It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
The pursuit of whats new and innovative is a mirage. Doing away with features that defined the genre and bringing in "the new", was exactly what got us where we are today: vapid single player mmos that offer more back-patting than challenge, more convenience than immersion, and a lack of a reason to keep playing, leaving virtual worlds virtually empty.Mendel said:I don't know about this. It seems to me that a game made by the same people that created those easy versions that you don't like, leading severely understaffed teams, with nebulous schedules, and functioning on a shoestring budget aren't likely to be the solution. I agree that new ideas are needed, perhaps desperately so, but looking to the past to find those ideas just doesn't seem the best way to get new and innovative games to play. Squeezing lemons doesn't usually produce chardonnay.Kulharin said:I'm ready for Niche games, every online PVE focused game I play now is exactly the same in presentation; super easy, casual tutorial content up until max level/end game... everyone rush to end game effortlessly... new expansion is released; previous challenging content is nerfed and old items made irrelevant to get you to the new end game tier... rinse and repeat... I'm over this crap. We need niche games.
Since always. More people thought it was better, but that doesn't make it any less subjective. Regarding better gameplay, yeah I'd say the game with weaker graphics, a clunkier engine and a zoned world that still had 5x the players probably succeeded in achieving better gameplay. Or sorry, gameplay that "appealed to more people" for the sensitive who cannot tolerate such definitive adjectives like 'better'.Kyleran said:So, people thought more popular equals better, even back in 1998 eh?Dullahan said:Yeah just me and my friends and around half a million other people who chose EQ over AC. The real question is did you even play EQ? Serious question.drivendawn said:
No he is not kidding himself, How does EQ have infinitely more depth to its game play than AC? I know the guy before was being rude but you have nothing backing your claim besides your friends say so. Did you play AC?
It doesn't mean AC was a bad game, but it speaks for itself. Just the people playing on the EQ pvp servers would have been more than all their pvp players and a few of their PvE server playerbases combined. And this wasn't a WoW scenario where another established publisher came along years later with updated graphics, EQ and AC were contemporary. AC even had advantages in some of the features pointed out like a non-zoned world and better graphics, but those things were not enough to pull people away.
I thought that was just a WOW thing.