This are a question for those who started the MMOs back in late 90s and early 00s.
What did you think back then how the future of MMOs would evolve and how much right and wrong are you today?
I started with UO in 1998 and EQ1 in march 1999.
Other than improving graphics I didnt have a clue how the gameplay would improve, but I thought that mmorpgs would move away from simple and antiquated "hitpool" and "damage" die roll mechanics to something that resembles real life simulation (when you punch someone or shoot somone in real life, there are no hitpoint bars or damage numbers)
I always thought that real life physics, ecosystems and organism simulations would be what mmorpgs would be like - not anytime soon due to massive compute power that would require.
So completely wrong.
But I also had no idea how my lifestyle would change and how much family life with work and kiddo schedules would change how I play games.
Never thought about that either back in 98/99 - I always assumed that I would have most of my day to devote to gaming.
Was completely wrong too.
I also never considered how I would change as a person and that I would lose desire to spend 10 hours raiding which at one point back in early 2000s I thought was amazing.
Zero desire to ever do that again today.
So again very wrong.
Am I happy with the direction that its going?
Well gaming is going on all directions, so yes I am very happy. There is a larger variety of games being made by more people today than at any other point in history.
I am having more fun gaming today than back in 98/99 due to so many different games.
Never been a better time than right now.
You admit mmos didn't evolve into what you expected, like everyone else here. You contradict this by saying gaming has a larger variety.
You have "no time" or any "desire" to play an mmorpg. Because games evolved into what you want you say "never been a better time than right now".
Just because your MMO interactions lacked meaning, doesn't mean that was the case for everyone else. I still play games and stay in contact with people I met 20 years ago in EQ.
If all your interactions including the ones in your day to day are meaningless, it may be time for you to look inward.
In so many MMORPG's, the Massive has become Tiny, the Multiplayer has become Soloplayer and the Roleplaying has disappeared. But its not all bad, they are still online.
I thought we would have every larger MMOs, where gameplay would diversify, where group play and solo play stood side by side. Where RPG tools got better and communities grew.
For a several years it seemed to be going that way. In many ways MMORPG's were online gaming communities, who needed social media? Today you can still find a like minded guild and make the game what you want it to be as best you can. But that huge promise MMO's had has been squandered.
I miss the time period where people were less concerned about intelligence and things were a bit more chaotic. Still, despite the chaos, people were allowed to be more creative in games. I'm sure people in games now could be just as creative given the opportunity, but generally, they aren't given that opportunity in games. It seemed like in old MMOs especially the players controlled the games more than the developers and it was a very niche group of like-minded players. Most were fairly immature, but some were quite responsible and got all the groups together via word of mouth.
I can't really enjoy modern games even though it is what the average player now seems to want. I don't enjoy the concept of free to play or buying items in the game. I don't find the game immersive at all with the quest structure and aim and fast-paced large quantities of content. I've always found less is more in many cases. When quests are rarer they are more meaningful.
Wheather people can solo or not isn't important to me. I preferred that it was more difficult to solo in old games due to various factors like trains, not having leashes on mobs, mobs being tuned for group play, etc. That and a large array of abilities made experimentation in soloing quite enjoyable.
I feel like the aspects I liked about MMOs are generally gone. This is why I usually only play single player games now. They are too invasive and simple-minded entertainment now. The player base is not as fun. I'm not really sure what purpose they serve or why lots of people play them. There are so many single player games out there that offer the same thing but are often more interesting and less invasive in terms of reality invading the fantasy world.
I wouldn't imagine the cash shop to be so popular.
My experience in cash shop is mixed. In some games I spend a few hundred dollar a month. In some games I rarely spend any real money, and essentially paid less money than a 15$ subscription.
Yeah have to agree, at least now that I'm about to hit 40. All I play now are turn based games, or real-time pause systems like Pillars of Eternity. The only exceptions I make are TES games and FO games because I love bethesda's slower paced worldly live another life approach. I didn't even like the WItcher 3 due to it's combat system (as well as lack of a do what you want feeling<- at least for me).
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I can remember playing EQ and imagining the possible.
Modem connection to the internet was a barrier to better games. I expected it to improve vastly and it has. Data flow is faster and wider.
Computer capability was a barrier. I expected better processing and it has in a big way.
In response to the better data flow and computer processing I expected MMOGs to no longer be restrained and needing gimmicks such as static spawn. I expected NPCs to be dyanmic and real. I expected my more computer created landscaped. I expected worlds to be infinitely huge.
Well, we have gotten smoother game play. Graphics are so much better.
But, it seems hardware capability does not mean the gameplay will evolve. Static spawn is a travesty if the goal is to create worlds. Writing code to make NPCs who/which behave as individuals must be difficult. Some games are huge worlds but lack a cohesive story or intelligence to them.
I can not tell if the coding is still a mountain to climb or if creative talents are drawn to other software projects.
4 new purchases in the last month,all 4 i played a lot for one day and now lost interest to go back to them. I am very disappointed in the constant CHEAP game designs i am seeing all over the place.
The game industry no longer looks like passionate game designers,it looks 100% like a business,design games as fast as possible,unless of course going the Star citizen route making more money without a product than you would with a crap finished game.
If i were to make a game i would love to play,i would put a lot of thought into each area of design,what i see in games right now,is VERY little thought,linear,hand holding,simple games look like they were built for 8-10 year olds.
When i saw people giving high fives to games like moba's and arpgs and stuff like Bloodthorne or whatever it was called,i shake my head in disbelief,seems the new generation of gamer's are a VERY easy sell,low standards and perhaps no clue what they are buying.
I guess it is pretty obvious when we see twitch TV full of viewers and NOT players,there seems to be more interest in just hanging out than playing these games.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I thought worlds would be more interactive. When I played those early game there was so much static stuff in the world that I couldn't interact with, it felt confining.
and i thought worlds are totally unnecessary. And i was right .. MMOs are more games and less worlds these days.
Exactly going where i like .. more entertainment, less simulation & chores.
Back in the day I didn't expect that other forms of social media would make MMOs of the future so antisocial.
When I played my first MMO it was a totally new thing. Before that your gaming community was restricted. For multiplayer gaming, you either went to your friend's house to play their new console game or you packed up your PC and took it to a friend's place for a LAN party. In both cases, it was always that same small group of local friends you got to play with. MMOs changed all of that. For the first time you could play in the same game with people from all over the world. That was what that drew me into it originally. Being able to game with 2-16 friends in your local area is fine but the chance to see how you fare in comparison to the rest of the world was too good for me to pass up.
However, what seemed amazing about it at the time is now underwhelming to the younger crowd who grew up with so many forms of social media. In those days our online game of choice WAS our social media! When waiting for a party or camping a boss our chat windows weren't empty whilst everyone was afk on their smartphones chatting with their social media friends in Skype or FB.. No! We would chat with each other, exchange stories, discussed things, and made friends while doing so. Now other players can't be bothered to type a couple words in the game's chat when you try to strike up a conversation. Although you can't see it, you know they are ignoring you and staring at their phones.
In the old days I really thought that they would keep expanding on the social aspect of these games to the point where the other forms of social media at the time like internet chat rooms and instant messengers would be rendered obsolete by virtual online worlds.
Instead we see the opposite happening. I couldn't have been more wrong about the future.
To be honest I didn't know where the MMO games were going back when I tried Meridian59 on a PCGamer disk back in mid 90s, play for 1 hour free then pay or reroll for another 1 hour.
Of course I knew the graphics would be better but not sure how gameplay would be. I guess I was hoping for a huge world really huge, where things happen all around without you as a player was involved you know a living world, a world you as a player played what you enjoyed may it be a adventures, barkeep, farmer, crafter or whatever you as a player enjoyed playing and still having fun doing it.
I didn't in my wildest dream think the MMORPG turned into a level step that max level means the game started with stupid dungeons to get pixles that will be useless when the next x-pack get released.
After reflecting on it more, one thing I definitely didn't expect is that PvP would be so oppressively universal. I thought there would be more PvE-only games. But it seems like no one thought that it would be the best return on development costs to focus on any kind of niche MMO audience; pretty much every MMO seems to be trying for the same excessively broad audience.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
I thought the genre would go closer to pen and paper RPGs but it seems it went closer to Diablo instead. I can't say I am very happy with that.
With software like Fantasy Grounds and Roll20, it's easy to go back to PnP RPG's. Especially when the people you used to play with live a thousand miles away.
I prefer tabletop simular myself but that is not really what I meant. Playing RPGs with people through the net have worked for a long time but there is a lot of fun gameplay in P&P games you don't see in MMOs and it have become less since the 90s.
I would say that the big difference is the freedom, in a P&P game the heroes more or less create the story together with the gamemaster, in a MMO you are only doing what the game constantly tells you even though you could make it far more like a P&P game if you wanted too.
I believe MMORPGs have a lot more to learn from pen and paper games, the genre were created by people who played P&P games originally but they got cut out of the genre rather fast.
If a DM would tell me to kill 10 rats in the taverns kitchen cellar I would find a new DM, it is just too boring but for some reason do MMO devs add so much boring that it is hard to find the fun stuff.
I believe MMORPGs have a lot more to learn from pen and paper games, the genre were created by people who played P&P games originally but they got cut out of the genre rather fast.
If a DM would tell me to kill 10 rats in the taverns kitchen cellar I would find a new DM, it is just too boring but for some reason do MMO devs add so much boring that it is hard to find the fun stuff.
nah .. video games and p&p games are just two vastly different medium. There is no way to do flashy, fast combat on p&p, and you can do that in video games.
I wouldn't kill 10 rats in a p&p game, but i will kill 100 rats in a video games if i have lots of flashy skills to blow them up in tactically interesting ways. Heck, video games are superior in combat.
And if i want a good story, i will go read a book. Most DMs are too amateurish to make any sort of good stories.
i always thought mmorpgs would amount to massive sprawling landscapes with explorable land air, sea, and space. Now look at it. 75 dollars for entry to an alpha that used to be free to a game that was actually released. Whole genre has turned into a dumpster dive.
From someone that has started mmorpgs from Dark Ages(nexon), I would say no i'm not exactly happy or excited at all.
I've always thought mmorpgs were more about the journey, not the destination. Making friends and adventuring together, braving the unknown areas with others, getting wasted by monsters that were stronger than you thought it would be, bugging a fellow crafter to make you an equipment so you could proceed, etc etc. Now everything is accessible on a spreadsheet or a quick google and you'd have every info handed to you on a silver platter. Hell, even the game developers offer money(some free, even) in exchange for a quick ticket to end game. Games change sure, but the audience these games are targeting changed the most.
Unlike most people who seem to only like to be forced into grouping to do generic nonsense and consider that to be the pinnacle of MMO social interaction, I find that to just give truth to the lie there is any worth while social interaction in mmorpgs. Its meaningless interaction and I avoid it as much as possible. I have to deal with people all day at work, and if my interaction with them in games can't be of any significance (and trying to rp for no reason isn't significant either) I'd rather not do it.
This is all on you isn't it? I mean, it sounds to me like you don't really "like" people so any interaction isn't going to be worth it to you.
Now if it's just game play well, that's a tough nut to crack. Making "relevant" game play decisions for an entire server, and doing so consistently, is going to be tough. How many massive events can happen before players feel like they lose their luster and say "meh, I'll catch the next one".
But the interaction with people is all about you finding meaning there. No one else can give it to you. Heck, I mostly solo and I can say that the group outings I've had in these games still stick with me to this day. It wasn't about what we were doing but how we were interacting with each other.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
This are a question for those who started the MMOs back in late 90s and early 00s.
What did you think back then how the future of MMOs would evolve and how much right and wrong are you today?
I started with UO in 1998 and EQ1 in march 1999.
Other than improving graphics I didnt have a clue how the gameplay would improve, but I thought that mmorpgs would move away from simple and antiquated "hitpool" and "damage" die roll mechanics to something that resembles real life simulation (when you punch someone or shoot somone in real life, there are no hitpoint bars or damage numbers)
I always thought that real life physics, ecosystems and organism simulations would be what mmorpgs would be like - not anytime soon due to massive compute power that would require.
So completely wrong.
But I also had no idea how my lifestyle would change and how much family life with work and kiddo schedules would change how I play games.
Never thought about that either back in 98/99 - I always assumed that I would have most of my day to devote to gaming.
Was completely wrong too.
I also never considered how I would change as a person and that I would lose desire to spend 10 hours raiding which at one point back in early 2000s I thought was amazing.
Zero desire to ever do that again today.
So again very wrong.
Am I happy with the direction that its going?
Well gaming is going on all directions, so yes I am very happy. There is a larger variety of games being made by more people today than at any other point in history.
I am having more fun gaming today than back in 98/99 due to so many different games.
Never been a better time than right now.
There's a lot that's gone off-track, in my opinion. It's disappointing, actually. The scope of the earlier games like UO and EQ1 were far greater in the things the developers attempted to put into the games. Subsequent games have been steadily removing systems and functions, making the world less and less interactive. Games have consistently adapted the same abstractions that were present in D&D in 1972, without attempting to use the computer to explore new ways to represent people in hazardous situations.
It appears that instead of using the computer as a tool to bring new concepts to the RPG environment, it was only seen as a cash cow, a platform for more of the same. It could be argued that there have been more advancements in how a business can make money from an MMORPG than actually how to make an MMORPG better.
I expected more progress in the form of AI to populate these world's with more life-like NLC inhabitants. Factions warring independent of player input, dynamically attacking, defending, and counterattacking one another. A world alive that the player is dropped into to play a role in.
AI is another primary area where games have failed to deliver. Gamers seem to want games to emulate real-world eco-systems. Why haven't we seen packs of wolves adapt to players attempts to hunt them? Machine learning and neural networks have been important areas in computer science since the 1980s, but we've yet to see these types of technologies improving how the computerized opponents act, react, and behave.
Players are still stuck dealing with static content, which makes for lackluster worlds. Mrs. Johnsten always needs you to make a new scarf for her, which requires somehow getting wool. Captain Anders will always direct a player to visit the outlands to battle the bandits disrupting trade. Farmer Mycroft always needs someone (everyone) to kill 10 rats for him. Events and actions within the world are scripted (occasionally badly), with predictable results. New content is dependent on developers creating it. Too often, this requires yet another bit of writing, once again focused on an individual, and plopped into the world via an expansion or (more infrequently) a major patch. Dynamic generation of content is still a distant pipe-dream, while manual content creation is a restraint to the genre.
Where are encounters that don't require dialog? A pack of wolves roam into the woods near Farmer Mycroft and discover snacking on his hogs, then roam off once repelled? Living things aren't always predictable and aren't slaves to a respawn timer. There are no coincidental events in MMORPGs. Or non-repeatable events. Life is full of them.
So, I was extremely wrong on where I thought MMORPGs would go. Problem is, I still believe that it's a reasonable path to follow in the future. Enough of rebuilding the basics, let's see new ideas and elements take advantage of the computing power in the servers and desktops to really move the genre forward.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Very. I've very much enjoyed all of the new features of modern mmos coupled with the increase in more involved combat systems.
Sometimes I think I want to go back, but then I remember how much it sucked in the long run. It'll be interesting to see how a game like Pantheon fairs once it releases as it is really the only attempt at a return to the "old ways"
This are a question for those who started the MMOs back in late 90s and early 00s.
What did you think back then how the future of MMOs would evolve and how much right and wrong are you today?
I started with UO in 1998 and EQ1 in march 1999.
Other than improving graphics I didnt have a clue how the gameplay would improve, but I thought that mmorpgs would move away from simple and antiquated "hitpool" and "damage" die roll mechanics to something that resembles real life simulation (when you punch someone or shoot somone in real life, there are no hitpoint bars or damage numbers)
I always thought that real life physics, ecosystems and organism simulations would be what mmorpgs would be like - not anytime soon due to massive compute power that would require.
So completely wrong.
But I also had no idea how my lifestyle would change and how much family life with work and kiddo schedules would change how I play games.
Never thought about that either back in 98/99 - I always assumed that I would have most of my day to devote to gaming.
Was completely wrong too.
I also never considered how I would change as a person and that I would lose desire to spend 10 hours raiding which at one point back in early 2000s I thought was amazing.
Zero desire to ever do that again today.
So again very wrong.
Am I happy with the direction that its going?
Well gaming is going on all directions, so yes I am very happy. There is a larger variety of games being made by more people today than at any other point in history.
I am having more fun gaming today than back in 98/99 due to so many different games.
Never been a better time than right now.
There's a lot that's gone off-track, in my opinion. It's disappointing, actually. The scope of the earlier games like UO and EQ1 were far greater in the things the developers attempted to put into the games. Subsequent games have been steadily removing systems and functions, making the world less and less interactive. Games have consistently adapted the same abstractions that were present in D&D in 1972, without attempting to use the computer to explore new ways to represent people in hazardous situations.
It appears that instead of using the computer as a tool to bring new concepts to the RPG environment, it was only seen as a cash cow, a platform for more of the same. It could be argued that there have been more advancements in how a business can make money from an MMORPG than actually how to make an MMORPG better.
I expected more progress in the form of AI to populate these world's with more life-like NLC inhabitants. Factions warring independent of player input, dynamically attacking, defending, and counterattacking one another. A world alive that the player is dropped into to play a role in.
AI is another primary area where games have failed to deliver. Gamers seem to want games to emulate real-world eco-systems. Why haven't we seen packs of wolves adapt to players attempts to hunt them? Machine learning and neural networks have been important areas in computer science since the 1980s, but we've yet to see these types of technologies improving how the computerized opponents act, react, and behave.
Players are still stuck dealing with static content, which makes for lackluster worlds. Mrs. Johnsten always needs you to make a new scarf for her, which requires somehow getting wool. Captain Anders will always direct a player to visit the outlands to battle the bandits disrupting trade. Farmer Mycroft always needs someone (everyone) to kill 10 rats for him. Events and actions within the world are scripted (occasionally badly), with predictable results. New content is dependent on developers creating it. Too often, this requires yet another bit of writing, once again focused on an individual, and plopped into the world via an expansion or (more infrequently) a major patch. Dynamic generation of content is still a distant pipe-dream, while manual content creation is a restraint to the genre.
Where are encounters that don't require dialog? A pack of wolves roam into the woods near Farmer Mycroft and discover snacking on his hogs, then roam off once repelled? Living things aren't always predictable and aren't slaves to a respawn timer. There are no coincidental events in MMORPGs. Or non-repeatable events. Life is full of them.
So, I was extremely wrong on where I thought MMORPGs would go. Problem is, I still believe that it's a reasonable path to follow in the future. Enough of rebuilding the basics, let's see new ideas and elements take advantage of the computing power in the servers and desktops to really move the genre forward.
The attempt was apparently made by Daybreak with EQN's concepts. Of course nobody knows how functional they really were but I like to think that someone somewhere will be inspired by this concept and eventually bring it to life.
Even if the first one or two iterations are not as dynamic as we would like someone has to take the first step eventually or we will never see an end to the static, boring worlds we have today in every game.
For this reason I was very sad when EQN was cancelled. If nothing else it represented an opportunity for change/evolution.
<snip> The attempt was apparently made by Daybreak with EQN's concepts. Of course nobody knows how functional they really were but I like to think that someone somewhere will be inspired by this concept and eventually bring it to life.
Even if the first one or two iterations are not as dynamic as we would like someone has to take the first step eventually or we will never see an end to the static, boring worlds we have today in every game.
For this reason I was very sad when EQN was cancelled. If nothing else it represented an opportunity for change/evolution.
EQN might have been a step along these lines. That is, if SOE/Daybreak weren't just blowing smoke. I had a lot of issues with SOE promising more than they delivered. The problem I had with EQN wasn't the direction it was apparently heading (it also seemed a bit too gamey for me and some of the technology decisions seemed to be technology for the sake of technology -- destructible voxel-based world, since when did we need to bash holes in the ground?), but rather that the evolution it represented was 10 years too late.
But, you're absolutely right, @Kajidourden. Some company has to take that first step into the unknown. I don't know if any company in the genre really has the drive, vision, and courage to do that anymore.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Comments
You admit mmos didn't evolve into what you expected, like everyone else here. You contradict this by saying gaming has a larger variety.
You have "no time" or any "desire" to play an mmorpg. Because games evolved into what you want you say "never been a better time than right now".
I view this as being extremely selfish !
If all your interactions including the ones in your day to day are meaningless, it may be time for you to look inward.
I thought we would have every larger MMOs, where gameplay would diversify, where group play and solo play stood side by side. Where RPG tools got better and communities grew.
For a several years it seemed to be going that way. In many ways MMORPG's were online gaming communities, who needed social media? Today you can still find a like minded guild and make the game what you want it to be as best you can. But that huge promise MMO's had has been squandered.
I can't really enjoy modern games even though it is what the average player now seems to want. I don't enjoy the concept of free to play or buying items in the game. I don't find the game immersive at all with the quest structure and aim and fast-paced large quantities of content. I've always found less is more in many cases. When quests are rarer they are more meaningful.
Wheather people can solo or not isn't important to me. I preferred that it was more difficult to solo in old games due to various factors like trains, not having leashes on mobs, mobs being tuned for group play, etc. That and a large array of abilities made experimentation in soloing quite enjoyable.
I feel like the aspects I liked about MMOs are generally gone. This is why I usually only play single player games now. They are too invasive and simple-minded entertainment now. The player base is not as fun. I'm not really sure what purpose they serve or why lots of people play them. There are so many single player games out there that offer the same thing but are often more interesting and less invasive in terms of reality invading the fantasy world.
My experience in cash shop is mixed. In some games I spend a few hundred dollar a month. In some games I rarely spend any real money, and essentially paid less money than a 15$ subscription.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Modem connection to the internet was a barrier to better games. I expected it to improve vastly and it has. Data flow is faster and wider.
Computer capability was a barrier. I expected better processing and it has in a big way.
In response to the better data flow and computer processing I expected MMOGs to no longer be restrained and needing gimmicks such as static spawn. I expected NPCs to be dyanmic and real. I expected my more computer created landscaped. I expected worlds to be infinitely huge.
Well, we have gotten smoother game play. Graphics are so much better.
But, it seems hardware capability does not mean the gameplay will evolve. Static spawn is a travesty if the goal is to create worlds. Writing code to make NPCs who/which behave as individuals must be difficult. Some games are huge worlds but lack a cohesive story or intelligence to them.
I can not tell if the coding is still a mountain to climb or if creative talents are drawn to other software projects.
I am very disappointed in the constant CHEAP game designs i am seeing all over the place.
The game industry no longer looks like passionate game designers,it looks 100% like a business,design games as fast as possible,unless of course going the Star citizen route making more money without a product than you would with a crap finished game.
If i were to make a game i would love to play,i would put a lot of thought into each area of design,what i see in games right now,is VERY little thought,linear,hand holding,simple games look like they were built for 8-10 year olds.
When i saw people giving high fives to games like moba's and arpgs and stuff like Bloodthorne or whatever it was called,i shake my head in disbelief,seems the new generation of gamer's are a VERY easy sell,low standards and perhaps no clue what they are buying.
I guess it is pretty obvious when we see twitch TV full of viewers and NOT players,there seems to be more interest in just hanging out than playing these games.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I use entertainment products as i see fit.
and i thought worlds are totally unnecessary. And i was right .. MMOs are more games and less worlds these days.
Exactly going where i like .. more entertainment, less simulation & chores.
Back in the day I didn't expect that other forms of social media would make MMOs of the future so antisocial.
When I played my first MMO it was a totally new thing. Before that your gaming community was restricted. For multiplayer gaming, you either went to your friend's house to play their new console game or you packed up your PC and took it to a friend's place for a LAN party. In both cases, it was always that same small group of local friends you got to play with. MMOs changed all of that. For the first time you could play in the same game with people from all over the world. That was what that drew me into it originally. Being able to game with 2-16 friends in your local area is fine but the chance to see how you fare in comparison to the rest of the world was too good for me to pass up.
However, what seemed amazing about it at the time is now underwhelming to the younger crowd who grew up with so many forms of social media. In those days our online game of choice WAS our social media! When waiting for a party or camping a boss our chat windows weren't empty whilst everyone was afk on their smartphones chatting with their social media friends in Skype or FB.. No! We would chat with each other, exchange stories, discussed things, and made friends while doing so. Now other players can't be bothered to type a couple words in the game's chat when you try to strike up a conversation. Although you can't see it, you know they are ignoring you and staring at their phones.
In the old days I really thought that they would keep expanding on the social aspect of these games to the point where the other forms of social media at the time like internet chat rooms and instant messengers would be rendered obsolete by virtual online worlds.
Instead we see the opposite happening. I couldn't have been more wrong about the future.
So, in short, no. I can't say I'm happy with it.
Of course I knew the graphics would be better but not sure how gameplay would be.
I guess I was hoping for a huge world really huge, where things happen all around without you as a player was involved you know a living world, a world you as a player played what you enjoyed may it be a adventures, barkeep, farmer, crafter or whatever you as a player enjoyed playing and still having fun doing it.
I didn't in my wildest dream think the MMORPG turned into a level step that max level means the game started with stupid dungeons to get pixles that will be useless when the next x-pack get released.
Ashes of Creation might be the one.
I would say that the big difference is the freedom, in a P&P game the heroes more or less create the story together with the gamemaster, in a MMO you are only doing what the game constantly tells you even though you could make it far more like a P&P game if you wanted too.
I believe MMORPGs have a lot more to learn from pen and paper games, the genre were created by people who played P&P games originally but they got cut out of the genre rather fast.
If a DM would tell me to kill 10 rats in the taverns kitchen cellar I would find a new DM, it is just too boring but for some reason do MMO devs add so much boring that it is hard to find the fun stuff.
nah .. video games and p&p games are just two vastly different medium. There is no way to do flashy, fast combat on p&p, and you can do that in video games.
I wouldn't kill 10 rats in a p&p game, but i will kill 100 rats in a video games if i have lots of flashy skills to blow them up in tactically interesting ways. Heck, video games are superior in combat.
And if i want a good story, i will go read a book. Most DMs are too amateurish to make any sort of good stories.
I've always thought mmorpgs were more about the journey, not the destination.
Making friends and adventuring together, braving the unknown areas with others, getting wasted by monsters that were stronger than you thought it would be, bugging a fellow crafter to make you an equipment so you could proceed, etc etc. Now everything is accessible on a spreadsheet or a quick google and you'd have every info handed to you on a silver platter. Hell, even the game developers offer money(some free, even) in exchange for a quick ticket to end game.
Games change sure, but the audience these games are targeting changed the most.
But hey, just my opinion.
Now if it's just game play well, that's a tough nut to crack. Making "relevant" game play decisions for an entire server, and doing so consistently, is going to be tough. How many massive events can happen before players feel like they lose their luster and say "meh, I'll catch the next one".
But the interaction with people is all about you finding meaning there. No one else can give it to you. Heck, I mostly solo and I can say that the group outings I've had in these games still stick with me to this day. It wasn't about what we were doing but how we were interacting with each other.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
There's a lot that's gone off-track, in my opinion. It's disappointing, actually. The scope of the earlier games like UO and EQ1 were far greater in the things the developers attempted to put into the games. Subsequent games have been steadily removing systems and functions, making the world less and less interactive. Games have consistently adapted the same abstractions that were present in D&D in 1972, without attempting to use the computer to explore new ways to represent people in hazardous situations.
It appears that instead of using the computer as a tool to bring new concepts to the RPG environment, it was only seen as a cash cow, a platform for more of the same. It could be argued that there have been more advancements in how a business can make money from an MMORPG than actually how to make an MMORPG better.
AI is another primary area where games have failed to deliver. Gamers seem to want games to emulate real-world eco-systems. Why haven't we seen packs of wolves adapt to players attempts to hunt them? Machine learning and neural networks have been important areas in computer science since the 1980s, but we've yet to see these types of technologies improving how the computerized opponents act, react, and behave.
Players are still stuck dealing with static content, which makes for lackluster worlds. Mrs. Johnsten always needs you to make a new scarf for her, which requires somehow getting wool. Captain Anders will always direct a player to visit the outlands to battle the bandits disrupting trade. Farmer Mycroft always needs someone (everyone) to kill 10 rats for him. Events and actions within the world are scripted (occasionally badly), with predictable results. New content is dependent on developers creating it. Too often, this requires yet another bit of writing, once again focused on an individual, and plopped into the world via an expansion or (more infrequently) a major patch. Dynamic generation of content is still a distant pipe-dream, while manual content creation is a restraint to the genre.
Where are encounters that don't require dialog? A pack of wolves roam into the woods near Farmer Mycroft and discover snacking on his hogs, then roam off once repelled? Living things aren't always predictable and aren't slaves to a respawn timer. There are no coincidental events in MMORPGs. Or non-repeatable events. Life is full of them.
So, I was extremely wrong on where I thought MMORPGs would go. Problem is, I still believe that it's a reasonable path to follow in the future. Enough of rebuilding the basics, let's see new ideas and elements take advantage of the computing power in the servers and desktops to really move the genre forward.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Sometimes I think I want to go back, but then I remember how much it sucked in the long run. It'll be interesting to see how a game like Pantheon fairs once it releases as it is really the only attempt at a return to the "old ways"
Even if the first one or two iterations are not as dynamic as we would like someone has to take the first step eventually or we will never see an end to the static, boring worlds we have today in every game.
For this reason I was very sad when EQN was cancelled. If nothing else it represented an opportunity for change/evolution.
But, you're absolutely right, @Kajidourden. Some company has to take that first step into the unknown. I don't know if any company in the genre really has the drive, vision, and courage to do that anymore.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.