We aren't saying that you are wrong for what you like. I'm glad that you are able to enjoy the new era of mmorpgs, you aren't the one I'm worried about. You have plenty of top notch games to play atm. The point is that us oldschool players are asking for one decent MMORPG and you say that we have no right to ask for a single game out of hundreds because you don't enjoy the same playstyle as we do.
You have every right to ask, you have no right whatsoever to demand. If you can convince a developer to make a game for you, more power to you. However, the only way any developer is going to make a game is if the old school players can demonstrate that they have enough numbers and money to warrant the development of a game. If they can't, then no matter how much you want one, chances are slim that you'll ever actually get one.
Welcome to the real world.
Who is demanding anything? This thread is about a person ( OP ) asking others if they would like to see old school MMO concepts introduced into new MMORPGs.
Thing is back in the day each company tried to make things differently from what was already out there. We had MMOs where each game was built on different principles and mechanics. Each company aimed to innovate over what was already done. Now fast forward to today where each game coming out is nothing more than WoW in a new skin. Innovation has been replaced by stagnation. Where companies would once try something new and different, they now just take what the giant makes, slap a new name on it and change the actors a bit and call it 'New' or 'Next Gen'. As far as monotony goes, it's in EVERY game in this genre. Camping mob spawns is the same as doing every form of 'Kill 10 Rats' or 'Bring me 10 of (insert item here)' quests availible in newer MMOs. The monotony is the same, its just the method has changed slightly. And once you hit end game in these 'New and Improved' games, you're hitting the same brick wall of grinding bosses for loot. The only difference between then and now is everyone is a winner as opposed to everyone could be a winner. Like how in grade school everyone gets a ribbon for their project because if they didn't it might cause their feelings to be hurt. Before WoW there were 5 MMOs I can name that while being similar in some ways were vastly different in others. UO, EQ, AC, DAoC, AO. Each game added something new to the genre (EQ being the first MMO to truely make use of 3D graphics on a massive scale, AC making a game that added more depth to character customization, DAoC refining PvP into the RvR format, AO melding a massive world with the first use of instancing technology as well as being the first game to use flight). You also had games like SWG that focused more on living and being a part of a world rather than just playing in one. Now all we get are games built to be like WoW with heavy use of instancing, emphasis on quest grinding and PvP in the form of Battlegrounds. It's all just become 'Copy/Paste = Win?'.
The idea behind my previous post and the comparison between the camping monster respawns vs quest system is that the quest system is more complex in its design. It offers back story, purpose, it makes you go to specific points, it tells you when you're done. Respawn camps are much simpler in design than this where its you go to point A, you kill until you're strong enough to go to point B etc. We have a gone a long way.
Obviously, if there's a large influx of new MMO's especially ones trying to follow the success of others, expect things to be borrowed, copied, used because all the other genres do this. Shooters don't differentiate each other too much in terms of gameplay - "Grab gun, point gun, pull trigger, strafe left to right and pray you survive", but yet they manage to separate themselves from each other. Newer games that might not have appeared successful have been contributing and progressing the genre, even if it is subtle, i.e. WAR's public questing system, experimentations with PvPvE design, various class designs/skill allocations etc.
Ultimately, what is in older MMO's that aren't in newer MMO's? This is a question that many people tend to brush by and ignore but its probably the most important to answer. This'll define the reason whether or not there is a missed feeling about the genre that does not exist today. As hard as I try, I cannot find anything that isn't available to us that existed then.
Thing is back in the day each company tried to make things differently from what was already out there. We had MMOs where each game was built on different principles and mechanics. Each company aimed to innovate over what was already done.
Now fast forward to today where each game coming out is nothing more than WoW in a new skin. Innovation has been replaced by stagnation. Where companies would once try something new and different, they now just take what the giant makes, slap a new name on it and change the actors a bit and call it 'New' or 'Next Gen'.
As far as monotony goes, it's in EVERY game in this genre. Camping mob spawns is the same as doing every form of 'Kill 10 Rats' or 'Bring me 10 of (insert item here)' quests availible in newer MMOs. The monotony is the same, its just the method has changed slightly. And once you hit end game in these 'New and Improved' games, you're hitting the same brick wall of grinding bosses for loot. The only difference between then and now is everyone is a winner as opposed to everyone could be a winner. Like how in grade school everyone gets a ribbon for their project because if they didn't it might cause their feelings to be hurt.
Before WoW there were 5 MMOs I can name that while being similar in some ways were vastly different in others. UO, EQ, AC, DAoC, AO. Each game added something new to the genre (EQ being the first MMO to truely make use of 3D graphics on a massive scale, AC making a game that added more depth to character customization, DAoC refining PvP into the RvR format, AO melding a massive world with the first use of instancing technology as well as being the first game to use flight). You also had games like SWG that focused more on living and being a part of a world rather than just playing in one.
Now all we get are games built to be like WoW with heavy use of instancing, emphasis on quest grinding and PvP in the form of Battlegrounds. It's all just become 'Copy/Paste = Win?'.
The idea behind my previous post and the comparison between the camping monster respawns vs quest system is that the quest system is more complex in its design. It offers back story, purpose, it makes you go to specific points, it tells you when you're done. Respawn camps are much simpler in design than this where its you go to point A, you kill until you're strong enough to go to point B etc. We have a gone a long way.
Obviously, if there's a large influx of new MMO's especially ones trying to follow the success of others, expect things to be borrowed, copied, used because all the other genres do this. Shooters don't differentiate each other too much in terms of gameplay - "Grab gun, point gun, pull trigger, strafe left to right and pray you survive", but yet they manage to separate themselves from each other. Newer games that might not have appeared successful have been contributing and progressing the genre, even if it is subtle, i.e. WAR's public questing system, experimentations with PvPvE design, various class designs/skill allocations etc.
Ultimately, what is in older MMO's that aren't in newer MMO's? This is a question that many people tend to brush by and ignore but its probably the most important to answer. This'll define the reason whether or not there is a missed feeling about the genre that does not exist today. As hard as I try, I cannot find anything that isn't available to us that existed then.
Older MMOs had open non-instanced worlds, Group-based design for leveling, meaningful world bosses, difficult world mobs, meaningful quest-lines, and most importantly of all they enforced community > all else. You seem to brush community aside as a non-factor and you do this because that has what the MMORPG genre has done, but to the old school players out there community is everything.
The reason that I play MMORPGs is not so that I can walk around the city and show off my phat lewts to everyone, I play them to interact with others, build friendships, and work towards goals ( all of these I find fun, by the way. )
Older MMOs had open non-instanced worlds, Group-based design for leveling, meaningful world bosses, difficult world mobs, meaningful quest-lines, and most importantly of all they enforced community > all else. You seem to brush community aside as a non-factor and you do this because that has what the MMORPG genre has done, but to the old school players out there community is everything. The reason that I play MMORPGs is not so that I can walk around the city and show off my phat lewts to everyone, I play them to interact with others, build friendships, and work towards goals ( all of these I find fun, by the way. )
Instance and non-instance, group-based design for leveling, what is/isn't meaningful and difficult varies on people's opinion or are very subjective. Its either the greatest thing or the worst thing, generally most people like somewhere in between in terms of any of these things. It's funny you mention quest-lines because they were very rare compared to what it is now and I haven't heard of questing until WoW and I wouldn't call questing a very inherent feature of the past. It was only experienced by a select few people. I still stand firm that older MMO's are a bit of a shell of where we are at today, its just today's MMO's have the challenge of having to cater to millions rather than thousands.
In regards to community, how exactly did they reinforce community better than today? They more or less did the same things that MMO's do now, release patches and everyone once in awhile host a big game event. Actual in the past, communities more or less formed and managed themselves and companies didn't really put forth much effort in terms of their own community management. I haven't heard of an MMO having their own forum until WoW, I don't thnk I even recall DAoC having one.
These days, you have PR and community managers trying to gather feedback in a somewhat organized fashion, reaching out to the community, answering questions, bringing back other questions to ask devs etc.
EDIT: In regards to group design, it actually doesn't cater too well to the casual. You needed 1-2 hours at the very least set aside to do anything meaningful and thats if you can find a group right away, which can sometimes take 30min to an hour. Then after that you have to pray that your group doesn't wipe at ALL or else you are literally pushed back in progression, which has created many frustrating experiences for myself. Sounds like a fairly rigid design and not the greatest gaming experience at times.
Older MMOs had open non-instanced worlds, Group-based design for leveling, meaningful world bosses, difficult world mobs, meaningful quest-lines, and most importantly of all they enforced community > all else. You seem to brush community aside as a non-factor and you do this because that has what the MMORPG genre has done, but to the old school players out there community is everything.
The reason that I play MMORPGs is not so that I can walk around the city and show off my phat lewts to everyone, I play them to interact with others, build friendships, and work towards goals ( all of these I find fun, by the way. )
Instance and non-instance, group-based design for leveling, what is/isn't meaningful and difficult varies on people's opinion or are very subjective. Its either the greatest thing or the worst thing, generally most people like somewhere in between in terms of any of these things. It's funny you mention quest-lines because they were very rare compared to what it is now and I haven't heard of questing until WoW and I wouldn't call questing a very inherent feature of the past. It was only experienced by a select few people. I still stand firm that older MMO's are a bit of a shell of where we are at today, its just today's MMO's have the challenge of having to cater to millions rather than thousands.
In regards to community, how exactly did they reinforce community better than today? They more or less did the same things that MMO's do now, release patches and everyone once in awhile host a big game event. Actual in the past, communities more or less formed and managed themselves and companies didn't really put forth much effort in terms of their own community management. I haven't heard of an MMO having their own forum until WoW, I don't thnk I even recall DAoC having one.
These days, you have PR and community managers trying to gather feedback in a somewhat organized fashion, reaching out to the community, answering questions, bringing back other questions to ask devs etc.
The reason quests were so rare back then was because they actually had meaning. EQ1 had very few quests, but the quests that it had ( epic quests, raid - progression quests, etc.. ) were extremely epic and had nothing to do with killing 10 rats.
By community I am talking in-game community. You may not know, but human beings follow what is called the path of least resistance. If WoW handed out weapons that 1 shot raid bosses, you can be damn sure that people would use it. Would it be more fun? Not to most people, but then there are people like you who would call it progress because you don't have to go through combat and healing and tanking and strategy and all of that lame stuff that people had to do before the 1-shotting weapons were introduced.
By creating goals for players that were not easily achieved, it caused players to work together to achieve said goals and promoted a sense of unity within the playerbase. Things like $10 name-change, LFD tool, cheap server Xfers, make your name absolutely pointless in MMOs these days. You have no reputation because one day you can ninja loot an entire raid or be a total asshat to people, and the next day have an entirely new identity.
Sure new MMOs have instanced raids where 25 people from a guild get together to try and get loot, but old MMOs had so much more. Open world bosses, Epic Questlines that required a raid to complete, Keys / Flags that guilds had to work together to attain, etc. These things built up in game community and built friendships.
We aren't saying that you are wrong for what you like. I'm glad that you are able to enjoy the new era of mmorpgs, you aren't the one I'm worried about. You have plenty of top notch games to play atm. The point is that us oldschool players are asking for one decent MMORPG and you say that we have no right to ask for a single game out of hundreds because you don't enjoy the same playstyle as we do.
You have every right to ask, you have no right whatsoever to demand. If you can convince a developer to make a game for you, more power to you. However, the only way any developer is going to make a game is if the old school players can demonstrate that they have enough numbers and money to warrant the development of a game. If they can't, then no matter how much you want one, chances are slim that you'll ever actually get one.
Welcome to the real world.
If you really think that is completely true, learn Korean
Ultimately, what is in older MMO's that aren't in newer MMO's? This is a question that many people tend to brush by and ignore but its probably the most important to answer. This'll define the reason whether or not there is a missed feeling about the genre that does not exist today. As hard as I try, I cannot find anything that isn't available to us that existed then.
For myself, this is simple. It IS the tedious things you are talking about. Some people just don't find them tedious, and its my opinion that those things make the community. Why? Because there is a greater chance for like minded people. WOW is not an MMORPG community, its a game community, so there are many different playstyles. Old school gamers tend to poke fun of the worst members, but there are many good people in there too of course.
When you remove the tedious features, the world becomes a game. Its that simple. If you disagree, cool. But that is the way I see it. I think the old schoolers ( I am one ) prefer worlds, and don't last very long in games, even if they are in fact fun. Now those old games were among the first generation, so of course many tedious features were just bad design. I think what we wanted was those things fixed, not removed.
Other games I prefer that have the same subtle differences.
Flight Simulators compared to Tom Clancy's HAWK or those console Aces games
Flight sims have the tediousness of take-offs, landing, navigation, gimble ranges in radars etc
Rainbow Six series compared to the latest versions of it
The first RS6 games had the tediousness of designing and outfitting the missions
Armed Assault compared to Modern Warfare.
Armed Assault had the tediousness of flying to your objective, bullet drop, real weapons range, frontal assaults do
not work etc.
I would say in all those examples, the average gamer would prefer the second choice, which I view as the version with the good features removed. The first examples are much more broad in scope over the second, but I have no illusions, the second set look better, run better, have far more gamers and less bugs. But to me, they are simple games, no more. I just can't get into them for more than short bursts. MMORPGs are no different. Worlds were replaced with loot chasing mini games. I doubt the majority of these players even read their quests, which is a mechanic they asked for.
To communities again, the Flight community is just amazing, you never need to worry about playing alone, but can if you wish ( get your arse handed to you though ). Armed Assault is just as good, with many good guilds to help you out. They are good because they all playing that niche game for the same reasons. Old school gamers were RPG players. Same thing. The new games are designed to attract large cross over, so the community is not as similar.
I could go on and on, but I always type too much anyways, and I know its pointless. Most people here aren't looking for discussion but arguments. The bottom line is, people look for different things in their games, but no one seems to accept this. Numbers and stats do not mean anything. But it matters is your preference isnt even available to play. The only good old school game ( not affected by massive changes since it started anyways ) is Eve, which is doing well, but you can't get more niche than that.
Thing is back in the day each company tried to make things differently from what was already out there. We had MMOs where each game was built on different principles and mechanics. Each company aimed to innovate over what was already done.
Now fast forward to today where each game coming out is nothing more than WoW in a new skin. Innovation has been replaced by stagnation. Where companies would once try something new and different, they now just take what the giant makes, slap a new name on it and change the actors a bit and call it 'New' or 'Next Gen'.
As far as monotony goes, it's in EVERY game in this genre. Camping mob spawns is the same as doing every form of 'Kill 10 Rats' or 'Bring me 10 of (insert item here)' quests availible in newer MMOs. The monotony is the same, its just the method has changed slightly. And once you hit end game in these 'New and Improved' games, you're hitting the same brick wall of grinding bosses for loot. The only difference between then and now is everyone is a winner as opposed to everyone could be a winner. Like how in grade school everyone gets a ribbon for their project because if they didn't it might cause their feelings to be hurt.
Before WoW there were 5 MMOs I can name that while being similar in some ways were vastly different in others. UO, EQ, AC, DAoC, AO. Each game added something new to the genre (EQ being the first MMO to truely make use of 3D graphics on a massive scale, AC making a game that added more depth to character customization, DAoC refining PvP into the RvR format, AO melding a massive world with the first use of instancing technology as well as being the first game to use flight). You also had games like SWG that focused more on living and being a part of a world rather than just playing in one.
Now all we get are games built to be like WoW with heavy use of instancing, emphasis on quest grinding and PvP in the form of Battlegrounds. It's all just become 'Copy/Paste = Win?'.
The idea behind my previous post and the comparison between the camping monster respawns vs quest system is that the quest system is more complex in its design. It offers back story, purpose, it makes you go to specific points, it tells you when you're done. Respawn camps are much simpler in design than this where its you go to point A, you kill until you're strong enough to go to point B etc. We have a gone a long way.
Obviously, if there's a large influx of new MMO's especially ones trying to follow the success of others, expect things to be borrowed, copied, used because all the other genres do this. Shooters don't differentiate each other too much in terms of gameplay - "Grab gun, point gun, pull trigger, strafe left to right and pray you survive", but yet they manage to separate themselves from each other. Newer games that might not have appeared successful have been contributing and progressing the genre, even if it is subtle, i.e. WAR's public questing system, experimentations with PvPvE design, various class designs/skill allocations etc.
Ultimately, what is in older MMO's that aren't in newer MMO's? This is a question that many people tend to brush by and ignore but its probably the most important to answer. This'll define the reason whether or not there is a missed feeling about the genre that does not exist today. As hard as I try, I cannot find anything that isn't available to us that existed then.
Large open worlds, character depth, difficulty, puzzels, exploration on a large scale and more social interaction. These games were virtual worlds where the emphasis was on the journey and not the destination. There was no 'Game begins at (insert level cap)' mentality. Accomplishments meant more than they do today.
Thing is when you mention the part about questing, how it shows you where to go, gives you the back story and tells you when its time to move on, thats where the games lost their sense of adventure and exploration. The so called 'complexity' of the questing systems is really just a clever way to make a player follow a predetermined path. This makes the journey more of a guided tour. In most cases this tour was created to prevent the players from wandering too far off this path and seeing how small the worlds have actually become. It also allowed the developers to focus less on content at a large scale and provide just enough things to do to get you through the level range and closer to the end game at a faster clip. And once at end game the only content they really have to provide is a new dungeon now and then and a new set of epics to farm.
In older MMOs crafting was a viable option for people who didn't care about making it to end game. Crafting allowed players to make useful items at all levels, such as armor and weapons to outfit their characters with as well as sell to others. In newer MMOs crafting is rendered almost useless as anything you can make can easily be out classed by something you find on a quick dungeon run or from quest rewards.
The problem isn't 'what was in older MMOs that aren't in newer MMOs'. The problem is what was scaled back, thinned out or made completely irrelevent in newer MMOs. Older MMOs were about playing in a virtual world. Newer MMOs are more about racing to the end to grind out epic loot or pvp gear while waiting for the next new dungeon or pvp season to start so you can grind again.
Community in older MMOs were a lot different than they are today. In old MMOs reputation meant something. If you were a dick people knew you as such. Be a dick to too many people and your rep would make it hard for you to get anything done. Today people can be a dick all they want and nothing happens. And on the off chance something does happen, $25 buys you a new name or a server change. In older MMOs players who Ebay'd their characters were shunned because they never learned how to play the class. They were a liability and rightly labled as such. And it was hard to hide the fact you bought the character from Ebay because again, reputation. Someone somewhere knew the character before it was sold off. Word gets around that 'so and so sold his Pally on ebay'. Today people can buy an account, pay a lil extra to switch servers or change the name and no one is the wiser. People can now just buy a max level character with full epics and get away with it.
As far as social interaction, in older MMIOs you got to know the people you were playing with. Some people even made lasting friendships with other players, even players outside of their own guilds. People actually talked to each other back then, even in passing. People helped strangers just to help them. Today the most talking that happens in a group of strangers is 'AFK' 'BRB' 'PULLING' 'LOL' 'Can I need on that?'. And people rarely help strangers. In fact when you have a group of several people all needing a mob spawn for a quest objective, these people would rather try to beat everyone else to the kill than to group up for it.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
The problem isn't 'what was in older MMOs that aren't in newer MMOs'. The problem is what was scaled back, thinned out or made completely irrelevent in newer MMOs. Older MMOs were about playing in a virtual world. Newer MMOs are more about racing to the end to grind out epic loot or pvp gear while waiting for the next new dungeon or pvp season to start so you can grind again.
I tried to say that above your post, but I probably rambled too much. Its just that simple to me. The new generation are less buggy, look better, have many amazing features, but removed all the things that made them worlds. This is why the communities are crap, and why many get bored fast. If there is nothing to do other than combat, it doesn't matter how pretty it looks, or how good it plays, there is no way I can stay subbed for very long.
I like games, and play many, but I prefer worlds, and they are gone for now in this genre.
I guess we can possibly agree on the industry has moved on from offering challenging, complex games to offering simple, easy games because the market changed.
Fixed that for you. Not all players like to be spoonfed their games. WoW was far more noob-friendly than EQ1, but not nearly as noob-friendly as it is now. Accessibility is a big draw to new MMO-ers and level of polish is a draw to all gamers, but that accessibility is only great until you have a grip on the dynamics of the game- after that it just feels condescending. The sad thing is that newer gamers just have no idea what they could have in a game, because WoW is all they have experienced. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
For those that do know better but play anyway- Just because people are subscribing to WoW doesn't mean they are playing it often, are captivated by it, or even like the game itself as it is now. There are many possible reasons for this but I think a couple of good reasons are because there really isn't a better choice out (especially one that's as polished/bug-free) or that they have enough friends in the game that it's hard to leave them all behind.
Two things:
1. Accessibility is important for a large number of the MMO crowd, including me. I don't have many hours of playtime each week and I'll be damned to spend them doing something which isn't fun. I sub to games because they provide entertainment, I have plenty of challenges at work.
2. I've experienced a number of old school MMO's and I didn't like what they offered.I've experienced a number of new MMO's and didn't like what they offered. Ignorance isn't always bliss, sometimes it's being informed.
1. That's great, there are plenty of dumbed down games out there for players like you that can't be bothered to put in some extra time. Not all games are for all players. We're just asking for one contemporary MMO that has the attributes we wish to see in a MMORPG.
2. Firstly, ignorance is never being informed because that doesn't make any sense except in your head. Secondly, it's a shame that you, one player (of three in this thread that seem to be extreme wow fanboys), dislike all MMOs except WoW, but thankfully there is WoW for you. There still isn't a *playable* contemporary game that plays with old school attributes.
The problem isn't 'what was in older MMOs that aren't in newer MMOs'. The problem is what was scaled back, thinned out or made completely irrelevent in newer MMOs. Older MMOs were about playing in a virtual world. Newer MMOs are more about racing to the end to grind out epic loot or pvp gear while waiting for the next new dungeon or pvp season to start so you can grind again.
I tried to say that above your post, but I probably rambled too much. Its just that simple to me. The new generation are less buggy, look better, have many amazing features, but removed all the things that made them worlds. This is why the communities are crap, and why many get bored fast. If there is nothing to do other than combat, it doesn't matter how pretty it looks, or how good it plays, there is no way I can stay subbed for very long.
I like games, and play many, but I prefer worlds, and they are gone for now in this genre.
Aye.
A lot of the gamers WoW brought in are the people who would never have touched an MMO to begin with because in their eyes there was no definitve 'point' to the games. And thats what made them great, the fact that there wasn't any one true point other than to be in that world.
The gamers WoW appealed to needed a 'point' to a game, a 'reason' to keep playing long enough to justify playing it to begin with. They also needed a game that rewarded them for every little thing they did, while at the same time wanting a game that got to the 'point' as fast as possible, with little to no distractions (or 'time sinks') along the way.
Today WoW is a game with little of what made MMOs fun (sure its there, but its so thinned out, watered down and irrelevent to the point of being unneeded) with a set 'point' (get to end game as fast as possible and raid/pvp till eyes bleed). They wanted nothing to do with camping the same mobs 24/7 because it was boring and a grind, So instead they were given a quest system. Yet strangely they are willing to sit in the same dungeons over and over and over grinding out bosses for weeks to months on end for trivial gear that will be rendered 'junk' once the next dungeon comes out....
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Originally posted by fyerwall Today WoW is a game with little of what made MMOs fun (sure its there, but its so thinned out, watered down and irrelevent to the point of being unneeded) with a set 'point' (get to end game as fast as possible and raid/pvp till eyes bleed). They wanted nothing to do with camping the same mobs 24/7 because it was boring and a grind, So instead they were given a quest system. Yet strangely they are willing to sit in the same dungeons over and over and over grinding out bosses for weeks to months on end for trivial gear that will be rendered 'junk' once the next dungeon comes out....
This exactly; I think a real disconnect between gamers that enjoy the old school MMORPGs and those that love WoW is that the old schoolers enjoy the RPG aspect, whereas WoW players want a MMO Action/Adventure game. The same desires just aren't there.
Originally posted by fyerwall Today WoW is a game with little of what made MMOs fun (sure its there, but its so thinned out, watered down and irrelevent to the point of being unneeded) with a set 'point' (get to end game as fast as possible and raid/pvp till eyes bleed). They wanted nothing to do with camping the same mobs 24/7 because it was boring and a grind, So instead they were given a quest system. Yet strangely they are willing to sit in the same dungeons over and over and over grinding out bosses for weeks to months on end for trivial gear that will be rendered 'junk' once the next dungeon comes out....
This exactly; I think a real disconnect between gamers that enjoy the old school MMORPGs and those that love WoW is that the old schoolers enjoy the RPG aspect, whereas WoW players want a MMO Action/Adventure game. The same desires just aren't there.
Exactly.
Thing is people can't for some reason accept that. It somehow makes their heads hurt and noses bleed when they try to figure out 'People can play a game and have fun without the game having a 'point' or 'goal' to it?!'
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Originally posted by fyerwall Today WoW is a game with little of what made MMOs fun (sure its there, but its so thinned out, watered down and irrelevent to the point of being unneeded) with a set 'point' (get to end game as fast as possible and raid/pvp till eyes bleed). They wanted nothing to do with camping the same mobs 24/7 because it was boring and a grind, So instead they were given a quest system. Yet strangely they are willing to sit in the same dungeons over and over and over grinding out bosses for weeks to months on end for trivial gear that will be rendered 'junk' once the next dungeon comes out....
This exactly; I think a real disconnect between gamers that enjoy the old school MMORPGs and those that love WoW is that the old schoolers enjoy the RPG aspect, whereas WoW players want a MMO Action/Adventure game. The same desires just aren't there.
Exactly.
Thing is people can't for some reason accept that. It somehow makes their heads hurt and noses bleed when they try to figure out 'People can play a game and have fun without the game having a 'point' or 'goal' to it?!'
I'd much rather be free to just go where I want, which the mob grinding system allowed. People didn't camp the same room for hours, they usually moved around, because you'd get camp bonus xp if you killed mobs that hadn't been hunted in a long time. And since you're moving around and exploring the dungeon, and each encounter is different, its a bit more exciting. Also, it allows for more socializing, instead of just follow the mini map to quest hub over and over and over.
Well, that is not the EQ i remember. If you leave teh room, you LOSE your place in the camp queue. In fact, camping was much much longer, and horribly BORING, in the old EQ dungeons. Even xp mobs are camped to death because people only do the most efficient ones.
Plus, no one says you have to follow the quests the same way. You have a choice of WHICH quest to do first, and which hub to do first.
I guess we can possibly agree on the industry has moved on from offering challenging, complex games to offering simple, easy games because the market changed.
Fixed that for you. Not all players like to be spoonfed their games. WoW was far more noob-friendly than EQ1, but not nearly as noob-friendly as it is now. Accessibility is a big draw to new MMO-ers and level of polish is a draw to all gamers, but that accessibility is only great until you have a grip on the dynamics of the game- after that it just feels condescending. The sad thing is that newer gamers just have no idea what they could have in a game, because WoW is all they have experienced. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
For those that do know better but play anyway- Just because people are subscribing to WoW doesn't mean they are playing it often, are captivated by it, or even like the game itself as it is now. There are many possible reasons for this but I think a couple of good reasons are because there really isn't a better choice out (especially one that's as polished/bug-free) or that they have enough friends in the game that it's hard to leave them all behind.
Two things:
1. Accessibility is important for a large number of the MMO crowd, including me. I don't have many hours of playtime each week and I'll be damned to spend them doing something which isn't fun. I sub to games because they provide entertainment, I have plenty of challenges at work.
2. I've experienced a number of old school MMO's and I didn't like what they offered.I've experienced a number of new MMO's and didn't like what they offered. Ignorance isn't always bliss, sometimes it's being informed.
1. That's great, there are plenty of dumbed down games out there for players like you that can't be bothered to put in some extra time. Not all games are for all players. We're just asking for one contemporary MMO that has the attributes we wish to see in a MMORPG.
2. Firstly, ignorance is never being informed because that doesn't make any sense except in your head. Secondly, it's a shame that you, one player (of three in this thread that seem to be extreme wow fanboys), dislike all MMOs except WoW, but thankfully there is WoW for you. There still isn't a *playable* contemporary game that plays with old school attributes.
EDIT: added playable above to address Vanguard
Good thing you are making assumptions to suit your accusations of me and my gaming preferences. I'm not going to respond to it as its clear you have made your mind up and unable to change your opinion no matter what sort of evidence to the contrary I may offer.
For the nth time, if there really was a playerbase large enough to support an old school game one would probably exist. If there isn't, your best option is to create it yourself to get the final proof that it isn't nearly as popular as you claim. What you are asking for seems to be outside the realm of possibility, and the sooner you realize, the better.
My play on words obviously did not sit well with you and in retrospect I see that it was erroneous. I was talking about ignoring old school features because you know what they are, not being ignorant about them.
And I'm pretty sure there are some quite unaltered MUDs still running, but that's not the old school you want I guess. If I am not mistaken you want EQ/UO/AC etc circa 2000. Some day you'll face it: Just won't happen, things have changed.
Yep, that's pretty much old school. Not for every encounter, but you did need at least one or two friends to do some things. That would be considered forced grouping. All games have some level of it, but it's hard to really see anylonger besides raids and such. Well one vote for NO! So back to Disney Toon Town for you!
Originally posted by nariusseldon
I'd much rather be free to just go where I want, which the mob grinding system allowed. People didn't camp the same room for hours, they usually moved around, because you'd get camp bonus xp if you killed mobs that hadn't been hunted in a long time. And since you're moving around and exploring the dungeon, and each encounter is different, its a bit more exciting. Also, it allows for more socializing, instead of just follow the mini map to quest hub over and over and over.
Well, that is not the EQ i remember. If you leave teh room, you LOSE your place in the camp queue. In fact, camping was much much longer, and horribly BORING, in the old EQ dungeons. Even xp mobs are camped to death because people only do the most efficient ones.
Plus, no one says you have to follow the quests the same way. You have a choice of WHICH quest to do first, and which hub to do first.
Dude yeah there was camping for hours, and it was fun! Sometimes you had to wait to join a group spot. My fav was KC for sure, it took skill to stay alive in there and I liked the setting. That started to die out though, after EQ started to reorganize for solo players. I mean I like to solo sometimes too, and even did back then for some things, but when it all becomes solo, it kills the experiance. Why group when you can just get good stuff soloing?(drying uip zone groups). May as well play Morrowind, or Oblivion.
For the nth time, if there really was a playerbase large enough to support an old school game one would probably exist. If there isn't, your best option is to create it yourself to get the final proof that it isn't nearly as popular as you claim. What you are asking for seems to be outside the realm of possibility, and the sooner you realize, the better.
I've seen this comment so many times on these forums and every time I place a response it gets ignored, like the people saying this stuff can't find a counter-argument. Again, I shall point out the figures to show that the playerbase is there and waiting for a new game to jump onto:
EverQuest and Final Fantasy had higher subscription rates than most of the others combined. EverQuest dropped in popularity the moment EverQuest 2 came out - obviously people were jumping over the try the new game. No doubt they were disappointed with the WoW-esque approach, didn't go back to original EverQuest and have been hovering around ever since.
Look at where the new wave of solo-friendly MMO's have come. Games such as City of Heroes and Lord of the Rings Online are struggling to reach 200,000 where in its day, EverQuest more than doubled it.
At the other end of the spectrum you have World of Warcraft:
This is incomparable to every other MMO out there. Why? Because it attracted the people who played the original Warcraft games. It had a franchise behind it and the game was friendly to people who had never played an MMO before. You can't have a subscription base of 10,000,000 when the best MMO before that only reached 500,000ish without reason. The typical people who chose to play WoW are not your average MMO player and haven't, according to the figures, migrated to any other MMO since.
So to say that there aren't 'old school' gamers still around is just wrong. They just haven't found anywhere to place their hats yet. Over 500,000 people are waiting for the next 'old school' game to arrive, it makes sense for the developers to start making one, rather than repeatedly trying to pull in a crowd from WoW that don't even want to play 'normal' MMO's.
EverQuest and Final Fantasy had higher subscription rates than most of the others combined. EverQuest dropped in popularity the moment EverQuest 2 came out - obviously people were jumping over the try the new game. No doubt they were disappointed with the WoW-esque approach, didn't go back to original EverQuest and have been hovering around ever since.
Look at where the new wave of solo-friendly MMO's have come. Games such as City of Heroes and Lord of the Rings Online are struggling to reach 200,000 where in its day, EverQuest more than doubled it.
Ummmm you didn't play EQ? It changed before EQII came around. EQII was even more solo play than what EQ had become. They listened to the QQ'ers, made consession, ruined the game. LOTRO is WoW. CoH... boring solo too, quick pickup groups lasting 10 minutes then dispersed to follow mission arcs. Same old same old. WoW is a locked community, they are not interested in other mmo's be they group or solo. But the publishers see the WoW numbers and keep beating their heads against the wall ignoring the actual mmog community.
It's not that there are not enough people, it just the publishers want a safe bet, and they see the WoW numbers as the bar to set for that investment. If it falls short of that, it's not worth publishing for them. It's about big money. Why invest 3mil and take a couple years to turn a profit (as all companies endure), they want instant gratification too, just like the dribble they are trying to push on the mmo community while trying to make the killer app/game for the locked community of WoW. If you don't have publishers for investment, then you have no chance to produce a AAA game as they decide what makes it to development and what does not. So they will keep cranking out fail after fail like a mad miner after a phantom vein of gold. Making a living isn’t good enough, it’s gotta be a like winning the lotto.
EverQuest and Final Fantasy had higher subscription rates than most of the others combined. EverQuest dropped in popularity the moment EverQuest 2 came out - obviously people were jumping over the try the new game. No doubt they were disappointed with the WoW-esque approach, didn't go back to original EverQuest and have been hovering around ever since.
Everquest 2 was released around the same time as WoW. We see Everquests subscriptions plummet and, crucially, not recover. The important question is why didn't they recover? Did 250,000 players suddenly decide to completely quit the genre?
I don't think that's likely and there is one rather obvious possibility. Perhaps they preferred the new approach and continued playing either EQ2 or WoW? Hard to say, but I think it's very likely.
If you take a time-out from playing a game you enjoy to test drive a new game and don't like it, then why wouldn't you go back to the game that you enjoy?
For the nth time, if there really was a playerbase large enough to support an old school game one would probably exist. If there isn't, your best option is to create it yourself to get the final proof that it isn't nearly as popular as you claim. What you are asking for seems to be outside the realm of possibility, and the sooner you realize, the better.
I've seen this comment so many times on these forums and every time I place a response it gets ignored, like the people saying this stuff can't find a counter-argument. Again, I shall point out the figures to show that the playerbase is there and waiting for a new game to jump onto:
EverQuest and Final Fantasy had higher subscription rates than most of the others combined. EverQuest dropped in popularity the moment EverQuest 2 came out - obviously people were jumping over the try the new game. No doubt they were disappointed with the WoW-esque approach, didn't go back to original EverQuest and have been hovering around ever since.
Look at where the new wave of solo-friendly MMO's have come. Games such as City of Heroes and Lord of the Rings Online are struggling to reach 200,000 where in its day, EverQuest more than doubled it.
At the other end of the spectrum you have World of Warcraft:
This is incomparable to every other MMO out there. Why? Because it attracted the people who played the original Warcraft games. It had a franchise behind it and the game was friendly to people who had never played an MMO before. You can't have a subscription base of 10,000,000 when the best MMO before that only reached 500,000ish without reason. The typical people who chose to play WoW are not your average MMO player and haven't, according to the figures, migrated to any other MMO since.
So to say that there aren't 'old school' gamers still around is just wrong. They just haven't found anywhere to place their hats yet. Over 500,000 people are waiting for the next 'old school' game to arrive, it makes sense for the developers to start making one, rather than repeatedly trying to pull in a crowd from WoW that don't even want to play 'normal' MMO's.
I think people should listen up to this. Well said. Plus, the old-school MMOs, albeit dated comparatively, are still around. In some ways I think Darkfall is attempting to apply more modern looks an old-school approach, but nothing at the level of EQ IMO. I'm also a more "old-schooler", and most of my tendencies are toward the EQ-style of play. However, I play LoTRO and thoroughly enjoy it. I also like EVE and several others. I think that looking at the landscape of MMOs out there right now, you have to give at least some credit to Blizzard for innovating Apple-style. They took some of the best game mechanics from DAoC, EQ, AC, and several others but instead of pulling a Microsoft and copying it directly, they took the time and effort to put their own spin on it. I don't play WoW anymore because of it's massive addicting qualities. And the players, at least on the PvE server I was on, made the experience less than stellar. So to all the so-called "old-schoolers" out there, I feel your pain, but like almost all hobbies, MMOs are evolving to support the newer crowd, not just us more PnP D&D folks. We played for the fun of it, the companionship, and the challenge. Nowadays I just don't think those points are at the forefront anymore.
For the nth time, if there really was a playerbase large enough to support an old school game one would probably exist. If there isn't, your best option is to create it yourself to get the final proof that it isn't nearly as popular as you claim. What you are asking for seems to be outside the realm of possibility, and the sooner you realize, the better.
I've seen this comment so many times on these forums and every time I place a response it gets ignored, like the people saying this stuff can't find a counter-argument. Again, I shall point out the figures to show that the playerbase is there and waiting for a new game to jump onto:
EverQuest and Final Fantasy had higher subscription rates than most of the others combined. EverQuest dropped in popularity the moment EverQuest 2 came out - obviously people were jumping over the try the new game. No doubt they were disappointed with the WoW-esque approach, didn't go back to original EverQuest and have been hovering around ever since.
Look at where the new wave of solo-friendly MMO's have come. Games such as City of Heroes and Lord of the Rings Online are struggling to reach 200,000 where in its day, EverQuest (had) more than doubled it.
At the other end of the spectrum you have World of Warcraft:
This is incomparable to every other MMO out there. Why? Because it attracted the people who played the original Warcraft games. It had a franchise behind it and the game was friendly to people who had never played an MMO before. You can't have a subscription base of 10,000,000 when the best MMO before that only reached 500,000ish without reason. The typical people who chose to play WoW are not your average MMO player and haven't, according to the figures, migrated to any other MMO since.
So to say that there aren't 'old school' gamers still around is just wrong. They just haven't found anywhere to place their hats yet. Over 500,000 people are waiting for the next 'old school' game to arrive, it makes sense for the developers to start making one, rather than repeatedly trying to pull in a crowd from WoW that don't even want to play 'normal' MMO's.
I'll comment on what's on red. You are talking in past tense and then suddenly projecting past numbers to the future without any proof that the people who played pre-WoW would automatically join a new old school game. The fact that they didn't go back quite possibly means they went to WoW. The meteoric rise of WoW is more a proof that it stole huge numbers from other games, and not that the people playing other games stopped playing.
Face it, most of the people who played old school games ended up in WoW, their decline just correlates too well, both statistically and logically, with WoWs rise to be spurious. They didn't stop playing, and they might not be a interested as you think to join a new old school MMO. 500k waiting for an old school MMO? You wish..
Comments
Who is demanding anything? This thread is about a person ( OP ) asking others if they would like to see old school MMO concepts introduced into new MMORPGs.
The idea behind my previous post and the comparison between the camping monster respawns vs quest system is that the quest system is more complex in its design. It offers back story, purpose, it makes you go to specific points, it tells you when you're done. Respawn camps are much simpler in design than this where its you go to point A, you kill until you're strong enough to go to point B etc. We have a gone a long way.
Obviously, if there's a large influx of new MMO's especially ones trying to follow the success of others, expect things to be borrowed, copied, used because all the other genres do this. Shooters don't differentiate each other too much in terms of gameplay - "Grab gun, point gun, pull trigger, strafe left to right and pray you survive", but yet they manage to separate themselves from each other. Newer games that might not have appeared successful have been contributing and progressing the genre, even if it is subtle, i.e. WAR's public questing system, experimentations with PvPvE design, various class designs/skill allocations etc.
Ultimately, what is in older MMO's that aren't in newer MMO's? This is a question that many people tend to brush by and ignore but its probably the most important to answer. This'll define the reason whether or not there is a missed feeling about the genre that does not exist today. As hard as I try, I cannot find anything that isn't available to us that existed then.
Older MMOs had open non-instanced worlds, Group-based design for leveling, meaningful world bosses, difficult world mobs, meaningful quest-lines, and most importantly of all they enforced community > all else. You seem to brush community aside as a non-factor and you do this because that has what the MMORPG genre has done, but to the old school players out there community is everything.
The reason that I play MMORPGs is not so that I can walk around the city and show off my phat lewts to everyone, I play them to interact with others, build friendships, and work towards goals ( all of these I find fun, by the way. )
Instance and non-instance, group-based design for leveling, what is/isn't meaningful and difficult varies on people's opinion or are very subjective. Its either the greatest thing or the worst thing, generally most people like somewhere in between in terms of any of these things. It's funny you mention quest-lines because they were very rare compared to what it is now and I haven't heard of questing until WoW and I wouldn't call questing a very inherent feature of the past. It was only experienced by a select few people. I still stand firm that older MMO's are a bit of a shell of where we are at today, its just today's MMO's have the challenge of having to cater to millions rather than thousands.
In regards to community, how exactly did they reinforce community better than today? They more or less did the same things that MMO's do now, release patches and everyone once in awhile host a big game event. Actual in the past, communities more or less formed and managed themselves and companies didn't really put forth much effort in terms of their own community management. I haven't heard of an MMO having their own forum until WoW, I don't thnk I even recall DAoC having one.
These days, you have PR and community managers trying to gather feedback in a somewhat organized fashion, reaching out to the community, answering questions, bringing back other questions to ask devs etc.
EDIT: In regards to group design, it actually doesn't cater too well to the casual. You needed 1-2 hours at the very least set aside to do anything meaningful and thats if you can find a group right away, which can sometimes take 30min to an hour. Then after that you have to pray that your group doesn't wipe at ALL or else you are literally pushed back in progression, which has created many frustrating experiences for myself. Sounds like a fairly rigid design and not the greatest gaming experience at times.
The reason quests were so rare back then was because they actually had meaning. EQ1 had very few quests, but the quests that it had ( epic quests, raid - progression quests, etc.. ) were extremely epic and had nothing to do with killing 10 rats.
By community I am talking in-game community. You may not know, but human beings follow what is called the path of least resistance. If WoW handed out weapons that 1 shot raid bosses, you can be damn sure that people would use it. Would it be more fun? Not to most people, but then there are people like you who would call it progress because you don't have to go through combat and healing and tanking and strategy and all of that lame stuff that people had to do before the 1-shotting weapons were introduced.
By creating goals for players that were not easily achieved, it caused players to work together to achieve said goals and promoted a sense of unity within the playerbase. Things like $10 name-change, LFD tool, cheap server Xfers, make your name absolutely pointless in MMOs these days. You have no reputation because one day you can ninja loot an entire raid or be a total asshat to people, and the next day have an entirely new identity.
Sure new MMOs have instanced raids where 25 people from a guild get together to try and get loot, but old MMOs had so much more. Open world bosses, Epic Questlines that required a raid to complete, Keys / Flags that guilds had to work together to attain, etc. These things built up in game community and built friendships.
If you really think that is completely true, learn Korean
…and Chinese soon enough.
At some point the suits will abandon you, too.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
For myself, this is simple. It IS the tedious things you are talking about. Some people just don't find them tedious, and its my opinion that those things make the community. Why? Because there is a greater chance for like minded people. WOW is not an MMORPG community, its a game community, so there are many different playstyles. Old school gamers tend to poke fun of the worst members, but there are many good people in there too of course.
When you remove the tedious features, the world becomes a game. Its that simple. If you disagree, cool. But that is the way I see it. I think the old schoolers ( I am one ) prefer worlds, and don't last very long in games, even if they are in fact fun. Now those old games were among the first generation, so of course many tedious features were just bad design. I think what we wanted was those things fixed, not removed.
Other games I prefer that have the same subtle differences.
Flight Simulators compared to Tom Clancy's HAWK or those console Aces games
Flight sims have the tediousness of take-offs, landing, navigation, gimble ranges in radars etc
Rainbow Six series compared to the latest versions of it
The first RS6 games had the tediousness of designing and outfitting the missions
Armed Assault compared to Modern Warfare.
Armed Assault had the tediousness of flying to your objective, bullet drop, real weapons range, frontal assaults do
not work etc.
I would say in all those examples, the average gamer would prefer the second choice, which I view as the version with the good features removed. The first examples are much more broad in scope over the second, but I have no illusions, the second set look better, run better, have far more gamers and less bugs. But to me, they are simple games, no more. I just can't get into them for more than short bursts. MMORPGs are no different. Worlds were replaced with loot chasing mini games. I doubt the majority of these players even read their quests, which is a mechanic they asked for.
To communities again, the Flight community is just amazing, you never need to worry about playing alone, but can if you wish ( get your arse handed to you though ). Armed Assault is just as good, with many good guilds to help you out. They are good because they all playing that niche game for the same reasons. Old school gamers were RPG players. Same thing. The new games are designed to attract large cross over, so the community is not as similar.
I could go on and on, but I always type too much anyways, and I know its pointless. Most people here aren't looking for discussion but arguments. The bottom line is, people look for different things in their games, but no one seems to accept this. Numbers and stats do not mean anything. But it matters is your preference isnt even available to play. The only good old school game ( not affected by massive changes since it started anyways ) is Eve, which is doing well, but you can't get more niche than that.
Large open worlds, character depth, difficulty, puzzels, exploration on a large scale and more social interaction. These games were virtual worlds where the emphasis was on the journey and not the destination. There was no 'Game begins at (insert level cap)' mentality. Accomplishments meant more than they do today.
Thing is when you mention the part about questing, how it shows you where to go, gives you the back story and tells you when its time to move on, thats where the games lost their sense of adventure and exploration. The so called 'complexity' of the questing systems is really just a clever way to make a player follow a predetermined path. This makes the journey more of a guided tour. In most cases this tour was created to prevent the players from wandering too far off this path and seeing how small the worlds have actually become. It also allowed the developers to focus less on content at a large scale and provide just enough things to do to get you through the level range and closer to the end game at a faster clip. And once at end game the only content they really have to provide is a new dungeon now and then and a new set of epics to farm.
In older MMOs crafting was a viable option for people who didn't care about making it to end game. Crafting allowed players to make useful items at all levels, such as armor and weapons to outfit their characters with as well as sell to others. In newer MMOs crafting is rendered almost useless as anything you can make can easily be out classed by something you find on a quick dungeon run or from quest rewards.
The problem isn't 'what was in older MMOs that aren't in newer MMOs'. The problem is what was scaled back, thinned out or made completely irrelevent in newer MMOs. Older MMOs were about playing in a virtual world. Newer MMOs are more about racing to the end to grind out epic loot or pvp gear while waiting for the next new dungeon or pvp season to start so you can grind again.
Community in older MMOs were a lot different than they are today. In old MMOs reputation meant something. If you were a dick people knew you as such. Be a dick to too many people and your rep would make it hard for you to get anything done. Today people can be a dick all they want and nothing happens. And on the off chance something does happen, $25 buys you a new name or a server change. In older MMOs players who Ebay'd their characters were shunned because they never learned how to play the class. They were a liability and rightly labled as such. And it was hard to hide the fact you bought the character from Ebay because again, reputation. Someone somewhere knew the character before it was sold off. Word gets around that 'so and so sold his Pally on ebay'. Today people can buy an account, pay a lil extra to switch servers or change the name and no one is the wiser. People can now just buy a max level character with full epics and get away with it.
As far as social interaction, in older MMIOs you got to know the people you were playing with. Some people even made lasting friendships with other players, even players outside of their own guilds. People actually talked to each other back then, even in passing. People helped strangers just to help them. Today the most talking that happens in a group of strangers is 'AFK' 'BRB' 'PULLING' 'LOL' 'Can I need on that?'. And people rarely help strangers. In fact when you have a group of several people all needing a mob spawn for a quest objective, these people would rather try to beat everyone else to the kill than to group up for it.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
I tried to say that above your post, but I probably rambled too much. Its just that simple to me. The new generation are less buggy, look better, have many amazing features, but removed all the things that made them worlds. This is why the communities are crap, and why many get bored fast. If there is nothing to do other than combat, it doesn't matter how pretty it looks, or how good it plays, there is no way I can stay subbed for very long.
I like games, and play many, but I prefer worlds, and they are gone for now in this genre.
1. That's great, there are plenty of dumbed down games out there for players like you that can't be bothered to put in some extra time. Not all games are for all players. We're just asking for one contemporary MMO that has the attributes we wish to see in a MMORPG.
2. Firstly, ignorance is never being informed because that doesn't make any sense except in your head. Secondly, it's a shame that you, one player (of three in this thread that seem to be extreme wow fanboys), dislike all MMOs except WoW, but thankfully there is WoW for you. There still isn't a *playable* contemporary game that plays with old school attributes.
EDIT: added playable above to address Vanguard
Aye.
A lot of the gamers WoW brought in are the people who would never have touched an MMO to begin with because in their eyes there was no definitve 'point' to the games. And thats what made them great, the fact that there wasn't any one true point other than to be in that world.
The gamers WoW appealed to needed a 'point' to a game, a 'reason' to keep playing long enough to justify playing it to begin with. They also needed a game that rewarded them for every little thing they did, while at the same time wanting a game that got to the 'point' as fast as possible, with little to no distractions (or 'time sinks') along the way.
Today WoW is a game with little of what made MMOs fun (sure its there, but its so thinned out, watered down and irrelevent to the point of being unneeded) with a set 'point' (get to end game as fast as possible and raid/pvp till eyes bleed). They wanted nothing to do with camping the same mobs 24/7 because it was boring and a grind, So instead they were given a quest system. Yet strangely they are willing to sit in the same dungeons over and over and over grinding out bosses for weeks to months on end for trivial gear that will be rendered 'junk' once the next dungeon comes out....
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
This exactly; I think a real disconnect between gamers that enjoy the old school MMORPGs and those that love WoW is that the old schoolers enjoy the RPG aspect, whereas WoW players want a MMO Action/Adventure game. The same desires just aren't there.
Exactly.
Thing is people can't for some reason accept that. It somehow makes their heads hurt and noses bleed when they try to figure out 'People can play a game and have fun without the game having a 'point' or 'goal' to it?!'
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
The question to your answer is the number 42
..oh wait.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
I'd much rather be free to just go where I want, which the mob grinding system allowed. People didn't camp the same room for hours, they usually moved around, because you'd get camp bonus xp if you killed mobs that hadn't been hunted in a long time. And since you're moving around and exploring the dungeon, and each encounter is different, its a bit more exciting. Also, it allows for more socializing, instead of just follow the mini map to quest hub over and over and over.
Well, that is not the EQ i remember. If you leave teh room, you LOSE your place in the camp queue. In fact, camping was much much longer, and horribly BORING, in the old EQ dungeons. Even xp mobs are camped to death because people only do the most efficient ones.
Plus, no one says you have to follow the quests the same way. You have a choice of WHICH quest to do first, and which hub to do first.
Good thing you are making assumptions to suit your accusations of me and my gaming preferences. I'm not going to respond to it as its clear you have made your mind up and unable to change your opinion no matter what sort of evidence to the contrary I may offer.
For the nth time, if there really was a playerbase large enough to support an old school game one would probably exist. If there isn't, your best option is to create it yourself to get the final proof that it isn't nearly as popular as you claim. What you are asking for seems to be outside the realm of possibility, and the sooner you realize, the better.
My play on words obviously did not sit well with you and in retrospect I see that it was erroneous. I was talking about ignoring old school features because you know what they are, not being ignorant about them.
And I'm pretty sure there are some quite unaltered MUDs still running, but that's not the old school you want I guess. If I am not mistaken you want EQ/UO/AC etc circa 2000. Some day you'll face it: Just won't happen, things have changed.
If by old school you mean:
Big/Huge world
No instances
Higher difficulty levels and harsher death penalties
No RMT
Then YES!
However if you mean:
Un-intuitive GUI and/or manual (be it online or otherwise)
Long Downtime between fights
Forced grouping
Then NO!
My gaming blog
Yep, that's pretty much old school. Not for every encounter, but you did need at least one or two friends to do some things. That would be considered forced grouping. All games have some level of it, but it's hard to really see anylonger besides raids and such. Well one vote for NO! So back to Disney Toon Town for you!
Dude yeah there was camping for hours, and it was fun! Sometimes you had to wait to join a group spot. My fav was KC for sure, it took skill to stay alive in there and I liked the setting. That started to die out though, after EQ started to reorganize for solo players. I mean I like to solo sometimes too, and even did back then for some things, but when it all becomes solo, it kills the experiance. Why group when you can just get good stuff soloing?(drying uip zone groups). May as well play Morrowind, or Oblivion.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
For the nth time, if there really was a playerbase large enough to support an old school game one would probably exist. If there isn't, your best option is to create it yourself to get the final proof that it isn't nearly as popular as you claim. What you are asking for seems to be outside the realm of possibility, and the sooner you realize, the better.
I've seen this comment so many times on these forums and every time I place a response it gets ignored, like the people saying this stuff can't find a counter-argument. Again, I shall point out the figures to show that the playerbase is there and waiting for a new game to jump onto:
http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart2.html
EverQuest and Final Fantasy had higher subscription rates than most of the others combined. EverQuest dropped in popularity the moment EverQuest 2 came out - obviously people were jumping over the try the new game. No doubt they were disappointed with the WoW-esque approach, didn't go back to original EverQuest and have been hovering around ever since.
Look at where the new wave of solo-friendly MMO's have come. Games such as City of Heroes and Lord of the Rings Online are struggling to reach 200,000 where in its day, EverQuest more than doubled it.
At the other end of the spectrum you have World of Warcraft:
http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart1.html
This is incomparable to every other MMO out there. Why? Because it attracted the people who played the original Warcraft games. It had a franchise behind it and the game was friendly to people who had never played an MMO before. You can't have a subscription base of 10,000,000 when the best MMO before that only reached 500,000ish without reason. The typical people who chose to play WoW are not your average MMO player and haven't, according to the figures, migrated to any other MMO since.
So to say that there aren't 'old school' gamers still around is just wrong. They just haven't found anywhere to place their hats yet. Over 500,000 people are waiting for the next 'old school' game to arrive, it makes sense for the developers to start making one, rather than repeatedly trying to pull in a crowd from WoW that don't even want to play 'normal' MMO's.
You don't "have" to play anything you don't like. In fact, you don't "have" to comment here. Why not try another thread with other like-minded people?
insanex
Ummmm you didn't play EQ? It changed before EQII came around. EQII was even more solo play than what EQ had become. They listened to the QQ'ers, made consession, ruined the game. LOTRO is WoW. CoH... boring solo too, quick pickup groups lasting 10 minutes then dispersed to follow mission arcs. Same old same old. WoW is a locked community, they are not interested in other mmo's be they group or solo. But the publishers see the WoW numbers and keep beating their heads against the wall ignoring the actual mmog community.
It's not that there are not enough people, it just the publishers want a safe bet, and they see the WoW numbers as the bar to set for that investment. If it falls short of that, it's not worth publishing for them. It's about big money. Why invest 3mil and take a couple years to turn a profit (as all companies endure), they want instant gratification too, just like the dribble they are trying to push on the mmo community while trying to make the killer app/game for the locked community of WoW. If you don't have publishers for investment, then you have no chance to produce a AAA game as they decide what makes it to development and what does not. So they will keep cranking out fail after fail like a mad miner after a phantom vein of gold. Making a living isn’t good enough, it’s gotta be a like winning the lotto.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
Everquest 2 was released around the same time as WoW. We see Everquests subscriptions plummet and, crucially, not recover. The important question is why didn't they recover? Did 250,000 players suddenly decide to completely quit the genre?
I don't think that's likely and there is one rather obvious possibility. Perhaps they preferred the new approach and continued playing either EQ2 or WoW? Hard to say, but I think it's very likely.
If you take a time-out from playing a game you enjoy to test drive a new game and don't like it, then why wouldn't you go back to the game that you enjoy?
I think people should listen up to this. Well said. Plus, the old-school MMOs, albeit dated comparatively, are still around. In some ways I think Darkfall is attempting to apply more modern looks an old-school approach, but nothing at the level of EQ IMO. I'm also a more "old-schooler", and most of my tendencies are toward the EQ-style of play. However, I play LoTRO and thoroughly enjoy it. I also like EVE and several others. I think that looking at the landscape of MMOs out there right now, you have to give at least some credit to Blizzard for innovating Apple-style. They took some of the best game mechanics from DAoC, EQ, AC, and several others but instead of pulling a Microsoft and copying it directly, they took the time and effort to put their own spin on it. I don't play WoW anymore because of it's massive addicting qualities. And the players, at least on the PvE server I was on, made the experience less than stellar. So to all the so-called "old-schoolers" out there, I feel your pain, but like almost all hobbies, MMOs are evolving to support the newer crowd, not just us more PnP D&D folks. We played for the fun of it, the companionship, and the challenge. Nowadays I just don't think those points are at the forefront anymore.
insanex
Not me because we're supposed to be advancing mmos for the better not moving backwards in time.
I'll comment on what's on red. You are talking in past tense and then suddenly projecting past numbers to the future without any proof that the people who played pre-WoW would automatically join a new old school game. The fact that they didn't go back quite possibly means they went to WoW. The meteoric rise of WoW is more a proof that it stole huge numbers from other games, and not that the people playing other games stopped playing.
Face it, most of the people who played old school games ended up in WoW, their decline just correlates too well, both statistically and logically, with WoWs rise to be spurious. They didn't stop playing, and they might not be a interested as you think to join a new old school MMO. 500k waiting for an old school MMO? You wish..