"The other major problem is that players expect high tech graphics, so everything done in today's MMO takes 5x longer than back in 2000. So either the world becomes a facade, or there isn't much content "
I don't think is true at all. Once the game creates its engine - its a lot easier to add content then it used to be.
I'd wager that most professional technical artists and creative directors would disagree with you on that one.
I went middle of the road on both so to keep it as even as possible.
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
The graphics problem has become the bane of MMOs. The easymode path we now have reflects the easier content of solo player gaming. And unfortunately wherever solo games go MMOs must follow.
Welcome to the forums btw. Don't let a bad PUG or post get you down!
The graphics issue adds to the start up costs. For a new AAA MMO its between 60 - 100 million dollars to get going. But I don't think that is the bane of MMOs - any more then its the bane of shooters, sports games etc. Gamers want nice graphics - and they vote with their dollar and get them, right?
What's hurting MMOs is actually more subtle, IMHO. I can't take all the credit for seeing this - I had similar ideas but was reading MMO and a player their crystalized it more..
Humans want to pick the fastest easiest path to character advancement. This is true even if the more difficult path is more exciting. This has a lot to do with divided nature of the human mind. Another example would be a manual transmission vs. an automatic with regards to cars. Manuals are hands down more enjoyable if you get the hang of it. But most people will choose automatic because its easier and they just want to get some place. Cars that have 'paddle shifters' even when they are fast - don't get used because the car generally does a pretty good job of shifting for you.
Anyway this 'need' of human beings has been taken up by the manufacturers of MMOs. So they release "quality of life' enhancements. You don't need to run or walk to places - you can beam. You don't need to socialize - the players are found for you. You don't need to use teamwork - just do your own thing and the mob will die. You don't have to worry about trains - mobs won't run. You don't need to worry about your build - your basic build is pre-decided. You don't need to worry about inventory space - you can sell your stuff at the AH anytime. This list goes on and on and on..
Now all of this sounds good right? Damn - yeah good for the casuals right? Yeah sure. But it does two things..
1) It eliminates forced social interaction
2) It allows player to get to the 'game' part of the game a whole lot quicker.
Again THAT sounds good right? But its not for developers. The major issue is that the grind itself is not very interesting. People on forums like this complain bout grinding. But grinding is NOT BAD. Bad grinding IS bad. Tetris is a game that's nothing but grind. Mindsweeper is nothing but grind. Bejeweled/Candy Crush is nothing but grind..
But the 'grind' part of most MMOs wasn't very good. Its just hit some buttons.. The very worst MMOS have mechanics were the grind is just hit any buttons in any order while being reasonable close to any mob. This 'mini-game' so to speak sucks. So when you eliminate all the 'roadblocks' and people get to experience the game. They are like WTF - this sucks. I am outta here.
Some level of forced interaction and some carefully chosen "quality of life" problems are ESSENTIAL for your games longevity. You also want as much 'sandbox' as your gamers can stomach because this will enhance the longevity of your game. Back when Blizzard had real open world PvP people would spend hours 'defending' their town - even if they didn't particularly life PvP. That very modest 'sandbox' saves developers effort..
But its not just the grind - its the forced social interaction. World of Warcraft has successfully removed all of the benefits of social interaction in that game. You can go from 1 to full raid geared without knowing anyone or making friends with anyone. You don't need anyone..
I know yes they still have 'real' raiding. But from a mental standpoint getting gear that's 90% as good with no social interaction is much easier. Almost everyone is going to choose that path - and they have. This saves a ton of time for the gamer. They don't play because their friends need them. They don't need friends.
It's a fascinating picture into human nature. Giving players what they want is really the road to failure. The WoW business model is becoming unsustainable. They players blow through the easy content they wanted - and then just quit. Because the content is easier - even the ones that don't blow through it and quit early don't feel they are missing out on anything because faceroll content makes their achievements 'feel' worthless.
I love WoW for sticking to their guns though. It will be a lesson to the industry as we watch them slip to around half their before LFD user base of 12 million next quarter. There are no shortcuts. Making a game is hard. Blizzard thought well easy was good - easier will be better. They thought well less social is good - no socialization is better. Again it wasn't true.
there is also another leg to keep in mind. One of the contributing factors to "bad" grind is demographics. Lets just take an example of two; raiders / soloers. For the soloer landscape content IS the game for the Raider that content is just a means to an end getting ready for the weekend raid. You are not going to get that landscape content grind/reward mix right. As they are looking for different things from it. As you add more demographics the problem snowballs.
It' more than achievable to make a balance grind to a specific demographic or playstyle. Single player games have been doing it for decades. It's when you start adding large numbers of completely different play styles and demographics that the wheels fall off.
" there is also another leg to keep in mind. One of the contributing factors to "bad" grind is demographics. Lets just take an example of two; raiders / soloers. For the soloer landscape content IS the game for the Raider that content is just a means to an end getting ready for the weekend raid. You are not going to get that landscape content grind/reward mix right. As they are looking for different things from it. As you add more demographics the problem snowballs. "
Well the problem that WoW is having is that the developers decided that all content needs to work for all people. Before that crew took over they went with the traditional model of a kind of pyramid of content. The idea was that the game was easy to play but hard to master. To that they tied forced social interaction.. The more difficult content that you wanted to do - the more sociable you had to become. But if you wanted to stick to the less sociable content - they had that too.
I think we are seeing very small return to that with the advent of 'flex' raiding. Blizzard is starting to see the value of forcing players to work together (as unpopular as that sounds).. But its likely to be too little too late. Its not important at all from a company standpoint that you make your players see all the content. All you want to do is get as many players playing as possible for as long as possible - so they keep paying.
If seeing the content was the key to that - I couldn't knock them. But it sure doesn't seem to be.
Developers paint a false picture of their games,that is why people get excited to only be let down once they reach the game.
It is funny the title of this thread,i just finished watching an older movie based on a falling star "Stardust".
Stars however burn VERY bright and for a long time before dying,MMOPRPG's are neither very bright ,nor are they surviving a very long time.
Even in the game,i consider the best overall design ever,i still see gamer's following one distinct pattern,speed leveling and chasing the best max level loot.That is not what Role play gaming means but devs are catering to this and players seem to not know how to game any other way.
We need to lose all these old school producers,they obviously cannot think outside the bubble.We need some fresh new blood but that is tough to see a developer with a lot of money hiring someone totally new to the genre.They have a board,investors,they want to see a direction that shows them profits,new faces,new different ideas seem sketchy to them.
It is going to take a ton of luck to see that one bright mind getting a job with a rich investor/developer and being able to fulfill something fresh and exciting.Imo the odds are staggering ,there will only be one such person and one such attempt and chances it succeeds is again luck.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
" there is also another leg to keep in mind. One of the contributing factors to "bad" grind is demographics. Lets just take an example of two; raiders / soloers. For the soloer landscape content IS the game for the Raider that content is just a means to an end getting ready for the weekend raid. You are not going to get that landscape content grind/reward mix right. As they are looking for different things from it. As you add more demographics the problem snowballs. "
Well the problem that WoW is having is that the developers decided that all content needs to work for all people. Before that crew took over they went with the traditional model of a kind of pyramid of content. The idea was that the game was easy to play but hard to master. To that they tied forced social interaction.. The more difficult content that you wanted to do - the more sociable you had to become. But if you wanted to stick to the less sociable content - they had that too.
I think we are seeing very small return to that with the advent of 'flex' raiding. Blizzard is starting to see the value of forcing players to work together (as unpopular as that sounds).. But its likely to be too little too late. Its not important at all from a company standpoint that you make your players see all the content. All you want to do is get as many players playing as possible for as long as possible - so they keep paying.
If seeing the content was the key to that - I couldn't knock them. But it sure doesn't seem to be.
Hmmm ok time to put on our "way back" glasses
Wow was not originally targeted at its current player base. They were after a specific demographic of the era.
Once upon a time the were a couple handfuls of mmo on the periphery of gaming. Each was unique in content and delivery but they all shared 1 thing. To one degree or another they were all unforgiving. That similarity created a completely new but small demographic in the mmo sphere. Burnouts even people who loved their particular game eventually had 1 corpse run too many 1 pk too many. Wow was designed with malice aforethought as the mmo version of Vegas; the vacation spot one could come blow off steam and depress mindlessly rolling through content. Then they happily returned to their poisen of choice. Wow did very well out of this but wasn't in any danger of de-throning EQ
Then something happened that no one including Blizz expected. that style of play enticed gamers that were on no-bodies radar to enter the scene. Bliz merely adapted to changing market conditions. Over time Bliz has experimented on it's player base via pvp/pve ratios; easier/harder pve content and I assume that experimentation goes on.
Blizes one HUGE advantage when this happened is that they already had existing systems/feature sets in place that they could modify add to or change to fit with the new demographics. Everyone else then; to the bright shiny new pos that launches tomorrow don't have that advantage they all have to build systems/ feature sets from scratch designed for multiple divergent demographics in direct competition with an entity that has had all the time in the world to perfect it's feature sets. Since every bright eyed mmo dv and pub keep trying to attract the same divergent mass of demographics WoW already services they always run into the following wall.
Marketing 101 if you have the same or similar product/service as a competitor you have the following options
1. Better mousetrap
2. lower price point
3. better marketing
4. buyout the competition
They would have better luck targeting only a handful of those demographics building core systems around them or targeting a demographic outside the mmo sphere entirely.
EDIT: I agree the blizz biggest potential problem is the sheer diversity of it's demographics and keeping them happy, but since every competitor is trying to do the same thing with less polish they are in no danger of stealing WOW's market share. Currently wow's biggest competitor is age.
Wow was not originally targeted at its current player base. They were after a specific demographic of the era.
Once upon a time the were a couple handfuls of mmo on the periphery of gaming. Each was unique in content and delivery but they all shared 1 thing. To one degree or another they were all unforgiving. That similarity created a completely new but small demographic in the mmo sphere. Burnouts even people who loved their particular game eventually had 1 corpse run too many 1 pk too many. Wow was designed with malice aforethought as the mmo version of Vegas; the vacation spot one could come blow off steam and depress mindlessly rolling through content. Then they happily returned to their poisen of choice. Wow did very well out of this but wasn't in any danger of de-throning EQ.
Then something happened that no one including Blizz expected. that style of play enticed gamers that were on no-bodies radar to enter the scene. Bliz merely adapted to changing market conditions. Over time Bliz has experimented on it's player base via pvp/pve ratios; easier/harder pve content and I assume that experimentation goes on.
WOW was always intended to be a far more accessible, more forgiving and less grindy MMO than its predecessors. What happened in WOW is exactly what they expected to happen, only it happened at a far more accelerated rate in the first six months than predicted.
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
Wow was not originally targeted at its current player base. They were after a specific demographic of the era.
Once upon a time the were a couple handfuls of mmo on the periphery of gaming. Each was unique in content and delivery but they all shared 1 thing. To one degree or another they were all unforgiving. That similarity created a completely new but small demographic in the mmo sphere. Burnouts even people who loved their particular game eventually had 1 corpse run too many 1 pk too many. Wow was designed with malice aforethought as the mmo version of Vegas; the vacation spot one could come blow off steam and depress mindlessly rolling through content. Then they happily returned to their poisen of choice. Wow did very well out of this but wasn't in any danger of de-throning EQ.
Then something happened that no one including Blizz expected. that style of play enticed gamers that were on no-bodies radar to enter the scene. Bliz merely adapted to changing market conditions. Over time Bliz has experimented on it's player base via pvp/pve ratios; easier/harder pve content and I assume that experimentation goes on.
WOW was always intended to be a far more accessible, more forgiving and less grindy MMO than its predecessors. What happened in WOW is exactly what they expected to happen, only it happened at a far more accelerated rate in the first six months than predicted.
Yup to the more forgiving gaming no to the they expected the quadrupling of the entire mmo population, the influx composed of non mmo gamers many weren't even "gamers") all in their game. They said at the time it took them by surprise. Up until then they were targeting an existing untapped mmo market share.
WOW was always intended to be a far more accessible, more forgiving and less grindy MMO than its predecessors. What happened in WOW is exactly what they expected to happen, only it happened at a far more accelerated rate in the first six months than predicted.
Sure. WoW in some respects was easier. It certainly had less grind. This doesn't mean that it needed to become even more easy and less sociable to grow its base to unprecedented levels. Blizzard carried the same design they used in Vanilla (with raiding becoming slightly more accessible) and hit 11 million players. In fact during that period - even between expansions they didn't lose any players. This clearly was a trend though - and I don't think they anticpated that kind of growth. However what those guys did worked.
There is such a thing as too much though accessibility and too much ease. You really want your players to waste some time. A great example of this is bag space. It's trivial for every developer to give players long distance access to a bank and make that bank GIGANTIC. They don't do this because they want you to screw around with your inventory. This is a simple way to keep your players occupied a little longer in a way that feels organic.
I'd point out as well that realistically WoW was actually a BETTER GAME then the competition. It had a better engine then EQ and EQ2 (which could produce some good graphics but ran like a dog). It had a better interface. And the mini game of combat was more frenetic - with more ability had a for more "actiony' feel to it.
If "easier' with "no gear grind' = success then Guild Wars 2 would be the biggest game ever. Clearly you need a whole lot more then this.
- Easy. So easy that you don't need any teamwork = no need to interact with other players.
- Instances. Same crap as "outside", just more hitpoints and they hit harder.
- Fast exp. Cough and get exp - fart and get a whole level.
- There's such a rush to this 'End Game', like it's the whole point in the game. To me it's quite the opposite, I like adventuring, checking out places, crafting, learning new skills here and there. When the end game hits, I usually quit. I don't see the fun in running around endlessly same old instances in hopes of better gear, so I can then run more instances over and over again. It is just biggest waste of time and zero fun.
This is the only reason I still love Eve, even though I suck at it, die alot, rage and most of the time hate it - but it doesn't have those above mentioned problems. There is no end game, gear grind, exp and you aren't limited to choose 3 out of 5 professions while crafting stuff.
WOW was always intended to be a far more accessible, more forgiving and less grindy MMO than its predecessors. What happened in WOW is exactly what they expected to happen, only it happened at a far more accelerated rate in the first six months than predicted.
Sure. WoW in some respects was easier. It certainly had less grind. This doesn't mean that it needed to become even more easy and less sociable to grow its base to unprecedented levels. Blizzard carried the same design they used in Vanilla (with raiding becoming slightly more accessible) and hit 11 million players. In fact during that period - even between expansions they didn't lose any players. This clearly was a trend though - and I don't think they anticpated that kind of growth. However what those guys did worked.
There is such a thing as too much though accessibility and too much ease. You really want your players to waste some time. A great example of this is bag space. It's trivial for every developer to give players long distance access to a bank and make that bank GIGANTIC. They don't do this because they want you to screw around with your inventory. This is a simple way to keep your players occupied a little longer in a way that feels organic.
I'd point out as well that realistically WoW was actually a BETTER GAME then the competition. It had a better engine then EQ and EQ2 (which could produce some good graphics but ran like a dog). It had a better interface. And the mini game of combat was more frenetic - with more ability had a for more "actiony' feel to it.
If "easier' with "no gear grind' = success then Guild Wars 2 would be the biggest game ever. Clearly you need a whole lot more then this.
Oh agreed there is an insane amount of untapped market share floating around the mmo scene these days. Unfortunately for unrealistic devs/pubs it's spread across multable play styles. They invariably try to grab them all and build feature sets around them that become less polished with each new demographic they try too woo. It's a factor of time/resources I don't care if your team is 30 or 3000 you are not going to be able to design/implement from scratch systems and feature sets catering to wildly divergent play styles in a reasonable(or affordable) amount of time. The process it self gets in the way. You know you've aimed to unrealistically high when "design compromises" have more to do with deadlines than technical issues. That's just bad planning and poor goal setting.
EDIT:
And yes functionally wow was a better product than anything out there. Even without the mass influx they were on track to take the crown eventually, but no where near the speed that it happened with the "invasion" .
MMO games are mostly trash. Go look at the games list, hardly any of the games listed get a review over 9.0, about 2 or three got that score out of the all the MMO's released. Let's face it, the genre is a mess.
I agree with all you say but I think this highlights the OP's original question. Where are the new fresh idea's to get us old school players re-invested in the genre? We do have a been there done that mentality and with all the new "cutting edge OMG Amazing" tech coming out companies are simply putting out what seems to be more of the same old same old with new graphics.
The problem is, you don't want new, fresh ideas, you want the old ideas that failed 10 years ago in old-school games. You're not looking for something new, you're looking for something old, dressed up to look newer. The only thing that's going to get you reinvested is for the industry to bring back failed game mechanics that have long been rejected by the mainstream audience. In fact, aren't you looking for the same old same old with new graphics?
Good posts. There are a ton of different games out there. If one style isn't doing it for you then play something that does. Stop buying new games just because they're new releases. Start to develop realistic expectations.
I really like the Koster reference. I think it has a lot of truth in it as does the point maplestone makes about vocalizing and projecting blame. It might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game experience entirely new so we get consuming engagement.
Good point, I tried that, have played a wide variety of MMORPG's over the years including not only most major AAA releases, but several indy ones such as Fallen Earth, Xyson, Uncharted Waters and a few I've forgotton.
I've stopped buying new games anymore, as I've seen nothing that would likely interest me and I've returned to playing a circa 2003 version of DAOC because it delivers what I'm looking for.
While it might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game entirely new, it would be nice if we could get just 2 or 3 titles that delivered on that premise. Heck, I'd take one right now.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't seem to understand that. They spend all their time whining about how much they hate MMOs, but they still buy every single one that comes out and play every single one on the market and keep whining. They can't imagine just... not playing MMOs anymore. Stop playing all MMOs period. Heck, stop playing video games period. Go find a different hobby. Why are so many people utterly unable to do that?
Good posts. There are a ton of different games out there. If one style isn't doing it for you then play something that does. Stop buying new games just because they're new releases. Start to develop realistic expectations.
I really like the Koster reference. I think it has a lot of truth in it as does the point maplestone makes about vocalizing and projecting blame. It might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game experience entirely new so we get consuming engagement.
Good point, I tried that, have played a wide variety of MMORPG's over the years including not only most major AAA releases, but several indy ones such as Fallen Earth, Xyson, Uncharted Waters and a few I've forgotton.
I've stopped buying new games anymore, as I've seen nothing that would likely interest me and I've returned to playing a circa 2003 version of DAOC because it delivers what I'm looking for.
While it might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game entirely new, it would be nice if we could get just 2 or 3 titles that delivered on that premise. Heck, I'd take one right now.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't seem to understand that. They spend all their time whining about how much they hate MMOs, but they still buy every single one that comes out and play every single one on the market and keep whining. They can't imagine just... not playing MMOs anymore. Stop playing all MMOs period. Heck, stop playing video games period. Go find a different hobby. Why are so many people utterly unable to do that?
Same reason huge numbers of people stand in line days on end for a phone they don't really need that might be marginally better than the one they have. Some people are just wired that way.
Good posts. There are a ton of different games out there. If one style isn't doing it for you then play something that does. Stop buying new games just because they're new releases. Start to develop realistic expectations.
I really like the Koster reference. I think it has a lot of truth in it as does the point maplestone makes about vocalizing and projecting blame. It might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game experience entirely new so we get consuming engagement.
Good point, I tried that, have played a wide variety of MMORPG's over the years including not only most major AAA releases, but several indy ones such as Fallen Earth, Xyson, Uncharted Waters and a few I've forgotton.
I've stopped buying new games anymore, as I've seen nothing that would likely interest me and I've returned to playing a circa 2003 version of DAOC because it delivers what I'm looking for.
While it might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game entirely new, it would be nice if we could get just 2 or 3 titles that delivered on that premise. Heck, I'd take one right now.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't seem to understand that. They spend all their time whining about how much they hate MMOs, but they still buy every single one that comes out and play every single one on the market and keep whining. They can't imagine just... not playing MMOs anymore. Stop playing all MMOs period. Heck, stop playing video games period. Go find a different hobby. Why are so many people utterly unable to do that?
Same reason huge numbers of people stand in line days on end for a phone they don't really need that might be marginally better than the one they have. Some people are just wired that way.
Good posts. There are a ton of different games out there. If one style isn't doing it for you then play something that does. Stop buying new games just because they're new releases. Start to develop realistic expectations.
I really like the Koster reference. I think it has a lot of truth in it as does the point maplestone makes about vocalizing and projecting blame. It might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game experience entirely new so we get consuming engagement.
Good point, I tried that, have played a wide variety of MMORPG's over the years including not only most major AAA releases, but several indy ones such as Fallen Earth, Xyson, Uncharted Waters and a few I've forgotton.
I've stopped buying new games anymore, as I've seen nothing that would likely interest me and I've returned to playing a circa 2003 version of DAOC because it delivers what I'm looking for.
While it might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game entirely new, it would be nice if we could get just 2 or 3 titles that delivered on that premise. Heck, I'd take one right now.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't seem to understand that. They spend all their time whining about how much they hate MMOs, but they still buy every single one that comes out and play every single one on the market and keep whining. They can't imagine just... not playing MMOs anymore. Stop playing all MMOs period. Heck, stop playing video games period. Go find a different hobby. Why are so many people utterly unable to do that?
Same reason huge numbers of people stand in line days on end for a phone they don't really need that might be marginally better than the one they have. Some people are just wired that way.
Because they're idiots?
I don't know if I'd go that far but they are definitely wired differently than me
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't seem to understand that. They spend all their time whining about how much they hate MMOs, but they still buy every single one that comes out and play every single one on the market and keep whining. They can't imagine just... not playing MMOs anymore. Stop playing all MMOs period. Heck, stop playing video games period. Go find a different hobby. Why are so many people utterly unable to do that?
I think the issue is that people don't really understand much of the technology behind the MMO. FWIW I play GW2 some. I like it some. It has some real fun aspects. I am more casual then most and have likely put less hours in then some people did in their first month..
But the game was a classic crash and burn kind of start. It was pretty much the answer to everything at first - and ended up being not the answer for most? Why?
Computers haven't changed. Sure they are faster - but they are not 'smarter.' When you are playing an MMO there are limited things they can do to make the game interesting. This is why developers fall back on the same ideas - because to a limited extent - They work.
It's the same for all aspects of gaming. Shooters are very similiar to how they have always been. So are platformers - so are so called 3d platformers. So are sports games - and so are fighting games. It's pretty much the same thing with a new coat of paint.
Really for gamers you want the games that feature the best execution of the same old ideas. This is alot more realistic then hoping for a bunch of new ideas that just don't work..
Let's take dynamic events. GW2 had some gamers CONVINCED that players could make lasting impact by triggering these events - and thus their actions 'mattered' in the gaming universe. The game would react and evolve by what the players did.. In reality they were more like escort quests you could participate in - that cycle every few minutes.
Don't get me wrong - I actually like the DEs in GW2. But its people who don't understand anything about how computers work who have unrealistic expectations. Computers are stupid - and AI sucks. The mobs in GW2 still don't know how to path right - and its 2013!
Every 'new' idea has been tried - and has usually been discarded for a reason. There are reasons why 'build your own class' systems don't work. And their are reasons why developers stick with concepts like the Holy Trinity. And there are reasons why they continue to rely on dungeons and raids. It's not some laziness - its that no one has figured out ways of improving gaming that really work.
its important to support the developers that do the best job possible of polishing and balancing using the best known game design. Hoping for the next big thing is unrealistic. They can't make a robot Vacumn cleaner that doesn't get stuck on my chair - never mind a MMO that plays like a table top rpg.
In fact when I read about a game like EQN which seems to promise everything - I am pretty certain they will deliver nothing. Last I checked SOE doesn't have a lock on all the intelligent programmers. If there were really good solutions to the current MMO problems - we would be using them. There are only tradedoffs. No roles? Kiss accessible teamwork good bye. No gear grind? Kiss long term player commitment good bye. etc etc. Dungeon finders? Kiss difficult dungeons goodbye.
Good point, I tried that, have played a wide variety of MMORPG's over the years including not only most major AAA releases, but several indy ones such as Fallen Earth, Xyson, Uncharted Waters and a few I've forgotton.
I've stopped buying new games anymore, as I've seen nothing that would likely interest me and I've returned to playing a circa 2003 version of DAOC because it delivers what I'm looking for.
While it might not be realistic to expect developers to make each game entirely new, it would be nice if we could get just 2 or 3 titles that delivered on that premise. Heck, I'd take one right now.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't seem to understand that. They spend all their time whining about how much they hate MMOs, but they still buy every single one that comes out and play every single one on the market and keep whining. They can't imagine just... not playing MMOs anymore. Stop playing all MMOs period. Heck, stop playing video games period. Go find a different hobby. Why are so many people utterly unable to do that?
Why do you even care, Cephus?
It's funny because you consistently spend part of your spare time whining about these supposed "whiners". Where does that leave you?
Note: I am not one of those gamers that buys every bloody McMMO that comes out on a daily basis and then whines when feeling unfulfilled. I prefer to spend my time with one or two quality MMOs at a time and enjoy them for years at a time. I simply do not understand why you seem to care so much about them there "whiners".
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Well, I myself started with UO when it launched back in 97' never found an MMO that gave me that same "buzz" since then. While I don't whine or complain a lot about MMO's or where they've headed. I will say after vanilla WoW it felt like MMO's started to be designed without a lot of things that made MMO's different from the RPG game you played on whatever console at that time. MMO's have been turning to a less social/community friendly path with "group/dungeon" finders for those working people who don't have the time for shouting in chat.. but what happened to socializing making friends setting maybe a schedule with these friends so you won't have to? BOOM Dungeon/Group Finder! People use "real world", "work", and "family" as reasons to why MMO's have to be beat in a day *CONGRATS YOU WON WORLD OF WARCRAFT!" But then they whine about there's nothing left to do. So dev's hear this and make "sandbox" MMO's that done hold your hands tell you where to go what to do, then those same people complain "it's stupid, there's no quests, there's no endgame!.. or "its too hard, this will fail"
Also, another large part I would say is the access to PC's. Back in the day when UO came out, not everyone and their brother had a PC, today PC's are about as common as cell phones. So a lot of the time (no offense to those of you who don't do this) you'll get the gamer, who typically plays on a console, hop on the PC fire up an MMO and go into it with the same expectations as he/she has with CoD or something. I'm sorry but to me MMO's have strayed so far from where they were. And most people that do play them still me being one, also don't spend much time in the forums for them complaining about something because I'm busy enjoying it.
TL:DR
Easier access to PC's now compared to when MMO's like UO came out
Younger Gamers not fully understanding MMOs aren't CoD/LoL
OKAY done sorry, lol did this on my phone at work fingers are sore
Sad part is that same MMOs are among longest and most expensive games to develop. Yet they burn and die in 2 months.
Why do you care?
Personally i don't. I am not a game dev and i care less if a game crash and burn in 2 weeks, or 2 days.
Now if a game gives me 2 months of fun .. hey .. that is not bad. I will take it.
Would you rather a game that gave you 2 months of fun, or 6 months of fun?
3 different games giving me 2 months of fun each .. is the same as one game giving me 6 months of fun .. assuming, of course, the levels of fun are the same.
Sad part is that same MMOs are among longest and most expensive games to develop. Yet they burn and die in 2 months.
Why do you care?
Personally i don't. I am not a game dev and i care less if a game crash and burn in 2 weeks, or 2 days.
Now if a game gives me 2 months of fun .. hey .. that is not bad. I will take it.
Would you rather a game that gave you 2 months of fun, or 6 months of fun?
3 different games giving me 2 months of fun each .. is the same as one game giving me 6 months of fun .. assuming, of course, the levels of fun are the same.
That wasn't really answering the question...
Would you rather a game (one game) gave you 2 months of fun, or 6 months of fun?
Would you rather a game (one game) gave you 2 months of fun, or 6 months of fun?
For me, there is no difference. If a game will give me 6 months of fun, I'm fine with it; if not, I'm fine with it too. Sure, it's nice to have a game which I can play for a long time, like, for example, I'm currently playing WoT - 2 years and counting, I'm still having a blast every time I log in.
But if there would be a game tomorrow that'll give me more fun, I'll switch without any negative emotions or hesitations. People talk about "investing" in the game, and hesitance to lose "the investments" - I'm not "investing" in games, I'm getting fun out of them. All my attitudes towards games are measured in fun received, not "investments made".
*shrug* Having one game giving 6 month of fun is better than giving 2 months of fun, especially if it's a F2P game, but it's a "little" better, while making such game is a lot harder; so I don't really expect them to be done with that goal in mind.
Comments
I'd wager that most professional technical artists and creative directors would disagree with you on that one.
To use 3D shooters as an example:
2000 - Blood 2 (video)
2013 - DUST 514 (video)
I went middle of the road on both so to keep it as even as possible.
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
there is also another leg to keep in mind. One of the contributing factors to "bad" grind is demographics. Lets just take an example of two; raiders / soloers. For the soloer landscape content IS the game for the Raider that content is just a means to an end getting ready for the weekend raid. You are not going to get that landscape content grind/reward mix right. As they are looking for different things from it. As you add more demographics the problem snowballs.
It' more than achievable to make a balance grind to a specific demographic or playstyle. Single player games have been doing it for decades. It's when you start adding large numbers of completely different play styles and demographics that the wheels fall off.
" there is also another leg to keep in mind. One of the contributing factors to "bad" grind is demographics. Lets just take an example of two; raiders / soloers. For the soloer landscape content IS the game for the Raider that content is just a means to an end getting ready for the weekend raid. You are not going to get that landscape content grind/reward mix right. As they are looking for different things from it. As you add more demographics the problem snowballs. "
Well the problem that WoW is having is that the developers decided that all content needs to work for all people. Before that crew took over they went with the traditional model of a kind of pyramid of content. The idea was that the game was easy to play but hard to master. To that they tied forced social interaction.. The more difficult content that you wanted to do - the more sociable you had to become. But if you wanted to stick to the less sociable content - they had that too.
I think we are seeing very small return to that with the advent of 'flex' raiding. Blizzard is starting to see the value of forcing players to work together (as unpopular as that sounds).. But its likely to be too little too late. Its not important at all from a company standpoint that you make your players see all the content. All you want to do is get as many players playing as possible for as long as possible - so they keep paying.
If seeing the content was the key to that - I couldn't knock them. But it sure doesn't seem to be.
Developers paint a false picture of their games,that is why people get excited to only be let down once they reach the game.
It is funny the title of this thread,i just finished watching an older movie based on a falling star "Stardust".
Stars however burn VERY bright and for a long time before dying,MMOPRPG's are neither very bright ,nor are they surviving a very long time.
Even in the game,i consider the best overall design ever,i still see gamer's following one distinct pattern,speed leveling and chasing the best max level loot.That is not what Role play gaming means but devs are catering to this and players seem to not know how to game any other way.
We need to lose all these old school producers,they obviously cannot think outside the bubble.We need some fresh new blood but that is tough to see a developer with a lot of money hiring someone totally new to the genre.They have a board,investors,they want to see a direction that shows them profits,new faces,new different ideas seem sketchy to them.
It is going to take a ton of luck to see that one bright mind getting a job with a rich investor/developer and being able to fulfill something fresh and exciting.Imo the odds are staggering ,there will only be one such person and one such attempt and chances it succeeds is again luck.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Hmmm ok time to put on our "way back" glasses
Wow was not originally targeted at its current player base. They were after a specific demographic of the era.
Once upon a time the were a couple handfuls of mmo on the periphery of gaming. Each was unique in content and delivery but they all shared 1 thing. To one degree or another they were all unforgiving. That similarity created a completely new but small demographic in the mmo sphere. Burnouts even people who loved their particular game eventually had 1 corpse run too many 1 pk too many. Wow was designed with malice aforethought as the mmo version of Vegas; the vacation spot one could come blow off steam and depress mindlessly rolling through content. Then they happily returned to their poisen of choice. Wow did very well out of this but wasn't in any danger of de-throning EQ
Then something happened that no one including Blizz expected. that style of play enticed gamers that were on no-bodies radar to enter the scene. Bliz merely adapted to changing market conditions. Over time Bliz has experimented on it's player base via pvp/pve ratios; easier/harder pve content and I assume that experimentation goes on.
Blizes one HUGE advantage when this happened is that they already had existing systems/feature sets in place that they could modify add to or change to fit with the new demographics. Everyone else then; to the bright shiny new pos that launches tomorrow don't have that advantage they all have to build systems/ feature sets from scratch designed for multiple divergent demographics in direct competition with an entity that has had all the time in the world to perfect it's feature sets. Since every bright eyed mmo dv and pub keep trying to attract the same divergent mass of demographics WoW already services they always run into the following wall.
Marketing 101 if you have the same or similar product/service as a competitor you have the following options
1. Better mousetrap
2. lower price point
3. better marketing
4. buyout the competition
They would have better luck targeting only a handful of those demographics building core systems around them or targeting a demographic outside the mmo sphere entirely.
EDIT: I agree the blizz biggest potential problem is the sheer diversity of it's demographics and keeping them happy, but since every competitor is trying to do the same thing with less polish they are in no danger of stealing WOW's market share. Currently wow's biggest competitor is age.
WOW was always intended to be a far more accessible, more forgiving and less grindy MMO than its predecessors. What happened in WOW is exactly what they expected to happen, only it happened at a far more accelerated rate in the first six months than predicted.
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
Yup to the more forgiving gaming no to the they expected the quadrupling of the entire mmo population, the influx composed of non mmo gamers many weren't even "gamers") all in their game. They said at the time it took them by surprise. Up until then they were targeting an existing untapped mmo market share.
Sure. WoW in some respects was easier. It certainly had less grind. This doesn't mean that it needed to become even more easy and less sociable to grow its base to unprecedented levels. Blizzard carried the same design they used in Vanilla (with raiding becoming slightly more accessible) and hit 11 million players. In fact during that period - even between expansions they didn't lose any players. This clearly was a trend though - and I don't think they anticpated that kind of growth. However what those guys did worked.
There is such a thing as too much though accessibility and too much ease. You really want your players to waste some time. A great example of this is bag space. It's trivial for every developer to give players long distance access to a bank and make that bank GIGANTIC. They don't do this because they want you to screw around with your inventory. This is a simple way to keep your players occupied a little longer in a way that feels organic.
I'd point out as well that realistically WoW was actually a BETTER GAME then the competition. It had a better engine then EQ and EQ2 (which could produce some good graphics but ran like a dog). It had a better interface. And the mini game of combat was more frenetic - with more ability had a for more "actiony' feel to it.
If "easier' with "no gear grind' = success then Guild Wars 2 would be the biggest game ever. Clearly you need a whole lot more then this.
My problem with current mmorpgs:
- Easy. So easy that you don't need any teamwork = no need to interact with other players.
- Instances. Same crap as "outside", just more hitpoints and they hit harder.
- Fast exp. Cough and get exp - fart and get a whole level.
- There's such a rush to this 'End Game', like it's the whole point in the game. To me it's quite the opposite, I like adventuring, checking out places, crafting, learning new skills here and there. When the end game hits, I usually quit. I don't see the fun in running around endlessly same old instances in hopes of better gear, so I can then run more instances over and over again. It is just biggest waste of time and zero fun.
This is the only reason I still love Eve, even though I suck at it, die alot, rage and most of the time hate it
- but it doesn't have those above mentioned problems. There is no end game, gear grind, exp and you aren't limited to choose 3 out of 5 professions while crafting stuff.
Oh agreed there is an insane amount of untapped market share floating around the mmo scene these days. Unfortunately for unrealistic devs/pubs it's spread across multable play styles. They invariably try to grab them all and build feature sets around them that become less polished with each new demographic they try too woo. It's a factor of time/resources I don't care if your team is 30 or 3000 you are not going to be able to design/implement from scratch systems and feature sets catering to wildly divergent play styles in a reasonable(or affordable) amount of time. The process it self gets in the way. You know you've aimed to unrealistically high when "design compromises" have more to do with deadlines than technical issues. That's just bad planning and poor goal setting.
EDIT:
And yes functionally wow was a better product than anything out there. Even without the mass influx they were on track to take the crown eventually, but no where near the speed that it happened with the "invasion"
.
The problem is, you don't want new, fresh ideas, you want the old ideas that failed 10 years ago in old-school games. You're not looking for something new, you're looking for something old, dressed up to look newer. The only thing that's going to get you reinvested is for the industry to bring back failed game mechanics that have long been rejected by the mainstream audience. In fact, aren't you looking for the same old same old with new graphics?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't seem to understand that. They spend all their time whining about how much they hate MMOs, but they still buy every single one that comes out and play every single one on the market and keep whining. They can't imagine just... not playing MMOs anymore. Stop playing all MMOs period. Heck, stop playing video games period. Go find a different hobby. Why are so many people utterly unable to do that?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Same reason huge numbers of people stand in line days on end for a phone they don't really need that might be marginally better than the one they have. Some people are just wired that way.
Because they're idiots?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I don't know if I'd go that far but they are definitely wired differently than me
I think the issue is that people don't really understand much of the technology behind the MMO. FWIW I play GW2 some. I like it some. It has some real fun aspects. I am more casual then most and have likely put less hours in then some people did in their first month..
But the game was a classic crash and burn kind of start. It was pretty much the answer to everything at first - and ended up being not the answer for most? Why?
Computers haven't changed. Sure they are faster - but they are not 'smarter.' When you are playing an MMO there are limited things they can do to make the game interesting. This is why developers fall back on the same ideas - because to a limited extent - They work.
It's the same for all aspects of gaming. Shooters are very similiar to how they have always been. So are platformers - so are so called 3d platformers. So are sports games - and so are fighting games. It's pretty much the same thing with a new coat of paint.
Really for gamers you want the games that feature the best execution of the same old ideas. This is alot more realistic then hoping for a bunch of new ideas that just don't work..
Let's take dynamic events. GW2 had some gamers CONVINCED that players could make lasting impact by triggering these events - and thus their actions 'mattered' in the gaming universe. The game would react and evolve by what the players did.. In reality they were more like escort quests you could participate in - that cycle every few minutes.
Don't get me wrong - I actually like the DEs in GW2. But its people who don't understand anything about how computers work who have unrealistic expectations. Computers are stupid - and AI sucks. The mobs in GW2 still don't know how to path right - and its 2013!
Every 'new' idea has been tried - and has usually been discarded for a reason. There are reasons why 'build your own class' systems don't work. And their are reasons why developers stick with concepts like the Holy Trinity. And there are reasons why they continue to rely on dungeons and raids. It's not some laziness - its that no one has figured out ways of improving gaming that really work.
its important to support the developers that do the best job possible of polishing and balancing using the best known game design. Hoping for the next big thing is unrealistic. They can't make a robot Vacumn cleaner that doesn't get stuck on my chair - never mind a MMO that plays like a table top rpg.
In fact when I read about a game like EQN which seems to promise everything - I am pretty certain they will deliver nothing. Last I checked SOE doesn't have a lock on all the intelligent programmers. If there were really good solutions to the current MMO problems - we would be using them. There are only tradedoffs. No roles? Kiss accessible teamwork good bye. No gear grind? Kiss long term player commitment good bye. etc etc. Dungeon finders? Kiss difficult dungeons goodbye.
Why do you even care, Cephus?
It's funny because you consistently spend part of your spare time whining about these supposed "whiners". Where does that leave you?
Note: I am not one of those gamers that buys every bloody McMMO that comes out on a daily basis and then whines when feeling unfulfilled. I prefer to spend my time with one or two quality MMOs at a time and enjoy them for years at a time. I simply do not understand why you seem to care so much about them there "whiners".
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Why do you care?
Personally i don't. I am not a game dev and i care less if a game crash and burn in 2 weeks, or 2 days.
Now if a game gives me 2 months of fun .. hey .. that is not bad. I will take it.
Would you rather a game that gave you 2 months of fun, or 6 months of fun?
Well, I myself started with UO when it launched back in 97' never found an MMO that gave me that same "buzz" since then. While I don't whine or complain a lot about MMO's or where they've headed. I will say after vanilla WoW it felt like MMO's started to be designed without a lot of things that made MMO's different from the RPG game you played on whatever console at that time. MMO's have been turning to a less social/community friendly path with "group/dungeon" finders for those working people who don't have the time for shouting in chat.. but what happened to socializing making friends setting maybe a schedule with these friends so you won't have to? BOOM Dungeon/Group Finder! People use "real world", "work", and "family" as reasons to why MMO's have to be beat in a day *CONGRATS YOU WON WORLD OF WARCRAFT!" But then they whine about there's nothing left to do. So dev's hear this and make "sandbox" MMO's that done hold your hands tell you where to go what to do, then those same people complain "it's stupid, there's no quests, there's no endgame!.. or "its too hard, this will fail"
Also, another large part I would say is the access to PC's. Back in the day when UO came out, not everyone and their brother had a PC, today PC's are about as common as cell phones. So a lot of the time (no offense to those of you who don't do this) you'll get the gamer, who typically plays on a console, hop on the PC fire up an MMO and go into it with the same expectations as he/she has with CoD or something. I'm sorry but to me MMO's have strayed so far from where they were. And most people that do play them still me being one, also don't spend much time in the forums for them complaining about something because I'm busy enjoying it.
TL:DR
Easier access to PC's now compared to when MMO's like UO came out
Younger Gamers not fully understanding MMOs aren't CoD/LoL
OKAY done sorry, lol did this on my phone at work fingers are sore
3 different games giving me 2 months of fun each .. is the same as one game giving me 6 months of fun .. assuming, of course, the levels of fun are the same.
That wasn't really answering the question...
Would you rather a game (one game) gave you 2 months of fun, or 6 months of fun?
For me, there is no difference. If a game will give me 6 months of fun, I'm fine with it; if not, I'm fine with it too. Sure, it's nice to have a game which I can play for a long time, like, for example, I'm currently playing WoT - 2 years and counting, I'm still having a blast every time I log in.
But if there would be a game tomorrow that'll give me more fun, I'll switch without any negative emotions or hesitations. People talk about "investing" in the game, and hesitance to lose "the investments" - I'm not "investing" in games, I'm getting fun out of them. All my attitudes towards games are measured in fun received, not "investments made".
*shrug* Having one game giving 6 month of fun is better than giving 2 months of fun, especially if it's a F2P game, but it's a "little" better, while making such game is a lot harder; so I don't really expect them to be done with that goal in mind.