Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Lowest Common Denominator Sucks Prunes

24

Comments

  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 5,563
    I think people miss that an MMO is supposed to be entertainment, not work.

    In this venture not every book should be Moby Dick, sometimes, reading Twilight is perfectly fine escapism.

    Equally so, not every movie should be Shogun, sometimes, just watching something like Shawn of the Dead, is perfectly fine escapism. 

    With that said:

    I firmly believe that an MMO should have a target market and demographic, and build their game to be the best game for that group of gamers, and if others want to play, great, but they need to maintain focus on making the best game for their target market, be damned what anyone else wants.


    AlBQuirkySovrathTuor7GdemamiTheocritusbcbullyRoin
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
  • Po_ggPo_gg Member EpicPosts: 5,571
    Ungood said:
    I think people miss that an MMO is supposed to be entertainment, not work.
    Not the people, companies do... and not just within this industry, but overall.
    It's kinda built into the system, the lower you set the bar the higher number of customers you can reach.

    Ungood said:
    I firmly believe that an MMO should have a target market and demographic, and build their game to be the best game for that group of gamers, and if others want to play, great, but they need to maintain focus on making the best game for their target market, be damned what anyone else wants.
    If only... I'm on the same belief, but unfortunately it's just a dream. Just look at TSW, as soon as Funcom had the financial leeway they've flushed their target market down the loo in an attempt to milk a new, and (in their hopes) larger, target market.

    I honestly couldn't name a single * ongoing* game which is immune to this chase of the lowest common denominator, and it's a gripe since years. The constant revamps, watering down, the attempts to make a game "more accessible"... hell, lately I started to use accessible as the synonym of shit when it's about games.


    * to be honest, maintenance games are sorta immune, maybe that's why I like CO and AoC that much. They're safe from further dumbing downs, since they're just left behind by the devs. Which is a nice thing in the current environment.
    AlBQuirkyGdemami
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 4,387
    Iselin said:
    Iselin said:
    Iselin said:
    I recently saw a post here saying that separating PvP into it's own zone(s) sucks because if you're a 100% PvE player you're "forced to PvP" if you go to those zones.

    To me that's a perfect example of the mentality by some who believe that they have an inalienable right to play every part of an MMO and go anywhere whether that's actually their thing or not.

    Same as bitching about not having access to bind-on-pick-up raid gear when you don't raid.

    Large and expensive MMO projects try to cater to many different people for the obvious reason that they need a lot of different people with different interests to buy in order to break even or turn a profit - that's an OK thing. But making all parts of it accessible for everyone is pretty short sighted. The goal should be to make each different part of it like exploration, crafting, raiding, PvP, etc., a good experience for the portion of their audience that really cares about that part.

    Otherwise, yeah, you end up with mediocre systems that everyone can do but no one really enjoys.

    I agree in the concept as you stated it, except for the world being divided part. 
    Again, I don't know where PvP came into this subject, but I guess it needs to since some games have it. 

    In my opinion, if you have PvP zones, inevitably there is loot/resources there, and most games make it something different than what's available elsewhere. Lots of them make it the best stuff for whatever it's used for. 
    But why do we need that when we can just plop PvP in the rest of the world, and still keep it separate from PvE players? 
    If you have a war, others are not part of it. There is more a game can do, but it doesn't have to, although I'd recommend they do. Just keep the PvPing separate from those who don't sign up and it can all happen in the same world. The PvEers aren't left out of parts of the world's content. 

    Again, all of this is a separate issue from what I OPed. 
    You didn't mention PvP in your OP but it's a very simple jump to that from what you did say:

    "I think each aspect of game play needs to be made for players who actually enjoy the challenges of that particular sort of game play. And not for everyone."

    What you're talking about is having sub categories of MMO activities catering to those who enjoy really getting into those activities. That by definition is exclusivity and is the opposite end of the spectrum from "lowest common denominator" which is all about making all things accessible to all people.

    I brought up PvP because that same kind of discussion has been going on a lot around here lately with respect to New World and its gimmicky flagging system.

    A natural consequence of your idea of making sub-systems for the players who actually enjoy those sub-systems and not for everyone is excluding some from access to some things that are only obtainable in those sub-systems.

    I'm simply extending the same concept to places in the game but you seem to draw a line there because there may be rewards there that you want. I don't draw that line.
    Bah! Let the PvPers play for the same stuff as everyone else. 
    Why do they get special treatment? 

    Why do crafters or raiders? I don't raid any more - not that I ever did it a lot - so I'm resigned to the fact that I will just never have some raid-exclusive bind on pick-up gear and that a lot of developer time is being "wasted" on content I will never do.

    It's my choice and I'm willing to live with the consequences. If everyone was like me with respect to the parts of MMOs they don't want to do there would be a lot less whining about things you're "missing out on." Just my 2 cents.
    Maybe you aren't getting it. 
    If Crafters and Raiders get something special, then PvPers do too. But none of that should be different than the other set of play styles. It should all be the same world, the same possibilities, etc. The same stuff in rare spawns that aren't set to a location.
    But what it should not be is something special locked into rewards for one play style. 

    Now remember, I'm calling for change from this static, lowest common denominator game design. Static being the operative word here. Rarity (ingredients, knowledge of how to make something) should never be available in a fixed location. 
    Gdemami

    Once upon a time....

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 4,387
    Ungood said:
    I think people miss that an MMO is supposed to be entertainment, not work.

    In this venture not every book should be Moby Dick, sometimes, reading Twilight is perfectly fine escapism.

    Equally so, not every movie should be Shogun, sometimes, just watching something like Shawn of the Dead, is perfectly fine escapism. 

    With that said:

    I firmly believe that an MMO should have a target market and demographic, and build their game to be the best game for that group of gamers, and if others want to play, great, but they need to maintain focus on making the best game for their target market, be damned what anyone else wants.


    Have both. 
    And everything in between. 
    But people are always using the "work" card for anything beyond this lowest common denominator. 
    If it's fun, interesting, or otherwise rewarding, is it work or game play? 
    Gdemami

    Once upon a time....

  • BruceYeeBruceYee Member EpicPosts: 2,241
    Kinda feels like we're still in the stone age of gaming at times for various reasons but the main one being that gamers have very specific tastes and game companies put money making before trying to cater and capitalize on those specific needs in many cases. In the case of MMO's they try to add everything to their game like a sushi, pizza, hamburger restaurant not realizing if they just stuck to one thing and made it great they'd probably get more customers. Just look at those kickstarter MMO struggling to either add meaningful PVE to a mostly PvP game and vice versa. The reason why arpg, moba, shooters retain a loyal playerbase is cause simple sells and they prove that age old saying "less is more" is absolutely true.

    If catering to the lowest common denominator was actually profitable in every situation then SWG should have increased their players after NGE but OOPS there was that pesky thing called personal preference that prevented that. Uniqueness and complexity is actually desired but game companies either threw that aside or now charge you for it to the max in mobile games. There's a new turn based Lego mobile game by Gameloft that's one of the most money grubby mobiles I've ever tried and it got the friggin OK green light from Lego.

    Maybe sometime in the distant future we'll see a change in the greed culture but until that happens if we want anything more than basic gameplay it's indie or you will have to pay $$$. I'm hoping game companies start focusing their efforts more on specific things rather than try to do everything. Maybe separating games by recommended player age, or avg amount of time required like calories would create a more organized industry cause right now there's limited order and lots of dragon chasing.
    AlBQuirkyVermillion_RaventhalGdemamibcbully
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,848
    edited March 2020
    The biggest problem is that people like to cheat. They do it and game companies by allowing them to P2W for stuff is allowing sanctioned cheating in some form. They reduce the difficulty when the forums are full of whines and threats of people leaving a game. That too is a form of cheating. In the end it is all about ill gotten accolades.
    AlBQuirkyGdemamiAmathe
    Chamber of Chains
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,132
    Honestly, I can live with lowest common denominator.  

    I hate how distorted gaming has been come with microtransactions and seeking maximum profits. A lot of these games seem worst than arcade games pushing you to spend money.  
    [Deleted User]AlBQuirkyBruceYeeTuor7Gdemami
  • BruceYeeBruceYee Member EpicPosts: 2,241
    Honestly, I can live with lowest common denominator.  

    I hate how distorted gaming has been come with microtransactions and seeking maximum profits. A lot of these games seem worst than arcade games pushing you to spend money.  
    Some keep their greed somewhat in check but others recently in the mobile realm seem to have collectively decided to push it to the max. Some companies like Supercell, Gameloft and Netmarble are going full totalitarian with their treatment of their players and it's kind of scary. Stopping support to large portions of their playerbase, making game almost unplayable unless you pay tons, putting in algorithm designed specifically to make players face unbeatable situations to get them to spend more. Not sure if it's greed and/or if they know there's no one who can stop them cause there's no gaming oversight but I never thought it would get so bad. By comparison many PC games are still quite tame so that's a good sign at least.
    Gdemami
  • Gamer54321Gamer54321 Member UncommonPosts: 452
    edited March 2020
    Btw, I think a general failing is the art direction in games itself.

    If you have a game that ends up undermining the fiction, the fantasy, or the immersion into a game world, by a game's gimmicks, or by other poor choices like adding weird or bad looking GUI's or by including meta stuff like in-game purchases, it just annoys me to no end. 
    Post edited by Gamer54321 on
    AmarantharTuor7Gdemami
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 6,707
    BruceYee said:
    Honestly, I can live with lowest common denominator.  

    I hate how distorted gaming has been come with microtransactions and seeking maximum profits. A lot of these games seem worst than arcade games pushing you to spend money.  
    Some keep their greed somewhat in check but others recently in the mobile realm seem to have collectively decided to push it to the max. Some companies like Supercell, Gameloft and Netmarble are going full totalitarian with their treatment of their players and it's kind of scary. Stopping support to large portions of their playerbase, making game almost unplayable unless you pay tons, putting in algorithm designed specifically to make players face unbeatable situations to get them to spend more. Not sure if it's greed and/or if they know there's no one who can stop them cause there's no gaming oversight but I never thought it would get so bad. By comparison many PC games are still quite tame so that's a good sign at least.
    You can bet that PC gaming is watching what happens here very closely :)

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 5,563
    Po_gg said:
    Ungood said:
    I think people miss that an MMO is supposed to be entertainment, not work.
    Not the people, companies do... and not just within this industry, but overall.
    It's kinda built into the system, the lower you set the bar the higher number of customers you can reach.
    It's not the companies, it's the players.

    You are correct that easier games get more players, but this is not the companies doing, it is the players doing.

    To understand this, imagine there are 3 groups of players.

    • Average Skilled.
    • Highly Skilled 
    • Gifted.

    The thing here is that everyone above the Average Skilled, thinks they are king shit, and they want to play games where they get to feel like king shit, and that can only happen in a game where the majority of the players are lower skilled then they are, but has content that only the Highly Skilled or better can do.. this allowing them to feel like king shit in the game.

    This means, Highly Skilled Player who has already built a huge fucking ego playing other games, is not going to be motivated to play a game that was designed for their skill bracket and above, because that would make them the 'average' players, and the Gifted Players would be the King Shits in that game.. so these games designed to be "hardcore" attract even less a crowed then they are targeted for. 

    Game Companies realize this, they realize they cannot set the bar too high, because first off, it removes the "Average" players, so they lose that entire demographic, and then the "Highly Skilled" players won't play, because their ego can't handle it, so they are only left with the gifted players, and, making pumping out content fast enough to keep them happy, is just fucking impossible.

    This is exactly what happened in GW2, where they had a game that was originally built from the ground up to be a 'average' gamers playpen, easy, relaxing, with some minor challenges and content to if they felt up to it, but nothing that was, what anyone would call demanding. Then a bunch of wanna-be's and try-hards came in and cried and whined and complained that they needed their own specialty hard content, just for them, because they needed to feed their e-peen, and feel better than the unwashed masses of average players.

    That happened, because as opposed to moving on to a harder game, like say Wild Star, that was designed for the hardcore player, where they would be equally or better skilled players, doing content that was designed just for them, they hung around in some casual swamp hallow, and cried for content that would make them feel like king-shit and allow them to wave their e-peen around.

    Watching that kind of shit unfold, if you were going to make a game, and wanted it to sell, what would you legitimately make at that point?

    An easy as fuck game, right? 

    That is what is going to sell, that will pull in the average players, and everyone else as well. But it's not the company that wants to make cake walk easy shit games, it's players that move the market that push things in those directions.

    For example, If every player that cried in GW2 that they needed challenge, and raids went to Wild Star, Wild Star would have still be around, and GW2, would not have made the fuck up's that it did, alienating it's casuals.

    This is also why I say, MMO makers need to have a market in mind, they need to have a demographic they are going to focus on, and make the best game they can for that group. If that focus is Hard Core Mutherfuckers, then that is what they should focus on, the hell with anyone else. If that group is casuals, then that is what they should focus on, screw anyone else.

    Just my feels.
    Tuor7AlBQuirkyGdemamibcbully
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,630
    I prefer a system where there are beginner, medium, and advanced levels to each undertaking.  So if I want to craft, just a little, I can make batwing crunchies. But the better stat foods are harder. Same for other activities, like exploration, dungeons, raiding, and so on.
    AlBQuirkytzervocheyane

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

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,132
    If I did an MMORPG combat difficulty would be based skill not levels. My thinking on MMORPG is different though.  I don't believe in using the world for purely progression even if I did levels.  I like making worlds more practical.

    I always loved the Legend of Zelda approach.  You feel stronger and get cool stuff but could still be hurt by the same creatures you meet in the beginning if careless.  
    AmarantharAlBQuirkyGdemami
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member EpicPosts: 1,964
    If I did an MMORPG combat difficulty would be based skill not levels. My thinking on MMORPG is different though.  I don't believe in using the world for purely progression even if I did levels.  I like making worlds more practical.

    I always loved the Legend of Zelda approach.  You feel stronger and get cool stuff but could still be hurt by the same creatures you meet in the beginning if careless.  
    Darkfall Online was like this. The low level mobs could and would kill anyone sitting in their spawn not paying attention no matter what skill level or what gear. 
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,132
    Amathe said:
    I prefer a system where there are beginner, medium, and advanced levels to each undertaking.  So if I want to craft, just a little, I can make batwing crunchies. But the better stat foods are harder. Same for other activities, like exploration, dungeons, raiding, and so on.
    With vertical progression..  I don't think you will get that.  It's easier to make vertical progression with stepping stone world and systems while trying to milk you with microtransactions.  
    Amaranthar
  • Gamer54321Gamer54321 Member UncommonPosts: 452
    edited March 2020
    Being super cynical here, given the subject of this thread, I wonder now if Chris Roberts and CIG's imo all too casual use of the word "fun" is perchance indicative of game developers that DOES NOT really fancy immersion into a game's world for it to be enjoyed, but instead is symptomatic of somebody that thinks that a game is basically a product and/or service, as opposed to creating a game world that is enjoyable, for better and for worse (meaning things not always going your way).

    I've never understood myself on CIG and Star Citizen. Presumably they have been, and still is bogged down in tech issues (even though if making progress).

    Btw, since I am here, I think for anyone seeking to develop a non-shallow game, they better develop games with a good overview, or risk trivialize everything they do and not maintaining control of the creative process, without having to limit their creativity to avoid tech issues, or, sticking with singular, or a few ideas that maybe aren't well thought out, or, in other ways could be thought of a being a wasted opportunity.

    Presumably a common thing to working with ideas, is not having the clarity for best understanding them, and maybe instead relying and focusing on what things would or should look in a game. I would personally chose a focus on intent and motivation before needing to seeing a result of an idea. Ofc, one would be wise to have strategic goals that are achievable, and aren't resulting in predicatble performance issues or crippling game issues, or, otherwise undermining other aspects to ones game.
    AmarantharGdemami
  • Gamer54321Gamer54321 Member UncommonPosts: 452
    edited March 2020
    I couldn't stand playing WoW for more than a week. The silly leveling system, that required one to be say lvl 20 to eat a particular food item, or wear some particular boots, just ruined my fun playing the game, because advancement seemed very fake, with things with stats just scaling upwards, in a seemingly never ending and pointless grind.

    I remember it was fun getting help from this other higher level player I met, and we traveled to the Elven area in the north where I could buy a bow. Something that wouldn't be possible iirc, playing on your own at low level. :)
    Gdemami
  • Hawkaya399Hawkaya399 Member UncommonPosts: 604
    edited August 2020
    AlBQuirky said:
    I've said for a long while that I'd rather see many different smaller MMORPGs made for specific playstyles than one huge MMORPG that tries to please everyone. But all we get are attempts to please as many as possibe MMORPGs.

    The gaming industry confuses me, I admit. On one hand, they everyone playing their games. On the other, they make games exclusive.

    I guess money is the be all, end all of gaming, too :(

    Maybe because game developers are always changing and driven by financial constraints. Most of us have bills to pay. game developers, as they get older, want to make a game to be played by many people so they can pay bills. They might release something but later patch it to appeal to more gamers.

    early on we're naive and make a game because of passion and to meet a niche need. but later necessity becomes more important. we become vulnerable. people die. life is tough. we grow out of our naivety stage and figure out it's better to appeal to larger audiences?

    it's like early on your first game is to meet your own extremely niche needs. then later you make a game to just please you and your nerdy friends. but when you become an adult you start making games to please hundreds of thousands and millions of gamers. it's nice to make money, especially as we get older and witness how frail loved ones can be. it's a need to be part of the greater community, for prosperity, friendship and social support. the reasoning is unimportant. everybody has ideas. it's hte ($$$) results that matter.

    just an idea i'll propose to explain why game developers might make a game for a select audience on one hand but on the other try to make it for everyone.

    broadly speaking we all bear witness to this. we're all ultimately persuaded--nay, forced--to be more social, or possibly die early, being rejected or lonely. the problem goes both ways. it can happen i think when we blindly embrace community over our own individual needs. sometimes it's ok to be niche.

    just substitute the notion of violence with different niches or opinions, or no money for vital needs. try to imagine:


    Post edited by Hawkaya399 on
    AlBQuirkyGdemami
  • KnightFalzKnightFalz Member EpicPosts: 1,677
    AlBQuirky said:
    I've said for a long while that I'd rather see many different smaller MMORPGs made for specific playstyles than one huge MMORPG that tries to please everyone. But all we get are attempts to please as many as possibe MMORPGs.

    The gaming industry confuses me, I admit. On one hand, they everyone playing their games. On the other, they make games exclusive.

    I guess money is the be all, end all of gaming, too :(

    For profit companies are for profit. If a company feels the overall profit from a game will benefit from a temporary exclusivity deal it will be inclined to make one.

    For profit companies are also risk averse. If a company believes a temporary exclusivity deal will reduce or eliminate risk it will be inclined to make one. This motivation would likely be more common for game companies just starting out or existing ones that for whatever reason need the security such would provide.

    Generally, any behaviour by a for profit company that seems confusing or inexplicable on the surface will have an expectation of increased earning potential behind it.
    Gdemami
  • BloodaxesBloodaxes Member EpicPosts: 4,511
    AlBQuirky said:
    I've said for a long while that I'd rather see many different smaller MMORPGs made for specific playstyles than one huge MMORPG that tries to please everyone. But all we get are attempts to please as many as possibe MMORPGs.

    The gaming industry confuses me, I admit. On one hand, they everyone playing their games. On the other, they make games exclusive.

    I guess money is the be all, end all of gaming, too :(
    So much this!

    I'm sick and tired on looking at new releases and see them trying to please every play style in the same game. It has been proven time and time again that it doesn't last long, yet here we are. To me it seems like, they're in for the quick buck before the game becomes stale and people start leaving.
    GdemamiAlBQuirky

  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 14,881
    The problem can be defined as modern MMO's being somewhere where you play multiplayer and old school was where you played in a world.

    Today rather than playing in a world, you play in MMOs with little in the way of lore or even the most basic information about the "world" the game is set in. Which is handy when you want to make changes, as you have told players nothing. BDO would be my classic example here.

    To enable that one size fits all, modern MMO's only fit players who want what the majority want in all areas. You have to be very Norman normal to fit that.

    Obviously there are many MMOs running today with standards above the lowest common denominator, but the pull of the LCD is there. Every time a game is made easier, simpler to play, dependent more on spending money in the cash shop rather than playing, thats the drift to the LCD for you.
    GdemamiAlBQuirky

    25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 18,805
    Devs are good at copying someone else's ideas that make money.

    I am quite sure that these devs know how to make a really good mmorpg,they simply won't because there is too big a risk to invest that much into a game to see it fail.

    It is sort of obvious really,devs turned to asking gamer's for money,they don't want to inherit any risk at all anymore.It tells me they have no confidence in themselves or their game.

    So we are at a standstill,how do we get over the hump and back to studios taking risks on large robust games?We may never see it ever again,there are too many SIMPLE gimmicks that are making a lot of money.
    If you were a develoepr,you rather spend 5+ years,300-500 million in HOEPS your game does well or spend 4 months a few hundred k and make a Fortnite or Valorant type game?

    You can make 50 Fortnite games and only need to make it big with one while mmorpg's require that yousucceed the first try.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • KnightFalzKnightFalz Member EpicPosts: 1,677
    Scot said:
    The problem can be defined as modern MMO's being somewhere where you play multiplayer and old school was where you played in a world.

    Today rather than playing in a world, you play in MMOs with little in the way of lore or even the most basic information about the "world" the game is set in. Which is handy when you want to make changes, as you have told players nothing. BDO would be my classic example here.

    To enable that one size fits all, modern MMO's only fit players who want what the majority want in all areas. You have to be very Norman normal to fit that.

    Obviously there are many MMOs running today with standards above the lowest common denominator, but the pull of the LCD is there. Every time a game is made easier, simpler to play, dependent more on spending money in the cash shop rather than playing, thats the drift to the LCD for you.

    Is that a problem? Can players not choose to play the MMORPGs that suit their desires best. There are plenty around to suit a variety of tastes, ranging from the oldest titles to latest releases. One is only confined to the LCD if wanting to play the largest of games that must maximize the scope of their appeal to endure.
  • botrytisbotrytis Member RarePosts: 3,353
    Wizardry said:
    Devs are good at copying someone else's ideas that make money.

    I am quite sure that these devs know how to make a really good mmorpg,they simply won't because there is too big a risk to invest that much into a game to see it fail.

    It is sort of obvious really,devs turned to asking gamer's for money,they don't want to inherit any risk at all anymore.It tells me they have no confidence in themselves or their game.

    So we are at a standstill,how do we get over the hump and back to studios taking risks on large robust games?We may never see it ever again,there are too many SIMPLE gimmicks that are making a lot of money.
    If you were a develoepr,you rather spend 5+ years,300-500 million in HOEPS your game does well or spend 4 months a few hundred k and make a Fortnite or Valorant type game?

    You can make 50 Fortnite games and only need to make it big with one while mmorpg's require that yousucceed the first try.

    You know the old saying, 'Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery'. There is nothing wrong with taking ideas from other games to make your own.

    Right now, only CIG has raised that much money and has produced one tech demo.

    Problem is, like many other areas, the MMO consumer is fickle and now has this yearning for yesteryear games (which were not better only different). We need to get away from judging games based on each other and base our judgement on how well this game represents itself. Until we get away from, 'This is not WOW or LOTRO or GW1' than we will probably never have many games that stretch and we will get hungry people trowing money down a rathole, on a game that may never be finished (CIG).


  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 14,881
    Scot said:
    The problem can be defined as modern MMO's being somewhere where you play multiplayer and old school was where you played in a world.

    Today rather than playing in a world, you play in MMOs with little in the way of lore or even the most basic information about the "world" the game is set in. Which is handy when you want to make changes, as you have told players nothing. BDO would be my classic example here.

    To enable that one size fits all, modern MMO's only fit players who want what the majority want in all areas. You have to be very Norman normal to fit that.

    Obviously there are many MMOs running today with standards above the lowest common denominator, but the pull of the LCD is there. Every time a game is made easier, simpler to play, dependent more on spending money in the cash shop rather than playing, thats the drift to the LCD for you.

    Is that a problem? Can players not choose to play the MMORPGs that suit their desires best. There are plenty around to suit a variety of tastes, ranging from the oldest titles to latest releases. One is only confined to the LCD if wanting to play the largest of games that must maximize the scope of their appeal to endure.
    There are not plenty of different play styles around that's the point, even the old school MMOs have bowed to the expectations of the LCD. Sure, not every MMO is identical, but in gameplay and content they move ever closer. Today difference is determined as much by revenue model as actual gameplay, which is why we on here talk so much about revenue models.
    GdemamiAlBQuirky

    25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

Sign In or Register to comment.