Sorry but in my opinion I think it is pretty stupid to say you need to make a WoW clone to be successful. WoW clone's usually fail within a year, this has already been proven.
You ought to be worried that they think the WoW model of MMO works.
And trust me, many long-term players are sick of WoW's mechanics. The fact that the only new gameplay mechanic Blizzard could churn up for Cata was Archaeology is sad in and of itself, and that is something which has been the death of WoW for some.
You go on to compare BiowarEA to Trion in what they are doing... well as Trion found out, player retention is a lot harder than getting people to buy your game. Putting it plainly: a game is screwed if it's too much like WoW with nothing alternative to offer.
So SWTOR has an advantage that way in that it will be a great story. But how long will it keep the players paying, that is the question*.
*doesn't apply to hardcore SW fans of course - they will play the game for the IP.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
Sorry but in my opinion I think it is pretty stupid to say you need to make a WoW clone to be successful. WoW clone's usually fail within a year, this has already been proven.
Since you didn't bother to read rest of the replies i will copy paste this for you..
Don't believe you are making WoW 2.0 with a quarter of WoW's budget
Many recent MMOs failed because they were rushed to market, had less content, or were not as polished as established games. It's no secret that WoW has been a big success, and there is a reason for that success. While it may not be the most innovative product on the market, WoW offers a tremendous amount of content and is an exceptionally polished game. Everyone wants to duplicate that success, but I'm not sure that everyone is realistic about what that means.
pay attention to rushed to market, less content and lack of polish. Sounds familiar? AOC? Warhammer?. A lot of MMOS failed in first year due to this reason not because they were just a WOW clone. How come Rift is doing so well then? because it had a perfect launch and Trion is very dedicated in releasing new content.
That is only partially true. People get bored with doing the same things over and over again. After 5+ years of WoW mechanics people are just tired of the same old same old. When TOR and GW2 release Rift will lose alot of those players. Rift is nothing more than a stop gap until we get something better.
So, Rift, which is very obviously basing their game on the WoW model, will lose a bunch of subs to SWTOR, who is very obviously basing their game on the WoW model? You just sabotaged your own point. If anything, it proves that people will still always flock to the proven formula. Most are just looking for a different and better version of it.
And as far as the burger joint analogy...some people just like burgers. Open a new joint, run it well, and it will sell.
Sorry but in my opinion I think it is pretty stupid to say you need to make a WoW clone to be successful. WoW clone's usually fail within a year, this has already been proven.
So do non-WoW clones, to be fair.
Please name some.
Aside from War, I can't think of any and the reasons War failed had nothing to do with how like or unlike WoW it was.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
Sorry but in my opinion I think it is pretty stupid to say you need to make a WoW clone to be successful. WoW clone's usually fail within a year, this has already been proven.
Since you didn't bother to read rest of the replies i will copy paste this for you..
Don't believe you are making WoW 2.0 with a quarter of WoW's budget
Many recent MMOs failed because they were rushed to market, had less content, or were not as polished as established games. It's no secret that WoW has been a big success, and there is a reason for that success. While it may not be the most innovative product on the market, WoW offers a tremendous amount of content and is an exceptionally polished game. Everyone wants to duplicate that success, but I'm not sure that everyone is realistic about what that means.
pay attention to rushed to market, less content and lack of polish. Sounds familiar? AOC? Warhammer?. A lot of MMOS failed in first year due to this reason not because they were just a WOW clone. How come Rift is doing so well then? because it had a perfect launch and Trion is very dedicated in releasing new content.
That is only partially true. People get bored with doing the same things over and over again. After 5+ years of WoW mechanics people are just tired of the same old same old. When TOR and GW2 release Rift will lose alot of those players. Rift is nothing more than a stop gap until we get something better.
You are making assumptiosn regarding Rift, no one knows what will really happen once GW2 and SWTOR will release. But no matter what happens in future one can not deny the fact that RIFT did a lot of things right and had a perfect launch. So to say games fail in first year only because they try to clone WOW is wrong.
They failed because they tried to copy WOW in wrong manner and forgot the main reason why WOW is such a success..content, quality and polish. Bring these three elements in your MMO and it is bound to be a success. People are not bored with WOW mechanics but the way they are done in broken and half assed manner.
Aside from War, I can't think of any and the reasons War failed had nothing to do with how like or unlike WoW it was.
It can be done simpler: name one non-WoW clone that appeared the last couple of years that has been successful the past 5 years.
As for Rift, I think that one of the major reasons that its retention isn't great is that its world is too small and content to enjoy too little. The majority of people don't really care whether an MMO is themepark or sandbox, but they do care whether there's enough content to enjoy or not. Besides the rifts, Rift was lacking in that area.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Sorry but in my opinion I think it is pretty stupid to say you need to make a WoW clone to be successful. WoW clone's usually fail within a year, this has already been proven.
Since you didn't bother to read rest of the replies i will copy paste this for you..
Don't believe you are making WoW 2.0 with a quarter of WoW's budget
Many recent MMOs failed because they were rushed to market, had less content, or were not as polished as established games. It's no secret that WoW has been a big success, and there is a reason for that success. While it may not be the most innovative product on the market, WoW offers a tremendous amount of content and is an exceptionally polished game. Everyone wants to duplicate that success, but I'm not sure that everyone is realistic about what that means.
pay attention to rushed to market, less content and lack of polish. Sounds familiar? AOC? Warhammer?. A lot of MMOS failed in first year due to this reason not because they were just a WOW clone. How come Rift is doing so well then? because it had a perfect launch and Trion is very dedicated in releasing new content.
That is only partially true. People get bored with doing the same things over and over again. After 5+ years of WoW mechanics people are just tired of the same old same old. When TOR and GW2 release Rift will lose alot of those players. Rift is nothing more than a stop gap until we get something better.
If you're bored of WoW mechanics, why go to Rift? There are literally dozens of other MMOs which do things very differently to WoW and Rift where you could, as a stop gap, experience a very different kind of game.
Fallen Earth, Champions Online, Dungeons & Dragons Online, Global Agenda, Pirates of the Burning Sea - and that's just off the top of my head. They're all free (not sure if FE is yet, tbh) and all worth a go for at least a month apiece. There's no reason not to expand your horizons if you're bored of WoW-alikes.
It makes no sense to call games "WoW clones" and complain about them before they've even come out, while playing a WoW-clone instead of trying something different.
This here show a mindset that Bioware arent simplay a studio made up of Ego Driven Blind WoW Haters like Mythic was with Warhammer (ironic I know), and how Anet and ZombieLabs are. They remind me of Trion, the developers seem to understand that most of these WoW players dont HATE WOW, they simply tired of it and want something new. Developers with this mindset seem to do well.
I'm curious how UndeadLabs are "ego driven blind WoW haters". Like, you're insulting companies because they're not making WoW? UndeadLabs isn't even making a high-fantasy fantasy MMO, nor would it ever have the same gameplay elements because it's a game intended for consoles. They're just making something different because they're ambitious developers.
Like, you're actively encouraging the genre not to move forward. As if you feel it's your duty to discourage ambition and creativity. I fear I may soon find myself weeping at the shattered remains of what was once the MMO industry.
Sorry but in my opinion I think it is pretty stupid to say you need to make a WoW clone to be successful. WoW clone's usually fail within a year, this has already been proven.
You're giving your own interpretation to something they said.
This is what has been said:
"It [World of Warcraft] is a touchstone. It has established standards, it's established how you play an MMO. Every MMO that comes out, I play and look at it. And if they break any of the WoW rules, in my book that's pretty dumb," Zeschuk said
Now, I know that people - especially MMO gamers and especially on this particular site - have a tendency to interpret everything in extremes and in black and white and to see the world in black and white, but nowhere did it say "we are going to make a WoW clone" or "we are going to make a copy of WoW".
In fact, in other interviews they've clearly stated that they followed their own path with several features.
The guy merely states that WoW had some design rules to it that should be taken to heart, and of which can be learnt from.
Which sounds pretty obvious to me, considering WoW's success. People can say that WoW uses the same mechanics as EQ did, but WoW's mega success clearly says that apparently there's more to it than just these core features to generate such success. It's too simple - and wrong - an explanation to say that it was because they dumbed things down that caused the success, after all it didn't work like that for other MMO's that 'dumbed things down'.
In fact, in several articles Blizzard's designers elaborated upon several of the key design philosophies they used for WoW and how they implemented them, there was nothing simple about those.
Originally posted by SaintViktor
That is only partially true. People get bored with doing the same things over and over again. After 5+ years of WoW mechanics people are just tired of the same old same old. When TOR and GW2 release Rift will lose alot of those players. Rift is nothing more than a stop gap until we get something better.
Hmm. When WoW appeared, MMO gamers had been playing EQ for 4+ years, but still they weren't that bored to leave EQ for a WoW to do the same things over and over again that they'd been doing for the past4 years.
So, maybe some are tired, others however can still enjoy those mechanics when done in a different setting or slightly different way.
Yea but the quote itself is pretty extreme. Read it again. Any mmo that doesnt follow the WoW rules is pretty dumb? Rift being the exception (and its pretty new still), the more successful and long lasting mmos had mechanics that in no way resembled WoW. EvE comes to mind for instance.
It just seems like a total lack of imagination to me. WoW's mechanics should not be some sort of holy grail to developers who believe this is the only way it can be done or be successful. WoW did what it did, and it did it fairly well. That doesnt mean a developer cant do something completely different and also do that extremely well. Quality is quality regardless of form.
From the vibe I get from most posts around the gaming community at large, there are a lot of people that are tired of WoW. They're tired of the mechanics. They're tired of the game play. They're tired of it all. Does that mean WoW is bad? Of course not. But how long can someone really expect to be entertained by that same old play style? What these developers dont seem to be understanding is that most WoW players played the game for years. Anyone who played WoW likely played it for longer than a few months. So lets just make a game with the exact same stuff going on.
Developers? We've already been playing that. For years. Seriously. If what you are doing isnt new, someone out there is bound to try cracking the mold a bit. Use some imagination. Its your job. Literally.
How mant times we have to do this? lack of imagination, nothing is new, it is not that innovatiive. Come on guys. After looking at all the features lsit of SWTOR how can anyone come to conclusion that devs lack imagination or there is absolutely nothing new in game?
I know that most of you keep GW2 in mind when making comparisons and try to undermine SWTOR on your own precpetion of innovation. It might not be what you are looking for but i am not even a hardcore SW fan and i can see so many new things in SWTOR. Only because Jeff praises WOW doesn't mean he is talking about copying WOW from head to toe.
Sorry but in my opinion I think it is pretty stupid to say you need to make a WoW clone to be successful. WoW clone's usually fail within a year, this has already been proven.
So do non-WoW clones, to be fair.
Please name some.
Aside from War, I can't think of any and the reasons War failed had nothing to do with how like or unlike WoW it was.
Champions Online, Fallen Earth, Age of Conan, Dungeons & Dragons Online (you can probably see a pattern forming here from my previous post), Pirates of the Burning Sea, Auto Assault, Tabula Rasa.
None of those games have been anywhere near as successful as LOTRO and Rift, which are probably the most WoW cloned games out there.
I've played all of them and none of them play like WoW, and each doesn't play like WoW in it's own unique way.
There's a lot of diversity in MMO design, but very few of us are genuinely interested in it. In fact I'd say that very few are as interested in it as they think they are - hence the ongoing, soul-crushing popularity of fantasy MMOs.
Champions Online, Fallen Earth, Age of Conan, Dungeons & Dragons Online (you can probably see a pattern forming here from my previous post), Pirates of the Burning Sea, Auto Assault, Tabula Rasa.
None of those games have been anywhere near as successful as LOTRO and Rift, which are probably the most WoW cloned games out there.
I've played all of them and none of them play like WoW, and each doesn't play like WoW in it's own unique way.
There's a lot of diversity in MMO design, but very few of us are genuinely interested in it. In fact I'd say that very few are as interested in it as they think they are - hence the ongoing, soul-crushing popularity of fantasy MMOs.
Those games failings had more to do with how lacking they were in content coupled with issues like an incompetent developer team, or poor customer service for example.
Don't confuse that with the game being too unlike WoW.
MMOs that aren't the run-of-the-mill hotkey based ones CAN succeed (or can not fail). EVE and SWG come to mind. AoC, Aion, TR could have had success if they had real content.
In short, most of these MMOs "failed" because they didn't go the distance on their offers. Blizzard did.
Has nothing to do with gameplay model.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
Interesting discussion. I hear arguments about mechanics like wow, innovation, polish, content, and a host of other analysis on what makes a good game. What I'm not hearing a lot of is the word 'FUN'. Is the game fun to play. As a general rule, I don't go into a game thinking 'I like the mechanics' or 'wow, i'm gonna play it because its innovative.' Instead I think to myself 'That looks like its gonna be fun' The others play a part in the consideration, but they aren't the main driving force. Once I get into the game, then the mechanical elements begin to come to the forefront and help shape my enjoyability. To 'innovative, novel, different' and you may lose me (maybe not) depending on how they are implemented.
I rather think that WoW did a good job on their mechanics and you could do worse than model some of your mechanics on this. I think that SWTOR looks like its gonna be fun to play. The mechanics from what I read aren't going to be that revolutionary. But thats ok. I personally don't need everything to be revolutionary to be fun. Some innovation is usually nice, and I think that SWTOR brings some of that with the story aspect as well as some other areas.
It seems to me that they are doing it right. Proven mechanics that the vast majority of players enjoy, while adding some unique elements to add to the legacy. GW2 looks to do the same. And as each new evolutionary game comes out, there will be a bit more innovation along with tried and true methods.
Yea but the quote itself is pretty extreme. Read it again. Any mmo that doesnt follow the WoW rules is pretty dumb? Rift being the exception (and its pretty new still), the more successful and long lasting mmos had mechanics that in no way resembled WoW. EvE comes to mind for instance.
It just seems like a total lack of imagination to me. WoW's mechanics should not be some sort of holy grail to developers who believe this is the only way it can be done or be successful. WoW did what it did, and it did it fairly well. That doesnt mean a developer cant do something completely different and also do that extremely well. Quality is quality regardless of form.
I didn't say that I agreed with what he said or how he said it, only that I disagreed that this meant that they made some near-exact copy of WoW. Nor do I think that every other lead designer at BW thinks and feels exactly the same about it like Zeschuk did. This was just how he saw it, other interviews also with other spokesmen show a broader picture.
As I said earlier in this thread in posts of mine, I already stated that I don't think there's only 1 way to Rome and all others strays.
As for appeal, well, MMO gamers were pretty bored of EQ's gameplay after a couple of years, yet they jumped ship to WoW in their hundreds of thousands when it appeared, and a lot of them stayed to enjoy it.
So, that'll be the interesting question: how bored has the general MMO populace, not this site and refuge haven for sandbox gamers and the tired and jaded MMO vets, really become of WoW, and does this mean they've become bored of themepark MMO gameplay all around, or just WoW?
That last one will be the 64 million dollar question that we will see answered in the upcoming year.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
It can be done simpler: name one non-WoW clone that appeared the last couple of years that has been successful the past 5 years.
I think you'll find my reponse to Gibbonici appropriate regarding this matter. The success/failure of games has very little to do with their gaming model. I mean EVE has had 11 patches (Trinity can be considered a true expac I think) and they have done fairly well.
As for Rift, I think that one of the major reasons that its retention isn't great is that its world is too small and content to enjoy too little. The majority of people don't really care whether an MMO is themepark or sandbox, but they do care whether there's enough content to enjoy or not. Besides the rifts, Rift was lacking in that area.
I agree with your premise but you fail to note what "content" truly is. Because as it stands, there is a lot of content in RIFT. There are 3 20 man raids, multiple 10 man raids, Rifts and instanced PvP. So the fact of the matter is, it has nothing to do with the amount of content but the quality. And even that gets stale (WoW: Cataclysm when it's same-old-same-old).
What's alarming to me is that James Ohlen's take on MMOs is so skewed - he cited the story-driven RPG aspect of it as crucial as opposed to a more open-world expansive approach. Personally, I wish he was on the right track, but he isn't. This genre is known for people actively skipping story content. Folks barely read quest text; what's to stop them from abusing their escape key?
And this is where the point about retention comes in. Once the novelty wears off, what is there to keep the non-story-lovers in this game?
I think this is a pertinent question for BioWare and their ultimate success hinges on their decision.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
Champions Online, Fallen Earth, Age of Conan, Dungeons & Dragons Online (you can probably see a pattern forming here from my previous post), Pirates of the Burning Sea, Auto Assault, Tabula Rasa.
None of those games have been anywhere near as successful as LOTRO and Rift, which are probably the most WoW cloned games out there.
I've played all of them and none of them play like WoW, and each doesn't play like WoW in it's own unique way.
There's a lot of diversity in MMO design, but very few of us are genuinely interested in it. In fact I'd say that very few are as interested in it as they think they are - hence the ongoing, soul-crushing popularity of fantasy MMOs.
Those games failings had more to do with how lacking they were in content coupled with issues like an incompetent developer team, or poor customer service for example.
Don't confuse that with the game being too unlike WoW.
MMOs that aren't the run-of-the-mill hotkey based ones CAN succeed (or can not fail). EVE and SWG come to mind. AoC, Aion, TR could have had success if they had real content.
In short, most of these MMOs "failed" because they didn't go the distance on their offers. Blizzard did.
Has nothing to do with gameplay model.
Exactly the same can be said for all the WoW-clones that failed too.
As for SWTOR, I've got it preordered and can't wait for it to come out. I'm not looking forward to it because of its similarities to WoW, but for it's differences - the storylines and the size of the world, plus the fact that it's not straight fantasy. Having played dozens of MMOs of many different types, I'm pretty sure that the SWTOR's similarities to WoW are going to be pretty superficial, in the same way that the similarities between Quake and Battlefield 3 will be pretty superficial.
Interesting discussion. I hear arguments about mechanics like wow, innovation, polish, content, and a host of other analysis on what makes a good game. What I'm not hearing a lot of is the word 'FUN'. Is the game fun to play. As a general rule, I don't go into a game thinking 'I like the mechanics' or 'wow, i'm gonna play it because its innovative.'
LOL, I don't think any of us do that. Well maybe some, but I'm sure they are in the minority. :P
We are after all verbalising experiences here. What usually happens is,
"Wow, this game rocks! I've never seen that before!"
"Wow, this game is just like that other game I play - awesome!"
"Wow, this game is just like this other game I play. Why wouldn't I just go back to that instead when that does it better?"
"Wow, this game is just like that other game. I am really sick and tired of that other game; not in the mood for it again!"
I rather think that WoW did a good job on their mechanics and you could do worse than model some of your mechanics on this.
They did but unftortunately, in this genre it has become very stale. EQ was fresh. WoW was EQ-lite, which made it fresh. As multiple people have observed (Total Biscuit for example), hotkey based MMOs get old and stale. Sad truth about the genre. I just can't see someone who is burned out of the genre (like TB) playing SWTOR solely for the gameplay component. He himself has admitted that he will play it for the story (and I don't blame him!)
I think that SWTOR looks like its gonna be fun to play.
I'm sure it will be.
The mechanics from what I read aren't going to be that revolutionary. But thats ok. I personally don't need everything to be revolutionary to be fun. Some innovation is usually nice, and I think that SWTOR brings some of that with the story aspect as well as some other areas.
And therein lies my point - how long will the story aspect of it keep people hooked? I mean other games have had cutscenes and all the bells and whitses (although nothing like the way it is here).
Also, this is an MMO we're talking about; what happens if the content patches don't feature an more cool story avenues?
It seems to me that they are doing it right. Proven mechanics that the vast majority of players enjoy, while adding some unique elements to add to the legacy. GW2 looks to do the same. And as each new evolutionary game comes out, there will be a bit more innovation along with tried and true methods.
I don't think there is much innovative about SW, tbh. I think SWG brought much more to the table regarding the innovation factor.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
I agree with your premise but you fail to note what "content" truly is. Because as it stands, there is a lot of content in RIFT. There are 3 20 man raids, multiple 10 man raids, Rifts and instanced PvP. So the fact of the matter is, it has nothing to do with the amount of content but the quality. And even that gets stale (WoW: Cataclysm when it's same-old-same-old).
What's alarming to me is that James Ohlen's take on MMOs is so skewed - he cited the story-driven RPG aspect of it as crucial as opposed to a more open-world expansive approach. Personally, I wish he was on the right track, but he isn't. This genre is known for people actively skipping story content. Folks barely read quest text; what's to stop them from abusing their escape key?
And this is where the point about retention comes in. Once the novelty wears off, what is there to keep the non-story-lovers in this game?
I think this is a pertinent question for BioWare and their ultimate success hinges on their decision.
I think if we can conclude one thing safely, then it's that it's not only quest content that keeps people playing in themepark MMO's: after all, in the past 5-6 years it was possible in as good as all themepark MMO's to reach level cap in 2-3 months. Yet as sub figures prove, MMO gamers stayed a hell of a lot longer in the themepark MMO of their choice than merely 2-3 months.
So, the conclusion: MMO's with quest based leveling focus do not have a retention that stops when people reach level cap. Proven by history.
Another thing: you are off with your conclusion that people are skipping story content because they dislike questing. Let people do the same repeater quests like in Aion or FFXIV or remove quests and let them level by mob grinding, and you'll find out what MMO gamers really, really dislike when leveling. They skip story content and quest text because it has become trivial and boring in their implementation. In fact, the MMO designers of 3 of the biggest upcoming MMO's disagree with you here: because all have stated that MMO gamers were skipping quest text, that questing has become bland and bad in current MMO's and that the RPG needed to be put back into MMORPG, by implementing more story and context to the quest leveling. Which you'll see in SWTOR, GW2 (Personal Story) and TSW.
As for content amount in Rift: you reach level cap in 100-125 straight hours gameplay after you've leveled your 1st character to L50, there's little else to do, the world is very small with little options for exploration, leveling a second character in the same faction will guarantee you a 90-100% exact same leveling experience, and the rifts lose their charm after the first month or so. If you read the threads, then you'll notice quite a few that talk about lack of content past the 2 month peak.
So, yes, Rift has less content than for example an MMO that takes 200-300 hours to reach level cap, and where it's more interesting to level alts.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Exactly the same can be said for all the WoW-clones that failed too.
What's your point?
As for SWTOR, I've got it preordered and can't wait for it to come out. I'm not looking forward to it because of its similarities to WoW, but for it's differences - the storylines and the size of the world, plus the fact that it's not straight fantasy. Having played dozens of MMOs of many different types, I'm pretty sure that the SWTOR's similarities to WoW are going to be pretty superficial, in the same way that the similarities between Quake and Battlefield 3 will be pretty superficial.
I sure hope so but as it stands, I see very little that is different.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
im playing dragon age 2 and i know the story will be pretty much the same based on my choices. even if i play as a diffrent class then i am now and i still wanna re roll as a diffrent class knowing its the same content.
i totally love the companion character meriill and its the coolest thing i have ever experianced in any video game ive ever played putting this in an mmo will be so awesome.
The fact that just like dragon age and mass effect when u go by npcs u can hear them chatting with each other will be a cool twist also.
Look peole play themepark mmos cause even if it is gear grind at the end they have a set thing to do and even runnign the same area and quests over like i have in wow numerous times i keep rolling alts.
So to say people wont stay with a game tht has vo and story and choice added to the quest grind is ridiculous.
truth is themepark mmos on the whole do better then sandbox games
by the way u cant get rid of questin in an mmorpg quests are part of what make an rpg bioware turning those into story based quest wth choice and consequences adds to the intrigue of the quest.
im playing dragon age 2 and i know the story will be pretty much the same based on my choices. even if i play as a diffrent class then i am now and i still wanna re roll as a diffrent class knowing its the same content.
i totally love the companion character meriill and its the coolest thing i have ever experianced in any video game ive ever played putting this in an mmo will be so awesome.
The fact that just like dragon age and mass effect when u go by npcs u can hear them chatting with each other will be a cool twist also.
Look peole play themepark mmos cause even if it is gear grind at the end they have a set thing to do and even runnign the same area and quests over like i have in wow numerous times i keep rolling alts.
So to say people wont stay with a game tht has vo and story and choice added to the quest grind is ridiculous.
truth is themepark mmos on the whole do better then sandbox games
by the way u cant get rid of questin in an mmorpg quests are part of what make an rpg bioware turning those into story based quest wth choice and consequences adds to the intrigue of the quest.
Before WoW, themeparks and sandboxes were pretty close. If Blizzard would have gone the sandbox route, who knows what could have happened?
Comments
So do non-WoW clones, to be fair.
You ought to be worried that they think the WoW model of MMO works.
And trust me, many long-term players are sick of WoW's mechanics. The fact that the only new gameplay mechanic Blizzard could churn up for Cata was Archaeology is sad in and of itself, and that is something which has been the death of WoW for some.
You go on to compare BiowarEA to Trion in what they are doing... well as Trion found out, player retention is a lot harder than getting people to buy your game. Putting it plainly: a game is screwed if it's too much like WoW with nothing alternative to offer.
So SWTOR has an advantage that way in that it will be a great story. But how long will it keep the players paying, that is the question*.
*doesn't apply to hardcore SW fans of course - they will play the game for the IP.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
I need to take this advice more.
So, Rift, which is very obviously basing their game on the WoW model, will lose a bunch of subs to SWTOR, who is very obviously basing their game on the WoW model? You just sabotaged your own point. If anything, it proves that people will still always flock to the proven formula. Most are just looking for a different and better version of it.
And as far as the burger joint analogy...some people just like burgers. Open a new joint, run it well, and it will sell.
Please name some.
Aside from War, I can't think of any and the reasons War failed had nothing to do with how like or unlike WoW it was.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
I need to take this advice more.
You are making assumptiosn regarding Rift, no one knows what will really happen once GW2 and SWTOR will release. But no matter what happens in future one can not deny the fact that RIFT did a lot of things right and had a perfect launch. So to say games fail in first year only because they try to clone WOW is wrong.
They failed because they tried to copy WOW in wrong manner and forgot the main reason why WOW is such a success..content, quality and polish. Bring these three elements in your MMO and it is bound to be a success. People are not bored with WOW mechanics but the way they are done in broken and half assed manner.
It can be done simpler: name one non-WoW clone that appeared the last couple of years that has been successful the past 5 years.
As for Rift, I think that one of the major reasons that its retention isn't great is that its world is too small and content to enjoy too little. The majority of people don't really care whether an MMO is themepark or sandbox, but they do care whether there's enough content to enjoy or not. Besides the rifts, Rift was lacking in that area.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
If you're bored of WoW mechanics, why go to Rift? There are literally dozens of other MMOs which do things very differently to WoW and Rift where you could, as a stop gap, experience a very different kind of game.
Fallen Earth, Champions Online, Dungeons & Dragons Online, Global Agenda, Pirates of the Burning Sea - and that's just off the top of my head. They're all free (not sure if FE is yet, tbh) and all worth a go for at least a month apiece. There's no reason not to expand your horizons if you're bored of WoW-alikes.
It makes no sense to call games "WoW clones" and complain about them before they've even come out, while playing a WoW-clone instead of trying something different.
EDIT:typo
I'm curious how UndeadLabs are "ego driven blind WoW haters". Like, you're insulting companies because they're not making WoW? UndeadLabs isn't even making a high-fantasy fantasy MMO, nor would it ever have the same gameplay elements because it's a game intended for consoles. They're just making something different because they're ambitious developers.
Like, you're actively encouraging the genre not to move forward. As if you feel it's your duty to discourage ambition and creativity. I fear I may soon find myself weeping at the shattered remains of what was once the MMO industry.
Yea but the quote itself is pretty extreme. Read it again. Any mmo that doesnt follow the WoW rules is pretty dumb? Rift being the exception (and its pretty new still), the more successful and long lasting mmos had mechanics that in no way resembled WoW. EvE comes to mind for instance.
It just seems like a total lack of imagination to me. WoW's mechanics should not be some sort of holy grail to developers who believe this is the only way it can be done or be successful. WoW did what it did, and it did it fairly well. That doesnt mean a developer cant do something completely different and also do that extremely well. Quality is quality regardless of form.
From the vibe I get from most posts around the gaming community at large, there are a lot of people that are tired of WoW. They're tired of the mechanics. They're tired of the game play. They're tired of it all. Does that mean WoW is bad? Of course not. But how long can someone really expect to be entertained by that same old play style? What these developers dont seem to be understanding is that most WoW players played the game for years. Anyone who played WoW likely played it for longer than a few months. So lets just make a game with the exact same stuff going on.
Developers? We've already been playing that. For years. Seriously. If what you are doing isnt new, someone out there is bound to try cracking the mold a bit. Use some imagination. Its your job. Literally.
How mant times we have to do this? lack of imagination, nothing is new, it is not that innovatiive. Come on guys. After looking at all the features lsit of SWTOR how can anyone come to conclusion that devs lack imagination or there is absolutely nothing new in game?
I know that most of you keep GW2 in mind when making comparisons and try to undermine SWTOR on your own precpetion of innovation. It might not be what you are looking for but i am not even a hardcore SW fan and i can see so many new things in SWTOR. Only because Jeff praises WOW doesn't mean he is talking about copying WOW from head to toe.
Champions Online, Fallen Earth, Age of Conan, Dungeons & Dragons Online (you can probably see a pattern forming here from my previous post), Pirates of the Burning Sea, Auto Assault, Tabula Rasa.
None of those games have been anywhere near as successful as LOTRO and Rift, which are probably the most WoW cloned games out there.
I've played all of them and none of them play like WoW, and each doesn't play like WoW in it's own unique way.
There's a lot of diversity in MMO design, but very few of us are genuinely interested in it. In fact I'd say that very few are as interested in it as they think they are - hence the ongoing, soul-crushing popularity of fantasy MMOs.
Those games failings had more to do with how lacking they were in content coupled with issues like an incompetent developer team, or poor customer service for example.
Don't confuse that with the game being too unlike WoW.
MMOs that aren't the run-of-the-mill hotkey based ones CAN succeed (or can not fail). EVE and SWG come to mind. AoC, Aion, TR could have had success if they had real content.
In short, most of these MMOs "failed" because they didn't go the distance on their offers. Blizzard did.
Has nothing to do with gameplay model.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
I need to take this advice more.
I've been eating Porridge for many years. No more Porridge, please?
Interesting discussion. I hear arguments about mechanics like wow, innovation, polish, content, and a host of other analysis on what makes a good game. What I'm not hearing a lot of is the word 'FUN'. Is the game fun to play. As a general rule, I don't go into a game thinking 'I like the mechanics' or 'wow, i'm gonna play it because its innovative.' Instead I think to myself 'That looks like its gonna be fun' The others play a part in the consideration, but they aren't the main driving force. Once I get into the game, then the mechanical elements begin to come to the forefront and help shape my enjoyability. To 'innovative, novel, different' and you may lose me (maybe not) depending on how they are implemented.
I rather think that WoW did a good job on their mechanics and you could do worse than model some of your mechanics on this. I think that SWTOR looks like its gonna be fun to play. The mechanics from what I read aren't going to be that revolutionary. But thats ok. I personally don't need everything to be revolutionary to be fun. Some innovation is usually nice, and I think that SWTOR brings some of that with the story aspect as well as some other areas.
It seems to me that they are doing it right. Proven mechanics that the vast majority of players enjoy, while adding some unique elements to add to the legacy. GW2 looks to do the same. And as each new evolutionary game comes out, there will be a bit more innovation along with tried and true methods.
I self identify as a monkey.
I didn't say that I agreed with what he said or how he said it, only that I disagreed that this meant that they made some near-exact copy of WoW. Nor do I think that every other lead designer at BW thinks and feels exactly the same about it like Zeschuk did. This was just how he saw it, other interviews also with other spokesmen show a broader picture.
As I said earlier in this thread in posts of mine, I already stated that I don't think there's only 1 way to Rome and all others strays.
As for appeal, well, MMO gamers were pretty bored of EQ's gameplay after a couple of years, yet they jumped ship to WoW in their hundreds of thousands when it appeared, and a lot of them stayed to enjoy it.
So, that'll be the interesting question: how bored has the general MMO populace, not this site and refuge haven for sandbox gamers and the tired and jaded MMO vets, really become of WoW, and does this mean they've become bored of themepark MMO gameplay all around, or just WoW?
That last one will be the 64 million dollar question that we will see answered in the upcoming year.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
I need to take this advice more.
Exactly the same can be said for all the WoW-clones that failed too.
As for SWTOR, I've got it preordered and can't wait for it to come out. I'm not looking forward to it because of its similarities to WoW, but for it's differences - the storylines and the size of the world, plus the fact that it's not straight fantasy. Having played dozens of MMOs of many different types, I'm pretty sure that the SWTOR's similarities to WoW are going to be pretty superficial, in the same way that the similarities between Quake and Battlefield 3 will be pretty superficial.
So don't eat porridge. There are other options, you know.
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
I need to take this advice more.
There is crap and porridge with crap in it, enjoy!
meh, and some people eat porridge all their life and are happy. Its better than no food at all.
I self identify as a monkey.
I think if we can conclude one thing safely, then it's that it's not only quest content that keeps people playing in themepark MMO's: after all, in the past 5-6 years it was possible in as good as all themepark MMO's to reach level cap in 2-3 months. Yet as sub figures prove, MMO gamers stayed a hell of a lot longer in the themepark MMO of their choice than merely 2-3 months.
So, the conclusion: MMO's with quest based leveling focus do not have a retention that stops when people reach level cap. Proven by history.
Another thing: you are off with your conclusion that people are skipping story content because they dislike questing. Let people do the same repeater quests like in Aion or FFXIV or remove quests and let them level by mob grinding, and you'll find out what MMO gamers really, really dislike when leveling. They skip story content and quest text because it has become trivial and boring in their implementation. In fact, the MMO designers of 3 of the biggest upcoming MMO's disagree with you here: because all have stated that MMO gamers were skipping quest text, that questing has become bland and bad in current MMO's and that the RPG needed to be put back into MMORPG, by implementing more story and context to the quest leveling. Which you'll see in SWTOR, GW2 (Personal Story) and TSW.
As for content amount in Rift: you reach level cap in 100-125 straight hours gameplay after you've leveled your 1st character to L50, there's little else to do, the world is very small with little options for exploration, leveling a second character in the same faction will guarantee you a 90-100% exact same leveling experience, and the rifts lose their charm after the first month or so. If you read the threads, then you'll notice quite a few that talk about lack of content past the 2 month peak.
So, yes, Rift has less content than for example an MMO that takes 200-300 hours to reach level cap, and where it's more interesting to level alts.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
I need to take this advice more.
im playing dragon age 2 and i know the story will be pretty much the same based on my choices. even if i play as a diffrent class then i am now and i still wanna re roll as a diffrent class knowing its the same content.
i totally love the companion character meriill and its the coolest thing i have ever experianced in any video game ive ever played putting this in an mmo will be so awesome.
The fact that just like dragon age and mass effect when u go by npcs u can hear them chatting with each other will be a cool twist also.
Look peole play themepark mmos cause even if it is gear grind at the end they have a set thing to do and even runnign the same area and quests over like i have in wow numerous times i keep rolling alts.
So to say people wont stay with a game tht has vo and story and choice added to the quest grind is ridiculous.
truth is themepark mmos on the whole do better then sandbox games
by the way u cant get rid of questin in an mmorpg quests are part of what make an rpg bioware turning those into story based quest wth choice and consequences adds to the intrigue of the quest.
Before WoW, themeparks and sandboxes were pretty close. If Blizzard would have gone the sandbox route, who knows what could have happened?