Howdy, Stranger!

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

Do you think forced-grouping could work if...

1910121415

Comments

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Axehilt said:
    "might work"?

    It does work .. LoL, WoT, CS, even WoW ... lobby one click grouping is quite popular, i will have to say. LoL clearly is NOT harmed by it. 
    Yes, "might work".  Because for every game that makes it work there are a bunch of other games that fail to make it work because they're just bad games.
    You can say that for anything in a game.

    Several games that require groups are dominating at the top 10 of MMO revenue charts. 
  • ste2000ste2000 Member EpicPosts: 6,194
    Let's put it this way.

    In EQ the majority of people preferred to group, yet there were a good number of solo players (mainly Necros) that mainly liked to solo and they were pretty good at it.
    Soloing  EQ required actually a good sets of personal skills that not everyone had.
    Everyone else preferred groups because it was just more convenient, and in my opinion more fun.
    Listening to other people bullshit while we were playing was priceless for me.

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,952
    Dullahan said:
    There also hasn't been a new game resembling those of the first gen in over a decade.
    There hasn't been a car like a first generation Ford Mustang since 1973.

    Why ?

    Simple. Modern cars are much more reliable, faster, much much safer, pollute much less and use less fuel too. They also have many comfort elements that didn't even exist back then.

    Apply that to MMORPGs, and it works too.

    No one but a very small group of nostalgia struck old players want to go back to those tedious and boring grind games with boring downtime mechanics and forced grouping. And you can be sure that among those who ask for such a game to be made today thinking they will play it, most would have quit after a couple of months, realizing that actually, that MMO model sucked, and also that they don't have the kind of time to invest waste in such a game anymore.

    Proof being that all the games who attempted to emulate those old, tedious and boring mechanics since 2004 have all failed. Because players, even old timers like me and many others, know better now. And given the choice, which they didn't have back then, they will play a FUN game where they aren't forced into one specific play style.
    But that's not really what happened.  

    To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively.  People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines.  Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.  

    Translanted into the MMORPG genre we want games like EQ or UO with updated graphics, mechanics and usability.  Some of us want more hardcore.  Just not the generic WoW clone where you know what's going to happen before you play it.  
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772


    To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively.  People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines.  Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.  


    Not accurately at all. Many exit MMORPG scenes and go with other types of online games like shooters and MOBAs.

    In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.

    Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    You can say that for anything in a game.

    Several games that require groups are dominating at the top 10 of MMO revenue charts. 
    Right you can and should make careful, truthful statements rather than use reckless absolutism.

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

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Axehilt said:
    You can say that for anything in a game.

    Several games that require groups are dominating at the top 10 of MMO revenue charts. 
    Right you can and should make careful, truthful statements rather than use reckless absolutism.
    Which statement is not truthful? Here is the list of the top 10 MMOs in terms of revenue:

    http://www.engadget.com/2014/10/23/league-of-legends-tops-mmo-revenue-list-hearthstone-no-10/

    LoL .. clearly is dominating (#1) and it is forced grouping. Aside from LoL, WoT, CSO and DOTA2 also require groups.

    So 4 out of top 10 require grouping. You don't think grouping is popular?
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,952
    edited November 2015


    To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively.  People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines.  Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.  


    Not accurately at all. Many exit MMORPG scenes and go with other types of online games like shooters and MOBAs.

    In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.

    Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
    And many exit the MMORPG scene because they're largely unserved by the MMORPG genre.  Majority of my MMORPG circle stop playing almost entirely. Many are looking towards the newer more niche games that are trying to incorporate older play style. 

    The point was that in my scenario that the market suddenly went unservered.  Other types if MMORPG didn't make it out of 2004 but majority of the clones did no better or worst than those games did in a smaller market. 
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772


    To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively.  People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines.  Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.  


    Not accurately at all. Many exit MMORPG scenes and go with other types of online games like shooters and MOBAs.

    In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.

    Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
    And many exit the MMORPG scene because they're largely unserved by the MMORPG genre.  Majority of my MMORPG circle stop playing almost entirely. Many are looking towards the newer more niche games that are trying to incorporate older play style. 

    The point was that in my scenario that the market suddenly went unservered.  Other types if MMORPG didn't make it out of 2004 but majority of the clones did no better or worst than those games did in a smaller market. 
    That is the point .. you do not know if the market went under-served. How do you know the market is not well served by MOBAs, shooters, CCGs and other online games?

    After people exit MMORPG (guess there is no disagreement here), they don't have to be under-served, or wait for niche MMORPGs .. they can forget MMORPGs and play other online games. How do you know the bulk of the players did not just do that?
  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Which statement is not truthful? Here is the list of the top 10 MMOs in terms of revenue:

    http://www.engadget.com/2014/10/23/league-of-legends-tops-mmo-revenue-list-hearthstone-no-10/

    LoL .. clearly is dominating (#1) and it is forced grouping. Aside from LoL, WoT, CSO and DOTA2 also require groups.

    So 4 out of top 10 require grouping. You don't think grouping is popular?
    My statement was that streamlined grouping might work.  The alternative would be an absolute statement: "streamlined grouping always works".  That absolute statement would be wrong, because there are examples of streamlined grouping failing to work in some less successful games.

    Nothing I said implied grouping wasn't popular, so that's just your own straw man.

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

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Axehilt said:
    Which statement is not truthful? Here is the list of the top 10 MMOs in terms of revenue:

    http://www.engadget.com/2014/10/23/league-of-legends-tops-mmo-revenue-list-hearthstone-no-10/

    LoL .. clearly is dominating (#1) and it is forced grouping. Aside from LoL, WoT, CSO and DOTA2 also require groups.

    So 4 out of top 10 require grouping. You don't think grouping is popular?
    My statement was that streamlined grouping might work.  The alternative would be an absolute statement: "streamlined grouping always works".  That absolute statement would be wrong, because there are examples of streamlined grouping failing to work in some less successful games.

    Nothing I said implied grouping wasn't popular, so that's just your own straw man.
    no .. your statement is, and i quote "Right you can and should make careful, truthful statements rather than use reckless absolutism" .. implying that my statement is not truthful.

    Now you agree my statements are truthful?
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,952


    To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively.  People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines.  Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.  


    Not accurately at all. Many exit MMORPG scenes and go with other types of online games like shooters and MOBAs.

    In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.

    Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
    And many exit the MMORPG scene because they're largely unserved by the MMORPG genre.  Majority of my MMORPG circle stop playing almost entirely. Many are looking towards the newer more niche games that are trying to incorporate older play style. 

    The point was that in my scenario that the market suddenly went unservered.  Other types if MMORPG didn't make it out of 2004 but majority of the clones did no better or worst than those games did in a smaller market. 
    That is the point .. you do not know if the market went under-served. How do you know the market is not well served by MOBAs, shooters, CCGs and other online games?

    After people exit MMORPG (guess there is no disagreement here), they don't have to be under-served, or wait for niche MMORPGs .. they can forget MMORPGs and play other online games. How do you know the bulk of the players did not just do that?
    Those players didn't suddenly disappear.  The fact is that WoW's market sized dwarfed the rest of the genre 26 times over.  This caused the perception that if you create a game like WoW you will approach WoW numbers.  

    The previous market average mainstream MMORPG were in the 250k to 500k range before 2004.  The post 2004 average MMORPG is in the 250k to 500k even free.  Meaning despite chasing the gold of WoW the average MMORPG still brought in around the same numbers.  While chasing the goal of WoW almost all development in other type of MMORPG stopped instantaneously.  

    A person like me who wants a UO experience is not playing MOBA or shooters or whatever for that experience.  I do play other games but that choice is for its own reason.  It doesn't cure my MMORPG itch.  

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    no .. your statement is, and i quote "Right you can and should make careful, truthful statements rather than use reckless absolutism" .. implying that my statement is not truthful.

    Now you agree my statements are truthful?
    I never claimed they weren't.  Clearly I meant the vague non-specific "you" there.  You can replace it with "one can and should make careful, truthful statements" if it helps you.

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

  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    I believe what he is talking about is both innovation and complexity.  This is something that isn't likely to happen in what is quickly becoming and old technology.  Once rules and guide lines are in place in terms of what people want you don't have much room for innovation.  Most of the early innovation in games came from people having the freedom to experiment with their own ideas instead of collecting data to find out what other people wanted.  There was a much more limited precedent for data collection and analysis.  These days that seems to be all people do in their computer related jobs.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Flyte27 said:
    I believe what he is talking about is both innovation and complexity.  This is something that isn't likely to happen in what is quickly becoming and old technology.  Once rules and guide lines are in place in terms of what people want you don't have much room for innovation.  Most of the early innovation in games came from people having the freedom to experiment with their own ideas instead of collecting data to find out what other people wanted.  There was a much more limited precedent for data collection and analysis.  These days that seems to be all people do in their computer related jobs.
    Experimenting with their own ideas is not as efficient as collecting data if the goal is to please a large audience. 

    If you are a dev, do you want to know what the audience like (data) or do you want to spend time to make 10 prototypes to test them out?
  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    If you are a dev, do you want to know what the audience like (data) or do you want to spend time to make 10 prototypes to test them out?
    There's no automatic answer to that question, given that Angry Birds was the result of a developer making 51 prototypes ("The Heds had developed 51 titles before Angry Birds.")

    Several companies are built on a model of making a lot of experimental games to see what sticks.  These companies don't work on giant, crushingly expensive MMOs, but the experimentation model is a viable game business model.

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

  • DeathofsageDeathofsage Member UncommonPosts: 1,102
    It's true, but I think there's a substantial market for it.  All forced grouping MMOs were successful ~
    City of Heroes. Despite it having one of the first lfg tools, (which was simply a modified /who system that allowed you to add extra information.) I often found myself waiting around for a few hours to find something to do. Probably because I stuck to my guns with Empathy instead of hopping aboard the Pain Domination train. When you look back at it CoH barely lasted 8 years. That being said you could also say that 8 years is a success, and to that I would point out that Warhammer Online lasted 5 years. Do the extra 3 years make a difference?

    I still liked CoH, however not being able to do anything on your own kinda sucked.

    Moreover DFO competes with WoW, and that's definitely a "solo" game.
    FFXI had this problem too.

    Certain jobs, or at certain times, it was more difficult to find a group.

    That's why I've been saying all along: MMOs have learned a dozen ways to mitigate this problem.

    • Level-sync/sidekicking/capping a players level in a zone. (Even if they're 50, or whatever, they're brought down to 35). This lets friends play together, and just as importantly, let's the 43 tank play with the 35 healer and 34 damage-dealers.
    • Cross-server group finders, with appropriate tools to moderate misconduct and cross-server friendlists/blacklists. This is important because some servers are more active at certain times, so you might be able to find a group from another server's pool.
    • The ability to LFG for one job/role ("I'll tank either on my ninja, paladin or warrior.") while doing something on another job/role. It's important for this that you can have all jobs on the same character.
    • Making crafting real jobs. That was the smartest thing FFXIV did. Craft-jobs have no combat capability but it made it easier to pop over to your crafter and craft while LFG.
    • One NPC helper that you can define a job for. Allow multiple of these to be summoned in group to fill the slots. A dd can use a healer-npc to solo "even match" mobs. A tank can use a DD NPC to solo. FFXIV did good with this, kinda, your chocobo [mount] was your npc. It just wasn't very good, and you couldn't summon another mount (even of a different variety) while it was out.
      If a dd and tank teamed up, the dd could summon a healer and the tank could summon another dd.
    At level 75. Tanks, DDs, Support, and Healers loved pink birds for meriting (exp earned at cap to increase the potency of skills/traits). Black Mages (nukers) weren't welcome in these parties because the birds cast any spell at you that it cast at him, and superfast. So if the blm spent 5 seconds casting Blizzard IV, the bird spent half a second casting it back at the tank. Ew.

    So BLMs merited on other things, "puddings", that had high resistance to melee, and moved slow. They formed their own groups.

    Finding a group for a geared melee was pretty easy, finding a group for a geared blm wasn't always easy depending on the number of other blms online (Red mages and support were welcome in these groups too).

    FFXI also added campaign which was like primitive RIFTs and they worked well for soloers who could ... dun dun dun ... earn decent exp while looking for a group that would get them better exp. I'm a hardcore-paladin and paladin wasn't really welcome in bird parties (ninja or dancer tanks killed faster and took less damage) and was useless on puddings. So when I felt like playing paladin I solo'd in campaign.

    But please, and I seriously mean this, if another forced grouping game came out, and you don't like it, don't play it. I'm not saying ALL MMOs MUST GROUP. I'm saying some should.

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

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,064
    There's still no logical answer to why (some) people need others to be forced to group with them.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • zekeofevzekeofev Member UncommonPosts: 240
    There's still no logical answer to why (some) people need others to be forced to group with them.
    Game design. Many mmos offer solo options with group incentivized content for leveling. Then the end game is group content (either small groups or raids). The result is many people who played solo not being able to perform well in group content and getting frustrated at either the players who don't want a poor performing player there or at the devlopers for why there is no solo endgame.

    Forced grouping MMOs get rid of that, FF11 had it for leveling but I like FF14s design better where certain dungeons have to be cleared in story quests in order to unlock more story/dungeons. In fact the entire expansion (besides the new race) is gated behind the story quests which involves dungeons (4 man group play) starting at level 15.

    Its very easy to find a group in FF14 (cross server duty finder that is able to be queued into solo).
  • DeathofsageDeathofsage Member UncommonPosts: 1,102
    edited December 2015
    There's still no logical answer to why (some) people need others to be forced to group with them.
    There's still no logical answer to why you keep deliberately misinterpreting the moniker. It's not like I'm looking for a game to burden someone with the weight of grouping, I'm looking for a game that brings back the multiplayer to mmo.

    It's not forcing people to group with others if they don't want to (don't play if you don't like a core feature of a game), it's designing a game where grouping is necessary at all but the earliest levels.

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

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,064
    edited December 2015
    zekeofev said:
    There's still no logical answer to why (some) people need others to be forced to group with them.
    The result is many people who played solo not being able to perform well in group content and getting frustrated at either the players who don't want a poor performing player there or at the devlopers for why there is no solo endgame.
    Your interpretation of what happens may be a bit different from reality...
    Not to mention the games with optional grouping also have soloing at endgame, there's stuff for all play styles to do.
    Unlike forced grouping games, which force all players into a single play style.
    And you wonder why those games have little success?

    There's still no logical answer to why (some) people need others to be forced to group with them.
    There's still no logical answer to why you keep deliberately misinterpreting the moniker. It's not like I'm looking for a game to burden someone with the weight of grouping, I'm looking for a game that brings back the multiplayer to mmo.

    It's not forcing people to group with others if they don't want to (don't play if you don't like a core feature of a game), it's designing a game where grouping is necessary at all but the earliest levels.

    "It's not like I'm looking for a game to burden someone with the weight of grouping," and then "It's designing a game where grouping is necessary at all but the earliest levels."

    Not sure if serious.

    "It's not forcing people to group with others if they don't want to (don't play if you don't like a core feature of a game),"

    That's exactly what people are doing nowadays they got choice. And that's why forced grouping games are a niche and most fail.


    "I'm looking for a game that brings back the multiplayer to mmo."

    Any game with OPTIONAL grouping has that multiplayer part you crave for. The only difference is that you have to go towards other people, since they aren't forced to endure you just because they have no choice. If you are unable to do that, then the problem lies with YOU, and not with the game design.

    ______________________________________________________________


    At the end of the day, it's always the same conclusion that comes out of those threads... the "forced grouping" proponents want everyone to cater to their play style, while apparently being unable to associate with others who share the same play style in games where grouping is highly beneficial but also optional. Go figure.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • DeathofsageDeathofsage Member UncommonPosts: 1,102
    edited December 2015
    "I'm looking for a game that brings back the multiplayer to mmo."
    Any game with OPTIONAL grouping has that multiplayer part you crave for. The only difference is that you have to go towards other people, since they aren't forced to endure you just because they have no choice. If you are unable to do that, then the problem lies with YOU, and not with the game design.
    I think we're different type of people, and that's fine.

    I do gravitate towards other people. I like tanks, and tanks work best in parties. I don't like tanks because "I like to lead", though people usually expect that of tanks. I like tanks because I like to protect. That's also why I play healers and don't usually play damage dealers.

    But I've found that the strongest communities, with the most likable people (on a large scale) are groups where grouping matters.

    One thing that I hope you will not deny about any solo game where grouping is necessary at endgame: People get to endgame and have no idea how to play their class. None at all. This does a lot of damage to the community. When party play is necessary/desirable for all but the first few levels, a shocking thing happens, people learn in the easy content how to play their job in a party and the transition to endgame isn't so abrupt.

    The problem isn't with me, the problem isn't with my friends. The problem is with the randoms that I end up playing with in games like FFXIV and WoW that are either soooo noobily that they are stopping the group from progressing or sooooo hardcore that they'll hold a group back til the noob is kicked.

    (Edit: You can't tell either of these people anything, no matter how nice you are. Both will basically say "It's my sub, I do what I want.")

    There certainly were asinine linkshells (guilds) in FFXI, but they clustered together. Friendly LS's had friendly and simultaneously skilled players. It's a shocking thing. That's not unheard of in solo-focused games, but you typically end up with a lot of people that show up only when they need a group and can't help anyone that doesn't benefit them in some way.

    All this is based on personal experience. I have no statistical data for you. I'm sure there's some in barrens chat with their anal-ogies.

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

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,064
    edited December 2015
    "I'm looking for a game that brings back the multiplayer to mmo."
    Any game with OPTIONAL grouping has that multiplayer part you crave for. The only difference is that you have to go towards other people, since they aren't forced to endure you just because they have no choice. If you are unable to do that, then the problem lies with YOU, and not with the game design.
    I think we're different type of people, and that's fine.

    I do gravitate towards other people.
    Not sure you do. Otherwise, you wouldn't need them to be forced to gravitate towards you.

    And about the rest of your post, there are bad players in every game. That's what guilds and friends are for. That's why you go towards other likeminded people to befriend them.

    Can't remember the last time I had a bad PUG experience in a non-raid dungeon. Because I always go with a majority of guildies and/or real life friends. If we happen to have the rare "dipshit", we just kick him. And for raids, I go with my guild, so no risk there.


    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Axehilt said:
    If you are a dev, do you want to know what the audience like (data) or do you want to spend time to make 10 prototypes to test them out?
    There's no automatic answer to that question, given that Angry Birds was the result of a developer making 51 prototypes ("The Heds had developed 51 titles before Angry Birds.")

    Several companies are built on a model of making a lot of experimental games to see what sticks.  These companies don't work on giant, crushingly expensive MMOs, but the experimentation model is a viable game business model.
    Not for giant, crushingly expensive MMOs. Except Blizz, who can built a MMO prototype and then junk it if they don't think it will work?

    If you want MMOs built with the same amount of resource like a Angry Birds, then building 50 prototypes may be viable. 
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 34,492
    edited December 2015
    Dullahan said:
    There also hasn't been a new game resembling those of the first gen in over a decade.
    There hasn't been a car like a first generation Ford Mustang since 1973.

    Why ?

    Simple. Modern cars are much more reliable, faster, much much safer, pollute much less and use less fuel too. They also have many comfort elements that didn't even exist back then.

    Apply that to MMORPGs, and it works too.

    No one but a very small group of nostalgia struck old players want to go back to those tedious and boring grind games with boring downtime mechanics and forced grouping. And you can be sure that among those who ask for such a game to be made today thinking they will play it, most would have quit after a couple of months, realizing that actually, that MMO model sucked, and also that they don't have the kind of time to invest waste in such a game anymore.

    Proof being that all the games who attempted to emulate those old, tedious and boring mechanics since 2004 have all failed. Because players, even old timers like me and many others, know better now. And given the choice, which they didn't have back then, they will play a FUN game where they aren't forced into one specific play style.
    When you say there was little alternative, they could have played AC1, UO, Lineage 1, and a few others, (plenty of single player games, just like today) yet they stuck with EQ1 and it's forced grouping.  Yet they weren't having any fun in doing it?

    Must have been something special about the game for people to "endure" forced grouping just to play it.

    Perhaps if developers created a MMORPG with something special, people would again return to a group oriented game.

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 34,492
    "I'm looking for a game that brings back the multiplayer to mmo."
    Any game with OPTIONAL grouping has that multiplayer part you crave for. The only difference is that you have to go towards other people, since they aren't forced to endure you just because they have no choice. If you are unable to do that, then the problem lies with YOU, and not with the game design.
    I think we're different type of people, and that's fine.

    I do gravitate towards other people.
    Not sure you do. Otherwise, you wouldn't need them to be forced to gravitate towards you.

    And about the rest of your post, there are bad players in every game. That's what guilds and friends are for. That's why you go towards other likeminded people to befriend them.

    Can't remember the last time I had a bad PUG experience in a non-raid dungeon. Because I always go with a majority of guildies and/or real life friends. If we happen to have the rare "dipshit", we just kick him. And for raids, I go with my guild, so no risk there.


    Just curious, when was the last time you played a MMO "cold", without taking anyone you know, and started making new contacts from scratch?  Have you ever done it?

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






Sign In or Register to comment.