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!

Time Investment: The Downfall of MMO's

24

Comments

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,235Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by noturpal

    I PLAY THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE TIME SINKS 

    and you should too 

    GET THE FUCK OUT MY GENRE YOU FUCKING VAPID 12 year old 

    nich game ftw

    I think you have that reversed:

    • Vapid 12 year olds have abundant time and no concept of the value of their time.
    • Established older gamers have less time, and a better understanding of what their time is worth.
    So established gamers tend to demand more meat out of their gaming time investment, as opposed to vapid 12 year olds who actually are fine wasting time frivolously because they have no concept of using time efficiently.

    What is "meat" for adults?

    __________________________
    "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

  • Jairoe03Jairoe03 Winthrop Harbor, ILPosts: 732Member

    You can't compare MMO's to other genres. One has persistence, and others generally don't. One has a shared environment for lots of players, the others don't. It definitely caters to different styles and types of players.


    And if you want to talk about grind, how about playing the same exact map for countless hours. It might not be a time sink to immediately start let's say a league of legends account, but acquiring the skills to even be semi-competitive at the low levels requires time. You have to level to max level first, then acquiring all the top tier runes that'll cater to a variety of different champions, situations and team compositions between your team and your enemies team. THEN you have to throw on top of that learning current meta strategies and acquire the twitch skills to play the game. It's a constant progression just like MMO's are. This similar idea can be applied to just about any other competitive game. All games require timesinks just at a different level and it is purely self motivated just like anything else.


    I don't think there's a downfall of the MMO, but more of a realization amongst people that maybe its just not that fun for themselves and move on to other things or maybe people just getting tired of it for now. People are fleeting and move from one hot thing to the next fairly quickly. MMO's was last decade, MOBA's are this decade.


    In short, my belief is that MMO's are being brought back down to a more realistic level than where it was at in the 2000's, but I don't see it ending any time soon especially as technology progresses. I think there'll be an increased likeliness in resurgences of this genre as technology becomes more advanced through time.

  • TorikTorik London, ONPosts: 2,343Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by Arclan

    Niche is where it belongs, and is nothing to be ashamed of. Ask Rolls Royce and Farrari if they feel bad about catering to a niche market. I require depth of gameplay and challenging PVE content, and the mass marketed games out recently are lacking in that department.

    Except those niche games are the opposite of Rolls Royce or Ferrari. Those niche games, claiming to be hardcore, add inhuman levels of grinding and tedium, while Rolls Royce and Ferrari basically permit one to get to his destination faster, more securely and with more style.

    I've driven a Ferrari Enzo shortly during my now quite long existence. Anyone thinking it's tedious or hardcore as in the old school MMOs definitely never drove such a car. Those cars are pure pleasure right out of the box.

    The disconnect comes because they believe that they are driving a Ferrari but when we look all we see is a bunch of guys going gaga over Trabants, Yugos and AMC Gremlins.

  • drakaenadrakaena Posts: 488Member Uncommon

    I don't see why time investment would be anymore of an issue today than it was 10 or 20 years ago. People still had real life responsibilities then, as they do now. 

    I can see how it is more of an issue for older gamers because we grew up and have jobs and families but there is always the next generation with summers off.

    The fantasy genre is more popular now than it has ever been so I don't see it as a generational thing where kids today didn't grow up playing PnP. LOTR won an oscar and was a smashing success.

    Which leads me to the conclusion that MMO's today just kind of suck. 

  • KaledrenKaledren , NYPosts: 310Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by noturpal

    I PLAY THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE TIME SINKS 

    and you should too 

    GET THE FUCK OUT MY GENRE YOU FUCKING VAPID 12 year old 

    nich game ftw

    I think you have that reversed:

    • Vapid 12 year olds have abundant time and no concept of the value of their time.
    • Established older gamers have less time, and a better understanding of what their time is worth.
    So established gamers tend to demand more meat out of their gaming time investment, as opposed to vapid 12 year olds who actually are fine wasting time frivolously because they have no concept of using time efficiently.

    Mostly true...but not in all cases.

     

    I am an older gamer. I have a job, a daughter, a grandmother I take care of, friends I visit or hang out with, and many other responsibilities. I like MMORPG's and would LOVE to see one like EQ again but updated with modern graphics, UI systems, and modern era MMORPG combat.

    I know the time needed for such games, and I know what my time constraints are for such games. I don't need to feel some sense of big accomplishment in one sitting...hell or even one or two hours to feel the game is worth it or my time is worth it. Knowing every little bit I do is another step towards a future accomplishment is enough for me. Getting half a bar of xp towards a level, getting a few items I needed for a particularly longer quest, or exploring a small portion of a given area is gratifying.

    Sadly though, it seems most need to feel they conquered the world in an hour or two or else they feel their time was wasted, or the game isn't worth playing. IMO and from some personal observation.

     

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,235Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kaledren
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by noturpal

    I PLAY THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE TIME SINKS 

    and you should too 

    GET THE FUCK OUT MY GENRE YOU FUCKING VAPID 12 year old 

    nich game ftw

    I think you have that reversed:

    • Vapid 12 year olds have abundant time and no concept of the value of their time.
    • Established older gamers have less time, and a better understanding of what their time is worth.
    So established gamers tend to demand more meat out of their gaming time investment, as opposed to vapid 12 year olds who actually are fine wasting time frivolously because they have no concept of using time efficiently.

    Mostly true...but not in all cases.

     

    I am an older gamer. I have a job, a daughter, a grandmother I take care of, friends I visit or hang out with, and many other responsibilities. I like MMORPG's and would LOVE to see one like EQ again but updated with modern graphics, UI systems, and modern era MMORPG combat.

    I know the time needed for such games, and I know what my time constraints are for such games. I don't need to feel some sense of big accomplishment in one sitting...hell or even one or two hours to feel the game is worth it or my time is worth it. Knowing every little bit I do is another step towards a future accomplishment is enough for me. Getting half a bar of xp towards a level, getting a few items I needed for a particularly longer quest, or exploring a small portion of a given area is gratifying.

    Sadly though, it seems most need to feel they conquered the world in an hour or two or else they feel their time was wasted, or the game isn't worth playing. IMO and from some personal observation.

     

    Exactly.

    Look y'all, I've played those old "grindheavy, hardcore, timesink" games we like to bash.  And you know what?  I met housewives there.  I met grandparents there.  I met lawyers and accountants there.  And you know, they didn't play much....and that was okay for them.

    They were satisfied dancing in the cantina for an hour or so.  Or stocking some supplies on the market.  Or designing a new outfit.  Or RPing at the town.

    Because, for adults, it's not about the level bar, or the loots, or the quest chains.  It's about having a purpose, having a source of meaning, and having a platform for self-expression.

    That's why Farmville is making a killing with the demographics this genre has left behind...specifically those "busy adults" that don't have a lot of time.  Because if they are truly busy, and truly adults, they are above such juvenile stuff like levels and loot.  What they do want is something meaningful, something they can create.

    Which is why these "casual friendly" MMOs that make leveling and loot acquisition a priority offer nothing for them.  Because it was never about the loots and levels.  It was about context and meaning...the very things that has been taken out in favor of "fast action combat" and "no timesinks between Quest A and B."

    __________________________
    "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

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

    MMO's are losing the majority of their player 2 or 3 months after launch, because the average player doesn't WANT to be retained !. They want new and fresh and exciting challenges, otherwise they just get bored.

    I think it's more than possible that mmo's haven't delivered anything substantially different from the turn of the century.

    Yes, (some?many?most?) players will actually tire of same ol', eventually.

    Attrition has always been hidden by new players incoming; new players today may find little reason to leave their consoles when this genre isn't exactly exploding with new concepts.

     

    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.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,744Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Four0Six

    the RPG is gone, and I don't just mean having a sob story to tell in a bar. You see the "time sink" that is intended in a RPG is character development. When it took long hard fought hours of XP, and you faced the potential loss of said XP through death, the time invested was worth more than it is when it takes only week(s) to cap, and death means nothing.

    With the current system of "GET TO END GAME NAO!!!!!!", the journey to that point becomes tedium. Now in a FPS there is none of this, because there is very little character development. Unless you want to count the "human aspect". In truth it is like the whole leveling experience has been reduced to an extended tutorial. In the past this journey was the game, and not something to be suffered through.

    It has been the transition to this that has lead us to a point of pondering the "downfall".

    Nonsense.

    The RPG is as alive as ever.  RPG implies a story and character progression, and modern RPGs and MMORPGs offer that in abundance -- at better quality than most early RPGs actually (certainly I would take Mass Effect or WOW to a deserted island over Sword of Fargoal or Final Fantasy 1 -- even though I absolutely adored the latter two games in their prime.)

    Timesinks were never the point.  They were a necessary evil.  They're the gaming equivalent of trying to stretch 1 day's worth of food to last 2 weeks.  We weren't happier when we were starving, no matter what nostalgic players would have you believe.

    An ideal RPG isn't empty, like early MMORPGs.  An ideal RPG is filled with content.

    Changing gears, imagine you're at a giant forested national park with a mountain...

    • A path exists.  Along it are countless scenic and recreational areas (lakes, rivers, waterfalls, watersports, sunbathing, archery, you name it.)  The journey.
    • 75 miles to the mountain. The destination.
    • The first 5 miles of the trail have mile-markers.
    • Knowing that levels are mile-markers, are really playing games for the mile-markers, the journey, or the destination?
    I point this out because I'm fascinated that some posters will paint themselves as the gamers most interested in the journey, but then they actually only care about the mile-markers.  It's a very interesting phenomenon.  And a little tragic.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • KaledrenKaledren , NYPosts: 310Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Four0Six

    the RPG is gone, and I don't just mean having a sob story to tell in a bar. You see the "time sink" that is intended in a RPG is character development. When it took long hard fought hours of XP, and you faced the potential loss of said XP through death, the time invested was worth more than it is when it takes only week(s) to cap, and death means nothing.

    With the current system of "GET TO END GAME NAO!!!!!!", the journey to that point becomes tedium. Now in a FPS there is none of this, because there is very little character development. Unless you want to count the "human aspect". In truth it is like the whole leveling experience has been reduced to an extended tutorial. In the past this journey was the game, and not something to be suffered through.

    It has been the transition to this that has lead us to a point of pondering the "downfall".

    Nonsense.

    The RPG is as alive as ever.  RPG implies a story and character progression, and modern RPGs and MMORPGs offer that in abundance -- at better quality than most early RPGs actually (certainly I would take Mass Effect or WOW to a deserted island over Sword of Fargoal or Final Fantasy 1 -- even though I absolutely adored the latter two games in their prime.)

    Timesinks were never the point.  They were a necessary evil.  They're the gaming equivalent of trying to stretch 1 day's worth of food to last 2 weeks.  We weren't happier when we were starving, no matter what nostalgic players would have you believe.

    An ideal RPG isn't empty, like early MMORPGs.  An ideal RPG is filled with content.

    Changing gears, imagine you're at a giant forested national park with a mountain...

    • A path exists.  Along it are countless scenic and recreational areas (lakes, rivers, waterfalls, watersports, sunbathing, archery, you name it.)  The journey.
    • 75 miles to the mountain. The destination.
    • The first 5 miles of the trail have mile-markers.
    • Knowing that levels are mile-markers, are really playing games for the mile-markers, the journey, or the destination?
    I point this out because I'm fascinated that some posters will paint themselves as the gamers most interested in the journey, but then they actually only care about the mile-markers.  It's a very interesting phenomenon.  And a little tragic.

    You're "Mile-markers" WERE part of the journey in earlier MMORPG's, because it took more to get them, actually made your character stronger, and meant something beyond a necessary evil to get to "end game".

    Most MMORPG's these days you can plow through mobs from lvl 1 and blink and be at the cap. This gives...at least to me, no sense of accomplishment that means anything, no attachment to my character, nor give the game itself any real worth or attachment.

    What character progression is there really in today's MMORPG's? I mean...you can get to cap in a month or less.

    The reason I played EQ for 5 years was not only the community it had (On my server anyways, can't speak for others) was I was attached to my characters because I worked hard at their development, enjoyed the journey I took them on to get them there, and had many fond memories made during that journey.

    MMORPG's were at least at one point about character development. What you put in to get them to where they were in both their power, lvl (Which meant much more then than the dime a dozen cap wanderers now), and personal reputation you built for them through your actions and interactions. Which...you rarely get these days since you can change character names, sex, switch servers, cross server stuff, etc and just continue acting like a jerk elsewhere fresh.

    Hell...I didn't even care about getting to cap when I played EQ. I mean, sure....I wanted to get there eventually...but it wasn't my only goal. There was plenty to do otherwise and I just enjoyed exploring and meeting people. And when I got there...it was more gratifying than all my experiences in all MMORPG's since combined...because it took a lot to get there. And got my epic weapons too boot which anyone who played EQ can tell you how much that took. BTW, took me a full year of insomnia driven nights to get to cap =P. Another 6 months to get my Beastlords epic weapons.

    I love how some fall back on the Nostalgia excuse. Sure, EQ WAS my 1st MMORPG....sure, I loved it. But that doesn't mean I am not willing to state if I found one better. It's just hasn't happened yet for me. Although Vanguard got REAL close if it weren't for the botched launch. Most are hollow shells of what made MMORPG's unique. Just single player games cloaked in an MMORPG wrapper where other players are basically AI NPC's with foul mouths and bad attitudes in most cases.

     

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Sioux City, IAPosts: 3,828Member


    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by Arclan
    I require depth of gameplay and challenging PVE content, and the mass marketed games out recently are lacking in that department.
    Deus Ex has depth.D3 has very challenging PvE content (as options).Mass marketed games are not lacking in either.
    M. M. O.

    I am surprised you play anything other than D3. You bring it up for your answer to everything. Remember to keep in mind what topic you're posting in and the thread title.

    To the OP:


    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Looking at the success of MOBA's and FPS games like Call of Duty, it's pretty clear that a very large portion of gamers enjoy competitive online gaming.The other common denominator is the fact that these games do not require a huge time investment to get started or to stay viable.
    Yet these same players want to play MMOs?


    Originally posted by Xssiv
    In my opinion, the huge time investment is what's causing MMO's to lose their popularity at an alarming rate. People will say it's because no "good" MMO's have come out in years and while this may be part of the reason, it's clearly a subjective excuse for the dwindling subscription numbers and rise in F2P titles.We're also seeing a significant change in focus from the big game companies like EA and Blizzard, neither of which has any plans to release a new MMO style game at this point in time.
    Has Titan been scrapped? Also what do you consider "significant?" I must have missed that article that said MMO players are on the decline. They may not be concentrated in just handful of games, but the numbers do not seem to suffering, I think.


    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Even Trion, who once touted End of Nations as an RTS MMO, is now changing the game into a MOBA in order to salvage the project. In my opinion, the upcoming big budget MMO's (Wildstar, TESO, AA, and EQN) will most likely be the last round of AAA quality MMO's that will follow the traditional MMO concepts.From there, I believe that the MMO as we know it now will fall back into obscurity with niche games from small developers providing the last resemblance of what the genre once was.
    It will be interesting to see what the future holds. My crystal ball has been foggy for several years now. Either that, or I refuse to see what is shown me :)

    - 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

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,744Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kaledren

    You're "Mile-markers" WERE part of the journey in earlier MMORPG's, because it took more to get them, actually made your character stronger, and meant something beyond a necessary evil to get to "end game".

    Most MMORPG's these days you can plow through mobs from lvl 1 and blink and be at the cap. This gives...at least to me, no sense of accomplishment that means anything, no attachment to my character, nor give the game itself any real worth or attachment.

    What character progression is there really in today's MMORPG's? I mean...you can get to cap in a month or less.

    The reason I played EQ for 5 years was not only the community it had (On my server anyways, can't speak for others) was I was attached to my characters because I worked hard at their development, enjoyed the journey I took them on to get them there, and had many fond memories made during that journey.

    MMORPG's were at least at one point about character development. What you put in to get them to where they were in both their power, lvl (Which meant much more then than the dime a dozen cap wanderers now), and personal reputation you built for them through your actions and interactions. Which...you rarely get these days since you can change character names, sex, switch servers, cross server stuff, etc and just continue acting like a jerk elsewhere fresh.

    Hell...I didn't even care about getting to cap when I played EQ. I mean, sure....I wanted to get there eventually...but it wasn't my only goal. There was plenty to do otherwise and I just enjoyed exploring and meeting people. And when I got there...it was more gratifying than all my experiences in all MMORPG's since combined...because it took a lot to get there. And got my epic weapons too boot which anyone who played EQ can tell you how much that took. BTW, took me a full year of insomnia driven nights to get to cap =P. Another 6 months to get my Beastlords epic weapons.

    I love how some fall back on the Nostalgia excuse. Sure, EQ WAS my 1st MMORPG....sure, I loved it. But that doesn't mean I am not willing to state if I found one better. It's just hasn't happened yet for me. Although Vanguard got REAL close if it weren't for the botched launch. Most are hollow shells of what made MMORPG's unique. Just single player games cloaked in an MMORPG wrapper where other players are basically AI NPC's with foul mouths and bad attitudes in most cases.

     

    Mile-markers are still part of the journey.  They don't exist along the entire journey though -- they don't need to either, since they're just dumb little signposts, while what really matters to most players (usually) is the journey itself and whether it's interesting.  The dumb little signposts never meant a whole lot.  If you take a non-leveling game and attach levels to it, those little signposts don't dramatically increase the meaning of the game.

    It doesn't have to give you a sense of accomplishment to reach the final mile-marker #5.  Everyone understands it's pretty easy to reach, and the only accomplishments people tend to care about in any situation are actual accomplishments.  Like the soft-gates to progression where you have to beat something genuinely hard to keep moving forward along the trail (the equivalent of a chasm with a very challenging rope course which you need to pass successfully to keep moving down the trail.)  These are actual accomplishments which will feel like actual accomplishments.

    Now sure it gets a little hard for the analogy to keep up when we introduce the fact that you can keep doing earlier bosses to eventually get better gear to make that challenging rope course a little easier, but that's just good RPG design where skill matters, but if you get stuck you can always use some progression to gain a little advantage and eventually get unstuck.)

    Which feeds into your next comment about being attached to characters, given that all progression is progression and builds up a powerful character.  It doesn't matter whether it's fictionally tied directly to the character or their gear, because at the end of the day your character is all of that.  And your fireball does 100 more damage.

    I didn't want to get to the cap (the actual, real, end cap) in WOW.  In fact I've never reached it (best-in-slot everything.)  Almost nobody has.  I don't expect to.  But what keeps me playing is the journey -- the fact that the game has more interesting encounters and content and classes than other games I've played.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • LonestryderLonestryder Tampa, FLPosts: 169Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Arclan

    Niche is where it belongs, and is nothing to be ashamed of. Ask Rolls Royce and Farrari if they feel bad about catering to a niche market. I require depth of gameplay and challenging PVE content, and the mass marketed games out recently are lacking in that department.

    Agreed.

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ZombieKen

    If it takes countless hours to get to the "good" content, then yes time investment is a problem for me.

     

    If the "good" content exists at all levels, then time investment is just called playing the game.

     

    If there is no "good" content, the whole process feels like a waste of time.

         That is the PROBLEM with MMO's today..  The good content should start at level 1 and NEVER STOP..  However, in most games, most people perceive "good" content to be end game grind.. When devs and game companies do this, it is a HUGE flaw and normally a sure sign F2P mode with limited future is coming..  Only a small number of games ever gave me the feeling of enjoyment from the start, while the rest made me feel enclosed and smothered..

         If the content and game is "good", one should never feel the need to GRIND out levels to get to max..  I wish I could interview a dev with NO HOLDS BAR on what topics are off limits.. lol 

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard La BarrePosts: 3,549Member Uncommon

    We can thank Everquest for introducing the "end game" based MMORPG model.

    Neither UO nor AC1, the two other oldtimers, were based on any kind of "end game" at some "max level".

    Playing now: WoW, Landmark, GW2, The Crew, SotA

    Top 3 MMORPGs played: UO, AC1 and WoW

    Honorable mentions: AO, LotRO, SW:TOR and GW2.

    ----------------

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.

  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo LondonPosts: 3,221Member

    Just to chip in: Great thread OP. To recap:

    1. MMORPGs are exceedingly challenging to develop successfully

    2. The early mmos had COMMUNITY - and player interaction not game interaction was emphasized. 

    3. There is a market for a good mmorpg where time in = rewarding gameplay out; directly proportional and over a longer time frame which as noted correctly sets the genre apart: Persistence!

    Quality discussion here. I'm hoping MMORPG.com/Pathfinder_Online/GeneralDiscussion_Forums achieves some of these things. I don't believe filling the game full of fun content is the right answer: Space for things to happen (organically) according to player actions is the key. Funny how Tolkien knew all this long ago: Shame he's not a mmorpg designer!

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,001Member Uncommon

    I am not so sure that really is the problem. 

    I think it more have to do with MMOs that try to make everyone happy.

    You want casual players to see 98% of the content but still want to have the players that play 8 hours+ each day.

    You want a gear focused PvE game with raiding but still want PvPers.

    You want a new and fresh game but still uses all the features Wow have to not turn off old Wow players.

    And it goes on...

    It doesn't help that reaching the endgame is something and average gamer do in a few weeks while the endgame is just 10% of the content, that makes the endgame very repetitive and feeling pretty small.

    MMOs need to make the game great for one group of players, not so-so for everyone. And they need to refocus so you don't spend 90% of your time in 10% of the content.

    If you make a game for casual players don't add a huge grind somewhere. And if you make a game for hardcore gamers you can either make leveling a lot slower or skip leveling altogether and put all your work into an awesome endgame, a 3 week tutorial is just annoying.

    And get the difficulty right for the group of players you are aiming for, having leveling so easy a 3 year old can do it while making raiding really hard just messes with all the players.

    The downfall of MMOs is trying to please everyone, it is impossible.

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    We can thank Everquest for introducing the "end game" based MMORPG model.

    Neither UO nor AC1, the two other oldtimers, were based on any kind of "end game" at some "max level".

         Maybe with PoP and LDoN expansions.. Those expansions were the downfall of the game in my opinion.. but at that time, remember that many dev's at Blizzard were playing EQ and went hand in hand..  I don't think it was by chance that Blizzard still in development, went with end game raiding and instance dungeons before EQ released the two above expansions..  PoP was not released until Oct 2002 and WoW was still in development.. I would like to go back to PRE 2002 gaming myself

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon

    Well said Loke :)

         These game companies are designing games to appeal to everyone and everything..  and they can't even "balance" their classes because of it.....

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,001Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MumboJumbo

    Just to chip in: Great thread OP. To recap:

    1. MMORPGs are exceedingly challenging to develop successfully

    2. The early mmos had COMMUNITY - and player interaction not game interaction was emphasized. 

    3. There is a market for a good mmorpg where time in = rewarding gameplay out; directly proportional and over a longer time frame which as noted correctly sets the genre apart: Persistence!

    Quality discussion here. I'm hoping MMORPG.com/Pathfinder_Online/GeneralDiscussion_Forums achieves some of these things. I don't believe filling the game full of fun content is the right answer: Space for things to happen (organically) according to player actions is the key. Funny how Tolkien knew all this long ago: Shame he's not a mmorpg designer!

    But the early MMOs where made by devs who wanted to play the game themselves. They had a very specific focusgroup and the devs only added features they liked themselves.

    Today MMOs are so expensive that suits makes all the important decisions and they only care about cash.

    I do believe that filling a game with fun content is a good idea but you have to fill it with fun content for your specific focus group of customers.You also have to spread that fun so the players wont run past all the fun in a few weeks and then be stuck repeating a few raids forever.

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,001Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    We can thank Everquest for introducing the "end game" based MMORPG model.

    Neither UO nor AC1, the two other oldtimers, were based on any kind of "end game" at some "max level".

         Maybe with PoP and LDoN expansions.. Those expansions were the downfall of the game in my opinion.. but at that time, remember that many dev's at Blizzard were playing EQ and went hand in hand..  I don't think it was by chance that Blizzard still in development, went with end game raiding and instance dungeons before EQ released the two above expansions..  PoP was not released until Oct 2002 and WoW was still in development.. I would like to go back to PRE 2002 gaming myself

    No, it wasn't. Kaplan got hired because he was in the same guild as Morhaime and the idea for Wow was from Strain who wanted to make a similar game to EQ but in the Warcraft world.

    But it is not really the endgame in itself that is the problem, the problem is that they put so little of the game into it. Just skip the leveling process altogether if you want to have a game all about endgame, then you suddenly have the resources to make it really fun and varied. Or you can do what AC and M59 did and have the game about leveling up. Another possibility is to have a player generated sandbox endgame.

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,001Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rydeson

    Well said Loke :)

         These game companies are designing games to appeal to everyone and everything..  and they can't even "balance" their classes because of it.....

    Yeah, that is because they make a PvE game but throw in a little PvP in the hopes of getting millions of PvP players as well. Balancing a PvE game for PvP is close to impossible.

    You could of course make a game that try to make both those happy but then the game have to have equal PvP and PvE, and you would have to still focus on casuals or hardcore players. That is hard enough without making raiders, crafters, arenaplayers and the rest happy as well.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,744Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    We can thank Everquest for introducing the "end game" based MMORPG model.

    Neither UO nor AC1, the two other oldtimers, were based on any kind of "end game" at some "max level".

    In that light (comparing the endgame model with AC1's eternal repetitive mob grind) you make it sound like we really should be thanking EQ1 for improving things.  I'm not sure that was your point...?

    Whereas while the current game elements in modern endgame are clearly superior to AC1's repetition, the endgame model doesn't have too many specific advantages which couldn't be similarly reproduced in a non-endgame game.

    The main advantage of having players hit an endgame is to provide a little more perception of equality so that more grouping happens at endgame.  It's one layer of abstraction.  If you're level 450 and got matched into a dungeon with a bunch of level 350 players, you are probably more inclined to leave the group than when you're all level 90 but your gear is iLVL 450 and theirs is 350, because it requires a little more effort to actually figure out you're that much further ahead of them.  It still happens of course, but not nearly as much as it would in a game where it's the prominently-displayed value. ...but again, this isn't a massive advantage to endgame and I think either model can work fine if designed well.

    Admittedly it's a lot harder to design challenging content for an endless level game than one where you know players will be at a certain specific power when attempting the content.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    We can thank Everquest for introducing the "end game" based MMORPG model.

    Neither UO nor AC1, the two other oldtimers, were based on any kind of "end game" at some "max level".

         Maybe with PoP and LDoN expansions.. Those expansions were the downfall of the game in my opinion.. but at that time, remember that many dev's at Blizzard were playing EQ and went hand in hand..  I don't think it was by chance that Blizzard still in development, went with end game raiding and instance dungeons before EQ released the two above expansions..  PoP was not released until Oct 2002 and WoW was still in development.. I would like to go back to PRE 2002 gaming myself

    No, it wasn't. Kaplan got hired because he was in the same guild as Morhaime and the idea for Wow was from Strain who wanted to make a similar game to EQ but in the Warcraft world.

    But it is not really the endgame in itself that is the problem, the problem is that they put so little of the game into it. Just skip the leveling process altogether if you want to have a game all about endgame, then you suddenly have the resources to make it really fun and varied. Or you can do what AC and M59 did and have the game about leveling up. Another possibility is to have a player generated sandbox endgame.

         Oh don't get me wrong.. I wasn't trying to say certain people by name were at fault.. It was a team effort, and I'm sure Kaplan was only hired along with others cause they shared the same vision their bosses did.. I'm just implying that EQ's vision changed after the first few expansions, most likey because of change in leadership at SOE.. We all know that SOE was playing musical chairs with devs at the time.. Just saying that it's more then coincidence that EQ end game guild raiders ended up working for Bliz :)

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard La BarrePosts: 3,549Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    We can thank Everquest for introducing the "end game" based MMORPG model.

    Neither UO nor AC1, the two other oldtimers, were based on any kind of "end game" at some "max level".

    In that light (comparing the endgame model with AC1's eternal repetitive mob grind) you make it sound like we really should be thanking EQ1 for improving things.  I'm not sure that was your point...?

    You didn't need to be level 126 in AC1 to enjoy all the content, which had some of the best quests ever designed for a MMORPG.

    And in EQ, it was all about camping and grinding mobs too, so what is your point? ;-)

    Playing now: WoW, Landmark, GW2, The Crew, SotA

    Top 3 MMORPGs played: UO, AC1 and WoW

    Honorable mentions: AO, LotRO, SW:TOR and GW2.

    ----------------

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,744Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    You didn't need to be level 126 in AC1 to enjoy all the content, which had some of the best quests ever designed for a MMORPG.

    And in EQ, it was all about camping and grinding mobs too, so what is your point? ;-)

    I guess I never experienced more of AC1 than a bunch of very slow, monotonous, repetitive grinding to find any quests worth doing.

    As for EQ, I guess myself and the other poster misunderstood you as implying EQ invented endgame, rather than brutalized gamers with excessive mob-grind gameplay, forcing the industry to search for better alternatives.  Certainly of the early MMORPGs I did play (didn't play EQ) endless mob grind was the worst part of the experience and new things like quests and instanced dungeons were badly needed.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

Sign In or Register to comment.