Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Are Too Many Options Killing the Genre
Spankster77
Member UncommonPosts: 487
Ok, so something hit me this morning I was perusing through the forums on MMORPG.com. Are too many options responsible for so many "failed" games over the past few years? I am starting to think that the plethora of current and new MMOs are flooding the market hence driving down the value and longevity of each game. The exception to this rule is WoW solely because it has built it's player base prior to the flooding of the market.
If you think back to the launch of WoW it was not a "great" game, there was little or no real end game, there was no organized PvP, it was loaded with bugs, etc... However, people played it and as time went on and subscriber base grew these issues were all addressed. In todays MMO market if a game doesn't have a perfect launch, have enough content to keep players overwhelmed, balanced PvP from launch, etc it's people start jumping ship after the free 30 days to play either the next released MMO, return to a previously played MMO, or try another existing MMO.
IMO, MMOs are like stocks as soon as people start leaving there is a cascading effect never really giving the "stock" a chance to truly recover.
Comments
Back in the old days, you made the game what it is because they didn't give you everything on a laundry list of things to do. There was lots to do in old WoW... most of which you came up with on your very own.
It's not options that is killing the genre... it's the spoon fed nature of the game that is killing the genre. It's like getting a puzzle and it's already put together for you. Boring.
Now take that same puzzle, toss it into a big box, add 3 more puzzles to it, shake it up, throw away the picture of the puzzles in it and then put the puzzles together. Now that involves some more work and is not so boring. The day they started giving you a reason to do something was they day they killed the genre. It used to be about what you decided to do, not what they decided for you to do.
They're nearly all the same and we've seen and done it all before.
If anything It's a lack of innovation and polish, all we're getting is uninspired iterations of what we had before.
I agree- I would say that too few innovative or original options have seen a stagnation in mmo's over a number of years- each new mmo is much the same as the last themepark you played.
Options are never a bad thing imo. In fact, I feel that the genre actually needs MORE innovation and options for content/ game play.
Bah, others beat me too it, but the point still stands. I think we need more options rather than less.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
I see very very few failed games.
I think the more options the better. Right now I feel the options that are have are iterations of an old product. There hasn't really been any sort of 'groundbreaking' innovation since WoW has come out. Everything has more or less stuck to the same formula since. With 'gimmicky' features having been added on top.
Risk of having a failed product is what is stifling innovation, and by extension is what is killing the genre.
And just how long are we to wait for this evolution to take place? People say that games get better over time... only because it was worth playing in the first place. We don't want to wait around for the game to evolve into a good game, we want it to be a good game when we buy it. If it's going to evolve it should evolve into an even better game. WoW is de-evolving. It doesn't know what it wants to be. They're doing more to kill their own game than the players are.
Companies like Square-Enix and Blizzard used to be good and had a stream-line p2p gamer base mainly because they could afford it. They were producing other things aside from their mmo and there was a lot least competition back then. So they could control their models the way that was "more structured." Now its just a stupid free-for-all.
Best B2P game is still Diablo 2, so suck it GW2!
Asherons Call 2, Rift, Warhammer, ESO, FF14(release), Darkfall, Vanguard, Star Wars, Tabula Rasa, Ryzom, CoX, Neverwinter. Edit: Adding DCUO, CoH and GW2.
Thats not few. And there's more im missing.
Ill edit if i think of more. And im not even googling games this is off memory.
I would somewhat agree with the argument that B2P and F2P are partially to blame for some of the decline in quality in MMORPG games. I never understood what the issue is with paying a very nominal fee for a monthly service? Seems like somewhere along the line MMO gamers started thinking that they would get a better product if the games were free, not sure how anyone ever came up with that logic?
Anyway, yeah but F2P kind of goes along with too many options not enough quality. If games like GW2 were P2P people would expect regular content, they would expect major releases etc.
You going answer the first question. What do you define as failed? To me only a few failed on that list.
In my mind "fail" would be any game that was over hyped and under delivered. Which is most MMOs that we see on this site anymore. I would also say that "failure" status could also go to any game that was developed and released with a P2P model that goes F2P within the first year or two.
IMO, the top 4 "failures" in the genre are:
1. Star Wars: The Old Republic
2. Guild Wars 2
3. Elder Scrolls Online
4. Ever Quest 2
IMO, the top 3 most "successful" games
1. World of Warcraft
2. Guild Wars
3. EVE
4. The Lord of the Rings Online
This is my opinion only! I would say that if you look at my top 3 "failures" you will see one thing in common, they all had large budgets, they all had coat tails to ride on, they all undelivered in comparison to the amount of hype they had.
the amount of mmos is not affecting the genre. The amount of BAD companies making/running bad mmos IS affecting the genre.
If they were all at least decent then the large competition would make them improve to stay relevant.
So fail is any game you don't like and success is any game you do. So if we put together a community list of failed games it would include every game and a list of successful games would include every game.
That sounds like a good way to determine success and failure.
I love people who blame innovation or the lack thereof for the failure of games...
The lack of innovation is killing video games.
There's not enough innovation in X genre.
Blah blah blah.
It's very easy to blame the lack of innovation for the failure of genres, but in reality, everyone who buys a CoD 1 through X, a Diablo 1 through X, a Zelda X, a Mario X, is to blame.
Why innovate when I can use the same old, same old, add one or two features, and POOF, profit and best selling game of the year.
It's complete bullcrud. Gamers do not want innovation (
Game Theory, watch and prepare to have your mind blown!)
RAWR
True. If I was a linear quest hub themepark MMO person It would be great...but I'm not. The fact that only one type of MMO is being made (other than Eve and Darkfall) is the big issue. They are ignoring an entire subset of the MMO genre.
No, not by any means. I did not like EVE, LoTRO, or the original Guild Wars but they all delivered what was promised from them. EVE still has paying players to today, LoTRO was one of the most content rich games of all times, WoW is the largest MMO at almost 10 years old, etc.
On the flipside, SWToR sold over 2 million copies but had about 500k subs 6 months after release, EQ 2 had the EQ name and funding yet never took off like its predecessor, ESO comes in riding the coat tails of one of the largest gaming franchises yet has failed to retain a good majority of it's players.
I am not talking about "good" and "bad" games I am talking about "successful" games. There is a different between judging good and bad and success.
I had fun once, it was terrible.
EQ2 fan sites
Almost the only difference between SPGs and MMOs today is that MMOs have a sub fee and/or a cash shop, and usually have worse graphics. The genre is dissapearing because some nutcase in marketing department realised there are millions and millions of gamers playing SPGs and online FPS-shooters only, and MMO markets can be expanded by attracting those people to MMO genre.
Well, here we are.. most of the 'so called MMOs' are about soloable content and action orientated PvP, and god forbid if some studio even talks about something different, the mob infests their forums and cry how developers don't know what we want. The next thing we can read is they have scrapped their design and the project is rebooted..
There are certainly not 'too many options'; the genre is dieing because developers design subpar SPGs and call them MMOs.
Congratulations! Of all those you listed, only four have actually 'failed'.
The genre is fine. If you can't find a game amongst the hundreds of options offering a plethora of settings, game play, and even payment models to like in this day and age, then the problem is yours.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
#IStandWithVic
Swtor had a crappy launch but lately its doing fairly well right after a lot of updates (not counting the misery that non subscribers have to deal with). Also GW2 has been very successful since launch and you marked it as a failure too.
I think that personal opinions need to be flexible for when real facts show they are wrong. IMO it does look like you mark as failure what you don like, regardless of actual success or improvement done over time.
So..... you dont like mmos and you come here blaming them for not appealing to you? go back to diablo 2. Stop wasting peoples time.