...in fact, EVE has new players all over the place... Yes, it does - the problem is that most of them don't stay long. Eve has the highest churn rate, by far, of any MMO. There is ONE guy that has played continously since launch. But check EQ1, UO, EQ2, WOW, and many other games and you will find a lot that have been around since day 1. According to CCP's own figures, the average sub time per account is less than 6 months. Actually according to EvEs own igres its an average of 7 months right now and as for there being multiple mong term palyers in other gmaes well they do ahve a bigger subsciber ammount and have more servers. But you knew this as you read the official report and have been corrected by me before in just the same way. Eve, unfortunately, lacks depth despite it's high ratings here. Once you get past the rather steep learning curve, there really is not much (if anything) new or exciting past the first month or two. And with the skill system in EVE, there is no possibility of anyone new EVER catching up. Yea well i wont go into the illogicalness of that comment as im sure you wont even respond to this. As far as other games that fall into this category, I would eliminate most from the OP's list except for DAOC and EQ1, and add EVE Online. Oddly enough for some, AC is still a better game after 7+ years than many of the new games - just too bad that they elected put their money into Fantasy Clone Game #973..er LOTRO instead of doing something with AC.
No matter how many times you say it people wont belive yur little lie you know. Especially with the Quaterly finantial report EvE has made.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Retired from: Neocron, Everquest, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, RF Online and Final Fantasy VII
I think the reason joining a late game sucks is because of the server population, like in WoW the older servers are probably like anyone under 70 is a 70's alt.
In EVE however since it's just one server I don't think it's ever too late. My main character JackDonkey has 61 million skill points and I can't shoot large guns, i made another account a couple months after first starting and made my pvp guy, he's up to 61 million skill points as well now and can only fly one race of hacs, one race of dreads, no carriers, no interdictors, no blueprint copying. So the point is even the older characters have to be specialized. I can fly all tech 1 ships with my pvp guy but with tech 2 you have to specialize.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You? if I were to kill a titan tomorrow and no CCP employees showed up to say grats I would petition it. Waiting for: the next MMO that lets me make this macro if hp < 30 then CastSpell("heal") SpellTargetUnit("player") else CastSpell("smite") end
DAOC does have a /Level that brings you up to 20. This way it removed that MMORPG childhood and brings you straight to adolescence. Also, DAOC has made leveling so quick that it can be done while you PvP. Also remember, some players enjoy the newbie PvP grounds. in fact, I know a few who play it exclusivly. Torrential
I'm very familiar with DAoC, since I've played it starting in 2002. The /level command was a curse, not a blessing. It is one of the reasons I went to a Classic server. The /level command made it hard for new players to start. I believe this is one of the reasons Classic servers was needed. Granted, I have a level 50, but I look out for what's best for all people, not just myself. It was not healthy for the long term of the game to have a /level command. I know it is possible to level up just PvPing, because I did it. However, if you recall, one of my points were that a game is too old when you cannot complete some of the original content released with the game, because no one is interested in doing it anymore. No on really wants to do dungeon crawls in the classic dungeons, seek out and kill legendary monsters, or anything like that anymore. People rarely do the class armor quests anymore and before the dragon quests came out, people rarely did dragon raids. The PvE community that was playing DAoC when I first started is gone now. Therefore the game is too old to start for a new player that wants to experience the entire game, not just PvP.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
I guess im the oddball as far as thinking a game is too old to start playing. I constantly go from game to game, and frequently pick up games like Eve, Lineage 2 and DAoC every so often. I have no problem having fun in any of the games that I play. furthemore, I find a more mature and gaming community who go to great lengths to make newcomers and low level character feel at home. Its always the newer games where the community is full of egotistic noobs who consider themselves vets when the game hasnt even been out for a year. Its like pulling teeth in newly released games to get any sort of assistance. God forbid you have to ask someone for pointers or suggestions in general chat. I dont mean any offense, but this seems very similiar to not wanting to play a game because you cant achieve something that hasnt already been done. Is this more of a community issue (everyone playing the game in your opinion will be too high to group with/guild with), or the fact that vets have been playing the game and you feel inferior?
No, you're not an oddball. You are just missing the point of this thread. The question isn't if you are having fun, because only boring people don't have fun. The question is if the game is too old to enjoy every bit a game has to offer. Every game ends up at a point where they introduce new content that makes the old, yet still interesting to a new player, content obsolete. These new players won't every experience that content, because the veterans are too busy with the new content to help the new guys out. However, a game with a constant influx of new players off sets this for a while. So a combination of lack of new players coming in and the constant introduction of expansions makes a game unfriendly for new players to start. Get my point?
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
Overall I agree with the OP as well, and I disagree with those who feel that EVE should be added to the list. The terrific thing about EVE is that it is loaded with new players and it is consistently growing. I believe that now would be as good a time as any for someone to start out in EVE.
I played EvE. Before I tell everyone why I didn't add them to the list, I would like to point out that because of the advancement system in EvE, you cannot judge time the same way in another game. In your typical game that is too late to join, it may take you 6-12 mo to catch up to the end game players. However, in EvE, it will take you 6-12 mo just to finish getting good at one role in a corporation.
I didn't put EvE on the list, because any new person can be effective to a corps within 2 weeks of play. Also, EvE relies on player made content (territorial PvP), so it never gets old. EvE doesn't have a lack of population, new players can fill a role quickly and experience all EvE has to offer as far as content fairly quickly, and has a good community to get you involved. So EvE is not ready to join my list yet.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
Ultima Online, Star Wars Galaxies, and Guild Wars are way too old to start playing now because they don't even exist in their original states any more.
UO went all carebear when tram came out.
SWG went down the shitter with NGE.
GW was mauled by the expansions and the exodus of most of the PvP community.
I'm sorry people can't have as much fun with these games as I did before they changed so much.
_______________________________ PM me when an MMO as good as UO was comes out.
I think a game is too old to start playing when the majority of the population has gotten to mid-high level; there aren't a steady flow of new players coming in; the economy caters to the twinks; and when group content has to be ignored, because the veteran players has done it already. What games would you consider too old to start playing? In my opinion (going down the list): AO, AL, AC, DAoC, EQ, EQ2, Horizons, FFXI, Lineage II, SWG, UO, WoW I personally think it is a big waste of money to start a game and find out you have to solo 20-30 levels before you can catch up with the main crowd; in effect, ignoring a lot of good content, because no one will help you. In my opinion, if you cannot play all of the content and feel that the world is populated at all levels, then you are better off waiting for the next MMORPG to come along. Because of this, I find no games really worth playing on the list right now. The most recent games that came out (Vanguard & LoTRO) both have serious flaws. Vanguards flaw is a poor release, which doomed the game for people that want to experience all the content, but can't since there aren't enough people to group with for it. I think Vanguard is a good game, but I couldn't find groups for the group quests at lower levels, so I quit. LoTRO's flaw was that it was too linear and quest based. Quest based games encourage soloing, not grouping. When you do find a group, it is only for one quest and then they are gone without so much as a good bye. In the old days (DAoC), people would join a group soon after logging in and would stay grouped for several hours. People were respectful, friendly, and helpful. The community of todays MMORPG's are largely anti-social and will only group if they have to. Of course there are exceptions, but I find that this blanket statement fits well. Reason why I bring this up is because if the community of todays MMORPG's were sociable like in the old MMORPG's, games would stay new for a lot longer. Note: I didn't include all the games that may be too old, since I didn't play every single one of them and because some of them I didn't play longer than a month. Anyhow, what games would you warn people to stay away from due to there being empty starting areas, an unbalanced economy, and/or low population?
I agree 100% with this post but a tthe same time its not all true, I will say EQ2 is not one to be ont his list, and with this new x-pack (RoK) It has really boost lower and medium level activity, And their are always low level groups going down.
I disagree with the person that said add EVE to the list, its true that players that have played for years have more skillpoints, but doesn't mean you can't be as good as them in a few months like many others said, they just have more options then you will.
Hi,
The reason why EQ2 belong on the list is because newer expansions has made old areas obsolete and barren. A new player who chooses to start in Queynos or Freeport will have a difficult time finding a group for the grouping quests, while everyone else is in RoK. A new player will unlikely be able to experience all EQ2 has to offer as far as content goes like the veteran players were able to do, because veteran players are not going to want to do the older dungeons when they can do the newer ones instead. Also, most EQ2 players agree that you can usually find a group from lvl 30 and up. This doesn't help new players who like to group that are levels 1-20. A new player derives his first impression before lvl 20. So if that new player is a grouper and starts in Queynos, that new player will get the impression that the population is top heavy and that the game is too old. Plus, the economy has been inflated for twinks. That alone makes EQ2 too old to start.
I'm not denying that there are ways around the negative things I pointed out, but it is unfair to ask a new player to skip content that he has never played or to farm collectables for hours to compete in the economy.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
I agree mostly, but not with EQ2/WoW, especially WoW. It's constantly growing with more newbies turning up every day, meaning it's still keeping the low-end game viable for new players.
I really started playing WoW when the Burning Crusade was released. I quit when I realized that I wouldn't be able to do the raid dungeons released before the Burning Crusade, because no one wants to do them. The epic gear in the old raid dungeons were made obsolete by the lvl 70 Outlands gear. Because a new player cannot complete all of the content, because the game has "advanced (aka gotten too old)" passed these raid dungeons, the game is too old to start playing.
As a new player, starting with the BC, I was able to complete all of the content and group instances, except those that competed with the better ways of getting gear that was released with BC. This isn't uncommon, because every MMORPG that releases an expansion that contains new and better ways to get gear or to level will suffer from this. This is bad game design and ages your game faster than it should. New players have a right to experience all of the content that they paid for. However, they don't have a right to force the veteran players to take them through this content. When new players don't have enough other new players to run through the old content, the game becomes too old for new players to start. Oh yes, and I do realize that a lot of new players who start the older MMORPG's don't care if they miss the old content. So I am speaking from the POV of the gamer who does care.
Oh, one more thing. The economy is overly inflated and new players don't have a prayer to buy items for their level from the auction house. Those items are priced for twinks, not new players. When the game first started, and everytime a new server is released, the auction house prices are reasonable. Only when the server becomes older does the economy rise to unreasonable rates for a new player. If a new player cannot buy items from the auction house that are around his own level without having to farm for hours for it, the game is too old to start playing.
Thank you
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
I think a game is too old to start playing when the majority of the population has gotten to mid-high level; there aren't a steady flow of new players coming in; the economy caters to the twinks; and when group content has to be ignored, because the veteran players has done it already. What games would you consider too old to start playing? In my opinion (going down the list): AO, AL, AC, DAoC, EQ, EQ2, Horizons, FFXI, Lineage II, SWG, UO, WoW I personally think it is a big waste of money to start a game and find out you have to solo 20-30 levels before you can catch up with the main crowd; in effect, ignoring a lot of good content, because no one will help you. In my opinion, if you cannot play all of the content and feel that the world is populated at all levels, then you are better off waiting for the next MMORPG to come along. Because of this, I find no games really worth playing on the list right now. The most recent games that came out (Vanguard & LoTRO) both have serious flaws. Vanguards flaw is a poor release, which doomed the game for people that want to experience all the content, but can't since there aren't enough people to group with for it. I think Vanguard is a good game, but I couldn't find groups for the group quests at lower levels, so I quit. LoTRO's flaw was that it was too linear and quest based. Quest based games encourage soloing, not grouping. When you do find a group, it is only for one quest and then they are gone without so much as a good bye. In the old days (DAoC), people would join a group soon after logging in and would stay grouped for several hours. People were respectful, friendly, and helpful. The community of todays MMORPG's are largely anti-social and will only group if they have to. Of course there are exceptions, but I find that this blanket statement fits well. Reason why I bring this up is because if the community of todays MMORPG's were sociable like in the old MMORPG's, games would stay new for a lot longer. Note: I didn't include all the games that may be too old, since I didn't play every single one of them and because some of them I didn't play longer than a month. Anyhow, what games would you warn people to stay away from due to there being empty starting areas, an unbalanced economy, and/or low population?
In my opinion, you are wrong with at least this ones. EQ2 is receiving new players everyday, same for Wow and SWG. And with Anarchy online, well, tried the trial recently and, not being my type of game, I found lots of low level people around, but I dont know how many of them were really newbies. The mmorpg scene is not as bad as you try to see it.
Please reread my definition of a game that is too old to start playing. The games listed fit my definition. If you want to argue my definition, that is fine, but you can't claim that these games don't fit one of the reasons in my definition. Please read other responses I have made in this thread for clarification on why I think those games are too old. Thank you.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
Some games aren't really trying to grab new players, just keep the existing players happy. EQ1 comes to mind as an example. They added only a half-hearted tutorial, but pretty much content is designed to get established players more levels and more loots.
DAoC may be old, but it is rather newbie friendly. As stated before anyone already 50 can make a lvl 20, no need to grind out newbie quests when you already know how to play. For a brand new player, if you can't level quick enough you will earn a "free level", so say you hit 20 and go train, the trainer then makes you 21.
Seriously though, I agree with the OP. This goes right to the heart of part of the problem with all the "WoW clone" MMOs. The real culprit here is:
- Level-based advancement
- The entire "end game" philosophy
- No FFA PVP
- No corpse-looting (once someone has "uber gear" and it's "bound" to them, it becomes impossible for the balance of power to ever change. Noobs have to try to find groups to help them grind through "end game instances" to try to get the SAME gear so they can compete. That's ridiculous. Let players corpse-loot each other!!!)
- Other "interaction-breaking" features... listed below:
Many games fail because they are not a real "sandbox" and most MMOs are designed with interaction-breaking features such as:
- instances
- auctionhouses with access to global commerce from one location, eliminating any reason for players to travel or for the need for player merchants who manage a group of vendors and are responsible for creating safe locations for their business. These auctionhouses also eliminate the need for consumers to travel to make purchases, creating opportunities for more "chance encounters," etc.
- The ability to "insta-travel" everywhere. (again, less opportunity for "chance encounters" on the roads or the high-seas, such as planned supply-route ambushes, etc.)
It only takes one counter-example to disprove a statement, so allow me to disprove most of your theories with one game ... CoH. City of Heroes continues to have a very active population of low-level characaters at all times, even though it has:
level-based advancement
no FFA PvP
no corpse-looting
instances
a global auction house (across all servers, no less)
extremely fast travel -- not always instant, but close enough
So what does that leave as the sole killer of interaction between old and new players? Endgame.
CoH has very little to offer in terms of endgame, and much to offer in terms of replay value -- assuming you like to try different powersets and don't mind the repetitive nature of a lot of the missions. The Flashback thing they just added will probably prove fairly detrimental to the game, as it seems to encourage people to stick to one toon. Time will tell, I guess.
My point is, of all the things listed above that various people like to blame for all the evils in MMO gaming, only the endgame has truly proven harmful to a game's ability to attract and hold new players.
But let us not forget to mention positive things that help keep the low-level game alive:
excellent grouping and player search tools
reasons for high and low levels to team up, such as level-normative events and encounters
tools to allow high and low levels to team up without penalty
level-normative PvP
bonuses for guilds that recruit low-level characters
prestige awards or classes for new characters once you max-level an old character
And -- surprise, surprise! -- CoH has all of these.
Regardless of what you think of it as a game (and everyone knows the content isn't stellar), you have to admit that CoH is a shining example of an MMO that doesn't leave newbies in the dust.
I think a game is too old to start playing when the majority of the population has gotten to mid-high level; there aren't a steady flow of new players coming in; the economy caters to the twinks; and when group content has to be ignored, because the veteran players has done it already. What games would you consider too old to start playing? In my opinion (going down the list): AO, AL, AC, DAoC, EQ, EQ2, Horizons, FFXI, Lineage II, SWG, UO, WoW I personally think it is a big waste of money to start a game and find out you have to solo 20-30 levels before you can catch up with the main crowd; in effect, ignoring a lot of good content, because no one will help you. In my opinion, if you cannot play all of the content and feel that the world is populated at all levels, then you are better off waiting for the next MMORPG to come along. Because of this, I find no games really worth playing on the list right now. The most recent games that came out (Vanguard & LoTRO) both have serious flaws. Vanguards flaw is a poor release, which doomed the game for people that want to experience all the content, but can't since there aren't enough people to group with for it. I think Vanguard is a good game, but I couldn't find groups for the group quests at lower levels, so I quit. LoTRO's flaw was that it was too linear and quest based. Quest based games encourage soloing, not grouping. When you do find a group, it is only for one quest and then they are gone without so much as a good bye. In the old days (DAoC), people would join a group soon after logging in and would stay grouped for several hours. People were respectful, friendly, and helpful. The community of todays MMORPG's are largely anti-social and will only group if they have to. Of course there are exceptions, but I find that this blanket statement fits well. Reason why I bring this up is because if the community of todays MMORPG's were sociable like in the old MMORPG's, games would stay new for a lot longer. Note: I didn't include all the games that may be too old, since I didn't play every single one of them and because some of them I didn't play longer than a month. Anyhow, what games would you warn people to stay away from due to there being empty starting areas, an unbalanced economy, and/or low population?
I agree with what you are saying,wich is why i believe games should just have a real END game,then start all over.I don't like the idea of expansion packs,or games going on forever.If the game was fun,you could prolong it a bit by playing a different race/ job.I'd rather see it end then if it was fun you and your friends could start up again in a new adventure,say a part 2 or part3 of the game whatever or a brand new game by the same company you like.
This would keep high level players from being stagnant as they only wish to wait/hang around looking pimp until the expansion/s come out [believe me this happens ALOT].If the game is truly fun,they will start over at level 1 playing a different race/job and experience the game from a different perspective.This would in turn keep the game ACTIVE so that new players would join in and not find noob areas barren.
There is one huge factor that i realise,that makes this hard to do.How would a company keep an old game's servers active,while still maintain a new adventure's servers,this would get costly after awhile.However SOE has done it for years with say EQ and EQ2,so it deff is doable.
Guild Wars has done exactly that. Guild Wars offers a campaign to beat in each of their released games. The problem I see with this model is that a lot of people don't like repeating content. So assuming that people don't like repeating content, you have to release new content. However, releasing new content doesn't mean you need to replace old content. I am a believer in increasing the max level with an expansion and giving the community new areas to explore. That is actually expanding the game. I call replacing old content with better content (making old content obsolete with new content) revamping the game. Revamping the game is bad business practice unless it is widely recognized that the old game does not cut it. There are different ways of creating an end game. With all of WoW's achievements, their end game is a failure.
For example, you have DAoC, whose end game is RvR. RvR never ends, so there is no reason to add levels in new expansions. The only thing DAoC needed was the release of new areas to explore to keep things interesting on the PvE side of the fence and to release new races/classes. Releasing new RvR things would have been good too. However, DAoC released expansions that made old areas obsolete, which in turn made the game unfriendly for people just starting out. So the first method is the RvR or PvP method, where the end game is using what you've learned and earned in PvE to fight other players.
Another method is story telling. LoTRO is using this method. The game revolves around telling a story, your story. Future expansion will expand this story. The game ends when the story ends. This will take several years. The downside to story driven MMORPG's is that it only caters to the casual playing crowd, because the power gamers will beat the story before the devs have a chance to release an expansion to add on to the story. Guild Wars is another story driven MMORPG, albeit a much shorter story. They have released other Guild Wars games that you can buy to continue playing in a story. Guild Wars combines a story telling method with arena style PvP end-game. Once a player beats the story, they can buy the next one or choose to PvP.
Another method is the sand-box model. In a sandbox game, the players create their own stories. These type of games are built like real life simulations, so the core of their game play makes it to where the game never ends. The game goes on as long as you choose for your story to go on. Open PvP or factional Pvp adds some spice to a sandbox game.
Then you have raiding. Raiding can only work as an end-game if done right. When you need to repeat raid dungeons for a piece of gear, the game is flawed. The reason being is because eventually the devs need to release new raids or people will leave. If the whole reason to raid is to get gear, then old raids will become obsolete when new raids with better gear are released. But if raids are created to just be ran for the fun of it, then the old raids won't become obsolete. All raids should have a good story associated with it and should have traps, puzzles, and require team work. WoW failed in this endeavor by making their raids a grind.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
...in fact, EVE has new players all over the place... Yes, it does - the problem is that most of them don't stay long. Eve has the highest churn rate, by far, of any MMO. There is ONE guy that has played continously since launch. But check EQ1, UO, EQ2, WOW, and many other games and you will find a lot that have been around since day 1. According to CCP's own figures, the average sub time per account is less than 6 months. Eve, unfortunately, lacks depth despite it's high ratings here. Once you get past the rather steep learning curve, there really is not much (if anything) new or exciting past the first month or two. And with the skill system in EVE, there is no possibility of anyone new EVER catching up. As far as other games that fall into this category, I would eliminate most from the OP's list except for DAOC and EQ1, and add EVE Online. Oddly enough for some, AC is still a better game after 7+ years than many of the new games - just too bad that they elected put their money into Fantasy Clone Game #973..er LOTRO instead of doing something with AC.
The question isn't if an old game is better than a new game, the question is if a game is too old to start. I believe the majority of older games knock the socks off of the newer games. But sadly, those older games are not newb friendly. For instance, if you were looking to play EQ just starting off, many players would recommend that you buy two accounts to two box, since you wouldn't have any new people to play with. You would also miss out on the majority of the content up until the content that the majority of the population is currently playing. If you analyze other older games this way, you will see the same trend. The populations of the older games are also too small to encourage newer gamers to try it out...not to mention the older and harder to get into UI, graphics, and game mechanics.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
Comments
No matter how many times you say it people wont belive yur little lie you know. Especially with the Quaterly finantial report EvE has made.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retired from: Neocron, Everquest, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, RF Online and Final Fantasy VII
Currently Playing : EvE Online.
I think the reason joining a late game sucks is because of the server population, like in WoW the older servers are probably like anyone under 70 is a 70's alt.
In EVE however since it's just one server I don't think it's ever too late. My main character JackDonkey has 61 million skill points and I can't shoot large guns, i made another account a couple months after first starting and made my pvp guy, he's up to 61 million skill points as well now and can only fly one race of hacs, one race of dreads, no carriers, no interdictors, no blueprint copying. So the point is even the older characters have to be specialized. I can fly all tech 1 ships with my pvp guy but with tech 2 you have to specialize.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
if I were to kill a titan tomorrow and no CCP employees showed up to say grats I would petition it.
Waiting for: the next MMO that lets me make this macro
if hp < 30 then CastSpell("heal") SpellTargetUnit("player") else CastSpell("smite") end
I'm very familiar with DAoC, since I've played it starting in 2002. The /level command was a curse, not a blessing. It is one of the reasons I went to a Classic server. The /level command made it hard for new players to start. I believe this is one of the reasons Classic servers was needed. Granted, I have a level 50, but I look out for what's best for all people, not just myself. It was not healthy for the long term of the game to have a /level command. I know it is possible to level up just PvPing, because I did it. However, if you recall, one of my points were that a game is too old when you cannot complete some of the original content released with the game, because no one is interested in doing it anymore. No on really wants to do dungeon crawls in the classic dungeons, seek out and kill legendary monsters, or anything like that anymore. People rarely do the class armor quests anymore and before the dragon quests came out, people rarely did dragon raids. The PvE community that was playing DAoC when I first started is gone now. Therefore the game is too old to start for a new player that wants to experience the entire game, not just PvP.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
No, you're not an oddball. You are just missing the point of this thread. The question isn't if you are having fun, because only boring people don't have fun. The question is if the game is too old to enjoy every bit a game has to offer. Every game ends up at a point where they introduce new content that makes the old, yet still interesting to a new player, content obsolete. These new players won't every experience that content, because the veterans are too busy with the new content to help the new guys out. However, a game with a constant influx of new players off sets this for a while. So a combination of lack of new players coming in and the constant introduction of expansions makes a game unfriendly for new players to start. Get my point?
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
I played EvE. Before I tell everyone why I didn't add them to the list, I would like to point out that because of the advancement system in EvE, you cannot judge time the same way in another game. In your typical game that is too late to join, it may take you 6-12 mo to catch up to the end game players. However, in EvE, it will take you 6-12 mo just to finish getting good at one role in a corporation.
I didn't put EvE on the list, because any new person can be effective to a corps within 2 weeks of play. Also, EvE relies on player made content (territorial PvP), so it never gets old. EvE doesn't have a lack of population, new players can fill a role quickly and experience all EvE has to offer as far as content fairly quickly, and has a good community to get you involved. So EvE is not ready to join my list yet.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
Ultima Online, Star Wars Galaxies, and Guild Wars are way too old to start playing now because they don't even exist in their original states any more.
UO went all carebear when tram came out.
SWG went down the shitter with NGE.
GW was mauled by the expansions and the exodus of most of the PvP community.
I'm sorry people can't have as much fun with these games as I did before they changed so much.
_______________________________
PM me when an MMO as good as UO was comes out.
I agree 100% with this post but a tthe same time its not all true, I will say EQ2 is not one to be ont his list, and with this new x-pack (RoK) It has really boost lower and medium level activity, And their are always low level groups going down.
I disagree with the person that said add EVE to the list, its true that players that have played for years have more skillpoints, but doesn't mean you can't be as good as them in a few months like many others said, they just have more options then you will.
Hi,
The reason why EQ2 belong on the list is because newer expansions has made old areas obsolete and barren. A new player who chooses to start in Queynos or Freeport will have a difficult time finding a group for the grouping quests, while everyone else is in RoK. A new player will unlikely be able to experience all EQ2 has to offer as far as content goes like the veteran players were able to do, because veteran players are not going to want to do the older dungeons when they can do the newer ones instead. Also, most EQ2 players agree that you can usually find a group from lvl 30 and up. This doesn't help new players who like to group that are levels 1-20. A new player derives his first impression before lvl 20. So if that new player is a grouper and starts in Queynos, that new player will get the impression that the population is top heavy and that the game is too old. Plus, the economy has been inflated for twinks. That alone makes EQ2 too old to start.
I'm not denying that there are ways around the negative things I pointed out, but it is unfair to ask a new player to skip content that he has never played or to farm collectables for hours to compete in the economy.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
Duplicate, please delete.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
I really started playing WoW when the Burning Crusade was released. I quit when I realized that I wouldn't be able to do the raid dungeons released before the Burning Crusade, because no one wants to do them. The epic gear in the old raid dungeons were made obsolete by the lvl 70 Outlands gear. Because a new player cannot complete all of the content, because the game has "advanced (aka gotten too old)" passed these raid dungeons, the game is too old to start playing.
As a new player, starting with the BC, I was able to complete all of the content and group instances, except those that competed with the better ways of getting gear that was released with BC. This isn't uncommon, because every MMORPG that releases an expansion that contains new and better ways to get gear or to level will suffer from this. This is bad game design and ages your game faster than it should. New players have a right to experience all of the content that they paid for. However, they don't have a right to force the veteran players to take them through this content. When new players don't have enough other new players to run through the old content, the game becomes too old for new players to start. Oh yes, and I do realize that a lot of new players who start the older MMORPG's don't care if they miss the old content. So I am speaking from the POV of the gamer who does care.
Oh, one more thing. The economy is overly inflated and new players don't have a prayer to buy items for their level from the auction house. Those items are priced for twinks, not new players. When the game first started, and everytime a new server is released, the auction house prices are reasonable. Only when the server becomes older does the economy rise to unreasonable rates for a new player. If a new player cannot buy items from the auction house that are around his own level without having to farm for hours for it, the game is too old to start playing.
Thank you
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
In my opinion, you are wrong with at least this ones. EQ2 is receiving new players everyday, same for Wow and SWG. And with Anarchy online, well, tried the trial recently and, not being my type of game, I found lots of low level people around, but I dont know how many of them were really newbies. The mmorpg scene is not as bad as you try to see it.
Please reread my definition of a game that is too old to start playing. The games listed fit my definition. If you want to argue my definition, that is fine, but you can't claim that these games don't fit one of the reasons in my definition. Please read other responses I have made in this thread for clarification on why I think those games are too old. Thank you.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
Not really i retried FFXI didn't saw anyone that was lvl 1.
And canceled cause that game like any asian mmo sucks balls.
Some games aren't really trying to grab new players, just keep the existing players happy. EQ1 comes to mind as an example. They added only a half-hearted tutorial, but pretty much content is designed to get established players more levels and more loots.
DAoC may be old, but it is rather newbie friendly. As stated before anyone already 50 can make a lvl 20, no need to grind out newbie quests when you already know how to play. For a brand new player, if you can't level quick enough you will earn a "free level", so say you hit 20 and go train, the trainer then makes you 21.
It only takes one counter-example to disprove a statement, so allow me to disprove most of your theories with one game ... CoH. City of Heroes continues to have a very active population of low-level characaters at all times, even though it has:
So what does that leave as the sole killer of interaction between old and new players? Endgame.
CoH has very little to offer in terms of endgame, and much to offer in terms of replay value -- assuming you like to try different powersets and don't mind the repetitive nature of a lot of the missions. The Flashback thing they just added will probably prove fairly detrimental to the game, as it seems to encourage people to stick to one toon. Time will tell, I guess.
My point is, of all the things listed above that various people like to blame for all the evils in MMO gaming, only the endgame has truly proven harmful to a game's ability to attract and hold new players.
But let us not forget to mention positive things that help keep the low-level game alive:
And -- surprise, surprise! -- CoH has all of these.
Regardless of what you think of it as a game (and everyone knows the content isn't stellar), you have to admit that CoH is a shining example of an MMO that doesn't leave newbies in the dust.
This would keep high level players from being stagnant as they only wish to wait/hang around looking pimp until the expansion/s come out [believe me this happens ALOT].If the game is truly fun,they will start over at level 1 playing a different race/job and experience the game from a different perspective.This would in turn keep the game ACTIVE so that new players would join in and not find noob areas barren.
There is one huge factor that i realise,that makes this hard to do.How would a company keep an old game's servers active,while still maintain a new adventure's servers,this would get costly after awhile.However SOE has done it for years with say EQ and EQ2,so it deff is doable.
Guild Wars has done exactly that. Guild Wars offers a campaign to beat in each of their released games. The problem I see with this model is that a lot of people don't like repeating content. So assuming that people don't like repeating content, you have to release new content. However, releasing new content doesn't mean you need to replace old content. I am a believer in increasing the max level with an expansion and giving the community new areas to explore. That is actually expanding the game. I call replacing old content with better content (making old content obsolete with new content) revamping the game. Revamping the game is bad business practice unless it is widely recognized that the old game does not cut it. There are different ways of creating an end game. With all of WoW's achievements, their end game is a failure.
For example, you have DAoC, whose end game is RvR. RvR never ends, so there is no reason to add levels in new expansions. The only thing DAoC needed was the release of new areas to explore to keep things interesting on the PvE side of the fence and to release new races/classes. Releasing new RvR things would have been good too. However, DAoC released expansions that made old areas obsolete, which in turn made the game unfriendly for people just starting out. So the first method is the RvR or PvP method, where the end game is using what you've learned and earned in PvE to fight other players.
Another method is story telling. LoTRO is using this method. The game revolves around telling a story, your story. Future expansion will expand this story. The game ends when the story ends. This will take several years. The downside to story driven MMORPG's is that it only caters to the casual playing crowd, because the power gamers will beat the story before the devs have a chance to release an expansion to add on to the story. Guild Wars is another story driven MMORPG, albeit a much shorter story. They have released other Guild Wars games that you can buy to continue playing in a story. Guild Wars combines a story telling method with arena style PvP end-game. Once a player beats the story, they can buy the next one or choose to PvP.
Another method is the sand-box model. In a sandbox game, the players create their own stories. These type of games are built like real life simulations, so the core of their game play makes it to where the game never ends. The game goes on as long as you choose for your story to go on. Open PvP or factional Pvp adds some spice to a sandbox game.
Then you have raiding. Raiding can only work as an end-game if done right. When you need to repeat raid dungeons for a piece of gear, the game is flawed. The reason being is because eventually the devs need to release new raids or people will leave. If the whole reason to raid is to get gear, then old raids will become obsolete when new raids with better gear are released. But if raids are created to just be ran for the fun of it, then the old raids won't become obsolete. All raids should have a good story associated with it and should have traps, puzzles, and require team work. WoW failed in this endeavor by making their raids a grind.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
The question isn't if an old game is better than a new game, the question is if a game is too old to start. I believe the majority of older games knock the socks off of the newer games. But sadly, those older games are not newb friendly. For instance, if you were looking to play EQ just starting off, many players would recommend that you buy two accounts to two box, since you wouldn't have any new people to play with. You would also miss out on the majority of the content up until the content that the majority of the population is currently playing. If you analyze other older games this way, you will see the same trend. The populations of the older games are also too small to encourage newer gamers to try it out...not to mention the older and harder to get into UI, graphics, and game mechanics.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.