Another point of contention: Yes, its great for the casual gamer to have a wow like system where items are abundant, but are bound upon use. Old schoolers i think as a general rule HATE this. Why? There is no sense of pride in getting a nice item. None, whatsoever. In orig EQ, if you saw a warrior or ranger run by with a pair of SSoY's, as a low level you generally went "ZOMG, that guy had dual f*ckin yaks!". In a game like WOW, the only time you even had a smidgen of surprise was if you saw someone with one of the few orange con weapons in the game. Even then it was still like "meh /shrug".
Doesn't this mean every item can be traded or bought by gold? So any chump with some RMT-bought Gold can have any item in the game? Is there any pride in such a system?
I'm sure people in EVE take pride in what they own.
Yeah studios having to file for bankrupty, firing devs and former independent studios such as Bioware becoming bought up by crappy publishers is for sure a sign that this games are more popular than ever...not. Our genre is on the crossroads and it will soon split thanks god.
Hate to say it, but have you looked at the worldwide economy? Everyone is going bankrupt, firing employees, etc. Maybe if you got out of the basement more often, you'd realize that this is not restricted to the MMO industry.
MMOs are mostly dead. like my tag line says, theyve turned into little more than console games with a chat box. Frankly if this next batch of games disappoints me like others have over the last 5 years, Im done. This is a joke with no punchline.
If you're bored with MMOs, you're bored. But to call them dead is ridiculous, given that they're more popular than ever.
Eh, I think it's pretty ridiculous to call them more popular than ever. WoW is more popular than ever, sure. Every other mmo? Not so much. Studios continue to churn out MMOs hoping to catch Blizzard's lightning in a bottle, but no MMO has or will approach what they've done in terms of numbers (no, not even TOR).
In a nutshell you have mainstream WoW and you have the rest of the MMO space which is still very much a niche market.
And before someone jumps in and goes 'Facebook games' or 'f2p XYZ has eleventy billion users!' allow me to pre-emptively say who cares. I'm talking about traditional sub MMORPGs.
Specifics of market share are irrelevant. I was simply denying the nonsensical notion that "MMOs are mostly dead" when the MMORPG genre as a whole is more alive than ever.
I guess that depends on how you define 'more alive than ever.' To me, the vast majority of customers using one product out of several hundred doesn't equate to wild genre success. It's more like one company struck gold and everyone else is a day late and a dollar short.
As someone else pointed out earlier, most WoW players don't know or care about other MMORPGs. That's hardly irrelevant when you're talking about overall genre success.
Anyhow, that's enough side-tracking on my part, and I'm sure you're never wrong, so I salute you.
It’s not dead, about the same populace in the normal-ish mmo’s, but spread out a little. It’s just hemorrhaging from all the bad ideas coming in from CRPG companies jumping in and knocking out stupid games hoping to be the next WoW. Once that is out of the way, those companies close down, Blizzard/WoW players get drawn off to the next smash Blizzard release (pref non mmo), then we can get back to the same vitality that got our mmo’s going in the first place. We don’t need 30 million Western subs to have fun again.
Very well thought out and informative post, op. I remember those days fondly, as you yourself do apparently. Over all my years of MMO's though, from UO to WoW, there's one that I keep returning to over and over even with it's horribly outdated graphics and lack of sound called Tibia due to one reason that makes it continue endlessly.
NO MAX LEVEL, BUT CAN STILL PROVIDE CHALLENGES EVEN AT RIDICULOUS NUMBERS SUCH AS LEVEL 300.
It looks like a really bad version of UO for people on welfare. It's bad. But I find it incredibly enjoyable, knowing there's truly no limit to how far you can go. At the same time, even at these seemingly "invincible" power levels (insert DBZ meme here), there are still areas of the game being actively developed that can give you a challenge if you're not prepared enough.
Just to go on a little more about it, this game has the things that would be amazing in a large scale 3-D game. Collision detection where people/ objects become tactical rather than decoration; quests which require the quester to seek them out, and interact with various NPC's through actual typed speech in order to gain the objectives or information; open looting pvp with many options, one option to fit everyone from complete carebear pacifist to fragfest afficionado; secret passageways that can be found as early as in the starter area (truly secret, no hints are given unless you are lucky and find a book that might tell you where or find the right keyword for the npc.); and these are just to name a few. The game is really clever, and if someone wanted to try and blow it up with some updated graphics, I think it could really really go somewhere. The gameworld is so immense that even crowded areas don't seem like they are. Death penalty seems appropriate, not too severe (some experience up to 2 levels dependent on total, backpack, and 1-all items from character, dependent on status at the time). And I think most importantly....although they only have 4 of them, the classes feel like what they are. You're playing a squishy mage, you feel it. But you also feel the power of the mage, for your attacks are truly devastating.
I dunno, these are the things this old school gamer wants in his mmo these days (and being 31, the first kid on the block with DOOM on a LAN in his house when he was 14, I think i qualify.) An EQ clone, no, a UO clone, no, but something that takes some forgotten elements and puts some challenge back into the equation again.
I want a reason to get excited about *ding*, feel like i earned it.
Sorry I'm responding so late here to the replies, but it was two (three?) nights ago and I had to get to work and didn't want to necro the thread last night (that was bumped down to at least page 2). Anyway...
@Daywolf - "Wrong. They were done away with to appeal to CRPG style of gaming (and dumbed down noob gaming) which is mostly stale for many years other than a few sandbox CRPG's which got the most rewards. Morrowind and Oblivion ore sandbox CRPG's, Oblivion not only had best of the year awards but best CRPG of all time awards. This is how the oldschool games were as well, a formula that works, but abandoned for a recent trend that is garbage like 99% of CRPG's."
It's not wrong. You pretty much contradict yourself there in that first sentence. Obviously it wouldn't have been done if they didn't feel it would bring in more subscribers. Morrowind and Oblivion are NOT sandbox RPGs either, you and most people on the forums throw the term around without knowing it's meaning. In Morrowind or Oblivion you cannot effect the main world beyond the progression via the storyline and side quests. You cannot build structures in the world or change the ruleset of the game or do anything (the term comes from a child playing within the sandbox, building what he wants within the given world). The term you are looking for is open-ended RPG, since you have the freedom to do what you please beyond the main storyline, but you are still limited in regards to what you can do. For examples of true sandbox RPGs look at Haven & Hearth, Wurm Online, and Second Life. The formula doesn't work in regards to generating the highest amount of subscribers. EQ's subs never reached past the 1 million mark, and a complete sandbox game likely never will. It will work when marketted properly to a niche market, but you can never expect the quality of game you got years ago. These MMOs are simply too complex for the majority of current generation gamers (most of whom are gaming on consoles not PCs).
Fallacy. Many of the old school games you could log in and just play an hour. I did all the time, playing a couple games an evening in fact. Played them for years, got all the stuff that the people who played 16 hours a day for three months upon their inevitable burn-out got, and then more. Now all the games are burnouts as they made you all like those power gamers but with less time invested. The whole “time investment” thing was marketing hype to get you to think their games were better, to pull you to their games. Some things took time, but you could do other things when you didn’t have enough time to play (sandbox). And what about all the people that spend hours and hours playing WoW? See, just hype.
No, you can't. You couldn't log onto UO or EQ to do anything PRODUCTIVE within an hour. In EQ all the good grouping spots from level 10 orc camps to SolusekB on had huge lists. Soloing was an activity that, unless you picked a solo class, couldn't be done effectively either.
@LotosSlayer in response to me hating the mechanics of EQ "If you played for 5 years then that's a load of bullshit. I found WoW boring and I played it for 5 months on and off, nothing possessed me to play it for 5 years. If you don't find a game fun why would you play it for 5 years?"
You are taking what I'm saying out of context. I didn't hate EQ. I hated those particular mechanics. They just weren't fun. There are loads of great things about EQ that don't pertain to these mechanics, like the majority of the world not being instanced, having more content than any other MMO, it was unique for it's generation, the community was fantastic, the truely epic quests where having an "epic" meant something (even legendary items in WoW barely take any effort to receive), even the factions the OP mentioned were a good feature, the sense of danger when walking through a high level area (like Kithicor Woods at night), nothing was ever "given" to you, you had to make your own maps and exploring was often rewarded. That doesn't mean EQ doesn't have a lot of bad mechanics. For it's time, EQ was the best MMO, and overall is the game that I kept playing the longest out of any other game. I just think people are being WAY too nostaligic about EQ (and other games frequently mentioned on the boards like UO (original), SWG (original), and even Vanilla WoW. Rather than proposing innovation or even an evolution on these older system they just want their game to be just like the old...
@Hrimnir"What you don't realize and don't understand is that we will get games like that again. The idea that a game is going to come along and topple WOW and get 10 million subscribers is a MYTH. Its been proven time and time again that WOW's popularity is a one time fluke. The reason for this is that prior to WOW, mmo gamers were a very specific subset of PC gamers. WOW came along and made the game accessible to more people by taking all the best aspects of the PVE mmo's that existed at that point, which was basically EQ, got rid of the harsh parts of it, made leveling easy, getting items easy, etc. What this accomplished was getting the casual gamer to play MMO's. The mistake EVERYONE makes today is to make the assumption that 80% of wow players are MMO gamers, they're not. MMO gamers understand that there is a time investment, that you won't get near instant gratification. MMO gamers are not the same type of people who typically will log off wow and loadup modern warfare on their XBOX, or madden NFL 2010 or whatever. We like a very specific type of game. The vast majority of WOW's playerbase are just CASUAL GAMERS, they play whatever gets their rocks off for a short period of time, whether thats an FPS, WOW, a sports or fighting game, etc."
The vast majority of gamers are casual gamers. They net the biggest profit. There is a reason why Wii sells more than Xbox and PS3. There is simply a bigger market for casual gamers. Yes, you will get games like that again (unless you are super nitpicky like a few are being and want every single mechanic to be exactly like EQ or whatever game's original mechanics). You just simply won't see games like this being highly successful, less than 500k subscribers at best. That's not to say the niche markets won't be successful (EVE is evident of this) they just will reach nowhere near the success of some of the games that do appeal to all types of games. I agree wholeheartly that MMO gamers were a specific type of gamer back in the day, I was one of them. We'd probably be thrown in the category of nerd. Very few even heard of a MMO (and aside from WoW, very few even now will likely be able to mention a single one). As I said there are games that have some of the appeal of these old school games with harsh mechanics, risk/reward, long travel times, etc. already appealing to that niche audience. For whatever reason these don't seem to be enough you guys clinging to nostaglia want to throw are upset every new game isn't in that category.
Rifts is actually one of my top picks for new upcoming MMOs. It has a lot of what I'm looking for in a MMO. None of the mechanics are hooked on nostalgia, though. None of the mechanics are in question here that are in Rifts (at least not yet mentioned), so I'm not sure why you are using that as an example. I fully support a lean towards more group play rather than solo play (though I think solo play should exist in some capacity) it was one of the big pros of Everquest. I also support a lack of instance use, because they are used way too damn much lately and when it's like that I'd rather just play a lobby based games because that's what MMOs are turning into. You aren't getting complaints from me there, the mechanics I didn't like I mentioned.
@Larsa"Then how comes, that the old games - in their days - had more subcribers than the current crop of the Western MMORPGs save WoW? As far as I know EQ, DAoC, UO, etc. had more subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, AoC, etc. can show these days."
Actually Everquest in it's prime (I can't remember the actual numbers, but EQ was around 500k, DAoC 100kish, and UO around 200k at prime) had LESS subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, and AoC in their primes. I'm not sure about LotRO actually, but Warhammer and AoC both had around 700k-800k boxed copies sold and since these copies come with a free month subscription they technically had a period of time where the active sub count was higher than EQ's max. While Warhammer and AoC had poor customer retention their stable sub numbers are probably still higher than these older MMOs. We also have to factor in that at the time there was far less competition on the MMO market (these low subscription numbers further prove how old school MMO gaming was a niche hobby).
It's not wrong. You pretty much contradict yourself there in that first sentence. Obviously it wouldn't have been done if they didn't feel it would bring in more subscribers. Morrowind and Oblivion are NOT sandbox RPGs either, you and most people on the forums throw the term around without knowing it's meaning.
I'm not reading your big wall of text, dude, that's just being rude to me and to other forum members. You say I contradict myself in the fist line, which your post makes absolutely no sense with that claim, but your next line of the post shows no comprehension to what Morrowind/Oblivion is.
Even the Wikipedia entry for Oblivion regarding it being classified as a sandbox is in no dispute. Why don't you go post there to dispute it to being declassified as a sandbox? ...I mean if you really want your post to be laughed at there.
heh they should have an auto-delete forum account feature here when someone tries to post more than 10 lines in block form.
I'm not reading your big wall of text, dude, that's just being rude to me and to other forum members. You say I contradict myself in the fist line, which your post makes absolutely no sense with that claim, but your next line of the post shows no comprehension to what Morrowind/Oblivion is.
Even the Wikipedia entry for Oblivion regarding it being classified as a sandbox is in no dispute. Why don't you go post there to dispute it to being declassified as a sandbox? ...I mean if you really want your post to be laughed at there.
heh they should have an auto-delete forum account feature here when someone tries to post more than 10 lines in block form.
Why is it when people have a short attention span or can't comprehend complex ideas put forth in a clear manner that they must resort to belittling a post by claiming it is a "wall of text" and hence has no value?
How would you know what worth the post has unless you take the time to read it?
TL;DR
Maybe they should have an "auto-delete forum account" for elite members that can't be troubled to actually read a post before trashing its worth.
If ignorance truly is bliss, you must be one happy guy.
Edit: Also, someone of your posting stature should do things like capitalize the first letter of sentences, avoid run-ons, learn to proofread for simple spelling mistakes ("fist" rather than "first"), avoid ellipticals (the little "..." you started one sentence with, known as an elliptical), etc. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone from inside his glass house and all that good jazz :P
@Larsa"Then how comes, that the old games - in their days - had more subcribers than the current crop of the Western MMORPGs save WoW? As far as I know EQ, DAoC, UO, etc. had more subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, AoC, etc. can show these days."
Actually Everquest in it's prime (I can't remember the actual numbers, but EQ was around 500k, DAoC 100kish, and UO around 200k at prime) had LESS subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, and AoC in their primes. I'm not sure about LotRO actually, but Warhammer and AoC both had around 700k-800k boxed copies sold and since these copies come with a free month subscription they technically had a period of time where the active sub count was higher than EQ's max. While Warhammer and AoC had poor customer retention their stable sub numbers are probably still higher than these older MMOs. We also have to factor in that at the time there was far less competition on the MMO market (these low subscription numbers further prove how old school MMO gaming was a niche hobby).
</blockquote>
1. Lotro never ever announced their sub numbers
2. Warhammer: SOLD 800k but lost 500k in the first month FACT
3. Age of Conan: even better drop off
Everquest 1 had this numbers over year if sold copies are the main factor well do the maths :-)
Again MMORPG's aren't supposed to be mainstream just look at the numbers now, despite Aion, Wow there is no P2P MMO over 1.000k (F2P are worthless because most of them are counting the registered members so who cares). Numbers like 200 - 500k are the norm you can expect, tough Indie-developers can do well with much smaller subs too.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play." "Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
Why is it when people have a short attention span or can't comprehend complex ideas put forth in a clear manner that they must resort to belittling a post by claiming it is a "wall of text" and hence has no value?
LOL a wall of text on an internet forum is not readable, causes eye strain. Maybe you like that, but most people don’t. I don't care if their spelling and grammar looks to be distributed by monkeys, it's an internet forum so who cares?!? But to spam post a big wall of text in someone’s direction is just rude (was directed at me). Why don't you worry about your own business and let the discussion between him and I not be disrupted by silly and erroneous posts as yours?
Or was your attention span not long enough to see that it was him and I in the discussion and not you? Watch where you throw around those personal remarks. And by the way, taking shots/comments about my posts in other threads, as you just did, is one step away from being an actual troll. I'll be happy to file a report if it goes further.
You are taking what I'm saying out of context. I didn't hate EQ. I hated those particular mechanics. They just weren't fun. There are loads of great things about EQ that don't pertain to these mechanics, like the majority of the world not being instanced, having more content than any other MMO, it was unique for it's generation, the community was fantastic, the truely epic quests where having an "epic" meant something (even legendary items in WoW barely take any effort to receive), even the factions the OP mentioned were a good feature, the sense of danger when walking through a high level area (like Kithicor Woods at night), nothing was ever "given" to you, you had to make your own maps and exploring was often rewarded. That doesn't mean EQ doesn't have a lot of bad mechanics. For it's time, EQ was the best MMO, and overall is the game that I kept playing the longest out of any other game. I just think people are being WAY too nostaligic about EQ (and other games frequently mentioned on the boards like UO (original), SWG (original), and even Vanilla WoW. Rather than proposing innovation or even an evolution on these older system they just want their game to be just like the old...
Actually Everquest in it's prime (I can't remember the actual numbers, but EQ was around 500k, DAoC 100kish, and UO around 200k at prime) had LESS subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, and AoC in their primes. I'm not sure about LotRO actually, but Warhammer and AoC both had around 700k-800k boxed copies sold and since these copies come with a free month subscription they technically had a period of time where the active sub count was higher than EQ's max. While Warhammer and AoC had poor customer retention their stable sub numbers are probably still higher than these older MMOs. We also have to factor in that at the time there was far less competition on the MMO market (these low subscription numbers further prove how old school MMO gaming was a niche hobby).
1st paragraph: Dude, I totally agree with you. I'm not saying old school MMOs were perfect, they did have a lot of bad mechanics. I heard a lot of things about EQ that sound horrible, like waiting in queue for camps(later oldschool MMOs don't have this btw), ridiculously long travel times, and corpse runs. What I'm saying is the good outweighed the bad and oldschool MMOs are just so much better than the way the mediocre new ones are now. All the things you mentioned you liked about EQ are exactly what made oldschool MMOs so great, MMOs were already removing all the bad/annoying mechanics, then WoW came along and removed all the bad mechanics but removed all the good mechanics too. Now because WoW did so good simply because of the IP and advertising everyone thinks copying it is the only way to make a profitable MMO.
2nd paragraph: Actually, DaoC had 250k, EQ had 500k(but peaked at 650k), FFXI had and still has around 500k, SWG had 300k, both Lineages had millions(but that's worldwide subs), and the rest like AO and AC combined were 200k+. Far more than new MMOs that aren't WoW have. Yeah, AoC and WAR had 800k box sales, that just proves advertising/popularity = success more than quality of the game. Most people don't know much about a new game before they buy it. How much subs does AoC have now? Less than 100k, that's less than EQ currently has. LotR the second most popular new MMO has 300k.
Grouping over soloing and fun challenging gameplay is NOT niche. No way. Games were always made to challenge people.
Why am I NOT surprised to see Axehilt as the first poster. One of the biggest old-school haters on these forums.
Anyways, I agree with your post 100%. I think a lot of these newer players tend to think we want a carbon copy of original EQ, which isn't the case. Sure, I'd like to have the meaningful exploration, social levels of EQ, a reason to think before you act (Death penalty), longer leveling so you can appreciate things more, etc....but there are also plenty of things, most of which you mentioned, I would like to see updated.
I never understood those that complain about not haing the time to dedicate to hours of play, or taking time to get items, or to a certain place in-game, etc. Why are you playing an MMO then? That is what they were meant for. Console games were meant for fast gratification...that or WoW.
Anywho...brings back a lot of fond memories. Good post.
Why is it when people have a short attention span or can't comprehend complex ideas put forth in a clear manner that they must resort to belittling a post by claiming it is a "wall of text" and hence has no value?
LOL a wall of text on an internet forum is not readable, causes eye strain. Maybe you like that, but most people don’t. I don't care if their spelling and grammar looks to be distributed by monkeys, it's an internet forum so who cares?!? But to spam post a big wall of text in someone’s direction is just rude (was directed at me). Why don't you worry about your own business and let the discussion between him and I not be disrupted by silly and erroneous posts as yours?
Or was your attention span not long enough to see that it was him and I in the discussion and not you? Watch where you throw around those personal remarks. And by the way, taking shots/comments about my posts in other threads, as you just did, is one step away from being an actual troll. I'll be happy to file a report if it goes further.
What's hilarious about this statement is wall of text was common in a much smaller format of chat boxes in old school MMORPGs, remember when you'd hail a NPC and or go through his text quest and he'd spam paragraphs of quest text. Funny people don't complain about eye strain when they read a book or Wikipedia entry. Guess it's just forum text that does it, like it has some magical properities to it.
There is no "discussion" anymore. You are attacking me, as a poster (I'm rude, ignorant, should have my account deleted), rather than my agruements. Now you are attacking another person (short attention span, being "silly and erroneous"). Also, I count 11 lines of text in your post, guess you should go delete your forum account. That wall of text is causing me "eye strain".
Why is it when people have a short attention span or can't comprehend complex ideas put forth in a clear manner that they must resort to belittling a post by claiming it is a "wall of text" and hence has no value?
LOL a wall of text on an internet forum is not readable, causes eye strain. Maybe you like that, but most people don’t. I don't care if their spelling and grammar looks to be distributed by monkeys, it's an internet forum so who cares?!? But to spam post a big wall of text in someone’s direction is just rude (was directed at me). Why don't you worry about your own business and let the discussion between him and I not be disrupted by silly and erroneous posts as yours?
Or was your attention span not long enough to see that it was him and I in the discussion and not you? Watch where you throw around those personal remarks. And by the way, taking shots/comments about my posts in other threads, as you just did, is one step away from being an actual troll. I'll be happy to file a report if it goes further.
What's hilarious about this statement is wall of text was common in a much smaller format of chat boxes in old school MMORPGs, remember when you'd hail a NPC and or go through his text quest and he'd spam paragraphs of quest text. Funny people don't complain about eye strain when they read a book or Wikipedia entry. Guess it's just forum text that does it, like it has some magical properities to it.
There is no "discussion" anymore. You are attacking me, as a poster (I'm rude, ignorant, should have my account deleted), rather than my agruements. Now you are attacking another person (short attention span, being "silly and erroneous"). Also, I count 11 lines of text in your post, guess you should go delete your forum account. That wall of text is causing me "eye strain".
What are you talking about, I said the same EXACT thing back to him what he said to me. I said it to make a point, and in hopes he would knock that off, maybe see the point.
I said that you were being rude by posting big walls of text at me, a rude act as it is well known, but not that you are rude, but being rude. And I never said that you were ignorant, you are making things up now. I gave you a discussion point back, from your first couple lines. Your post is flapping pure BS, we are done.
Grouping over soloing and fun challenging gameplay is NOT niche. No way. Games were always made to challenge people.
I actually don't think it is either. I'm a strong supporter of having group oriented play rather than solo play. I've said many times while I do think solo play has it's place and should be doable in the game, it's something that should never be as rewarding or encouraged as group play, because that's what MMOs are all about.
There are some great mechanics EQ has. The good does far outweigh the bad. I still think it was the greatest MMO for it's time. My complaint is about those who are getting too nostalgic and want basically a clone of the original EQ. Come on, we can ask for better here. Regardless of what your opinion might be of WoW, there are some great things WoW introduced to the MMO industry such as an easy to use moddable UI.
There isn't anything preventing these people from going and playing the original EQ right now. Heck, you could play on the PoP only server and never do any content except the original EQ, just find enough likeminded players (here's the hard part) and make your own rules for what's acceptable to do with expansion content and what's not.
I also stand corrected on the sub numbers. I admit I didn't have a chart in front of me and was pulling the numbers out of my ass (well, back in memory from when I did see sub numbers). Still, I'm willing to bet if you average the sub numbers over a period of say 2-3 years in the MMO's prime, you'll see they are probably pretty close, with far less competition back in the "old school" days.
Comments
I'm sure people in EVE take pride in what they own.
Hate to say it, but have you looked at the worldwide economy? Everyone is going bankrupt, firing employees, etc. Maybe if you got out of the basement more often, you'd realize that this is not restricted to the MMO industry.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
It’s not dead, about the same populace in the normal-ish mmo’s, but spread out a little. It’s just hemorrhaging from all the bad ideas coming in from CRPG companies jumping in and knocking out stupid games hoping to be the next WoW. Once that is out of the way, those companies close down, Blizzard/WoW players get drawn off to the next smash Blizzard release (pref non mmo), then we can get back to the same vitality that got our mmo’s going in the first place. We don’t need 30 million Western subs to have fun again.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
Very well thought out and informative post, op. I remember those days fondly, as you yourself do apparently. Over all my years of MMO's though, from UO to WoW, there's one that I keep returning to over and over even with it's horribly outdated graphics and lack of sound called Tibia due to one reason that makes it continue endlessly.
NO MAX LEVEL, BUT CAN STILL PROVIDE CHALLENGES EVEN AT RIDICULOUS NUMBERS SUCH AS LEVEL 300.
It looks like a really bad version of UO for people on welfare. It's bad. But I find it incredibly enjoyable, knowing there's truly no limit to how far you can go. At the same time, even at these seemingly "invincible" power levels (insert DBZ meme here), there are still areas of the game being actively developed that can give you a challenge if you're not prepared enough.
Just to go on a little more about it, this game has the things that would be amazing in a large scale 3-D game. Collision detection where people/ objects become tactical rather than decoration; quests which require the quester to seek them out, and interact with various NPC's through actual typed speech in order to gain the objectives or information; open looting pvp with many options, one option to fit everyone from complete carebear pacifist to fragfest afficionado; secret passageways that can be found as early as in the starter area (truly secret, no hints are given unless you are lucky and find a book that might tell you where or find the right keyword for the npc.); and these are just to name a few. The game is really clever, and if someone wanted to try and blow it up with some updated graphics, I think it could really really go somewhere. The gameworld is so immense that even crowded areas don't seem like they are. Death penalty seems appropriate, not too severe (some experience up to 2 levels dependent on total, backpack, and 1-all items from character, dependent on status at the time). And I think most importantly....although they only have 4 of them, the classes feel like what they are. You're playing a squishy mage, you feel it. But you also feel the power of the mage, for your attacks are truly devastating.
I dunno, these are the things this old school gamer wants in his mmo these days (and being 31, the first kid on the block with DOOM on a LAN in his house when he was 14, I think i qualify.) An EQ clone, no, a UO clone, no, but something that takes some forgotten elements and puts some challenge back into the equation again.
I want a reason to get excited about *ding*, feel like i earned it.
Sorry I'm responding so late here to the replies, but it was two (three?) nights ago and I had to get to work and didn't want to necro the thread last night (that was bumped down to at least page 2). Anyway...
@Daywolf - "Wrong. They were done away with to appeal to CRPG style of gaming (and dumbed down noob gaming) which is mostly stale for many years other than a few sandbox CRPG's which got the most rewards. Morrowind and Oblivion ore sandbox CRPG's, Oblivion not only had best of the year awards but best CRPG of all time awards. This is how the oldschool games were as well, a formula that works, but abandoned for a recent trend that is garbage like 99% of CRPG's."
It's not wrong. You pretty much contradict yourself there in that first sentence. Obviously it wouldn't have been done if they didn't feel it would bring in more subscribers. Morrowind and Oblivion are NOT sandbox RPGs either, you and most people on the forums throw the term around without knowing it's meaning. In Morrowind or Oblivion you cannot effect the main world beyond the progression via the storyline and side quests. You cannot build structures in the world or change the ruleset of the game or do anything (the term comes from a child playing within the sandbox, building what he wants within the given world). The term you are looking for is open-ended RPG, since you have the freedom to do what you please beyond the main storyline, but you are still limited in regards to what you can do. For examples of true sandbox RPGs look at Haven & Hearth, Wurm Online, and Second Life. The formula doesn't work in regards to generating the highest amount of subscribers. EQ's subs never reached past the 1 million mark, and a complete sandbox game likely never will. It will work when marketted properly to a niche market, but you can never expect the quality of game you got years ago. These MMOs are simply too complex for the majority of current generation gamers (most of whom are gaming on consoles not PCs).
Fallacy. Many of the old school games you could log in and just play an hour. I did all the time, playing a couple games an evening in fact. Played them for years, got all the stuff that the people who played 16 hours a day for three months upon their inevitable burn-out got, and then more. Now all the games are burnouts as they made you all like those power gamers but with less time invested. The whole “time investment” thing was marketing hype to get you to think their games were better, to pull you to their games. Some things took time, but you could do other things when you didn’t have enough time to play (sandbox). And what about all the people that spend hours and hours playing WoW? See, just hype.
No, you can't. You couldn't log onto UO or EQ to do anything PRODUCTIVE within an hour. In EQ all the good grouping spots from level 10 orc camps to SolusekB on had huge lists. Soloing was an activity that, unless you picked a solo class, couldn't be done effectively either.
@LotosSlayer in response to me hating the mechanics of EQ "If you played for 5 years then that's a load of bullshit. I found WoW boring and I played it for 5 months on and off, nothing possessed me to play it for 5 years. If you don't find a game fun why would you play it for 5 years?"
You are taking what I'm saying out of context. I didn't hate EQ. I hated those particular mechanics. They just weren't fun. There are loads of great things about EQ that don't pertain to these mechanics, like the majority of the world not being instanced, having more content than any other MMO, it was unique for it's generation, the community was fantastic, the truely epic quests where having an "epic" meant something (even legendary items in WoW barely take any effort to receive), even the factions the OP mentioned were a good feature, the sense of danger when walking through a high level area (like Kithicor Woods at night), nothing was ever "given" to you, you had to make your own maps and exploring was often rewarded. That doesn't mean EQ doesn't have a lot of bad mechanics. For it's time, EQ was the best MMO, and overall is the game that I kept playing the longest out of any other game. I just think people are being WAY too nostaligic about EQ (and other games frequently mentioned on the boards like UO (original), SWG (original), and even Vanilla WoW. Rather than proposing innovation or even an evolution on these older system they just want their game to be just like the old...
@Hrimnir "What you don't realize and don't understand is that we will get games like that again. The idea that a game is going to come along and topple WOW and get 10 million subscribers is a MYTH. Its been proven time and time again that WOW's popularity is a one time fluke. The reason for this is that prior to WOW, mmo gamers were a very specific subset of PC gamers. WOW came along and made the game accessible to more people by taking all the best aspects of the PVE mmo's that existed at that point, which was basically EQ, got rid of the harsh parts of it, made leveling easy, getting items easy, etc. What this accomplished was getting the casual gamer to play MMO's. The mistake EVERYONE makes today is to make the assumption that 80% of wow players are MMO gamers, they're not. MMO gamers understand that there is a time investment, that you won't get near instant gratification. MMO gamers are not the same type of people who typically will log off wow and loadup modern warfare on their XBOX, or madden NFL 2010 or whatever. We like a very specific type of game. The vast majority of WOW's playerbase are just CASUAL GAMERS, they play whatever gets their rocks off for a short period of time, whether thats an FPS, WOW, a sports or fighting game, etc."
The vast majority of gamers are casual gamers. They net the biggest profit. There is a reason why Wii sells more than Xbox and PS3. There is simply a bigger market for casual gamers. Yes, you will get games like that again (unless you are super nitpicky like a few are being and want every single mechanic to be exactly like EQ or whatever game's original mechanics). You just simply won't see games like this being highly successful, less than 500k subscribers at best. That's not to say the niche markets won't be successful (EVE is evident of this) they just will reach nowhere near the success of some of the games that do appeal to all types of games. I agree wholeheartly that MMO gamers were a specific type of gamer back in the day, I was one of them. We'd probably be thrown in the category of nerd. Very few even heard of a MMO (and aside from WoW, very few even now will likely be able to mention a single one). As I said there are games that have some of the appeal of these old school games with harsh mechanics, risk/reward, long travel times, etc. already appealing to that niche audience. For whatever reason these don't seem to be enough you guys clinging to nostaglia want to throw are upset every new game isn't in that category.
Rifts is actually one of my top picks for new upcoming MMOs. It has a lot of what I'm looking for in a MMO. None of the mechanics are hooked on nostalgia, though. None of the mechanics are in question here that are in Rifts (at least not yet mentioned), so I'm not sure why you are using that as an example. I fully support a lean towards more group play rather than solo play (though I think solo play should exist in some capacity) it was one of the big pros of Everquest. I also support a lack of instance use, because they are used way too damn much lately and when it's like that I'd rather just play a lobby based games because that's what MMOs are turning into. You aren't getting complaints from me there, the mechanics I didn't like I mentioned.
@Larsa "Then how comes, that the old games - in their days - had more subcribers than the current crop of the Western MMORPGs save WoW? As far as I know EQ, DAoC, UO, etc. had more subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, AoC, etc. can show these days."
Actually Everquest in it's prime (I can't remember the actual numbers, but EQ was around 500k, DAoC 100kish, and UO around 200k at prime) had LESS subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, and AoC in their primes. I'm not sure about LotRO actually, but Warhammer and AoC both had around 700k-800k boxed copies sold and since these copies come with a free month subscription they technically had a period of time where the active sub count was higher than EQ's max. While Warhammer and AoC had poor customer retention their stable sub numbers are probably still higher than these older MMOs. We also have to factor in that at the time there was far less competition on the MMO market (these low subscription numbers further prove how old school MMO gaming was a niche hobby).
I'm not reading your big wall of text, dude, that's just being rude to me and to other forum members. You say I contradict myself in the fist line, which your post makes absolutely no sense with that claim, but your next line of the post shows no comprehension to what Morrowind/Oblivion is.
Even the Wikipedia entry for Oblivion regarding it being classified as a sandbox is in no dispute. Why don't you go post there to dispute it to being declassified as a sandbox? ...I mean if you really want your post to be laughed at there.
heh they should have an auto-delete forum account feature here when someone tries to post more than 10 lines in block form.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
Why is it when people have a short attention span or can't comprehend complex ideas put forth in a clear manner that they must resort to belittling a post by claiming it is a "wall of text" and hence has no value?
How would you know what worth the post has unless you take the time to read it?
TL;DR
Maybe they should have an "auto-delete forum account" for elite members that can't be troubled to actually read a post before trashing its worth.
If ignorance truly is bliss, you must be one happy guy.
Edit: Also, someone of your posting stature should do things like capitalize the first letter of sentences, avoid run-ons, learn to proofread for simple spelling mistakes ("fist" rather than "first"), avoid ellipticals (the little "..." you started one sentence with, known as an elliptical), etc. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone from inside his glass house and all that good jazz :P
Edit: For minor grammar.
<blockquote>
@Larsa "Then how comes, that the old games - in their days - had more subcribers than the current crop of the Western MMORPGs save WoW? As far as I know EQ, DAoC, UO, etc. had more subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, AoC, etc. can show these days."
Actually Everquest in it's prime (I can't remember the actual numbers, but EQ was around 500k, DAoC 100kish, and UO around 200k at prime) had LESS subscribers than LotRO, Warhammer, and AoC in their primes. I'm not sure about LotRO actually, but Warhammer and AoC both had around 700k-800k boxed copies sold and since these copies come with a free month subscription they technically had a period of time where the active sub count was higher than EQ's max. While Warhammer and AoC had poor customer retention their stable sub numbers are probably still higher than these older MMOs. We also have to factor in that at the time there was far less competition on the MMO market (these low subscription numbers further prove how old school MMO gaming was a niche hobby).
</blockquote>
1. Lotro never ever announced their sub numbers
2. Warhammer: SOLD 800k but lost 500k in the first month FACT
3. Age of Conan: even better drop off
Everquest 1 had this numbers over year if sold copies are the main factor well do the maths :-)
Again MMORPG's aren't supposed to be mainstream just look at the numbers now, despite Aion, Wow there is no P2P MMO over 1.000k (F2P are worthless because most of them are counting the registered members so who cares). Numbers like 200 - 500k are the norm you can expect, tough Indie-developers can do well with much smaller subs too.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play."
"Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
LOL a wall of text on an internet forum is not readable, causes eye strain. Maybe you like that, but most people don’t. I don't care if their spelling and grammar looks to be distributed by monkeys, it's an internet forum so who cares?!? But to spam post a big wall of text in someone’s direction is just rude (was directed at me). Why don't you worry about your own business and let the discussion between him and I not be disrupted by silly and erroneous posts as yours?
Or was your attention span not long enough to see that it was him and I in the discussion and not you? Watch where you throw around those personal remarks. And by the way, taking shots/comments about my posts in other threads, as you just did, is one step away from being an actual troll. I'll be happy to file a report if it goes further.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
1st paragraph: Dude, I totally agree with you. I'm not saying old school MMOs were perfect, they did have a lot of bad mechanics. I heard a lot of things about EQ that sound horrible, like waiting in queue for camps(later oldschool MMOs don't have this btw), ridiculously long travel times, and corpse runs. What I'm saying is the good outweighed the bad and oldschool MMOs are just so much better than the way the mediocre new ones are now. All the things you mentioned you liked about EQ are exactly what made oldschool MMOs so great, MMOs were already removing all the bad/annoying mechanics, then WoW came along and removed all the bad mechanics but removed all the good mechanics too. Now because WoW did so good simply because of the IP and advertising everyone thinks copying it is the only way to make a profitable MMO.
2nd paragraph: Actually, DaoC had 250k, EQ had 500k(but peaked at 650k), FFXI had and still has around 500k, SWG had 300k, both Lineages had millions(but that's worldwide subs), and the rest like AO and AC combined were 200k+. Far more than new MMOs that aren't WoW have. Yeah, AoC and WAR had 800k box sales, that just proves advertising/popularity = success more than quality of the game. Most people don't know much about a new game before they buy it. How much subs does AoC have now? Less than 100k, that's less than EQ currently has. LotR the second most popular new MMO has 300k.
Grouping over soloing and fun challenging gameplay is NOT niche. No way. Games were always made to challenge people.
Why am I NOT surprised to see Axehilt as the first poster. One of the biggest old-school haters on these forums.
Anyways, I agree with your post 100%. I think a lot of these newer players tend to think we want a carbon copy of original EQ, which isn't the case. Sure, I'd like to have the meaningful exploration, social levels of EQ, a reason to think before you act (Death penalty), longer leveling so you can appreciate things more, etc....but there are also plenty of things, most of which you mentioned, I would like to see updated.
I never understood those that complain about not haing the time to dedicate to hours of play, or taking time to get items, or to a certain place in-game, etc. Why are you playing an MMO then? That is what they were meant for. Console games were meant for fast gratification...that or WoW.
Anywho...brings back a lot of fond memories. Good post.
What's hilarious about this statement is wall of text was common in a much smaller format of chat boxes in old school MMORPGs, remember when you'd hail a NPC and or go through his text quest and he'd spam paragraphs of quest text. Funny people don't complain about eye strain when they read a book or Wikipedia entry. Guess it's just forum text that does it, like it has some magical properities to it.
There is no "discussion" anymore. You are attacking me, as a poster (I'm rude, ignorant, should have my account deleted), rather than my agruements. Now you are attacking another person (short attention span, being "silly and erroneous"). Also, I count 11 lines of text in your post, guess you should go delete your forum account. That wall of text is causing me "eye strain".
What are you talking about, I said the same EXACT thing back to him what he said to me. I said it to make a point, and in hopes he would knock that off, maybe see the point.
I said that you were being rude by posting big walls of text at me, a rude act as it is well known, but not that you are rude, but being rude. And I never said that you were ignorant, you are making things up now. I gave you a discussion point back, from your first couple lines. Your post is flapping pure BS, we are done.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
I actually don't think it is either. I'm a strong supporter of having group oriented play rather than solo play. I've said many times while I do think solo play has it's place and should be doable in the game, it's something that should never be as rewarding or encouraged as group play, because that's what MMOs are all about.
There are some great mechanics EQ has. The good does far outweigh the bad. I still think it was the greatest MMO for it's time. My complaint is about those who are getting too nostalgic and want basically a clone of the original EQ. Come on, we can ask for better here. Regardless of what your opinion might be of WoW, there are some great things WoW introduced to the MMO industry such as an easy to use moddable UI.
There isn't anything preventing these people from going and playing the original EQ right now. Heck, you could play on the PoP only server and never do any content except the original EQ, just find enough likeminded players (here's the hard part) and make your own rules for what's acceptable to do with expansion content and what's not.
I also stand corrected on the sub numbers. I admit I didn't have a chart in front of me and was pulling the numbers out of my ass (well, back in memory from when I did see sub numbers). Still, I'm willing to bet if you average the sub numbers over a period of say 2-3 years in the MMO's prime, you'll see they are probably pretty close, with far less competition back in the "old school" days.
I don't hate oldschool games. I was merely disapointed with their excessive tedium.
Even modern MMORPGs still have a lot of tedium (and here's why) but it's down to acceptable levels in the better games.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver