Howdy, Stranger!

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

Current day MMORPG issues.

Spector88Spector88 Member UncommonPosts: 112

I couldn't put my finger on it for the longest time. As a PC gamer since the Ultima Online/Everquest days, and have also played just about every major release in the last 10 years, including over a dozen free to play MMORPGs, such as Conquer, 9 Dragons, and the list goes on and on.

My best friend and some of my gaming pals have been going through what a lot of people have been going through, Game A gets hyped, people buy Game A for 60$, Game A gets huge box sales, within 45 days Game A has 75% of population leave game and disperse, within 6 months Game A is scrambling to get new subs/players.

What happened?

 

Originally games were designed FOR GAMERS by GAMERS, this makes a big difference, see back in the day, games were made  to be enjoyed and to be bold, different. Now games are designed for casuals, for sales, and to be dumbed down and enjoyed on a smaller level by a larger amount of people. Best recent example: Diablo III, no skill points, no build points, super - mega easy quest helper, super super super linear, almost no social apsects, the game should be called Diablo: Casual Edition.

Don't mistake me for an elitist, I'm not, what I am though, is a guy who longs for seamless or semi-seamless worlds with realistic social aspects/adventure, where things aren't super duper easy and handed to me, where I can get lost and caught up trying to figure stuff out, like Everquest, Asheron's Call etc.

Instead of farming unique, interesting creatures for pieces of items and building awesome gear we just find it, instead of running all over the place and FINDING dungeons and finding mysterious places or having people guide us to different locations we click portal A and end up at destination B.

We have sacrficed customization for ease, and the experience for graphics, time and time again. Now I'm not saying every game that has come out since WoW vanilla has been terrible, but the fact is people, ORPG's aren't made for gamers anymore, they're made for box sales which is going to always be the casual player. The 8 people out of 10 who buy a game, play it for 3 weeks, and then quit or pay for a sub for 3-4 months but hardly ever log on, because that's how they define success, by a bottom line.

Games like Diablo 3 most recently and SWTOR, I just ask myself. These people that develope these games, do they play them? Have they hit max level and been honest with themselves? If they had they would say damn, this game is so restrictive, and I'm bored.

The fact is, I've given a lot of games a chance, and instead of them taking ideas from original games and coming up with original/bold ideas they keep simplifying, making things dumbed down and too easy, and they keep failing. I haven't outgrown MMORPG's, MMORPG's dumbed themselves out of my arms and into the laps of 16 year olds with play Xbox 14 hours a day.

I know im not the only one hurting, man I wish I could figure out how to get involved in an ORPG company as a career, but it seems like it is just as political or a longshot as trying to get into acting, modeling, or politics, its a close knit community of people, and that is probably why they keep having the same results. If triple chin Jay Wilson knew anything about games, Diablo III wouldn't have the end game it does now, which wasn't even tested. Don't even get me started on Aion, and several other games.

Best of luck to you all, hope I find a home sometime before 2015.

image

Comments

  • Spector88Spector88 Member UncommonPosts: 112

    :)

    image

  • ClerigoClerigo Member UncommonPosts: 400

    Well nothing more i could add to the OP words. So... ill just say this:

    image

  • SynthetickSynthetick Member Posts: 977

    I agree with a lot of sentiments in the OP, but there's more to it than just the direction that games are being developed. A lot of it also has to do with how long we as gamers have subjected ourselves to the same fantasy settings that function off the same mechanics.

    I've seen first-hand people come over to my house who are not versed in MMOs and get lost in them like I did in Asheron's Call back in '99. The reason being? Everything is absolutely new to them. They aren't grasping the limited customization options, the uninspired repetive motions, the copy and pasted combat systems and mobs from other games. Why? Because they haven't been exposed to it.

    I find myself semi-bored with the genre for multiple reasons. But half those reasons are my fault. Because I, as a gamer, have played MMOs virtually every day for the last 13 years. What excites me, surprises me, or even comes off as original to me has came and past in this genre.

    There are things to do in current games that I could never imagine back in '99. The scope of sieges in a lot of games, the scopes of PVP battles, some of the raid encounters, systems like dynamic events, rifts, and so much more. It's just after 13 years, these things appear as gimmicks to me. To a fresh player, they are absolutely amazing.

    It's all about perspective. MMOs, and any game, are always going to be limited. As a consumer, we know this. As a consumer, we are responsible for opening our eyes and realizing it's just just the developers here.

    image

  • DeathofsageDeathofsage Member UncommonPosts: 1,102

    Games like Diablo 3 most recently and SWTOR, I just ask myself. These people that develope these games, do they play them? Have they hit max level and been honest with themselves? If they had they would say damn, this game is so restrictive, and I'm bored.

    .

    I asked myself that about the time I quit Warcraft (about the same time as Cata release).

    They'd had this plan for protection paladins (tanks) that had several second of deadspace in the rotation and they were fine with it. Their idea was that "You can use some of your other tools while you're in this deadspace.".

    The other tools available to a protection paladin were~

    • Hand of Freedom - Removed and made target immune to movement impairing effects. Totally wasted if the target isn't impared as you're not likely to know when the target will need it.
    • Hand of Protection - Made the target immune to most physical damage, but also made the target virtually unable to tank. This was mostly used because it also cleared physical damage debuffs like Impale.
    • Hand of Salvation - Lowered the target's threat by 20%. Strategic use of this, if needed, was best.
    • Divine Guardian - Reduced damage to the raid for something like 6 or 8 seconds. Highly useful to use at strategic points.
    Point being that yeah.. their idea that you should burn one of these while sitting on a dead gap.. was stupid.
     
    Equally "inspring", Blizzard more recently said of Diablo 3 that "restarting" an instance to get a fresh random generation of enemies is a perfectly fine mechanic.
     
    I miss the days when games had to ship working properly and so they were properly tested by several teams rather than "eh, they'll live with it, we got our $".
     

    Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
    12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.

  • ScarlyngScarlyng Member UncommonPosts: 159

    I also believe there are no real experts.  There are a lot of people who want to think of themselves as experts, though.  Ultimately, game development companies are all about making money, so to be an expert, one would have to understand what economic factors figure into game design and development.

    The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw

  • Spector88Spector88 Member UncommonPosts: 112

    To me Diablo III has been the biggest disappointment to date, and worste handling of a community to date. Mostly because a 10 billion dollar company cannot make the same excuses an indy developer can. We expected more from D3, they did not deliver.

     

    ^ to the guy above, I agree. Maybe me and my friends are "BURNT" out from the genre, I do agree, you have a point such as TRANSFORMERS, to many the second and third movie did not seem as good, Maybe part of it is you have SEEN the amazing animations/the epicness of the transformers in the first movie, any movie after that no longer has the blow me away with 90 foot tall robot effects, so yes, maybe previous exposure makes enjoyment harder. But overall, I feel like many features and customization and social aspects keep getting reduced, and reduced, and reduced.

    image

  • DisdenaDisdena Member UncommonPosts: 1,093
    Originally posted by Spector88

    Originally games were designed FOR GAMERS by GAMERS, [... ] Now games are designed for casuals

    Don't mistake me for an elitist, I'm not

    Yes you are. See that right there? That's the definition of elitism. You're saying that of all the people who play video games, only a subset of that group—a subset that includes you—can truly be called GAMERS. The others aren't worthy of that label, you have to find another name for them, like "casuals".

    That's elitism.

    image
  • silvermembersilvermember Member UncommonPosts: 526
    Originally posted by Scarlyng

    I also believe there are no real experts.  There are a lot of people who want to think of themselves as experts, though.  Ultimately, game development companies are all about making money, so to be an expert, one would have to understand what economic factors figure into game design and development.

    I think this is an important point that a lot of people seem to not get especially the experts here on this stupid forum. They seem to think designing a product pretty much amounts to coming up with the idea, but it is far more than just that. Honestly, I believe coming up with the idea is the easiest part. Making it work so that it matches the companies objective is a whole otehr beast.

  • Spector88Spector88 Member UncommonPosts: 112
    Originally posted by Disdena
    Originally posted by Spector88

    Originally games were designed FOR GAMERS by GAMERS, [... ] Now games are designed for casuals

    Don't mistake me for an elitist, I'm not

    Yes you are. See that right there? That's the definition of elitism. You're saying that of all the people who play video games, only a subset of that group—a subset that includes you—can truly be called GAMERS. The others aren't worthy of that label, you have to find another name for them, like "casuals".

    That's elitism.

    The difference is im not saying I'm better then them, I'm just saying that I have different expecations. I don't make fun of a guy for going to a drag race to support his buddies 9 second QTR mile vette'. But I will argue that the track and racing conditions shouldn't be designed around the guys who show up to the track one day a year. Not the greatest anology, but I tried.

    image

  • DeathofsageDeathofsage Member UncommonPosts: 1,102
    Originally posted by Spector88
    Originally posted by Disdena
    Originally posted by Spector88

    Originally games were designed FOR GAMERS by GAMERS, [... ] Now games are designed for casuals

    Don't mistake me for an elitist, I'm not

    Yes you are. See that right there? That's the definition of elitism. You're saying that of all the people who play video games, only a subset of that group—a subset that includes you—can truly be called GAMERS. The others aren't worthy of that label, you have to find another name for them, like "casuals".

    That's elitism.

    The difference is im not saying I'm better then them, I'm just saying that I have different expecations. I don't make fun of a guy for going to a drag race to support his buddies 9 second QTR mile vette'. But I will argue that the track and racing conditions shouldn't be designed around the guys who show up to the track one day a year. Not the greatest anology, but I tried.

    OP isn't being an elitist.

    When you have games that are made by business people, just (and only just) doing a job, you end up with games that aren't fun. There's no other good answer for some of the colossal failures we've seen. Some of the mechanics that launches or expansions bring.. are just terrible but still they chug on.

    There's this attitude that companies have that betas are nearly-solely for reporting bugs. Most betas don't listen to feedback/suggestions that much, and instead focus just on fixing the bugs. They disregard what the gamers--people who play the game solely for fun--think of the game.

    That attitude is how we end up with colossal failures like FF14 and ToR and any number of others not worth naming.

    Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
    12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.

  • DrakxiiDrakxii Member Posts: 594
    Originally posted by Disdena
    Originally posted by Spector88

    Originally games were designed FOR GAMERS by GAMERS, [... ] Now games are designed for casuals

    Don't mistake me for an elitist, I'm not

    Yes you are. See that right there? That's the definition of elitism. You're saying that of all the people who play video games, only a subset of that group—a subset that includes you—can truly be called GAMERS. The others aren't worthy of that label, you have to find another name for them, like "casuals".

    That's elitism.

    No he saying that from the late 80s to early 2000s that games were made by gamers for gamers.  But now the majority of games are being made by gamers being directed by suits for the mass market.

    I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.

  • Spector88Spector88 Member UncommonPosts: 112

    I just want that feeling again, and everytime I wait a year or so for a game, and shell out 60$ I pray someone got it right, they never do.

     

    The closest game I've seen as of late I really like was Rift, and I still had my quarrels. I atleast respect Trion as a company.

     

    Sigh, someone save us.

    image

  • maplestonemaplestone Member UncommonPosts: 3,099
    Originally posted by Spector88

    I just want that feeling again, and everytime I wait a year or so for a game, and shell out 60$ I pray someone got it right, they never do.

    Alas, that's the curse of getting older.  You can't have those first experiences over again.  Everything fades, everything seems to keep flying by a little faster.  Those wonderful memories were not just the old games - they were your innocence colliding with the unknown. 

  • QuirhidQuirhid Member UncommonPosts: 6,230

    I had to. Don't judge!

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • KenFisherKenFisher Member UncommonPosts: 5,035
    Originally posted by Spector88

    I just want that feeling again, and everytime I wait a year or so for a game, and shell out 60$ I pray someone got it right, they never do.

     

    If anything, blame it on the budgets.  Pressure for return on investment is so great that the companies who finance game development dictate mass appeal.  They have to, or they don't make enough money back.

     

    In 1992 a game fit on 6 1.44 meg floppies.  In 2012 distribution packages are 6 gigs and up.  That costs money.

     

    Larger worlds, more detailed art, increased labor costs, longer development cycles... it all adds up.  Games for gamers simply isn't possible* except for niche games that don't need to sell a gazzilion copies to break even and don't have to pay back tons of money to a corporate financier.

     

    Consider this statement.  "I keep buying mainstream games looking for a gem, but most of them just end up being mainstream games".  If you think about it, that's not very surprising.

     

    * at least it isn't very likely


    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  When I don't understand, I ask.  Such is not intended as criticism.
  • Four0SixFour0Six Member UncommonPosts: 1,175

    I too am suffering from what I like to call MMO Malaise.

    I have divined up a solution though. Turn off the computer. We are all like junkies that are tired of the junk. When the developers see we are off doing something else, they, just like a good junk dealer, will figure out what we do want and see that we get it.

     

    I know it seems simple enough, but I was serious about "being junkies", that is why even after we hear/see/experiance poor gameplay, we still see crappy titles sell millions of copies.

     

    I recently quit smoking cigerettes after almost 20 years, I KNOW I can walk away from crap games, hell even the good ones. I'm going to fill my time with tabletop minature games, teaching my daughter to play MTG, knew I kept those cards for a reason, and even going outside, have my fishing licence in hand as we speak. Maybe after a bit a trend will develope and many more will walk away, causing our pain to transfer to the publishers by shrinking their magins. If not, I'll have a better tan, less fat, a better realitionship with my wife and daughter, and mostl likley a better attitude in general.

     

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,601

    I don't think it's ever possible to get that feeling again.  You have changed, you know more, your more experienced, your thought process is different.

    Not entirely equal but I'm going through a similar issue with my gf.  We've been dating for 2.5 years.  She just finisehd her nursing degree last month and was hired by a hospital yesterday.  I'm running out of excuses.  I don't hink I'm afraid of commitment however I just keep thinking to the girl I had before, unfair yes.  However the previous girlfriend, there was so  much passsion and fun, and energy, I was just a douche and didn't appreciate it.  This gf she is great don't get me wrong, kind, caring, outgoing, loves me to death... but there just isn't the same passion.  I've been thinking about it a lot and I honestly believe it's because I've changed.  I'm not the same, I know more, I've experienced more, maybe I'm more guarded, more jaded, I was younger and more ignorant, and making mistakes and more passionate as a whole, and because all that has change I'm not I will ever get that burning passion again so of course it is unfair to expect that of her.

    This is the same as our gaming history.  We are different, we know more, we've experienced more.  We played those other games when we were younger, more passionate, more energy, more time, more willing to be adventurous, make mistakes, and we made those mistakes with a zest for life and appeal that often fades as we get older, get more responsibilities and learn more about how things acutally work...  Those will never come back again because we have grown, we have changed.

     

    Edit - it may be possible to get that feeling back, but I'm entirely convinced it will not happen until you have the same zest for life that you had in your youth.  Not impossible, but definately harder to get as the world tries to wear us down :)

    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • Four0SixFour0Six Member UncommonPosts: 1,175
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

    I don't think it's ever possible to get that feeling again.  You have changed, you know more, your more experienced, your thought process is different.

    Not entirely equal but I'm going through a similar issue with my gf.  We've been dating for 2.5 years.  She just finisehd her nursing degree last month and was hired by a hospital yesterday.  I'm running out of excuses.  I don't hink I'm afraid of commitment however I just keep thinking to the girl I had before, unfair yes.  However the previous girlfriend, there was so  much passsion and fun, and energy, I was just a douche and didn't appreciate it.  This gf she is great don't get me wrong, kind, caring, outgoing, loves me to death... but there just isn't the same passion.  I've been thinking about it a lot and I honestly believe it's because I've changed.  I'm not the same, I know more, I've experienced more, maybe I'm more guarded, more jaded, I was younger and more ignorant, and making mistakes and more passionate as a whole, and because all that has change I'm not I will ever get that burning passion again so of course it is unfair to expect that of her.

    This is the same as our gaming history.  We are different, we know more, we've experienced more.  We played those other games when we were younger, more passionate, more energy, more time, more willing to be adventurous, make mistakes, and we made those mistakes with a zest for life and appeal that often fades as we get older, get more responsibilities and learn more about how things acutally work...  Those will never come back again because we have grown, we have changed.

     

    Edit - it may be possible to get that feeling back, but I'm entirely convinced it will not happen until you have the same zest for life that you had in your youth.  Not impossible, but definately harder to get as the world tries to wear us down :)

     The green is "hit the nail on the head" correct. But it is more of a "drug experiance" anagoly. It is not a realitionship anagoly since you don't build a dynamic realtionship with the a game. You experiance it.

    You can talk to your GF, then if you both are willing you can change what is dragging the realtionship down. I can't sit down with a game and say, " You know I want to expand what we have..yadda yadda.". Sure I can post on a forum but that is like talking to a stranger at a bus stop about your poor home life.

    Bringing us back to game to drug analogy. Which is fine, I think it is a concise and acurate one. But I understand that many shy away from it because of society's negetive branding.

     

  • lifesbrinklifesbrink Member UncommonPosts: 553
    Originally posted by Synthetick

    I agree with a lot of sentiments in the OP, but there's more to it than just the direction that games are being developed. A lot of it also has to do with how long we as gamers have subjected ourselves to the same fantasy settings that function off the same mechanics.

    I've seen first-hand people come over to my house who are not versed in MMOs and get lost in them like I did in Asheron's Call back in '99. The reason being? Everything is absolutely new to them. They aren't grasping the limited customization options, the uninspired repetive motions, the copy and pasted combat systems and mobs from other games. Why? Because they haven't been exposed to it.

    I find myself semi-bored with the genre for multiple reasons. But half those reasons are my fault. Because I, as a gamer, have played MMOs virtually every day for the last 13 years. What excites me, surprises me, or even comes off as original to me has came and past in this genre.

    There are things to do in current games that I could never imagine back in '99. The scope of sieges in a lot of games, the scopes of PVP battles, some of the raid encounters, systems like dynamic events, rifts, and so much more. It's just after 13 years, these things appear as gimmicks to me. To a fresh player, they are absolutely amazing.

    It's all about perspective. MMOs, and any game, are always going to be limited. As a consumer, we know this. As a consumer, we are responsible for opening our eyes and realizing it's just just the developers here.

    This is one of the truer statements I have seen in a long time on this site.  Sadly, it is likely one of the prime reasons MMO's as a whole stay successful, despite so many of us hating everything that comes out.

    My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.

  • DisdenaDisdena Member UncommonPosts: 1,093
    Originally posted by Spector88
    Originally posted by Disdena
    Originally posted by Spector88

    Originally games were designed FOR GAMERS by GAMERS, [... ] Now games are designed for casuals

    Don't mistake me for an elitist, I'm not

    Yes you are. See that right there? That's the definition of elitism. You're saying that of all the people who play video games, only a subset of that group—a subset that includes you—can truly be called GAMERS. The others aren't worthy of that label, you have to find another name for them, like "casuals".

    That's elitism.

    The difference is im not saying I'm better then them, I'm just saying that I have different expecations. I don't make fun of a guy for going to a drag race to support his buddies 9 second QTR mile vette'. But I will argue that the track and racing conditions shouldn't be designed around the guys who show up to the track one day a year. Not the greatest anology, but I tried.

    But I'm not saying you're calling yourself better than them. It's about labels. I totally get what you're trying to say, and I agree with it somewhat, but you can make that point without resorting to this. By trying to take the word "gamer" away from people who don't eat, sleep, and breathe video games, you're screwing up your own message. The video game industry stopped designing games for gamers? You can't even read that sentence out loud without facepalming. Say it for what it is: the video game industry has realized that there is much more than just the hardcore gamer demographic.

    To use your own analogy, it would be like saying that a vette is not a car and the people who race them are not racers, and then building your argument around that.

    image
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by Spector88

    Originally games were designed FOR GAMERS by GAMERS, this makes a big difference, see back in the day, games were made  to be enjoyed and to be bold, different. Now games are designed for casuals, for sales, and to be dumbed down and enjoyed on a smaller level by a larger amount of people. Best recent example: Diablo III, no skill points, no build points, super - mega easy quest helper, super super super linear, almost no social apsects, the game should be called Diablo: Casual Edition.

     

    Don't know what you are smoking. Diablo 3 Inferno is as hard core gaming as you can get. And it even has a hard core PD mode.

    And no skill/build points ... getting rid of all the cookie cutter build. In fact, there are MORE skil customizations and i am currently trying new build MUCH more in this game than any other before. This is a step forward for the genre. Finally choices matter, and choices are doing something DIFFERENT than gaining another 2% damage.

    I do agree with linear quest part though. Of course it is linear. Why shouldn't it? It is a ARPG .. linear since the first Diabloe. You do get random dungeons though.

     

  • RundorfRundorf Member UncommonPosts: 3

    I completely agree with the OP, I have found myself over the past year moving from one game to another every few months. SWToR came along I thought great, I enjoyed first month of it... but then it died. Moved back to Rift, lots of interesting changes most for the worse. It's just turned into one huge boring grind for gear - no one speaks but to moan or poke fun at someone. I'll stop myself there b4 I go into a huge rant about why Rift has killed itself and won't retain any new players. They have managed to screw up PvE and PvP amazing really (think due to listening to "community" too much). TSW - played beta other weekend, I have no hopes for that game. Can just see so many issues that affect other MMO's already.

    Now I find myself again wondering what to play for entertainment. Nothing on the immediate horizon - I have feint hopes for GW2 just hope they don't follow in other MMO's mistakes.

    take care all and have fun!

  • fenistilfenistil Member Posts: 3,005

    Agreed with OP.

     

    Quest gps, ah, cash shop I would throw them all out.

  • rcubanorcubano Member Posts: 68

    Eh.  I see a lot of posts about the idiocy of game developers.  This might make sense when discussing SWTOR, since they are struggling and bleeding subs like crazy.  However, Diablo 3 was a massive, ridiculously ginormous success in terms of sales.  If I owned the company that made Diablo 3, I'd be praising the guys who made it and giving them some fat Christmas bonuses.  They obviously did a very good job. 

    I personally found Diablo 3 to be OK--nothing amazing, but a fun little game to play for a week.  But my personal taste has nothing to do with a game's overall success, and when discussing what developers "ought to do", my personal taste means little.  It's all about the money, honey; when companies discuss game-making stradegies, they are taking into account what will result in the biggest financial success. Period.  And there's nothing wrong with that; without the financial success, they have no means for making a game in the first place.  They're entertainment companies, not the Red Cross.

Sign In or Register to comment.