Howdy, Stranger!

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

What are valid reasons for themeparks to be an MMORPG?

13»

Comments

  • BeezerbeezBeezerbeez Member UncommonPosts: 302
    This is like the String Theory of gaming debates: The same talking points brought up over and over for the past 14 years with no new nuance, analytics, or evidence. Some day instead of "what came first, the chicken or the egg?" people will ask "what's better, a sandbox or a themepark." A thousand years from now it'll be codified in an ancient koan alongside "what is the sound of one hand clapping?". 

    I'm only kidding of course, but I do wish that 14 years from now we have some actual insight into this.


  • InteritusInteritus Member UncommonPosts: 236
    This is like the String Theory of gaming debates: The same talking points brought up over and over for the past 14 years with no new nuance, analytics, or evidence. Some day instead of "what came first, the chicken or the egg?" people will ask "what's better, a sandbox or a themepark." A thousand years from now it'll be codified in an ancient koan alongside "what is the sound of one hand clapping?". 

    I'm only kidding of course, but I do wish that 14 years from now we have some actual insight into this.



  • GaladournGaladourn Member RarePosts: 1,813
    edited September 2018
    Galadourn said:
    Galadourn said:
    you have confounded everything, themepark vs sandbox, MMO vs co-op... jeez....
    They are all connected.  I am trying to leave sandbox out of it and evaluate pure themeparks on it's own merit.
    they are, but you are comparing apples and oranges here; themepark is a game style, while co-op/MMO is a game genre...


    I feel like people are taking this as an attack. 
    oh no, not at all, I just wasn't sure what the comparison was for. It's more clear to me now.

    So regarding this approach, I think that being "the best in the playground" amongst a multitude of players in MMOs (most/all of them unknown to you) is more rewarding than simply "completing goals" with a group of friends in a co-op. there's no one to brag about it in a co-op.
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    I don't think people are seeing it as an attack (in general), they are seeing repeated conflation of 2 things that are independent of each other. OP keeps creeping independent terms into the question/debate and causing confusion in his philosophy.

    Again, the amount of players in a title has 0 to do with if it's a themepark or sandbox. Start from there and re-frame your stance.

    To skip all of the semantics. YES, themeparks are a more risky option because of the added variable of "a journey" which is finite. Was it a good journey? Did it end too fast? Can it be continued? At what cost? A sandbox on the other hand relies on providing the player with the tools to keep themselves entertained. Dropping new tools into a sandbox is cheaper and has more instant gratification than constructing a new journey.

    Smart developers understand that hybrids of both approaches can mitigate some of the cons both have.
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,196
    I don't think people are seeing it as an attack (in general), they are seeing repeated conflation of 2 things that are independent of each other. OP keeps creeping independent terms into the question/debate and causing confusion in his philosophy.

    Again, the amount of players in a title has 0 to do with if it's a themepark or sandbox. Start from there and re-frame your stance.

    To skip all of the semantics. YES, themeparks are a more risky option because of the added variable of "a journey" which is finite. Was it a good journey? Did it end too fast? Can it be continued? At what cost? A sandbox on the other hand relies on providing the player with the tools to keep themselves entertained. Dropping new tools into a sandbox is cheaper and has more instant gratification than constructing a new journey.

    Smart developers understand that hybrids of both approaches can mitigate some of the cons both have.
    I am not comparing themepark to sandbox.  This is like saying I am comparing football and basketball.  It is more like asking does a boys and girls club football game need to be played at an large expensive professional football stadium if the crowd can fit in a small high school field?


  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,196
    Galadourn said:
    Galadourn said:
    Galadourn said:
    you have confounded everything, themepark vs sandbox, MMO vs co-op... jeez....
    They are all connected.  I am trying to leave sandbox out of it and evaluate pure themeparks on it's own merit.
    they are, but you are comparing apples and oranges here; themepark is a game style, while co-op/MMO is a game genre...


    I feel like people are taking this as an attack. 
    oh no, not at all, I just wasn't sure what the comparison was for. It's more clear to me now.

    So regarding this approach, I think that being "the best in the playground" amongst a multitude of players in MMOs (most/all of them unknown to you) is more rewarding than simply "completing goals" with a group of friends in a co-op. there's no one to brag about it in a co-op.
    Fair enough.  Do you think those reasons are worth the extra expenses, development times and technical limitations?
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,560
    Galadourn said:
    Galadourn said:
    Galadourn said:
    you have confounded everything, themepark vs sandbox, MMO vs co-op... jeez....
    They are all connected.  I am trying to leave sandbox out of it and evaluate pure themeparks on it's own merit.
    they are, but you are comparing apples and oranges here; themepark is a game style, while co-op/MMO is a game genre...


    I feel like people are taking this as an attack. 
    oh no, not at all, I just wasn't sure what the comparison was for. It's more clear to me now.

    So regarding this approach, I think that being "the best in the playground" amongst a multitude of players in MMOs (most/all of them unknown to you) is more rewarding than simply "completing goals" with a group of friends in a co-op. there's no one to brag about it in a co-op.
    Fair enough.  Do you think those reasons are worth the extra expenses, development times and technical limitations?
    It probably take so much money to make every element of Wow/GW2/ESO already, you might as well add in the world.  Everyone are expecting more and more nowadays.

    I presume that is how GW1 started.  When GW2 started to develop, they think the standard is have a world build.  
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 17,915
    What you really seem to be asking has very little to do with sandbox/themepark. What I hear you saying is if a game -- any game of any type -- does not have any game play elements where you can have hundreds of players participating in the same spot, why bother?

    And my answer to that question is yeah, why bother indeed. And if they do bother it's probably just for the social atmosphere enhanced by many different players in busy hubs.

    But if it does have at least one game play feature that accommodates hundreds though, it really doesn't mater if the other 95% of the game is instanced for solo or small group content. It needs to be an MMORPG for the 5%.
    blueturtle13Vermillion_Raventhal
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 41,521
    edited September 2018
    I don't think people are seeing it as an attack (in general), they are seeing repeated conflation of 2 things that are independent of each other. OP keeps creeping independent terms into the question/debate and causing confusion in his philosophy.

    Again, the amount of players in a title has 0 to do with if it's a themepark or sandbox. Start from there and re-frame your stance.

    To skip all of the semantics. YES, themeparks are a more risky option because of the added variable of "a journey" which is finite. Was it a good journey? Did it end too fast? Can it be continued? At what cost? A sandbox on the other hand relies on providing the player with the tools to keep themselves entertained. Dropping new tools into a sandbox is cheaper and has more instant gratification than constructing a new journey.

    Smart developers understand that hybrids of both approaches can mitigate some of the cons both have.
    I am not comparing themepark to sandbox.  This is like saying I am comparing football and basketball.  It is more like asking does a boys and girls club football game need to be played at an large expensive professional football stadium if the crowd can fit in a small high school field?


    Or does a professional football game really need to be played in a large, expensive stadium when the fans could just watch it on their TV at home while the two teams play the game at a nearby small field?


    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

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

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    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






  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,330
    Kyleran said:

    Or does a professional football game really need to be played in a large, expensive stadium when the fans could just watch it on their TV at home while the two teams play the game at a nearby small field?


    But in the MMOs you are one of the players, not a fan.
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 8,667
    edited September 2018
    If developers truly thought they can do away with the massively and  the theme part and still make the mullah they would. But the need for the huge populations to populate the game to draw in the whales and the players is by their own data necessary. Whales need other players to see them in their awesome gear whether it be cosmetic or earned to ask them "where did you get that?". They need a place and story to show their progression. Just going through a game with nothing but bare mobs without an overreaching arch is very boring. You need big quests and goals and story behind what you do.

    You need places where players can see other players in their gear and also see weapon effects and even see them while you travel about. Nothing screams sad and lonely game then you going about the roads and towns alone with no objective aside from gaining experience. I wouldn't play a game like that. I want other people to be around me and have the possibility of talking to them and asking them to group and finish some big quest to advance the story.

    I want to arrive at a dungeon and see others there and ask them if they need another hand. So in my opinion developers have realised that to get the big bucks they need a big game with massive amount of people and story .

    Advertising is also way more potent with a themepark see wow videos as a reference to this power. They can embellish and create excitement way before the game is ready.

    As a result since big bucks need big backing these types of games are dwindling.
    [Deleted User]Vermillion_Raventhal
    Chamber of Chains
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,330
    edited September 2018
    cheyane said:


    You need places where players can see other players in their gear and also see weapon effects and even see them while you travel about.
    Yeah, and when they see you they will be so amazed, and will like you, and will fall in love with your character, and will be jealous a bit, will want to look like you... The reality - nobody cares how your avatar looks. If there is a PvP they may appreciate the good gear as a threat, if there is not - they simply do not care. You are maybe an exclusion, but I doubt you care too.
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 8,667
    edited September 2018

    ikcin said:
    cheyane said:


    You need places where players can see other players in their gear and also see weapon effects and even see them while you travel about.
    Yeah, and when they see you they will be so amazed, and will like you, and will fall in love with your character, and will be jealous a bit, will want to look like you... The reality - nobody cares how your avatar looks. If there is a PvP they may appreciate the good gear as a threat, if there is not - they simply do not care. You are maybe an exclusion, but I doubt you care too.

    The selling of skins and cosmetics that even games like Fortnite, PUBG, LoL, BDO have a huge market that may not be in number but generate value and I think the statistics seem to support my point of view but you often shoot from the hip with only your opinion in mind lacking any data or evidence.

    I have evidence 
    http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/322408/Fortnite_has_collected_1_billion_from_ingame_purchases.php
    https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-06-27-69-percent-of-fortnite-players-have-bought-in-game-purchases-average-spend-is-usd85

    68.8 per cent of these players stated they had purchased in-game content for Fortnite, with most of that spending (58.9 per cent) going on outfits or characters. 18.06 per cent had bought gliders, 13.52 per cent had picked up new harvesting tools, while 9.52 per cent had been shopping for emotes or dance moves.

    https://www.pcgamer.com/most-expensive-pubg-items/

    “People told us when we started that if you don’t charge up front, or if you’re not selling extra power or stats, it won’t work,” Mr. Merrill said. “But that fails to account for the coolness factor. If you’re really into cars, you don’t mind spending $50,000 to soup up your Honda. That’s the player we’re tapping into.” 
    Source https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/technology/riot-games-league-of-legends-main-attraction-esports.html


    https://medium.com/wax-io/how-on-earth-is-trading-virtual-items-in-video-games-a-50-billion-industry-5972c211d621

    In fact, though, this is cheap compared to some similar items bought and sold by video game fans. For those who are unacquainted with the world of virtual items, the image above shows a skin, an in-game file that modifies the appearance of a character or item.

    Generally speaking, these things are strictly cosmetic. They don’t make a player stronger, faster, better protected or functionally enhanced in any way. They do, however, look damn good.

    The primary market for virtual items — composed of video gamers purchasing virtual content directly from game publishers — is tens of billions of dollars.

    Around 60% of console gamers have purchased virtual items at some point, along with 43% of PC gamers and 33% of smartphone gamers. In the last 12 months, video gamers have spent an average of $133 (console gamers), $96 (PC gamers), and $37 (smartphone gamers) on virtual items.


    I personally don't care for nor spend on cosmetics except in Path of Exile where I purchased an outfit to assist the Grinding Gear Games. So your shallow opinion of my motives falls flat. I value a good friend that I can play with not because of what they are wearing although if it is my friend I will compliment them on their outfit.


    I suggest you read the reports of the market value of cosmetics before you dismiss my point of view.

    If as you say no one cares how their avatar looks how come they are spending all this money. You really should not try to pass your opinion on as fact when it can be so easily proven to be false.

    [Deleted User]Vermillion_RaventhalVengeSunsoarikcin
    Chamber of Chains
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,196
    cheyane said:
    If developers truly thought they can do away with the massively and  the theme part and still make the mullah they would. But the need for the huge populations to populate the game to draw in the whales and the players is by their own data necessary. Whales need other players to see them in their awesome gear whether it be cosmetic or earned to ask them "where did you get that?". They need a place and story to show their progression. Just going through a game with nothing but bare mobs without an overreaching arch is very boring. You need big quests and goals and story behind what you do.

    You need places where players can see other players in their gear and also see weapon effects and even see them while you travel about. Nothing screams sad and lonely game then you going about the roads and towns alone with no objective aside from gaining experience. I wouldn't play a game like that. I want other people to be around me and have the possibility of talking to them and asking them to group and finish some big quest to advance the story.

    I want to arrive at a dungeon and see others there and ask them if they need another hand. So in my opinion developers have realised that to get the big bucks they need a big game with massive amount of people and story .

    Advertising is also way more potent with a themepark see wow videos as a reference to this power. They can embellish and create excitement way before the game is ready.

    As a result since big bucks need big backing these types of games are dwindling.
    I think some of this could be done with player visitable instanced guild halls, player housing,  central cities, market square etc. Doesn't have to be really more than 16 to 64 players in an instance.

    Not sure how you do the the meet up pickup groups.  Not sure how popular it is.  
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 41,521
    ikcin said:
    Kyleran said:

    Or does a professional football game really need to be played in a large, expensive stadium when the fans could just watch it on their TV at home while the two teams play the game at a nearby small field?


    But in the MMOs you are one of the players, not a fan.
    Are you? Seems more and more people are watching professionals and amateurs play video games rather than playing them.

    ikcin

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

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

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    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: 41,521
    edited September 2018
    cheyane said:

    ikcin said:
    cheyane said:


    You need places where players can see other players in their gear and also see weapon effects and even see them while you travel about.
    Yeah, and when they see you they will be so amazed, and will like you, and will fall in love with your character, and will be jealous a bit, will want to look like you... The reality - nobody cares how your avatar looks. If there is a PvP they may appreciate the good gear as a threat, if there is not - they simply do not care. You are maybe an exclusion, but I doubt you care too.

    The selling of skins and cosmetics that even games like Fortnite, PUBG, LoL, BDO have a huge market that may not be in number but generate value and I think the statistics seem to support my point of view but you often shoot from the hip with only your opinion in mind lacking any data or evidence.

    I have evidence 
    http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/322408/Fortnite_has_collected_1_billion_from_ingame_purchases.php
    https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-06-27-69-percent-of-fortnite-players-have-bought-in-game-purchases-average-spend-is-usd85

    68.8 per cent of these players stated they had purchased in-game content for Fortnite, with most of that spending (58.9 per cent) going on outfits or characters. 18.06 per cent had bought gliders, 13.52 per cent had picked up new harvesting tools, while 9.52 per cent had been shopping for emotes or dance moves.

    https://www.pcgamer.com/most-expensive-pubg-items/

    “People told us when we started that if you don’t charge up front, or if you’re not selling extra power or stats, it won’t work,” Mr. Merrill said. “But that fails to account for the coolness factor. If you’re really into cars, you don’t mind spending $50,000 to soup up your Honda. That’s the player we’re tapping into.” 
    Source https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/technology/riot-games-league-of-legends-main-attraction-esports.html


    https://medium.com/wax-io/how-on-earth-is-trading-virtual-items-in-video-games-a-50-billion-industry-5972c211d621

    In fact, though, this is cheap compared to some similar items bought and sold by video game fans. For those who are unacquainted with the world of virtual items, the image above shows a skin, an in-game file that modifies the appearance of a character or item.

    Generally speaking, these things are strictly cosmetic. They don’t make a player stronger, faster, better protected or functionally enhanced in any way. They do, however, look damn good.

    The primary market for virtual items — composed of video gamers purchasing virtual content directly from game publishers — is tens of billions of dollars.

    Around 60% of console gamers have purchased virtual items at some point, along with 43% of PC gamers and 33% of smartphone gamers. In the last 12 months, video gamers have spent an average of $133 (console gamers), $96 (PC gamers), and $37 (smartphone gamers) on virtual items.


    I personally don't care for nor spend on cosmetics except in Path of Exile where I purchased an outfit to assist the Grinding Gear Games. So your shallow opinion of my motives falls flat. I value a good friend that I can play with not because of what they are wearing although if it is my friend I will compliment them on their outfit.


    I suggest you read the reports of the market value of cosmetics before you dismiss my point of view.

    If as you say no one cares how their avatar looks how come they are spending all this money. You really should not try to pass your opinion on as fact when it can be so easily proven to be false.

    You are not wrong, no one really took into account how shallow the masses are when it comes to spending money on the "coolness factor" nor how much money they will spend on such.

    The concept is almost incomprehensible to the average rational person though it should have been obvious people's long standing purchases of designer clothing or shoes such as Jordons at ridiculous prices would eventually translate into electronic mediums. 


    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

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

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    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






  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,560
    cheyane said:
    If developers truly thought they can do away with the massively and  the theme part and still make the mullah they would. But the need for the huge populations to populate the game to draw in the whales and the players is by their own data necessary. Whales need other players to see them in their awesome gear whether it be cosmetic or earned to ask them "where did you get that?". They need a place and story to show their progression. Just going through a game with nothing but bare mobs without an overreaching arch is very boring. You need big quests and goals and story behind what you do.

    You need places where players can see other players in their gear and also see weapon effects and even see them while you travel about. Nothing screams sad and lonely game then you going about the roads and towns alone with no objective aside from gaining experience. I wouldn't play a game like that. I want other people to be around me and have the possibility of talking to them and asking them to group and finish some big quest to advance the story.

    I want to arrive at a dungeon and see others there and ask them if they need another hand. So in my opinion developers have realised that to get the big bucks they need a big game with massive amount of people and story .

    Advertising is also way more potent with a themepark see wow videos as a reference to this power. They can embellish and create excitement way before the game is ready.

    As a result since big bucks need big backing these types of games are dwindling.
    I think some of this could be done with player visitable instanced guild halls, player housing,  central cities, market square etc. Doesn't have to be really more than 16 to 64 players in an instance.

    Not sure how you do the the meet up pickup groups.  Not sure how popular it is.  
    I don't know if you even play themepark game but which would you personally prefer more?  COOPRPG or MMORPG?  

    You talk about turning MMORPG into COOPRPG for I don't know what reason.  I think many of the low budget chinese or korean online RPG sort of played like a COOPRPG already.  And even cheap mobile games dont' have a problem hosting a world map which can host 100 players in the same area.

    The larger budget game 60+ million dollar are called large budget game for a reason.  So they won't have a problem creating a map which can host large number of people.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Please give examples of the coop games you are referring to. 

    I personally don't want to play lobby games, I prefer seeing anyone out in the world and in cities.  I also like the global chat and higher population.

    I mainly solo in ARPGs but I get bored with games like torchlight and Grim Dawn as I want global chat and a real community.
    There are none.  That is kind of my point.  Developers jumped in the deep end of the pool for results they could have gotten in just being in their height. 

    STWOR as a coop multiplayer game would have probably been a highly rated game.
    There are no coop games?

    Destiny.  The Division, Vindictus, PoE, Diablo, Warframe, hell Divinity has coop....  There are plenty of coop theme park games.  Most of those are some flavor of RPG.

    The reason to do an MMORPG is, as Kyleran said, to leverage the advantages of that genre.  If you aren't going to try and leverage those advantages, just make a title like any one of the ones I mentioned above.  Everything, including your combat and conversation systems, will benefit from not having to scale upwards.
    Nepheth

    image
  • WarEnsembleWarEnsemble Member UncommonPosts: 252
    Aside from the fact that your question is wrote so poorly that I can't even figure what you are asking, the fact that you asked "what are valid reasons" means that you reject the notion that themepark games are mmo no matter what the reason is.
    Nepheth
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,330
    cheyane said:


    The selling of skins and cosmetics that even games like Fortnite, PUBG, LoL, BDO have a huge market that may not be in number but generate value and I think the statistics seem to support my point of view but you often shoot from the hip with only your opinion in mind lacking any data or evidence.

    If as you say no one cares how their avatar looks how come they are spending all this money. You really should not try to pass your opinion on as fact when it can be so easily proven to be false.

    Cool research. And I do not say nobody cares how their avatar looks - all care, even I. Will not pay for it, but kind of care. In the real life I buy labeled clothes for the quality, but not for the label. I say nobody cares how your or somebody's else avatar looks. The dress up game you call MMO is heavy delusional. Like if you wear Gucci or drive Porsche in the real life. Most people do not really care. And as the car is big enough to be obvious, most even will not notice the bag or the clothes. This is even more true in the games, as many people there are intentionally ignorant - including you. Well nobody is overestimated. Maybe few will notice the gear or the look. And even less will care about it. So, do you really need a MMO for that dress up competition - it is doubtful.

  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,560
    Please give examples of the coop games you are referring to. 

    I personally don't want to play lobby games, I prefer seeing anyone out in the world and in cities.  I also like the global chat and higher population.

    I mainly solo in ARPGs but I get bored with games like torchlight and Grim Dawn as I want global chat and a real community.
    There are none.  That is kind of my point.  Developers jumped in the deep end of the pool for results they could have gotten in just being in their height. 

    STWOR as a coop multiplayer game would have probably been a highly rated game.
    There are no coop games?

    Destiny.  The Division, Vindictus, PoE, Diablo, Warframe, hell Divinity has coop....  There are plenty of coop theme park games.  Most of those are some flavor of RPG.

    The reason to do an MMORPG is, as Kyleran said, to leverage the advantages of that genre.  If you aren't going to try and leverage those advantages, just make a title like any one of the ones I mentioned above.  Everything, including your combat and conversation systems, will benefit from not having to scale upwards.
    I think he mean coop RPG games which have all the feature of a themepark mmorpg.  But without an open world map which can host large amount of people at the same time.    
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,560
    ikcin said:
    cheyane said:


    The selling of skins and cosmetics that even games like Fortnite, PUBG, LoL, BDO have a huge market that may not be in number but generate value and I think the statistics seem to support my point of view but you often shoot from the hip with only your opinion in mind lacking any data or evidence.

    If as you say no one cares how their avatar looks how come they are spending all this money. You really should not try to pass your opinion on as fact when it can be so easily proven to be false.

    Cool research. And I do not say nobody cares how their avatar looks - all care, even I. Will not pay for it, but kind of care. In the real life I buy labeled clothes for the quality, but not for the label. I say nobody cares how your or somebody's else avatar looks. The dress up game you call MMO is heavy delusional. Like if you wear Gucci or drive Porsche in the real life. Most people do not really care. And as the car is big enough to be obvious, most even will not notice the bag or the clothes. This is even more true in the games, as many people there are intentionally ignorant - including you. Well nobody is overestimated. Maybe few will notice the gear or the look. And even less will care about it. So, do you really need a MMO for that dress up competition - it is doubtful.

    I personally don't care about Avatar look.  I thought most people won't care too.  But after playing GW2, I'm quite perplexed how many people actually care.  

    I always have a sense you think your view applied to everyone and most people think like you.  There is a post on people voting for their favorite AAA mmorpg.  The vote is so spread out.  It just show how vastly different people are.
    KyleranAlBQuirky
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,196
    AAAMEOW said:
    Please give examples of the coop games you are referring to. 

    I personally don't want to play lobby games, I prefer seeing anyone out in the world and in cities.  I also like the global chat and higher population.

    I mainly solo in ARPGs but I get bored with games like torchlight and Grim Dawn as I want global chat and a real community.
    There are none.  That is kind of my point.  Developers jumped in the deep end of the pool for results they could have gotten in just being in their height. 

    STWOR as a coop multiplayer game would have probably been a highly rated game.
    There are no coop games?

    Destiny.  The Division, Vindictus, PoE, Diablo, Warframe, hell Divinity has coop....  There are plenty of coop theme park games.  Most of those are some flavor of RPG.

    The reason to do an MMORPG is, as Kyleran said, to leverage the advantages of that genre.  If you aren't going to try and leverage those advantages, just make a title like any one of the ones I mentioned above.  Everything, including your combat and conversation systems, will benefit from not having to scale upwards.
    I think he mean coop RPG games which have all the feature of a themepark mmorpg.  But without an open world map which can host large amount of people at the same time.    
    Actually can have an open world just smaller amount of people outside of raids, dungeons and other instances.

Sign In or Register to comment.