Howdy, Stranger!

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

When did atlas shrug?

TimEisenTimEisen ColumnistMember EpicPosts: 3,290

It's pretty obvious now. The times they are a changing. It seems like every other day we hear about a new MMO from a small company that plans to get back to the old school, the way they used to be, to have consequence and meaning again. Its a beautiful thing but I wonder, when did this happen? Was it one event or several that led us to this place? I have my thoughts, but I'm curious what everyone else is thinking before I sway anyone with my view.

So, when did the genre take a turn and head back into the virtual world (for both PVP and PVE MMOs) and away from the WOW model?

*edit I had no idea this was a Novel Title by Ayn Rand I thought it was an expression about a sudden change of the world.

I used to role-play a Warrior Priest now I role-play a writer.
«13

Comments

  • KarbleKarble Member UncommonPosts: 750
    Originally posted by Tierless

    It's pretty obvious now. The times they are a changing. It seems like every other day we hear about a new MMO from a small company that plans to get back to the old school, the way they used to be, to have consequence and meaning again. Its a beautiful thing but I wonder, when did this happen? Was it one event or several that led us to this place? I have my thoughts, but I'm curious what everyone else is thinking before I sway anyone with my view.

    So, when did the genre take a turn and head back into the virtual world (for both PVP and PVE MMOs) and away from the WOW model?

    My answer to this is July of 2009.

    There was a small company that tried to bring virtual world/ sandbox/ pvp/ pve.

    Darkfall was the game. Around that time there was another company also trying for this same thing.

    Their game came out later June 2010 called Mortal Online.

    Also these two games were modeled in some way off of the concept of in spirit of Ultima Online.

     

    Both games had engines that were not great, horrible ai, bad user interface....but this period is when many others took notice and decided the end goal would be well worth the pay off if they could offer something polished, complex, and functional.

    We currently have several games that are pushing forward and should be quite interesting. I don't think themepark is going anywhere, but it will need to evolve or get pushed to the side if this new crop of virtual worlds catch fire and take the crown.

  • RamanadjinnRamanadjinn Member UncommonPosts: 1,365

    This is a very interesting topic.

    I have no doubt someone here has much better insight into this than I.

    I can share my personal experience with this topic though.  

    my personal last straw was SWTOR.  I thought before that game released that since every game seemed to be just like WOW, if I could just get a WOW with an IP that I liked and with some decent polish and a clean UI, I could be happy with it.  

    I was wrong.

    I've dreamed of a living, breathing, online virtual world since I played Dungeons and Dragons in the 1980s.  I would say I have never been truly happy with the MMOs that have released, but until SWTOR I was always willing to put up with a lot of bad in my games.  

    SWTOR was so foul to me that it seemed to kill whatever small amount of love I ever had for the WOW type of game.  It went so far in the opposite direction from what I wanted that I just felt like the entire genre was regressing to Super Mario Brothers rather than forging its way toward a true living virtual world. 

  • AtlysAtlys Member Posts: 69

    When Ayn Ran....d  *crickets*

    I'm sorry I couldn't resist.

    On to the topic at hand, I think that the move away from the WoW model was a many steps process over the last few years. There was a time where WoW was the be-all end-all of MMOs. Something that companies could only aspire to make. So naturally most MMOs that were released after WoW all had the same elements that made WoW successful. Unfortunately, most of the WoW imitators had a fraction of a fraction of the budget and team that WoW had. Therefore companies would crank out WoW clones left and right and it became stale.

    Over the past few years though, MMOs have been able to look for inspiration in other places than WoW. That's where we get MMOs that lean towards the oldschool and games that use action combat or exploration focus. When companies realized that WoWclone does not equal mega profit, they started innovating. Players are tired of the tired formulas.

    Also I think this post might hold the world record for most times using the term WoW. I've never seen so many red squiggly lines.

    On the eternal quest for that one perfect MMO.

  • RobokappRobokapp Member RarePosts: 6,045

    much like players, companies tried to slay the wow dragon...and failed.

     

    wowkiller after wowkiller ended up in the graveyard.

     

    then they stoppd trying.

     

    and here we are.

    image

  • dave6660dave6660 Member UncommonPosts: 2,693
    Who is John Galt?

    “There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.”
    -- Herman Melville

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504

    This stuff started quite a while back.

    Vanguard's (2007) big shpeel was getting back to MMORPGs' roots.  Even 2006's DDO was a similar nostalgia play.

    Companies have been trying to deliver a "classic" MMORPG experience for years, and they've met with mediocre success.  In part it's because nobody wants a game which isn't created with modern design sensibilities, and nostalgia games often neglect modern learnings in order to better reflect the game they're trying to imitate.  Sometimes it pans out, but often it doesn't.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • TimEisenTimEisen ColumnistMember EpicPosts: 3,290

    I started my own theory which soon turned into a classic Tierless TLDR. I'll put the bullet points here and if you want to go blind you can go to my blog linked below. I did not do it this way to get blog hits. I just didn't want to get derailed with the TLDR posts.

    Like most things in this world rarely does 1 single event cause significant change (for some reason we people always tend to look for 1 reason) I think it's many things combined with timing.

    * WOW has been dropping subs for years only getting them back with Xpacs. New content = retention but it's hard to keep up with us, letting us make the content is cheaper and easier.

    * AAA after AAA tried and failed to clone WOW. SWTOR being the biggest and best example. SWTOR also prove that even the best MMO-RPG didn't appeal to RPG fans as much as single player RPGs. Social in the MMO became viable again.

    * 3 games. GTA, Skyrim, and Minecraft were successful and resembled virtual worlds more than the last 8 years of MMOs did. Give us freedom, get our money.

    * MMO fans utilizing social media (and our wallets or lack of) to be heard.

    Timing is everything.

    * Enter Kickstarter. KS gave us a way to prove what we've been saying for years. If you build it we will come, and we will even help foot the bill! It also showed that we are far more than a vocal minority.

    http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/Xobdnas/072013/25362_34-When-did-Atlas-shrug

    **Side note: I always found it ironic that as SOCIAL media blew up MMOs became far less social. Silly MMOs.

    I used to role-play a Warrior Priest now I role-play a writer.
  • AvsRock21AvsRock21 Member UncommonPosts: 256
    Um, isn't it pretty obvious? Every AAA mmorpg game that has come out that has used the WOW formula has failed. TOR, Aion, Rift, AOC etc... Gamers everywhere have been calling for more virtual worlds for awhile now. 
  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Member UncommonPosts: 2,408

    I think the change really happened when Star Wars: The Old Republic failed to meet expectations.

    Remember, SW:TOR was designed from the ground up to be the MMO that couldn't fail, because it had all the ingredients to be better than any other MMO before.  Namely:

    1)  A big name publisher.

    2)  Big name design house.

    3)  A Veteran MMO development staff.

    4)  A proven model on which to build (the WoW model)

    5) A huge budget.

    6)  A long development time.

    7)  A good IP.

    No expense was spared.  Everything the industry folks learned about what players wanted (and what they didn't want) over the past ten years was incorporated in SW:TOR.  So how could they fail?

    But the game did fail.  It failed to maintain the sort interest it "ought" to have, and churn was dreadful.  It was SW: TOR which showed everyone in the industry that the "formula" of the post-WoW era wasn't working.  SW:TOR showed that the content-driven MMO would undermine itself faster than it could generate new content.  SW:TOR showed that a game which is designed for casual tastes will only ever be approached with casual enthusiasm, and big budgets, IP-tie-ins, and state of the art graphics could do little to revive it.

    In short, the smart producers who learned from SW:TOR started to realize that mechanics matter.  They understood that an MMO isn't just an action/adventure title played in a DRM-dictated service; it's a whole other animal.  They learned that, if an MMO is to survive in such a crowded market, it has to build on the strengths of the format: the persistence, the multiplayer format, the multiplicity of interests this genre attracts.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • BrenelaelBrenelael Member UncommonPosts: 3,821

    I would say it mostly has to do with the seriously underwhelming releases of big name MMOs in the last few years that follow the "WoW formula" (Standard Themepark feature sets). This has sent a pretty clear message to publishers/developers that players are not going to pay good money to be fed the same old tired crap anymore. It's not just Indie developers that are jumping on this bandwagon of making the past new again. Some really big names in the industry are talking about this as well in their games. John Smedley(EQ), Richard Garriott(UO), Jake Song(L2), Matt Firor(DAoC) and many others in the industry are embracing the past as well. While I don't think any of these new games will take us fully back to 1997 when MMOs were a new young genre they will take those old concepts and mix them with some modern mechanics to make MMOs that will feel new and fresh again. Only time will tell however but this new trend in MMO development is certainly worth keeping an eye on.

     

    Bren

    while(horse==dead)
    {
    beat();
    }

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,728
    Everyone's been trying to "wow" us (Pun intended) with flashy stuff. But with each game that has been released, we are getting activities that are more intense, but fewer of them. What we are doing has become more attention grabbing. Better graphics, special effects, animations, cut scenes, voice overs, action combat., randomly generated events. But with all that stuff, we are getting games with progressively fewer and fewer things to do and/or reasons to do them.
  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 Member UncommonPosts: 2,770
    It feels like singleplayer games are for the most part exceeding expectations. People using their now high expectations from SP games for MMOs perceptively makes for some really inferior games.
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 5,243

    Has Atlas shrugged yet? I sure do read a lot about this MMO or that MMO "trying" to go old school. I do not recall any deliverance on these promises. Yet.

    Seems to me that most of the recent MMOs are still flash in-the-pan combat fests. I hear rumblings on the horizon, but that is not quite the same as "Old School is back!"

    I could be wrong. I admit I do not follow everything with abated breath.

    - Al

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

  • TimEisenTimEisen ColumnistMember EpicPosts: 3,290


    Originally posted by AlBQuirky
    Has Atlas shrugged yet? I sure do read a lot about this MMO or that MMO "trying" to go old school. I do not recall any deliverance on these promises. Yet.

    Seems to me that most of the recent MMOs are still flash in-the-pan combat fests. I hear rumblings on the horizon, but that is not quite the same as "Old School is back!"

    I could be wrong. I admit I do not follow everything with abated breath.


    I guess I'm speaking more about the direction of development than the games themselves. It seems like every day another company announces a new virtual world like MMO in development but I haven't seen new WOWesque games being announced for a while now (or maybe I've just learned to ignore them hehe). EQ next might just have a shot at being at the right place at the right time.

    I used to role-play a Warrior Priest now I role-play a writer.
  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,728
    Originally posted by Tierless

     


    Originally posted by AlBQuirky
    Has Atlas shrugged yet? I sure do read a lot about this MMO or that MMO "trying" to go old school. I do not recall any deliverance on these promises. Yet.

     

    Seems to me that most of the recent MMOs are still flash in-the-pan combat fests. I hear rumblings on the horizon, but that is not quite the same as "Old School is back!"

    I could be wrong. I admit I do not follow everything with abated breath.


     

    I guess I'm speaking more about the direction of development than the games themselves. It seems like every day another company announces a new virtual world like MMO in development but I haven't seen new WOWesque games being announced for a while now (or maybe I've just learned to ignore them hehe). EQ next might just have a shot at being at the right place at the right time.

    Any game with the promise to deliver would have a shot at being at the right place at the right time right now. Because right now is the right time. Or at least the ripe time. But they have to actually deliver and none have in almost a decade.

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by Tierless

    I guess I'm speaking more about the direction of development than the games themselves. It seems like every day another company announces a new virtual world like MMO in development but I haven't seen new WOWesque games being announced for a while now (or maybe I've just learned to ignore them hehe). EQ next might just have a shot at being at the right place at the right time.

    This just feels completely like selective perception:

    • 6-7 years ago you had Vanguard making the same "Look! We're oldschool!" promise, so this isn't a direction change.
    • Many WOW-like MMORPGs are still getting released.   Wildstar being the most obvious upcoming game.
    • Only the most failed WOW-like games have actually been business failures, though certainly some businesses see "merely profitable" as a failure I guess. 

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • NovusodNovusod Member UncommonPosts: 912
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    • 6-7 years ago you had Vanguard making the same "Look! We're oldschool!" promise, so this isn't a direction change.
    • Many WOW-like MMORPGs are still getting released.   Wildstar being the most obvious upcoming game.
    • Only the most failed WOW-like games have actually been business failures, though certainly some businesses see "merely profitable" as a failure I guess. 

    Vanguard didn't fail because it promised "Old school." Vanguard's problem was Brad McQuaid never should have been put in charge of a company. He was a great game designer but his terrible business sense is what doomed Vanguard. He ran out of money and released the game before it was ready. There was no quality control and the game hardly even ran because of all the bugs. Vanguard had the worse AAA release in history by a mile. That is not an exaggeration.

     

    The failure of Vanguard and the disappointing numbers from Eq2 led to a perfect storm where studios decided that "Old School" was dead. The pronouncement that nobody wanted old school anymore was the WRONG decision made at the worst time. There had already been a long drought of sandboxes before Vanguard. So the decision to nix old school turned the drought into an outright famine and turned MMO gaming community into a bunch of cynics. We have been waiting ten long years for someone to deliver a AAA sandbox and nobody has done it yet.

     

    SWTOR was not "merely profitable." It cost almost 300million to make and has not even come close to making that kind of money back. "Merely profitable" as in barely covering daily operating expenses while ignoring the $300 million development costs is a disaster. It is why SWTOR is called the TORtanic by many who work in the industry. Compared to Vanguard which had a $25 million dollar budget and still sold 240,000 copies makes Vanguard look like a success.

     

    If Atlas did shrug maybe it is because someone hired an accountant to look at the numbers and crunch some Math. For the cost of SWTOR they could have made 12 Vanguard like MMOs. Old School didn't die. It was never given a chance. That is why many are saying now the time has come.

  • jesadjesad Member UncommonPosts: 881
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Who is John Galt?

    Haha! I wanted to say this too, but honestly I don't think that it fits here.  This is an answerable question and I think that the answer is written in the OP's statement about finding an IP he liked.

    At the risk of repeating myself (having said this elsewhere already in the last week or so) the industry already has a couple of blueprints to shoot for.  The Sisyphean Mountain and the treadmill.  Games like Eve, Everquest, Darkfall, Age of Wushu, etc....all fall into the Sisyphean Mountain category, meaning that they are huge, time intensive, climbs from one content expansion to the next.  Games like WoW, SWTOR, and others represent the treadmill, same concept as the mountain but with a much more level incline.

    So using these two structures all you have to do is apply the right IP to the right incline and you have a game that people will pay to play.  For years now a lot of development has been focused towards applying that IP to the lower incline.  This was financially feasible because, of course, more people would play an MMO that was easier to learn, WoW proved that.

    Now, however, a lot of you have grown up.  You've become smarter, more in tune with the way these things work, and capable of taking on the beefier stuff.  So finally!! (ye gods be praised) the market can begin to focus on applying the good IP's to the harder stuff.

    The long and short of it is that the MMO community (barring those that came from the PnP games or mathematical backgrounds) has been cultivated from the ground up.

    I believe that the desired effect now is to hope that those who are still around after the starter games are as legion as those who played those starter games for years.

    I hope that's true also.  Will make for a great time.

    But in this case I don't think that Atlas Shrugged in so much as repositioned himself in order to redistribute the weight.  He is still very much into carrying the world on his shoulders (...as if he would ever really not be.  Then who would even know his name?)

    image
  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by Novusod

    Vanguard didn't fail because it promised "Old school." Vanguard's problem was Brad McQuaid never should have been put in charge of a company. He was a great game designer but his terrible business sense is what doomed Vanguard. He ran out of money and released the game before it was ready. There was no quality control and the game hardly even ran because of all the bugs. Vanguard had the worse AAA release in history by a mile. That is not an exaggeration. 

    The failure of Vanguard and the disappointing numbers from Eq2 led to a perfect storm where studios decided that "Old School" was dead. The pronouncement that nobody wanted old school anymore was the WRONG decision made at the worst time. There had already been a long drought of sandboxes before Vanguard. So the decision to nix old school turned the drought into an outright famine and turned MMO gaming community into a bunch of cynics. We have been waiting ten long years for someone to deliver a AAA sandbox and nobody has done it yet.

    SWTOR was not "merely profitable." It cost almost 300million to make and has not even come close to making that kind of money back. "Merely profitable" as in barely covering daily operating expenses while ignoring the $300 million development costs is a disaster. It is why SWTOR is called the TORtanic by many who work in the industry. Compared to Vanguard which had a $25 million dollar budget and still sold 240,000 copies makes Vanguard look like a success. 

    If Atlas did shrug maybe it is because someone hired an accountant to look at the numbers and crunch some Math. For the cost of SWTOR they could have made 12 Vanguard like MMOs. Old School didn't die. It was never given a chance. That is why many are saying now the time has come.

    What does Vanguard's success or failure have to do with anything?  They promised an oldschool direction, and that's all that's being discussed here.  The OP seems to be under the impression that games promising a classic MMORPG feel are a new thing, I was pointing they aren't.

    SWTOR was profitable. Before that link was published (~3 months after TOR's launch) I reached an estimate of ~6 month (after launch) to reach profit.  As someone who works in the industry, I was curious, so I ran numbers on TOR's sales and estimated cost ($200-250 million at the time) and modeled out a harshly decaying subscription base to reach my ~6 month prediction. So when this announcement came out ~7 months after launch saying they were profitable, it was pretty nice to have my estimates confirmed.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • jesadjesad Member UncommonPosts: 881
    Any game that is still in operation still has a chance to be profitable anyway.  Win to Lose and vice-versa is only a patch away in a lot of cases.  That's why patches were invented.

    image
  • NovusodNovusod Member UncommonPosts: 912
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    What does Vanguard's success or failure have to do with anything?  They promised an oldschool direction, and that's all that's being discussed here.  The OP seems to be under the impression that games promising a classic MMORPG feel are a new thing, I was pointing they aren't.

    SWTOR was profitable. Before that link was published (~3 months after TOR's launch) I reached an estimate of ~6 month (after launch) to reach profit.  As someone who works in the industry, I was curious, so I ran numbers on TOR's sales and estimated cost ($200-250 million at the time) and modeled out a harshly decaying subscription base to reach my ~6 month prediction. So when this announcement came out ~7 months after launch saying they were profitable, it was pretty nice to have my estimates confirmed.

    There is nothing in that link that shows SWTOR was profitable. You are confusing the total profitability of EA with the individual profits for TOR. I think this quote here tells the real story.

    2:03 Disappointing performance of Star Wars: The Old Republic was offset by powerful performance of Battlefield 3.

    2:20: Our diversity allows us to make up for a miss on one franchise (SWTOR) with a hit on another (BF3).

    Clearly SWTOR was losing money. TOR went Free 2 Play because they were losing money.

    You might want to check your math again. 1.3million units sold at $50 is only $65million. When your cost is $300 million that makes out for a massive loss. It is going to take years and years recover that investment and that is if it ever does.

     

    As for Vanguard they Promised old school but delivered a barely playable game that was riddled with bugs. Whoever makes the first new AAA sandbox they will be making the first of its' kind in ten years. This is something that is indeed very new.

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by Novusod

    There is nothing in that link that shows SWTOR was profitable. You are confusing the total profitability of EA with the individual profits for TOR. I think this quote here tells the real story.

    2:03 Disappointing performance of Star Wars: The Old Republic was offset by powerful performance of Battlefield 3.

    2:20: Our diversity allows us to make up for a miss on one franchise (SWTOR) with a hit on another (BF3).

    Clearly SWTOR was losing money. TOR went Free 2 Play because they were losing money.

    You might want to check your math again. 1.3million units sold at $50 is only $65million. When your cost is $300 million that makes out for a massive loss. It is going to take years and years recover that investment and that is if it ever does. 

    As for Vanguard they Promised old school but delivered a barely playable game that was riddled with bugs. Whoever makes the first new AAA sandbox they will be making the first of its' kind in ten years. This is something that is indeed very new.

    "Last year we announced that the breakeven point was roughly 500,000 subscribers. And while we are well above that today," -EA

    So...

    • EA confirmed it in their investor call, and that's all that really matters.
    • My math was solid.
    • 1.3 million was the subscriber count in May.  The game had 1 million players on day 3. Total sales by February were over 2 million, with the subscriber count 1.7 million at that time (the peak.)  (All of which are backed with evidence citations on the wiki.)
    • TOR was "well above" (aka probably not that much higher than) 500k subscribers in July, and my math (which used a brutal subscriber-bleed) actually had the subscriber count slightly below that number by that month.
    • Estimates of the cost to make SWTOR (by launch) were $150-200 million.
    If you want to continue discussing this please keep in mind that your opinions are not facts.
     
    Facts are facts. You cannot make SWTOR unprofitable by disliking it.  I'm sorry if this is disappointing news.  
     
    As for Vanguard, again we're only discussing whether more MMORPGs are pushing the "oldschool" angle or not.  Not whether it's successful, not whether its launch was successful.  (It wouldn't be relevant either way, since upcoming "oldschool" MMORPGs are just as likely to have bad launches.)

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • ApraxisApraxis Member UncommonPosts: 1,509
    Originally posted by Axehilt
    Originally posted by Tierless

    I guess I'm speaking more about the direction of development than the games themselves. It seems like every day another company announces a new virtual world like MMO in development but I haven't seen new WOWesque games being announced for a while now (or maybe I've just learned to ignore them hehe). EQ next might just have a shot at being at the right place at the right time.

    This just feels completely like selective perception:

    • 6-7 years ago you had Vanguard making the same "Look! We're oldschool!" promise, so this isn't a direction change.
    • Many WOW-like MMORPGs are still getting released.   Wildstar being the most obvious upcoming game.
    • Only the most failed WOW-like games have actually been business failures, though certainly some businesses see "merely profitable" as a failure I guess. 

    Ok. First of all. The new trend is not solely about old school. It is much more about "more sandbox", more "emergent gameplay", and more "player generated content. And one reason is to get back the longevity of mmorpgs, and to solve the problem of "users consume content faster than developer can produce it".

    And in my opinion it is because a few different chain of events.

    - EvE as the only MMORPG with increasing numbers after a long time

    - any Themepark with decreasing numbers after just a few month (WoW excluded)

    - huge Indy success of games like Minecraft and DayZ with sold games noone would ever expected, especially given the low quality production level

    - Failure of SWTOR.

    All this events lead to the general idea, that "old styled Themeparks" don't work anymore, or are just barely profitable with a very high investments and very high risk. (SWTOR)

    So a lot jump into the "user generated content" train with different approaches. And the reincarnation of old sandbox mmo ideas. But.. in all honestly.. until now this is just a rather small trend. First of all, almost only indy developments go for sandbox games at the moment, with only EQNext as the AAA contender. And we know almost nothing about EQNext and how much of a sandbox it really will be.

    With other words it is far to early to call for the new virtual world reign within MMORPGs. Up to now we don't have one out there. But let assume EQNext will be a sandbox, and further assume it will be successful, and withit i mean more successful as recent Themepark releases. (of course in relation to production value.. because i somehow don't believe EQNext is as expensive as SWTOR, Wildstar, ESO, or GW2.. with other words 100 million +)

    If all that comes true we may really see the switch to more virtual world/sandbox mmos from AAA development studios and projects with above 100 million. But we aren't there at the moment.

  • VocadiVocadi Member UncommonPosts: 205

    I think the change in the MMO architecture happened when free to play became the new business model. I really strongly feel that game companies start  with a framework for their chosen payment model and build a game around that model. 

    The resulting lack of deep gameplay mechanics was born and subsequently a whole new gaming populace surfaced. I truly believe that SWTOR had full intention of falling back on a FTP model from its inception, however they did not expect that to happen so soon after launch. The fact that it launched as subscription was a testament to the arrogance of developers and marketing guru's. 

    Games like DDO and LOTRO, although older games may likely have also had a FTP fallout plan from the get go.

    Unfortunately to me, FTP seems synonymous with themepark gameplay. This is mostly why I am adverse to the majority of MMO games that are available today. Their lack of depth and immersion is so off putting and disappointing that I almost read FTP and think automatically that the game is shallow and lackluster. I truly hope EQnext can break the FTP stereotype, preferably with an available subscription option.

    image
  • BanquettoBanquetto Member UncommonPosts: 1,037
    I think Alganon was the game that proved that while there were plenty of failed attempts at big-budget WoW clones, if a small indie developer tried a WoW clone, whole new levels of fail could be achieved.

    In a world where a player base in the hundreds of thousands is a fail.. what do you call a player base in the hundreds?
Sign In or Register to comment.