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!

The MMO Genre has become stale and boring.

13

Comments

  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,253Member

    The only game I see coming that has a chance to fix this is EQ next. Even if the game itself stinks it is pushing new concepts into the genre that should last into future games and since most of it is AI driven it isn't just tweaking what already exists like say GW2 did. It is actually changing the game at the design level.

  • BMBenderBMBender Nowhere, NCPosts: 568Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ender4

     


    This site alone represents a fairly significant untapped market share.

     

    This is definitely true for most game genres but it is a lot different with MMORPG's. Most genres you don't need a huge investment to make a game that targets a more niche market. Path of Exile is a nice little game that specifically targets older D2 fans instead of the current market. It was made on a smaller budget and funded largely by donations. It has tons of little flaws largely centered around disconnects, poor mob AI etc that come from not having AAA development. The problem is that a MMO that is funded this way in general is just unplayable.

    Even with a bigger budget a lot of these games are just awful. WAR was dead before it ever came out, it was just a clunky pile of junk, they couldn't get the combat to run smoothly. SWTOR was doomed before release, I could tell you it was going FTP within 2 years. Darkfall is one of the more famous but the execution was so bad it couldn't even fill the niche it wanted. I won't even mention Vanguard which was so bad it ate peoples PCs. The budget required to pull these games off just make them very hard to aim at a smaller portion of the market. As the genre matures it will probably become easier and easier but that is still a number of years away.

    The concept behind the games might have been solid but actually producing these games is harder than any other genre. On top of all of that the market is pushing towards no subscriptions which makes your margin for profits even smaller, it is getting harder to compete, not easier.

    Witch is why I keep saying they should stop trying to pull every swinging D... into their game.  Pick a target audience;  make the game YOU (the developer) wants to play, and don't be afraid to discourage other demographics away.  I think they would find if an actual practical plan and design concept would actually keep costs down. Going 50 different directions at once it's no wonder the return on investment for mmos suck(in comparison to every other form of entertainment media on the planet).

     

    And the reasons it's getting harder to compete is they all keep chasing the EXACT SAME demographic

    marketing 101 if you have the same similar product as a competitor you better  have either a better product, cheaper, better marketing, or buyout the competition

     

    Competing in the same market space with the EXACT same target scheme as your competition, the exact same features with a bell or whistle thrown in for "diversity" it's no wonder they all fail to meet the designers expectations.

    image
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Ender4

    The only game I see coming that has a chance to fix this is EQ next. Even if the game itself stinks it is pushing new concepts into the genre that should last into future games and since most of it is AI driven it isn't just tweaking what already exists like say GW2 did. It is actually changing the game at the design level.

    I am more interested in Destiny and Division. They may not even be classified as MMOs.

     

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,762Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Ender4

    The only game I see coming that has a chance to fix this is EQ next. Even if the game itself stinks it is pushing new concepts into the genre that should last into future games and since most of it is AI driven it isn't just tweaking what already exists like say GW2 did. It is actually changing the game at the design level.

    I am more interested in Destiny and Division. They may not even be classified as MMOs.

    Indeed, so suggest a MMO you are looking forward to coming out.

    I am not sure we are going to get new concepts from EQNext. Everything seems to be heading for easyMMOde with the exception of the modding tool. This is not EQ3, it is just a MMO set in the same world. If EQ3 was in development I am sure EQ fans would not even be focused on EQN. 

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Scot
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Ender4

    The only game I see coming that has a chance to fix this is EQ next. Even if the game itself stinks it is pushing new concepts into the genre that should last into future games and since most of it is AI driven it isn't just tweaking what already exists like say GW2 did. It is actually changing the game at the design level.

    I am more interested in Destiny and Division. They may not even be classified as MMOs.

    Indeed, so suggest a MMO you are looking forward to coming out.

    I am not sure we are going to get new concepts from EQNext. Everything seems to be heading for easyMMOde with the exception of the modding tool. This is not EQ3, it is just a MMO set in the same world. If EQ3 was in development I am sure EQ fans would not even be focused on EQN. 

     

    Why so obsessed with EQN? If you don't like it, don't play it. It is going to be F2P anyway.

    There are plenty of interesting online games coming out soon. In fact, i may try Hearthstone when the iOS version is out. That is probably more fun (to me) than the standard MMORPG.

     

  • MendelMendel Marietta, GAPosts: 925Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ender4

    The only game I see coming that has a chance to fix this is EQ next. Even if the game itself stinks it is pushing new concepts into the genre that should last into future games and since most of it is AI driven it isn't just tweaking what already exists like say GW2 did. It is actually changing the game at the design level.

    I don't know if EQ:N is actually going to create as much change as we might think.  So far, EQ:N is apparently going to use some new technology (voxels and Storybook), but these might not change the actual game play all that much.  What if EQ:N still has massive progression grinds?  How is that fundamentally different from EQ1 or WoW?   Right now, there's still not enough known about EQ:N to effectively state how much EQ:N will actually deviate from the norm.

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,253Member

    Well everything they have said certainly points to it. I watched GW2 in development and it was pretty clear that the events were just chained together and wouldn't be long term changes to the world. EQN is at least trying to use AI to make mob locations roam around the world and make more sense. They are using AI to try to make the mobs react in a smarter way instead of just attacking the top guy on the threat meter. These are fundamental changes to the genre that will eventually make an amazing leap in gameplay. I dunno if EQN will pull it off or some game in the future will but that is how I wanted MMORPG to be way back when they first started. I've always felt going into linear quest and spawn camping was a bad thing. Moving towards a more living world that changes over time is just such a natural step that I'm surprised it has taken this long for anyone to even attempt it.

    Way back in the day Asheron's Call would actually spawn mob camps in a semi intelligent way and since then we've had loads and loads of games with just static spawns.

  • Mors.MagneMors.Magne LondonPosts: 1,420Member
    Originally posted by Ender4

    Well everything they have said certainly points to it. I watched GW2 in development and it was pretty clear that the events were just chained together and wouldn't be long term changes to the world. EQN is at least trying to use AI to make mob locations roam around the world and make more sense. They are using AI to try to make the mobs react in a smarter way instead of just attacking the top guy on the threat meter. These are fundamental changes to the genre that will eventually make an amazing leap in gameplay. I dunno if EQN will pull it off or some game in the future will but that is how I wanted MMORPG to be way back when they first started. I've always felt going into linear quest and spawn camping was a bad thing. Moving towards a more living world that changes over time is just such a natural step that I'm surprised it has taken this long for anyone to even attempt it.

    Way back in the day Asheron's Call would actually spawn mob camps in a semi intelligent way and since then we've had loads and loads of games with just static spawns.

    No - advances in MMORPG technology don't advance fast enough to give players a 'gee whizz - look at this new technology / AI' feeling.

     

    The advances happen so slow that you wouldn't notice it unless you had a complete break and came back in 10 years time.

     

    At that point, Oculus Rift etc might be mainstream.

  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,253Member

    It happens faster than you think. Just look at the steps from WAR to GW2 and Rift to see how quickly games pick up on a good idea that is poorly implemented (PQs) and change/improve on them. We had a slew of non tab targeting games come out after AoC etc. If EQN drives spawn locations with AI some other game will pick up on it and improve it within a couple of years. The dev time on these games is shrinking and the number of them being released is growing so the technology should move faster.

    Original MMORPG's had everything in one state. If I wanted to draw a picture of an orc fort I could draw it on one storyboard and it would look the same a year later. Newer games have made this 2 or 3 states with 'dynamic content'. GW2 you would have to draw the orc controlled fort, a skrit controlled fort and one when they are fighting. The true next gen MMO will need unlimited storyboards to draw this fort.

    The player shows up and kills the orcs. Maybe they find another group of orcs and band together to take it back. Maybe some dwarves come and tear it down for supplies to increase the size of their mine and the fort is gone completely. Maybe a dragon burns it down. Maybe a necromancer roams in and turns the orcs into undead. Maybe a player stakes a claim to the area and builds it into their guild hall transforming it completely. Maybe it just rots over time as nobody is near it.

    In order to achieve that you need to be able to let the AI build terrain on the fly, something EQN is doing with the voxel technology. You need the AI to make mobs work together, something they claim they are doing. You need to give players the ability to change terrain something again that EQN is doing.

    I think EQN will give us a flawed version of all of this but once it is there someone else will pick up on it and improve it and the genre starts to get less stale for me at least. There is at least one other MMO using this as well so they have more than one source to build off of.

  • worldalphaworldalpha Milton, ONPosts: 403Member
    We're trying to make the genre exciting! :)   Seriously though, going outside what is proven to work is hugely risky.  Who wants to risk a $50M budget on a completely new idea that is unproven.  It is tough to take huge risks.  Indies can, but they are panned because it may be novel idea, but does haven't the look and feel of AAA budgets.

    Thanks,
    Mike
    Working on Social Strategy MMORTS (now Launched!) http://www.worldalpha.com

  • Mors.MagneMors.Magne LondonPosts: 1,420Member
    Originally posted by Ender4

    It happens faster than you think. Just look at the steps from WAR to GW2 and Rift to see how quickly games pick up on a good idea that is poorly implemented (PQs) and change/improve on them. We had a slew of non tab targeting games come out after AoC etc. If EQN drives spawn locations with AI some other game will pick up on it and improve it within a couple of years. The dev time on these games is shrinking and the number of them being released is growing so the technology should move faster.

    Original MMORPG's had everything in one state. If I wanted to draw a picture of an orc fort I could draw it on one storyboard and it would look the same a year later. Newer games have made this 2 or 3 states with 'dynamic content'. GW2 you would have to draw the orc controlled fort, a skrit controlled fort and one when they are fighting. The true next gen MMO will need unlimited storyboards to draw this fort.

    The player shows up and kills the orcs. Maybe they find another group of orcs and band together to take it back. Maybe some dwarves come and tear it down for supplies to increase the size of their mine and the fort is gone completely. Maybe a dragon burns it down. Maybe a necromancer roams in and turns the orcs into undead. Maybe a player stakes a claim to the area and builds it into their guild hall transforming it completely. Maybe it just rots over time as nobody is near it.

    In order to achieve that you need to be able to let the AI build terrain on the fly, something EQN is doing with the voxel technology. You need the AI to make mobs work together, something they claim they are doing. You need to give players the ability to change terrain something again that EQN is doing.

    I think EQN will give us a flawed version of all of this but once it is there someone else will pick up on it and improve it and the genre starts to get less stale for me at least. There is at least one other MMO using this as well so they have more than one source to build off of.

    I think it's common for developers to make all sorts of bold statements. It's a marketing tactic to get you to buy games pre-release. After the release, you discover the game isn't so good after all.

     

    For example, SWTOR was billed as being the most epic MMORPG ever, and it basically turned out to be WoW with different skins.

  • GuyClinchGuyClinch Sunnyvale, CAPosts: 485Member

     

    "For example, SWTOR was billed as being the most epic MMORPG ever, and it basically turned out to be WoW with different skins."

     

    Yeah not a good example. It's a famous disaster sure - but Bioware didn't understand MMOs and near as I can tell didn't play a lot of them.  If you want a good game you need developers that actually play games. It should be pretty clear to any MMO player that tacking on a lot of movies and star wars lore to a WoW game won't work..

    Actually some question whether ANY kind of narrative works well in an MMO.. I don't know that a lot of people love the personal story in GW2. Its a nice try..but I think everyone really wants to see a story unfold from what they do in the open world.. If they had played more MMOs they would have understood this.

    Themepark MMOs need more sandboxes - not more narratives. Narratives have crap replay value..

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by GuyClinch

     

    Themepark MMOs need more sandboxes - not more narratives. Narratives have crap replay value..

    I don't need replay value in my MMOs. Just finish one and move onto the next.

    Fun in the first play-through is more important (to me).

  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,253Member


    Originally posted by Mors.Magne
    I think it's common for developers to make all sorts of bold statements. It's a marketing tactic to get you to buy games pre-release. After the release, you discover the game isn't so good after all.

     

    For example, SWTOR was billed as being the most epic MMORPG ever, and it basically turned out to be WoW with different skins.


    I don't expect EQN to be the greatest game ever but I do tend to pay more attention to how a game goes about pushing the genre forward. SWTOR's big claim was by introducing more story and more voice work but neither of those things are really important to me or are particularly big innovations.

    Rift and GW2 talked a lot about dynamic content and that got me more excited, once they showed how the content worked though it was just chained events which isn't nearly as interesting.

    AI driven mob spawns and a world that can build structures on the fly etc is the biggest leap I've read about in the genre though. If they can pull it off at all I think it revolutionizes the entire genre. Even if that particular game ends up being crappy it will drive future games in a meaningful direction. That is what I'm excited about.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,998Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by worldalpha
    We're trying to make the genre exciting! :)   Seriously though, going outside what is proven to work is hugely risky.  Who wants to risk a $50M budget on a completely new idea that is unproven.  It is tough to take huge risks.  Indies can, but they are panned because it may be novel idea, but does haven't the look and feel of AAA budgets.

    But look at the examples in history where those who took calculated, but huge risks on new ideas reaped great rewards in the long run.

    Nothing ventured, nothing gained if you want to break out of mediocrity.

     

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

  • SlampigSlampig Chantilly, VAPosts: 2,376Member Uncommon
    Know what else is boring and stale? Post number 5003 about how MMOs are boring and stale...

    That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Oxon Hill, MDPosts: 1,147Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by GuyClinch

     

    Themepark MMOs need more sandboxes - not more narratives. Narratives have crap replay value..

    I don't need replay value in my MMOs. Just finish one and move onto the next.

    Fun in the first play-through is more important (to me).

     

    Every MMORPG doesn't have to suit you though.  Its kind of a weird thing that everyone assumes every MMORPG needs to be what they like.  

     

    The consume and move on MMORPG aren't really financially viable for the genre with long term cost.  I am not sure they even designed the games to be that way.  Or maybe they did.  I guess only a developer could tell you.  

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by GuyClinch

     

    Themepark MMOs need more sandboxes - not more narratives. Narratives have crap replay value..

    I don't need replay value in my MMOs. Just finish one and move onto the next.

    Fun in the first play-through is more important (to me).

     

    Every MMORPG doesn't have to suit you though.  Its kind of a weird thing that everyone assumes every MMORPG needs to be what they like.  

     

    The consume and move on MMORPG aren't really financially viable for the genre with long term cost.  I am not sure they even designed the games to be that way.  Or maybe they did.  I guess only a developer could tell you.  

     

    Really? How do you know? You have seen the details financial costs & revenue for a MMO?

    The fact that there are many F2P short term MMOs indicate that devs believe they will make money. Don't tell me you think you know better.

    ANd where do you get that i think every MMO has to suit me? I am merely stating my preference. If a MMO does not suit me, i will go somewhere else. It is that simple. There are plenty of MMO out there. In fact, even if every MMO suits me, i don't have time for all of them. They have to beg me to play.

     

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,762Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by GuyClinch

     

    Themepark MMOs need more sandboxes - not more narratives. Narratives have crap replay value..

    I don't need replay value in my MMOs. Just finish one and move onto the next.

    Fun in the first play-through is more important (to me).

     

    Every MMORPG doesn't have to suit you though.  Its kind of a weird thing that everyone assumes every MMORPG needs to be what they like.  

     

    The consume and move on MMORPG aren't really financially viable for the genre with long term cost.  I am not sure they even designed the games to be that way.  Or maybe they did.  I guess only a developer could tell you.  

     

    Really? How do you know? You have seen the details financial costs & revenue for a MMO?

    The fact that there are many F2P short term MMOs indicate that devs believe they will make money. Don't tell me you think you know better.

    ANd where do you get that i think every MMO has to suit me? I am merely stating my preference. If a MMO does not suit me, i will go somewhere else. It is that simple. There are plenty of MMO out there. In fact, even if every MMO suits me, i don't have time for all of them. They have to beg me to play.

     

    We know this because people in the industry have stated their concern, articles on this site have discussed it. The MMO industry don't always go on about it funnily enough, just like the oil industry does not make a song and dance about oil spills. Companies have folded and staff are left high and dry, we have talked about this before. One of the CEO's I am thinking of who mentioned this was in a link you provided Nari.

    Overall the MMO industry is doing very well, but there are concerns about the model.

     

  • MurlockDanceMurlockDance ParisPosts: 1,223Member

    To get back to the OP here I think the big problem of MMORPGs these days is that they are trying to attract a lot of players/customers in a genre that has been fairly niche for most of its existence: the RPG. WoW really is a big fluke that it had so much mass appeal. I bet if you asked a lot of current and ex WoW players if they like the idea of a PnP RPG like AD&D a lot would say that they don't because of xyz. How do you attract a lot of people with a niche genre like the RPG ? That is the dilemma for investors and devs.

    The inconvenient truth is that to most gamers RPGs suck. If you see what games are most often on bestseller lists, they tend not to be RPGs outside of one or two titles here and there. MMORPGs are getting rid of the RPG aspect little by little and that draws in the action-oriented crowd who only want to get from point A to Z as fast as possible. This is aided in part by extremely shallow and restricted storyline (personal story is in my opinion a big step backwards for MMORPGs) that caters to a 'fast food' style roleplay environment that a lot of players bypass anyway.

    I think that perhaps there should be a split in the genre where you have the lighter MMOs and e-sport like games in one new genre and the deeper, less stream-lined games with heavy RPG elements in another. The second catégory might not ever be as popular as the first, but I really hope that devs get in their heads that there *is* still a market for those kinds of games even if it is smaller.

    They just need to figure out how to make a decent budget to push a good game out. I don't think MMORPGs *have* to be expensive. If anything they could be produced for less now because there are a glut of decent engines, much better massively multiplayer technology and hardware out than there were in the old days. There is no real reason why you need to have a budget of 200 million USD to make a game. All it takes is some extremely dedicated gamer devs and fans that are willing to become investors in the traditional way (I am leery of crowdfunding, I think it should be gamers investing as investors and not donors).

    Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.

    image
  • Mors.MagneMors.Magne LondonPosts: 1,420Member
    Originally posted by Ender4

     


    Originally posted by Mors.Magne
    I think it's common for developers to make all sorts of bold statements. It's a marketing tactic to get you to buy games pre-release. After the release, you discover the game isn't so good after all.

     

     

    For example, SWTOR was billed as being the most epic MMORPG ever, and it basically turned out to be WoW with different skins.


     

    I don't expect EQN to be the greatest game ever but I do tend to pay more attention to how a game goes about pushing the genre forward. SWTOR's big claim was by introducing more story and more voice work but neither of those things are really important to me or are particularly big innovations.

    Rift and GW2 talked a lot about dynamic content and that got me more excited, once they showed how the content worked though it was just chained events which isn't nearly as interesting.

    AI driven mob spawns and a world that can build structures on the fly etc is the biggest leap I've read about in the genre though. If they can pull it off at all I think it revolutionizes the entire genre. Even if that particular game ends up being crappy it will drive future games in a meaningful direction. That is what I'm excited about.

     

     

    Bold AI claims have disappointed in the past.

     

    For example, Rome Total War II was billed as having superb AI. The AI turned out to be worse that Rome Total War I.

     

    Commercial companies generally don't have time to mess about with AI. They tend to concentrate on tangible visual aspects - keeping up with the graphics hardware technology.

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

    I find the genre more exciting than ever after 8 quite "stale" years of WoW clones.

    Companies try new things, like ANet with GW2, SoE with EQ Next, Richard Garriot's Shroud of the Avatar, or hell, even Age of Wushu which got me bored quite fast but which is apparently a decent success.

    Would you have posted this two years ago, I would have agreed, WoW clones, WoW clones, and more WoW clones. But today... nope. I think a new era is about to start for the genre.

    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.

  • Mors.MagneMors.Magne LondonPosts: 1,420Member
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    I find the genre more exciting than ever after 8 quite "stale" years of WoW clones.

    Companies try new things, like ANet with GW2, SoE with EQ Next, Richard Garriot's Shroud of the Avatar, or hell, even Age of Wushu which got me bored quite fast but which is apparently a decent success.

    Would you have posted this two years ago, I would have agreed, WoW clones, WoW clones, and more WoW clones. But today... nope. I think a new era is about to start for the genre.

     

    I disagree - WoW's graphics have been improved upon, but the gameplay / AI is still pretty similar.

     

    In our lifetimes, we will see photo-realistic graphics, but the gameplay won't change.

     

    This is because games are a visual medium. They are not made to be 'clever'.

     

    For example, lots of TV presenters are selected on the basis of their looks, but get sacked after the age of 35 years. They are not selected based on their wit.

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

    I find the genre more exciting than ever after 8 quite "stale" years of WoW clones.

    Companies try new things, like ANet with GW2, SoE with EQ Next, Richard Garriot's Shroud of the Avatar, or hell, even Age of Wushu which got me bored quite fast but which is apparently a decent success.

    Would you have posted this two years ago, I would have agreed, WoW clones, WoW clones, and more WoW clones. But today... nope. I think a new era is about to start for the genre.

     

    I disagree - WoW's graphics have been improved upon, but the gameplay / AI is still pretty similar.

    I don't understand your post. None of the games I listed are copies of WoW.

    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.

  • BMBenderBMBender Nowhere, NCPosts: 568Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Mors.Magne
    Originally posted by Ender4

     


    Originally posted by Mors.Magne
    I think it's common for developers to make all sorts of bold statements. It's a marketing tactic to get you to buy games pre-release. After the release, you discover the game isn't so good after all.

     

     

    For example, SWTOR was billed as being the most epic MMORPG ever, and it basically turned out to be WoW with different skins.


     

    I don't expect EQN to be the greatest game ever but I do tend to pay more attention to how a game goes about pushing the genre forward. SWTOR's big claim was by introducing more story and more voice work but neither of those things are really important to me or are particularly big innovations.

    Rift and GW2 talked a lot about dynamic content and that got me more excited, once they showed how the content worked though it was just chained events which isn't nearly as interesting.

    AI driven mob spawns and a world that can build structures on the fly etc is the biggest leap I've read about in the genre though. If they can pull it off at all I think it revolutionizes the entire genre. Even if that particular game ends up being crappy it will drive future games in a meaningful direction. That is what I'm excited about.

     

     

    Bold AI claims have disappointed in the past.

     

    For example, Rome Total War II was billed as having superb AI. The AI turned out to be worse that Rome Total War I.

     

    Commercial companies generally don't have time to mess about with AI. They tend to concentrate on tangible visual aspects - keeping up with the graphics hardware technology.

    Because it's never been a problem of the AI or any other technical hurdles.  Like any large gathering the more varied the demographics involved the lower the the common denominator HAS to be.  Quite often Developers in the past had more....  hmmm "robust" ai than we see today but as mmo's became more mainstream they became too "hard".

     

     

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.