Howdy, Stranger!

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

MMORPG.com will be down for maintenance beginning at midnight EST on Wednesday, August 31. Downtime is expected to last only a couple of hours.

The market is there, why not make it?

135

Comments

  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,247Member Uncommon


    There's a reason the mmorpg was strictly a niche genre back when EQ1 was popular

    Yeah it was because there were only a few players who had the rigs to run a graphical MMORPG. I mean any other opinion you have is useless as it was a completely new genre at that point and the choices they made had nothing to do with how many people tried it.

  • HolophonistHolophonist Pittsburgh, PAPosts: 2,090Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    Originally posted by Antiquated
    Originally posted by Xthos
    Originally posted by flizzer
    I have consistently mentioned these old games are still around to be played, but, not. people want "new old games" to play. 

     I guess you failed to realize, that these 'old games' were usually ruined in a lot of peoples opinions, when they tried to make them more casual.

    What? You mean income > idealism, to your average corporation? That is shocking. How dare they.

    We should do a million man march--oh wait, we'd have to get out of our chairs for that. Forget it.

    His point was that these old games AREN'T really around anymore. I'm not sure why you even brought up the sarcasm about corporations favoring income over idealism.

    I think Antiquated's point was that they aren't really around any more because the old design didn't appeal to most people, thus progressing the game in favor of continued revenue rather than letting it die a slow death in favor of idealism.

    I get his point, it's just irrelevant. It doesn't help that he was being sarcastic while talking about something unrelated to what he was responding to.

  • ZzadZzad Palma de MallorcaPosts: 1,371Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Zakk1011
    Obviously, there is a LARGE constituent of players out there that want to see the old-school style of MMORPG's brought back.  Death penalty, limited fast travel, community/social interaction, adventure sandbox...no quest markers... Essentially, an updated rehashed version of EQ1 or Asheron's Call... WHY hasn't a publisher done this??  It seems SO LOW budget to me (relative to other titles) and people would EAT IT UP.  Sure, they wouldn't attract the masses, but the fact that they don't have to reinvent the wheel allows them to save a lot of money on production costs and, therefore, have a MUCH higher profit margin from attracting the hundreds of thousands of players (rather than millions). How successful do you think a graphically updated EQ1, with some minor gameplay tweaks/additions, would be right now?   ....   I have about 70 pages of written material outlining an entire MMORPG - classes, races, world layout, combat mechanics, skill system, advancement system, some lore (need to finish itemization and quest scripts)....   What do I need to do to get someone to make this?  Seriously.  I'm basically handing over a complete game concept saying "Produce this game, put it on the shelves, and make money".  Is nobody out there interested?  Does nobody out there share the passion for recreating those awesome game experiences?

    Just wondering..... How do you feel about "RIFT"?

    Seems to me like everything you are looking for.... +plus.

    Best "talent trees" on the market since 2 years ago? yeah it´s gone FTP but still the best conversion to FTP ¡¡¡EVER!!!!

    I know you can buy Gear for real cash & that can be a turn OFF.... :/

    but the benefits of its paying model it´s just too good & worth that "suffering"..... in my opinion.

    Not just my kind of game....played it for over 6 months....but it felt too old school for me...pure gear grinding to be able to progress in content!!! (HATE THAT!) it just disbanded comunity...

    gear Score & Trinity,and nothing else but a frikking Tank & healer & 3 whatever more....

    I was pretty tired of that....

    at least RIFT has flexible classes, i must admit...

    and amazing dinamic events like the new Gen is demanding....

    image

    You should try it out ;)

  • neorandomneorandom bev hills, CAPosts: 1,681Member
    Originally posted by Zakk1011
    Obviously, there is a LARGE constituent of players out there that want to see the old-school style of MMORPG's brought back.  Death penalty, limited fast travel, community/social interaction, adventure sandbox...no quest markers... Essentially, an updated rehashed version of EQ1 or Asheron's Call... WHY hasn't a publisher done this??  It seems SO LOW budget to me (relative to other titles) and people would EAT IT UP.  Sure, they wouldn't attract the masses, but the fact that they don't have to reinvent the wheel allows them to save a lot of money on production costs and, therefore, have a MUCH higher profit margin from attracting the hundreds of thousands of players (rather than millions). How successful do you think a graphically updated EQ1, with some minor gameplay tweaks/additions, would be right now?   ....   I have about 70 pages of written material outlining an entire MMORPG - classes, races, world layout, combat mechanics, skill system, advancement system, some lore (need to finish itemization and quest scripts)....   What do I need to do to get someone to make this?  Seriously.  I'm basically handing over a complete game concept saying "Produce this game, put it on the shelves, and make money".  Is nobody out there interested?  Does nobody out there share the passion for recreating those awesome game experiences?

    get a group of people that like your concept book, set up a kickstarter, if you get the funding hire an Indie developer to code/produce on behalf of your group.  between a good kickstarter and sales/subs later, if your game is good itll be good.

  • Zakk1011Zakk1011 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 14Member

    Originally posted by RebelScum99

    So, you're saying there is a market for dated MMOs that are exceedingly awkward, tedious, and frustrating for players?  
    No.  There is a market for updated MMORPGs that provide more depth and challenge than the games that typically come out.

    Originally posted by Zzad

    Just wondering..... How do you feel about "RIFT"?
    I enjoyed RIFT...for about 2 months.  It is not an old-school game, though.  They had certain elements that were slightly different than the standard today, but they implemented them ineffectively and with a definite lack of depth compared to what I'm talking about.

    Originally posted by neorandom

    get a group of people that like your concept book, set up a kickstarter, if you get the funding hire an Indie developer to code/produce on behalf of your group.  between a good kickstarter and sales/subs later, if your game is good itll be good.

    I'm going to look into Kickstarter.  Basically, put the idea on the site, get funding for it, then take that funding and idea to a Publisher and say "Here's the money, make this!"

    Hmm.  Where there's a will there's a way.  I expect all of you to contribute to the fund!!! ;-)

  • Zakk1011Zakk1011 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 14Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Define "large" audience.

    That's the problem. The assumption that there's a large audience willing to pay enough money for a such-and-such type of game.

    The second assumption is that because the project is to develop a such-and-such type of game that it will automatically lead to success.

    The final assumption is that there is a group of people who want to spend five years working on something, with no guarantee of even breaking even, just because it's a such-and-such type of game.

    I did have a lot of assumptions in my original post...I came looking for help, not criticism, and I didn't want to have to pull figures in order to justify my request, haha.  This was meant to be a 5 minute sit-down post...but obviously, that's not the case any more.

    By "Large" I simply meant "enough to achieve profit and/or sustain revenue".  I'm not delusional with regards to the massive market that IS the MMORPG crowd, but there's more than enough people out there to make a single good niche game profitable.  Agreed?

    The second assumption is because of basic business and common sense.  This game would be the only one of its type out there, essentially, so it should grab a very high percentage of the niche market it's aiming to acquire...therefore, helping its success.

    The final assumption is ANYTHING in business, really.  There is no guarantee any MMO will be profitable (or any business idea).  THere is always some risk...although, what companies are doing now is taking the least risky for the highest profit.  You know what other business model does that?  Franchising.

    Also, the second and third assumptions rely on the first.  There IS a market for this type of game, which kind of nullifies bringing up assumption 2+3.

  • corpusccorpusc Chattanooga, TNPosts: 1,331Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by Xthos
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Most of them are all talk. It's find to sit here with rose colored glasses on talking about how great EQ! was but when it comes time to put up or shut up ...well...they tend to do neither. Wishing you could relive your first mmo love is not the same thing as someone willing to go back and do it over again...knowing what they know now. Your experiences in mmos will forever keep you from ever having that first love back again.

     First love, maybe not, but a game you love, I disagree.  I loved UO and Vanguard many years later.  I had a new high end computer, so I wasn't hit with the problems as bad as most people, which helped make it basically an abandoned game.  I really liked TSW, which I think is odd for me, but ran out of content, and didn't find it too set up for continual gameplay without a 'end', like EQ/UO and other titles.

     

    I didn't say you can't ever love another mmo, I said you can't have it like it was your first time.... and the TSW is hardly an old school mmo. Millions of people love playing their mmo now. That doesn't mean they want EQ1 back with updated graphics.

    This is just something you guys say for kind of no reason. The reason a lot of us haven't recaptured this feeling in MMOs is because there really haven't been any reasonable candidates. Case in point: I have similar feelings about single player games and I absolutely have recaptured those feelings with games like demon souls and dark souls.

     

    and i recaptured my brief EQ1 addiction 11 years later when they opened one of the later progression servers.

    while there is some basis in reality for the rose-tinted glasses theory, it can oftentimes be complete horse crap too.

    because not EVERYone is irrational.

    The End
    ---------------------------
    i don't expect to like Darkfall, altho i may like it MORE than other MMOs. i know it is gonna have a very frustrating level of grind to it, even if its significantly less than most. waiting for a pure FAST action virtual world. dice rolling & character levels (even "skills") IN COMBAT should have never carried over from pencil & paper to a computer that can reasonably model 3D spaces and objects

  • AntiquatedAntiquated Posts: 1,411Member Rare
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    I get his point, it's just irrelevant.

    If you actually did get it, it would be relevant.

    When the players demand, over and over again, a model of exclusion... they're asking for their ideal; not what's in the company's best interest.

    "Why can't we make a game just for us?" ("just for us", of course, is the same as "not for them")

  • XthosXthos Columbus, OHPosts: 2,628Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by Xthos
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Most of them are all talk. It's find to sit here with rose colored glasses on talking about how great EQ! was but when it comes time to put up or shut up ...well...they tend to do neither. Wishing you could relive your first mmo love is not the same thing as someone willing to go back and do it over again...knowing what they know now. Your experiences in mmos will forever keep you from ever having that first love back again.

     First love, maybe not, but a game you love, I disagree.  I loved UO and Vanguard many years later.  I had a new high end computer, so I wasn't hit with the problems as bad as most people, which helped make it basically an abandoned game.  I really liked TSW, which I think is odd for me, but ran out of content, and didn't find it too set up for continual gameplay without a 'end', like EQ/UO and other titles.

     

    I didn't say you can't ever love another mmo, I said you can't have it like it was your first time.... and the TSW is hardly an old school mmo. Millions of people love playing their mmo now. That doesn't mean they want EQ1 back with updated graphics.

    I mentioned TSW, as even a old school player can like certain newer mmos...I even said first love maybe not.  I think the amount of people that 'love' their newer mmos is lessening, and more of a play and hop thing.  I do not see as much play and stay.

  • XthosXthos Columbus, OHPosts: 2,628Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    Originally posted by Antiquated
    Originally posted by Xthos
    Originally posted by flizzer
    I have consistently mentioned these old games are still around to be played, but, not. people want "new old games" to play. 

     I guess you failed to realize, that these 'old games' were usually ruined in a lot of peoples opinions, when they tried to make them more casual.

    What? You mean income > idealism, to your average corporation? That is shocking. How dare they.

    We should do a million man march--oh wait, we'd have to get out of our chairs for that. Forget it.

    His point was that these old games AREN'T really around anymore. I'm not sure why you even brought up the sarcasm about corporations favoring income over idealism.

    I think Antiquated's point was that they aren't really around any more because the old design didn't appeal to most people, thus progressing the game in favor of continued revenue rather than letting it die a slow death in favor of idealism.

     

    My point was that the game wasn't there anymore, didn't mention money, corporations or anything of the sort.  So some people on these forums like to bring it up, and call people a hypocrit for not funding the changed game...

     

    Now with that said, a f2p game with 5-10% whales, having 1 million people playing it, turn that into a niche p2p mmo, and have 50,000-100,000 people playing it and you could have roughly the same income....Sure it probably won't be the next WoW.... 

     

    Lastly, I could be sarcastic too and mention how the money grab always works, but it doesn't, some stuff changes and still slow dies...or quick.

     

  • XthosXthos Columbus, OHPosts: 2,628Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Antiquated
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    I get his point, it's just irrelevant.

    If you actually did get it, it would be relevant.

    When the players demand, over and over again, a model of exclusion... they're asking for their ideal; not what's in the company's best interest.

    "Why can't we make a game just for us?" ("just for us", of course, is the same as "not for them")

    I NEVER demanded, asked, or wondered why, you just felt the need to go off topic....So no, it wasn't relevant to the game has changed and is not there for the usual person to say , "go play it then".  What model of exclusion is this?  I must of missed it in my post, or you are putting more words in my mouth/post....

     

    I posted about this, but a small example of niche projecting as profitable is something like Camelot Unchained, it isn't my thing, but they numbered it out to how they can be 'niche' and profitable, it won't be the next WoW, but I got news for you, nothing has been, and we we are in the 100s of mmos since WoW probably.

     

    Investors like the idea of being the next WoW, over being niche and profitible though.

     

     

  • EdliEdli TiranaPosts: 941Member
    Originally posted by Zakk1011 You think people played AC and EQ1 (and were addicted to it) because "being in an online world" was novel?

    Um yeah, and because back then you didn't really have much choice. If EQ1 were to be released today in the exact shape I wouldn't touch it. 

  • Zakk1011Zakk1011 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 14Member
    In the exact state? Of course you wouldn't touch it...a lot of it would need a facelift/updating. But the core mechanics and philosophy could remain the same and a lot of people would not only enjoy it, but stay with it paying a sub FAR longer than 2 months.

    Just because YOU wouldn't doesn't mean others wouldn't.
  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 14,247Member Rare
    Originally posted by Xthos
    Originally posted by Antiquated
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    I get his point, it's just irrelevant.

    If you actually did get it, it would be relevant.

    When the players demand, over and over again, a model of exclusion... they're asking for their ideal; not what's in the company's best interest.

    "Why can't we make a game just for us?" ("just for us", of course, is the same as "not for them")

    I NEVER demanded, asked, or wondered why, you just felt the need to go off topic....

    The interesting mistake in your past two replies is you have falsely assumed that either you or your posts were the topic in either of the exchanges you just replied to.

    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

  • MahavishnuMahavishnu BerlinPosts: 336Member

    1. Old school MMOs have not been very successful. EQ2, Vanguard, ...

    2. Even the great majority of "old school hard core" players played WoW. They complained about it all the time, but they cept on playing it.

    3. The MMO market is shrinking. Facebook and multiplayer features of single player games (Battlefield, GTA5) draw away a huge amount of players.

    4. This whole "old school" argument is a terrible lie. Nobody wants to farm stupid mobs for rare drops again. It is just stupid gameplay. What they really want is:

    • rush up as fast as possible to endlevel
    • get better gear and higher level than most of other players
    • boost their vanitiy because they do more damage and have more HP than anybody else (good for PvP and PvE)

    Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need.

  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Sacramento, CAPosts: 1,152Member
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by Zakk1011
    Obviously, there is a LARGE constituent of players out there that want to see the old-school style of MMORPG's brought back. 

    How do you know there is a large constituency of players who want old school games?

    I would say that if there was indeed a large group of players then there would be no question about making games like "old school games".

    I would say that the dearth of these games points to a smaller group of people interested in these games.

    Additionally, any "old school" games are probably going to come from smaller development teams who set out to specifically make these games.

    You aren't going to find large development houses taking on games that are probably not going to make their money back. That's one fast way to start needing to lay people off.

     

    Listening to your guild buddies or scanning websites  with a greater population of old school players isn't a good way to know what the general game audience wants.

     

    Wow! You made some huge assumptions, and ignored all the forum debate over this very topic

    Seriously dude, I think your in denial.

    EQ1 and AC were epic MMOs, people still talk about them today, all over the net.

    A game company would be smart to relaunch such an MMO

    And in fact we are seeing them. Wildstar, Star Citizen and X-rebirth are all MMOs that are going back to the old school way of doing MMOs.

    image
  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Sacramento, CAPosts: 1,152Member
    Originally posted by Mahavishnu
    1. Old school MMOs have not been very successful. EQ2, Vanguard, ... 2. Even the great majority of "old school hard core" players played WoW. They complained about it all the time, but they cept on playing it. 3. The MMO market is shrinking. Facebook and multiplayer features of single player games (Battlefield, GTA5) draw away a huge amount of players. 4. This whole "old school" argument is a terrible lie. Nobody wants to farm stupid mobs for rare drops again. It is just stupid gameplay. What they really want is: rush up as fast as possible to endlevel get better gear and higher level than most of other players boost their vanitiy because they do more damage and have more HP than anybody else (good for PvP and PvE)

     

    And here we go again with the huge assumptions and flat out misdirection

    The OP used EQ1 and AC as his examples, but you use EQ2 and Vanguard as examples.

    Those games don't even compare...lol.

    EQ2 wasn't too bad, but Vanguard was an epic disaster.

    I think you completely missed the boat here.....

    image
  • HolophonistHolophonist Pittsburgh, PAPosts: 2,090Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Antiquated
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    I get his point, it's just irrelevant.

    If you actually did get it, it would be relevant.

    When the players demand, over and over again, a model of exclusion... they're asking for their ideal; not what's in the company's best interest.

    "Why can't we make a game just for us?" ("just for us", of course, is the same as "not for them")

    No, this is still off topic. Somebody told him that if he really does enjoy those old games, then he should go play them. He pointed out (rightly so) that they don't exist in their original form, if at all.

  • NadiaNadia Topsham, MainePosts: 11,866Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Zakk1011
    WHY hasn't a publisher done this??  It seems SO LOW budget to me (relative to other titles) and people would EAT IT UP. How successful do you think a graphically updated EQ1, with some minor gameplay tweaks/additions, would be right now?

    how is that lowbudget?

     

    players will be expecting POLISH and Good Graphics  -- both expensive

    and content !

     

    to create a low budget mmo

    if a dev used HTML5 to create a browser game, like Runes of Magic,

    but it had all the features of EQ1 / AC

     

    would you play it?   

    I'll readily admit I wouldn't - I'm not a fan of browser mmos

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member

    The problem is that people aren't interested in anything less than triple A development quality and the market isn't there for that sort of development cash, as the many promising but failed indie games have shown - if it isn't 100% amazing quality at launch its a fail.  The people voting on the EQN polls are diehard MMO followers, not the mass market they are chasing.

     

    How many WoW players do you think seriously even look at sites like this or even their own forums? The hits would be much higher. But that's not how casual players operate.  They log in, have fun for an hour or two then log out.  And that's where all the money is.

     

    You would be lucky to get 100k subs for a diehard game like you suggest, and that's not something that people are willing to bet triple A quality development costs on.

  • steelheartxsteelheartx Biloxi, MSPosts: 434Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Zakk1011
    What do I need to do to get someone to make this?  

    Money.  Lots and lots of money.

    Looking for a family that you can game with for life? Check out Grievance at https://www.grievancegaming.org !

  • RusqueRusque Las Vegas, NVPosts: 2,633Member Rare
    Originally posted by Zakk1011
    Obviously, there is a LARGE constituent of players out there that want to see the old-school style of MMORPG's brought back.  Death penalty, limited fast travel, community/social interaction, adventure sandbox...no quest markers...

     

    I'm not going to go into everything you said, everyone has their own MMO concept  and no, no one will make it for them.

     

    But you say it's obvious that there's a large number of players who want X. Proof? People talked about DAOC all the time on this forum, and when Camelot Unchained showed up on kickstarter here was everyone's chance to help fund the second coming of one of their proclaimed favorite games ever.

    It came right down to the wire and almost didn't get funded. Not only did it just scrape by on the funding . . . but by the end it had a fairly miniscule 14,873 backers.

    Now, if you're on the forums, 15k people does indeed seem like a LARGE constituency doesn't it? If we had 15k people here clamoring for a certain type of game we'd be befuddled as to why no one is serving that market?

    But if you turn around and put that 15k into a game . . . all of a sudden those numbers are tiny. A game like FFARR gets 300k concurrent players and has queues out the door, while a game that people claim everyone wants to play gets 15k supporters. Bit of a disconnect there?

     

    I know this is just one example, but the burden of proof is not on me. You (and others like you) are the one's who claim that this market exists in significant numbers. Well, where is it? You want something and that's fine. I'm all for multiple market segments being serviced, but you have to show that you actually have a segment and not a couple hundred people on an internet forum making noise.

    The other groups (the one's driving the games you don't like - aka the new ones) are making themselves heard with their wallets. They keep opening them and supporting these games. If you're on the forum talking about what you want, that means nothing to developers.

    Want to show that there's an old school community that's ripe for the picking? Have them all sign up to the old games, repopulate Vanguard - even if you don't log in to play, just paying into it gives meaning to your claims. I know it sounds stupid to pay for something you won't use, but developers don't sit around saying, "You know, there were 32 posts on MMORPG.com today asking for an old school style MMO, let's devote the next 5+ years and millions of dollars  to making one!"

    They need to know that there is some money to be made. It doesn't have to be WoW money, but it has to be enough that they can reasonably project some type of ROI on their game.

  • AntiquatedAntiquated Posts: 1,411Member Rare
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    Originally posted by Antiquated
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    I get his point, it's just irrelevant.

    If you actually did get it, it would be relevant.

    When the players demand, over and over again, a model of exclusion... they're asking for their ideal; not what's in the company's best interest.

    "Why can't we make a game just for us?" ("just for us", of course, is the same as "not for them")

    No, this is still off topic.

    I think a review of post #1 in this thread is in order.

  • TheocritusTheocritus Gary, INPosts: 4,592Member Rare
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Most of them are all talk. It's find to sit here with rose colored glasses on talking about how great EQ! was but when it comes time to put up or shut up ...well...they tend to do neither. Wishing you could relive your first mmo love is not the same thing as someone willing to go back and do it over again...knowing what they know now. Your experiences in mmos will forever keep you from ever having that first love back again.

     

    I agree...Alot of them are all talk.....THere are versions of these games out there, many free, and yet they only draw a handful of players.....If these games are so in demand wouldn't these private server type of games draw thousands?.......Theres also a newer game in alpha stages, made by former devs of EQ, that went back to old school gameplay.....WHile not everyone knows about it, there still is hardly anyone playing it.....It sounds great in theory, but one you actually start playing like that again it gets boring pretty fast......Its then that you realize that 1999 is over and done...Its fun for a few hours but not for years liek it used to be.

  • MendelMendel Marietta, GAPosts: 1,295Member Uncommon

    A couple of very important points about the problems with building old-school games.

    • Games (and genres and businesses) evolve by looking forward, not backwards.  While the OP may want to relive the early days of MMORPGs, there isn't money to be made in attracting players with those longings.   Generally, people want new things; even the OP wanted EQ1 or AC with modern, updated graphics, not a remade EQ1 with retro graphics.  The industry would describe those that want that early-era feeling as a niche market.  Companies make money by expanding their product to appeal to larger market segments.  If you generate $10 million in revenue this year, you can expect to need to generate $11 - $12 million in revenue next year, just to keep up with inflation.   Catering to niche markets isn't the way to keep the business growing.  So, any company large enough to build an MMORPG is going to focus on increasing that market space, and leave the niche markets alone.
    • Products (including MMORPGs) are developed with a specific vision in place.  The business itself will have some form of business plan -- including a basic development strategy, some viable customer (market segment) identified, and some rudimentary expectations about development costs.  These factors can (and usually will) evolve as the development progresses.  The business plan allows economic projections about the product, which ultimately give the project a green or red light.
    • In addition to a business plan, a game also needs a game design plan.  A 70 page document like the OP describes does not describe the game in enough depth to build a game. There are game mechanics to describe for the game itself, and lore necessary to build the content.   Telling a programmer to build something like an inventory system without specific details will ensure that the design of the project will be uncontrolled, and therefore unpredictable.   If the programmer codes slots for a single worn armor items and, later, the armor system allows 'layers' of clothing to contribute to the overall defense (A combination of a cotton undershirt, quilted padding and a bronze breastplate would have a different protection rating than a silk undershirt, quilted padding and bronze breastplate), then the original implementation is very likely to need significant revision (rework) to deal with this concept.  The designers need the lore basics in order to develop quests with consistency.   I would barely feel comfortable defining bullet points for the game mechanics in a 70 page document, and the lore of the world would require much, much detail.
    So without a major change in the marketplace (as measured by businesses), I'd say that a company large enough to produce a top-line quality MMORPG isn't likely to choose to build what is perceived to be a niche product because of the economics, leaving the niche markets to the marginal companies and independents, who by their very nature are not capable of producing the polished product desired.

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

Sign In or Register to comment.