A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
There'll always be a niche spread of games like this, but the reason most aren't like this is that the majority of players are looking for the core of what makes games fun (interesting decisionmaking) and hiding those interesting decisions behind a lot of timesinks (like travel or waiting for a boss to respawn) means that less of the player's time is spent doing what they want to do.
If we're talking about a game where there are interesting decisions still, during the travel or whatnot, then that's a lot more viable an idea.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
ughh i can't stand how traveling is considered a timesink..that's how half of anything fun used to be found. You'd be going from continent A to continent B but on the way you'd find a cool island to chill/exp/quest on. Core gameplay is definatley a big contributor to fun but if there's no immersion in the game it's really kind of a waste imo.
The casuals complain they do not have enough time in the day to accomplish anything in their games and fast travel makes it easier for them instead of having to waste 30 min riding on a mount. The casuals whine and the mmo gods listen, thats how it works.
Well most/all of my RPG's have fast travel, technically they are all instanced, and death penalty is gone due to the saving function, so that is the demographic that they are targeting, the RPG players. The RPG players don't realize it's killing mmorpg's with the stagnant RPG mechanics, it's just the latest and greatest flavor of RPG's at cost to mmorpg's, maybe until they get bored and move on.
ughh i can't stand how traveling is considered a timesink..that's how half of anything fun used to be found. You'd be going from continent A to continent B but on the way you'd find a cool island to chill/exp/quest on. Core gameplay is definatley a big contributor to fun but if there's no immersion in the game it's really kind of a waste imo.
I really enjoy exploration, traveling from one area to a new area to explore and see and do cool stuff and experiene rich story and content etc. etc.
But when I have to log off quick cause something came up IRL, I like having a hearthstone.
And when I need to head back to a major city to train skills, I'd rather it not take me an hour so I can get back to exploring the cool new area I just found.
Not having to spend all my time running back and forth.
WoW really does do things quite well.
You have to run to a new place initially. Win.
Once you are there, you have fast travel options (not instant) to get you back to important places faster, but not instantly. Win.
You have very limited instant travel only usable every so often. Win.
true at some point it was a time sink!but hell thats was part of the fun do you remember being in fellwood or other part of the wow world to do an errant and unable to find it!some felt it was a time sink and they are probably right but it made it fun you explored while chatting away and men i bet you recall how you felt when you finally found how to trigger the chain of event to go in endgame(vanilla era)back then you never knew what could happen there was no such thing as arena.so pvp was done else where as mutch in the world as in other instanced zone lol!one thing is sure you were rarelly bored ,and that was on worst of days.on good days you never knew where you might end up might end up kiting a world boss to a opposing city just for the trip of it or you might try to kill world raid dragon north of org knowing full well :you were so close to the horde they might try to stop you at any given moment but that what made the hunt so fun!
How is it killing mmorpgs? The ammount of people playing various mmos is probably at an all time high.
They are not mmorpg's at their core, they are repackaged RPG's, which kill mmorpg dynamics. There are more players, mainly with WoW, because it has RPG mechanics that Blizzard waved the carrot from to their devout RPG and RTS player base. Other games are dieing because they took up the RPG mentality thinking they could draw the RPG players from the Blizzards player base. Then there are other companies that probably just got tired of RPG players pirating their games, so now they make quasi-mmorpg’s to save their business.
Well unfortunately, there aren't many newer MMORPG's that fit your criteria these days..MMO's have become to easy and shallow the last 5 years.. The mmorpg community has shifted to the fps/mmo hybrid type of gamers who don't enjoy working hard to achieve their goals.. They want a quick fix rollercoaster ride as opposed to a epic sandbox experience..
Games like Everquest, EQ2, DAOC, and Vanguard are the only fantasy based MMORPG's left that fit your gaming preference...
The Genre has changed, unfortunately.. And with it the types of gamers as well..
EQ2, and DAoC are both riddled with instances and instant travel, (hence why people don't play DAoC anymore)
can take off eq2 from the last 3 expansions, think its awhile ago you played, last 2 being full time instance grinders....
Same way you can dumb down a movie. Cheap action flick that looks pretty, and pulls in as many people as possible by having a shallow plot and nice flashes, and then is quickly forgotten after a quick cash grab.
But i am sure people have fun in those kind of movies.If every movie was serious and full of deep meaning how boring movies will be? there is a thing called variety in life. You might not agree with other peoples taste but it in no way makes you better or smarter then anyone else.
Also movies are supposed to offer escape from worries and tensions of daily life. Whats wrong with entering a theatre and switching off your brain for mindless fun? does it makes a person dumb in anyway? sorry but i strongly disagree with this kind of logic. I enjoy Godfather as much as Scary Movie.
I have "fun" when I play mini-golf.
I really have fun when I go to the lake and spend 2 weeks on my Chris Craft uninterrupted.
When I play an FPS I have fun. It's mostly mindless, but it can be loads of fun for short bursts of time.
When I play a deep complex MMORPG that takes up many months of my time, I am immersed as well as extremely entertained and mentally stimulated.
I like the cheap thrills of an FPS/RTS, but I expect more from a game that requires a monthly fee like an MMORPG. I want to invest more in a game like this.
I left WOW shortly after BG was introduced. It was plain to see what direction the game was headed so I bailed before I became too attached.
There's nothing wrong with enjoying some cheap thrills. I enjoy a fluff movie as much as the next person, but there comes a time when I'm looking for a more mature and mentally stimulating level of entertainment. I think what many people are trying to say is that we expect more out of this genre. There is already a plethora of other genres out there waiting to accomodate other tastes.
If you personally are satisfied with cheap thrills more power to ya! But please don't expect the rest of us to settle just because you have.
Funny because its quite the opposite. People who are looking for some deeper stimualting fun are ridiculing those who just want to have fun deeper or not. Seriously you should read before you hit the reply button. Once again, the type of videogame you play or movies you watch does not make you smarter or better then anyone else. Thats what most of the posters here are trying to prove. And thats the kind of mentality i am against.
In WoW, instances and the solo focus prevent you from meeting people. Joining a guild is almost mandatory if you want to actually talk to ANYONE.
All the things you mentioned, the raids, the guild tools, were there in much larger ways in DAoC.
DAoC alliance system, hundred man + raids, and the RvR brought everyone together.
There were several websites devoted to DAoC communities, and they're just as valid as WoW.
Point is, DAoC promoted and rewarded socializing, WoW does not. Instances do not.
I can't even count how many times I've met people in dungeons/instances or raids that I end up talking to, playing with again, maybe joining up with for a pug or as an alternate in a guild run, or inviting them to join my guild or vice versa.
Your opinion is biased from your own experiences and beliefs.
That's fine, everyones is.
However this doesn't make you right and me wrong, nor does it make me right and your wrong. Both have merit. Both are opinion. Both are backed up by experiences and facts.
So... now what?
You said yourself that raids are done with guild mates, and that instances are usually done with pre arranged groups, because you can't meet anyone once you're inside. I'm not denying that its possible to meet people, I'm just saying non instanced dungeons, and games that encourage/reward grouping, allow you greater chance to make friends. But I appreciate your level headedness, as it is mostly a matter of opinion.
A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
Where did you find those numbers at? I know its not reliable but MMODATA says DAoC is less than 50k and EQ is just over 150k... Granted it was sometime last year when they had those numbers.
A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
Aion has like 4 million last I heard.
.
Runequest has a bunch.
.
[Mod Edit]
If we get into the Eastern market, almost all their games completely eclipse the populations in western markets, and even did back in the oldschool days, Lineage 1 and 2 were HUGE, despite being back when "only 100k played".
A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
Where did you find those numbers at? I know its not reliable but MMODATA says DAoC is less than 50k and EQ is just over 150k... Granted it was sometime last year when they had those numbers.
My mistake, at its height, DAoC had 300k, and EQ had 550k.
A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
Aion has like 4 million last I heard.
.
Runequest has a bunch.
.
[Mod Edit]
If we get into the Eastern market, almost all their games completely eclipse the populations in western markets, and even did back in the oldschool days, Lineage 1 and 2 were HUGE, despite being back when "only 100k played".
You still didn't disprove what I said.
There is nothing to disprove because MMORPGS are way more main stream now compared to olden days. You can not compare current numbers of players interested in MMOS to the old school population playing EQ and DAOC.
Not saying you are wrong but numbers of players have certainly gone up.
So you would like a game where high level guilds camp the raid bosses?
Hey i love a good walk though a game, but after a while you just want to get stuff done......having instant travel or zones doesnt prevent you from taking the long way. Zones that are not run on instances ( some do and are tied together seamlessly in various games) need to have less detail. Oh and have fun at launch when you have to either skip content or fight with the hordes of players, if only they had a way to instance another zone and relieve the congestion, reducing players drawn and improving everyones preformance....
Nobody wants a single player game with a chat room, but going to the complete opposite extreme is stupid...all for what....for people who get the urge to spend a few hours running around a seamless world?
Most games do a decent job of blending an open world and instancing.
No but one day youll get your 100% non instanced mmorpg...first youll all bitch about preformance issues and ability to complete quests due to congestion....then youll end up quitting when the top guilds are always camping the endgame content..
ya they have beaten wow a while ago but those market dont count success the way we do in america
here you got 11 million player your company is happy there it doesnt work that way they could have 30 million player but the first thing corp ask how mutch we made,he they dont ask that question if they have lot of player they made lot of money ,there they could have 100 million player but if only 10 baught product its a fiascvo for the corp!so having the total number of player in those market is a nightmare when the day is sunny ,if its raining good luck lol!most have stopped trying decades ago!
A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
Aion has like 4 million last I heard.
.
Runequest has a bunch.
.
[Mod Edit]
If we get into the Eastern market, almost all their games completely eclipse the populations in western markets, and even did back in the oldschool days, Lineage 1 and 2 were HUGE, despite being back when "only 100k played".
You still didn't disprove what I said.
There is nothing to disprove because MMORPGS are way more main stream now compared to olden days. You can not compare current numbers of players interested in MMOS to the old school population playing EQ and DAOC.
Not saying you are wrong but numbers of players have certainly gone up.
I'm not saying they haven't, I was merely pointing out how foolish the person who said there was only 100k players across the entire genre was being. And I am also saying that most old MMOs were FAR FAR more successful than modern ones, and made a lot more money.
So you would like a game where high level guilds camp the raid bosses?
Most games do a decent job of blending an open world and instancing.
No but one day youll get your 100% non instanced mmorpg...first youll all bitch about preformance issues and ability to complete quests due to congestion....then youll end up quitting when the top guilds are always camping the endgame content..
Oh sweet mother of god can we stop with the "lololol camping raid bosses taking turns to finish quests lololol", because that crap didn't happen in the vast majority of seamless MMORPGs. Badly designed one trick pony games run into that problem, good MMOs don't. Its a stupid straw man argument.
And we HAVE had 100% non instanced MMOs, both new and old, and I've never had a problem completing quests or with performance. If computers in freaking 1999 could do it, they sure as hell can do it now.
Maybe some genius should come up with some useful end game content so that everyone isn't camping a raid dungeon, oh wait.. Dark Age of Camelot did that
Maybe first should be determined what is "old school", what is "sandbox" ("sandbox" and "old school" seem to be mixed together by some) and what elements belong to "themepark".
Because some changes in the course of years are just natural evolutions of the MMO genre, while some other aspects clearly belong to the "themepark" approach to MMO's.
Also i think the 'themepark' was a path to handle a number of the problems or frustrations that people had with the "old school" MMO's (having to eat, travel times, too few quests, severe death punishments). Problem is that many - due to the success of WoW - see it as the solution to those problems, not as just one way to handle those former issues.
Another problem is that the themepark approach in some cases cut too much away instead of only the braintumor, in some aspects 'lobotomising' the patient, figuratively speaking: the patient lives, even looks happy and smiles, but has a problem sometimes with talking or thinking.
Sadly enough we haven't encountered that many good alternative solutions to the issues "old school" MMO's had besides themepark solutions. But I like how GW2 will have a different way to deal with loot and Xp issues when joining random strangers in a fight, and I'm curious to see how The Secret World will deal with level-less/class-less system they want to implement, next to deeper storytelling and puzzles/mysteries being implemented while still facilitating the MMO players who aren't interested in that sort of things.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
A lot of whining about casuals around here (not just this thread but in general). Well if not for that "casual" playerbase most of these games wouldn't be around. So pick your poison, hardcore gaming but limited (and most likely low cost production) game selection, or casual gameplay but with more selection and higher quality games.
MMO's were doing just fine before the casual.
I call bullshit.
edit: As for the others, you aren't even worth replying too except maybe to tell you, again, that you are in the wrong genre.
Diablo is that way. >>
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
Where did you find those numbers at? I know its not reliable but MMODATA says DAoC is less than 50k and EQ is just over 150k... Granted it was sometime last year when they had those numbers.
My mistake, at its height, DAoC had 300k, and EQ had 550k.
MMOcharts.
Heh no problems it happens, I was actually hoping those games did have those numbers. I wish there was a game that would be more old school but do it right and with some cool new features. Someone needs to break the mold so we can get that virtual world feeling but yet bring some innovation to the genre.
If a developer actually went out and made a game just like this, it would get rejected by the very same people who whine about wanting it. Why? Because it could never be the MMO inside their heads. Seriously, theres a reason why developers take no risks, and thats because gamers, in particular those who (quite laughably) consider themselves 'Hardcore', are a finicky bunch and are hard to please.
What would happen is the developer would present the ideas, hardcore gamers would pick over it, moan about things not being right (doesnt fit in with the image inside their head or the rose tinted view of past games) and then reject the game entirely and come back to make threads just like this.
Why are people not playing games like Wurm, Darkfall, Mortal, Fallen Earth, Ryzom and Vanguard? Because they are all real games that cannot please everybody, and they cant compete with romantic rose tinted fantasies that revolve around players heads. How quickly will Xyson get rejected do you think? Pretty quick id say.
Comments
Really do tell? less than 100k people playing your mmos?
Anyway, argument is moot, casual play is here to say. Find a way to adapt or do something else.
There'll always be a niche spread of games like this, but the reason most aren't like this is that the majority of players are looking for the core of what makes games fun (interesting decisionmaking) and hiding those interesting decisions behind a lot of timesinks (like travel or waiting for a boss to respawn) means that less of the player's time is spent doing what they want to do.
If we're talking about a game where there are interesting decisions still, during the travel or whatnot, then that's a lot more viable an idea.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
ughh i can't stand how traveling is considered a timesink..that's how half of anything fun used to be found. You'd be going from continent A to continent B but on the way you'd find a cool island to chill/exp/quest on. Core gameplay is definatley a big contributor to fun but if there's no immersion in the game it's really kind of a waste imo.
Well most/all of my RPG's have fast travel, technically they are all instanced, and death penalty is gone due to the saving function, so that is the demographic that they are targeting, the RPG players. The RPG players don't realize it's killing mmorpg's with the stagnant RPG mechanics, it's just the latest and greatest flavor of RPG's at cost to mmorpg's, maybe until they get bored and move on.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
How is it killing mmorpgs? The ammount of people playing various mmos is probably at an all time high.
I really enjoy exploration, traveling from one area to a new area to explore and see and do cool stuff and experiene rich story and content etc. etc.
But when I have to log off quick cause something came up IRL, I like having a hearthstone.
And when I need to head back to a major city to train skills, I'd rather it not take me an hour so I can get back to exploring the cool new area I just found.
Not having to spend all my time running back and forth.
WoW really does do things quite well.
You have to run to a new place initially. Win.
Once you are there, you have fast travel options (not instant) to get you back to important places faster, but not instantly. Win.
You have very limited instant travel only usable every so often. Win.
true at some point it was a time sink!but hell thats was part of the fun do you remember being in fellwood or other part of the wow world to do an errant and unable to find it!some felt it was a time sink and they are probably right but it made it fun you explored while chatting away and men i bet you recall how you felt when you finally found how to trigger the chain of event to go in endgame(vanilla era)back then you never knew what could happen there was no such thing as arena.so pvp was done else where as mutch in the world as in other instanced zone lol!one thing is sure you were rarelly bored ,and that was on worst of days.on good days you never knew where you might end up might end up kiting a world boss to a opposing city just for the trip of it or you might try to kill world raid dragon north of org knowing full well :you were so close to the horde they might try to stop you at any given moment but that what made the hunt so fun!
They are not mmorpg's at their core, they are repackaged RPG's, which kill mmorpg dynamics. There are more players, mainly with WoW, because it has RPG mechanics that Blizzard waved the carrot from to their devout RPG and RTS player base. Other games are dieing because they took up the RPG mentality thinking they could draw the RPG players from the Blizzards player base. Then there are other companies that probably just got tired of RPG players pirating their games, so now they make quasi-mmorpg’s to save their business.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
can take off eq2 from the last 3 expansions, think its awhile ago you played, last 2 being full time instance grinders....
The first time you travel to a distant city, you explore.
.
The second time you travel to the same distant city, it's a commute.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
Funny because its quite the opposite. People who are looking for some deeper stimualting fun are ridiculing those who just want to have fun deeper or not. Seriously you should read before you hit the reply button. Once again, the type of videogame you play or movies you watch does not make you smarter or better then anyone else. Thats what most of the posters here are trying to prove. And thats the kind of mentality i am against.
You said yourself that raids are done with guild mates, and that instances are usually done with pre arranged groups, because you can't meet anyone once you're inside. I'm not denying that its possible to meet people, I'm just saying non instanced dungeons, and games that encourage/reward grouping, allow you greater chance to make friends. But I appreciate your level headedness, as it is mostly a matter of opinion.
Try DAoC and EQ both having 500-600k+ at the same time. That's more than just about any other MMORPG out at the moment, save WoW.
Aion has like 4 million last I heard.
.
Runequest has a bunch.
.
[Mod Edit]
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
Where did you find those numbers at? I know its not reliable but MMODATA says DAoC is less than 50k and EQ is just over 150k... Granted it was sometime last year when they had those numbers.
If we get into the Eastern market, almost all their games completely eclipse the populations in western markets, and even did back in the oldschool days, Lineage 1 and 2 were HUGE, despite being back when "only 100k played".
You still didn't disprove what I said.
My mistake, at its height, DAoC had 300k, and EQ had 550k.
MMOcharts.
There is nothing to disprove because MMORPGS are way more main stream now compared to olden days. You can not compare current numbers of players interested in MMOS to the old school population playing EQ and DAOC.
Not saying you are wrong but numbers of players have certainly gone up.
So you would like a game where high level guilds camp the raid bosses?
Hey i love a good walk though a game, but after a while you just want to get stuff done......having instant travel or zones doesnt prevent you from taking the long way. Zones that are not run on instances ( some do and are tied together seamlessly in various games) need to have less detail. Oh and have fun at launch when you have to either skip content or fight with the hordes of players, if only they had a way to instance another zone and relieve the congestion, reducing players drawn and improving everyones preformance....
Nobody wants a single player game with a chat room, but going to the complete opposite extreme is stupid...all for what....for people who get the urge to spend a few hours running around a seamless world?
Most games do a decent job of blending an open world and instancing.
No but one day youll get your 100% non instanced mmorpg...first youll all bitch about preformance issues and ability to complete quests due to congestion....then youll end up quitting when the top guilds are always camping the endgame content..
ya they have beaten wow a while ago but those market dont count success the way we do in america
here you got 11 million player your company is happy there it doesnt work that way they could have 30 million player but the first thing corp ask how mutch we made,he they dont ask that question if they have lot of player they made lot of money ,there they could have 100 million player but if only 10 baught product its a fiascvo for the corp!so having the total number of player in those market is a nightmare when the day is sunny ,if its raining good luck lol!most have stopped trying decades ago!
I'm not saying they haven't, I was merely pointing out how foolish the person who said there was only 100k players across the entire genre was being. And I am also saying that most old MMOs were FAR FAR more successful than modern ones, and made a lot more money.
Oh sweet mother of god can we stop with the "lololol camping raid bosses taking turns to finish quests lololol", because that crap didn't happen in the vast majority of seamless MMORPGs. Badly designed one trick pony games run into that problem, good MMOs don't. Its a stupid straw man argument.
And we HAVE had 100% non instanced MMOs, both new and old, and I've never had a problem completing quests or with performance. If computers in freaking 1999 could do it, they sure as hell can do it now.
Maybe some genius should come up with some useful end game content so that everyone isn't camping a raid dungeon, oh wait.. Dark Age of Camelot did that
Maybe first should be determined what is "old school", what is "sandbox" ("sandbox" and "old school" seem to be mixed together by some) and what elements belong to "themepark".
Because some changes in the course of years are just natural evolutions of the MMO genre, while some other aspects clearly belong to the "themepark" approach to MMO's.
Also i think the 'themepark' was a path to handle a number of the problems or frustrations that people had with the "old school" MMO's (having to eat, travel times, too few quests, severe death punishments). Problem is that many - due to the success of WoW - see it as the solution to those problems, not as just one way to handle those former issues.
Another problem is that the themepark approach in some cases cut too much away instead of only the braintumor, in some aspects 'lobotomising' the patient, figuratively speaking: the patient lives, even looks happy and smiles, but has a problem sometimes with talking or thinking.
Sadly enough we haven't encountered that many good alternative solutions to the issues "old school" MMO's had besides themepark solutions. But I like how GW2 will have a different way to deal with loot and Xp issues when joining random strangers in a fight, and I'm curious to see how The Secret World will deal with level-less/class-less system they want to implement, next to deeper storytelling and puzzles/mysteries being implemented while still facilitating the MMO players who aren't interested in that sort of things.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Heh no problems it happens, I was actually hoping those games did have those numbers. I wish there was a game that would be more old school but do it right and with some cool new features. Someone needs to break the mold so we can get that virtual world feeling but yet bring some innovation to the genre.
If a developer actually went out and made a game just like this, it would get rejected by the very same people who whine about wanting it. Why? Because it could never be the MMO inside their heads. Seriously, theres a reason why developers take no risks, and thats because gamers, in particular those who (quite laughably) consider themselves 'Hardcore', are a finicky bunch and are hard to please.
What would happen is the developer would present the ideas, hardcore gamers would pick over it, moan about things not being right (doesnt fit in with the image inside their head or the rose tinted view of past games) and then reject the game entirely and come back to make threads just like this.
Why are people not playing games like Wurm, Darkfall, Mortal, Fallen Earth, Ryzom and Vanguard? Because they are all real games that cannot please everybody, and they cant compete with romantic rose tinted fantasies that revolve around players heads. How quickly will Xyson get rejected do you think? Pretty quick id say.