Eve is the only one that is doing 'it' right. I haven't touched the game, but solely because I am a diehard for fantasy and can't stomach sci-fi save for Star Wars products. 'It' I define as 'developper focus on game, community, and business model'. Eve's devs are undeniably involved with a business model that uses entirely proprietary hardware despite a relatively niche subscriber base. Their devs are involved directly with the playing community both outside as well as inside their game (full-time employed economists on staff <~ this one blew my mind). And the game itself plays very unique and is 'its own' game, without clones. Blizzard openly stated they sold out. WoW was built as a game that had the makings of all the 'it' elements in play, but the devs stated their path forward was to allow more people to see more content, aka focusing on their subscribers, aka selling out. Everything else about WoW has 'it' for sure: polished mechanics/animations, financial success/monopoly, etc. LOTRO I haven't played nor know anyone in RL circles who does, so I will withhold comment. The fantasy genre feels bloated at present, so this title would need to do a lot to achieve minimal popular recognition.
Eve has 'it' right. WoW and LOTRO are honorable mentions.
LOL .. you have a STRANGE interpretation of selling out. Of course blizzard should focusing on their subs. What do you them to focus on? And i LIKE the fact that i am seeing more content.
Eve is the only one that is doing 'it' right. I haven't touched the game, but solely because I am a diehard for fantasy and can't stomach sci-fi save for Star Wars products. 'It' I define as 'developper focus on game, community, and business model'. Eve's devs are undeniably involved with a business model that uses entirely proprietary hardware despite a relatively niche subscriber base. Their devs are involved directly with the playing community both outside as well as inside their game (full-time employed economists on staff <~ this one blew my mind). And the game itself plays very unique and is 'its own' game, without clones. Blizzard openly stated they sold out. WoW was built as a game that had the makings of all the 'it' elements in play, but the devs stated their path forward was to allow more people to see more content, aka focusing on their subscribers, aka selling out. Everything else about WoW has 'it' for sure: polished mechanics/animations, financial success/monopoly, etc. LOTRO I haven't played nor know anyone in RL circles who does, so I will withhold comment. The fantasy genre feels bloated at present, so this title would need to do a lot to achieve minimal popular recognition.
Eve has 'it' right. WoW and LOTRO are honorable mentions.
LOL .. you have a STRANGE interpretation of selling out. Of course blizzard should focusing on their subs. What do you them to focus on? And i LIKE the fact that i am seeing more content.
They didn't focus on subs. They focused on milking those subs.
All this thread is, is for people to come and talk about the games they like. I mean how would you even judge what "right" is? All I see so far are people's opinions on what they are playing currently.
not necessarely, by "right" i mean that they are increasing in popularity and/or are still on the up curve of their life and/or the game mechanics are well done/made and/or the goods rightout outweight the bads.
looking at the posts i cant really comment on fallen earth simply because i have not even seen what this game is like, hell, i have not even visited their website. but from what i read, it does look like an honorable mention. though i would wait and see how the patches and fixes and evolution of the game goes before i pass judgement on the game
I would have to say that I agree with the fact that WoW, LotR and EvE are very well built games and probably considered some of the most well polished or long lasting, or whatever category you want to call it.. but how can anyone say they are necessarily doing it right and some of the others out there are not. I only state this because everyone has a diffferent opinion of what is right for them. I personally did not care for Eve, nor LotR, and I used to play WoW a lot but now find it boring and no longer wish to play it ever again. I have played other games as well and they all end up boring me at some point. I am not saying they are not great games or they didn't offer something that was really good and playable at one point but eventually they did lose interest. I guess what I am saying is that any game that has a steady fan base, provides new content, and attempts to re-polish their game over time, making it more appealing, or working out problems that the fan base has, then I would say it is a successful game. Also going in a different direction then the standard MMO and bringing something new to the table can be a big incentive as well, allthough in most cases it generally doesn't pan out.. Thumbs up to EvE for being successful at this. You may not personally agree with me, this is just my two cents.
the reason why i say these are the games that are doing it right because when you play it you dont feel like youve played that before. "this is the same sh*t all over"
honestly the NGE is a copy of WoW with a starwars skin. that type of games are doing it "wrong"
dare to be different and work hard and be proud and you will succeed.
It couldn't be more true. I understand it might not sit well with many fanbois due to the negative connotation that the term carries, but it doesn't change where they started with their product, some explicit public relations statements that they made, and where their product currently lies.
Selling out has nothing to do with doing things that others don't like or believe in.
Absolutely. On this we agree 100%. You cannot sell out if you stay true to yourself. Selling out is not a direct result of success.
Selling out means that a person, company, entity starts out with one mission but due to the desire to obtain acknowledment, some reward or benefit, etc from another group or entity then change their initial mission.
You can't be a sell out if you started with a mission and ended with that mission.
Blizzard didn't start out wanting to be a 13million subscriber mammoth. Blizzard started out making a game that took the Warcraft universe to its next stage, inviting its fans to experience the universe through the eyes of 1 character. This took on the form of evolution when you look at the RTS game that was WCII becoming an RTS with hero class game that was WCIII then the hero class only game that is WoW.
Please don't attempt to stand by the statement that Blizzard set out to be successful with subscription counts. They started out making a good game, and rode their success. In the process they figured they would change their focus from making truly 'epic' content that followed and further developed their WC storyline and instead appeal to the masses.
If I decide, because I like it and enjoy the music, that I want to be the greatest pop star the world has ever known and I achieve that goal, that is not a selling out.
It all lies with how you go about it. If i make music that caters to fans, rather than the music that bleeds through my creative mind, then I absolutely am a sell out. I won't entertain discussing an off-shoot topic of the means and the end being the same thing- that's absurd.
If I decide that I want to be the greatest pop star the world has ever known, but I get a lot of flack from people because my music has no great depth or musical complexity and is essentially just "fun" airplay music and I change to appease those people, even though it's not what I want, then I would be a sell out.
I've known several people who went the artsy intellectual route even though they desired to be more mainstream. I consider these people sell outs.
They sold (read changed) there initial desires becaues of what others felt they should be doing.
Wait, are we agreeing that Blizzard sold out? You've practically voiced the exact thing that Blizzard did. Blizzard felt that the casuals should have everything, and gave it to them. R14 and Naxx v1.0 were epic (I don't agree with the 12hr days in farming alone that these systems required) and shifted from making a good game that people could enjoy, to a game that anyone can follow.
I have more and greater respect for someone who knows what they like and enjoy and they do it regardless of what others think over people who allow others to dictate what they should be doing because it doesn't have the depth or complexity that one "thinks" they should have.
I agree wholeheartedly. Everyone in life should take in criticism and make it constructive without bending because of pressure.
Also, read Ruyn's post. He nails it in 10 words or less.
Edit: Apparently it was 11 words. My bad =P
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc. We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be. So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away. - MMO_Doubter
The only game in my book that has the potential to succeed (as in features not only related to dull combat) are Dawntide and Mortal Online. Wurm Online got it right as well
I fully agree that LotrO, EvE and WoW are the MMOs who are doing it "right"! Theese are the best, high quality products on the market and have healthy playerbases.
Honorable mentions to DDO who really turned itself around with Eberron Unlimited and now are up there with the big guyes. Its also very different from the rest of the fantasy MMOs and put bigg focus on grouping and depths which we dont see very often. Combat, AI and dungeons are way ahead of the rest of the industry.
Fallen earth is a solid game now but it really lacks the polish to be considered a high quality MMO (in my opinion). The combat and the mobs need ALOT of polish before its anywhere close to "right".
If WoW = The Beatles and WAR = Led Zeppelin Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
The Endless Forest. It's the game you all have wanted to play, but didn't know about. It's not a grindfest, it's not all about phat lewtz, it's not about who has the biggest e-peen... It's about... human faced deer, running around in the woods. You all bitch about wanting different... well, there you go. Put up or shut up.
different and empty, lacks content.
now please remove yourself from my awesome presence or post something intelligent :P ( teens i train take a chuckle to that phrase hehe)
@ Sovrath That's not selling out at all. It couldn't be more true. I understand it might not sit well with many fanbois due to the negative connotation that the term carries, but it doesn't change where they started with their product, some explicit public relations statements that they made, and where their product currently lies. Selling out has nothing to do with doing things that others don't like or believe in. Absolutely. On this we agree 100%. You cannot sell out if you stay true to yourself. Selling out is not a direct result of success. Selling out means that a person, company, entity starts out with one mission but due to the desire to obtain acknowledment, some reward or benefit, etc from another group or entity then change their initial mission. You can't be a sell out if you started with a mission and ended with that mission. Blizzard didn't start out wanting to be a 13million subscriber mammoth. Blizzard started out making a game that took the Warcraft universe to its next stage, inviting its fans to experience the universe through the eyes of 1 character. This took on the form of evolution when you look at the RTS game that was WCII becoming an RTS with hero class game that was WCIII then the hero class only game that is WoW. Please don't attempt to stand by the statement that Blizzard set out to be successful with subscription counts. They started out making a good game, and rode their success. In the process they figured they would change their focus from making truly 'epic' content that followed and further developed their WC storyline and instead appeal to the masses. If I decide, because I like it and enjoy the music, that I want to be the greatest pop star the world has ever known and I achieve that goal, that is not a selling out. It all lies with how you go about it. If i make music that caters to fans, rather than the music that bleeds through my creative mind, then I absolutely am a sell out. I won't entertain discussing an off-shoot topic of the means and the end being the same thing- that's absurd. If I decide that I want to be the greatest pop star the world has ever known, but I get a lot of flack from people because my music has no great depth or musical complexity and is essentially just "fun" airplay music and I change to appease those people, even though it's not what I want, then I would be a sell out. I've known several people who went the artsy intellectual route even though they desired to be more mainstream. I consider these people sell outs. They sold (read changed) there initial desires becaues of what others felt they should be doing. Wait, are we agreeing that Blizzard sold out? You've practically voiced the exact thing that Blizzard did. Blizzard felt that the casuals should have everything, and gave it to them. R14 and Naxx v1.0 were epic (I don't agree with the 12hr days in farming alone that these systems required) and shifted from making a good game that people could enjoy, to a game that anyone can follow. I have more and greater respect for someone who knows what they like and enjoy and they do it regardless of what others think over people who allow others to dictate what they should be doing because it doesn't have the depth or complexity that one "thinks" they should have. I agree wholeheartedly. Everyone in life should take in criticism and make it constructive without bending because of pressure.
Also, read Ruyn's post. He nails it in 10 words or less. Edit: Apparently it was 11 words. My bad =P
I can't comment on how blizzard went in and changed their content as I don't have first hand knowledge of this.
However, from what I know, Blizzard wanted to make an online game that didnt', have what they considered, all the nonsense that other online games had at the time.
they wanted to make an mmo that had a lower barrier of entry and I believe that is exactly what they did. Toward that point, anything they do to maintain that lower barrier of entry still seems in line with what they desired to do.
All this added raid content seems to me to be their acknowledgement that there were players who wanted to play their game but who were going to blaze through their own content so they added the end game raid game.
I never said they set out to be successful with subcription counts so I take issue with your suggesting it.
As far as the analogy about making music that caters toward fans, there is no reason that that can't be a viable method of creating that music. Keep in mind that John Cage came up with a system utilizing chance and then indeterrminancy in order to create some pieces. Is throwing the I Ching sticks any better than knowing your fan base, knowing what they love about your music and giving them more?
If one loves the genre that one is creating for and has fans who have input I don't believe that it's selling out if you love giving to those fans what they desire provided that it doesn't fall against what you believe in. I use the analogy because it's exactly what I think Blizzard did, to create a game based on the world of warcraft rts, to take out some of the long drawn out gameplay, to firm up the gameplay and to give the average person a game that they can experience.
So I don't see where they have gone off track.
It seems to me that they always had a more casual player in mind.
However, i don't have access to any of the orginal world of warcraft interviews so perhaps you have information that indicates differently?
as a footnote I think there are many companies who probably think of their playerbase when considering new content. I know that in LOTRO and DDO they look toward catering to their players as much as possible.
So given the vast amount of players who play WoW it would seem that they have a vast playerbase to think about when making these chages. If those changes are in line with their overall game philosophy and it makes the game easier then so be it.
Incidentally, to set the record straight, I am no fanboi of blizzard though perhaps to a certain extent I could be considered a fan even though I don't seriously play WoW. I do think they made a good game and it's one of the best put together games around.
And it does indeed cater to all the casual players who I know.
edit: actually I don't think I'm far off as to their wanting to cater to casuals:
IGNPC: Did tackling an MMORPG title for the first time alter your original plans for the title? Was the final product different from the original intent -- perhaps for the better -- or is WoW the achievement of that initial idea?
Jeffrey Kaplan: I think World of Warcraft has captured much of our original vision for the game. Like all Blizzard games, we wanted something that was easy to learn, yet hard to master. The demographics of our player base are proof that we succeeded in accomplishing this goal. We have some very dedicated, skilled, hardcore MMO veterans logging in nightly. Yet at the same time, there are thousands of players who have never played an MMO who are playing right there alongside of the vets.
Though to be fair they also mention in another early interview that the experienced players are the "Vanguard to promoting the game to their friends"
Jonric: From early on, you've stated that one of your goals is to have a simple learning curve, with the game being easy to learn but difficult to master. What are the keys to making this happen and the main hurdles to be overcome? And how satisfied are you with your progress?
Mark Kern: First and foremost, we try to make the game deep and rich enough to appeal to experienced gamers because they are the vanguard for promoting the game to their friends, who may be more casual gamers. Now, the things we do for casual gamers are also of benefit to the hardcore. Nobody wants to have an interface that is cryptic or gets in your way as you play the game, and we feel that players want good information about how spells, abilities and classes work without having to go to a website to figure it out. We also wanted to make sure that we brought the same ease of use and transparency to the game controls and mechanisms that our other games enjoy, to the World of Warcraft. Additionally, we wanted to make sure that players had a clear sense of what to do in the world, with lots of quest-driven content and cool locations in the world that reward exploration.
As for how satisfied we are with the results, we often look to how team members and their families are reacting to the game right now. We all play from home, and people were playing so much that we eventually had to ask them to limit the hours of they spent playing the alpha. We even have family members (casual gamers) who play from home, and who sometimes log more hours than the developers.
Jonric: What will make World of Warcraft appealing for the current online gamer community, and also for new online players?
Bill Roper: The core idea behind World of Warcraft is to create a game that is easy to get into and simple to play so we can stay focused on creating a rich and complex world that players can help evolve over the course of time. We want this game to be an ongoing experience for players of all abilities and levels of experience, regardless of whether they have 30 minutes or 30 hours to dedicate to a single play session.
There are players who do insist that WoW is indeed difficult to master. I don't know if there is any truth to this as I've never played beyond a low lvl 36 over the years I've played WoW. But from my seat in the bleachers it seems that they want the game accessilble to all types of players and will continue to allow casuals a place alongside their more experienced players.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Out of all the three games mentioned, I have to admit that I've only played one of them: EVE Online. I would have to agree with your assessment of EVE, and of how it is of the games that is really doing it right. I really aplaud the way they've gone the classless route; there so much you can actually do in that game that it literally boggles the mind. It's so different from some of the other MMOs that I've played, because in those games, you have to follow a set path with little or no deviation, while EVE actually gives you the chance to chose a career.
That being said, there's also one other game that I would like to add to the list, and that is Guild Wars. I love the fact that the game is extremely polished as well, and the scenery is beautiful even when not maxed. Moreover, the battle system is also the most fun I've come across so far, and it's the most balanced game out at the moment. It's payment model is also revolutionary, because it bypassed the traditional subscription and cash shop route, instead chosing the B2P route, which, while more risky, did pay off in the end.
I would ad EQ2 to the list. It's polished and works well with plenty of content.
Also, City of Heroes. It's a FUN game, and has been successful.
I haven't played Aion, and reviews on it are kinda mixed. Needs more time with Western servers up to be sure, but seems like a polished game that works and will maintain a good subscriber base.
I would not ad any "free" to play games to the list. I think that's doing it wrong, and I don't play those.
Eve is the biggest piece of boring trash I have ever played.
WOW OWNS !
EvE is not for all gamers, you need more brain to play it and that sucks!
LOL! XD
WoW was a simplified Everquest version with much faster lvling, much easier to get into in a way that attracts players that never had played a mmorgp before. Problem is that that its "userfriendliness" makes it shallow. It still attracts a lot players, you still see it in game stores, but it no longer makes players continue to play for years like it did in the beginning, now it is a matters of months before they quit.
Last time I checked into my old realm using a trial key the realm was almost fulI, I still could see some of the old guilds left, but I didn´t recognise any oldtimers at all in my old guild or any other guilds.
And like the Op I took not long before I was reminded why I quitted the game and this time there was no friends, rivals or "enemies" left in the game. And it isn´t just WoW I got bored any game that tries to be like WoW but just better, like Lotr isn´t my cup of tea anymore.
But big complex games "sandbox" games is keeping my intrests. EvE online being the prime example, its population isn´t growing because it attracts much players any given month, it grows because players are not leaving and playing for many years once they got past the treeshold and understand the game.
Icarus looked at EvE when they made Fallen Earth and so far they have done a lots of things right and I really enjoy it. I certainly hope that they are not going to do a "NGE" ie dumbing it down, that would be the only thing that could kill the game for me. And the potential of the game is unmatched, the map now only covers a small part of US, there is an entire world that it can expand to in the future. ;-)
First and foremost I feel the need to commend you on your ability to partake in open, detailed, even heated discussion while keeping focused on the topic. I feel this should be underlined and publicly noted, in hopes of more forum users taking this as the example to follow, compared to trolls and flamers. So for that, thank you.
Is it objectively possible for me, as a gamer, to truthfully state that Blizzard sold out after the release of WoW and seeing how much it took off? No. I don't think anyone can. What I can do is interpret statements that were made by Blizzard's staff, reference key points in WoW's history, and changes in direction that had been made- often directly counter to statements by Blizzard.
they wanted to make an mmo that had a lower barrier of entry and I believe that is exactly what they did. Toward that point, anything they do to maintain that lower barrier of entry still seems in line with what they desired to do.
I don't think this statement is false. No one can say Blizzard wanted only diehards to be able to purchase and play their game. Clearly Blizzard wanted fans to enter the 'world' of 'warcraft' through their own eyes.
All this added raid content seems to me to be their acknowledgement that there were players who wanted to play their game but who were going to blaze through their own content so they added the end game raid game.
End game raids are not a concept that was foreign to diehard MMO'ers. EQ did a wonderful job with making raids risky, as a sidenote.
I never said they set out to be successful with subcription counts so I take issue with your suggesting it.
Every content patch or expansion release has been coordinated to run within the same fiscal quarter that another game from another studio was set to release. The games, of course, were the noteworthy games that recieved much hype from then-current WoW subscribers. The most, most noteworthy of these releases was TBC fast on the heels of Naxx1.0. For anyone who knows the history, I sincerely feel that the following statement is true: Blizzard was more worried about keeping people interested in their game than allowing people to enjoy the designs and concepts the game devs provided. This event in WoW's history, to me, is what sets the tone for many more changes that occured as time moved on.
As far as the analogy about making music that caters toward fans, there is no reason that that can't be a viable method of creating that music. Keep in mind that John Cage came up with a system utilizing chance and then indeterrminancy in order to create some pieces. Is throwing the I Ching sticks any better than knowing your fan base, knowing what they love about your music and giving them more?
If you create music *to* cater to fans, and your means is your end, then you can't be a sellout. You're just a pawn. I don't feel this example warrants discussion as it's rather.. shallow.
I'm unfamiliar with John Cage's works. I'll make a personal point to research him and his works.
If one loves the genre that one is creating for and has fans who have input I don't believe that it's selling out if you love giving to those fans what they desire provided that it doesn't fall against what you believe in. I use the analogy because it's exactly what I think Blizzard did, to create a game based on the world of warcraft rts, to take out some of the long drawn out gameplay, to firm up the gameplay and to give the average person a game that they can experience.
When deciding a way forward, it should be done with personal interests in mind. The place of feedback, in the case of a public enterprise, should be taken into consideration when *implimenting* the way forward, not *deciding* the way forward.
It seems to me that they always had a more casual player in mind.
WoW used to be rewarding. It used to have goals that were legitimately difficult to achieve, much less impossible without proper planning, preperation, leadership, coordination- you name it. Some of the systems in play were just too much- I am a hardliner but I'm reasonable.
To grind rank14 you needed to be the top 1% (or was it .1%? regardless, the point is the same) of total honor that was gained on your server for that week. In order to achieve this, you simply needed to play long hours, killing every player you met. Since it was a sum system rather than a ratio system, it rewarded time invested, not skill. Most r14 players got their rank by account sharing, and them playing their account with their friends in 'shifts'. This was scrapped and an arena system implimented that worked off of ratio values, thus presenting a more skill-based reward approach. There are flaws with the arena system, which I won't go into here. Another fix, which I'm appalled Blizzard didn't incorporate was not only bringing in small-scale PvP (arena) but simply apply ratio-based criterium alongside a raw honor value criterium and maintain their r14 system for people who prefer that style of play. I digress.
I can go into greater detail with how time consuming AQ40 and Naxx1.0 were (12+ hours daily to farm consumables for a night's raiding?). I can go into great detail with how *expertly* tuned Sunwell was (exception of shaman chain heal).
The thing that is undeniable inside of WoW is the following: 1. the game revolves around endgame. There is no game left during the grind, none of it is meaningful. Blizzard has gone through great lengths to minimize time spent 'in the middle' (xp gains, level xp redux, BoA items with even more increased xp gains...). 2. the casual gamer, since WoW's inception, has claimed an increasing amount of real estate within the endgame. Based on 1. and 2., I'm not sure the casual was always in mind. I'd say, rather, Blizzard started well, and went increasingly casual. Inventing more and more ways to cater to the casual. So much so, even casuals have been witnessed expressing a lack of interest due to no real tangible challenges. Give a man a fish too many times, and he expects to be fed.
Incidentally, to set the record straight, I am no fanboi of blizzard though perhaps to a certain extent I could be considered a fan even though I don't seriously play WoW. I do think they made a good game and it's one of the best put together games around.
Ironically as it may seem, despite my critiques on them, I'm a *huge* Blizzard fan. They started as an extremely small company that built games for gamers. They have solid releases at every turn they take. When they release something, it's always above industry average for that given genre and time.
<Interview snipets>
Short of sounding like I'm going back on my stance or previous statements, let's state the obvious. As a company, I can manufacture quotes, skew statistics in whatever manner best fits the goal I seek to achieve. If I want to take things in a certain direction, I can come up with 'evidence' that promotes it's what the masses want. Not to insult intelligence, but this is common stock-trading practice.
The snipets provided do provide a fresh take since they are ver batim. The only way for a gamer to understand which words are just words, and which words are actually being acted on... is by triangulation. Letting the actions of devs do the talking, and interpretting those actions over time to determine where the real goal of devs lies.
Let me develop a bit more on the Naxx1.0 thought of earlier. This example didn't fit with 2 of their statements. Blizzard has gotten so caught up with their product they have failed to deliver on all fronts they try to juggle.
Naxxramas 1.0 was a thing of beauty. Anyone who played it knew it. Hell, going back to the zone at 70 weekly late on Friday nights was a blast. The zone was very well designed. The content was both refreshing and challenging (even at 70), that's just how amazing the zone was. Blizzard wanted to make a game that focused on players enjoying content? Explain why BC was released so hot on the heels of patch 1.11? Blizzard wasn't focused on their game. Blizzard was focused on the market. What other, *possible*, explanation is there? Please, if I'm wrongfully coming to my conclusion on this, I really, really need to be corrected.
Naxxramas again. Blizzard made at least 2 statements that I can think of where their public relations staff expressed that Blizzard had no problem obsoleting old content, and making new content for all to enjoy. Fast-forward to WoLK and we see recycled content. It's hard to lend credibility to anything Blizzard says with regards to WoW. Are they letting content become obsolete or are they redo'ing Ony/Deadmines etc? Are they focused on the game or the market? Watching them hype up and release content patches that correspond to AoC, WAR, etc is a typical marketing scheme that is commonplace in the entertainment industry.
When I look at how all the dice line up, objectively as I possibly can, I can't give Blizzard the benefit of the doubt. With them not having the benefit of the doubt, the pieces fall into place such that the only conclusions I can come to are that Blizzard was, quite simply, for better or for worse, a victim of their own success. They sold out.
There are players who do insist that WoW is indeed difficult to master. I don't know if there is any truth to this as I've never played beyond a low lvl 36 over the years I've played WoW. But from my seat in the bleachers it seems that they want the game accessilble to all types of players and will continue to allow casuals a place alongside their more experienced players.
There only difficulty in the game of WoW is coordination, but this concept differs not in the slightest from any other game under the sun. There are highly technical aspects that appeal to me such as the 2 tier balancing system that FrostFire mages would use: underbelly of Scorch and Living Bomb, with an active involvement of Frostfire with juggling insta-pyros. PvE rotations and PvP play has been twitch on most levels. I digress again.
The thing about WoW is it's highly, highly imbalanced. Classes are a wreck for PvP. The arena system exposes and compounds these imbalances. PvE isn't even balanced either. With a month's worth of gear, you can completely outgear raid bosses that were nigh impossible a month prior. Within the same content patch mind you. And the rate at which gear scales is beyond comprehension to me.
Where you and I vary in experience might very well explain our differences in opinion. I hail from a highly competitive background in life, which is exactly how I approach the games I play. Not that casual vs. hardcore is any more right or wrong the one from the other mind you, but it's the lawyer in the courtroom arguing over law principle because of his attunement on the subject vs. the law abiding citizen who will never know the better of a law that won't influence his sphere of existence.
Edit: Format. Sadly, can't fix the length.
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc. We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be. So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away. - MMO_Doubter
I think that it's not always about what an MMORPG "should" be, because they get bigger and better all the time. There's WOW of course, and then there's AION etc.
Interesting development on the MMORPG genre comes from stuff like, *shameless plug incoming* browser MMORPGs like Heroes of Gaia. Unlike WOW or AION, these browser MMORPGs don't require installs or heavy downloads, and they are played as if you were streaming a game. This is the basis of the popularity of games like those on Facebook, and now browser F2P MMORPGs are taking advantage of no-downloads, no-subscription and play-anywhere model while offering better graphics than traditional Flash games.
Just look at this:
Screenshot from Heroes of Gaia.
NOTHING that looks like this existed a year ago, or even more recently than that. Browser MMORPGs are only going to get bigger, better and more convenient that all the other MMORPGs out there. Look at Mafia Wars on Facebook with 62 million players a month. Combine ease of use with great gaming, and you have something that all gamers can play while at work, or out away from their desktop.
The Endless Forest. It's the game you all have wanted to play, but didn't know about. It's not a grindfest, it's not all about phat lewtz, it's not about who has the biggest e-peen... It's about... human faced deer, running around in the woods. You all bitch about wanting different... well, there you go. Put up or shut up.
different and empty, lacks content.
now please remove yourself from my awesome presence or post something intelligent :P ( teens i train take a chuckle to that phrase hehe)
I'm sorry. I must have misunderstood what you meant by "going it "right", and "are going what it takes to succeed." When you're "training your teens" about intelligent posting, don't forget about grammar!
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
I would also add Ryzom to that list for their crafting and skill based system.
I would also like to encourage more developers to allow open UIs for greater cusomization of the game experience and to create a greater sense of "ownership"
Comments
LOL .. you have a STRANGE interpretation of selling out. Of course blizzard should focusing on their subs. What do you them to focus on? And i LIKE the fact that i am seeing more content.
LOL .. you have a STRANGE interpretation of selling out. Of course blizzard should focusing on their subs. What do you them to focus on? And i LIKE the fact that i am seeing more content.
They didn't focus on subs. They focused on milking those subs.
not necessarely, by "right" i mean that they are increasing in popularity and/or are still on the up curve of their life and/or the game mechanics are well done/made and/or the goods rightout outweight the bads.
looking at the posts i cant really comment on fallen earth simply because i have not even seen what this game is like, hell, i have not even visited their website. but from what i read, it does look like an honorable mention. though i would wait and see how the patches and fixes and evolution of the game goes before i pass judgement on the game
the reason why i say these are the games that are doing it right because when you play it you dont feel like youve played that before. "this is the same sh*t all over"
honestly the NGE is a copy of WoW with a starwars skin. that type of games are doing it "wrong"
dare to be different and work hard and be proud and you will succeed.
same shit different skin = doing ti wrong
@ Sovrath
That's not selling out at all.
It couldn't be more true. I understand it might not sit well with many fanbois due to the negative connotation that the term carries, but it doesn't change where they started with their product, some explicit public relations statements that they made, and where their product currently lies.
Selling out has nothing to do with doing things that others don't like or believe in.
Absolutely. On this we agree 100%. You cannot sell out if you stay true to yourself. Selling out is not a direct result of success.
Selling out means that a person, company, entity starts out with one mission but due to the desire to obtain acknowledment, some reward or benefit, etc from another group or entity then change their initial mission.
You can't be a sell out if you started with a mission and ended with that mission.
Blizzard didn't start out wanting to be a 13million subscriber mammoth. Blizzard started out making a game that took the Warcraft universe to its next stage, inviting its fans to experience the universe through the eyes of 1 character. This took on the form of evolution when you look at the RTS game that was WCII becoming an RTS with hero class game that was WCIII then the hero class only game that is WoW.
Please don't attempt to stand by the statement that Blizzard set out to be successful with subscription counts. They started out making a good game, and rode their success. In the process they figured they would change their focus from making truly 'epic' content that followed and further developed their WC storyline and instead appeal to the masses.
If I decide, because I like it and enjoy the music, that I want to be the greatest pop star the world has ever known and I achieve that goal, that is not a selling out.
It all lies with how you go about it. If i make music that caters to fans, rather than the music that bleeds through my creative mind, then I absolutely am a sell out. I won't entertain discussing an off-shoot topic of the means and the end being the same thing- that's absurd.
If I decide that I want to be the greatest pop star the world has ever known, but I get a lot of flack from people because my music has no great depth or musical complexity and is essentially just "fun" airplay music and I change to appease those people, even though it's not what I want, then I would be a sell out.
I've known several people who went the artsy intellectual route even though they desired to be more mainstream. I consider these people sell outs.
They sold (read changed) there initial desires becaues of what others felt they should be doing.
Wait, are we agreeing that Blizzard sold out? You've practically voiced the exact thing that Blizzard did. Blizzard felt that the casuals should have everything, and gave it to them. R14 and Naxx v1.0 were epic (I don't agree with the 12hr days in farming alone that these systems required) and shifted from making a good game that people could enjoy, to a game that anyone can follow.
I have more and greater respect for someone who knows what they like and enjoy and they do it regardless of what others think over people who allow others to dictate what they should be doing because it doesn't have the depth or complexity that one "thinks" they should have.
I agree wholeheartedly. Everyone in life should take in criticism and make it constructive without bending because of pressure.
Also, read Ruyn's post. He nails it in 10 words or less.
Edit: Apparently it was 11 words. My bad =P
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc.
We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be.
So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away.
- MMO_Doubter
The only game in my book that has the potential to succeed (as in features not only related to dull combat) are Dawntide and Mortal Online. Wurm Online got it right as well
I fully agree that LotrO, EvE and WoW are the MMOs who are doing it "right"! Theese are the best, high quality products on the market and have healthy playerbases.
Honorable mentions to DDO who really turned itself around with Eberron Unlimited and now are up there with the big guyes. Its also very different from the rest of the fantasy MMOs and put bigg focus on grouping and depths which we dont see very often. Combat, AI and dungeons are way ahead of the rest of the industry.
Fallen earth is a solid game now but it really lacks the polish to be considered a high quality MMO (in my opinion). The combat and the mobs need ALOT of polish before its anywhere close to "right".
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
The Endless Forest.
It's the game you all have wanted to play, but didn't know about.
It's not a grindfest, it's not all about phat lewtz, it's not about who has the biggest e-peen...
It's about... human faced deer, running around in the woods.
You all bitch about wanting different... well, there you go. Put up or shut up.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
different and empty, lacks content.
now please remove yourself from my awesome presence or post something intelligent :P ( teens i train take a chuckle to that phrase hehe)
I can't comment on how blizzard went in and changed their content as I don't have first hand knowledge of this.
However, from what I know, Blizzard wanted to make an online game that didnt', have what they considered, all the nonsense that other online games had at the time.
they wanted to make an mmo that had a lower barrier of entry and I believe that is exactly what they did. Toward that point, anything they do to maintain that lower barrier of entry still seems in line with what they desired to do.
All this added raid content seems to me to be their acknowledgement that there were players who wanted to play their game but who were going to blaze through their own content so they added the end game raid game.
I never said they set out to be successful with subcription counts so I take issue with your suggesting it.
As far as the analogy about making music that caters toward fans, there is no reason that that can't be a viable method of creating that music. Keep in mind that John Cage came up with a system utilizing chance and then indeterrminancy in order to create some pieces. Is throwing the I Ching sticks any better than knowing your fan base, knowing what they love about your music and giving them more?
If one loves the genre that one is creating for and has fans who have input I don't believe that it's selling out if you love giving to those fans what they desire provided that it doesn't fall against what you believe in. I use the analogy because it's exactly what I think Blizzard did, to create a game based on the world of warcraft rts, to take out some of the long drawn out gameplay, to firm up the gameplay and to give the average person a game that they can experience.
So I don't see where they have gone off track.
It seems to me that they always had a more casual player in mind.
However, i don't have access to any of the orginal world of warcraft interviews so perhaps you have information that indicates differently?
as a footnote I think there are many companies who probably think of their playerbase when considering new content. I know that in LOTRO and DDO they look toward catering to their players as much as possible.
So given the vast amount of players who play WoW it would seem that they have a vast playerbase to think about when making these chages. If those changes are in line with their overall game philosophy and it makes the game easier then so be it.
Incidentally, to set the record straight, I am no fanboi of blizzard though perhaps to a certain extent I could be considered a fan even though I don't seriously play WoW. I do think they made a good game and it's one of the best put together games around.
And it does indeed cater to all the casual players who I know.
edit: actually I don't think I'm far off as to their wanting to cater to casuals:
IGNPC: Did tackling an MMORPG title for the first time alter your original plans for the title? Was the final product different from the original intent -- perhaps for the better -- or is WoW the achievement of that initial idea?
Jeffrey Kaplan: I think World of Warcraft has captured much of our original vision for the game. Like all Blizzard games, we wanted something that was easy to learn, yet hard to master. The demographics of our player base are proof that we succeeded in accomplishing this goal. We have some very dedicated, skilled, hardcore MMO veterans logging in nightly. Yet at the same time, there are thousands of players who have never played an MMO who are playing right there alongside of the vets.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/586/586256p1.html
Though to be fair they also mention in another early interview that the experienced players are the "Vanguard to promoting the game to their friends"
Jonric: From early on, you've stated that one of your goals is to have a simple learning curve, with the game being easy to learn but difficult to master. What are the keys to making this happen and the main hurdles to be overcome? And how satisfied are you with your progress?
Mark Kern: First and foremost, we try to make the game deep and rich enough to appeal to experienced gamers because they are the vanguard for promoting the game to their friends, who may be more casual gamers. Now, the things we do for casual gamers are also of benefit to the hardcore. Nobody wants to have an interface that is cryptic or gets in your way as you play the game, and we feel that players want good information about how spells, abilities and classes work without having to go to a website to figure it out. We also wanted to make sure that we brought the same ease of use and transparency to the game controls and mechanisms that our other games enjoy, to the World of Warcraft. Additionally, we wanted to make sure that players had a clear sense of what to do in the world, with lots of quest-driven content and cool locations in the world that reward exploration.
As for how satisfied we are with the results, we often look to how team members and their families are reacting to the game right now. We all play from home, and people were playing so much that we eventually had to ask them to limit the hours of they spent playing the alpha. We even have family members (casual gamers) who play from home, and who sometimes log more hours than the developers.
http://rpgvault.ign.com/articles/432/432771p1.html
Jonric: What will make World of Warcraft appealing for the current online gamer community, and also for new online players?
Bill Roper: The core idea behind World of Warcraft is to create a game that is easy to get into and simple to play so we can stay focused on creating a rich and complex world that players can help evolve over the course of time. We want this game to be an ongoing experience for players of all abilities and levels of experience, regardless of whether they have 30 minutes or 30 hours to dedicate to a single play session.
http://rpgvault.ign.com/articles/359/359998p3.html
There are players who do insist that WoW is indeed difficult to master. I don't know if there is any truth to this as I've never played beyond a low lvl 36 over the years I've played WoW. But from my seat in the bleachers it seems that they want the game accessilble to all types of players and will continue to allow casuals a place alongside their more experienced players.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
LotR has some good PvP too, my favourite MMO to date.
Fallen Earth without a Doubt ..
WoW
Lotro
Eve
EQ 2
Fallen Earth
EVE
LOTRO
Maybe Vanguard is sneaking back in (Yea I know, flame away)
*Edit
Yeesh rereading my list I am def burned out on the themepark style MMO
Out of all the three games mentioned, I have to admit that I've only played one of them: EVE Online. I would have to agree with your assessment of EVE, and of how it is of the games that is really doing it right. I really aplaud the way they've gone the classless route; there so much you can actually do in that game that it literally boggles the mind. It's so different from some of the other MMOs that I've played, because in those games, you have to follow a set path with little or no deviation, while EVE actually gives you the chance to chose a career.
That being said, there's also one other game that I would like to add to the list, and that is Guild Wars. I love the fact that the game is extremely polished as well, and the scenery is beautiful even when not maxed. Moreover, the battle system is also the most fun I've come across so far, and it's the most balanced game out at the moment. It's payment model is also revolutionary, because it bypassed the traditional subscription and cash shop route, instead chosing the B2P route, which, while more risky, did pay off in the end.
Main characters:
Jinn Gone Quiet (Guild Wars)
Princess Pudding (Guild Wars)
I would ad EQ2 to the list. It's polished and works well with plenty of content.
Also, City of Heroes. It's a FUN game, and has been successful.
I haven't played Aion, and reviews on it are kinda mixed. Needs more time with Western servers up to be sure, but seems like a polished game that works and will maintain a good subscriber base.
I would not ad any "free" to play games to the list. I think that's doing it wrong, and I don't play those.
Everquest 2
Shame sony doesn't advertise it.
Everyone should sign up to EQ2
Especially splitpaw server if your in EU.
WOW OWNS !
EvE is not for all gamers, you need more brain to play it and that sucks!
LOL! XD
WoW was a simplified Everquest version with much faster lvling, much easier to get into in a way that attracts players that never had played a mmorgp before. Problem is that that its "userfriendliness" makes it shallow. It still attracts a lot players, you still see it in game stores, but it no longer makes players continue to play for years like it did in the beginning, now it is a matters of months before they quit.
Last time I checked into my old realm using a trial key the realm was almost fulI, I still could see some of the old guilds left, but I didn´t recognise any oldtimers at all in my old guild or any other guilds.
And like the Op I took not long before I was reminded why I quitted the game and this time there was no friends, rivals or "enemies" left in the game. And it isn´t just WoW I got bored any game that tries to be like WoW but just better, like Lotr isn´t my cup of tea anymore.
But big complex games "sandbox" games is keeping my intrests. EvE online being the prime example, its population isn´t growing because it attracts much players any given month, it grows because players are not leaving and playing for many years once they got past the treeshold and understand the game.
Icarus looked at EvE when they made Fallen Earth and so far they have done a lots of things right and I really enjoy it. I certainly hope that they are not going to do a "NGE" ie dumbing it down, that would be the only thing that could kill the game for me. And the potential of the game is unmatched, the map now only covers a small part of US, there is an entire world that it can expand to in the future. ;-)
@ Sovrath
First and foremost I feel the need to commend you on your ability to partake in open, detailed, even heated discussion while keeping focused on the topic. I feel this should be underlined and publicly noted, in hopes of more forum users taking this as the example to follow, compared to trolls and flamers. So for that, thank you.
Is it objectively possible for me, as a gamer, to truthfully state that Blizzard sold out after the release of WoW and seeing how much it took off? No. I don't think anyone can. What I can do is interpret statements that were made by Blizzard's staff, reference key points in WoW's history, and changes in direction that had been made- often directly counter to statements by Blizzard.
they wanted to make an mmo that had a lower barrier of entry and I believe that is exactly what they did. Toward that point, anything they do to maintain that lower barrier of entry still seems in line with what they desired to do.
I don't think this statement is false. No one can say Blizzard wanted only diehards to be able to purchase and play their game. Clearly Blizzard wanted fans to enter the 'world' of 'warcraft' through their own eyes.
All this added raid content seems to me to be their acknowledgement that there were players who wanted to play their game but who were going to blaze through their own content so they added the end game raid game.
End game raids are not a concept that was foreign to diehard MMO'ers. EQ did a wonderful job with making raids risky, as a sidenote.
I never said they set out to be successful with subcription counts so I take issue with your suggesting it.
Every content patch or expansion release has been coordinated to run within the same fiscal quarter that another game from another studio was set to release. The games, of course, were the noteworthy games that recieved much hype from then-current WoW subscribers. The most, most noteworthy of these releases was TBC fast on the heels of Naxx1.0. For anyone who knows the history, I sincerely feel that the following statement is true: Blizzard was more worried about keeping people interested in their game than allowing people to enjoy the designs and concepts the game devs provided. This event in WoW's history, to me, is what sets the tone for many more changes that occured as time moved on.
As far as the analogy about making music that caters toward fans, there is no reason that that can't be a viable method of creating that music. Keep in mind that John Cage came up with a system utilizing chance and then indeterrminancy in order to create some pieces. Is throwing the I Ching sticks any better than knowing your fan base, knowing what they love about your music and giving them more?
If you create music *to* cater to fans, and your means is your end, then you can't be a sellout. You're just a pawn. I don't feel this example warrants discussion as it's rather.. shallow.
I'm unfamiliar with John Cage's works. I'll make a personal point to research him and his works.
If one loves the genre that one is creating for and has fans who have input I don't believe that it's selling out if you love giving to those fans what they desire provided that it doesn't fall against what you believe in. I use the analogy because it's exactly what I think Blizzard did, to create a game based on the world of warcraft rts, to take out some of the long drawn out gameplay, to firm up the gameplay and to give the average person a game that they can experience.
When deciding a way forward, it should be done with personal interests in mind. The place of feedback, in the case of a public enterprise, should be taken into consideration when *implimenting* the way forward, not *deciding* the way forward.
It seems to me that they always had a more casual player in mind.
WoW used to be rewarding. It used to have goals that were legitimately difficult to achieve, much less impossible without proper planning, preperation, leadership, coordination- you name it. Some of the systems in play were just too much- I am a hardliner but I'm reasonable.
To grind rank14 you needed to be the top 1% (or was it .1%? regardless, the point is the same) of total honor that was gained on your server for that week. In order to achieve this, you simply needed to play long hours, killing every player you met. Since it was a sum system rather than a ratio system, it rewarded time invested, not skill. Most r14 players got their rank by account sharing, and them playing their account with their friends in 'shifts'. This was scrapped and an arena system implimented that worked off of ratio values, thus presenting a more skill-based reward approach. There are flaws with the arena system, which I won't go into here. Another fix, which I'm appalled Blizzard didn't incorporate was not only bringing in small-scale PvP (arena) but simply apply ratio-based criterium alongside a raw honor value criterium and maintain their r14 system for people who prefer that style of play. I digress.
I can go into greater detail with how time consuming AQ40 and Naxx1.0 were (12+ hours daily to farm consumables for a night's raiding?). I can go into great detail with how *expertly* tuned Sunwell was (exception of shaman chain heal).
The thing that is undeniable inside of WoW is the following: 1. the game revolves around endgame. There is no game left during the grind, none of it is meaningful. Blizzard has gone through great lengths to minimize time spent 'in the middle' (xp gains, level xp redux, BoA items with even more increased xp gains...). 2. the casual gamer, since WoW's inception, has claimed an increasing amount of real estate within the endgame. Based on 1. and 2., I'm not sure the casual was always in mind. I'd say, rather, Blizzard started well, and went increasingly casual. Inventing more and more ways to cater to the casual. So much so, even casuals have been witnessed expressing a lack of interest due to no real tangible challenges. Give a man a fish too many times, and he expects to be fed.
Incidentally, to set the record straight, I am no fanboi of blizzard though perhaps to a certain extent I could be considered a fan even though I don't seriously play WoW. I do think they made a good game and it's one of the best put together games around.
Ironically as it may seem, despite my critiques on them, I'm a *huge* Blizzard fan. They started as an extremely small company that built games for gamers. They have solid releases at every turn they take. When they release something, it's always above industry average for that given genre and time.
<Interview snipets>
Short of sounding like I'm going back on my stance or previous statements, let's state the obvious. As a company, I can manufacture quotes, skew statistics in whatever manner best fits the goal I seek to achieve. If I want to take things in a certain direction, I can come up with 'evidence' that promotes it's what the masses want. Not to insult intelligence, but this is common stock-trading practice.
The snipets provided do provide a fresh take since they are ver batim. The only way for a gamer to understand which words are just words, and which words are actually being acted on... is by triangulation. Letting the actions of devs do the talking, and interpretting those actions over time to determine where the real goal of devs lies.
Let me develop a bit more on the Naxx1.0 thought of earlier. This example didn't fit with 2 of their statements. Blizzard has gotten so caught up with their product they have failed to deliver on all fronts they try to juggle.
Naxxramas 1.0 was a thing of beauty. Anyone who played it knew it. Hell, going back to the zone at 70 weekly late on Friday nights was a blast. The zone was very well designed. The content was both refreshing and challenging (even at 70), that's just how amazing the zone was. Blizzard wanted to make a game that focused on players enjoying content? Explain why BC was released so hot on the heels of patch 1.11? Blizzard wasn't focused on their game. Blizzard was focused on the market. What other, *possible*, explanation is there? Please, if I'm wrongfully coming to my conclusion on this, I really, really need to be corrected.
Naxxramas again. Blizzard made at least 2 statements that I can think of where their public relations staff expressed that Blizzard had no problem obsoleting old content, and making new content for all to enjoy. Fast-forward to WoLK and we see recycled content. It's hard to lend credibility to anything Blizzard says with regards to WoW. Are they letting content become obsolete or are they redo'ing Ony/Deadmines etc? Are they focused on the game or the market? Watching them hype up and release content patches that correspond to AoC, WAR, etc is a typical marketing scheme that is commonplace in the entertainment industry.
When I look at how all the dice line up, objectively as I possibly can, I can't give Blizzard the benefit of the doubt. With them not having the benefit of the doubt, the pieces fall into place such that the only conclusions I can come to are that Blizzard was, quite simply, for better or for worse, a victim of their own success. They sold out.
There are players who do insist that WoW is indeed difficult to master. I don't know if there is any truth to this as I've never played beyond a low lvl 36 over the years I've played WoW. But from my seat in the bleachers it seems that they want the game accessilble to all types of players and will continue to allow casuals a place alongside their more experienced players.
There only difficulty in the game of WoW is coordination, but this concept differs not in the slightest from any other game under the sun. There are highly technical aspects that appeal to me such as the 2 tier balancing system that FrostFire mages would use: underbelly of Scorch and Living Bomb, with an active involvement of Frostfire with juggling insta-pyros. PvE rotations and PvP play has been twitch on most levels. I digress again.
The thing about WoW is it's highly, highly imbalanced. Classes are a wreck for PvP. The arena system exposes and compounds these imbalances. PvE isn't even balanced either. With a month's worth of gear, you can completely outgear raid bosses that were nigh impossible a month prior. Within the same content patch mind you. And the rate at which gear scales is beyond comprehension to me.
Where you and I vary in experience might very well explain our differences in opinion. I hail from a highly competitive background in life, which is exactly how I approach the games I play. Not that casual vs. hardcore is any more right or wrong the one from the other mind you, but it's the lawyer in the courtroom arguing over law principle because of his attunement on the subject vs. the law abiding citizen who will never know the better of a law that won't influence his sphere of existence.
Edit: Format. Sadly, can't fix the length.
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc.
We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be.
So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away.
- MMO_Doubter
I think that it's not always about what an MMORPG "should" be, because they get bigger and better all the time. There's WOW of course, and then there's AION etc.
Interesting development on the MMORPG genre comes from stuff like, *shameless plug incoming* browser MMORPGs like Heroes of Gaia. Unlike WOW or AION, these browser MMORPGs don't require installs or heavy downloads, and they are played as if you were streaming a game. This is the basis of the popularity of games like those on Facebook, and now browser F2P MMORPGs are taking advantage of no-downloads, no-subscription and play-anywhere model while offering better graphics than traditional Flash games.
Just look at this:
Screenshot from Heroes of Gaia.
NOTHING that looks like this existed a year ago, or even more recently than that. Browser MMORPGs are only going to get bigger, better and more convenient that all the other MMORPGs out there. Look at Mafia Wars on Facebook with 62 million players a month. Combine ease of use with great gaming, and you have something that all gamers can play while at work, or out away from their desktop.
different and empty, lacks content.
now please remove yourself from my awesome presence or post something intelligent :P ( teens i train take a chuckle to that phrase hehe)
I'm sorry. I must have misunderstood what you meant by "going it "right", and "are going what it takes to succeed." When you're "training your teens" about intelligent posting, don't forget about grammar!
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
I agree, and awesome avatar, btw! Master of Magic Merlin ftw!
A witty saying proves nothing.
-Voltaire
I would also add Ryzom to that list for their crafting and skill based system.
I would also like to encourage more developers to allow open UIs for greater cusomization of the game experience and to create a greater sense of "ownership"
A witty saying proves nothing.
-Voltaire