Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Why did the best mmorpg never....

filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
My biggest problem with WOW is the things they never put in the game.  

1.  First thing and probably the most widely accepted is player housing.  
2.  The second thing is the vast ocean they are doing nothing with.  They could have easily turned it into something akin to Archeage with ships, sailing, fishing, ect ect...  
3.  The next thing is WVW.  They could have made a nice map just like GW2 and ESO did but they just never did.  
4.  Then the world events all over the world like GW2, DCUO, Rift we never saw this either.

I could never figure out why they never did these things.  Or maybe they did and I missed it.
Are you onto something or just on something?
«1

Comments

  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 6,912
    All the content and every feature added takes time.

    WoW is the best MMO because they spend that time polishing things instead of constantly adding more.
     
  • VutarVutar Member UncommonPosts: 931
    Vrika said:
    All the content and every feature added takes time.

    WoW is the best MMO because they spend that time polishing things instead of constantly adding more.

    I'd say the spend most of their time figuring out how to make the game and classes less fun to play. Then they package everything they are removing together and charge players for it.
  • Kane72Kane72 Member UncommonPosts: 211
    edited July 2016
    Vrika said:
    All the content and every feature added takes time.

    WoW is the best MMO because they spend that time polishing things instead of constantly adding more.
    They actually spend their time making items to sell in the shop - what they spend precious little time in is new content and features. They need nearly 2 years worth of subs to make zero content and when the do, you pay for it on the form of an expansion.

    The reason Blizzard add little to the game unless you pay directly for it is because it went from being someone's vision to a company's big fat monthly pay packet every month.

    It was very easy to see when they lost genuine interest in the game and now see it as 100% cash cow.
  • XiaokiXiaoki Member RarePosts: 3,358
    Blizzard has said a dozen times over the years that they do not like personal housing.

    They said they didnt want people to be spending all their time alone in their house and not out in the world with all of the other players.

    They made the Garrisons as a way to do personal housing but in a Warcraft-like army base way.


    They never did a big PvP map like GW2 or ESO? You mean like Lake Wintergrasp?


  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    Lake Wintergrasp?  Thats more like what Rift does in their instanced conquest battle.  Good to know WOW has this but why I wonder is this the first time I have ever heard of it?
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • heerobyaheerobya Member UncommonPosts: 465
    The first 3 would not work in WoW, the 4th they are kind of doing this next expansion with world quests, or something like that?

    WoW focuses on the things it's players like to do. They've added tons of new features over the years. 
  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 5,164
    edited July 2016
    Even at their highest point, they were never about giving MORE to the player. No special GM run events or anything that would have shown where all that extra money was going.  They just took your money and kept doing what they always planned, nothing more.   But the sheeple kept subbing so they had no incentive I guess.

    Player housing has more negatives than positives.  The garrisons alone showed many of them.

    The Blizzard that has made WOW is not dedicated to the players.  They are dedicated to maintaining the status quo and lining their pockets.  It's a fun game, but they never took it to the next level when it comes to events and WvW.  They totally destroyed the epicness that was Alterac Valley as well.  Although they never balanced the bases on that damn map.

    Server versus Server could have been amazing.

  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    heerobya said:
    WoW focuses on the things it's players like to do. They've added tons of new features over the years. 
    Can't believe you just said that.  Considering they had the resources and ability to have over 20 million players right now.  Probably too late though.
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • holdenhamletholdenhamlet Member EpicPosts: 3,766
    Blizzard's motto often is "If it isn't broke, don't fix it".  You can see this in Hearthstone with how infrequently they modify cards.

    Adding new features means adding new potential problems.  I'm sure they also notice that anything new they do add is generally not well-received, most recently garrisons.

    Besides, people have been playing this game for 12 years now.  At this point, nobody playing the game is doing it looking for something different.  They are looking for the game to be the same as it always was.  That's the appeal.
  • heerobyaheerobya Member UncommonPosts: 465
    filmoret said:
    heerobya said:
    WoW focuses on the things it's players like to do. They've added tons of new features over the years. 
    Can't believe you just said that.  Considering they had the resources and ability to have over 20 million players right now.  Probably too late though.
    I'll quote holdenhamlet to answer you:

    "Blizzard's motto often is "If it isn't broke, don't fix it".  You can see this in Hearthstone with how infrequently they modify cards.

    Adding new features means adding new potential problems.  I'm sure they also notice that anything new they do add is generally not well-received, most recently garrisons.

    Besides, people have been playing this game for 12 years now.  At this point, nobody playing the game is doing it looking for something different.  They are looking for the game to be the same as it always was.  That's the appeal."

    Blizzard is smarter than your average game developer. Hence every title they release sells millions and become an instant classic, literally defining the genre it's in.

    MMO, RTS, ARPG, DCG, and now FPS.

    They know you don't just add "stuff" and you don't just blindly create everything your players want. Their biggest flaw is that they are SO concerned for quality they certainly don't pump out new content or games quickly.

    But what they do deliver is always worth waiting for.

    And yes, they have added a LOT to WoW over the 12+ years it's been around. I've been playing off and on (mostly on I'm sure) for the entire time.

    Sure, they've added a few things that gave me pause... things like pet battles and a selfie camera - I thought, really?

    But the pet battles turned out to be very popular, and they're completely optional.

    I never did the quest for the selfie camera. No thanks!

    Garrisons?

    Garrisons were a great idea I think, to give players a Warcraft style "housing" system - your own base ala the RTS games. 

    Problem is/was it just didn't fit into the game very well. I think they knew that. I think they went in knowing that - knowing that it would define an entire expansion cycle, for better or for worse.

    I think Legion proves they are back on the right track. 
  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    So how low does the subscriptions need to be in order for them to realize its broken?
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • GhavriggGhavrigg Member RarePosts: 1,308
    edited July 2016
    Because Blizzard knows their playerbase, and they're not setting out to NGE into a pseudo-sandbox with shit zerg-fest large scale WvW.
  • DaikuruDaikuru Member RarePosts: 797
    filmoret said:
    My biggest problem with WOW is the things they never put in the game.  

    1.  First thing and probably the most widely accepted is player housing.  
    2.  The second thing is the vast ocean they are doing nothing with.  They could have easily turned it into something akin to Archeage with ships, sailing, fishing, ect ect...  
    3.  The next thing is WVW.  They could have made a nice map just like GW2 and ESO did but they just never did.  
    4.  Then the world events all over the world like GW2, DCUO, Rift we never saw this either.

    I could never figure out why they never did these things.  Or maybe they did and I missed it.
    Blizzard always trys to make maximum money with so ittle effort as possible.

    I guess to add things like sailing ect, would require an open seamless world which WoW just dont have.

    But other things like housing, WvW, world events would be no problem.

    Maybe such a game would be the "WoW-Killer"? 

    A game with a seamless open world, sailing  fishing, naval combat, air combat, housing, world events, WvW, subscription, no p2w, meaningful crafting, trading.

    Someone should do it. :D
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    - Albert Einstein


  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,886
    Daikuru said:

    A game with a seamless open world, sailing  fishing, naval combat, air combat, housing, world events, WvW, subscription, no p2w, meaningful crafting, trading.

    Black Desert Online.
    Naval combat is coming, air combat not yet, but everything else is there.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 10700k (5.10ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z490 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • TaiphozTaiphoz Member UncommonPosts: 347
    Xiaoki said:
    Blizzard has said a dozen times over the years that they do not like personal housing.

    They said they didnt want people to be spending all their time alone in their house and not out in the world with all of the other players.

    They made the Garrisons as a way to do personal housing but in a Warcraft-like army base way.


    They never did a big PvP map like GW2 or ESO? You mean like Lake Wintergrasp?


    this just made me piss my pants laughing so hard right now..

    Blizzard actually said they did'nt want to just do player housing they wanted to do it right, there used to be an area in old Stormwind where this housing area was going to go, instead what they actually did was do it all wrong with garrisons and they actually did exactly what you said they didnt want, they gave players a place only they could see and spent most of their time in, GG Blizz...!!

    Note good player housing like Archeage would have easily been possible in WoW with little town districts set aside in each of the zones the game world is more than big enough to fit, AA player housing is how all mmo's should takle this, open world and not instanced or phased.

    As for big PVP map's they did actually, it was called Winter graps, later it was called Zangar marsh and the savana place to the south I forget its name, and then the panda's the zone on the south of the map all a full zone all about PVP, the fact that blizzard time and time again fails to hit the world pvp nail with its huge planet sized hammer is their own damn fault.

    Above are just some of the reasons I no longer play. :/
  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,630
    filmoret said:
    My biggest problem with WOW is the things they never put in the game.  

    1.  First thing and probably the most widely accepted is player housing.  

    Draenor garrisons are a lot like player housing. You can build your own little town. 

    2.  The second thing is the vast ocean they are doing nothing with.  They could have easily turned it into something akin to Archeage with ships, sailing, fishing, ect ect...  

    Cataclism expansion has more water than you could ever want.

    3.  The next thing is WVW.  They could have made a nice map just like GW2 and ESO did but they just never did.  

    This is not really in, but there are large zone wide battlegrounds. 

    4.  Then the world events all over the world like GW2, DCUO, Rift we never saw this either.

    Those are coming in a week or so for Legion pre-patch. 

    I could never figure out why they never did these things.  Or maybe they did and I missed it.

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • simsalabim77simsalabim77 Member RarePosts: 1,607
    filmoret said:
    My biggest problem with WOW is the things they never put in the game.  

    1.  First thing and probably the most widely accepted is player housing.  
    2.  The second thing is the vast ocean they are doing nothing with.  They could have easily turned it into something akin to Archeage with ships, sailing, fishing, ect ect...  
    3.  The next thing is WVW.  They could have made a nice map just like GW2 and ESO did but they just never did.  
    4.  Then the world events all over the world like GW2, DCUO, Rift we never saw this either.

    I could never figure out why they never did these things.  Or maybe they did and I missed it.
    They've repteatedly said they do not like personal housing. They've experimented with the idea with farms, then garrisons, and now class halls. 

    The also toyed with water zones via Vashj'ir. Not too many people liked it, in my experience. Thousand Needles gives you your own boat to sail around on. I agree they should put more islands and explorable areas in the ocean. 

    They've made entire zones with PVE and PVP objectives. Not to the scale of GW2, but they exist. 

    No MMO that has ever existed or will ever exist can cover all the bases. 
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,886
    edited July 2016
    Taiphoz said:

    Note good player housing like Archeage would have easily been possible in WoW with little town districts set aside in each of the zones the game world is more than big enough to fit, AA player housing is how all mmo's should takle this, open world and not instanced or phased.

    Archeage, good player housing? You got to be kidding us, right?

    Housing was so well designed that if you weren't among the no lifers able to rush and play all day on launch day, you were screwed, and you couldn't even find a small garden to own because nothing was left! And we know how important owning some terrain is in AA, for crafting. Pretty much why I asked and got a refund after launch even though I loved the game during beta when the population was limited.

    Open world housing always had availability problems and/or negatively affected the game world.

    In AC1, which had OW housing, you had the same problem than in AA, the haves and the have not, that was so bad they patched in zoned (instanced) appartment areas so everybody could finally own a house.

    In UO, the world turned from a wild, open world into an ugly urban sprawl with houses placed everywhere, and you also had availability problems when all the terrains were taken.

    Yeah, superb design indeed.

    Housing can be part of the world and still be instanced. Like e.g. in Black Desert. This avoids the urban sprawl problem as well as the lack of availability for those who join later, while still having the houses part of the world and keeping the cities busy, alive and full of players. That's MUCH better design than the terrible badly planned mess that was AA.

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 10700k (5.10ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z490 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • DaikuruDaikuru Member RarePosts: 797
    Taiphoz said:

    Note good player housing like Archeage would have easily been possible in WoW with little town districts set aside in each of the zones the game world is more than big enough to fit, AA player housing is how all mmo's should takle this, open world and not instanced or phased.

    Archeage, good player housing? You got to be kidding us, right?

    Housing was so well designed that if you weren't among the no lifers able to rush and play all day on launch day, you were screwed, and you couldn't even find a small garden to own because nothing was left! And we know how important owning some terrain is in AA, for crafting. Pretty much why I asked and got a refund after launch even though I loved the game during beta when the population was limited.

    Open world housing always had availability problems and/or negatively affected the game world.

    In AC1, which had OW housing, you had the same problem than in AA, the haves and the have not, that was so bad they patched in zoned (instanced) appartment areas so everybody could finally own a house.

    In UO, the world turned from a wild, open world into an ugly urban sprawl with houses placed everywhere, and you also had availability problems when all the terrains were taken.

    Yeah, superb design indeed.

    Housing can be part of the world and still be instanced. Like e.g. in Black Desert. This avoids the urban sprawl problem as well as the lack of availability for those who join later, while still having the houses part of the world and keeping the cities busy, alive and full of players. That's MUCH better design than the terrible badly planned mess that was AA.

    Housing in AA wasnt perfect, but it showed how it could work, the only problem was the limited space. I prefer OW housing rather than instanced housing, maybe not everywhere, but in many parts of the world.
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    - Albert Einstein


  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    Daikuru said:
    Taiphoz said:

    Note good player housing like Archeage would have easily been possible in WoW with little town districts set aside in each of the zones the game world is more than big enough to fit, AA player housing is how all mmo's should takle this, open world and not instanced or phased.

    Archeage, good player housing? You got to be kidding us, right?

    Housing was so well designed that if you weren't among the no lifers able to rush and play all day on launch day, you were screwed, and you couldn't even find a small garden to own because nothing was left! And we know how important owning some terrain is in AA, for crafting. Pretty much why I asked and got a refund after launch even though I loved the game during beta when the population was limited.

    Open world housing always had availability problems and/or negatively affected the game world.

    In AC1, which had OW housing, you had the same problem than in AA, the haves and the have not, that was so bad they patched in zoned (instanced) appartment areas so everybody could finally own a house.

    In UO, the world turned from a wild, open world into an ugly urban sprawl with houses placed everywhere, and you also had availability problems when all the terrains were taken.

    Yeah, superb design indeed.

    Housing can be part of the world and still be instanced. Like e.g. in Black Desert. This avoids the urban sprawl problem as well as the lack of availability for those who join later, while still having the houses part of the world and keeping the cities busy, alive and full of players. That's MUCH better design than the terrible badly planned mess that was AA.

    Housing in AA wasnt perfect, but it showed how it could work, the only problem was the limited space. I prefer OW housing rather than instanced housing, maybe not everywhere, but in many parts of the world.
    There is a difference between good design and good implementation.  Archeage is example of great design with horrible implementation.  
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • JudgeUKJudgeUK Member RarePosts: 1,538
    I only wish they'd continued with their next generation WoW.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,886
    edited July 2016
    Daikuru said:
    Taiphoz said:

    Note good player housing like Archeage would have easily been possible in WoW with little town districts set aside in each of the zones the game world is more than big enough to fit, AA player housing is how all mmo's should takle this, open world and not instanced or phased.

    Archeage, good player housing? You got to be kidding us, right?

    Housing was so well designed that if you weren't among the no lifers able to rush and play all day on launch day, you were screwed, and you couldn't even find a small garden to own because nothing was left! And we know how important owning some terrain is in AA, for crafting. Pretty much why I asked and got a refund after launch even though I loved the game during beta when the population was limited.

    Open world housing always had availability problems and/or negatively affected the game world.

    In AC1, which had OW housing, you had the same problem than in AA, the haves and the have not, that was so bad they patched in zoned (instanced) appartment areas so everybody could finally own a house.

    In UO, the world turned from a wild, open world into an ugly urban sprawl with houses placed everywhere, and you also had availability problems when all the terrains were taken.

    Yeah, superb design indeed.

    Housing can be part of the world and still be instanced. Like e.g. in Black Desert. This avoids the urban sprawl problem as well as the lack of availability for those who join later, while still having the houses part of the world and keeping the cities busy, alive and full of players. That's MUCH better design than the terrible badly planned mess that was AA.

    Housing in AA wasnt perfect, but it showed how it could work, the only problem was the limited space. I prefer OW housing rather than instanced housing, maybe not everywhere, but in many parts of the world.
    Yet every single implementation of AA style housing so far had big problems, always for the same reasons. Maybe it's because it just doesn't work in a MMORPG ?

    As much as I dislike fully instanced housing like e.g. LotRO or EQ2, I think some games found a good middle ground solution by making housing part of the world while still avoiding the availability problem with instancing.

    Fullly instanced housing makes the world and the cities dead places without players. OW housing creates horrible urban sprawls and problems of limited availability. The solution is instanced housing that is part of the world, like BDO. It can be done much better than BDO, but that's a good start.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 10700k (5.10ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z490 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • DaikuruDaikuru Member RarePosts: 797
    Daikuru said:
    Taiphoz said:

    Note good player housing like Archeage would have easily been possible in WoW with little town districts set aside in each of the zones the game world is more than big enough to fit, AA player housing is how all mmo's should takle this, open world and not instanced or phased.

    Archeage, good player housing? You got to be kidding us, right?

    Housing was so well designed that if you weren't among the no lifers able to rush and play all day on launch day, you were screwed, and you couldn't even find a small garden to own because nothing was left! And we know how important owning some terrain is in AA, for crafting. Pretty much why I asked and got a refund after launch even though I loved the game during beta when the population was limited.

    Open world housing always had availability problems and/or negatively affected the game world.

    In AC1, which had OW housing, you had the same problem than in AA, the haves and the have not, that was so bad they patched in zoned (instanced) appartment areas so everybody could finally own a house.

    In UO, the world turned from a wild, open world into an ugly urban sprawl with houses placed everywhere, and you also had availability problems when all the terrains were taken.

    Yeah, superb design indeed.

    Housing can be part of the world and still be instanced. Like e.g. in Black Desert. This avoids the urban sprawl problem as well as the lack of availability for those who join later, while still having the houses part of the world and keeping the cities busy, alive and full of players. That's MUCH better design than the terrible badly planned mess that was AA.

    Housing in AA wasnt perfect, but it showed how it could work, the only problem was the limited space. I prefer OW housing rather than instanced housing, maybe not everywhere, but in many parts of the world.
    Yet every single implementation of AA style housing so far had big problems, always for the same reasons. Maybe it's because it just doesn't work in a MMORPG ?

    As much as I dislike fully instanced housing like e.g. LotRO or EQ2, I think some games found a good middle ground solution by making housing part of the world while still avoiding the availability problem with instancing.

    Fullly instanced housing makes the world and the cities dead places without players. OW housing creates horrible urban sprawls and problems of limited availability. The solution is instanced housing that is part of the world, like BDO. It can be done much better than BDO, but that's a good start.
    Maybe there is a place for both concepts in mmos? ow housing and instanced housing like in BDO, if you want to live in the city, you can buy a house there, if you want to live in the countryside, you can claim a land and build a house there.
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    - Albert Einstein


  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    All those features are expensive to add and why bother when you earn an incredible sum of cash and is the king of the genre? 

    They could add some of them to try to regain lost players though, even though I think dynamic events would be far more similar to Rifts then GW2s if they added them to an expansion. It would require far less work and you can't really be sure that the current Wow fans would like it anyways. There is always risks with changing the base mechanics of a MMO, just look on SWG.

    Anyways, Wow do have changed a lot since 2004 but it have mainly been a pretty slow change. Player housing certainly is possible to replace the not so popular garrisons but you would probably start with a few then.
    Adding boats and actual sea content for instance would be a huge investment and is less likely, unless they built an entire expansion on it and turned unused water content into large PvE zones. That is certainly a possibility since it wouldn't affect the base game as much as adding flying mounts did and of course the fact that everything gets better with pirates.... But it certainly is not something I would bet money on.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,886
    Daikuru said:
    Daikuru said:
    Taiphoz said:

    Note good player housing like Archeage would have easily been possible in WoW with little town districts set aside in each of the zones the game world is more than big enough to fit, AA player housing is how all mmo's should takle this, open world and not instanced or phased.

    Archeage, good player housing? You got to be kidding us, right?

    Housing was so well designed that if you weren't among the no lifers able to rush and play all day on launch day, you were screwed, and you couldn't even find a small garden to own because nothing was left! And we know how important owning some terrain is in AA, for crafting. Pretty much why I asked and got a refund after launch even though I loved the game during beta when the population was limited.

    Open world housing always had availability problems and/or negatively affected the game world.

    In AC1, which had OW housing, you had the same problem than in AA, the haves and the have not, that was so bad they patched in zoned (instanced) appartment areas so everybody could finally own a house.

    In UO, the world turned from a wild, open world into an ugly urban sprawl with houses placed everywhere, and you also had availability problems when all the terrains were taken.

    Yeah, superb design indeed.

    Housing can be part of the world and still be instanced. Like e.g. in Black Desert. This avoids the urban sprawl problem as well as the lack of availability for those who join later, while still having the houses part of the world and keeping the cities busy, alive and full of players. That's MUCH better design than the terrible badly planned mess that was AA.

    Housing in AA wasnt perfect, but it showed how it could work, the only problem was the limited space. I prefer OW housing rather than instanced housing, maybe not everywhere, but in many parts of the world.
    Yet every single implementation of AA style housing so far had big problems, always for the same reasons. Maybe it's because it just doesn't work in a MMORPG ?

    As much as I dislike fully instanced housing like e.g. LotRO or EQ2, I think some games found a good middle ground solution by making housing part of the world while still avoiding the availability problem with instancing.

    Fullly instanced housing makes the world and the cities dead places without players. OW housing creates horrible urban sprawls and problems of limited availability. The solution is instanced housing that is part of the world, like BDO. It can be done much better than BDO, but that's a good start.
    Maybe there is a place for both concepts in mmos? ow housing and instanced housing like in BDO, if you want to live in the city, you can buy a house there, if you want to live in the countryside, you can claim a land and build a house there.
    You concept still separates the player base in two camps. Two camps which pay the same amount to play the game, one of which just can't get what the other has even if they want it just because there's none available anymore.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 10700k (5.10ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z490 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


Sign In or Register to comment.