If I see a game that keeps adding "fun things to do" behind a paywall I just lose any will to play it.
It's not for me. And I can't understand how todays players are ok with it. You are taking away the achievement aspect and changing for "buy it".
I think that's the nature of ongoing softwares but... again... just gaming gets away from exploiting it to no end.
If I see a game exploiting drops and selling advantages that affect directly gameplay and the community, making people who don't spend look and play shittier, I'm out.
Life is already like that. I don't play games to see someone with advantages because paid more than me.
I strong agree this. People say no lifers ruin the game but they are actually playing. It still doesn't balance things because many times those with massive disposable income still are no lifers. Creating have and have nots based on RL economy in a game will never sot well with me.
AAA developers have been delivering the same old crap since 2004. Which was based upon a model that started taking over the industry as far back as 1999.
If you don't want that model you have three options.
1. Pay into innovative ideas being worked on by smaller companies so they have the funds to make a decent MMO.
2. Wait until those games have released and then pay in.
3. Quit MMOs for a long time because it will be a damn long time before any of these companies will get the funds to make an MMO on their own, or a AAA title decides to take a risk again.
So personally I'm willing to throw quite a lot of my entertainment budget at option 1. Because I would rather gamble on being entertained by a game that might just be what I want, then pay into a game that is guaranteed to not be what I want.
I have a long list of Kickstarter pledges so I as guilty as anyone, but all number 1 has done is further splinter the money, attention and market. To date it hasn't produced any MMO that I would consider very good.
I honestly think there are too many games out on the market. WAYYYY too many.
I know it's not a popular opinion but I honestly think we need contraction.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
While I agree there are too MMOs, there is a critical shortage of any kind of MMO that isn't WoW. A contraction of the already limited variety of the present market would be a death sentence for MMOs.
What we need is less WoW clones, but for the most part the titles getting kickstarted aren't WoW clones.
Sometimes there are many parts of a game that someone likes but only one or two parts that they don't like. Yet for some reason they must do those parts they don't like.
Sometimes it makes sense to skip the part you don't like to continue to do the part you do like. Other times it makes sense to stop playing the whole game.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Sometimes there are many parts of a game that someone likes but only one or two parts that they don't like. Yet for some reason they must do those parts they don't like.
Sometimes it makes sense to skip the part you don't like to continue to do the part you do like. Other times it makes sense to stop playing the whole game.
Sometimes those one or two parts aren't content but primary game features.
I love the EVE system for the most part. Love the way there is no grinding to level and how you can make gold in whatever way you see fit. The risk vs. reward system of high sec / low sec / null sec / WH fits my tastes pretty well (Though I feel the game could reach a broader audience if high sec was more secure and it wouldn't hurt my experience much).
The part I don't like is the hand's off element. The combat, the crafting, most of it all seems stale because the game's systems don't put you into the action.
Changing that one element would make it close enough to my ideal game that I'd probably just go play EVE and never look back.
Unfortunately it's a very major element, and it permeates through every experience you have in the game. So it is enough to make the game far less enjoyable, and it wouldn't be a simple fix.
What does it take to convince you that a game is just too much through its model and its has gone over the edge? When does it become too much to the point it feels less like a game and more like a scam in your eyes?
Basic
math... if a game is, or becomes, 'too expensive' (for me, more than about $100
up front and $5-30 per month (depending on content)) then it simply isn't even worth considering.
As for the model generally, best I figure I can do is vote with my wallet (by
buying and playing games that aren't money pits), hope others do the same, and
that the whales will eventually be bled dry.
While I agree there are too MMOs, there is a critical shortage of any kind of MMO that isn't WoW. A contraction of the already limited variety of the present market would be a death sentence for MMOs.
What we need is less WoW clones, but for the most part the titles getting kickstarted aren't WoW clones.
Off the top of my head here are the Crowdfunded MMORPG games that released:
The Exiled- PvP based Pathfinder Online- PvP based Project Gorgon- Closer to AC (but the closest to WoW of the bunch) Shroud of the Avatar- UO based Albion Online- PvP based
Here are the ones in development (again off the top of my head so may be missing a few):
Ashes of Creation- Probably the closest to WoW Chronicles of Elyria- PvP based Shards Online/Legend of Aria- PvP based Dual Universe- Sci Fi exploration/building Crowfall- PvP based Camelot Unchained- PvP based Pantheon- EQ clone Saga of Lucimia- Group focused PvE (oldschool EQ developed as a hobby)
Rather I would argue that The Exiled, Pathfinder, Albion, Shards, Crowfall and Camelot Unchained are all too similar to each other. They are all targeting a rather small population segment and have been and will continue to cannibalize each other.
So... PvP focused players are just a portion of the population. Between what was recently release and what is in development we have no less than 8 unique crowdfunded efforts to deliver a game for that population.
It's far too many. They simply cannot all be supported. The early ones all die on the vine because they are rough and people just look down the line and see more in the pipeline so they move on.
The only reason a game like Pantheon has a shot is because it's got no other competition for it's gameplay other than perhaps SoL. All those PvP games are just going to have a circular firing squad and the vast majority will fail. I just hope that one of them survives and thrives.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
What does it take to convince you that a game is just too much through its model and its has gone over the edge? When does it become too much to the point it feels less like a game and more like a scam in your eyes?
Just be upfront with costs. Do not nickle and dime me. EVER. Do not hide behind gambling boxes and shops unless they are an ALTERNATE to a sub. I'll pay X for a box and I'll pay Y per month for access. I have absolutely no problem paying more for X and Y. Just make sure there aren't upcharges everywhere else in the game.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
While I agree there are too MMOs, there is a critical shortage of any kind of MMO that isn't WoW. A contraction of the already limited variety of the present market would be a death sentence for MMOs.
What we need is less WoW clones, but for the most part the titles getting kickstarted aren't WoW clones.
So... PvP focused players are just a portion of the population. Between what was recently release and what is in development we have no less than 8 unique crowdfunded efforts to deliver a game for that population.
It's far too many. They simply cannot all be supported. The early ones all die on the vine because they are rough and people just look down the line and see more in the pipeline so they move on.
This is where I personally would disagree.
If you look at the existing PvP population in MMOs, then sure, there aren't enough players to spread across all these crowd-funded pvp games.
But, if you look at the potential PvP population, there are more players than these games could ever handle. PvP is a massively popular game mode, people love it and the potential market is huge.
The difficulty, of course, is getting the PvP market to engage in MMO PvP. MMO PvP is usually pretty crap, involving a long grind before you can start competing competitively and full of balance issues / power gaps, plus it's usually not all that accessible.
I think some of the crowdfunded PvP MMOs are trying to tackle the underlying issues and so have the potential to be successes. If they can pull in the people that enjoy PvP but don't enjoy MMO PvP then they'll be very happy!
While I agree there are too MMOs, there is a critical shortage of any kind of MMO that isn't WoW. A contraction of the already limited variety of the present market would be a death sentence for MMOs.
What we need is less WoW clones, but for the most part the titles getting kickstarted aren't WoW clones.
Off the top of my head here are the Crowdfunded MMORPG games that released:
The Exiled- PvP based Pathfinder Online- PvP based Project Gorgon- Closer to AC (but the closest to WoW of the bunch) Shroud of the Avatar- UO based Albion Online- PvP based
Here are the ones in development (again off the top of my head so may be missing a few):
Ashes of Creation- Probably the closest to WoW Chronicles of Elyria- PvP based Shards Online/Legend of Aria- PvP based Dual Universe- Sci Fi exploration/building Crowfall- PvP based Camelot Unchained- PvP based Pantheon- EQ clone Saga of Lucimia- Group focused PvE (oldschool EQ developed as a hobby)
Rather I would argue that The Exiled, Pathfinder, Albion, Shards, Crowfall and Camelot Unchained are all too similar to each other. They are all targeting a rather small population segment and have been and will continue to cannibalize each other.
So... PvP focused players are just a portion of the population. Between what was recently release and what is in development we have no less than 8 unique crowdfunded efforts to deliver a game for that population.
It's far too many. They simply cannot all be supported. The early ones all die on the vine because they are rough and people just look down the line and see more in the pipeline so they move on.
The only reason a game like Pantheon has a shot is because it's got no other competition for it's gameplay other than perhaps SoL. All those PvP games are just going to have a circular firing squad and the vast majority will fail. I just hope that one of them survives and thrives.
Pathfinder Online isn't a real project. It was a half baked idea that needed outside investment to salvage anything at all from, and never received that investment and now has what like 10 active players? Let's cross that one off the list of actual games.
Project Gorgon may have a lot of cool ideas behind it but it looks like an early 2000s game. It will never amount to anything.
Shroud of the Avatar is extreme niche, it has it's fanbase but that fanbase will always be a drop in the bucket.
What is The Exiled? I've never even heard of it.
So of those you listed as released we have a single serious contender. We'll see if the rest are serious contenders or not as they release.
While I agree there are too MMOs, there is a critical shortage of any kind of MMO that isn't WoW. A contraction of the already limited variety of the present market would be a death sentence for MMOs.
What we need is less WoW clones, but for the most part the titles getting kickstarted aren't WoW clones.
Off the top of my head here are the Crowdfunded MMORPG games that released:
The Exiled- PvP based Pathfinder Online- PvP based Project Gorgon- Closer to AC (but the closest to WoW of the bunch) Shroud of the Avatar- UO based Albion Online- PvP based
Here are the ones in development (again off the top of my head so may be missing a few):
Ashes of Creation- Probably the closest to WoW Chronicles of Elyria- PvP based Shards Online/Legend of Aria- PvP based Dual Universe- Sci Fi exploration/building Crowfall- PvP based Camelot Unchained- PvP based Pantheon- EQ clone Saga of Lucimia- Group focused PvE (oldschool EQ developed as a hobby)
Rather I would argue that The Exiled, Pathfinder, Albion, Shards, Crowfall and Camelot Unchained are all too similar to each other. They are all targeting a rather small population segment and have been and will continue to cannibalize each other.
So... PvP focused players are just a portion of the population. Between what was recently release and what is in development we have no less than 8 unique crowdfunded efforts to deliver a game for that population.
It's far too many. They simply cannot all be supported. The early ones all die on the vine because they are rough and people just look down the line and see more in the pipeline so they move on.
The only reason a game like Pantheon has a shot is because it's got no other competition for it's gameplay other than perhaps SoL. All those PvP games are just going to have a circular firing squad and the vast majority will fail. I just hope that one of them survives and thrives.
Pathfinder Online isn't a real project. It was a half baked idea that needed outside investment to salvage anything at all from, and never received that investment and now has what like 10 active players? Let's cross that one off the list of actual games.
Project Gorgon may have a lot of cool ideas behind it but it looks like an early 2000s game. It will never amount to anything.
Shroud of the Avatar is extreme niche, it has it's fanbase but that fanbase will always be a drop in the bucket.
What is The Exiled? I've never even heard of it.
So of those you listed as released we have a single serious contender. We'll see if the rest are serious contenders or not as they release.
OK... you kind of prove my point. Those "not serious" contenders pulled in $25,000,000 in funding and hundreds of thousands of players.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The projects that are outright failing comprise less funding and players than it would take to float a single decent MMO.
True, we could have a decent MMO if they all rallied around a serious project. But I see that as far less of a problem than the fact the top games in the genre now are all variations on WoW.
If one of these projects hits on a good model they can actually bring players who have given up on MMOs entirely back into the genre. While games like ESO, GW2, FF14 and WoW are all canabalizing the same small demographic.
AAA developers have been delivering the same old crap since 2004. Which was based upon a model that started taking over the industry as far back as 1999.
If you don't want that model you have three options.
1. Pay into innovative ideas being worked on by smaller companies so they have the funds to make a decent MMO.
2. Wait until those games have released and then pay in.
3. Quit MMOs for a long time because it will be a damn long time before any of these companies will get the funds to make an MMO on their own, or a AAA title decides to take a risk again.
So personally I'm willing to throw quite a lot of my entertainment budget at option 1. Because I would rather gamble on being entertained by a game that might just be what I want, then pay into a game that is guaranteed to not be what I want.
While this is good in principle, I don't know that this exists in practice. What company is really developing 'innovative ideas'? Everything I've seen in the MMORPG space traces its roots back to D&D, with decisions and systems designed to allow players to explore their imaginations without being overwhelmed by math. D&D was a great idea, but it was far from perfect. Nobody wants to rethink the fundamental components, or take on the risk of doing something different. Fifty years is a very long time for a single idea/concept to dominate.
Paying into a game that you don't like or want is pretty easily circumvented by having some form of 'trial'. Many times, that trial is a F2P setup that many don't like for whatever reason. Trials have not been monetized, so that the developing company receives income for their labor. Maybe this is another 'idea' that they have inherited and have chosen not to question.
The gaming industry seems to be doing quite well overall, but the MMORPG segment of that industry appears to be struggling. There is generally a feel that our gaming segment is following a formula laid down by the 1st generation MMORPGs and aren't trying to step out of these confines to see what else might work. They're comfortable with what worked in the past.
The players are also at fault. We accept what has worked in the past as a gold standard, and criticize anything that attempts to deviate from that norm. We are complacent with 20 year old game play and don't want to challenge ourselves in ways that take us out of our comfortable box.
Players and developers are both clinging to old ideas, neither willing to innovate or produce any ideas that don't follow the path. Both sides of this equation seem to distrust the other. Eventually, this tight feedback loop will collapse with the MMORPG genre either dying off or being replaced by something else.
I can only hope it won't be too long in arriving.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I think it is great some lunatics/ rich people pay so I can enjoy it. Those games won't be there in the first place without generous donation from those supporters.
AAA developers have been delivering the same old crap since 2004. Which was based upon a model that started taking over the industry as far back as 1999.
If you don't want that model you have three options.
1. Pay into innovative ideas being worked on by smaller companies so they have the funds to make a decent MMO.
2. Wait until those games have released and then pay in.
3. Quit MMOs for a long time because it will be a damn long time before any of these companies will get the funds to make an MMO on their own, or a AAA title decides to take a risk again.
So personally I'm willing to throw quite a lot of my entertainment budget at option 1. Because I would rather gamble on being entertained by a game that might just be what I want, then pay into a game that is guaranteed to not be what I want.
While this is good in principle, I don't know that this exists in practice. What company is really developing 'innovative ideas'? Everything I've seen in the MMORPG space traces its roots back to D&D, with decisions and systems designed to allow players to explore their imaginations without being overwhelmed by math. D&D was a great idea, but it was far from perfect. Nobody wants to rethink the fundamental components, or take on the risk of doing something different. Fifty years is a very long time for a single idea/concept to dominate.
Paying into a game that you don't like or want is pretty easily circumvented by having some form of 'trial'. Many times, that trial is a F2P setup that many don't like for whatever reason. Trials have not been monetized, so that the developing company receives income for their labor. Maybe this is another 'idea' that they have inherited and have chosen not to question.
The gaming industry seems to be doing quite well overall, but the MMORPG segment of that industry appears to be struggling. There is generally a feel that our gaming segment is following a formula laid down by the 1st generation MMORPGs and aren't trying to step out of these confines to see what else might work. They're comfortable with what worked in the past.
The players are also at fault. We accept what has worked in the past as a gold standard, and criticize anything that attempts to deviate from that norm. We are complacent with 20 year old game play and don't want to challenge ourselves in ways that take us out of our comfortable box.
Players and developers are both clinging to old ideas, neither willing to innovate or produce any ideas that don't follow the path. Both sides of this equation seem to distrust the other. Eventually, this tight feedback loop will collapse with the MMORPG genre either dying off or being replaced by something else.
I can only hope it won't be too long in arriving.
If this is true then why have MMOs and games changed so much? They used to be very slow games that were more about strategy, patience, exploration, and persistence. Now they are just some quick fix for fun with lots of fast travel and accessibility for everyone. The many changes came from trying to bring in new people who wouldn't play otherwise.
The monetary model has also undergone many changes. It went from subscription, to free to play, to cash ship, to loot boxes.
Classes have been simplified because most people don't want to deal with experimenting or complain another class is to powerful.
Sometimes old ideals are actually quite good and if MMOs ever do start to die down a lot in terms of mass appeal then we may see people who desire the old model. This is kind of similar to how people still play chess the same way and still play baseball more or less the same way.
Some things reach a pinnacle at which point there is little innovation left to be had unless you want a simulation of the real world, but that can be had in the real world. I don't even want to think how much power it would take to simulate the real world. That would be a major waste.
What does it take to convince you that a game is just too much through its model and its has gone over the edge? When does it become too much to the point it feels less like a game and more like a scam in your eyes?
I despise "double dipping." If you are buy to play AND have cash shops, not interested. Even giving "cash shop credits" in a subscription game sucks for me. I don't want cash in my games, ever, MMO or single player.
I want a game where I simply load it up, click to play, and enjoy the game. Leave my credit card at the "digital storefront", please.
Even the old way of buy the game, spend each month for access (aka: subscription), then purchase expansions on top of it all does not sit well with me. MMOs rarely pump out expansions in less than 1 year and if $180/year ($15 sub fee * 12 months) is not enough, best take some budgeting courses at the local community college.
Could it be possible, companies have to nickle and dime to stay financially solvent given the exponential increase in labor costs for MMOs?
While I can accept that argument for indie MMOs, I can't for the big companies, the profits they make are ginormous. I would accept a higher initial cost for a AA or AAA, but they build in long term revenue streams which are there to treat gamers like punters and fleece them as much as they can.
Comments
I honestly think there are too many games out on the market. WAYYYY too many.
I know it's not a popular opinion but I honestly think we need contraction.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
What we need is less WoW clones, but for the most part the titles getting kickstarted aren't WoW clones.
Sometimes it makes sense to skip the part you don't like to continue to do the part you do like. Other times it makes sense to stop playing the whole game.
I love the EVE system for the most part. Love the way there is no grinding to level and how you can make gold in whatever way you see fit. The risk vs. reward system of high sec / low sec / null sec / WH fits my tastes pretty well (Though I feel the game could reach a broader audience if high sec was more secure and it wouldn't hurt my experience much).
The part I don't like is the hand's off element. The combat, the crafting, most of it all seems stale because the game's systems don't put you into the action.
Changing that one element would make it close enough to my ideal game that I'd probably just go play EVE and never look back.
Unfortunately it's a very major element, and it permeates through every experience you have in the game. So it is enough to make the game far less enjoyable, and it wouldn't be a simple fix.
As for the model generally, best I figure I can do is vote with my wallet (by buying and playing games that aren't money pits), hope others do the same, and that the whales will eventually be bled dry.
The Exiled- PvP based
Pathfinder Online- PvP based
Project Gorgon- Closer to AC (but the closest to WoW of the bunch)
Shroud of the Avatar- UO based
Albion Online- PvP based
Here are the ones in development (again off the top of my head so may be missing a few):
Ashes of Creation- Probably the closest to WoW
Chronicles of Elyria- PvP based
Shards Online/Legend of Aria- PvP based
Dual Universe- Sci Fi exploration/building
Crowfall- PvP based
Camelot Unchained- PvP based
Pantheon- EQ clone
Saga of Lucimia- Group focused PvE (oldschool EQ developed as a hobby)
Rather I would argue that The Exiled, Pathfinder, Albion, Shards, Crowfall and Camelot Unchained are all too similar to each other. They are all targeting a rather small population segment and have been and will continue to cannibalize each other.
So... PvP focused players are just a portion of the population. Between what was recently release and what is in development we have no less than 8 unique crowdfunded efforts to deliver a game for that population.
It's far too many. They simply cannot all be supported. The early ones all die on the vine because they are rough and people just look down the line and see more in the pipeline so they move on.
The only reason a game like Pantheon has a shot is because it's got no other competition for it's gameplay other than perhaps SoL. All those PvP games are just going to have a circular firing squad and the vast majority will fail. I just hope that one of them survives and thrives.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
If you look at the existing PvP population in MMOs, then sure, there aren't enough players to spread across all these crowd-funded pvp games.
But, if you look at the potential PvP population, there are more players than these games could ever handle. PvP is a massively popular game mode, people love it and the potential market is huge.
The difficulty, of course, is getting the PvP market to engage in MMO PvP. MMO PvP is usually pretty crap, involving a long grind before you can start competing competitively and full of balance issues / power gaps, plus it's usually not all that accessible.
I think some of the crowdfunded PvP MMOs are trying to tackle the underlying issues and so have the potential to be successes. If they can pull in the people that enjoy PvP but don't enjoy MMO PvP then they'll be very happy!
Project Gorgon may have a lot of cool ideas behind it but it looks like an early 2000s game. It will never amount to anything.
Shroud of the Avatar is extreme niche, it has it's fanbase but that fanbase will always be a drop in the bucket.
What is The Exiled? I've never even heard of it.
So of those you listed as released we have a single serious contender. We'll see if the rest are serious contenders or not as they release.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Circular firing squad: Split the population. Split the funding. Release is underwhelming. People look to the next game.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
True, we could have a decent MMO if they all rallied around a serious project. But I see that as far less of a problem than the fact the top games in the genre now are all variations on WoW.
If one of these projects hits on a good model they can actually bring players who have given up on MMOs entirely back into the genre. While games like ESO, GW2, FF14 and WoW are all canabalizing the same small demographic.
Paying into a game that you don't like or want is pretty easily circumvented by having some form of 'trial'. Many times, that trial is a F2P setup that many don't like for whatever reason. Trials have not been monetized, so that the developing company receives income for their labor. Maybe this is another 'idea' that they have inherited and have chosen not to question.
The gaming industry seems to be doing quite well overall, but the MMORPG segment of that industry appears to be struggling. There is generally a feel that our gaming segment is following a formula laid down by the 1st generation MMORPGs and aren't trying to step out of these confines to see what else might work. They're comfortable with what worked in the past.
The players are also at fault. We accept what has worked in the past as a gold standard, and criticize anything that attempts to deviate from that norm. We are complacent with 20 year old game play and don't want to challenge ourselves in ways that take us out of our comfortable box.
Players and developers are both clinging to old ideas, neither willing to innovate or produce any ideas that don't follow the path. Both sides of this equation seem to distrust the other. Eventually, this tight feedback loop will collapse with the MMORPG genre either dying off or being replaced by something else.
I can only hope it won't be too long in arriving.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
The monetary model has also undergone many changes. It went from subscription, to free to play, to cash ship, to loot boxes.
Classes have been simplified because most people don't want to deal with experimenting or complain another class is to powerful.
Sometimes old ideals are actually quite good and if MMOs ever do start to die down a lot in terms of mass appeal then we may see people who desire the old model. This is kind of similar to how people still play chess the same way and still play baseball more or less the same way.
Some things reach a pinnacle at which point there is little innovation left to be had unless you want a simulation of the real world, but that can be had in the real world. I don't even want to think how much power it would take to simulate the real world. That would be a major waste.
I want a game where I simply load it up, click to play, and enjoy the game. Leave my credit card at the "digital storefront", please.
Even the old way of buy the game, spend each month for access (aka: subscription), then purchase expansions on top of it all does not sit well with me. MMOs rarely pump out expansions in less than 1 year and if $180/year ($15 sub fee * 12 months) is not enough, best take some budgeting courses at the local community college.
VG
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
VG