Stop hating. The game is very much as good as the hyp and a nice change in that quests actually have depth and substance to them. Not to mention i dont feel like im a 10 year old with the graphics. So i say give it a try agin game changed since beta 5 months ago.
I'm an AoC basher and I stand by my greatest gripe (that you didn't list)..
It is broken in core gameplay and it brings absolutely nothing really conceptually new to the genre. In fact it even aggravates some of the problems that are traditionally plaguing MMORPGs since EQ onwards.
- linear level based progression
- largely static world
- too large a gap between relative character power for an online social game
- essentially it is a single player RPG within a MMO world. A conceptual shift from this model is long overdue.
I'm not playing this game nor I intend to. I feel that it is going to be fun till you level to the max but then it's the same old cr... I'd never support it because these problems are the same as with *gasp* WoW and are not bringing the genre one jot forward, quite the opposite - they are retarding the evolution of MMORPGs exactly like WoW did. If the game becomes a roaring success (which I doubt due to technical requirements) we'll be looking at an eternity of level-and-quest based MMORPGs, even worse than what we experienced since WoW released.
Yes, I admit I'm an AoC hater. DX10 and boobs doth not a next-gen make.
I'm an AoC basher and I stand by my greatest gripe (that you didn't list).. It is broken in core gameplay and it brings absolutely nothing really conceptually new to the genre. In fact it even aggravates some of the problems that are traditionally plaguing MMORPGs since EQ onwards. - linear level based progression - largely static world - too large a gap between relative character power for an online social game - essentially it is a single player RPG within a MMO world. A conceptual shift from this model is long overdue. I'm not playing this game nor I intend to. I feel that it is going to be fun till you level to the max but then it's the same old cr... I'd never support it because these problems are the same as with *gasp* WoW and are not bringing the genre one jot forward, quite the opposite - they are retarding the evolution of MMORPGs exactly like WoW did. If the game becomes a roaring success (which I doubt due to technical requirements) we'll be looking at an eternity of level-and-quest based MMORPGs, even worse than what we experienced since WoW released. Yes, I admit I'm an AoC hater. DX10 and boobs doth not a next-gen make.
I respect someone who stands by their opinions. Although I personally think you're being a little closed minded to it. But hey, that's just my opinion.
I don't however respect someone who infers that people who play certain MMO's are retards by default because YOU think the game is "retarding the evolution of MMORPG's". You really lost some credibility there, my friend.
From your post, I get the feeling that you haven't liked ANY MMO since EQ. Which is quite a lot of MMO's to dislike, far more than what came before it. Which basically says you dislike the MMO industry products in general. So why exactly are you here?
Something tells me you're a "Sandbox" fan. Possibly one who considers that SWG Pre-NGE was heading in the right direction? With its lack of story arc (or any evolving story at all) and those oh-so "innovative" features that completely threw off any restrictions and thus imbalanced the classes far worse than a standard "level based" system could do. Is this your idea of a good MMO? I'm not trying to insult, just curious as to your opinion.
Unfortunately, sometimes you have to just let life get on with what its doing, regardless of whether you like it or not.
And to you rabid WOW fanatics: Yes, WOW is a great game. I played it and enjoyed it for years... but AOC is also great. If you don't agree, your opinion is noted. Move along...
I'm an AoC basher and I stand by my greatest gripe (that you didn't list).. It is broken in core gameplay and it brings absolutely nothing really conceptually new to the genre. In fact it even aggravates some of the problems that are traditionally plaguing MMORPGs since EQ onwards. - linear level based progression - largely static world - too large a gap between relative character power for an online social game - essentially it is a single player RPG within a MMO world. A conceptual shift from this model is long overdue. I'm not playing this game nor I intend to. I feel that it is going to be fun till you level to the max but then it's the same old cr... I'd never support it because these problems are the same as with *gasp* WoW and are not bringing the genre one jot forward, quite the opposite - they are retarding the evolution of MMORPGs exactly like WoW did. If the game becomes a roaring success (which I doubt due to technical requirements) we'll be looking at an eternity of level-and-quest based MMORPGs, even worse than what we experienced since WoW released. Yes, I admit I'm an AoC hater. DX10 and boobs doth not a next-gen make.
I hate to rain on your parade but it's not the genre that has a problem, it's yourself, you have simply become bored with it and are blaming newer MMO's like AoC for your lack of interest, you have become bored with the MMO genre.
Well there are millions who comprise the majority of the MMO genre who are not yet bored with it.
Next Gen AoC may not be, but it has taken some baby steps towards a more interesting playstyle, with recent failures such as Vanguard and Tabula Rasa making losses of $40 million dollars to $96 million dollars respectively now is not the time to throw convention out the window, the genre needs to strengthen itself with a few solid successes before we go breaking the mold wide open.
Convince developers and publishing houses it's worth investing the huge capital over such a long time.
I'm an AoC basher and I stand by my greatest gripe (that you didn't list).. It is broken in core gameplay and it brings absolutely nothing really conceptually new to the genre. In fact it even aggravates some of the problems that are traditionally plaguing MMORPGs since EQ onwards. - linear level based progression - largely static world - too large a gap between relative character power for an online social game - essentially it is a single player RPG within a MMO world. A conceptual shift from this model is long overdue. I'm not playing this game nor I intend to. I feel that it is going to be fun till you level to the max but then it's the same old cr... I'd never support it because these problems are the same as with *gasp* WoW and are not bringing the genre one jot forward, quite the opposite - they are retarding the evolution of MMORPGs exactly like WoW did. If the game becomes a roaring success (which I doubt due to technical requirements) we'll be looking at an eternity of level-and-quest based MMORPGs, even worse than what we experienced since WoW released. Yes, I admit I'm an AoC hater. DX10 and boobs doth not a next-gen make.
I hate to rain on your parade but it's not the genre you are finding fault with, you have simply become bored with it and are blaming newer MMO's like AoC for your lack of interest, you have become bored with the MMO genre.
Well there are millions who comprise the majority of the MMO genre who are not yet bored with it.
Next Gen AoC may not be, but it has taken some baby steps towards a more interesting playstyle, with recent failures such as Vanguard and Tabula Rasa making failures of $40 million dollars to $96 million dollars respectively now is not the time to throw convention out the window, the genre needs to strengthen itself with a few solid successes before we go breaking the mold wide open.
Convince developers and publishing houses it's worth investing the huge capital over such a long time.
Good point, regardless of whether we feel a game isn't "next gen" or "innovative" enough, sometimes an MMO can deviate a little too far from what people like and thus it doesn't do so well. Regardless of how a small minority feel about it.
Also, as the previous poster said, it has been recently proven that even with names like McQuaid and Garriott attached to an MMO, it still doesn't guarantee success above all others.
First of all,i am not a fanboy but I enjoy AoC and was skeptic about playing it,but it turned out great.First of all please note,that there are 2-3 people hired by a company or just demented over-religious WoW fanboys that are making multiple accounts and posting rubish and lies with no backing. Soo here it goes: 1.EA rant - it was stated time and time again that EA will be limited,alot of people either didnt read or waited until the last second to register before servers went up,well after you couldnt get it you started screaming,ranting etc. Well if you wanted to get into EA that bad ,it was in your best intrest to register the code sooner and not at the last freaking second. 2.OMG,AoC has hi-system specs - yeah it does,it isnt very friendly to whiney kids whos parents dont want to buy them a new comp,most of the client was very optimized at launch (note: most) 3.OMG,the whole game is instanced - only the first 5 levels you are put in a small linear instance,the rest are bigger zones,but I guess most bashers cant know this since they didnt even play passed lvl 5,exemples of large areas in tortage: "white sand isle" 4.Funcom scammed me - pray tell,how did they scam you ? it was your own fault for not reading,if you are incapable of reading then it is no one's fault except your own. 5.I noticed that alot of threads on the WoW forums were posted about how much AoC sucks and that everyone hated it ,note that this was on the day the EA servers were to be launched,but they didnt do enough research and posted sooner then even the servers where launched.Proves how desperate some kids are to keep mature people in their game to hold their hand. Soo,sort story,dont belive threads that bash AoC made by people with less than 25 posts or that post on alts on their MMORPG forums.
Just a quick comment to number 2:
Yea the really see the beauty in the graphichs you need a high end computer.
But I would still say that you can play the game with a mid-end and even low-end computer, if you're willing to decrease resolution.
I played it on low end settings to begin with just to have it as smooth as possible while getting to know the gameplay and all.
Just a quick comment to number 2: Yea the really see the beauty in the graphichs you need a high end computer. But I would still say that you can play the game with a mid-end and even low-end computer, if you're willing to decrease resolution. I played it on low end settings to begin with just to have it as smooth as possible while getting to know the gameplay and all. Had over 60 fps alot of the time
Nice one, glad to hear that people with lower end pc's are able to play the game too.
I'm an AoC basher and I stand by my greatest gripe (that you didn't list).. It is broken in core gameplay and it brings absolutely nothing really conceptually new to the genre. In fact it even aggravates some of the problems that are traditionally plaguing MMORPGs since EQ onwards. - linear level based progression - largely static world - too large a gap between relative character power for an online social game - essentially it is a single player RPG within a MMO world. A conceptual shift from this model is long overdue. I'm not playing this game nor I intend to. I feel that it is going to be fun till you level to the max but then it's the same old cr... I'd never support it because these problems are the same as with *gasp* WoW and are not bringing the genre one jot forward, quite the opposite - they are retarding the evolution of MMORPGs exactly like WoW did. If the game becomes a roaring success (which I doubt due to technical requirements) we'll be looking at an eternity of level-and-quest based MMORPGs, even worse than what we experienced since WoW released. Yes, I admit I'm an AoC hater. DX10 and boobs doth not a next-gen make.
I respect someone who stands by their opinions. Although I personally think you're being a little closed minded to it. But hey, that's just my opinion.
I don't however respect someone who infers that people who play certain MMO's are retards by default because YOU think the game is "retarding the evolution of MMORPG's". Saying such a thing really makes you sound like a complete arrogant and condesceding ass. You really lost some credibility there, my friend.
From your post, I get the feeling that you haven't liked ANY MMO since EQ. Which is quite a lot of MMO's to dislike, far more than what came before it. Which basically says you dislike the MMO industry products in general. So why exactly are you here?
Something tells me you're a "Sandbox" fan. Possibly one who considers that SWG Pre-NGE was heading in the right direction? With its lack of story arc (or any evolving story at all) and those oh-so "innovative" features that completely threw off any restrictions and thus imbalanced the classes far worse than a standard "level based" system could do. Is this your idea of a good MMO? I'm not trying to insult, just curious as to your opinion.
Unfortunately, sometimes you have to just let life get on with what its doing, regardless of whether you like it or not.
Don't jump on the expression "retarding" because it associates with the mentally disabled people. I meant "retarding" as opposite to "advancing" - a mentally retarded person is someone whose mental advancement is below his age group. He stopped advancing mentally at some point.
Imo the same thing has happened to MMOs. I'm not saying that they should be "smarter" but they are retarded in the sense that most of them are basing their core gameplay mechanics on a fundamentally different paradigm - that of single player RPGs.
EQ is the biggest culprit in this. While the game had many great qualities for its time it shifted the whole genre onto an unnatural path of evolution that is simply leading nowhere. Why? Because linear story arcs along with leveling, large relative char power disparity etc are all single RPG features which are suited for single player environments. All of those are simply not inherent to a massively multiplayer persistent setting.
It is like putting wooden wheels and an open drivers seat on a motor car. I mean first cars did have those because the first car manufacturers had no precedent to base their design on and looked at something most similar in function - horse driven carriages. And that's why those early cars have those obviously useless features. They were smart for horse driven cars but completely out of place on motor ones.
The problem with sandboxes is that they haven't had the chance to evolve yet as the linear, story driven systems were "ready to use" from the existing single player RPGs. It was the "appeal of familiarity" that made them succesful with prospective investors and consequently players. However imo, the time is nigh to finally get rid of that tired old patchwork.
Imo, the first "true MMORPG" will be based on the so-called sandbox paradigm but will incorporate additional features that will safeguard its internal balance as well as generate a constant stream of non-scripted yet interesting content. It will have to be either completely level-less or levels won't mean as much because multiplayer environments absolutely abhor any kind of artificial division of participants, especially in terms of absolute power - would you play Monopoly if the players' starting capital depended on how many games they played previously?
Anyway, I had high hopes for AoC when it was first announced because it seemed a perfect world for something like this. It is a low-fantasy world. However how can you call something low fantasy when the difference in HP between a lvl 1 and lvl 80 character is 100x or more? In my books "low fantasy" = "no heroes". A sword in the gut is a sword in the gut. I naively thought this obvious logic will influence the core game design to move substantially away from the hillariously unrealistic and inbalancing quests-and-levels model, but alas...
All of this wouldn't bother me at all if AoC's possible success weren't likely to affect future MMORPG design decisions - just like WoW did. Clueless devs and investors looked at WoW and said "this is because it is level and quest based - we must do more of the same". If AoC succeeds this paradigm will be additionally strenghtened although most serious complaints against WoW all directly stem from its being based on fundamentally flawed core gameplay which is copy-pasted from a different genre.
Just imagine a game with AoC graphics and combat but with EVE-online world structure and GW advancement. (yes it could even be purely PvE, or less hardcore PvP, whatever) Now you might start getting the idea how much EQ, WoW and similar games "retarded" MMO development.
Markoraos, I get the feeling that you are a UO fan. Would you also prefer permakill?
The sandbox method has been done before and the success of a "level based system" has shown that the industry these days just really isn't that interested in a sandbox environment on the whole. Yes, there are a certain number of people who no doubt like it. But not enough to warrant high investment in an MMO project. Why? Well ask yourself, why do people like going to the movies or reading a good piece of fiction? Simply because the general public LIKES to be TOLD and to interact in well written stories.
Call them clichéd if you like, but people love the eternal struggle of "good vs evil" stories. Its escapism. Just like MMO's. It gives ones life perspective.
Its a shame for you that you cannot enjoy these things.
Markoraos, I get the feeling that you would prefer permakill. Is that so? If so, in your idealistic vision of an MMO, you have a world without a story (because the players will be the ones writing it) and there will be no levels and permadeath. Sorry but to me that sounds like the basis for nothing more than a "Deathmatch" type game with people role playing their characters. The sandbox method and has shown that people really aren't that interested in it on the whole. Yes, there are a small number. But not enough to warrant high investment in an MMO project. Why? Well ask yourself, why do people like going to the movies or reading a good piece of fiction? Simply because the general public LIKES to be told stories. Call them clichéd if you like, but people love the eternal struggle of "good vs evil" stories. Its escapism. Just like MMO's. It gives ones life perspective. Its a shame for you that you cannot enjoy these things.
You're 180 degrees off.
I'm not for permadeath. In fact I'm against any death penalties at all, unless really, really required for particular gameplay reasons.
In addition I'm all for stories.... However the way stories are structured in today's MMORPGs is simply laughable. A dynamic system which creates unique quests and storylines based on the fluid environment and individual player characters would be more appropriate than single-player crap we are used to now. Each and every player and character gets to do the very same quests. Now how immersive or.. anything is that? It is simply ridiculous that everyone gets to save that farmer's daughter. Well can't she learn to stay home ffs?
As for sandboxes.. Ofc they are flawed. Why? Because they haven't had the chance to evolve. Why? Because of EQ and WoW paradigm which established itself as dominant and strangled development of anything else.
A similar thing happened in the Doom days.... Remember that story? At about the same time Ultima Underworld and Doom appeared. Ofc Doom was hugely popular and suddenly it became totally "obvious" that if you have a 1st person 3D that it "must" be a first person shooter. Ultima Underworld 1st person RPGs died off while everybody concentrated on the dominant 1st person = action and RPG = turn based isometric cliches. It took AGES until Elder Scrolls and Diablo games appeared and broke that accursed mold.
If you told anyone in say 1995 that RPGs are going to be single character and action rather than turn based they'd call you crazy. The technology for that was already there but no one could break away from the old established paradigm. The same thing is with MMORPGs today. The future MMORPG worth playing will be BASED on an essentially sandbox foundation but it won't be only that. Just like Diablo was based on the old Gauntlet playstyle but vastly evolved and improved.
... lol ... I played a game called "Get Medieval" which came out right before Diablo and it was a total flop, although it was based on Gauntlet as well. If you told anyone that a game based on Gauntlet top-down 2D fantasy and gear grind is going to be the biggest seller of all times you wouldn't even get laughed at - you'd be put in a straight-jacket. However, Diablo did just that - why? Because it finally did the perfect action-rpg core gameplay right - by using permanent gear acquisition, varied skills and ingeniously simple yet flexible control scheme. However the basic foundation of those two games, the flop and the megahit, is the same.
Comments
Hey Kat,
Stop hating. The game is very much as good as the hyp and a nice change in that quests actually have depth and substance to them. Not to mention i dont feel like im a 10 year old with the graphics. So i say give it a try agin game changed since beta 5 months ago.
I'm an AoC basher and I stand by my greatest gripe (that you didn't list)..
It is broken in core gameplay and it brings absolutely nothing really conceptually new to the genre. In fact it even aggravates some of the problems that are traditionally plaguing MMORPGs since EQ onwards.
- linear level based progression
- largely static world
- too large a gap between relative character power for an online social game
- essentially it is a single player RPG within a MMO world. A conceptual shift from this model is long overdue.
I'm not playing this game nor I intend to. I feel that it is going to be fun till you level to the max but then it's the same old cr... I'd never support it because these problems are the same as with *gasp* WoW and are not bringing the genre one jot forward, quite the opposite - they are retarding the evolution of MMORPGs exactly like WoW did. If the game becomes a roaring success (which I doubt due to technical requirements) we'll be looking at an eternity of level-and-quest based MMORPGs, even worse than what we experienced since WoW released.
Yes, I admit I'm an AoC hater. DX10 and boobs doth not a next-gen make.
I respect someone who stands by their opinions. Although I personally think you're being a little closed minded to it. But hey, that's just my opinion.
I don't however respect someone who infers that people who play certain MMO's are retards by default because YOU think the game is "retarding the evolution of MMORPG's". You really lost some credibility there, my friend.
From your post, I get the feeling that you haven't liked ANY MMO since EQ. Which is quite a lot of MMO's to dislike, far more than what came before it. Which basically says you dislike the MMO industry products in general. So why exactly are you here?
Something tells me you're a "Sandbox" fan. Possibly one who considers that SWG Pre-NGE was heading in the right direction? With its lack of story arc (or any evolving story at all) and those oh-so "innovative" features that completely threw off any restrictions and thus imbalanced the classes far worse than a standard "level based" system could do. Is this your idea of a good MMO? I'm not trying to insult, just curious as to your opinion.
Unfortunately, sometimes you have to just let life get on with what its doing, regardless of whether you like it or not.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
Well said OP.
Down with the haters!
And to you rabid WOW fanatics: Yes, WOW is a great game. I played it and enjoyed it for years... but AOC is also great. If you don't agree, your opinion is noted. Move along...
I hate to rain on your parade but it's not the genre that has a problem, it's yourself, you have simply become bored with it and are blaming newer MMO's like AoC for your lack of interest, you have become bored with the MMO genre.
Well there are millions who comprise the majority of the MMO genre who are not yet bored with it.
Next Gen AoC may not be, but it has taken some baby steps towards a more interesting playstyle, with recent failures such as Vanguard and Tabula Rasa making losses of $40 million dollars to $96 million dollars respectively now is not the time to throw convention out the window, the genre needs to strengthen itself with a few solid successes before we go breaking the mold wide open.
Convince developers and publishing houses it's worth investing the huge capital over such a long time.
I hate to rain on your parade but it's not the genre you are finding fault with, you have simply become bored with it and are blaming newer MMO's like AoC for your lack of interest, you have become bored with the MMO genre.
Well there are millions who comprise the majority of the MMO genre who are not yet bored with it.
Next Gen AoC may not be, but it has taken some baby steps towards a more interesting playstyle, with recent failures such as Vanguard and Tabula Rasa making failures of $40 million dollars to $96 million dollars respectively now is not the time to throw convention out the window, the genre needs to strengthen itself with a few solid successes before we go breaking the mold wide open.
Convince developers and publishing houses it's worth investing the huge capital over such a long time.
Good point, regardless of whether we feel a game isn't "next gen" or "innovative" enough, sometimes an MMO can deviate a little too far from what people like and thus it doesn't do so well. Regardless of how a small minority feel about it.
Also, as the previous poster said, it has been recently proven that even with names like McQuaid and Garriott attached to an MMO, it still doesn't guarantee success above all others.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
Just a quick comment to number 2:
Yea the really see the beauty in the graphichs you need a high end computer.
But I would still say that you can play the game with a mid-end and even low-end computer, if you're willing to decrease resolution.
I played it on low end settings to begin with just to have it as smooth as possible while getting to know the gameplay and all.
Had over 60 fps alot of the time
Nice one, glad to hear that people with lower end pc's are able to play the game too.
What's your specs?
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
I respect someone who stands by their opinions. Although I personally think you're being a little closed minded to it. But hey, that's just my opinion.
I don't however respect someone who infers that people who play certain MMO's are retards by default because YOU think the game is "retarding the evolution of MMORPG's". Saying such a thing really makes you sound like a complete arrogant and condesceding ass. You really lost some credibility there, my friend.
From your post, I get the feeling that you haven't liked ANY MMO since EQ. Which is quite a lot of MMO's to dislike, far more than what came before it. Which basically says you dislike the MMO industry products in general. So why exactly are you here?
Something tells me you're a "Sandbox" fan. Possibly one who considers that SWG Pre-NGE was heading in the right direction? With its lack of story arc (or any evolving story at all) and those oh-so "innovative" features that completely threw off any restrictions and thus imbalanced the classes far worse than a standard "level based" system could do. Is this your idea of a good MMO? I'm not trying to insult, just curious as to your opinion.
Unfortunately, sometimes you have to just let life get on with what its doing, regardless of whether you like it or not.
Don't jump on the expression "retarding" because it associates with the mentally disabled people. I meant "retarding" as opposite to "advancing" - a mentally retarded person is someone whose mental advancement is below his age group. He stopped advancing mentally at some point.
Imo the same thing has happened to MMOs. I'm not saying that they should be "smarter" but they are retarded in the sense that most of them are basing their core gameplay mechanics on a fundamentally different paradigm - that of single player RPGs.
EQ is the biggest culprit in this. While the game had many great qualities for its time it shifted the whole genre onto an unnatural path of evolution that is simply leading nowhere. Why? Because linear story arcs along with leveling, large relative char power disparity etc are all single RPG features which are suited for single player environments. All of those are simply not inherent to a massively multiplayer persistent setting.
It is like putting wooden wheels and an open drivers seat on a motor car. I mean first cars did have those because the first car manufacturers had no precedent to base their design on and looked at something most similar in function - horse driven carriages. And that's why those early cars have those obviously useless features. They were smart for horse driven cars but completely out of place on motor ones.
The problem with sandboxes is that they haven't had the chance to evolve yet as the linear, story driven systems were "ready to use" from the existing single player RPGs. It was the "appeal of familiarity" that made them succesful with prospective investors and consequently players. However imo, the time is nigh to finally get rid of that tired old patchwork.
Imo, the first "true MMORPG" will be based on the so-called sandbox paradigm but will incorporate additional features that will safeguard its internal balance as well as generate a constant stream of non-scripted yet interesting content. It will have to be either completely level-less or levels won't mean as much because multiplayer environments absolutely abhor any kind of artificial division of participants, especially in terms of absolute power - would you play Monopoly if the players' starting capital depended on how many games they played previously?
Anyway, I had high hopes for AoC when it was first announced because it seemed a perfect world for something like this. It is a low-fantasy world. However how can you call something low fantasy when the difference in HP between a lvl 1 and lvl 80 character is 100x or more? In my books "low fantasy" = "no heroes". A sword in the gut is a sword in the gut. I naively thought this obvious logic will influence the core game design to move substantially away from the hillariously unrealistic and inbalancing quests-and-levels model, but alas...
All of this wouldn't bother me at all if AoC's possible success weren't likely to affect future MMORPG design decisions - just like WoW did. Clueless devs and investors looked at WoW and said "this is because it is level and quest based - we must do more of the same". If AoC succeeds this paradigm will be additionally strenghtened although most serious complaints against WoW all directly stem from its being based on fundamentally flawed core gameplay which is copy-pasted from a different genre.
Just imagine a game with AoC graphics and combat but with EVE-online world structure and GW advancement. (yes it could even be purely PvE, or less hardcore PvP, whatever) Now you might start getting the idea how much EQ, WoW and similar games "retarded" MMO development.
Markoraos, I get the feeling that you are a UO fan. Would you also prefer permakill?
The sandbox method has been done before and the success of a "level based system" has shown that the industry these days just really isn't that interested in a sandbox environment on the whole. Yes, there are a certain number of people who no doubt like it. But not enough to warrant high investment in an MMO project. Why? Well ask yourself, why do people like going to the movies or reading a good piece of fiction? Simply because the general public LIKES to be TOLD and to interact in well written stories.
Call them clichéd if you like, but people love the eternal struggle of "good vs evil" stories. Its escapism. Just like MMO's. It gives ones life perspective.
Its a shame for you that you cannot enjoy these things.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
You're 180 degrees off.
I'm not for permadeath. In fact I'm against any death penalties at all, unless really, really required for particular gameplay reasons.
In addition I'm all for stories.... However the way stories are structured in today's MMORPGs is simply laughable. A dynamic system which creates unique quests and storylines based on the fluid environment and individual player characters would be more appropriate than single-player crap we are used to now. Each and every player and character gets to do the very same quests. Now how immersive or.. anything is that? It is simply ridiculous that everyone gets to save that farmer's daughter. Well can't she learn to stay home ffs?
As for sandboxes.. Ofc they are flawed. Why? Because they haven't had the chance to evolve. Why? Because of EQ and WoW paradigm which established itself as dominant and strangled development of anything else.
A similar thing happened in the Doom days.... Remember that story? At about the same time Ultima Underworld and Doom appeared. Ofc Doom was hugely popular and suddenly it became totally "obvious" that if you have a 1st person 3D that it "must" be a first person shooter. Ultima Underworld 1st person RPGs died off while everybody concentrated on the dominant 1st person = action and RPG = turn based isometric cliches. It took AGES until Elder Scrolls and Diablo games appeared and broke that accursed mold.
If you told anyone in say 1995 that RPGs are going to be single character and action rather than turn based they'd call you crazy. The technology for that was already there but no one could break away from the old established paradigm. The same thing is with MMORPGs today. The future MMORPG worth playing will be BASED on an essentially sandbox foundation but it won't be only that. Just like Diablo was based on the old Gauntlet playstyle but vastly evolved and improved.
... lol ... I played a game called "Get Medieval" which came out right before Diablo and it was a total flop, although it was based on Gauntlet as well. If you told anyone that a game based on Gauntlet top-down 2D fantasy and gear grind is going to be the biggest seller of all times you wouldn't even get laughed at - you'd be put in a straight-jacket. However, Diablo did just that - why? Because it finally did the perfect action-rpg core gameplay right - by using permanent gear acquisition, varied skills and ingeniously simple yet flexible control scheme. However the basic foundation of those two games, the flop and the megahit, is the same.