Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal Lol yeah because there are a ton of Wow clones on the horizon like this the mid 00's. Have you guys actually smelled the roses lately? The scent has changed from years past. Not many are going to have the money to spend on tons of crafted quest that many players just want to skip past anyway. SOE is going sandbox. Blizzard shut their game down. Almost every small and mid budget MMORPG is player based content. There are no notable them themeparks coming down the line. With many themeparks failing to reach even 5% of a declining WoW I am sure even developers can see that it's not worth the money into unless you have STWOR/ESO budgets. The silent majority largely have not experienced anything but WoW clones to know if thats all they want. I think you're going to see themeparks transition into more open ended games, sandbox hybrids and backgrounds and player created
Can you link a source where it says Blizzard shut down Titan? 'Cause last I heard they're redesigning the game engine.
The rest of your post is just wishful thinking.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by ikcin But I like Linkin Park and Papa Roach, and Metallica, and Iron Maiden, and Nirvana, and etc. For me WoW is a huge success as a game marketing, but a huge failure as a game, that brought down the whole genre. And so many publishers still can't get it - WoW is not a good MMORPG, but it has brilliant marketing - so they copy the game, but not the marketing. The result is all AAA games are frozen in time as graphics, aesthetic, mechanics. And you shall look to the East to see something new. All features in post #206 exist in ArcheAge and Black Desert Online. Graphics of BLESS and BDO are far better than any AAA game. And the problem is not WoW itself or Blizzard, but the other devs, who make games for money, not for play.
Actually, I disagree. WoW is a good MMORPG. It was new, and brought playability to the genre which it needed. You can't blame them for the massive success that brought imitators. The imitators are the ones who have had us playing the same game for the past two MMORPG cycles. Seems like that's over now that there aren't many themeparks coming out past Wildstar.
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal Lol yeah because there are a ton of Wow clones on the horizon like this the mid 00's. Have you guys actually smelled the roses lately? The scent has changed from years past. Not many are going to have the money to spend on tons of crafted quest that many players just want to skip past anyway. SOE is going sandbox. Blizzard shut their game down. Almost every small and mid budget MMORPG is player based content. There are no notable them themeparks coming down the line. With many themeparks failing to reach even 5% of a declining WoW I am sure even developers can see that it's not worth the money into unless you have STWOR/ESO budgets. The silent majority largely have not experienced anything but WoW clones to know if thats all they want. I think you're going to see themeparks transition into more open ended games, sandbox hybrids and backgrounds and player created
Can you link a source where it says Blizzard shut down Titan? 'Cause last I heard they're redesigning the game engine.
The rest of your post is just wishful thinking.
Outside of Wildstar where are the WoW clone type games in development? Compare it to 2008 and I think you certainly have a trend.
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal Lol yeah because there are a ton of Wow clones on the horizon like this the mid 00's. Have you guys actually smelled the roses lately? The scent has changed from years past. Not many are going to have the money to spend on tons of crafted quest that many players just want to skip past anyway. SOE is going sandbox. Blizzard shut their game down. Almost every small and mid budget MMORPG is player based content. There are no notable them themeparks coming down the line. With many themeparks failing to reach even 5% of a declining WoW I am sure even developers can see that it's not worth the money into unless you have STWOR/ESO budgets. The silent majority largely have not experienced anything but WoW clones to know if thats all they want. I think you're going to see themeparks transition into more open ended games, sandbox hybrids and backgrounds and player created
Can you link a source where it says Blizzard shut down Titan? 'Cause last I heard they're redesigning the game engine.
The rest of your post is just wishful thinking.
Outside of Wildstar where are the WoW clone type games in development? Compare it to 2008 and I think you certainly have a trend.
I can't take you seriously because you used the term "WoW clone". With your attitude, there's no chance we can have a rational, mature discussion.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal Lol yeah because there are a ton of Wow clones on the horizon like this the mid 00's. Have you guys actually smelled the roses lately? The scent has changed from years past. Not many are going to have the money to spend on tons of crafted quest that many players just want to skip past anyway. SOE is going sandbox. Blizzard shut their game down. Almost every small and mid budget MMORPG is player based content. There are no notable them themeparks coming down the line. With many themeparks failing to reach even 5% of a declining WoW I am sure even developers can see that it's not worth the money into unless you have STWOR/ESO budgets. The silent majority largely have not experienced anything but WoW clones to know if thats all they want. I think you're going to see themeparks transition into more open ended games, sandbox hybrids and backgrounds and player created
Can you link a source where it says Blizzard shut down Titan? 'Cause last I heard they're redesigning the game engine.
The rest of your post is just wishful thinking.
Outside of Wildstar where are the WoW clone type games in development? Compare it to 2008 and I think you certainly have a trend.
I can't take you seriously because you used the term "WoW clone". With your attitude, there's no chance we can have a rational, mature discussion.
LMAO. Fine then themepark questhub's that are similar to WoW work better for you?
I welcome a shift in current themeparks to something new I just find to many people say we have to go back to what it was. There are a lot of "Sandbox" games in development I don't think they are catching the attention of many Themepark players besides Wildstar and ESO most players don't talk about other games in the MMO I am playing. Changes have to be made to refresh the genre the games that are coming out soon IMO won't but hopefully we will get new ideas that will.
Originally posted by Fenrir767 That's the issue with most vets they want it their way or no way!
You know... this logic actually explains the 'bitter-vets' and their behaviour.
The vets can't understand why the market isn't catering to them (hint: you are a niche) and thus become 'bitter'.
Since they refuse the acknowledge what 'market forces / free market / capitalism' means, they can't explain why the MMO they want isn't happening and thus it must be the 'evil Mass Market get off my lawn types!'
Yeah.. I'm bored. :P
or they are just killing time and blowing off steam here. It beats playing MMORPGs.
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
Likewise if you have real 'impact" you effect the player of the other players. This is fine if you have an intelligent backend that can simulate millions of NPCs with life like activity (aka the matrix). Its not cool in an actual MMO where people will grief you for hours or draw dick signs on the ground or kill imprortant NPCs to ruin your day.
MMOs are a series of trade offs - developers try to come up with the best formula given current technology. Some choose to make promises they can't keep "Cough SOE, SOE". But others try to keep it more grounded and make the most enjoyable game they know how.
It's not a matter of "WILL NOT" its a matter of "CANNOT" Like I said in numerous threads before - where is your example of game that provides these features and the kind of AAA gameplay experience players want in PVE.. You can only do this if you are prepared for MOST of your players to have a shitty time of it. Truth.
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
Likewise if you have real 'impact" you effect the player of the other players. This is fine if you have an intelligent backend that can simulate millions of NPCs with life like activity (aka the matrix). Its not cool in an actual MMO where people will grief you for hours or draw dick signs on the ground or kill imprortant NPCs to ruin your day.
MMOs are a series of trade offs - developers try to come up with the best formula given current technology. Some choose to make promises they can't keep "Cough SOE, SOE". But others try to keep it more grounded and make the most enjoyable game they know how.
It's not a matter of "WILL NOT" its a matter of "CANNOT" Like I said in numerous threads before - where is your example of game that provides these features and the kind of AAA gameplay experience players want in PVE.. You can only do this if you are prepared for MOST of your players to have a shitty time of it. Truth.
Giving power or control to one player will take it away from another player. While one player has fun, there is a good chance the other player will not. This doesn't even have to be PvP or griefing.
If a player can build a house in the world, one player will build a house someplace, and then nobody else can build a house there. If a player can kill all of something, then another player can never kill that something for the rewards.
The only way around this is to dilute the power and control. Players cannot choose the best spot for building a house, but can choose from among many, similar places to build a house. Mobs respawn, or more mobs migrate in so that other players can earn the same rewards. And so on.
Players can either have the ultimate power and control, by playing single player games, or they can have their power and control diluted in MMORPGs, so that when they play a game they do not take away from other players playing the same game. To have the power and control in an MMORPG limits the audience to people willing to have their personal game play affected by other players.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal Lol yeah because there are a ton of Wow clones on the horizon like this the mid 00's. Have you guys actually smelled the roses lately? The scent has changed from years past. Not many are going to have the money to spend on tons of crafted quest that many players just want to skip past anyway. SOE is going sandbox. Blizzard shut their game down. Almost every small and mid budget MMORPG is player based content. There are no notable them themeparks coming down the line. With many themeparks failing to reach even 5% of a declining WoW I am sure even developers can see that it's not worth the money into unless you have STWOR/ESO budgets. The silent majority largely have not experienced anything but WoW clones to know if thats all they want. I think you're going to see themeparks transition into more open ended games, sandbox hybrids and backgrounds and player created
Can you link a source where it says Blizzard shut down Titan? 'Cause last I heard they're redesigning the game engine.
The rest of your post is just wishful thinking.
Outside of Wildstar where are the WoW clone type games in development? Compare it to 2008 and I think you certainly have a trend.
I can't take you seriously because you used the term "WoW clone". With your attitude, there's no chance we can have a rational, mature discussion.
Good god, man, lol.
It's a very commonly used frame of reference that anyone who's spent any time in the genre can understand. No need to take things so damned personally. I played WoW for a fair bit of time and enjoyed the hell out of it, and you'll never see me take offence to the term.
And, believe it or not, there are people out there who are actually looking for quality WoW clones. Even though that may or may not be happening as much as it has in the past, it's been going on for many years now. Take a look at the history of MMORPGs since 2004 and tell me developers/publishers/investors have not taken notice. They've been hard at work in the biz of WoW clones and they know it better than anyone of us.
Anyways, it's just a quick and simple frame of reference that one can take in a negative way if one chooses. Can it be derogatory? Sure, but that doesn't mean we all have to stop using the term to ensure everyone's on the same page when discussing a given MMORPG.
Lighten up a bit
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
That is... OK, I don't want to insult you, and I suggest you to read carefully what you wrote. Freedom is not a lack of directions. Freedom means that you choose the directions. Your post makes me really angry, because I'm born in communist country, and I know very well the price of freedom - the Matrix can be very real. You must read "1984". I know you are talking about games, but your way of thinking is scary for me.
Let's not get political here. We aren't talking about personal freedom IRL - but freedom in a game world. Let me explain more because some guys here don't seem to get it.
Let's take ESO for example - its questing is 'on rails' so to speak. For example one of my characters is saving/helping the queen of the dominion. Its all scripted - with each little quest done part of the story 'unfolds'. So its like a moving where your character does certain things to trigger the next part of the story.
But here is the important part THERE IS A STORY. Its not your OWN story. Its not personal to you - its the same for everyone playing the game. But they are telling a story.
Here is what the fans on this board want: They want total freedom. For example if I decide to "double cross' the queen and go work for the veiled inheritance - that's an option. And doing that would trigger a whole story that plays out. Likewise I could instead go my own way and become king of the dominion - that's another option that would play out. The best case is if the game would 'fill in' the next part of the story entirely depending on what you do.
This is how the Matrix works. You do things in the world of the Matrix - and the computer creates a story for you depending on what you do. So your game is always great. You don't ever really want to leave the Matrix..because in comparision reality sucks.
But we don't have that kind of technology. Its either have a story like they do in ESO - a real legit professionally created LINEAR story. Or your alternative is NO STORY. A good example of this is EQ. Back in EQ you could kill various mobs and gain faction with various groups. But there wasn't a story - it didn't roll out like an interesting movie. Your story was basically "I 'killed' a huge number of x things so these guys want to kill me and those guys don't.' That was the only "STORY" you got - and that's basically from most players perspectives not a story at all.
PVP games fare a little better you get stories like "remember that time when we were outnumbers 3 to 1 and took that base" - that was great. Its not a very compelling story - its a little stronger but still pretty limited.
This is how things are now. You can whine about it - but the important point is not that developers don't WANT to. Its that they CANNOT. They CANNOT give you a story as compelling as the linear ones In a truly open world game.
It's the same thing with the 'real change' argument. They can give you 'real change' but you wouldn't like to live in this world. For example when the first guild killed Arthas in WoW. That should have been it. He was dead. He was done. So no one else would get to Kill Arthas. Now if you had "Matrix" technology on your hands you could make it so that say Paragon killed Arthas first - the next time another guild was going to kill a big boss it would be a new one - some guy entirely different from Arthas with a different backstory and everything.
That would be awesome but we CANNOT do that. So instead we suspend our disbelief and kill Arthas again - even though technically he should be already dead.
Its very clear to me that many posters in this forum have a very poor idea about how video games actually work and so they think that companies are holding out on them. They are not.
If companies could make games with compelling stories that feature open world game play and permanent change that doesn't screw up the world for other players - the ABSOLUTELY would. It would be a gold mine.
Everyone gets this - this is why ME3 has 3 different endings. They want you to feel that the ending YOU choose makes things different. They would love to have infinite endings based on exactly what you do..but that's beyond our technology.
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
That is... OK, I don't want to insult you, and I suggest you to read carefully what you wrote. Freedom is not a lack of directions. Freedom means that you choose the directions. Your post makes me really angry, because I'm born in communist country, and I know very well the price of freedom - the Matrix can be very real. You must read "1984". I know you are talking about games, but your way of thinking is scary for me.
Let's not get political here. We aren't talking about personal freedom IRL - but freedom in a game world. Let me explain more because some guys here don't seem to get it.
Let's take ESO for example - its questing is 'on rails' so to speak. For example one of my characters is saving/helping the queen of the dominion. Its all scripted - with each little quest done part of the story 'unfolds'. So its like a moving where your character does certain things to trigger the next part of the story.
But here is the important part THERE IS A STORY. Its not your OWN story. Its not personal to you - its the same for everyone playing the game. But they are telling a story.
Here is what the fans on this board want: They want total freedom. For example if I decide to "double cross' the queen and go work for the veiled inheritance - that's an option. And doing that would trigger a whole story that plays out. Likewise I could instead go my own way and become king of the dominion - that's another option that would play out. The best case is if the game would 'fill in' the next part of the story entirely depending on what you do.
This is how the Matrix works. You do things in the world of the Matrix - and the computer creates a story for you depending on what you do. So your game is always great. You don't ever really want to leave the Matrix..because in comparision reality sucks.
But we don't have that kind of technology. Its either have a story like they do in ESO - a real legit professionally created LINEAR story. Or your alternative is NO STORY. A good example of this is EQ. Back in EQ you could kill various mobs and gain faction with various groups. But there wasn't a story - it didn't roll out like an interesting movie. Your story was basically "I 'killed' a huge number of x things so these guys want to kill me and those guys don't.' That was the only "STORY" you got - and that's basically from most players perspectives not a story at all.
PVP games fare a little better you get stories like "remember that time when we were outnumbers 3 to 1 and took that base" - that was great. Its not a very compelling story - its a little stronger but still pretty limited.
This is how things are now. You can whine about it - but the important point is not that developers don't WANT to. Its that they CANNOT. They CANNOT give you a story as compelling as the linear ones In a truly open world game.
It's the same thing with the 'real change' argument. They can give you 'real change' but you wouldn't like to live in this world. For example when the first guild killed Arthas in WoW. That should have been it. He was dead. He was done. So no one else would get to Kill Arthas. Now if you had "Matrix" technology on your hands you could make it so that say Paragon killed Arthas first - the next time another guild was going to kill a big boss it would be a new one - some guy entirely different from Arthas with a different backstory and everything.
That would be awesome but we CANNOT do that. So instead we suspend our disbelief and kill Arthas again - even though technically he should be already dead.
Its very clear to me that many posters in this forum have a very poor idea about how video games actually work and so they think that companies are holding out on them. They are not.
If companies could make games with compelling stories that feature open world game play and permanent change that doesn't screw up the world for other players - the ABSOLUTELY would. It would be a gold mine.
Everyone gets this - this is why ME3 has 3 different endings. They want you to feel that the ending YOU choose makes things different. They would love to have infinite endings based on exactly what you do..but that's beyond our technology.
Wow your not really getting what these ppl mean by "CREATING YOUR OWN STORY". It has NOTHING to do with the Matrix (lol?) and what you are describing is just altering a linear story so it can branch of into multiple stories, and you want these to be randomly generated by a "Matrix", so obviously this isnt possible. But this is not what people mean by creating your own story in a sandbox. In these games, there are no quests, no queens you have to kill, only other players... The "story" is how you end up interacting with these ppl in a shared world, having to share resources, some ally up and others fight each other...
Its about the alliances and rivalries between guilds. If 2 guilds are based of the same town, theres bound to be some clashing and an all out war could erupt. Or they can ally up against an invading force. Its about what you as a player do, not a scripted story fed to you by the developers. No matter how professional the writers of these stories are, Id rather just watch a movie or read a book then...
It can also be about petty thing like someone is stealing all your loot in the farming area, so you try to gank him and you end up killing each other every where you can... We're talking about a sandbox with open pvp and full loot here, the least restrictions on gameplay possible, so theres tons of reasons to fight each other, or not to.
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
Likewise if you have real 'impact" you effect the player of the other players. This is fine if you have an intelligent backend that can simulate millions of NPCs with life like activity (aka the matrix). Its not cool in an actual MMO where people will grief you for hours or draw dick signs on the ground or kill imprortant NPCs to ruin your day.
MMOs are a series of trade offs - developers try to come up with the best formula given current technology. Some choose to make promises they can't keep "Cough SOE, SOE". But others try to keep it more grounded and make the most enjoyable game they know how.
It's not a matter of "WILL NOT" its a matter of "CANNOT" Like I said in numerous threads before - where is your example of game that provides these features and the kind of AAA gameplay experience players want in PVE.. You can only do this if you are prepared for MOST of your players to have a shitty time of it. Truth.
Giving power or control to one player will take it away from another player. While one player has fun, there is a good chance the other player will not. This doesn't even have to be PvP or griefing.
If a player can build a house in the world, one player will build a house someplace, and then nobody else can build a house there. If a player can kill all of something, then another player can never kill that something for the rewards.
The only way around this is to dilute the power and control. Players cannot choose the best spot for building a house, but can choose from among many, similar places to build a house. Mobs respawn, or more mobs migrate in so that other players can earn the same rewards. And so on.
Players can either have the ultimate power and control, by playing single player games, or they can have their power and control diluted in MMORPGs, so that when they play a game they do not take away from other players playing the same game. To have the power and control in an MMORPG limits the audience to people willing to have their personal game play affected by other players.
This is the new generations mentality, "everyone gets a trophy for attending"... lol If the developers of Dark Souls had that mentality they would have never made a game that sold millions...
If a player wants another players house spot, hes going to have to take it from him. "But no fair, I pay for game I want HOUSE SPOT NOWWWW!!!!"
If you dont want to lose to another player, why play multiplayer games in the first place? Just stick to single player, where you can "win" all you want...
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
Likewise if you have real 'impact" you effect the player of the other players. This is fine if you have an intelligent backend that can simulate millions of NPCs with life like activity (aka the matrix). Its not cool in an actual MMO where people will grief you for hours or draw dick signs on the ground or kill imprortant NPCs to ruin your day.
MMOs are a series of trade offs - developers try to come up with the best formula given current technology. Some choose to make promises they can't keep "Cough SOE, SOE". But others try to keep it more grounded and make the most enjoyable game they know how.
It's not a matter of "WILL NOT" its a matter of "CANNOT" Like I said in numerous threads before - where is your example of game that provides these features and the kind of AAA gameplay experience players want in PVE.. You can only do this if you are prepared for MOST of your players to have a shitty time of it. Truth.
Giving power or control to one player will take it away from another player. While one player has fun, there is a good chance the other player will not. This doesn't even have to be PvP or griefing.
If a player can build a house in the world, one player will build a house someplace, and then nobody else can build a house there. If a player can kill all of something, then another player can never kill that something for the rewards.
The only way around this is to dilute the power and control. Players cannot choose the best spot for building a house, but can choose from among many, similar places to build a house. Mobs respawn, or more mobs migrate in so that other players can earn the same rewards. And so on.
Players can either have the ultimate power and control, by playing single player games, or they can have their power and control diluted in MMORPGs, so that when they play a game they do not take away from other players playing the same game. To have the power and control in an MMORPG limits the audience to people willing to have their personal game play affected by other players.
This is the new generations mentality, "everyone gets a trophy for attending"... lol If the developers of Dark Souls had that mentality they would have never made a game that sold millions...
If a player wants another players house spot, hes going to have to take it from him. "But no fair, I pay for game I want HOUSE SPOT NOWWWW!!!!"
If you dont want to lose to another player, why play multiplayer games in the first place? Just stick to single player, where you can "win" all you want...
I'm not so sure this is a new player mentality. Think about it. A player wants to see their impact on the world, the results of their work. They don't want to see their impact negated and their effort wasted. This doesn't even have to be a gamer thing. People just don't want to see their effort wasted.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
You do realize you just described WOW, the game that massively increased MMO visibility and the potential for income. And has allowed all of these newer MMOs the opportunity to try and steal a piece of their pie.
You may not like the direction MMOs have taken, but don't claim the casual solo-friendly model is a failure when it' the opposite.
I think the original poster makes the standard mistake of thinking that what works for him/her works for everyone.
Even in "themepark mmos" you can tell that there are people after different things: some are raiders, some are pvpers, some are soloers. And you get plenty of debate about what the best path could be.
My ideal MMO was City of Heroes/Villains and I have yet to find anything like it. I liked the character customization and the great freedom in planning out fun builds and seeing them come slowly into demigod status. I pvped occasionally and raided occasionally but that was not my focus. My main focus was on the planning of my characters, both their cosmetic and in-game qualities.
It would be a grave mistake to assume that I quit other MMOs because of a lack of impact in the larger game world. I could give a flying f*** about impact in the larger gameworld. I wanted the freedom to plan out character builds like I wanted them and play them and see how they were. I also think in pen-and-paper rpgs the most fun I have is in planning the characters and actually playing them is often something of a drag.
Do I think I am like everyone else? NO! We all play for different reasons. This is easy to see by popping up any forum and looking at the heated debates, and/or asking people in game.
I am sorry you have not found the ideal MMO for yourself yet original poster, but please don't delude yourself into thinking that everyone else is out for the same things you are...
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
That is... OK, I don't want to insult you, and I suggest you to read carefully what you wrote. Freedom is not a lack of directions. Freedom means that you choose the directions. Your post makes me really angry, because I'm born in communist country, and I know very well the price of freedom - the Matrix can be very real. You must read "1984". I know you are talking about games, but your way of thinking is scary for me.
Let's not get political here. We aren't talking about personal freedom IRL - but freedom in a game world. Let me explain more because some guys here don't seem to get it.
Let's take ESO for example - its questing is 'on rails' so to speak. For example one of my characters is saving/helping the queen of the dominion. Its all scripted - with each little quest done part of the story 'unfolds'. So its like a moving where your character does certain things to trigger the next part of the story.
But here is the important part THERE IS A STORY. Its not your OWN story. Its not personal to you - its the same for everyone playing the game. But they are telling a story.
Here is what the fans on this board want: They want total freedom. For example if I decide to "double cross' the queen and go work for the veiled inheritance - that's an option. And doing that would trigger a whole story that plays out. Likewise I could instead go my own way and become king of the dominion - that's another option that would play out. The best case is if the game would 'fill in' the next part of the story entirely depending on what you do.
This is how the Matrix works. You do things in the world of the Matrix - and the computer creates a story for you depending on what you do. So your game is always great. You don't ever really want to leave the Matrix..because in comparision reality sucks.
But we don't have that kind of technology. Its either have a story like they do in ESO - a real legit professionally created LINEAR story. Or your alternative is NO STORY. A good example of this is EQ. Back in EQ you could kill various mobs and gain faction with various groups. But there wasn't a story - it didn't roll out like an interesting movie. Your story was basically "I 'killed' a huge number of x things so these guys want to kill me and those guys don't.' That was the only "STORY" you got - and that's basically from most players perspectives not a story at all.
PVP games fare a little better you get stories like "remember that time when we were outnumbers 3 to 1 and took that base" - that was great. Its not a very compelling story - its a little stronger but still pretty limited.
This is how things are now. You can whine about it - but the important point is not that developers don't WANT to. Its that they CANNOT. They CANNOT give you a story as compelling as the linear ones In a truly open world game.
It's the same thing with the 'real change' argument. They can give you 'real change' but you wouldn't like to live in this world. For example when the first guild killed Arthas in WoW. That should have been it. He was dead. He was done. So no one else would get to Kill Arthas. Now if you had "Matrix" technology on your hands you could make it so that say Paragon killed Arthas first - the next time another guild was going to kill a big boss it would be a new one - some guy entirely different from Arthas with a different backstory and everything.
That would be awesome but we CANNOT do that. So instead we suspend our disbelief and kill Arthas again - even though technically he should be already dead.
Its very clear to me that many posters in this forum have a very poor idea about how video games actually work and so they think that companies are holding out on them. They are not.
If companies could make games with compelling stories that feature open world game play and permanent change that doesn't screw up the world for other players - the ABSOLUTELY would. It would be a gold mine.
Everyone gets this - this is why ME3 has 3 different endings. They want you to feel that the ending YOU choose makes things different. They would love to have infinite endings based on exactly what you do..but that's beyond our technology.
I would say when most people say they want to have their own stories they mean not having any scripted stories at all. They want to play the game that's interdependent(not just combat like EQ) and have their own unique experiences in the setting of the game. All of my best experiences in older games came from no scripted events that happened with other players. Not roleplaying but just interactions that can't be created by AI or script.
In fact, I don't care if you have all the scripted content you want. But let me make my own way and advance without being forced to take part in. Let me build my own house and play the game how i want. Let me explore and find random crap. ESO has shown me that even well done quest are still overdone. I don't want to do 500 quest to get to max level. I don't need to be the chosen one long with everyone else.
And honestly, majority of the task could be generated. How much scripting does it take to randomly generate kill 10 wolves and get 15 paws?
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
That is... OK, I don't want to insult you, and I suggest you to read carefully what you wrote. Freedom is not a lack of directions. Freedom means that you choose the directions. Your post makes me really angry, because I'm born in communist country, and I know very well the price of freedom - the Matrix can be very real. You must read "1984". I know you are talking about games, but your way of thinking is scary for me.
Let's not get political here. We aren't talking about personal freedom IRL - but freedom in a game world. Let me explain more because some guys here don't seem to get it.
Let's take ESO for example - its questing is 'on rails' so to speak. For example one of my characters is saving/helping the queen of the dominion. Its all scripted - with each little quest done part of the story 'unfolds'. So its like a moving where your character does certain things to trigger the next part of the story.
But here is the important part THERE IS A STORY. Its not your OWN story. Its not personal to you - its the same for everyone playing the game. But they are telling a story.
Here is what the fans on this board want: They want total freedom. For example if I decide to "double cross' the queen and go work for the veiled inheritance - that's an option. And doing that would trigger a whole story that plays out. Likewise I could instead go my own way and become king of the dominion - that's another option that would play out. The best case is if the game would 'fill in' the next part of the story entirely depending on what you do.
This is how the Matrix works. You do things in the world of the Matrix - and the computer creates a story for you depending on what you do. So your game is always great. You don't ever really want to leave the Matrix..because in comparision reality sucks.
But we don't have that kind of technology. Its either have a story like they do in ESO - a real legit professionally created LINEAR story. Or your alternative is NO STORY. A good example of this is EQ. Back in EQ you could kill various mobs and gain faction with various groups. But there wasn't a story - it didn't roll out like an interesting movie. Your story was basically "I 'killed' a huge number of x things so these guys want to kill me and those guys don't.' That was the only "STORY" you got - and that's basically from most players perspectives not a story at all.
PVP games fare a little better you get stories like "remember that time when we were outnumbers 3 to 1 and took that base" - that was great. Its not a very compelling story - its a little stronger but still pretty limited.
This is how things are now. You can whine about it - but the important point is not that developers don't WANT to. Its that they CANNOT. They CANNOT give you a story as compelling as the linear ones In a truly open world game.
It's the same thing with the 'real change' argument. They can give you 'real change' but you wouldn't like to live in this world. For example when the first guild killed Arthas in WoW. That should have been it. He was dead. He was done. So no one else would get to Kill Arthas. Now if you had "Matrix" technology on your hands you could make it so that say Paragon killed Arthas first - the next time another guild was going to kill a big boss it would be a new one - some guy entirely different from Arthas with a different backstory and everything.
That would be awesome but we CANNOT do that. So instead we suspend our disbelief and kill Arthas again - even though technically he should be already dead.
Its very clear to me that many posters in this forum have a very poor idea about how video games actually work and so they think that companies are holding out on them. They are not.
If companies could make games with compelling stories that feature open world game play and permanent change that doesn't screw up the world for other players - the ABSOLUTELY would. It would be a gold mine.
Everyone gets this - this is why ME3 has 3 different endings. They want you to feel that the ending YOU choose makes things different. They would love to have infinite endings based on exactly what you do..but that's beyond our technology.
I would say when most people say they want to have their own stories they mean not having any scripted stories at all. They want to play the game that's interdependent(not just combat like EQ) and have their own unique experiences in the setting of the game. All of my best experiences in older games came from no scripted events that happened with other players. Not roleplaying but just interactions that can't be created by AI or script.
EQ had a story - it was just the same one over and over again. You can have 'stories' your way - they just won't be GOOD ones.
A story has a setting, conflict, characters, plot, resolution and theme. Its very clear how all these elements are capable of being achieved in a scripted game. It's much less clear how they are achieved in a open world 'sandbox' game with no scripted events. If you know of such a game - that has PVE content - kindly direct me to it because I would want to check it out.
If you just want to 'roleplay' some stories out - there are MUDs where people really get into that.. That's not what you mean right? Because themeparks allow for that kind of thing..without any problem.
Anyway stop acting like the developers are just holding out on you because they are 'lazy'. If they could make a game that allowed real stories to organically from some kind of sandbox platform and most players got to experience them.. They would most certainly do this.
Money. Plain and simple. MMORPG's had a way easier time before the economy went haywire. Now they have to keep their belts as tight as possible, while still finding a way to keep players paying for a game month after month. Even if FTP, they have to find clever ways to make customers want or have to spend more without scaring them off. It's just not easy at all and frankly, I'm surprised some still do as well as they do.
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
That is... OK, I don't want to insult you, and I suggest you to read carefully what you wrote. Freedom is not a lack of directions. Freedom means that you choose the directions. Your post makes me really angry, because I'm born in communist country, and I know very well the price of freedom - the Matrix can be very real. You must read "1984". I know you are talking about games, but your way of thinking is scary for me.
Let's not get political here. We aren't talking about personal freedom IRL - but freedom in a game world. Let me explain more because some guys here don't seem to get it.
Let's take ESO for example - its questing is 'on rails' so to speak. For example one of my characters is saving/helping the queen of the dominion. Its all scripted - with each little quest done part of the story 'unfolds'. So its like a moving where your character does certain things to trigger the next part of the story.
But here is the important part THERE IS A STORY. Its not your OWN story. Its not personal to you - its the same for everyone playing the game. But they are telling a story.
Here is what the fans on this board want: They want total freedom. For example if I decide to "double cross' the queen and go work for the veiled inheritance - that's an option. And doing that would trigger a whole story that plays out. Likewise I could instead go my own way and become king of the dominion - that's another option that would play out. The best case is if the game would 'fill in' the next part of the story entirely depending on what you do.
This is how the Matrix works. You do things in the world of the Matrix - and the computer creates a story for you depending on what you do. So your game is always great. You don't ever really want to leave the Matrix..because in comparision reality sucks.
But we don't have that kind of technology. Its either have a story like they do in ESO - a real legit professionally created LINEAR story. Or your alternative is NO STORY. A good example of this is EQ. Back in EQ you could kill various mobs and gain faction with various groups. But there wasn't a story - it didn't roll out like an interesting movie. Your story was basically "I 'killed' a huge number of x things so these guys want to kill me and those guys don't.' That was the only "STORY" you got - and that's basically from most players perspectives not a story at all.
PVP games fare a little better you get stories like "remember that time when we were outnumbers 3 to 1 and took that base" - that was great. Its not a very compelling story - its a little stronger but still pretty limited.
This is how things are now. You can whine about it - but the important point is not that developers don't WANT to. Its that they CANNOT. They CANNOT give you a story as compelling as the linear ones In a truly open world game.
It's the same thing with the 'real change' argument. They can give you 'real change' but you wouldn't like to live in this world. For example when the first guild killed Arthas in WoW. That should have been it. He was dead. He was done. So no one else would get to Kill Arthas. Now if you had "Matrix" technology on your hands you could make it so that say Paragon killed Arthas first - the next time another guild was going to kill a big boss it would be a new one - some guy entirely different from Arthas with a different backstory and everything.
That would be awesome but we CANNOT do that. So instead we suspend our disbelief and kill Arthas again - even though technically he should be already dead.
Its very clear to me that many posters in this forum have a very poor idea about how video games actually work and so they think that companies are holding out on them. They are not.
If companies could make games with compelling stories that feature open world game play and permanent change that doesn't screw up the world for other players - the ABSOLUTELY would. It would be a gold mine.
Everyone gets this - this is why ME3 has 3 different endings. They want you to feel that the ending YOU choose makes things different. They would love to have infinite endings based on exactly what you do..but that's beyond our technology.
I would say when most people say they want to have their own stories they mean not having any scripted stories at all. They want to play the game that's interdependent(not just combat like EQ) and have their own unique experiences in the setting of the game. All of my best experiences in older games came from no scripted events that happened with other players. Not roleplaying but just interactions that can't be created by AI or script.
EQ had a story - it was just the same one over and over again. You can have 'stories' your way - they just won't be GOOD ones.
A story has a setting, conflict, characters, plot, resolution and theme. Its very clear how all these elements are capable of being achieved in a scripted game. It's much less clear how they are achieved in a open world 'sandbox' game with no scripted events. If you know of such a game - that has PVE content - kindly direct me to it because I would want to check it out.
If you just want to 'roleplay' some stories out - there are MUDs where people really get into that.. That's not what you mean right? Because themeparks allow for that kind of thing..without any problem.
Anyway stop acting like the developers are just holding out on you because they are 'lazy'. If they could make a game that allowed real stories to organically from some kind of sandbox platform and most players got to experience them.. They would most certainly do this.
Um you can try any game pre - WoW. Having player freedom and scripted content is not mutually exclusive. In fact themeparks were invented in SWG as perm destination for factioned content in one of the most complex Sandboxes. I feel really sad if your idea of player freedom is wandering doing nothing or roleplaying thee and thou.
Majority of MMORPGS scripted content is bad, generic and repetitive. Majority of players don't even read or listen to them. How many would skip them altogether if they could to get to max level? Blizzard sells that privileged. Even well designed quest are skipped mentally. Lack of player freedom is one of the main reasons since reasonable progression is tied to questing. It makes questing a barrier and grind to getting max level.
I would enjoy quest a lot more if there weren't so many and my progression wasn't tied to it like it used to be in older games.
The real reason why new MMOs are failing is because of the "me, myself and I" mindset. Back in the 90's it was all about knowing the community and sharing cooking recipes while hunting dungeons. It was a true bond that kept you logged in for hours at a time.
Today it's all about you and only you, getting to max level ASAP, ditching people you hunt with for better people. Today's community is in a F all state of mind where YOU is the only thing important and everyone else is expandable. This is where MMOs are failing big time and will keep failing until mid 2015. I'm just hoping that Elite Dangerous, Star Citizen and Novus Aeterno will start fixing this problem. Those 3 are probably the only hope for the MMO universe. I don't see ArcheAge or EQN be any different then what we currently have.
Anyway, thank the heavens I still got my SNES with a bunch of classics that keeps me busy for hours and Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe.
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
That is... OK, I don't want to insult you, and I suggest you to read carefully what you wrote. Freedom is not a lack of directions. Freedom means that you choose the directions. Your post makes me really angry, because I'm born in communist country, and I know very well the price of freedom - the Matrix can be very real. You must read "1984". I know you are talking about games, but your way of thinking is scary for me.
Let's not get political here. We aren't talking about personal freedom IRL - but freedom in a game world. Let me explain more because some guys here don't seem to get it.
Let's take ESO for example - its questing is 'on rails' so to speak. For example one of my characters is saving/helping the queen of the dominion. Its all scripted - with each little quest done part of the story 'unfolds'. So its like a moving where your character does certain things to trigger the next part of the story.
But here is the important part THERE IS A STORY. Its not your OWN story. Its not personal to you - its the same for everyone playing the game. But they are telling a story.
Here is what the fans on this board want: They want total freedom. For example if I decide to "double cross' the queen and go work for the veiled inheritance - that's an option. And doing that would trigger a whole story that plays out. Likewise I could instead go my own way and become king of the dominion - that's another option that would play out. The best case is if the game would 'fill in' the next part of the story entirely depending on what you do.
This is how the Matrix works. You do things in the world of the Matrix - and the computer creates a story for you depending on what you do. So your game is always great. You don't ever really want to leave the Matrix..because in comparision reality sucks.
But we don't have that kind of technology. Its either have a story like they do in ESO - a real legit professionally created LINEAR story. Or your alternative is NO STORY. A good example of this is EQ. Back in EQ you could kill various mobs and gain faction with various groups. But there wasn't a story - it didn't roll out like an interesting movie. Your story was basically "I 'killed' a huge number of x things so these guys want to kill me and those guys don't.' That was the only "STORY" you got - and that's basically from most players perspectives not a story at all.
PVP games fare a little better you get stories like "remember that time when we were outnumbers 3 to 1 and took that base" - that was great. Its not a very compelling story - its a little stronger but still pretty limited.
This is how things are now. You can whine about it - but the important point is not that developers don't WANT to. Its that they CANNOT. They CANNOT give you a story as compelling as the linear ones In a truly open world game.
It's the same thing with the 'real change' argument. They can give you 'real change' but you wouldn't like to live in this world. For example when the first guild killed Arthas in WoW. That should have been it. He was dead. He was done. So no one else would get to Kill Arthas. Now if you had "Matrix" technology on your hands you could make it so that say Paragon killed Arthas first - the next time another guild was going to kill a big boss it would be a new one - some guy entirely different from Arthas with a different backstory and everything.
That would be awesome but we CANNOT do that. So instead we suspend our disbelief and kill Arthas again - even though technically he should be already dead.
Its very clear to me that many posters in this forum have a very poor idea about how video games actually work and so they think that companies are holding out on them. They are not.
If companies could make games with compelling stories that feature open world game play and permanent change that doesn't screw up the world for other players - the ABSOLUTELY would. It would be a gold mine.
Everyone gets this - this is why ME3 has 3 different endings. They want you to feel that the ending YOU choose makes things different. They would love to have infinite endings based on exactly what you do..but that's beyond our technology.
I would say when most people say they want to have their own stories they mean not having any scripted stories at all. They want to play the game that's interdependent(not just combat like EQ) and have their own unique experiences in the setting of the game. All of my best experiences in older games came from no scripted events that happened with other players. Not roleplaying but just interactions that can't be created by AI or script.
EQ had a story - it was just the same one over and over again. You can have 'stories' your way - they just won't be GOOD ones.
A story has a setting, conflict, characters, plot, resolution and theme. Its very clear how all these elements are capable of being achieved in a scripted game. It's much less clear how they are achieved in a open world 'sandbox' game with no scripted events. If you know of such a game - that has PVE content - kindly direct me to it because I would want to check it out.
If you just want to 'roleplay' some stories out - there are MUDs where people really get into that.. That's not what you mean right? Because themeparks allow for that kind of thing..without any problem.
Anyway stop acting like the developers are just holding out on you because they are 'lazy'. If they could make a game that allowed real stories to organically from some kind of sandbox platform and most players got to experience them.. They would most certainly do this.
Um you can try any game pre - WoW. Having player freedom and scripted content is not mutually exclusive. In fact themeparks were invented in SWG as perm destination for factioned content in one of the most complex Sandboxes. I feel really sad if your idea of player freedom is wandering doing nothing or roleplaying thee and thou.
Majority of MMORPGS scripted content is bad, generic and repetitive. Majority of players don't even read or listen to them. How many would skip them altogether if they could to get to max level? Blizzard sells that privileged. Even well designed quest are skipped mentally. Lack of player freedom is one of the main reasons since reasonable progression is tied to questing. It makes questing a barrier and grind to getting max level.
I would enjoy quest a lot more if there weren't so many and my progression wasn't tied to it like it used to be in older games.
The majority of television shows are scripted, bad, repetitive and generic. But that doesn't mean I prefer watching C-SPAN - hey that's unscripted and real. Its also boring as hell almost all the time.
Game making is a fundamentally limited art. its not capable of giving you the kind of experiences 'sandboxers' claim exist in their non yet existing games - that's my point. Its not that themeparks aren't imperfect. Its that are developers trying to give players the best experience possible.
Going back to the OP - IF the crux of the problem is that games don't have features X and Y - then developers would just give them freedom and 'real change'. The issue here is that those aren't the real problems. its that when you go for those changes you f-up the entire rest of your game.
GW2 is a good example. Hey the whole problem is the "Holy Trinity' right - now its gone - bravo. But they replaced it with basically NOTHING. So it hurt their entire game. You can't just pick out one random feature and blame everything on its absence.
Games are missing TONS of possible features. Making a good game is all about smoke and mirrors - you want your players to forget your numerous limitations and enjoy themselves. Because you will NOT stamp out the limitations. It can't be done. Don't even get me started on Dynamic Events..
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
That is... OK, I don't want to insult you, and I suggest you to read carefully what you wrote. Freedom is not a lack of directions. Freedom means that you choose the directions. Your post makes me really angry, because I'm born in communist country, and I know very well the price of freedom - the Matrix can be very real. You must read "1984". I know you are talking about games, but your way of thinking is scary for me.
Let's not get political here. We aren't talking about personal freedom IRL - but freedom in a game world. Let me explain more because some guys here don't seem to get it.
Let's take ESO for example - its questing is 'on rails' so to speak. For example one of my characters is saving/helping the queen of the dominion. Its all scripted - with each little quest done part of the story 'unfolds'. So its like a moving where your character does certain things to trigger the next part of the story.
But here is the important part THERE IS A STORY. Its not your OWN story. Its not personal to you - its the same for everyone playing the game. But they are telling a story.
Here is what the fans on this board want: They want total freedom. For example if I decide to "double cross' the queen and go work for the veiled inheritance - that's an option. And doing that would trigger a whole story that plays out. Likewise I could instead go my own way and become king of the dominion - that's another option that would play out. The best case is if the game would 'fill in' the next part of the story entirely depending on what you do.
This is how the Matrix works. You do things in the world of the Matrix - and the computer creates a story for you depending on what you do. So your game is always great. You don't ever really want to leave the Matrix..because in comparision reality sucks.
But we don't have that kind of technology. Its either have a story like they do in ESO - a real legit professionally created LINEAR story. Or your alternative is NO STORY. A good example of this is EQ. Back in EQ you could kill various mobs and gain faction with various groups. But there wasn't a story - it didn't roll out like an interesting movie. Your story was basically "I 'killed' a huge number of x things so these guys want to kill me and those guys don't.' That was the only "STORY" you got - and that's basically from most players perspectives not a story at all.
PVP games fare a little better you get stories like "remember that time when we were outnumbers 3 to 1 and took that base" - that was great. Its not a very compelling story - its a little stronger but still pretty limited.
This is how things are now. You can whine about it - but the important point is not that developers don't WANT to. Its that they CANNOT. They CANNOT give you a story as compelling as the linear ones In a truly open world game.
It's the same thing with the 'real change' argument. They can give you 'real change' but you wouldn't like to live in this world. For example when the first guild killed Arthas in WoW. That should have been it. He was dead. He was done. So no one else would get to Kill Arthas. Now if you had "Matrix" technology on your hands you could make it so that say Paragon killed Arthas first - the next time another guild was going to kill a big boss it would be a new one - some guy entirely different from Arthas with a different backstory and everything.
That would be awesome but we CANNOT do that. So instead we suspend our disbelief and kill Arthas again - even though technically he should be already dead.
Its very clear to me that many posters in this forum have a very poor idea about how video games actually work and so they think that companies are holding out on them. They are not.
If companies could make games with compelling stories that feature open world game play and permanent change that doesn't screw up the world for other players - the ABSOLUTELY would. It would be a gold mine.
Everyone gets this - this is why ME3 has 3 different endings. They want you to feel that the ending YOU choose makes things different. They would love to have infinite endings based on exactly what you do..but that's beyond our technology.
I would say when most people say they want to have their own stories they mean not having any scripted stories at all. They want to play the game that's interdependent(not just combat like EQ) and have their own unique experiences in the setting of the game. All of my best experiences in older games came from no scripted events that happened with other players. Not roleplaying but just interactions that can't be created by AI or script.
EQ had a story - it was just the same one over and over again. You can have 'stories' your way - they just won't be GOOD ones.
A story has a setting, conflict, characters, plot, resolution and theme. Its very clear how all these elements are capable of being achieved in a scripted game. It's much less clear how they are achieved in a open world 'sandbox' game with no scripted events. If you know of such a game - that has PVE content - kindly direct me to it because I would want to check it out.
If you just want to 'roleplay' some stories out - there are MUDs where people really get into that.. That's not what you mean right? Because themeparks allow for that kind of thing..without any problem.
Anyway stop acting like the developers are just holding out on you because they are 'lazy'. If they could make a game that allowed real stories to organically from some kind of sandbox platform and most players got to experience them.. They would most certainly do this.
Um you can try any game pre - WoW. Having player freedom and scripted content is not mutually exclusive. In fact themeparks were invented in SWG as perm destination for factioned content in one of the most complex Sandboxes. I feel really sad if your idea of player freedom is wandering doing nothing or roleplaying thee and thou.
Majority of MMORPGS scripted content is bad, generic and repetitive. Majority of players don't even read or listen to them. How many would skip them altogether if they could to get to max level? Blizzard sells that privileged. Even well designed quest are skipped mentally. Lack of player freedom is one of the main reasons since reasonable progression is tied to questing. It makes questing a barrier and grind to getting max level.
I would enjoy quest a lot more if there weren't so many and my progression wasn't tied to it like it used to be in older games.
The majority of television shows are scripted, bad, repetitive and generic. But that doesn't mean I prefer watching C-SPAN - hey that's unscripted and real. Its also boring as hell almost all the time.
Game making is a fundamentally limited art. its not capable of giving you the kind of experiences 'sandboxers' claim exist in their non yet existing games - that's my point. Its not that themeparks aren't imperfect. Its that are developers trying to give players the best experience possible.
Going back to the OP - IF the crux of the problem is that games don't have features X and Y - then developers would just give them freedom and 'real change'. The issue here is that those aren't the real problems. its that when you go for those changes you f-up the entire rest of your game.
GW2 is a good example. Hey the whole problem is the "Holy Trinity' right - now its gone - bravo. But they replaced it with basically NOTHING. So it hurt their entire game. You can't just pick out one random feature and blame everything on its absence.
Games are missing TONS of possible features. Making a good game is all about smoke and mirrors - you want your players to forget your numerous limitations and enjoy themselves. Because you will NOT stamp out the limitations. It can't be done. Don't even get me started on Dynamic Events..
Youre like a brick wall. Just because you have to be hand fed your entertainment doesnt mean other ppl dont enjoy having freedom. And comparing a TV show to the news?
So themeparks are developers trying to give players the best experience possible?? lmao, what if they just cant give me a fun experience to me? If there is no free pvp and open world Id rather play a different genre (FPS,MOBA,etc.) that do the combat 10x better.
Your argument that game developers cant deliver a proper sandbox experience is just stoopid. Have you ever heard of EvE??? DarkFall?? Mortal Online?? There are sandbox games out there, but there are mostly indie with limited budget. We sandboxers jsut wish there was a mmo with a bigger budget doing these games, not that the games are impossible to make.
So your solution is never try anything out of the box. Ok lets have wow clones forever, sounds like fun!!
Comments
Can you link a source where it says Blizzard shut down Titan? 'Cause last I heard they're redesigning the game engine.
The rest of your post is just wishful thinking.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Actually, I disagree. WoW is a good MMORPG. It was new, and brought playability to the genre which it needed. You can't blame them for the massive success that brought imitators. The imitators are the ones who have had us playing the same game for the past two MMORPG cycles. Seems like that's over now that there aren't many themeparks coming out past Wildstar.
Outside of Wildstar where are the WoW clone type games in development? Compare it to 2008 and I think you certainly have a trend.
I can't take you seriously because you used the term "WoW clone". With your attitude, there's no chance we can have a rational, mature discussion.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
LMAO. Fine then themepark questhub's that are similar to WoW work better for you?
or they are just killing time and blowing off steam here. It beats playing MMORPGs.
To quote another poster..
"The Matrix is not real."
Sure you can make MMOs with freedom and impact - but in the end they will NOT be good games.
If the game has freedom it will have no direction for most players. Even Skyrim did not have total freedom - the was a main quest and you had to do some if it to accomplish various things. Now if it had an intelligent backend that could create awesome game content on the fly that matched the needs and desires of the player - that world work. But the Matrix is NOT REAL. So we don't have that.
Likewise if you have real 'impact" you effect the player of the other players. This is fine if you have an intelligent backend that can simulate millions of NPCs with life like activity (aka the matrix). Its not cool in an actual MMO where people will grief you for hours or draw dick signs on the ground or kill imprortant NPCs to ruin your day.
MMOs are a series of trade offs - developers try to come up with the best formula given current technology. Some choose to make promises they can't keep "Cough SOE, SOE". But others try to keep it more grounded and make the most enjoyable game they know how.
It's not a matter of "WILL NOT" its a matter of "CANNOT" Like I said in numerous threads before - where is your example of game that provides these features and the kind of AAA gameplay experience players want in PVE.. You can only do this if you are prepared for MOST of your players to have a shitty time of it. Truth.
Giving power or control to one player will take it away from another player. While one player has fun, there is a good chance the other player will not. This doesn't even have to be PvP or griefing.
If a player can build a house in the world, one player will build a house someplace, and then nobody else can build a house there. If a player can kill all of something, then another player can never kill that something for the rewards.
The only way around this is to dilute the power and control. Players cannot choose the best spot for building a house, but can choose from among many, similar places to build a house. Mobs respawn, or more mobs migrate in so that other players can earn the same rewards. And so on.
Players can either have the ultimate power and control, by playing single player games, or they can have their power and control diluted in MMORPGs, so that when they play a game they do not take away from other players playing the same game. To have the power and control in an MMORPG limits the audience to people willing to have their personal game play affected by other players.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Good god, man, lol.
It's a very commonly used frame of reference that anyone who's spent any time in the genre can understand. No need to take things so damned personally. I played WoW for a fair bit of time and enjoyed the hell out of it, and you'll never see me take offence to the term.
And, believe it or not, there are people out there who are actually looking for quality WoW clones. Even though that may or may not be happening as much as it has in the past, it's been going on for many years now. Take a look at the history of MMORPGs since 2004 and tell me developers/publishers/investors have not taken notice. They've been hard at work in the biz of WoW clones and they know it better than anyone of us.
Anyways, it's just a quick and simple frame of reference that one can take in a negative way if one chooses. Can it be derogatory? Sure, but that doesn't mean we all have to stop using the term to ensure everyone's on the same page when discussing a given MMORPG.
Lighten up a bit
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Let's not get political here. We aren't talking about personal freedom IRL - but freedom in a game world. Let me explain more because some guys here don't seem to get it.
Let's take ESO for example - its questing is 'on rails' so to speak. For example one of my characters is saving/helping the queen of the dominion. Its all scripted - with each little quest done part of the story 'unfolds'. So its like a moving where your character does certain things to trigger the next part of the story.
But here is the important part THERE IS A STORY. Its not your OWN story. Its not personal to you - its the same for everyone playing the game. But they are telling a story.
Here is what the fans on this board want: They want total freedom. For example if I decide to "double cross' the queen and go work for the veiled inheritance - that's an option. And doing that would trigger a whole story that plays out. Likewise I could instead go my own way and become king of the dominion - that's another option that would play out. The best case is if the game would 'fill in' the next part of the story entirely depending on what you do.
This is how the Matrix works. You do things in the world of the Matrix - and the computer creates a story for you depending on what you do. So your game is always great. You don't ever really want to leave the Matrix..because in comparision reality sucks.
But we don't have that kind of technology. Its either have a story like they do in ESO - a real legit professionally created LINEAR story. Or your alternative is NO STORY. A good example of this is EQ. Back in EQ you could kill various mobs and gain faction with various groups. But there wasn't a story - it didn't roll out like an interesting movie. Your story was basically "I 'killed' a huge number of x things so these guys want to kill me and those guys don't.' That was the only "STORY" you got - and that's basically from most players perspectives not a story at all.
PVP games fare a little better you get stories like "remember that time when we were outnumbers 3 to 1 and took that base" - that was great. Its not a very compelling story - its a little stronger but still pretty limited.
This is how things are now. You can whine about it - but the important point is not that developers don't WANT to. Its that they CANNOT. They CANNOT give you a story as compelling as the linear ones In a truly open world game.
It's the same thing with the 'real change' argument. They can give you 'real change' but you wouldn't like to live in this world. For example when the first guild killed Arthas in WoW. That should have been it. He was dead. He was done. So no one else would get to Kill Arthas. Now if you had "Matrix" technology on your hands you could make it so that say Paragon killed Arthas first - the next time another guild was going to kill a big boss it would be a new one - some guy entirely different from Arthas with a different backstory and everything.
That would be awesome but we CANNOT do that. So instead we suspend our disbelief and kill Arthas again - even though technically he should be already dead.
Its very clear to me that many posters in this forum have a very poor idea about how video games actually work and so they think that companies are holding out on them. They are not.
If companies could make games with compelling stories that feature open world game play and permanent change that doesn't screw up the world for other players - the ABSOLUTELY would. It would be a gold mine.
Everyone gets this - this is why ME3 has 3 different endings. They want you to feel that the ending YOU choose makes things different. They would love to have infinite endings based on exactly what you do..but that's beyond our technology.
Wow your not really getting what these ppl mean by "CREATING YOUR OWN STORY". It has NOTHING to do with the Matrix (lol?) and what you are describing is just altering a linear story so it can branch of into multiple stories, and you want these to be randomly generated by a "Matrix", so obviously this isnt possible. But this is not what people mean by creating your own story in a sandbox. In these games, there are no quests, no queens you have to kill, only other players... The "story" is how you end up interacting with these ppl in a shared world, having to share resources, some ally up and others fight each other...
Its about the alliances and rivalries between guilds. If 2 guilds are based of the same town, theres bound to be some clashing and an all out war could erupt. Or they can ally up against an invading force. Its about what you as a player do, not a scripted story fed to you by the developers. No matter how professional the writers of these stories are, Id rather just watch a movie or read a book then...
It can also be about petty thing like someone is stealing all your loot in the farming area, so you try to gank him and you end up killing each other every where you can... We're talking about a sandbox with open pvp and full loot here, the least restrictions on gameplay possible, so theres tons of reasons to fight each other, or not to.
This is the new generations mentality, "everyone gets a trophy for attending"... lol If the developers of Dark Souls had that mentality they would have never made a game that sold millions...
If a player wants another players house spot, hes going to have to take it from him. "But no fair, I pay for game I want HOUSE SPOT NOWWWW!!!!"
If you dont want to lose to another player, why play multiplayer games in the first place? Just stick to single player, where you can "win" all you want...
I'm not so sure this is a new player mentality. Think about it. A player wants to see their impact on the world, the results of their work. They don't want to see their impact negated and their effort wasted. This doesn't even have to be a gamer thing. People just don't want to see their effort wasted.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Is this for real?
You do realize you just described WOW, the game that massively increased MMO visibility and the potential for income. And has allowed all of these newer MMOs the opportunity to try and steal a piece of their pie.
You may not like the direction MMOs have taken, but don't claim the casual solo-friendly model is a failure when it' the opposite.
I think the original poster makes the standard mistake of thinking that what works for him/her works for everyone.
Even in "themepark mmos" you can tell that there are people after different things: some are raiders, some are pvpers, some are soloers. And you get plenty of debate about what the best path could be.
My ideal MMO was City of Heroes/Villains and I have yet to find anything like it. I liked the character customization and the great freedom in planning out fun builds and seeing them come slowly into demigod status. I pvped occasionally and raided occasionally but that was not my focus. My main focus was on the planning of my characters, both their cosmetic and in-game qualities.
It would be a grave mistake to assume that I quit other MMOs because of a lack of impact in the larger game world. I could give a flying f*** about impact in the larger gameworld. I wanted the freedom to plan out character builds like I wanted them and play them and see how they were. I also think in pen-and-paper rpgs the most fun I have is in planning the characters and actually playing them is often something of a drag.
Do I think I am like everyone else? NO! We all play for different reasons. This is easy to see by popping up any forum and looking at the heated debates, and/or asking people in game.
I am sorry you have not found the ideal MMO for yourself yet original poster, but please don't delude yourself into thinking that everyone else is out for the same things you are...
I would say when most people say they want to have their own stories they mean not having any scripted stories at all. They want to play the game that's interdependent(not just combat like EQ) and have their own unique experiences in the setting of the game. All of my best experiences in older games came from no scripted events that happened with other players. Not roleplaying but just interactions that can't be created by AI or script.
In fact, I don't care if you have all the scripted content you want. But let me make my own way and advance without being forced to take part in. Let me build my own house and play the game how i want. Let me explore and find random crap. ESO has shown me that even well done quest are still overdone. I don't want to do 500 quest to get to max level. I don't need to be the chosen one long with everyone else.
And honestly, majority of the task could be generated. How much scripting does it take to randomly generate kill 10 wolves and get 15 paws?
EQ had a story - it was just the same one over and over again. You can have 'stories' your way - they just won't be GOOD ones.
A story has a setting, conflict, characters, plot, resolution and theme. Its very clear how all these elements are capable of being achieved in a scripted game. It's much less clear how they are achieved in a open world 'sandbox' game with no scripted events. If you know of such a game - that has PVE content - kindly direct me to it because I would want to check it out.
If you just want to 'roleplay' some stories out - there are MUDs where people really get into that.. That's not what you mean right? Because themeparks allow for that kind of thing..without any problem.
Anyway stop acting like the developers are just holding out on you because they are 'lazy'. If they could make a game that allowed real stories to organically from some kind of sandbox platform and most players got to experience them.. They would most certainly do this.
Somehow i feel ironic , want "role playing" go to Multi-User Dungeon and don't play Massive Multiplayers Online Role PLaying Game .
At lest give me better role ,
i'm done with being hero , i going to buy land and start work at farm .
Um you can try any game pre - WoW. Having player freedom and scripted content is not mutually exclusive. In fact themeparks were invented in SWG as perm destination for factioned content in one of the most complex Sandboxes. I feel really sad if your idea of player freedom is wandering doing nothing or roleplaying thee and thou.
Majority of MMORPGS scripted content is bad, generic and repetitive. Majority of players don't even read or listen to them. How many would skip them altogether if they could to get to max level? Blizzard sells that privileged. Even well designed quest are skipped mentally. Lack of player freedom is one of the main reasons since reasonable progression is tied to questing. It makes questing a barrier and grind to getting max level.
I would enjoy quest a lot more if there weren't so many and my progression wasn't tied to it like it used to be in older games.
The real reason why new MMOs are failing is because of the "me, myself and I" mindset. Back in the 90's it was all about knowing the community and sharing cooking recipes while hunting dungeons. It was a true bond that kept you logged in for hours at a time.
Today it's all about you and only you, getting to max level ASAP, ditching people you hunt with for better people. Today's community is in a F all state of mind where YOU is the only thing important and everyone else is expandable. This is where MMOs are failing big time and will keep failing until mid 2015. I'm just hoping that Elite Dangerous, Star Citizen and Novus Aeterno will start fixing this problem. Those 3 are probably the only hope for the MMO universe. I don't see ArcheAge or EQN be any different then what we currently have.
Anyway, thank the heavens I still got my SNES with a bunch of classics that keeps me busy for hours and Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe.
The majority of television shows are scripted, bad, repetitive and generic. But that doesn't mean I prefer watching C-SPAN - hey that's unscripted and real. Its also boring as hell almost all the time.
Game making is a fundamentally limited art. its not capable of giving you the kind of experiences 'sandboxers' claim exist in their non yet existing games - that's my point. Its not that themeparks aren't imperfect. Its that are developers trying to give players the best experience possible.
Going back to the OP - IF the crux of the problem is that games don't have features X and Y - then developers would just give them freedom and 'real change'. The issue here is that those aren't the real problems. its that when you go for those changes you f-up the entire rest of your game.
GW2 is a good example. Hey the whole problem is the "Holy Trinity' right - now its gone - bravo. But they replaced it with basically NOTHING. So it hurt their entire game. You can't just pick out one random feature and blame everything on its absence.
Games are missing TONS of possible features. Making a good game is all about smoke and mirrors - you want your players to forget your numerous limitations and enjoy themselves. Because you will NOT stamp out the limitations. It can't be done. Don't even get me started on Dynamic Events..
Youre like a brick wall. Just because you have to be hand fed your entertainment doesnt mean other ppl dont enjoy having freedom. And comparing a TV show to the news?
So themeparks are developers trying to give players the best experience possible?? lmao, what if they just cant give me a fun experience to me? If there is no free pvp and open world Id rather play a different genre (FPS,MOBA,etc.) that do the combat 10x better.
Your argument that game developers cant deliver a proper sandbox experience is just stoopid. Have you ever heard of EvE??? DarkFall?? Mortal Online?? There are sandbox games out there, but there are mostly indie with limited budget. We sandboxers jsut wish there was a mmo with a bigger budget doing these games, not that the games are impossible to make.
So your solution is never try anything out of the box. Ok lets have wow clones forever, sounds like fun!!