I love the part you say: "you can literally feel the love that went into it".
This tells me they are artist first, then programmers, Look at the Trolls for example, they are ugly as hell with simple graphics. No one seems to complain and the Trolls are effective, random, and scary as hell.
Artistic !
You see, this is the stuff that grinds my gears. You aren't an artist. I actually am an artist though my primary discipline is music.
And I can tell you, without blinking, with absolute certainty, that I've seen programmers talk about their work, their craft with the same passion and excitement and dedication as any artist that I know.
Also, If you see bad art or art you don't like in a game it's just because they are either bad artists or they have different tastes as you.
The third possible reason is that someone is dictating what the art style should be because they don't want it to become too weird and therefore unsalable.
But that isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Well what grinds my gears, is you think everything is rosy when the industry is failing and no one wants to invest.
Meanwhile were playing crappy heavy instance playground games. Played in order like a carrot-on-a-stick. The only reason games like ESO and FF14 are popular, is because their the last ones.
You don't have to have an eleven year doctors degree in programing to see, they suck.
Do they really suck?
I'm playing ESO right now and while it isn't at all like my all time favorite MMORPG EVE, there are many redeeming qualities in terms of what they deliver.
For what is worth there's very little driving a player to any particular area or content, very different from previous games I've played.
Remember, just because you or I don't care for a particular game doesn't automatically mean they suck, just means they are catering to different tastes.
Pro tip, devs cater to the customers most likely to spend money, the more the better, so what features are you willing to spend big on?
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
So, ask yourself this: what gameplay would you like to see that involved 250+ players?
That's an important point (not that the rest weren't ), since coordination in combat gets increasingly difficult as numbers rise.
(just look at army structures, command lines and the separation of tactical and strategic layer...)
You mentioned pvp, I ain't much fun of that aspect of MMORPGs but I'm sure besides zerg rushes those numbers are unnecessary.
Early Fusang in TSW (3x150 players) or creep raids in LotRO or the zone-wide tug-of-war in Planetside 2 can show that beyond a certain number it's more efficient if you divide your group and go after multiple goals at once, instead just piling up the numbers.
Same applies to PvE, 50 players, or 2x50 with the two dedicated leaders coordination sounds like about the top numbers for valid teamwork and contribution, before all goes to hell and just turns into mindless zerging (which ain't fun, imo)
For this reason, I'd definitely not like to see 250+ players at once in any kinda combat scenario - not a surprise though, I'm biased and don't care much about combat
What gameplay then? Your next post had the answer too, roleplaying.
Concerts in LotRO, fashion shows in CO, cabal parade in TSW, etc. Races, weddings, kinship events, festivals, server-wide competitions, the list could go on forever.
However, there's two tiny little problems with all that. Actually just one, since both have the same root cause. Which is the same problem the entire genre has, and why delete is bound to make these threads... and it boils down to this: nobody cares.
Take LotRO as an example, since it's a treasure trove in this aspect. Weatherstock/Winterstock, horse races, annual "olympics-like" Harnkegger Games, the TTHTI series, crafting events, housing events, language courses, etc.
Still, if we'd add everyone who was attending even just one of those events, and even just once over the 10+ years... I'm certain the number would be less than 5% of the entire playerbase.
In other games, I'm sure it's even lower. It's a sad truth, you can be as creative as possible, the playerbase could be as friendly and roleplay-focused as possible, the majority of them simply don't care.
Players just want "gameplay" (which almost always boils down to combat), some character advancement, and preferably fast, within short sessions, and solo.
And it leads back to delete as well, since what's "slump" for us, it's exactly what a much larger audience wants. The genre (and the entire industry, for what matters) might be "dying" in our eyes, but on the other side it's more profitable and popular than ever.
Just not for us, but the "nu-gamers", the new audience.
Hard to expect changes from an industry which currently makes the most money in its entire lifetime...
Thanks very much for the detailed response!
Co-ordination of large numbers of players will definitely be an issue for any massively multiplayer features. This is where the research and intelligence of the designers is going to come in.
Real militaries, like you say, have extremely complex communication and command structures in order to co-ordinate large numbers of troops. Could an MMORPG incorporate that? Gamify and simplify it so us civilians can make use of it? Camelot Unchained is attempting to do exactly that, they're adding some interesting tools to help organise large battles. We'll have to wait and see if it works.
On the roleplaying and community events front, I agree, total engagement numbers aren't great. But, that style of gaming is barely supported by devs and certainly not incentivised. What do you think would happen if it was properly supported? This seems to be something Raph is aiming for with Playable Worlds, he wants to create, support and incentivise a ton of extra roles compared to existing MMORPGs. It may not be the sort of roleplaying you are referring to, but do you think your style of RPing would benefit from being a profitable activity? Or do you think the lack of "gameplay" would still mean low uptake numbers?
As to the final part (about the mmo industry being at its most profitable right now), I would disagree. But, it depends where you draw the line on what you classify as an MMO, so I'll leave that for now :P
I was thinking about graphics the other day, especially in a MMO.......I look at some of these games and they are close to 100G to download.....When I play them I don't feel that the graphics are THAT great and alot of the data is fluff like voice acting and cutscenes (things which I can do without)...I don't need the game to entertain me like a TV show...I just want a game to go explore a nice virtual world and make my own fun.
I love the part you say: "you can literally feel the love that went into it".
This tells me they are artist first, then programmers, Look at the Trolls for example, they are ugly as hell with simple graphics. No one seems to complain and the Trolls are effective, random, and scary as hell.
Artistic !
You see, this is the stuff that grinds my gears. You aren't an artist. I actually am an artist though my primary discipline is music.
And I can tell you, without blinking, with absolute certainty, that I've seen programmers talk about their work, their craft with the same passion and excitement and dedication as any artist that I know.
Also, If you see bad art or art you don't like in a game it's just because they are either bad artists or they have different tastes as you.
The third possible reason is that someone is dictating what the art style should be because they don't want it to become too weird and therefore unsalable.
But that isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Well what grinds my gears, is you think everything is rosy when the industry is failing and no one wants to invest.
Meanwhile were playing crappy heavy instance playground games. Played in order like a carrot-on-a-stick. The only reason games like ESO and FF14 are popular, is because their the last ones.
You don't have to have an eleven year doctors degree in programing to see, they suck.
Do they really suck?
I'm playing ESO right now and while it isn't at all like my all time favorite MMORPG EVE, there are many redeeming qualities in terms of what they deliver.
For what is worth there's very little driving a player to any particular area or content, very different from previous games I've played.
Remember, just because you or I don't care for a particular game doesn't automatically mean they suck, just means they are catering to different tastes.
Pro tip, devs cater to the customers most likely to spend money, the more the better, so what features are you willing to spend big on?
Why do you even answer ?
He's calling Elder Scrolls Online a heavily instanced playground game when his MMO of reference is World of Warcraft...
Some things (and people) never change...
No, What I'm calling is Captain Kirk is far better Captain than Picard hands down. And he doesn't report his people to Star Fleet. He handles his problems directly and saves time and paperwork for Star Fleet, therefore liked better.
As to the final part (about the mmo industry being at its most profitable right now), I would disagree. But, it depends where you draw the line on what you classify as an MMO, so I'll leave that for now :P
Black Desert alone has surpassed 1.7 billion.
Add Elder Scrolls Online, Star Wars the Old Republic (as of 2019 has made a billion though World of warcraft. Not sure what that's bringing in now.
Just a quick search for Final Fantasy 14 yielded a 2019 quarterly result of 120 million right there.
so true, there are some big boys bringing in the bucks but I would say, overall, they are the most profitable right now.
As a whole.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I was thinking about graphics the other day, especially in a MMO.......I look at some of these games and they are close to 100G to download.....When I play them I don't feel that the graphics are THAT great and alot of the data is fluff like voice acting and cutscenes (things which I can do without)...I don't need the game to entertain me like a TV show...I just want a game to go explore a nice virtual world and make my own fun.
I was thinking about graphics the other day, especially in a MMO.......I look at some of these games and they are close to 100G to download.....When I play them I don't feel that the graphics are THAT great and alot of the data is fluff like voice acting and cutscenes (things which I can do without)...I don't need the game to entertain me like a TV show...I just want a game to go explore a nice virtual world and make my own fun.
Valheim is 573 mb! If you somehow havent played it, its waiting for you.
So, ask yourself this: what gameplay would you like to see that involved 250+ players?
That's an important point (not that the rest weren't ), since coordination in combat gets increasingly difficult as numbers rise.
(just look at army structures, command lines and the separation of tactical and strategic layer...)
You mentioned pvp, I ain't much fun of that aspect of MMORPGs but I'm sure besides zerg rushes those numbers are unnecessary.
Early Fusang in TSW (3x150 players) or creep raids in LotRO or the zone-wide tug-of-war in Planetside 2 can show that beyond a certain number it's more efficient if you divide your group and go after multiple goals at once, instead just piling up the numbers.
Same applies to PvE, 50 players, or 2x50 with the two dedicated leaders coordination sounds like about the top numbers for valid teamwork and contribution, before all goes to hell and just turns into mindless zerging (which ain't fun, imo)
For this reason, I'd definitely not like to see 250+ players at once in any kinda combat scenario - not a surprise though, I'm biased and don't care much about combat
What gameplay then? Your next post had the answer too, roleplaying.
Concerts in LotRO, fashion shows in CO, cabal parade in TSW, etc. Races, weddings, kinship events, festivals, server-wide competitions, the list could go on forever.
However, there's two tiny little problems with all that. Actually just one, since both have the same root cause. Which is the same problem the entire genre has, and why delete is bound to make these threads... and it boils down to this: nobody cares.
Take LotRO as an example, since it's a treasure trove in this aspect. Weatherstock/Winterstock, horse races, annual "olympics-like" Harnkegger Games, the TTHTI series, crafting events, housing events, language courses, etc.
Still, if we'd add everyone who was attending even just one of those events, and even just once over the 10+ years... I'm certain the number would be less than 5% of the entire playerbase.
In other games, I'm sure it's even lower. It's a sad truth, you can be as creative as possible, the playerbase could be as friendly and roleplay-focused as possible, the majority of them simply don't care.
Players just want "gameplay" (which almost always boils down to combat), some character advancement, and preferably fast, within short sessions, and solo.
And it leads back to delete as well, since what's "slump" for us, it's exactly what a much larger audience wants. The genre (and the entire industry, for what matters) might be "dying" in our eyes, but on the other side it's more profitable and popular than ever.
Just not for us, but the "nu-gamers", the new audience.
Hard to expect changes from an industry which currently makes the most money in its entire lifetime...
Thanks very much for the detailed response!
Co-ordination of large numbers of players will definitely be an issue for any massively multiplayer features. This is where the research and intelligence of the designers is going to come in.
Real militaries, like you say, have extremely complex communication and command structures in order to co-ordinate large numbers of troops. Could an MMORPG incorporate that? Gamify and simplify it so us civilians can make use of it? Camelot Unchained is attempting to do exactly that, they're adding some interesting tools to help organise large battles. We'll have to wait and see if it works.
On the roleplaying and community events front, I agree, total engagement numbers aren't great. But, that style of gaming is barely supported by devs and certainly not incentivised. What do you think would happen if it was properly supported? This seems to be something Raph is aiming for with Playable Worlds, he wants to create, support and incentivise a ton of extra roles compared to existing MMORPGs. It may not be the sort of roleplaying you are referring to, but do you think your style of RPing would benefit from being a profitable activity? Or do you think the lack of "gameplay" would still mean low uptake numbers?
As to the final part (about the mmo industry being at its most profitable right now), I would disagree. But, it depends where you draw the line on what you classify as an MMO, so I'll leave that for now :P
We already have that happening in Warhammer . ive seen 2/6/8(25in a WB) Warbands coordinate many times , al the while others in that same raid RPing during it , Like Bitterstone Thunderers/Bugmans Beer Bridage etc ..
It really come down to a community recognizing the need and show the aptitude to strive for the same goals .. In War it happens regualrly..
Ill add Bitterstone has been recognized for there efforts by the devs with an NPC brigade of them practicing at shooting range at Warcamp in Kadrin Valley
As to the final part (about the mmo industry being at its most profitable right now), I would disagree. But, it depends where you draw the line on what you classify as an MMO, so I'll leave that for now :P
Black Desert alone has surpassed 1.7 billion.
Add Elder Scrolls Online, Star Wars the Old Republic (as of 2019 has made a billion though World of warcraft. Not sure what that's bringing in now.
Just a quick search for Final Fantasy 14 yielded a 2019 quarterly result of 120 million right there.
so true, there are some big boys bringing in the bucks but I would say, overall, they are the most profitable right now.
As a whole.
Yea , there is plenty of money being made in the industry , personally it got me retired at 53
I was thinking about graphics the other day, especially in a MMO.......I look at some of these games and they are close to 100G to download.....When I play them I don't feel that the graphics are THAT great and alot of the data is fluff like voice acting and cutscenes (things which I can do without)...I don't need the game to entertain me like a TV show...I just want a game to go explore a nice virtual world and make my own fun.
Valheim is 573 mb! If you somehow havent played it, its waiting for you.
Yes I have heard so many good things about it...i added it to the wishlist right away and was just waiting for the Steam Easter sale, which apparently never happened lol. I definitely have my eye on it and thanks for the heads up!
I was thinking about graphics the other day, especially in a MMO.......I look at some of these games and they are close to 100G to download.....When I play them I don't feel that the graphics are THAT great and alot of the data is fluff like voice acting and cutscenes (things which I can do without)...I don't need the game to entertain me like a TV show...I just want a game to go explore a nice virtual world and make my own fun.
Valheim is 573 mb! If you somehow havent played it, its waiting for you.
Yes I have heard so many good things about it...i added it to the wishlist right away and was just waiting for the Steam Easter sale, which apparently never happened lol. I definitely have my eye on it and thanks for the heads up!
so if if you see extreme cube graphics and bacon swords, regardless of what else is hidden in the game, youve already alienated 95% of potential players who likely will think its a young children's game.
That's a double-edged (bacon) sword, I believe...
On one end, sure. Though I can't relate to (coming from text adventure games and MUDs), I can accept other players are more attached to graphics above everything else.
Don't get me wrong, I like good looking games as well, just its absence ain't something which steers me away from a game.
On the other end, it was the "right" pick, in the sense of the game was finished, launched, and even somewhat successful, as opposed to countless other games.
Above in this thread Neanderthal said (though for an another stupid idea, the open FFA pvp)
"Part of the problem is that the indie creative artists who are
passionate about their game also tend to have stupid, game killing ideas
they cling to stubbornly."
It's important to pick wisely, and for a game like Trove that (sure, often silly) style and setting was the right pick.
Both for the elements - with a "better looking" engine like Unity a lot of things would've been lost, not to mention flexibility and the low hardware demand,
as well the cost - considering the team size and budget, with a different engine the chances are high the game would still be somewhere in development, or already cancelled.
Just look at Landmark, awesome looking game it was (with much less options than Trove, and smaller world), with a larger studio and budget, still couldn't take off.
What I'm trying to say, knowing your limits and goals, then picking wisely, is important. Trove may look silly, but at least it exists, has a ton of features and a low hardware load. Some of those features even tied to the cubesy voxel design.
If it alienates many players, that's an unfortunate trade-off, but still a better outcome than a half-baked and/or cancelled game, stucked somewhere in the middle of the development process
Real militaries, like you say, have extremely complex communication and command structures in order to co-ordinate large numbers of troops. Could an MMORPG incorporate that?
Some games tried, with dedicated players "on top view" of the world, like playing a strategy game instructed the other players down. Other games offer beacons and other direction/leading tools, raid joins, etc.
It doesn't change the core issue about numbers. The actual fight zones in MMORPGs are fairly small actually, if you cramp more than 50-100 players at once (pvp and PvE alike), real coordination goes out of the window.
That's how in the 'Moors for example (since you know LotRO) when you had a large enough raid at a keep, it was better to direct the rest to take over an outpost instead, or used them as diversion at an another keep, since beyond a number they didn't really contribute to the outcome.
If you assign a target to focus fire on, and there's 30-40 present already to kill them off in seconds, the presence of an extra 20 there is pointless.
Same with Facs in Fusang, TSW. You rarely directed more than 50-60 players against a single Fac, the rest were more useful on flipping wells or killing off stray people on the streets.
On
the roleplaying and community events front, I agree, total engagement
numbers aren't great. But, that style of gaming is barely supported by
devs and certainly not incentivised. What do you think would happen if
it was properly supported?
I'm maybe too pessimistic, but I'm afraid it won't help too much. Would help a little, I too know of players who'd join in that case.
I remember a new player in LotRO when first saw a group rehearsing in Bree, first question was "What's in it?" (and when he learned it has no in-game benefits, just shrugged it off as "Pff, waste of time")
Mabinogi and Maplestory 2's case shows however, incentive ain't the key factor in this. (those two's music systems are more integrated into the character advancement, and has benefits)
The issue is not the lack of rewards, with the exceptcion of a handful of players, but the lack of interest.
Sad, but most players out there don't care about the roleplaying aspect, which kinda explains also why MMORPGs were diluted over time into simple MMOs.
But that's fine, as I used to say option is king, I'd never "force" them into roleplay. It'd be pointless anyway, since roleplay needs some sort of attachment, if people just show up against their wills, only for some rewards, that just ruins everyone's fun.
(Imagine a tabletop session with an extra who's only there for the free snacks )
Just it was the question what would we like to see with 250+ players, and my answer was/is player-made roleplay events. If the game allows that (option is king), I'm fine.
Even if a bit disheartened when always the same faces show up... would be great if more players would be interested in anything else above combat, but... it is what it is.
Real militaries, like you say, have extremely complex communication and command structures in order to co-ordinate large numbers of troops. Could an MMORPG incorporate that?
Some games tried, with dedicated players "on top view" of the world, like playing a strategy game instructed the other players down. Other games offer beacons and other direction/leading tools, raid joins, etc.
It doesn't change the core issue about numbers. The actual fight zones in MMORPGs are fairly small actually, if you cramp more than 50-100 players at once (pvp and PvE alike), real coordination goes out of the window.
That's how in the 'Moors for example (since you know LotRO) when you had a large enough raid at a keep, it was better to direct the rest to take over an outpost instead, or used them as diversion at an another keep, since beyond a number they didn't really contribute to the outcome.
If you assign a target to focus fire on, and there's 30-40 present already to kill them off in seconds, the presence of an extra 20 there is pointless.
Same with Facs in Fusang, TSW. You rarely directed more than 50-60 players against a single Fac, the rest were more useful on flipping wells or killing off stray people on the streets.
On
the roleplaying and community events front, I agree, total engagement
numbers aren't great. But, that style of gaming is barely supported by
devs and certainly not incentivised. What do you think would happen if
it was properly supported?
I'm maybe too pessimistic, but I'm afraid it won't help too much. Would help a little, I too know of players who'd join in that case.
I remember a new player in LotRO when first saw a group rehearsing in Bree, first question was "What's in it?" (and when he learned it has no in-game benefits, just shrugged it off as "Pff, waste of time")
Mabinogi and Maplestory 2's case shows however, incentive ain't the key factor in this. (those two's music systems are more integrated into the character advancement, and has benefits)
The issue is not the lack of rewards, with the exceptcion of a handful of players, but the lack of interest.
Sad, but most players out there don't care about the roleplaying aspect, which kinda explains also why MMORPGs were diluted over time into simple MMOs.
But that's fine, as I used to say option is king, I'd never "force" them into roleplay. It'd be pointless anyway, since roleplay needs some sort of attachment, if people just show up against their wills, only for some rewards, that just ruins everyone's fun.
(Imagine a tabletop session with an extra who's only there for the free snacks )
Just it was the question what would we like to see with 250+ players, and my answer was/is player-made roleplay events. If the game allows that (option is king), I'm fine.
Even if a bit disheartened when always the same faces show up... would be great if more players would be interested in anything else above combat, but... it is what it is.
This is a question of design though. It has nothing to do with players.
for instance
scenario1: i dont need any other player for anything scenario2: i need other players for everything scenario3: i dont need other players but its easier if i utilize them.
1: no requirement to eat or have a fire
2: only certain class of players "cook" can make fires and cook to regenerate my stats
3: anyone can cook and make a fire, if I see one in my travels I can drop in for bite to eat and it saves me the time from doing it myself.
can you really blame the players when you always choose option 1?
The only thing left for recovery is: A very LARGE mmorpg. Unannounced until two months before FULL RELEASE.... The 5-10 year hype has been abused too much and you all know it. Very close to bug free too. Crap undone games have been abused.
Think of it like this: You live in a bad city, how many times will you will be robbed at gunpoint until you move out...... It's all been abused, all of it !
Medium graphics. It's too expensive and takes away from large development to go beyond medium graphics.
"Artist" not management has to have full domain over all aspects of the game. Short definition of an artist, "creative imagination" first and foremost, THEN A PROGRAMMER!
You can say "your not being logical"..... Your right !!..... but every trick has been abused, no choice or no mmorpg.
I'll end with this...... NO CASH SHOPS
Feel free to post what YOU THINK to overcome EVERY SCAM.
Considering my MMORPG of choice is being expanded annually, I would describe the design as ongoing rather than over.
Medium graphics would make the game more accessible, so are a good idea for developers wanting a large potential audience.
MMORPGs are a business. Many creative people lack good business sense, and some enjoy the process too much to let it end in a timely fashion. Management has the focus many creatives lack, facilitating the transition of their vision into marketable product in a reasonable period of time.
Cash shops will end when people quit buying from them. So, likely never.
There is no scam to overcome so no solution need be considered, other than a person not doing business with a company that has practices they don't like.
I love the part you say: "you can literally feel the love that went into it".
This tells me they are artist first, then programmers, Look at the Trolls for example, they are ugly as hell with simple graphics. No one seems to complain and the Trolls are effective, random, and scary as hell.
Artistic !
You see, this is the stuff that grinds my gears. You aren't an artist. I actually am an artist though my primary discipline is music.
And I can tell you, without blinking, with absolute certainty, that I've seen programmers talk about their work, their craft with the same passion and excitement and dedication as any artist that I know.
Also, If you see bad art or art you don't like in a game it's just because they are either bad artists or they have different tastes as you.
The third possible reason is that someone is dictating what the art style should be because they don't want it to become too weird and therefore unsalable.
But that isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Well what grinds my gears, is you think everything is rosy when the industry is failing and no one wants to invest.
Meanwhile were playing crappy heavy instance playground games. Played in order like a carrot-on-a-stick. The only reason games like ESO and FF14 are popular, is because their the last ones.
You don't have to have an eleven year doctors degree in programing to see, they suck.
Do they really suck?
I'm playing ESO right now and while it isn't at all like my all time favorite MMORPG EVE, there are many redeeming qualities in terms of what they deliver.
For what is worth there's very little driving a player to any particular area or content, very different from previous games I've played.
Remember, just because you or I don't care for a particular game doesn't automatically mean they suck, just means they are catering to different tastes.
Pro tip, devs cater to the customers most likely to spend money, the more the better, so what features are you willing to spend big on?
Delete wouldn't know the qualities of ESO as he has not played it to the best of my knowledge. His critique of it is based solely on one to a few youtube videos he's watched, or at least was the last time we debated the virtues of the game.
As such, whatever he says about it is largely baseless.
EVE intrigues me, but I'm not a fan of PvP so haven't tried it out.
Comments
I'm playing ESO right now and while it isn't at all like my all time favorite MMORPG EVE, there are many redeeming qualities in terms of what they deliver.
For what is worth there's very little driving a player to any particular area or content, very different from previous games I've played.
Remember, just because you or I don't care for a particular game doesn't automatically mean they suck, just means they are catering to different tastes.
Pro tip, devs cater to the customers most likely to spend money, the more the better, so what features are you willing to spend big on?
"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
What I'm calling is Captain Kirk is far better Captain than Picard hands down. And he doesn't report his people to Star Fleet. He handles his problems directly and saves time and paperwork for Star Fleet, therefore liked better.
That's what I'm calling
Add Elder Scrolls Online, Star Wars the Old Republic (as of 2019 has made a billion though World of warcraft. Not sure what that's bringing in now.
Just a quick search for Final Fantasy 14 yielded a 2019 quarterly result of 120 million right there.
so true, there are some big boys bringing in the bucks but I would say, overall, they are the most profitable right now.
As a whole.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Yea , there is plenty of money being made in the industry , personally it got me retired at 53
Yes I have heard so many good things about it...i added it to the wishlist right away and was just waiting for the Steam Easter sale, which apparently never happened lol. I definitely have my eye on it and thanks for the heads up!
What is your Steam Name? PM it to me
for instance
scenario1: i dont need any other player for anything
scenario2: i need other players for everything
scenario3: i dont need other players but its easier if i utilize them.
1: no requirement to eat or have a fire
2: only certain class of players "cook" can make fires and cook to regenerate my stats
3: anyone can cook and make a fire, if I see one in my travels I can drop in for bite to eat and it saves me the time from doing it myself.
can you really blame the players when you always choose option 1?
Medium graphics would make the game more accessible, so are a good idea for developers wanting a large potential audience.
Cash shops will end when people quit buying from them. So, likely never.
Delete wouldn't know the qualities of ESO as he has not played it to the best of my knowledge. His critique of it is based solely on one to a few youtube videos he's watched, or at least was the last time we debated the virtues of the game.
As such, whatever he says about it is largely baseless.
EVE intrigues me, but I'm not a fan of PvP so haven't tried it out.
MMO's are really fun, it is just that there isnt enough time in the day to enjoy all the wonderful mmos out there.
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.