Howdy, Stranger!

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




Last Active
  • Make MMos great again! What would you do?

    BadSpock said:
    Also, I don't understand the hate for auto-grouping features.

    Do people want to go back to "join a guild or you might as well not play" or "spam chat channels for hours" really? So archaic. 

    I agree that the elitism and toxic environment is bad for MMO, but reality, if there is not a healthy PUG community in an MMO, then the Developers really should revisit how they designed their Instance content, because they screwed up someplace.

    Which goes back to game design, and a target market.
  • Make MMos great again! What would you do?

    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:

    I don't disagree and completely agree with your last sentence.

    that person who is complaining about that game (what game is it?) should know better and the developers "should" just say "this is what the game is about."

    But as I mentioned, there is another game, worlds adrift (finally remembered the name) where people have been asking for a more pve oriented server. The World's Adrift developers initially said they wouldn't but now they are.

    The "pvp people" seem to be up in arms. Did the developers abandoned their vision to listen to the complainers or did they realize they can't stay in business and need that revenue? I believe it's the latter.

    many people asked for an easy mode for the Dark Souls games and they got nothing. From Software could make money on their vision and not have to change.

    Worlds Adrift Developers? Not so much.
    I dunno about your example in that if the game doesn't change, and continues to develop, on the PVP servers I don't see where the loss is for anyone.  If there is a loss it would be 95% of the players moving to the PVE servers leaving the gankers with nothing to do.

    I guess before I'd create a new set of servers I'd want to take a hard looks at what could be done to make PvP endurable for the PvE crowd.  In UO I didn't mind getting ganked occasionally, but every 10 minutes got to be old.  Why do developers in 2018 think allowing high level people to slaughter noobs is workable?

    If your vision for a game is allowing struggling starting players to get serially destroyed ad nauseum then you're a bit of an idiot.  It would be good for those kinds of developers to fail, TBH.
    I would agree and there is absolutely no harm in having an alternate server. Some would argue it separates the player base but that is a huge assumption that those PvE players would tolerate PvP servers instead of leaving. Which is what they would do.

    all I know is that, at least from what I saw, they never had the inclination to make pve servers and suddenly they announced it.

    I guess the pvp players think it's time/money taken away from developing pvp servers, separating the player base and capitulating to whiners and "breaking their promise" as they said they would never have them.

    What I have to say to them is "life." Deal with it.
    Just as a theoretical though consider this: What if the developer had to do or die with the current servers?

    Necessity is the mother of invention, I've heard said.

    Perhaps true innovation in this space could be achieved if the answer wasn't always abandoning the vision and back pedaling to separate servers, cash shops, FTP, and other abominations.  I'll grant you encouraging correct player behavior is whopper of an undertaking - but figuring out those tough problems is what makes innovation so great.

    It seems the current solutions are around milking players for cash and developing for the lowest common denominator.  This thread is about making a great game - those answers won't get us there.
    Well, I've worked for small companies, one being a software company.

    It's possible that the developers can pull an "i-Mac" type product out of their ass which will save the company or most likely they will fail like so many others.

    Look at the game landscape; it's so full of failure, of small ventures tanking, because they were being run by passionate people who didn't have the talent or resources or patience to make it happen.

    And what is that mother of invention? if it's monetization and monetization that some players don't want, they are going to scream their bloody heads off.

    Even if they make a "good game" is it going to be enough to keep them in business. So many game companies release games and then close.

    Heck, famous game companies, game companies that created notable games closed.

    It's not always about a "we can do it!" attitude.

    I know what you are saying, but, a large part of making something good, is knowing who you are making it for.

    You don't try to market apple pie to people who don't like apples or pie.

    As such, one of the major points of game design is "Who is our target market"... and if the answer comes back "Anyone with a dollar" you are better off opening a Starbucks then trying to build a game.

    See, some games take off because they know their market, they know who this game is designed for, and they not only build the game for them, they market the game to them as well.

    And it's not as easy as "Do you like Animie Panty Shots? Our game has Animie Panty Shots! You will love our game!"

    Which, sadly seems to be how some MMO function.

    When Wildstar closed down, people cried that it was not because that is was hardcore, and there was some other reason for it, some even cited all the casual stuff people could do.

    But the reality is, the game was marketed as a hardcore raiders game, as such, it's failure is based on the fact that the game itself either didn't deliver that experience and that would be the fault of the dev team not really knowing what hardcore raiders wanted, (which happens), or they were not marketing their game to their correct audience.

    Now the later is most likely true, that they really wanted anyone, put in what they thought all these other groups would want, and would retain them, and then said this was a hardcore game so a vast staple of their content was pointless. Their is a good chance they also realized too late that demographic was not going to support them and tried to turn things around, but by then it was too late, and they just ended up wasting money.

    Hence their "good bye" with their story and all that jazz.. really.. only casual/moderate players get into that, or care, so the reality is, they really didn't focus on their market.

    So.. having that target demographic, and reaching them is a key point of MMO development.

    Just my two bits.
  • The innovation that matters in the videogame business right now isn’t game play. It’s payments.

    aummoid said:
    Sadly, in this instance, you are (semi) incorrect. The industry (in general) didn't react at all to this. It also didnt change the development of games from SE. In general, it made no difference to how games were developed, or monetized (the discussion of this thread).

    However, you are correct that there was a change, but you are not clearly understanding what it was. After accepting that the initial launch had run its course from a financial standpoint ( there was no long tail of profit being forecast), they made the decision to take the existing assets, and use them to build a new, second product. This was something that is rarely done this early in the process, and was a very brave (and risky) step for them. They should be recognized for not waiting another year or two to try to maximize the profit of the existing product, before moving to a new product.

    The key to why they were able to do it was this, they believed that if they moved quickly enough, they could obtain an artificially low customer acquisition cost for the new product, and in doing so, save a huge portion of the marketing cost associated with a new release. When they combined these savings with the low cost of recycling a new product from the old, and subtracted out the potential earnings from the old product, it looked like they would make more by abandoning the old product quickly, and moving to the next. I also have to think that in order for them to do it this quickly, there had to have been people internally that believed that the original product was not going to succeed long before it launched... and that they had ideas to fix it that had not been implemented.

    The bottom line here is that NOT spending money didnt have any real effect... but that the fact that they were chasing the people that WERE spending money did. i.e. it is not hard to fail, but it is hard to succeed.
    That's certainly a long-winded way of saying "yes, people stopped spending money; yes, they felt they could make more money if they got those people who stopped spending back; yes, they changed course to get those people back; yes, they did get those people back."

    That's why your bottom line of "no, people who stopped spending money didn't have an impact" is even sillier now than it was the first time you said it.

    As for me, I think the bottom line is that SE is still making and publishing PC games and you are not. That's why I used the phrase "evolution in action".

    This is not true at all, nor is that what they said.

    And.. Ummm.. FFXIV is not a tale about people not spending money changing a game, it's a cautionary tale about not putting out a piece of half baked shit, and thinking it's going to sell.
  • Make MMos great again! What would you do?

    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:

    I don't disagree. If an artist/creator/developer has a vision then let them realize their vision.

    But reality is that if the artist/creator/developer needs to put food on their table but they insist that they must be true to their vision then they should expect people to go find something else if that vision isn't in line with what people like.

    Developers don't change their games because whiny forum goers complain and complain.

    They change their games because they see that they are not making money and they need to stay open.

    but some players don't understand that. To the point where I've seen players say "well then they should just close it down."

    I bet those developers like their paycheck and might even have bills to pay so closing it down might be the last option.

    Okay, it would be cool if people in this thread would stop pretending to care about the developers as a means of justifying horrible products and ideas.  It isn't binary, it isn't "introduce crap into the game" or "starve to death".  

    How about making money by making a good product?

    Lazy, half hearted cash grabs are lazy, half-hearted cash grabs. Period.

    The thread is about "How to make games great again." and part of the answer is "Have a vision, stick to it" and not "prostitute out your vision for lazy ass cash grabs" or "do whatever you have to in order to keep the lights on".

    ^--- If you're at that point you already made a crap game.  This thread is about how to make a great game, not how to patch garbage to milk it for cash.

    It isn't fair to any of the players when games undergo significant changes because developers are too weak in the knees to follow through with a great idea.  If you want to make a great game come up with an idea and follow through with it at all costs.   That is how the great emerge.

    Well, I'll tell you, given the conversations I've had on this site, I usually side with the developers. Players are sometimes living in their little dream worlds and can certainly become untethered from reality.

    No one is saying it's one or another. But guess what? Most developers really do want to make great games.

    But it's not as easy as "Hey guys, let's just make a great game and cal it a day. The checks will just roll in"
    I know what you are saying, and I agree with you to a point.

    But I also agree with @WargfootYV that a big part of making a great game to start with is having that vision.

    As I see it, and I could be wrong, but this is my feels, without that deftness of direction, we both know that no matter how hard they try, they are just going to end up with some kind of "everything porridge" and there really is no way that will ever transform into a great game.

    And I am sure there must be that one case somewhere in existence, but AFIK no game took off because it let the masses affect its development direction, and just kinda followed the money.

    Too often when I hear about those games, they follow the money and it runs out anyway.
  • Make MMos great again! What would you do?

    With 100 million the first thing I'd do is find 10 other developers where we all have the same vision for a game and  then be prepared to defend that vision against customers who don't understand or appreciate it.

    I'm playing a survival game right now where a person is petitioning the developer to make it so when people die they don't lose their stuff.  This is in a game labeled 'survival' - in the genre 'survival'.  

    We desperately need developers who aren't afraid to clearly describe their vision to the community (crucial first step) and then defend it to the death against those that try to change it.  Too many games drift along with no real direction and the kneejerk responses to the community usually make it worse.

    Be unapologetic (See: Dark Souls) - Don't be afraid to make something challenging and great and don't be afraid to tell half the gaming public to take a hike.
    I agree, I really wish Anet had told all the people crying for challenge to shove it, and focused on making the best moderate/casual game out there as opposed to giving into a small subset of players that offer nothing to the game overall.

    I really think a developer should not try to appease everyone or put in content for everyone, find a group and stick with it, and build the best game for them. If other people play it, so be it, but the game is not for them in mind.

    If they want raids, or this "Oh I need hardmode content" or "I want Hardcore Challenge" piss off and go find some other game to play.

    All too often I see some really great games get killed because of the crybabies that always want some kind of "Hardmode" game play.. just kills the whole feel of the game, then they need to go all F2P, as their casuals are like Screw this, and move on, and then the Hardcore players cry that their game now has P2W and F2P.. well it was all your fault.