A 3.9 in metacritic? And that's the view of the 'common' person that you seem to think plays the game..
What 3.9? It is 87 on metacritics. I hope you are not naive enough to look at user ratings that are obviously pulled down by haters. "common" people don't go to websites hate & rate.
You don't like it do not mean that it is not good. In fact, if you go to D3 forum here, even many people here like it ... and this place is hostile to all things Blizz.
Good games have good scores in both user ratings and critics ratings.
Biohshock infinite - 9.5 and 8.5 (Critic and User) respectively.
Skyrim 9.3 and 8.3
Everquest 8.5 and 8.6
Diablo III has haters - because it sucks for a game released by a former gaming titan. Thus It's worthy of the hate. LIke I said its a great example of how critics in the industry get manipulated and just preview a game instead of playing it seriously.
Even games that suffer from 'haters' don't score 3.9.
Guild Wars 2 9.0 and 7.9.
Mass Effect 3 (Most hated on game in existence) scored a 5.1.
So sure - you can claim that Diablo isn't a 3.9 game. I'd buy that. But its not considered a good game in the industry (by other gaming companies) or by other players. Its not a trend setter or any kind of breakthrough. It's a nothing in the field of gaming. That you happen to like it is swell. I will be playing ESO and then Wildstar. ESO has already giving me more quality play then playing Diablo III a few times. I got that free with my year pass. What a waste..
But its not considered a good game in the industry (by other gaming companies) or by other players.
Obviously you haven't visited the D3 forum here. Plenty think that it is a good game. You didn't ... is just your preferences. There are lots of people (particularly those who spent hundred or thousands of hours) think that it is good.
But its not considered a good game in the industry (by other gaming companies) or by other players.
Obviously you haven't visited the D3 forum here. Plenty think that it is a good game. You didn't ... is just your preferences. There are lots of people (particularly those who spent hundred or thousands of hours) think that it is good.
I didn't mean to say that there are ZERO people that like the game - just that it was considered a failure by the general gaming population. Plenty of people liked Duke Nukem Forever and some other failures - so what.. SimCity (the new one) is considered a failure and I think I could go to a Maxis forum and find a bunch of people that love it. You prove nothing..
The 'masses' that you so like to use in your arguments don't like your favorite game. I guess its a little different when the shoe is on the other foot.
This is what Metacritic does it collects the views of the masses. Its hilarious that some like you would try to ignore user ratings when that's your #1 argument on these forums. Pot meet kettle.
Check out the 2.5 rating on Amazon for your beloved game - and lots of reviews too. LMAO.. Sliders yeah that worked..uh huh.
Well, that is just the thing isn't it, there will always be a gap between the people with time vs money. You have the money, others have the time, you don't want to play only 1 mmo because you have a real life job, and others want only 1 mmo whether they have a job or not.
Companies keep catering to the public masses, but now even old Everquest 1 has been terribly nerfed. It doesn't draw me back, because now it is to easy.
Star Wars lost my boyfriend because it was to easy and it didn't have enough content. WoW lost my boyfriend's interest, because it is to easy, even though it has plenty of ways to waste your time on dumbed down content.
I can't play any game that focuses on pvp, or doesn't have graphics (eye candy). So, I usually stick with the top AAA titles, even the lesser ones like Lord of the Rings Online, but even that has been nerfed down and is rediculously easy.
We need challenge brought back to mmos, we need more socialization and grouping in better friendlier communites...
Unfortunately, everyone is in a rush, they want to beat the game as soon as possible so they can either roll their 50th alt, or go play another game.
There are just way to many games on the market demanding your time and money now. It is oversaturated and rediculous.
I miss the old days of Everquest 1, I really seriously do, mechanics that matter, like mesmerization crowd control (having enchanters and bards in the game), debuffing mobs (Shamans, Mages, Enchanters, etc), ressurecting people for their xp back (Clerics), buffing (Enchanters, Shamans, Druids, Clerics), using reagents for said buffs and spells (Clerics, Mages, Enchanters, Wizards, etc), and teleportation (Druids, Wizards).
Using boats, which slowed down your travel time (Everquest 1 and 2, Final Fantasy 11 Online), and yet promoted socialization, and fishing on the boat should have fun monster battles... Or, riding a zeppelin/air ship should have fun air battles show up!!
Taking a shuttle on Star Wars shouldn't be instant!! IT should have a travel time and it SHOULD RUN INTO MONSTERS ENROUTE! If in fact you wanted to take a quick trip to get somewhere, then you shouldn't really be on an mmo in the first place, they were meant for people with free time, mmos were never meant to be casual friendly quick games.
There are already plenty of facebook applications, and angry bird, tetris, etc. Nintendo DS and other games on it are great for people with no time, mmo's should have remained harder and challenging, but ah well it is what it is.
IF you make something harder, you limit your player pool, that is why they came up with dungeon levels/modes and such. I am not a big fan of it, but that is their answer to making it as easy as possible to not discourage anyone, but also have something harder for other people. I prefer a mmo having the same difficulty for all, even if it is hard, because outside of the scaled content, stuff is generally too easy, if you are relying on scaling.
As long as enough people like it, they will keep doing it, just like the making the modern mmo into a jack of all trades.
Having designated downtime like travel times for riding a shuttle etc is exactly what killed a lot of old school MMOs more people play MMOs than ever before and that us because they made the games more enjoyable for most people needing a minimum game time of 4+ hours due to travel time and downtime is not going to keep your player base!
Originally posted by Fenrir767 Having designated downtime like travel times for riding a shuttle etc is exactly what killed a lot of old school MMOs more people play MMOs than ever before and that us because they made the games more enjoyable for most people needing a minimum game time of 4+ hours due to travel time and downtime is not going to keep your player base!
Old school MMOs are just not very good games to me. Even if I have hours to ride shuttles, i do not want to do that. It is simply no fun to me, which defeat the purpose of a video game.
It really just boils down to players' preferences.
Originally posted by Fenrir767 Having designated downtime like travel times for riding a shuttle etc is exactly what killed a lot of old school MMOs more people play MMOs than ever before and that us because they made the games more enjoyable for most people needing a minimum game time of 4+ hours due to travel time and downtime is not going to keep your player base!
You obviously don't need half hour or hour long waits for things to make a good old school style mmo, but being max level in 1-2 days (ESO is latest one that people did it) is way too fast imo.
I've been playing MMOs for 15 years. The MMO I played the longest was Everquest 1, and is also an MMO that people cite as challenging.
I have news for everyone, Everquest was easy. Really, really easy. One of the most notoriously hard raid bosses in Everquest, for instance, was the Avatar of War. Here's what an AOW raid was like:
1) Monk pulls mob.
2) Warrior tags mob and drags into corner.
3) Clerics begin Complete Heal chain on warrior.
4) Melee DPS turns on auto attack and go AFK.
5) Nukers spam their most powerful nuke.
6) Mob dies.
What made the Avatar of War raid extremely difficult to win, then, you say?
1) You needed about 60+ people to have a chance.
2) He could one round even a fully geared warrior, and your tank dying pretty much meant a wipe because half the raid would die before another warrior picked up aggro.
3) A cleric fizzles or misses their spot in the heal rotation.
4) If you wiped, it would take 45 minutes to recover and prepare for another attempt.
5) He only spawned once a week.
6) You were competing for the spawn with other guilds.
That's it, nothing about this raid (or any other raid in the game, up until some later expansions when they got a lot more complicated) was challenging. If the AOW raid was instanced, required 24 people instead of 72, and corpse recoveries took five minutes instead of nearly an hour, that raid would have been a total joke.
Long story short, Everquest was not hard, it was tedious.
Originally posted by Fenrir767 Having designated downtime like travel times for riding a shuttle etc is exactly what killed a lot of old school MMOs more people play MMOs than ever before and that us because they made the games more enjoyable for most people needing a minimum game time of 4+ hours due to travel time and downtime is not going to keep your player base!
It is called immersion. You were part of a living, breathing world.
With instant teleports to all areas of interest, you might as well be playing a fully instanced lobby game, not an MMO.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin
I've been playing MMOs for 15 years. The MMO I played the longest was Everquest 1, and is also an MMO that people cite as challenging.
I have news for everyone, Everquest was easy. Really, really easy. One of the most notoriously hard raid bosses in Everquest, for instance, was the Avatar of War. Here's what an AOW raid was like:
1) Monk pulls mob.
2) Warrior tags mob and drags into corner.
3) Clerics begin Complete Heal chain on warrior.
4) Melee DPS turns on auto attack and go AFK.
5) Nukers spam their most powerful nuke.
6) Mob dies.
What made the Avatar of War raid extremely difficult to win, then, you say?
1) You needed about 60+ people to have a chance.
2) He could one round even a fully geared warrior, and your tank dying pretty much meant a wipe because half the raid would die before another warrior picked up aggro.
3) A cleric fizzles or misses their spot in the heal rotation.
4) If you wiped, it would take 45 minutes to recover and prepare for another attempt.
5) He only spawned once a week.
6) You were competing for the spawn with other guilds.
That's it, nothing about this raid (or any other raid in the game, up until some later expansions when they got a lot more complicated) was challenging. If the AOW raid was instanced, required 24 people instead of 72, and corpse recoveries took five minutes instead of nearly an hour, that raid would have been a total joke.
Long story short, Everquest was not hard, it was tedious.
That actually sounds fun. Idk never experienced Everquest was to young.
It is called immersion. You were part of a living, breathing world.
With instant teleports to all areas of interest, you might as well be playing a fully instanced lobby game, not an MMO.
That is just semantics. Let's just call MMO instanced lobby game .. problem solved. I am more than happy to play instanced lobby games. If they happened to be categorized as MMOs, i won't count it against them.
Walking 10 min before i can play is not fun to me. "Immersion" is not as important as convenience for many. Otherwise, LFD/LFR wouldn't be so popular.
I've been playing MMOs for 15 years. The MMO I played the longest was Everquest 1, and is also an MMO that people cite as challenging.
I have news for everyone, Everquest was easy. Really, really easy. One of the most notoriously hard raid bosses in Everquest, for instance, was the Avatar of War. Here's what an AOW raid was like:
1) Monk pulls mob.
2) Warrior tags mob and drags into corner.
3) Clerics begin Complete Heal chain on warrior.
4) Melee DPS turns on auto attack and go AFK.
5) Nukers spam their most powerful nuke.
6) Mob dies.
What made the Avatar of War raid extremely difficult to win, then, you say?
1) You needed about 60+ people to have a chance.
2) He could one round even a fully geared warrior, and your tank dying pretty much meant a wipe because half the raid would die before another warrior picked up aggro.
3) A cleric fizzles or misses their spot in the heal rotation.
4) If you wiped, it would take 45 minutes to recover and prepare for another attempt.
5) He only spawned once a week.
6) You were competing for the spawn with other guilds.
That's it, nothing about this raid (or any other raid in the game, up until some later expansions when they got a lot more complicated) was challenging. If the AOW raid was instanced, required 24 people instead of 72, and corpse recoveries took five minutes instead of nearly an hour, that raid would have been a total joke.
Long story short, Everquest was not hard, it was tedious.
You could write up something like this for every game ever made, or even sending a rover to mars and make it sound the same.
Getting 72 people to do their job correctly is a little bit harder to do than say 24.
I do agree with you though, instances have made a lot of content a joke.
Originally posted by Fenrir767 Having designated downtime like travel times for riding a shuttle etc is exactly what killed a lot of old school MMOs more people play MMOs than ever before and that us because they made the games more enjoyable for most people needing a minimum game time of 4+ hours due to travel time and downtime is not going to keep your player base!
It is called immersion. You were part of a living, breathing world.
With instant teleports to all areas of interest, you might as well be playing a fully instanced lobby game, not an MMO.
What you call immersion I call a reminder that I am living in a pale shadow of a living breathing world. Due to the fact that game mechanics control the game and prevent a lot of things from occuring and limit what you can do it often breaks me out of the game world. I also want to play a game not live a second life in an online world therefore I am fine with the current iteration of MMOs
If anything the genre needs to evolve again instead of stay stagnant IMO the way forward is something new and not looking to the older games as they had more people quit them than are currently playing MMOs, they had some great ideas but are just as flawed as newer games.
I've been playing MMOs for 15 years. The MMO I played the longest was Everquest 1, and is also an MMO that people cite as challenging.
I have news for everyone, Everquest was easy. Really, really easy. One of the most notoriously hard raid bosses in Everquest, for instance, was the Avatar of War. Here's what an AOW raid was like:
1) Monk pulls mob.
2) Warrior tags mob and drags into corner.
3) Clerics begin Complete Heal chain on warrior.
4) Melee DPS turns on auto attack and go AFK.
5) Nukers spam their most powerful nuke.
6) Mob dies.
What made the Avatar of War raid extremely difficult to win, then, you say?
1) You needed about 60+ people to have a chance.
2) He could one round even a fully geared warrior, and your tank dying pretty much meant a wipe because half the raid would die before another warrior picked up aggro.
3) A cleric fizzles or misses their spot in the heal rotation.
4) If you wiped, it would take 45 minutes to recover and prepare for another attempt.
5) He only spawned once a week.
6) You were competing for the spawn with other guilds.
That's it, nothing about this raid (or any other raid in the game, up until some later expansions when they got a lot more complicated) was challenging. If the AOW raid was instanced, required 24 people instead of 72, and corpse recoveries took five minutes instead of nearly an hour, that raid would have been a total joke.
Long story short, Everquest was not hard, it was tedious.
You could write up something like this for every game ever made, or even sending a rover to mars and make it sound the same.
Getting 72 people to do their job correctly is a little bit harder to do than say 24.
I do agree with you though, instances have made a lot of content a joke.
The point though is that this is a game not a job, not some grand accomplishment for Mankind like sending a rover to Mars. I definitely found organizing groups to be quite tedious for the larger raids in older MMOs, I would much rather have more challenging just as rewarding smaller group based content instead.
Challenge is not directly linked to the amount of players needed to complete the content.
If anything the genre needs to evolve again instead of stay stagnant IMO the way forward is something new and not looking to the older games as they had more people quit them than are currently playing MMOs, they had some great ideas but are just as flawed as newer games.
Yes. That is why Destiny and Division are interesting. May be games like WOT and warframe will also points to a different way of doing online games.
MMOS have never been hard and I've been playing since MUDS. They just had rougher edges and were a lot less streamlined. Your nostalgia is blinding you.
Agreed. I would love to hear what games some posters on here are referring to when they talk about hard and what characteristics made them hard. Until then, it just seems like a nostalgia induced reaction to modern MMOs. My biggest gripe with new MMOs is not the easy/hard debate: It has more to do with their inability to make me feel like I am playing in a real living world in which my choices influence the world around me. Also there is no real reward to exploring or striking out into the unknown with no clear goal in mind. It is all about the linear quest progression from quest hub to quest hub and from zone to zone. Might as well be on a treadmill.
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
MMOS have never been hard and I've been playing since MUDS. They just had rougher edges and were a lot less streamlined. Your nostalgia is blinding you.
Agreed. I would love to hear what games some posters on here are referring to when they talk about hard and what characteristics made them hard. Until then, it just seems like a nostalgia induced reaction to modern MMOs. My biggest gripe with new MMOs is not the easy/hard debate: It has more to do with their inability to make me feel like I am playing in a real living world in which my choices influence the world around me. Also there is no real reward to exploring or striking out into the unknown with no clear goal in mind. It is all about the linear quest progression from quest hub to quest hub and from zone to zone. Might as well be on a treadmill.
MMOs in general are not hard. The concepts behind playing them are very simple. There are elements of MMOs that can be very difficult though.
* PvP can be difficult in general, but especially so when the opposing group is over powered relative to your group.
* Raids can be hard initially, even if they become easy once the threshold of gear is reached and some of them can remain difficult because of the mechanics used. Learning the mechanics doesn't make all encounters trivial, the ability to execute some encounters is key.
I think most other aspects of MMOs depend largely on how willing the player is to invest the time into the game. "Hard" in this context can mean patience, but if the player is having fun, it's not really that hard to spend a lot of time playing a game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Agreed. I would love to hear what games some posters on here are referring to when they talk about hard and what characteristics made them hard.
Sunwell? Only 2% have ever done it. If that is not hard, what is?
How about D3 inferno when it was first released? Most won't last seconds in front of an elite group.
Difficult why? Required some sort of special skill from the player or because it was a difficult raid that required the right gear and coordination of 20+ people?
D3 not an MMO in my opinion so doesn't factor into the discussion as far as I am concerned...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Agreed. I would love to hear what games some posters on here are referring to when they talk about hard and what characteristics made them hard.
Sunwell? Only 2% have ever done it. If that is not hard, what is?
How about D3 inferno when it was first released? Most won't last seconds in front of an elite group.
Difficult why? Required some sort of special skill from the player or because it was a difficult raid that required the right gear and coordination of 20+ people?
D3 not an MMO in my opinion so doesn't factor into the discussion as far as I am concerned...
Who cares why? 2% is difficult
D3 is close enough to a MMO to me .. and listed on the "MMORPG" list here, and many mentioned it here.
Agreed. I would love to hear what games some posters on here are referring to when they talk about hard and what characteristics made them hard.
Sunwell? Only 2% have ever done it. If that is not hard, what is?
How about D3 inferno when it was first released? Most won't last seconds in front of an elite group.
Difficult why? Required some sort of special skill from the player or because it was a difficult raid that required the right gear and coordination of 20+ people?
D3 not an MMO in my opinion so doesn't factor into the discussion as far as I am concerned...
Who cares why? 2% is difficult
D3 is close enough to a MMO to me .. and listed on the "MMORPG" list here, and many mentioned it here.
You do realize that your argument about D3 being on the games list holds 100% absolutely no merit what-so-ever. Why? Because the list contains single player games too. For instance, South Park: Stick of Truth is on the frickin list. Think abhout that for a moment. A single player RPG is on MMORPG.com's game list... This has been explained to you time and time again, the list has transformed into a collection of games that people who play MMORPG's will most likely enjoy. It is not meant to be used as way to define what an MMO is.
What happen to mmo's now? I remember when a mmo where a challenge. One play style, players adapting to the content, true team play, real player communities, Countless hours of dying and few players ever reaching really top level/gear because of hard work. But now, reaching top level can be done in a weekend, content is adjusted for the player so they can get through it, everything can be solo'ed in a weekend.
What makes anyone think the next two big mmo's coming out will be anything different? I mean, it more of the same. Will there be anything different? I mean really. The last 2 AAA mmo's I played, reaching top level was easy, I rarely died, leveling was a joke, getting high-end gear was not that difficult. I did most of that with a month's time. After, 3 months, I had no interest in continuing to play. Does anyone really thing the AAA games Wildstar online or Elder scrolls online will last that long?
I've played some of the best AAA mmo's out there, daoc, wow, rift, gw2, ac and with each new mmo the games gets easier. I'm here to bash but I can't see next two mmos as something that will change anything. Does anyone really seeing themselves play ESO or Wildstar for 6 months or longer?
Maybe it not just mmo's but video games in general. I watched this youtube post by Review Tech USA some up everything I felt.
What you are describing is a grindfest, I think.
I miss them too, in some ways. Alas, games had to evolve beyond that sometime.
Comments
Good games have good scores in both user ratings and critics ratings.
Biohshock infinite - 9.5 and 8.5 (Critic and User) respectively.
Skyrim 9.3 and 8.3
Everquest 8.5 and 8.6
Diablo III has haters - because it sucks for a game released by a former gaming titan. Thus It's worthy of the hate. LIke I said its a great example of how critics in the industry get manipulated and just preview a game instead of playing it seriously.
Even games that suffer from 'haters' don't score 3.9.
Guild Wars 2 9.0 and 7.9.
Mass Effect 3 (Most hated on game in existence) scored a 5.1.
So sure - you can claim that Diablo isn't a 3.9 game. I'd buy that. But its not considered a good game in the industry (by other gaming companies) or by other players. Its not a trend setter or any kind of breakthrough. It's a nothing in the field of gaming. That you happen to like it is swell. I will be playing ESO and then Wildstar. ESO has already giving me more quality play then playing Diablo III a few times. I got that free with my year pass. What a waste..
Obviously you haven't visited the D3 forum here. Plenty think that it is a good game. You didn't ... is just your preferences. There are lots of people (particularly those who spent hundred or thousands of hours) think that it is good.
I didn't mean to say that there are ZERO people that like the game - just that it was considered a failure by the general gaming population. Plenty of people liked Duke Nukem Forever and some other failures - so what.. SimCity (the new one) is considered a failure and I think I could go to a Maxis forum and find a bunch of people that love it. You prove nothing..
The 'masses' that you so like to use in your arguments don't like your favorite game. I guess its a little different when the shoe is on the other foot.
This is what Metacritic does it collects the views of the masses. Its hilarious that some like you would try to ignore user ratings when that's your #1 argument on these forums. Pot meet kettle.
Check out the 2.5 rating on Amazon for your beloved game - and lots of reviews too. LMAO.. Sliders yeah that worked..uh huh.
Well, that is just the thing isn't it, there will always be a gap between the people with time vs money. You have the money, others have the time, you don't want to play only 1 mmo because you have a real life job, and others want only 1 mmo whether they have a job or not.
Companies keep catering to the public masses, but now even old Everquest 1 has been terribly nerfed. It doesn't draw me back, because now it is to easy.
Star Wars lost my boyfriend because it was to easy and it didn't have enough content. WoW lost my boyfriend's interest, because it is to easy, even though it has plenty of ways to waste your time on dumbed down content.
I can't play any game that focuses on pvp, or doesn't have graphics (eye candy). So, I usually stick with the top AAA titles, even the lesser ones like Lord of the Rings Online, but even that has been nerfed down and is rediculously easy.
We need challenge brought back to mmos, we need more socialization and grouping in better friendlier communites...
Unfortunately, everyone is in a rush, they want to beat the game as soon as possible so they can either roll their 50th alt, or go play another game.
There are just way to many games on the market demanding your time and money now. It is oversaturated and rediculous.
I miss the old days of Everquest 1, I really seriously do, mechanics that matter, like mesmerization crowd control (having enchanters and bards in the game), debuffing mobs (Shamans, Mages, Enchanters, etc), ressurecting people for their xp back (Clerics), buffing (Enchanters, Shamans, Druids, Clerics), using reagents for said buffs and spells (Clerics, Mages, Enchanters, Wizards, etc), and teleportation (Druids, Wizards).
Using boats, which slowed down your travel time (Everquest 1 and 2, Final Fantasy 11 Online), and yet promoted socialization, and fishing on the boat should have fun monster battles... Or, riding a zeppelin/air ship should have fun air battles show up!!
Taking a shuttle on Star Wars shouldn't be instant!! IT should have a travel time and it SHOULD RUN INTO MONSTERS ENROUTE! If in fact you wanted to take a quick trip to get somewhere, then you shouldn't really be on an mmo in the first place, they were meant for people with free time, mmos were never meant to be casual friendly quick games.
There are already plenty of facebook applications, and angry bird, tetris, etc. Nintendo DS and other games on it are great for people with no time, mmo's should have remained harder and challenging, but ah well it is what it is.
IF you make something harder, you limit your player pool, that is why they came up with dungeon levels/modes and such. I am not a big fan of it, but that is their answer to making it as easy as possible to not discourage anyone, but also have something harder for other people. I prefer a mmo having the same difficulty for all, even if it is hard, because outside of the scaled content, stuff is generally too easy, if you are relying on scaling.
As long as enough people like it, they will keep doing it, just like the making the modern mmo into a jack of all trades.
Old school MMOs are just not very good games to me. Even if I have hours to ride shuttles, i do not want to do that. It is simply no fun to me, which defeat the purpose of a video game.
It really just boils down to players' preferences.
You obviously don't need half hour or hour long waits for things to make a good old school style mmo, but being max level in 1-2 days (ESO is latest one that people did it) is way too fast imo.
I've been playing MMOs for 15 years. The MMO I played the longest was Everquest 1, and is also an MMO that people cite as challenging.
I have news for everyone, Everquest was easy. Really, really easy. One of the most notoriously hard raid bosses in Everquest, for instance, was the Avatar of War. Here's what an AOW raid was like:
1) Monk pulls mob.
2) Warrior tags mob and drags into corner.
3) Clerics begin Complete Heal chain on warrior.
4) Melee DPS turns on auto attack and go AFK.
5) Nukers spam their most powerful nuke.
6) Mob dies.
What made the Avatar of War raid extremely difficult to win, then, you say?
1) You needed about 60+ people to have a chance.
2) He could one round even a fully geared warrior, and your tank dying pretty much meant a wipe because half the raid would die before another warrior picked up aggro.
3) A cleric fizzles or misses their spot in the heal rotation.
4) If you wiped, it would take 45 minutes to recover and prepare for another attempt.
5) He only spawned once a week.
6) You were competing for the spawn with other guilds.
That's it, nothing about this raid (or any other raid in the game, up until some later expansions when they got a lot more complicated) was challenging. If the AOW raid was instanced, required 24 people instead of 72, and corpse recoveries took five minutes instead of nearly an hour, that raid would have been a total joke.
Long story short, Everquest was not hard, it was tedious.
It is called immersion. You were part of a living, breathing world.
With instant teleports to all areas of interest, you might as well be playing a fully instanced lobby game, not an MMO.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
Benjamin Franklin
That actually sounds fun. Idk never experienced Everquest was to young.
i will pass on any game that depends on 59 others to have fun.
That is just semantics. Let's just call MMO instanced lobby game .. problem solved. I am more than happy to play instanced lobby games. If they happened to be categorized as MMOs, i won't count it against them.
Walking 10 min before i can play is not fun to me. "Immersion" is not as important as convenience for many. Otherwise, LFD/LFR wouldn't be so popular.
You could write up something like this for every game ever made, or even sending a rover to mars and make it sound the same.
Getting 72 people to do their job correctly is a little bit harder to do than say 24.
I do agree with you though, instances have made a lot of content a joke.
What you call immersion I call a reminder that I am living in a pale shadow of a living breathing world. Due to the fact that game mechanics control the game and prevent a lot of things from occuring and limit what you can do it often breaks me out of the game world. I also want to play a game not live a second life in an online world therefore I am fine with the current iteration of MMOs
If anything the genre needs to evolve again instead of stay stagnant IMO the way forward is something new and not looking to the older games as they had more people quit them than are currently playing MMOs, they had some great ideas but are just as flawed as newer games.
The point though is that this is a game not a job, not some grand accomplishment for Mankind like sending a rover to Mars. I definitely found organizing groups to be quite tedious for the larger raids in older MMOs, I would much rather have more challenging just as rewarding smaller group based content instead.
Challenge is not directly linked to the amount of players needed to complete the content.
Yes. That is why Destiny and Division are interesting. May be games like WOT and warframe will also points to a different way of doing online games.
Agreed. I would love to hear what games some posters on here are referring to when they talk about hard and what characteristics made them hard. Until then, it just seems like a nostalgia induced reaction to modern MMOs. My biggest gripe with new MMOs is not the easy/hard debate: It has more to do with their inability to make me feel like I am playing in a real living world in which my choices influence the world around me. Also there is no real reward to exploring or striking out into the unknown with no clear goal in mind. It is all about the linear quest progression from quest hub to quest hub and from zone to zone. Might as well be on a treadmill.
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Sunwell? Only 2% have ever done it. If that is not hard, what is?
How about D3 inferno when it was first released? Most won't last seconds in front of an elite group.
MMOs in general are not hard. The concepts behind playing them are very simple. There are elements of MMOs that can be very difficult though.
* PvP can be difficult in general, but especially so when the opposing group is over powered relative to your group.
* Raids can be hard initially, even if they become easy once the threshold of gear is reached and some of them can remain difficult because of the mechanics used. Learning the mechanics doesn't make all encounters trivial, the ability to execute some encounters is key.
I think most other aspects of MMOs depend largely on how willing the player is to invest the time into the game. "Hard" in this context can mean patience, but if the player is having fun, it's not really that hard to spend a lot of time playing a game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Difficult why? Required some sort of special skill from the player or because it was a difficult raid that required the right gear and coordination of 20+ people?
D3 not an MMO in my opinion so doesn't factor into the discussion as far as I am concerned...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Who cares why? 2% is difficult
D3 is close enough to a MMO to me .. and listed on the "MMORPG" list here, and many mentioned it here.
You do realize that your argument about D3 being on the games list holds 100% absolutely no merit what-so-ever. Why? Because the list contains single player games too. For instance, South Park: Stick of Truth is on the frickin list. Think abhout that for a moment. A single player RPG is on MMORPG.com's game list... This has been explained to you time and time again, the list has transformed into a collection of games that people who play MMORPG's will most likely enjoy. It is not meant to be used as way to define what an MMO is.
I don't know how else to explain this to you...
What you are describing is a grindfest, I think.
I miss them too, in some ways. Alas, games had to evolve beyond that sometime.