burn through the quests/stories/dungeon content the developers have provided.

    Agree with everything you said. I play three MMOs in a roundtable format: DAoC, EVE, and WoW. Each has excellent, and different, progression schemes that keep me invested in improving my character. 

    A lot of people on these boards tend to use the word "grind" or "time sinks" "carrot on a stick" to describe the mechanisms that companies employ to retain players. I prefer the words "progression", "goals", and "continual improvement" to describe these mechanisms.  I don't want everything handed to me on a silver platter or given to me just because I log on. I want to work toward a goal. I want to continually improve my character in meaningful ways.

    Games like EVE, DAoC, and WoW do that, and that's why I continue to play them.

    I agree, too. The more things there are to do, the more goals a player can set for themselves or voluntarily pursue, and the more ways there are for people to collaborate, the better the game's retention.

    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

  • theAsnatheAsna AsnatownPosts: 321Member


    Let's be honest here. The typical sandbox MMO has the content spread to different areas and you visit each area while leveling. In most cases you'll outlevel an area before you finish every single quest within this area. The dungeons that were placed in the area then don't have anything to offer anymore nor provide any real challenge or group play.



    People rarely have a reason to come back to certain areas when they outlevel the content in that area. There were attempts to make dungeon content viable at end game by providing different difficulty settings for the dungeons (e.g. at level difficulty, level cap difficulty).



    Maybe it would be good to rethink game mechanics. The traditional game mechanics (i.e. increasing in power/stats) turn a lot of the available content obsolete after a certain point. Maybe it would be better to tackle it from a different point of view. Players should still be able to unlock/train new abilities/skills (e.g. train new attacks, improve defensive capabilities, etc.) for their characters. Level and ability scores should only have a minimal effect on a character's power. Especially level should not be considered anymore for attack % or defense %. Maximum health shouldn't be much different on level 1 than on level cap. Hopefully with such a system people can visit any area of the game no matter their level and have a chance of survival. Of course they wouldn't have the same set of tools (i.e. skills/abilities) as a high level adventurer.

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member
    Size matters not. Judge my game by its size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the sandbox, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude level. You must feel the sandbox around you; here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere, yes.
  • XAPKenXAPKen Northwest, INPosts: 4,927Member Uncommon

    Slow down content consumption by slowing progression, and a fairly small game could last for a year.

     

    Speed up content consumption and even a huge game could be exhausted in a few months.

     


    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now turned Amateur Game Developer.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  Realm Lords 2 on MMORPG.com
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.