GW2 is going the right way. They're adding new twists to old classic ideas. It's like anything in life, it's always the person or organization that improves something that already exists that wins. Like Youtube, or the Japanese and Germans with cars. Someone provides the base idea/invention, then someone else makes it work. In the case of MMO's, I think the foundation has been laid, and GW2 is going to make it work.
But the thing is, I want more features to encourage people to socialize within the game, not outside of it, there's already enough tools to do that already IMO.
That's my point. The tools available for socializing in games are primitive compared to what's available outside games. You can add anything you want to encourage socialization, but if you filter it through a 90's era chat interface, it's going to fail.
About two years ago I was anxious to see social tools for the 21st century player enter MMOs, and I genuinely thought it would happen, but the closest we've come is mobile trading apps and integrated Twitter updating.
Exactly. Why I need to login to send message to my guildies, why not use cellphone or website. Why can't I do my preparations for raiding in work using website, buy potions from AH or trade with friends, move my character to log closest camp. Why can't I see situation of World PvP in website? Why is my character not doing anything while I'm offline, maybe I could control crafting or some other stuff.
Point is that when I log in to game I want to have action oriented fun, not look some spreadsheet AH UI, or manage banks. Why FPS games are huge, because it's fast action. You don't need to spend half of game time micromanaging or doing tedious repeative action.
I don't lke FPS because all you do is shoot stuff, I enjoy sitting around AH buying and selling, sitting at a tavern and chatting with other adventurer's
Its hard to get a specific answer. However I like to feel like a hero which themeparks offer, and I like freedom which sand boxes offer. I also like to feel like I have an impact on the environment from my actions and have some player created content in the mix as well.
To have all this, I think the right mix is a bit of themepark, and a lot of sand box. It would be two genres in one, and the combat can also be a two in one style. By trying to offer a cookie cutter style combat but also a bit of fps style at the same time. However the combat would be more cookie cutter than fps for my own personal tastes.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Seems everyone has different definition of the key element of revolutionary MMORPG...
it only points out one thing - there is never a single MMORPG satisfies everyone's need! From my point of view, since I love both MMORPG and Action game, at least I will give Core Blaze a shot, to see if it meets my need
Seems everyone has different definition of the key element of revolutionary MMORPG...
it only points out one thing - there is never a single MMORPG satisfies everyone's need!
Self-evident. I would hate some games that other players seem to get worked up about.
On the other hand, it's mostly about knowing what type of things you most enjoy doing, and not being afraid to "waste money" if you make the wrong choice. We've got some regulars here who seem to hate nearly everything, for whom no game is ever good enough.
But going clear back to the late 70's, I have yet to encounter a single game that was perfect in every way, by my standards. Day-um, there have been some terrific games that I would have rejected before trying, if I was seeking the Holy Grail of gaming perfection before risking a buck.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Seems everyone has different definition of the key element of revolutionary MMORPG...
it only points out one thing - there is never a single MMORPG satisfies everyone's need!
Self-evident. I would hate some games that other players seem to get worked up about.
On the other hand, it's mostly about knowing what type of things you most enjoy doing, and not being afraid to "waste money" if you make the wrong choice. We've got some regulars here who seem to hate nearly everything, for whom no game is ever good enough.
But going clear back to the late 70's, I have yet to encounter a single game that was perfect in every way, by my standards. Day-um, there have been some terrific games that I would have rejected before trying, if I was seeking the Holy Grail of gaming perfection before risking a buck.
We've come a long way though... open betas, demos, and trials. Generally speaking, the fool and his money being soon parted definitely applies to many games...where he/she does not partake of such.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
GW2 is going the right way. They're adding new twists to old classic ideas. It's like anything in life, it's always the person or organization that improves something that already exists that wins. Like Youtube, or the Japanese and Germans with cars. Someone provides the base idea/invention, then someone else makes it work. In the case of MMO's, I think the foundation has been laid, and GW2 is going to make it work.
Well lets see...The skill effects are like a light show at a rave party. Too many pets in the game. The camera control is restrictive. Still has target lock.
~see where I'm going with this?~
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Seems everyone has different definition of the key element of revolutionary MMORPG...
it only points out one thing - there is never a single MMORPG satisfies everyone's need! From my point of view, since I love both MMORPG and Action game, at least I will give Core Blaze a shot, to see if it meets my need
Indeed, in my mind revolutionary means getting bigger, more players. And lets face it that what it usually means. TV, computers, internet they all revolutionized our world because they got big. World of Warcraft got us 10 million, Facebook has hundreds of millions people. Can MMO ever be that big, yes I hope.
EQ sandbox? Um, EQ is a themepark. An older themepark...not so much on complete rails as modern themeparks...but it is still a themepark.
Shadowbane and DAoC were not very similar. Shadowbane definitely was not a FPS type game in the least.
Well, the MMMORPG/FPS discussion aside...
...I'm pretty sure that folks would enjoy the EQ-Shadowbane-DAoC hybrid if somebody were actually to try to make one.
Nobody has actually tried to make one. 7 years? MMORPGs have been out for 15+ years.
I do not quite follow your post.
First of all, I know MMO's have been out since Ultima Online,, which was 15 years.. What I meant to say was, there hasn't been a revolutionary MMORPG since the release of WoW,, which was 7 years ago... UO revolutionized the MMO genre, followed by Everquest, followed by DAOC, followed by WoW... You could throw in Asheron's Call and Shadowbane if you like, but I don't really consider them as the top 3-4 of all time...
Also, I was comparing different MMO styles of game mechanics with EQ and Shadowbane.. Both were very different in their own right.. Then DAOC basically combined both PVE, lore, and story with a nice and awesome RVR PVP experience..
We haven't seen this done in years.. Since 2004, DEV's have failed miserably at trying to combine MMO and FPS game mechanics in hopes of pleasing both types of gamers to make WoW type money.. Not only that, they tried to duplicate the features that made WoW so successful.. The only problem is, Blizzard combined the features and mechanics of the D&Dish Everquest, UO, and DAOC,, along with adding their own flavoring..
Since then, many MMO's have come and gone, and none of them are nearly as popular and successful as the top 4 I listed above.. They are mostly all fast paced themepark rides and nothing more...
Oh, stating EQ was a themepark and not a sandbox is completely absurd, lol.. That statement alone obviously shows you never played from pre Luclin era...
Rallithon Oakthornn (Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)
First of all, I know MMO's have been out since Ultima Online,, which was 15 years.. What I meant to say was, there hasn't been a revolutionary MMORPG since the release of WoW,, which was 7 years ago... UO revolutionized the MMO genre, followed by Everquest, followed by DAOC, followed by WoW... You could throw in Asheron's Call and Shadowbane if you like, but I don't really consider them as the top 3-4 of all time...
Also, I was comparing different MMO styles of game mechanics with EQ and Shadowbane.. Both were very different in their own right.. Then DAOC basically combined both PVE, lore, and story with a nice and awesome RVR PVP experience..
We haven't seen this done in years.. Since 2004, DEV's have failed miserably at trying to combine MMO and FPS game mechanics in hopes of pleasing both types of gamers to make WoW type money.. Not only that, they tried to duplicate the features that made WoW so successful.. The only problem is, Blizzard combined the features and mechanics of the D&Dish Everquest, UO, and DAOC,, along with adding their own flavoring..
Since then, many MMO's have come and gone, and none of them are nearly as popular and successful as the top 4 I listed above.. They are mostly all fast paced themepark rides and nothing more...
Oh, stating EQ was a themepark and not a sandbox is completely absurd, lol.. That statement alone obviously shows you never played from pre Luclin era...
I would not include DAoC in the top 3-4. DAoC is a very subjective game. There are many diehard DAoC fans that show up in almost every forum for any game (or subforum on general boards) talking about they wished that the game was like DAoC. I hated DAoC, personally, and I never saw what others did in it.
We had UO, EQ, and AC.
We had AO, DAoC, EnB, SB, EVE, SWG, and CoH.
We had WoW - a game that within a couple of months had already surpassed EQ's best numbers.
And since then...lol...we've had six years or so of bitching about the genre...heh.
With WoW, the genre changed. The playerbase changed - the very market for the genre changed. What the market wanted changed.
Hell, I still want a new UO. I was never fond of EQ. I'd like a new AC. I'd like an engine update for AO. I hated DAoC, so I'll pass there. I'd want a new EnB. I'd defintely want a new pre-ToO SB. With EVE, I want the old EVE...lol. I'd want a new pre-NGE SWG. I'd want an engine update for CoH. Hell, I'd even want another Vanilla WoW...not what happened with BC and later.
But that's just me. I'm one. There might be others out there. There are not millions upon millions of us though. Even if there were, you'd have to divy up those folks by their favorites - so you'd still not have the numbers of a game like WoW.
So companies try to make WoW... it's pretty obvious how that has worked out since the launch of WoW.
By the way, in regard to EQ themepark/sandbox. Shadows of Luclin was the last EQ xpac that I bought. I was heavy into the AO at the time, but I decided to give EQ another look. I went back to AO...
There is just as much opportunity to socialize in Rift as there was in Ultima Online. Ditto for World of Warcraft. People choose not to...or they choose to limit the people they interact with. Returning mechanics from UO to newer games would not make people more social. It's not just mmorpg that have changed, it's the audience. The current crop of mmorpg players do not play mmorpg for to socialize, they play them to play the game and being social takes a back seat. Give them a choice between talking to someone to buy something and buying off the auction house and they'll buy something off the auction house. Remove the option to buy off the auction house and they'll not be happy. They may actually play another game with the option to buy something off the auction house (which is kind of what's happened to the mmorpg scene).
I think it's partly true that the majority of current players are anti-social because they choose to be. I think that was always true. I think the reason the games as a whole started to feel anti-social is all the socializers stopped playing because the games have become less and less suited to what they want.
I think games need to step back to the Bartle formula for a moment and as an exercise imagine the extreme cases of players who are 100% socializers or 100% explorers or 100% achievers or 100% killers and then imagine what they might want as a bare minimum.
What do socializers want as a bare minimum? They want lots of people in one place to socialize with. "One place" in this context means in terms of communication. It could be one zone in a game or the whole of facebook, same thing.
Ergo, socializers need social hubs and the games aren't designed around permanent hubs. They're designed around a string of linear temporary hubs which people pass through. As there are no physical social hubs the only places where a lot of people are in place (in communication terms) is guild chat, which is where you find all the little pockets of socializers who would much rather be sitting in a city social hub with lots of city chatter *and* have the guild chat on top.
I don't think the old games were designed around social hubs either but the older games were designed more chaotically so sometimes it happened by accident. The newer games have got the linear achiever-targeted game honed to tha point where they actively discourage socializing.
The best example of a social hub i've seen in the games i've played was Kelethin in EQ. (The Shire in Lotro is another and for the same reaons but only in the early days of a server before players move on).
The reasons were (imo)
- city was physically part of the newbie/lowbie zone (levels 1-12 ish)
- city had an adjacent higher zone which increased the level range of players based in the zone up to c. level 24 ish
- city was the crafting centre and crafting wasn't instanced
- city was a crossroads so had players travelling through
- city had the standard neccessary facitities like banks for higher level players
This list created the conditions to get a lot of players in one place and an excuse for socializers to hang out.
If games took the Kelethin/Shire idea and expanded it so the game's zones were designed as circles around the starter cities rather than linear then you could maximize that effect e.g. starter city in newbie/lowbie zone for levels 1-12 with three adjacent zones west, north and east all of which have a base of 13-24 level mobs with sections of the zone or dungeons with level 25-36 and level 37-48 mobs. This sort of design would lead to most of the game's players constantly coming and going at the hubs.
Apart from the socializing effect another thing this design would do is make the newbie areas less deserted on old servers. There might not be many newbies but if there's a constant stream of high levels a new player wouldn't feel like the game was deserted.
Apart from the main basic design flaw (imo) i also think linear solo quest-grinding makes players OCD and untalkative. Firebreaks between quest-sets for mob-grinding would fix that.
Also, minimaps and quest helpers reduce newbies asking stupid questions for socializers to answer. If a game has to have them i'd switch them off till level 12, or in the starter zone, specifically to get newbies asking questions.
Also, make sure players aren't competing when they shouldn't be e.g on kill ten boars quests make the area like a very basic PQ where any player killing a boar in that area counts for any player in that area with the quest. You don't want other players to be the enemy except where it's part of the game.
What MMORPGs are you playing?
WOW -> uber social hubs (one per faction)
RIFT -> uber social hubs (one per faction)
Social hubs are already solved. If these games are perceived as having poor social interactions, it's definitely not for that reason.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Social hubs are already solved. If these games are perceived as having poor social interactions, it's definitely not for that reason.
What you call a social hub, some call a game lobby.
People standing around Stormwind, Orgrimmar, Meridian, or Sanctum... while sitting in a queue for instanced PvE or PvP . . .
. . . well, I would not call them social hubs. More like - waiting rooms?
They're standing in line waiting to go on the rides.
Exactly. I'm not a socializer type myself so i can only guess what they want but i did tend to duo with players like that a lot in EQ and they seem to have disappeared except a few in guilds. Kelethin in EQ (and the shire for a while on a new server) were the places i saw more players like that than anywhere else so i'm guessing the design of those zones is somehow the reason.
Social hubs are already solved. If these games are perceived as having poor social interactions, it's definitely not for that reason.
What you call a social hub, some call a game lobby.
People standing around Stormwind, Orgrimmar, Meridian, or Sanctum... while sitting in a queue for instanced PvE or PvP . . .
. . . well, I would not call them social hubs. More like - waiting rooms?
They're standing in line waiting to go on the rides.
Exactly. I'm not a socializer type myself so i can only guess what they want but i did tend to duo with players like that a lot in EQ and they seem to have disappeared except a few in guilds. Kelethin in EQ (and the shire for a while on a new server) were the places i saw more players like that than anywhere else so i'm guessing the design of those zones is somehow the reason.
They are safe areas, generally speaking, on most servers. You cannot be attacked unless you set the flag yourself. They tend to mark you as "rested" - meaning that you'll increase your XP gain. Banks, vendors, auction houses, trainers, etc - yep, all the services are located there. They're the perfect place to queue.
Take out any LFG tools (dungeon/PvP) - and - they very well could become social hubs.
Social hubs are already solved. If these games are perceived as having poor social interactions, it's definitely not for that reason.
What you call a social hub, some call a game lobby.
People standing around Stormwind, Orgrimmar, Meridian, or Sanctum... while sitting in a queue for instanced PvE or PvP . . .
. . . well, I would not call them social hubs. More like - waiting rooms?
They're standing in line waiting to go on the rides.
So you're going to tell me that in every other aspect of human life, people being forced to wait in a centralized location causes them to socialize, but not in WOW.
Or that I didn't see 5 fiery-phoenix-mounted players just waltzing around in Orgrimmar last night while they chatted, and all-chatted, and probably guild-chatted with their friends...
Or that during my friend-forced stint on an RP server I didn't see at least one example of RPing literally every time I walked through town... (usually more)
Socialization happens. A lot. In WOW and RIFT's social hubs.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I believe some of you are getting bored about those look-like-the-same games and the cliche they'd added...hence I've been searching for games with revolutionary elements such as Blade & Soul or Core Blaze. I think they overthrew the traditional thought of a online game for the following reasons:
Blade & Soul:
When you think of this game, what comes into your mind first? Despite its beautiful artworks (yeah I love it!), I bet you are impressive about the "freedom", including the fluent movement and the sky-walk system(WHOA!). In case anyone of you hasn't seen the video before, check it out here:
Core Blaze:
I was wondering if anyone of you ever heard of this game? This game is not released yet but their fans keep asking for the release date. I've watched their producer interview video() and found out that they put the emphasis on freedom as well, and some of their thoughts impressed me:
1. no weapon binding: you can use any weapon they got on one character according to different situation (something like Monster Hunter)
2. no class: since you can use different kinds of weapon, it decides the role you play
3. no levels: they want to pull ppl out from the hell of leveling
4.open world: this means a lot to me - it combines the world of online game and console game, let players feel like the adventure happens in the real life (finally, I don't have to host a game and wait for other ppl)
If you are interested in this game, I think their fan page is a better place than the official site:
What do you think is the key to a revolutionary MMORPG?
Neither of those games are. When will people understand that Eastern or Asian inspired MMO's will never be mainstream in the west?
Now for me I must say that GW2 is adding in a whole slew of revolutionary MMO ideas in 1 packet. It does not have every thing I want in an MMO but it has alot and in no one shape or form is it a clone of WoW unlike every single AAA western game released or soon to be released in the last 4-5 years.
I think once GW2's main ideas are taken as truely groundbreaking and another company (holding out hope for Curt Shilling and 38 studios's Reckoning's MMO based off their soon to be released single RPG) will take their ball and apply that to a sandbox world. Dynamic Content, Engaging and varied content with wonderous exploration is the future.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
A) So you're going to tell me that in every other aspect of human life, people being forced to wait in a centralized location causes them to socialize, but not in WOW.
Or that I didn't see 5 fiery-phoenix-mounted players just waltzing around in Orgrimmar while they chatted, and all-chatted, and probably guild-chatted with their friends...
C) Or that during my friend-forced stint on an RP server I didn't see at least one example of RPing literally every time I walked through town... (usually more)
D) Socialization happens. A lot. In WOW and RIFT's social hubs.
A) I did not say that in the least. In fact, I'd say that WoW mirrors real life pretty well in that manner. You can put together a larger group of people waiting - what will you see?
Reading an ebook
Surfing the web
Texting a friend not there
Talking on the phone
Earbuds in listening to music
Earbuds in listening to music while reading an ebook
Earbuds in listening to music while surfing the web
Earbuds in listening to music while texting a friend not there
Earbuds in watching a movie
Perhaps a couple talking amongst themselves
Small group of friends talking amongst themselves
You see a large group of people...isolated from others in the group. That's not social.
A group of five people walking around town, talking to each other, or talking in guild to folks that were not there. It's an isolated group of people amidst a large group of people. That's not social.
C) RP is an activity. They're playing. They're not being social. Even there, you're still going to see those isolated groups. That's not social.
D) Obviously your definition of a social hubl and mine do not match in the least.
Imagine being in the crowds at a football game. People are there for the game. They're likely to talk to the folks around them, whether they know them or not, about the game they're all watching. They're there for the game and they're being social.
So now imagine a game, where instead of people being off in their own worlds and ignoring the players around them - they see people doing the same thing, they talk about it, they do it together... they're being social.
It has been called "forced social" at times.
Imagine if there were no guild chat channels? Imagine if there were no zone chat channels? No trade? No etc, etc, etc, etc.
Imagine if people actually had to interact with the people around them...
Communities are what makes mmo great. Since devs have gone the way of solo play in a mmo , mmos are no longer fun. You might well just play single player rpgs instead.
Communities are what makes mmo great. Since devs have gone the way of solo play in a mmo , mmos are no longer fun. You might well just play single player rpgs instead.
For many people, they play MMORPGs as single-player games. They enjoy the persistent world. They enjoy getting more bang for their buck. There are entirely too many single-player games that you can finish in a weekend. $50-60 gone for a weekend of play. That covers 3-4 months of a subscription. If you're buying two games a month, you're looking at 6-8 months. Buy that third game, and you've covered a year's worth of subscriptions for your PORPG - persistent online RPG, single-player.
A) So you're going to tell me that in every other aspect of human life, people being forced to wait in a centralized location causes them to socialize, but not in WOW.
Or that I didn't see 5 fiery-phoenix-mounted players just waltzing around in Orgrimmar while they chatted, and all-chatted, and probably guild-chatted with their friends...
C) Or that during my friend-forced stint on an RP server I didn't see at least one example of RPing literally every time I walked through town... (usually more)
D) Socialization happens. A lot. In WOW and RIFT's social hubs.
A) I did not say that in the least. In fact, I'd say that WoW mirrors real life pretty well in that manner. You can put together a larger group of people waiting - what will you see?
Reading an ebook
Surfing the web
Texting a friend not there
Talking on the phone
Earbuds in listening to music
Earbuds in listening to music while reading an ebook
Earbuds in listening to music while surfing the web
Earbuds in listening to music while texting a friend not there
Earbuds in watching a movie
Perhaps a couple talking amongst themselves
Small group of friends talking amongst themselves
You see a large group of people...isolated from others in the group. That's not social.
A group of five people walking around town, talking to each other, or talking in guild to folks that were not there. It's an isolated group of people amidst a large group of people. That's not social.
C) RP is an activity. They're playing. They're not being social. Even there, you're still going to see those isolated groups. That's not social.
D) Obviously your definition of a social hubl and mine do not match in the least.
Um...so if groups of friends hanging out chatting and goofing around isn't social...what is?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I hope Curt Schilling's "project Copernicus" will cater to the old school EQ vets.. Since Curt loved EQ, I imagine he along with Salvatore and company will try to make that game as challenging, and rewarding as possible.. They won't listen to the gamers who want to reach end game within a week or a month.. Hopefully they'll have their own vision and stick to it, no matter what..
It's truly the last MMORPG I actually have high hopes for.. Let all the flamers, whiners, and haters say what they will about the game.. I hope to see Curt create the one true EQ Next with their own original revolutionary ideas that will help make this game legendary.. Then hopefully we'll see the MMORPG genre switch back to where it was pre WoW Era...
Rallithon Oakthornn (Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)
Comments
GW2 is going the right way. They're adding new twists to old classic ideas. It's like anything in life, it's always the person or organization that improves something that already exists that wins. Like Youtube, or the Japanese and Germans with cars. Someone provides the base idea/invention, then someone else makes it work. In the case of MMO's, I think the foundation has been laid, and GW2 is going to make it work.
I don't lke FPS because all you do is shoot stuff, I enjoy sitting around AH buying and selling, sitting at a tavern and chatting with other adventurer's
Its hard to get a specific answer. However I like to feel like a hero which themeparks offer, and I like freedom which sand boxes offer. I also like to feel like I have an impact on the environment from my actions and have some player created content in the mix as well.
To have all this, I think the right mix is a bit of themepark, and a lot of sand box. It would be two genres in one, and the combat can also be a two in one style. By trying to offer a cookie cutter style combat but also a bit of fps style at the same time. However the combat would be more cookie cutter than fps for my own personal tastes.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Seems everyone has different definition of the key element of revolutionary MMORPG...
it only points out one thing - there is never a single MMORPG satisfies everyone's need! From my point of view, since I love both MMORPG and Action game, at least I will give Core Blaze a shot, to see if it meets my need
Self-evident. I would hate some games that other players seem to get worked up about.
On the other hand, it's mostly about knowing what type of things you most enjoy doing, and not being afraid to "waste money" if you make the wrong choice. We've got some regulars here who seem to hate nearly everything, for whom no game is ever good enough.
But going clear back to the late 70's, I have yet to encounter a single game that was perfect in every way, by my standards. Day-um, there have been some terrific games that I would have rejected before trying, if I was seeking the Holy Grail of gaming perfection before risking a buck.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
We've come a long way though... open betas, demos, and trials. Generally speaking, the fool and his money being soon parted definitely applies to many games...where he/she does not partake of such.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Well lets see...The skill effects are like a light show at a rave party. Too many pets in the game. The camera control is restrictive. Still has target lock.
~see where I'm going with this?~
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Indeed, in my mind revolutionary means getting bigger, more players. And lets face it that what it usually means. TV, computers, internet they all revolutionized our world because they got big. World of Warcraft got us 10 million, Facebook has hundreds of millions people. Can MMO ever be that big, yes I hope.
First of all, I know MMO's have been out since Ultima Online,, which was 15 years.. What I meant to say was, there hasn't been a revolutionary MMORPG since the release of WoW,, which was 7 years ago... UO revolutionized the MMO genre, followed by Everquest, followed by DAOC, followed by WoW... You could throw in Asheron's Call and Shadowbane if you like, but I don't really consider them as the top 3-4 of all time...
Also, I was comparing different MMO styles of game mechanics with EQ and Shadowbane.. Both were very different in their own right.. Then DAOC basically combined both PVE, lore, and story with a nice and awesome RVR PVP experience..
We haven't seen this done in years.. Since 2004, DEV's have failed miserably at trying to combine MMO and FPS game mechanics in hopes of pleasing both types of gamers to make WoW type money.. Not only that, they tried to duplicate the features that made WoW so successful.. The only problem is, Blizzard combined the features and mechanics of the D&Dish Everquest, UO, and DAOC,, along with adding their own flavoring..
Since then, many MMO's have come and gone, and none of them are nearly as popular and successful as the top 4 I listed above.. They are mostly all fast paced themepark rides and nothing more...
Oh, stating EQ was a themepark and not a sandbox is completely absurd, lol.. That statement alone obviously shows you never played from pre Luclin era...
Rallithon Oakthornn
(Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)
I would not include DAoC in the top 3-4. DAoC is a very subjective game. There are many diehard DAoC fans that show up in almost every forum for any game (or subforum on general boards) talking about they wished that the game was like DAoC. I hated DAoC, personally, and I never saw what others did in it.
We had UO, EQ, and AC.
We had AO, DAoC, EnB, SB, EVE, SWG, and CoH.
We had WoW - a game that within a couple of months had already surpassed EQ's best numbers.
And since then...lol...we've had six years or so of bitching about the genre...heh.
With WoW, the genre changed. The playerbase changed - the very market for the genre changed. What the market wanted changed.
Hell, I still want a new UO. I was never fond of EQ. I'd like a new AC. I'd like an engine update for AO. I hated DAoC, so I'll pass there. I'd want a new EnB. I'd defintely want a new pre-ToO SB. With EVE, I want the old EVE...lol. I'd want a new pre-NGE SWG. I'd want an engine update for CoH. Hell, I'd even want another Vanilla WoW...not what happened with BC and later.
But that's just me. I'm one. There might be others out there. There are not millions upon millions of us though. Even if there were, you'd have to divy up those folks by their favorites - so you'd still not have the numbers of a game like WoW.
So companies try to make WoW... it's pretty obvious how that has worked out since the launch of WoW.
By the way, in regard to EQ themepark/sandbox. Shadows of Luclin was the last EQ xpac that I bought. I was heavy into the AO at the time, but I decided to give EQ another look. I went back to AO...
What MMORPGs are you playing?
WOW -> uber social hubs (one per faction)
RIFT -> uber social hubs (one per faction)
Social hubs are already solved. If these games are perceived as having poor social interactions, it's definitely not for that reason.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
What you call a social hub, some call a game lobby.
People standing around Stormwind, Orgrimmar, Meridian, or Sanctum... while sitting in a queue for instanced PvE or PvP . . .
. . . well, I would not call them social hubs. More like - waiting rooms?
They're standing in line waiting to go on the rides.
Exactly. I'm not a socializer type myself so i can only guess what they want but i did tend to duo with players like that a lot in EQ and they seem to have disappeared except a few in guilds. Kelethin in EQ (and the shire for a while on a new server) were the places i saw more players like that than anywhere else so i'm guessing the design of those zones is somehow the reason.
They are safe areas, generally speaking, on most servers. You cannot be attacked unless you set the flag yourself. They tend to mark you as "rested" - meaning that you'll increase your XP gain. Banks, vendors, auction houses, trainers, etc - yep, all the services are located there. They're the perfect place to queue.
Take out any LFG tools (dungeon/PvP) - and - they very well could become social hubs.
So you're going to tell me that in every other aspect of human life, people being forced to wait in a centralized location causes them to socialize, but not in WOW.
Or that I didn't see 5 fiery-phoenix-mounted players just waltzing around in Orgrimmar last night while they chatted, and all-chatted, and probably guild-chatted with their friends...
Or that during my friend-forced stint on an RP server I didn't see at least one example of RPing literally every time I walked through town... (usually more)
Socialization happens. A lot. In WOW and RIFT's social hubs.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Neither of those games are. When will people understand that Eastern or Asian inspired MMO's will never be mainstream in the west?
Now for me I must say that GW2 is adding in a whole slew of revolutionary MMO ideas in 1 packet. It does not have every thing I want in an MMO but it has alot and in no one shape or form is it a clone of WoW unlike every single AAA western game released or soon to be released in the last 4-5 years.
I think once GW2's main ideas are taken as truely groundbreaking and another company (holding out hope for Curt Shilling and 38 studios's Reckoning's MMO based off their soon to be released single RPG) will take their ball and apply that to a sandbox world. Dynamic Content, Engaging and varied content with wonderous exploration is the future.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
A) I did not say that in the least. In fact, I'd say that WoW mirrors real life pretty well in that manner. You can put together a larger group of people waiting - what will you see?
Reading an ebook
Surfing the web
Texting a friend not there
Talking on the phone
Earbuds in listening to music
Earbuds in listening to music while reading an ebook
Earbuds in listening to music while surfing the web
Earbuds in listening to music while texting a friend not there
Earbuds in watching a movie
Perhaps a couple talking amongst themselves
Small group of friends talking amongst themselves
You see a large group of people...isolated from others in the group. That's not social.
C) RP is an activity. They're playing. They're not being social. Even there, you're still going to see those isolated groups. That's not social.
D) Obviously your definition of a social hubl and mine do not match in the least.
Imagine being in the crowds at a football game. People are there for the game. They're likely to talk to the folks around them, whether they know them or not, about the game they're all watching. They're there for the game and they're being social.
So now imagine a game, where instead of people being off in their own worlds and ignoring the players around them - they see people doing the same thing, they talk about it, they do it together... they're being social.
It has been called "forced social" at times.
Imagine if there were no guild chat channels? Imagine if there were no zone chat channels? No trade? No etc, etc, etc, etc.
Imagine if people actually had to interact with the people around them...
...some people hate the thought of that.
Communities are what makes mmo great. Since devs have gone the way of solo play in a mmo , mmos are no longer fun. You might well just play single player rpgs instead.
For many people, they play MMORPGs as single-player games. They enjoy the persistent world. They enjoy getting more bang for their buck. There are entirely too many single-player games that you can finish in a weekend. $50-60 gone for a weekend of play. That covers 3-4 months of a subscription. If you're buying two games a month, you're looking at 6-8 months. Buy that third game, and you've covered a year's worth of subscriptions for your PORPG - persistent online RPG, single-player.
Um...so if groups of friends hanging out chatting and goofing around isn't social...what is?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
We're talking about MMORPGs. What social would be in a MMORPG.
What is social in a game lobby game...is not the same as what is social in a non-game lobby game.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
So MMORPG socializing is different from Real Life socializing?
I hope Curt Schilling's "project Copernicus" will cater to the old school EQ vets.. Since Curt loved EQ, I imagine he along with Salvatore and company will try to make that game as challenging, and rewarding as possible.. They won't listen to the gamers who want to reach end game within a week or a month.. Hopefully they'll have their own vision and stick to it, no matter what..
It's truly the last MMORPG I actually have high hopes for.. Let all the flamers, whiners, and haters say what they will about the game.. I hope to see Curt create the one true EQ Next with their own original revolutionary ideas that will help make this game legendary.. Then hopefully we'll see the MMORPG genre switch back to where it was pre WoW Era...
Rallithon Oakthornn
(Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)
Is walking to work different than driving to work? Yes.
Both are forms of getting to work, but they are different.
MMORPG socializing and real life socializing are both forms of socialization - but they are different forms.
Do you socialize with your significant other the same way you do with an acquaintance at work?
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%