Everything I did in yesterday's games I can do in today games and games today give me more options in how I choose to play. Can you... make a living crafting and peddling your wares from place to place? Can you collect items and trophies to decorate your house? Can you place items in the world for other players to find and use? Can you have massive 500 man battles with siege engines and naval combat, with towers and keeps falling apart? Can you build a village wherever you want and develop a community? Can you go into a random dungeon and find a new group of people and become buddies with them? Can you just group up with some folks and explore and kill what you see and level at a reasonable rate? Can I talk to random NPCs until I find a quest that sends me on a far flung journey without holding my hand the whole way through? Can I enter a persistent battleground with a constant war over a central keep? Can I customize my class with endless combinations of skills? Can I fight raids with however many people I want against a dynamic AI that scales its tactics? Cause you could do all that in old games, and you can't do any of that in modern MMOs like WoW. I can group much easier than in old games except that grouping is pretty much exclusive to people you already know, because the game mechanics don't actually encourage grouping, solo much easier than in old games and that's a good thing in a game about socializing and multiplayer? there aren't more options, soloing is the only real option now, and flight is far more common um... how?, as are housing systems of some kind Not true, just about every old MMO had housing, just about every new MMO DOESN'T have housing..
I think games today have progressed. Progress doesn't just mean something new. Progress also means how relevant or widespread something has become. That is probably the worst definition of progress I've seen in this thread yet. Generally, progress refers to new ideas, expanding, building, moving forward. MMOs have been getting smaller, have less features, have less diversity, appeal to less demographics of players, has less innovation and creativity... that isn't progress.. Flight was in 1 game back in the day, now it's common. Thats progress. Being able to choose how you want to play easier, thats progress.
More styles of games on the market, thats progress. There aren't more styles of games, there's one game, and all of its clones. WoW. That's not progress.
Venge
The answer to all those questions is yes. I can do all those things. I can make a living by crafting in WoW, CoH, Istaria... yes even in WoW. I"m very casual in WoW and my highest character is only 64 currently my banker has 15000 gold just from my alts crafting, gathering and selling. I don't expect I would ever really need that. Istaria crafted enhancements sell very quickly and in Istaria crafting is almost all there is. There are a great many MMO's on the market and. In CoH I can collect items and trophies and decorate the house. In Istarai I can put machines on my plot and lair.
There are several games out there that let you have 500 man battles - eve, darkfall, lineage.. and I believe several upcoming ones let you have naval combat. If there was an old game that lets you do it, and it is still around than guess what I can still do it today. Not many games let you build a village whereever you want but several games such as Istaria do let you build a village. There are many games that let you go into dungeons and meet people. I group up with folks all the time in WoW, CoH and Istaria and just go kill stuff for good xp.
Same with talk to NPC. Many games have battleground over property. Many games let you you customize your class. Darkfall and Istaria for 2.
What game let you fight a raid with as many as you want wit ha dynamic AI taht scales it's tactics?
WoW is not the only modern game, there are hundreds and hundreds on that list. Every single one of them has something from your list that you can do.
" I can group much easier than in old games except that grouping is pretty much exclusive to people you already know, because the game mechanics don't actually encourage grouping, solo much easier than in old games and that's a good thing in a game about socializing and multiplayer? "
Totally false. I group with new people all the time. It's very easy to do. The games make grouping very easy. All you do is talk to them for two minutes and then ask if they want to join you. I've found most people do.
Yes soloing being easier is a good thing in games about socializing and multiplayer. It gives options, and options are good. You don't have to be on the ball all the time, you can socialize and play hard, or just relax and smell the roses.
"there aren't more options, soloing is the only real option now, and flight is far more common um... how?, as are housing systems of some kind Not true, just about every old MMO had housing, just about every new MMO DOESN'T have housing.."
There are far more options. The old games you were standing in spot mob grinding for hours, or painfully leveling up solo. Now mob grinding, questiong, grouping and solo are all very viable and encouranged. I have no problems doing any of them and neither do a great many others.
Virtually no game had flight before. Now it is unsual for a game to not have flight, or not have flight planned. This makes it far more common.
Virtually no MMO's before had housing. Now many many many games have housing. This makes it far more common.
"I think games today have progressed. Progress doesn't just mean something new. Progress also means how relevant or widespread something has become. That is probably the worst definition of progress I've seen in this thread yet. Generally, progress refers to new ideas, expanding, building, moving forward. MMOs have been getting smaller, have less features, have less diversity, appeal to less demographics of players, has less innovation and creativity... that isn't progress.. Flight was in 1 game back in the day, now it's common. Thats progress. Being able to choose how you want to play easier, thats progress."
Hate to break it to you but that is the definition of progress. Progress has never and never will only refer to new things, it also refers to how widespread that issue becomes. Wright brothers inventing the airplane was progress. But that one airplane expanding into an airport in every city in the world is also progress.
MMO's have not been getting smaller, some games have smaller worlds, thats it. Some games have very big worlds. They are more diverse. Before we had fantasy skill based, fantasy lvl based, and fantasy faction pvp. Now we have all those in fantasy, sci-fi, post-apoc. There have been games about tanks, about cars. There are games about super heroes and at least one in development about horror - sounds more diverse to me.
They appeal to more a larger demographic of players - from the sterotype geek to kids, to grandmas, the working class, professionals, students.... a far far far wider demographic. That really was a silly statement you made.
They are still innovative and creative - however like everything else in existence, innovation and creativity is far easier when a genre is new. It is far more difficult the longer that genre is around as many ideas people think of is allready done. There are only so many tropes that are around. The longer something exists the more difficult it is to be new, not impossible just harder.
So yes there has been progress, a lot of it. You just refuse to recognize it because you don't like the direction that it is going.
More styles of games on the market, thats progress. There aren't more styles of games, there's one game, and all of its clones. WoW. That's not progress.
As I stated there are hundreds and hundreds of games. They are more diverse. Before we had fantasy skill based, fantasy lvl based, and fantasy faction pvp. Now we have all those in fantasy, sci-fi, post-apoc. There have been games about tanks, about cars. There are games about super heroes and at least one in development about horror - sounds more diverse to me.
You need to stop focusing on WoW and look at the other games. There are tonnes of them.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I think games today have progressed. Progress doesn't just mean something new. Progress also means how relevant or widespread something has become. That is probably the worst definition of progress I've seen in this thread yet. Generally, progress refers to new ideas, expanding, building, moving forward.
Hmmm.... O'rly?
MMOG's aside, what are any games doing nowadays that they weren't 7 years ago?
I have yet to see a CRPG match the features of Ultima Underworld or Ultima 7. The last real advance in FPS games was Doom or maybe Half Life. Strategy games haven't made any real impovements since MOO and X-Com. Adventure games were played out even before Kings Quest. Platformers are as old as dirt. Racing games? Nope. Physics games? Yup played out in the 90's.
Everything I did in yesterday's games I can do in today games and games today give me more options in how I choose to play. Can you... make a living crafting and peddling your wares from place to place? Can you collect items and trophies to decorate your house? Can you place items in the world for other players to find and use? Can you have massive 500 man battles with siege engines and naval combat, with towers and keeps falling apart? Can you build a village wherever you want and develop a community? Can you go into a random dungeon and find a new group of people and become buddies with them? Can you just group up with some folks and explore and kill what you see and level at a reasonable rate? Can I talk to random NPCs until I find a quest that sends me on a far flung journey without holding my hand the whole way through? Can I enter a persistent battleground with a constant war over a central keep? Can I customize my class with endless combinations of skills? Can I fight raids with however many people I want against a dynamic AI that scales its tactics? Cause you could do all that in old games, and you can't do any of that in modern MMOs like WoW. I can group much easier than in old games except that grouping is pretty much exclusive to people you already know, because the game mechanics don't actually encourage grouping, solo much easier than in old games and that's a good thing in a game about socializing and multiplayer? there aren't more options, soloing is the only real option now, and flight is far more common um... how?, as are housing systems of some kind Not true, just about every old MMO had housing, just about every new MMO DOESN'T have housing..
I think games today have progressed. Progress doesn't just mean something new. Progress also means how relevant or widespread something has become. That is probably the worst definition of progress I've seen in this thread yet. Generally, progress refers to new ideas, expanding, building, moving forward. MMOs have been getting smaller, have less features, have less diversity, appeal to less demographics of players, has less innovation and creativity... that isn't progress.. Flight was in 1 game back in the day, now it's common. Thats progress. Being able to choose how you want to play easier, thats progress.
More styles of games on the market, thats progress. There aren't more styles of games, there's one game, and all of its clones. WoW. That's not progress.
Venge
The answer to all those questions is yes. I can do all those things. Really? In what game? Sign me up, I'll be there in a second. I can make a living by crafting in WoW, CoH, Istaria... Not only is Istaria and CoH older than 7 years... but WoW has one of the worst crafting systems around, and its world econ is just a global auction house, hardly any kind of economic game there at all.
There are several games out there that let you have 500 man battles - eve old, darkfall see the indie clause brought up in this thread dozens of times already, the only games making progress are indie games, but it doesn't count because its largely ignored by the entire industry, so no progress is being made to the industry, just to those lone games, lineage..old, older than the game I was referring to when I said 500 man battles, I think and I believe several upcoming ones let you have naval combat So no, you can't have naval combat in mainstream games at the moment, good to know. If there was an old game that lets you do it, and it is still around than guess what I can still do it today I think you've missed the point of this entire thread. We're talking about new mainstream MMOs are we not, and how they haven't introduced any new ideas? More specifically you claimed that everything you could do in old MMOs you can do in new MMOs. So by saying "well, you can do naval combat in old MMOS!" you're proving my point.. Not many games let you build a village whereever you want but several games such as Istaria do let you build a village. Again, old games. There are many games that let you go into dungeons and meet people. Not any modern games, WoW, LotRO, Rift, all their dungeons are instanced, so you can't meet anyone in there. I group up with folks all the time in WoW, CoH and Istaria and just go kill stuff for good xp. CoH I can believe, as its an old game, WoW I cannot. If you try to level withing doing a quest grind in WoW it takes 5,00000 years longer. .
Same with talk to NPC. Many games have battleground over property. Many games let you you customize your class. Darkfall and Istaria for 2. Indie and old, as I said before. No, there are no persistent battlegrounds anymore, only instanced battlegrounds where the match doesn't even matter. And no, you don't talk to NPCs to find quests anymore, you're hit over the face with 5000 quest NPCs with !! over their head now..
What game let you fight a raid with as many as you want wit ha dynamic AI taht scales it's tactics? Dark Age of Camelot, EverQuest. More specifically DAoC. You could bring any number from 40-200 people to fight the Dragon and it'd still be a challenge.
WoW is not the only modern game, there are hundreds and hundreds on that list What list, the one on this site? Half of those aren't even MMOs, and pretty much the only mainstream AAA titles being made are WoW clones, so no. . Every single one of them has something from your list that you can do.
Yes soloing being easier is a good thing in games about socializing and multiplayer. It gives options, and options are good. No, it gives you this option. You can be social and take the insanely boring slow path to leveling, and hit your head against the wall trying to find ANYBODY willing to do it with you. Or you can solo, which the entire game is designed around.
"there aren't more options, soloing is the only real option now, and flight is far more common um... how?, as are housing systems of some kind Not true, just about every old MMO had housing, just about every new MMO DOESN'T have housing.."
There are far more options. The old games you were standing in spot mob grinding for hours, or painfully leveling up solo. Or you could do kill tasks, or do quests, or go to battlegrounds. Now mob grinding No longer an option, questiong the only option, grouping no one does this because its slower than soloing and solo are all very viable and encouranged. I have no problems doing any of them and neither do a great many others.
Virtually no game had flight before. Now it is unsual for a game to not have flight, or not have flight planned. This makes it far more common Woopy woo, one feature from 2002 has become more mainstream..
Virtually no MMO's before had housing. Really? Because I think it was the exception not to have housing back then. . Now many many many games have housing. This makes it far more common.
"I think games today have progressed. Progress doesn't just mean something new. Progress also means how relevant or widespread something has become. That is probably the worst definition of progress I've seen in this thread yet. Generally, progress refers to new ideas, expanding, building, moving forward. MMOs have been getting smaller, have less features, have less diversity, appeal to less demographics of players, has less innovation and creativity... that isn't progress.. Flight was in 1 game back in the day, now it's common. Thats progress. Being able to choose how you want to play easier, thats progress."
MMO's have not been getting smaller, some games have smaller worlds, thats it. Less features, less options, less gameplay mechanics, smaller worlds, yeah I'd say that's smaller. Some games have very big worlds. They are more diverse. Before we had fantasy skill based, fantasy lvl based, and fantasy faction pvp. Now we have all those in fantasy, sci-fi, post-apoc We had those before too. We had super hero games, scifi games, flight based games, post apoc games, so its becoming clear you don't know much about old MMOs.. T
They are still innovative and creative - however like everything else in existence, innovation and creativity is far easier when a genre is new. It was easier when the genre wasn't saturated by big publishing companies, yes. It is far more difficult the longer that genre is around as many ideas people think of is allready done. Incorrect.
More styles of games on the market, thats progress. There aren't more styles of games, there's one game, and all of its clones. WoW. That's not progress.
More styles of games on the market, thats progress. There aren't more styles of games, there's one game, and all of its clones. WoW. That's not progress.
I don't know who said it with all this inquote commenting, but this statement is clearly wrong, made by someone who either hasn't been paying much attention to the MMO market, or who just chose to ignore the obvious reality and facts to make his case.
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."
Originally posted by Garvon3 Originally posted by Leoghan
Originally posted by lizardbones
The industry has to prove that it can actually make money before you get all those innovations. Developing mmorpg isn't free you know.
How much money do they have to make though? It seems like every game launched is trying to hit WoW numbers and that's just not realistic. Right... Lizardbones, what about all the MMos of the Golden Age that were pumping out innovations like it was there job, despite the fact that it really wasn't clear if they'd make money on it?
The market is a bit different now. Those MMO's of the 'Golden Age' didn't take as long to create and didn't require the volume of knowledge necessary to be created. You and your friends could literally write a game in your garage in your spare time.
Now, the time it takes to create a game is a minimum of 5 years. That's for talented professionals. That's a minimum of (5 years * 10 people * $40k a year) $2 Million. That doesn't include any of the hardware necessary to develop the game, licensing costs, rent, electricity, etc. If you want anything approaching a triple-A game, you're looking at probably $30 to $50 Million dollars. That's only if you have people with the knowledge and experience necessary to actually get the game out the door.
Investors are only going to plunk down $10 Million dollars at a time and not get anything back for so long before they stop investing in things. They don't just want their money back, they want a profit.
The first innovation that the mmorpg genre needs is consistent profitability. After that, you will see more games than you'd ever care to play come into existence.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The answer to all those questions is yes. I can do all those things. Really? In what game? Sign me up, I'll be there in a second. I can make a living by crafting in WoW, CoH, Istaria... Not only is Istaria and CoH older than 7 years... but WoW has one of the worst crafting systems around, and its world econ is just a global auction house, hardly any kind of economic game there at all.
me = white
I didn't say I could do that all in one game. I said I could do them all. The point is those games are still around and enjoyed by many people, nor have they changed signficantly (arguably WoW has).
You didn't ask if you thought the crafting was good, you asked if you could make a living, the answer is yes you can.
There are several games out there that let you have 500 man battles - eve old, darkfall see the indie clause brought up in this thread dozens of times already, the only games making progress are indie games, but it doesn't count because its largely ignored by the entire industry, so no progress is being made to the industry, just to those lone games, lineage..old, older than the game I was referring to when I said 500 man battles, I think and I believe several upcoming ones let you have naval combat So no, you can't have naval combat in mainstream games at the moment, good to know. If there was an old game that lets you do it, and it is still around than guess what I can still do it today I think you've missed the point of this entire thread. We're talking about new mainstream MMOs are we not, and how they haven't introduced any new ideas? More specifically you claimed that everything you could do in old MMOs you can do in new MMOs. So by saying "well, you can do naval combat in old MMOS!" you're proving my point.. Not many games let you build a village whereever you want but several games such as Istaria do let you build a village. Again, old games. There are many games that let you go into dungeons and meet people. Not any modern games, WoW, LotRO, Rift, all their dungeons are instanced, so you can't meet anyone in there. I group up with folks all the time in WoW, CoH and Istaria and just go kill stuff for good xp. CoH I can believe, as its an old game, WoW I cannot. If you try to level withing doing a quest grind in WoW it takes 5,00000 years longer. .
Once again those games are still around, modern, and played by many people. Indie clause or not, they are there, modern, and people are playing them, and are at least moderatly successfull. You didn't state exclude indie, you asked if it could be done. Yes it is being done.
I've never played a game withe naval battles, but if you have, and the game is still around than guess what, it counts.
I think you missed the point. Everything you could do in old MMO's you can still do. Thats the point.
WoW is not the only game, and it is 7 years old. Many games do have dungeons and you can meet people. You should try actually meeting people. However if you play the games the same way you present on these boards it does not surprise me that you have trouble.
No it doesn't take very much longer at all in WoW the xp from mob grinding is pretty good, from dungeons even better, whether questing or not.
Same with talk to NPC. Many games have battleground over property. Many games let you you customize your class. Darkfall and Istaria for 2. Indie and old, as I said before. No, there are no persistent battlegrounds anymore, only instanced battlegrounds where the match doesn't even matter. And no, you don't talk to NPCs to find quests anymore, you're hit over the face with 5000 quest NPCs with !! over their head now..
There are still games with persitant battlegrounds, just not WoW and wow like games. See the list and play them.
What game let you fight a raid with as many as you want wit ha dynamic AI taht scales it's tactics? Dark Age of Camelot, EverQuest. More specifically DAoC. You could bring any number from 40-200 people to fight the Dragon and it'd still be a challenge.
And guess what you still can. They are still being played. So once again everything I did 10 years ago, I can still do today.
WoW is not the only modern game, there are hundreds and hundreds on that list What list, the one on this site? Half of those aren't even MMOs, and pretty much the only mainstream AAA titles being made are WoW clones, so no. . Every single one of them has something from your list that you can do.
They are MMO's just not your narrow definition, and triple A or not they are still games, still MMO's. And once again there are far more than just wow clones, open your mind, your blinded by wow.
Yes soloing being easier is a good thing in games about socializing and multiplayer. It gives options, and options are good. No, it gives you this option. You can be social and take the insanely boring slow path to leveling, and hit your head against the wall trying to find ANYBODY willing to do it with you. Or you can solo, which the entire game is designed around.
Once again your blinded. It's not very much slower, and who cares how slow it is if you enjoy it. I find peole all the time, you can too if you are somewhat nice and not so hostile.
"there aren't more options, soloing is the only real option now, and flight is far more common um... how?, as are housing systems of some kind Not true, just about every old MMO had housing, just about every new MMO DOESN'T have housing.."
Lots of options, the fact that I and others do them prove there are options. You not taking them does not mean they don't exist. And flight is more common because it is in more MMO"s - pretty self-explanatory..
No most the old MMO"s did not have housing. Now many do. That makes it more common. Heck even EQ just had housing added to it, if that doesn't show it's more common I don't know what will.
There are far more options. The old games you were standing in spot mob grinding for hours, or painfully leveling up solo. Or you could do kill tasks, or do quests, or go to battlegrounds. Now mob grinding No longer an option, questiong the only option, grouping no one does this because its slower than soloing and solo are all very viable and encouranged. I have no problems doing any of them and neither do a great many others.
All those option are still around and are generally not as irriting to set up. Lots of people group, apparently just not with you.
Virtually no game had flight before. Now it is unsual for a game to not have flight, or not have flight planned. This makes it far more common Woopy woo, one feature from 2002 has become more mainstream..
Thats a good thing.
Virtually no MMO's before had housing. Really? Because I think it was the exception not to have housing back then. . Now many many many games have housing. This makes it far more common.
No only a couple back then had housing.
"I think games today have progressed. Progress doesn't just mean something new. Progress also means how relevant or widespread something has become. That is probably the worst definition of progress I've seen in this thread yet. Generally, progress refers to new ideas, expanding, building, moving forward. MMOs have been getting smaller, have less features, have less diversity, appeal to less demographics of players, has less innovation and creativity... that isn't progress.. Flight was in 1 game back in the day, now it's common. Thats progress. Being able to choose how you want to play easier, thats progress."
See earlier statement. Something become more common is progress - this would be the expanding part.
MMO's have not been getting smaller, some games have smaller worlds, thats it. Less features, less options, less gameplay mechanics, smaller worlds, yeah I'd say that's smaller. Some games have very big worlds. They are more diverse. Before we had fantasy skill based, fantasy lvl based, and fantasy faction pvp. Now we have all those in fantasy, sci-fi, post-apoc We had those before too. We had super hero games, scifi games, flight based games, post apoc games, so its becoming clear you don't know much about old MMOs..
MOre features, more options, more gameplay mechanics, not change in world size.
And now we have even more of them. We did not have post-apoc before, now we do. We only had one sci-fi before, now we have more. We had one super hero before, now we have more. So once again we still have all the same ones we had before and more options. It's becoming clear you are deliberately selecting only critieria that you like and ignoring everything else.
They are still innovative and creative - however like everything else in existence, innovation and creativity is far easier when a genre is new. It was easier when the genre wasn't saturated by big publishing companies, yes. It is far more difficult the longer that genre is around as many ideas people think of is allready done. Incorrect.
Perfectly correct. The more of something there is the harder it is to be innovative.
More styles of games on the market, thats progress. There aren't more styles of games, there's one game, and all of its clones. WoW. That's not progress.
More styles, more games, some clones some not. Thats progress.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
More styles of games on the market, thats progress. There aren't more styles of games, there's one game, and all of its clones. WoW. That's not progress.
I don't know who said it with all this inquote commenting, but this statement is clearly wrong, made by someone who either hasn't been paying much attention to the MMO market, or who just chose to ignore the obvious reality and facts to make his case.
I said there are more styles of games. Garvon stated there aren't more styles, just one game and it's clones.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Gosh, people bring up some good points, and as was mentioned by someone on the first? second? page, it's just basically ignored or twisted to suit what you want.
They have progressed. Have we seen a giant leap ahead? Nope. And there is a big reason. If something is working so well and dominates the industry, they can easily buy up small "good things" and incorperate it into theirs.
Or, companies will try to be like the one dominating the industry but with their own flair.
Have some of the points brought up here been done before? Sure! But have they been done so well, and played so good, and been so much fun? Well...some would say yes. But that's all subjective.
It's objective to say the technical aspects of the game have improved a lot compared to seven years ago++. But if you enjoy a themepark sandbox like MO/EvE, you might argue against any real change in games since there really has been so few of those types of games.
Its really funny because he could have just clicked on your name to see that you aren't a WoW kiddie. It just goes to show you that its always best to do your homework before you make a fool of yourself.
And I agree with the idea that older MMOG's sucked compared to the newer ones. The just seemed cooler at the time.
To be fair i did play WoW. Heh. But I'm not hyper about it, was fun. I did find enjoyment in the older games, for sure, but I think the quality, polish, worlds and UI has improved in most games. To say the least.
Yes, because its unheard of for good things not to get noticed by the mass public. I mean, FIrefly was such a horrible show, it deserved to be cancelled. But Jersey Shore, now THAT'S quality!
This tack? Come on do better than this. Ok, I'll play along. Cheeseburgers are popular, and they are good.
So is/are:
Bacon
Cake
Music
Movies
Sex
Booze
Candy
Soda
Books
Pie
To list a few, those things are popular, massive quantities of them are consumed, viewed, partaken in. Being popular isn't always bad, and being old isn't always qualification for some golden age. I've never seen Jersey Shore, but I agree with you on that. My point is this, there has been innovation in MMOs in the last seven years, and there is a good chance you may not have liked it.
If something is good enough it survives the test of time, you have listed old games still around that prove that. To write off any innovation in a direction you do not agree with as nothing could mean several things, but none of those things actually point to all innovation ceasing in the MMO industry. Me personally, I hate how they have Hollywoodized the gaming industry and corporate America has latched onto it firmly and is proceding to fornicate it's cranial bone until the body stops twitching. I do miss the smaller teams involved, less add blitzing and the nerd street cred you used to get.
To be clear, I believe you feel strongly about a subject but you're not being objective enough to remove yourself from the argument and see that fact is not the same as opinion. Your opinion could align with a fact but facts are not subjegate to opine.
mmorpGs are much better games than they were first conceived.
Features like instances, dungeon finding tools, ability to customize interfaces, battleground, arenas ... make the gaming experience more diverse and more fun.
More DIVERSE? No, we had dungeons and battlegrounds and arenas in 2001, nothing new there.
More FUN? Maybe for people who don't like MMORPGs. For peple that would rather play a game like Diablo than EverQuest.
MMOs today have less features than MMOs of yesterday. That is the opposite of progress.
I do not agree with this, where do you draw the line at "yesterday?"
mmorpGs are much better games than they were first conceived.
Features like instances, dungeon finding tools, ability to customize interfaces, battleground, arenas ... make the gaming experience more diverse and more fun.
More DIVERSE? No, we had dungeons and battlegrounds and arenas in 2001, nothing new there.
More FUN? Maybe for people who don't like MMORPGs. For peple that would rather play a game like Diablo than EverQuest.
MMOs today have less features than MMOs of yesterday. That is the opposite of progress.
I do not agree with this, where do you draw the line at "yesterday?"
Yesterday is the MMO Golden Age 1997-2003. When WoW hit we entered the MMO Dark Ages where its just clones and stale ideas. There have been little to no innovations since 2003, despite there being hundreds more games being made. No AAA MMOs come out with new ideas.
mmorpGs are much better games than they were first conceived.
Features like instances, dungeon finding tools, ability to customize interfaces, battleground, arenas ... make the gaming experience more diverse and more fun.
More DIVERSE? No, we had dungeons and battlegrounds and arenas in 2001, nothing new there.
More FUN? Maybe for people who don't like MMORPGs. For peple that would rather play a game like Diablo than EverQuest.
MMOs today have less features than MMOs of yesterday. That is the opposite of progress.
I do not agree with this, where do you draw the line at "yesterday?"
Yesterday is the MMO Golden Age 1997-2003. When WoW hit we entered the MMO Dark Ages where its just clones and stale ideas. There have been little to no innovations since 2003, despite there being hundreds more games being made. No AAA MMOs come out with new ideas.
Again, even innovations you do not like or agree with are none the less real.
Well if you took Everquest or Ultima and compared it to the latest and greatest released mmos you will find not much has changed at all.
If you take Doom or Quake then you notice a lot of similarities with shooters this day too.
Heck, pick Halo from 2001 and you'll notice that the gameplay hasn't changed much with shooters you play today.
Same goes for other genres, like RTS: SC2 has almost exactly the same gameplay mechanics as SC, and that's 10 years later.
It's easy to be innovative when there's merely a handful in a new genre, like UO and EQ had the advantage of. Try to do the same when a genre has established itself, with a lot of the various gameplay mechanics within that genre explored, tried out and the most liked ones risen to be genre standards.
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."
mmorpGs are much better games than they were first conceived.
Features like instances, dungeon finding tools, ability to customize interfaces, battleground, arenas ... make the gaming experience more diverse and more fun.
More DIVERSE? No, we had dungeons and battlegrounds and arenas in 2001, nothing new there.
More FUN? Maybe for people who don't like MMORPGs. For peple that would rather play a game like Diablo than EverQuest.
MMOs today have less features than MMOs of yesterday. That is the opposite of progress.
I do not agree with this, where do you draw the line at "yesterday?"
Yesterday is the MMO Golden Age 1997-2003. When WoW hit we entered the MMO Dark Ages where its just clones and stale ideas. There have been little to no innovations since 2003, despite there being hundreds more games being made. No AAA MMOs come out with new ideas.
Again, even innovations you do not like or agree with are none the less real.
And they are nonetheless few and far between. Public quests, phasing, and.. that's about it. Wow, good job MMO industry, realling kicking in the creative juices.
7 years, dozens of games, and we have LESS features now than we did in 1997.. just really sad. Probably the most innovative and technically advanced game was made by 30 guys in Greece, but 200 developers in Blizzard cannot come up with a new idea to save their life.
And they are nonetheless few and far between. Public quests, phasing, and.. that's about it. Wow, good job MMO industry, realling kicking in the creative juices.
7 years, dozens of games, and we have LESS features now than we did in 1997.. just really sad. Probably the most innovative and technically advanced game was made by 30 guys in Greece, but 200 developers in Blizzard cannot come up with a new idea to save their life.
Could you maybe mention the great and successful innovations in shooters, RPG's and RTS games in the past 5-7 years that haven't been done before?
If so, you'd have a point. Else what you're saying is nothing more than that MMORPG's have outgrown their startup phase and become an established genre just like the other game genres.
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."
Well if you took Everquest or Ultima and compared it to the latest and greatest released mmos you will find not much has changed at all.
If you take Doom or Quake then you notice a lot of similarities with shooters this day too.
Heck, pick Halo from 2001 and you'll notice that the gameplay hasn't changed much with shooters you play today.
Same goes for other genres, like RTS: SC2 has almost exactly the same gameplay mechanics as SC, and that's 10 years later.
It's easy to be innovative when there's merely a handful in a new genre, like UO and EQ had the advantage of. Try to do the same when a genre has established itself, with a lot of the various gameplay mechanics within that genre explored, tried out and the most liked ones risen to be genre standards.
There's tons of innovation going on in the RTS genre, and the RPG genres. SC2 has almost the exact same gameplay becauze Blizzard is the pinnacle of not innovating lately. They're the shining example of coming up with no new ideas.
Look at games like the Total War series, coming out with new features and ideas every year, or Solar Empire, Rise of Nations. Or to RPGs you need to look at the Witcher 2, Skyrim, Amalur, all the new ideas they're bringing to the table. Each game has new ideas that set it apart and make it worth buying.
New MMOs do not. If they were at least the culmination of all ideas that came before them, that's one thing, but they have significantly LESS features than MMOs made by smaller teams years ago did.
And saying innovation is hard in this day and age... then how come games like Xyson and Darkfall and Fallen Earth can do it, but mainstream AAA MMOs just can't cause the genre is "too old"?
Still have my reservation about that game but who knows it looks promising in many ways and alot of progress from traditional fantasy mmorpgs and holding hand themeparks.
Total freedom no classes or lvles.
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009..... In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
There's tons of innovation going on in the RTS genre, and the RPG genres. SC2 has almost the exact same gameplay becauze Blizzard is the pinnacle of not innovating lately. They're the shining example of coming up with no new ideas.
Look at games like the Total War series, coming out with new features and ideas every year, or Solar Empire, Rise of Nations. Or to RPGs you need to look at the Witcher 2, Skyrim, Amalur, all the new ideas they're bringing to the table. Each game has new ideas that set it apart and make it worth buying.
Those aren't innovations at all, most of them, it's mechanics that have been done and seen before 2005. You're just mentioning games that have a style that you prefer. A different subgenre in some cases, maybe, but hardly innovative.
New MMOs do not. If they were at least the culmination of all ideas that came before them, that's one thing, but they have significantly LESS features than MMOs made by smaller teams years ago did.
Ok, now I'm starting to realise that you're seeing with a colored glasses and not objectively.
You're ignoring the multitude of games in the shooter genre (couldn't name a lot innovations there, eh?), RTS genre and RPG genre that had gameplay mechanics that were similar to games in those genres before 2005.
Furthermore, as good as all those so called 'innovations' you mention had been done one way or another in games before 2005. On top of that, you're purposely ignoring the innovations or different gameplay that has been done in the past few years or that can be seen in upcoming MMORPG's, merely because you don't like those innovations or changes
SWTOR, GW2, ArcheAge, Firefall, Black Prophecy, Rift, Xsyon, TSW, TERA, all are doing things differently, in 1 or more gameplay features, than what has been done before in current AAA MMORPG's.
But since it's so obvious that you're completely biased against MMORPG's that have appeared after your precious 'Golden Age' or that are on the verge of appearing, there's no use or sense at all in continuing this discussion with you. This kind of bias has become an idee fixe that will never go away, it feeds on itself. Shrug. Not my thing, but hf with it.
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."
How you define what is an MMO and what is not an MMO is irrelevant since the vast majority of players consider WoW an MMO.
Capitalism and free market is working as intended.
So by your logic... if more people use the word 'irony' incorrectly than use it the right way... the people who use it the right way are now wrong? If a lot of people say that we breathe aurem instead of oxygen, it makes the people who say we breathe oxygen wrong?
And wow, 7 years and the hundreds of MMOs that have come out have come up with... 2 features! Wow! What an acomplishment! We should be proud of this FLOURISHING industry.
How you personally define the term MMO is irrelevant since you need the majority of people to agree with you.
As an example, I can say 'COD:Black Ops is not an FPS because ZYX' but that's irrelevant to the other players since everyone agrees it is.
Similarly you can say 'WoW is not an MMO because XYZ' all you want but that's irrevelant to the vast majority of gamers.
As shown in this thread, lots of new features have come into the genre the past 7 years. Whether it suits one's personal taste is another issue but to say it hasn't 'progressed' is wrong.
I'm not really understanding why anyone is upset at a successful game (WoW in this case) though.
I love listening to music but I don't particularly care for Jazz music but I don't hate a successful Jazz Album. It just doesn't make sense.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Look at games like the Total War series, coming out with new features and ideas every year, or Solar Empire, Rise of Nations. Or to RPGs you need to look at the Witcher 2, Skyrim, Amalur, all the new ideas they're bringing to the table. Each game has new ideas that set it apart and make it worth buying.
Would you mind listing a few of these new ideas in these games you are talking about?
mmorpGs are much better games than they were first conceived.
Features like instances, dungeon finding tools, ability to customize interfaces, battleground, arenas ... make the gaming experience more diverse and more fun.
More DIVERSE? No, we had dungeons and battlegrounds and arenas in 2001, nothing new there.
More FUN? Maybe for people who don't like MMORPGs. For peple that would rather play a game like Diablo than EverQuest.
MMOs today have less features than MMOs of yesterday. That is the opposite of progress.
I do not agree with this, where do you draw the line at "yesterday?"
Yesterday is the MMO Golden Age 1997-2003. When WoW hit we entered the MMO Dark Ages where its just clones and stale ideas. There have been little to no innovations since 2003, despite there being hundreds more games being made. No AAA MMOs come out with new ideas.
Again, even innovations you do not like or agree with are none the less real.
And they are nonetheless few and far between. Public quests, phasing, and.. that's about it. Wow, good job MMO industry, realling kicking in the creative juices.
7 years, dozens of games, and we have LESS features now than we did in 1997.. just really sad. Probably the most innovative and technically advanced game was made by 30 guys in Greece, but 200 developers in Blizzard cannot come up with a new idea to save their life.
I've named a few things that have changed, what would you change that would be so ground breaking? Because at this point you're just pushing opinion as fact. If you hate it so much leave, never look back. Find something that makes you happy. To lurk here and bitch every time someone even thinks about WoW seems petty and sad.
mmorpGs are much better games than they were first conceived.
Features like instances, dungeon finding tools, ability to customize interfaces, battleground, arenas ... make the gaming experience more diverse and more fun.
More DIVERSE? No, we had dungeons and battlegrounds and arenas in 2001, nothing new there.
More FUN? Maybe for people who don't like MMORPGs. For peple that would rather play a game like Diablo than EverQuest.
MMOs today have less features than MMOs of yesterday. That is the opposite of progress.
I do not agree with this, where do you draw the line at "yesterday?"
Yesterday is the MMO Golden Age 1997-2003. When WoW hit we entered the MMO Dark Ages where its just clones and stale ideas. There have been little to no innovations since 2003, despite there being hundreds more games being made. No AAA MMOs come out with new ideas.
Again, even innovations you do not like or agree with are none the less real.
And they are nonetheless few and far between. Public quests, phasing, and.. that's about it. Wow, good job MMO industry, realling kicking in the creative juices.
7 years, dozens of games, and we have LESS features now than we did in 1997.. just really sad. Probably the most innovative and technically advanced game was made by 30 guys in Greece, but 200 developers in Blizzard cannot come up with a new idea to save their life.
I've named a few things that have changed, what would you change that would be so ground breaking? Because at this point you're just pushing opinion as fact. If you hate it so much leave, never look back. Find something that makes you happy. To lurk here and bitch every time someone even thinks about WoW seems petty and sad.
MMORPGs used to make me happy, before big publishers made the genre die a painful death.
What would I do that's ground breaking in a AAA MMO? I'd probably take Darkfall and give it AAA funding, and add in pieces of Xyson and Ultima Online, for starters. Then I'd work to maybe making a new type of RvR system. Hell I'd do SOMETHING. Rift has only ONE thing that people seem to agree sets it apart from other MMOs in the past. Rifts. But guess what, Rifts are little more than public quests, or the dynamic invasion from Ultima Online (actually, they're quite a bit worse than those) or the invasions from Tabula Rasa.
MMORPGs used to each have their own identity and learning curve. Now you can describe almost all new MMOs as "WoW with invasions" or "WoW with a Lord of the Rings skin" or "WoW with flying". You would never have been able to pull that off in the old days. You couldn't call SWG "EQ with a SW skin" or DAoC "EverQuest with battelgrounds" or Asheron's cal "Ultima Online in 3d" because all of them hardly shared any similarities. If MMO companies were able to come up with vastly different style games then, then they sure as hell can now, so don't blame the industry being "too old".
Hell, I'd even settle for rehashes of the Golden Age MMOs, becasue its been so long since we've seen so many of those great features in MMOs. I'd play a DAoC clone, or an AC clone, or a SWG clone, because unlike WoW clones (which we get about 4 of every year) we've not seen those games in a good 8 years. They'd feel fresh, unlike playing WoW's formula and gameplay and UI and instancing over and over and over again.
Still have my reservation about that game but who knows it looks promising in many ways and alot of progress from traditional fantasy mmorpgs and holding hand themeparks.
Total freedom no classes or lvles.
Agreed, it is good that Funcom tries something different, I just hope they have learned from AoCs 2 major problems (The engine far from optimized and too little content).
The ideas are not bad, a Delta green styled MMORPG is long overdue.
Comments
The answer to all those questions is yes. I can do all those things. I can make a living by crafting in WoW, CoH, Istaria... yes even in WoW. I"m very casual in WoW and my highest character is only 64 currently my banker has 15000 gold just from my alts crafting, gathering and selling. I don't expect I would ever really need that. Istaria crafted enhancements sell very quickly and in Istaria crafting is almost all there is. There are a great many MMO's on the market and. In CoH I can collect items and trophies and decorate the house. In Istarai I can put machines on my plot and lair.
There are several games out there that let you have 500 man battles - eve, darkfall, lineage.. and I believe several upcoming ones let you have naval combat. If there was an old game that lets you do it, and it is still around than guess what I can still do it today. Not many games let you build a village whereever you want but several games such as Istaria do let you build a village. There are many games that let you go into dungeons and meet people. I group up with folks all the time in WoW, CoH and Istaria and just go kill stuff for good xp.
Same with talk to NPC. Many games have battleground over property. Many games let you you customize your class. Darkfall and Istaria for 2.
What game let you fight a raid with as many as you want wit ha dynamic AI taht scales it's tactics?
WoW is not the only modern game, there are hundreds and hundreds on that list. Every single one of them has something from your list that you can do.
" I can group much easier than in old games except that grouping is pretty much exclusive to people you already know, because the game mechanics don't actually encourage grouping, solo much easier than in old games and that's a good thing in a game about socializing and multiplayer? "
Totally false. I group with new people all the time. It's very easy to do. The games make grouping very easy. All you do is talk to them for two minutes and then ask if they want to join you. I've found most people do.
Yes soloing being easier is a good thing in games about socializing and multiplayer. It gives options, and options are good. You don't have to be on the ball all the time, you can socialize and play hard, or just relax and smell the roses.
"there aren't more options, soloing is the only real option now, and flight is far more common um... how?, as are housing systems of some kind Not true, just about every old MMO had housing, just about every new MMO DOESN'T have housing.."
There are far more options. The old games you were standing in spot mob grinding for hours, or painfully leveling up solo. Now mob grinding, questiong, grouping and solo are all very viable and encouranged. I have no problems doing any of them and neither do a great many others.
Virtually no game had flight before. Now it is unsual for a game to not have flight, or not have flight planned. This makes it far more common.
Virtually no MMO's before had housing. Now many many many games have housing. This makes it far more common.
"I think games today have progressed. Progress doesn't just mean something new. Progress also means how relevant or widespread something has become. That is probably the worst definition of progress I've seen in this thread yet. Generally, progress refers to new ideas, expanding, building, moving forward. MMOs have been getting smaller, have less features, have less diversity, appeal to less demographics of players, has less innovation and creativity... that isn't progress.. Flight was in 1 game back in the day, now it's common. Thats progress. Being able to choose how you want to play easier, thats progress."
Hate to break it to you but that is the definition of progress. Progress has never and never will only refer to new things, it also refers to how widespread that issue becomes. Wright brothers inventing the airplane was progress. But that one airplane expanding into an airport in every city in the world is also progress.
MMO's have not been getting smaller, some games have smaller worlds, thats it. Some games have very big worlds. They are more diverse. Before we had fantasy skill based, fantasy lvl based, and fantasy faction pvp. Now we have all those in fantasy, sci-fi, post-apoc. There have been games about tanks, about cars. There are games about super heroes and at least one in development about horror - sounds more diverse to me.
They appeal to more a larger demographic of players - from the sterotype geek to kids, to grandmas, the working class, professionals, students.... a far far far wider demographic. That really was a silly statement you made.
They are still innovative and creative - however like everything else in existence, innovation and creativity is far easier when a genre is new. It is far more difficult the longer that genre is around as many ideas people think of is allready done. There are only so many tropes that are around. The longer something exists the more difficult it is to be new, not impossible just harder.
So yes there has been progress, a lot of it. You just refuse to recognize it because you don't like the direction that it is going.
More styles of games on the market, thats progress. There aren't more styles of games, there's one game, and all of its clones. WoW. That's not progress.
As I stated there are hundreds and hundreds of games. They are more diverse. Before we had fantasy skill based, fantasy lvl based, and fantasy faction pvp. Now we have all those in fantasy, sci-fi, post-apoc. There have been games about tanks, about cars. There are games about super heroes and at least one in development about horror - sounds more diverse to me.
You need to stop focusing on WoW and look at the other games. There are tonnes of them.
Venge
Hmmm.... O'rly?
MMOG's aside, what are any games doing nowadays that they weren't 7 years ago?
I have yet to see a CRPG match the features of Ultima Underworld or Ultima 7. The last real advance in FPS games was Doom or maybe Half Life. Strategy games haven't made any real impovements since MOO and X-Com. Adventure games were played out even before Kings Quest. Platformers are as old as dirt. Racing games? Nope. Physics games? Yup played out in the 90's.
I don't know who said it with all this inquote commenting, but this statement is clearly wrong, made by someone who either hasn't been paying much attention to the MMO market, or who just chose to ignore the obvious reality and facts to make his case.
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."
Right... Lizardbones, what about all the MMos of the Golden Age that were pumping out innovations like it was there job, despite the fact that it really wasn't clear if they'd make money on it?
The market is a bit different now. Those MMO's of the 'Golden Age' didn't take as long to create and didn't require the volume of knowledge necessary to be created. You and your friends could literally write a game in your garage in your spare time.
Now, the time it takes to create a game is a minimum of 5 years. That's for talented professionals. That's a minimum of (5 years * 10 people * $40k a year) $2 Million. That doesn't include any of the hardware necessary to develop the game, licensing costs, rent, electricity, etc. If you want anything approaching a triple-A game, you're looking at probably $30 to $50 Million dollars. That's only if you have people with the knowledge and experience necessary to actually get the game out the door.
Investors are only going to plunk down $10 Million dollars at a time and not get anything back for so long before they stop investing in things. They don't just want their money back, they want a profit.
The first innovation that the mmorpg genre needs is consistent profitability. After that, you will see more games than you'd ever care to play come into existence.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
More styles, more games, some clones some not. Thats progress.
Venge
I said there are more styles of games. Garvon stated there aren't more styles, just one game and it's clones.
Venge
Gosh, people bring up some good points, and as was mentioned by someone on the first? second? page, it's just basically ignored or twisted to suit what you want.
They have progressed. Have we seen a giant leap ahead? Nope. And there is a big reason. If something is working so well and dominates the industry, they can easily buy up small "good things" and incorperate it into theirs.
Or, companies will try to be like the one dominating the industry but with their own flair.
Have some of the points brought up here been done before? Sure! But have they been done so well, and played so good, and been so much fun? Well...some would say yes. But that's all subjective.
It's objective to say the technical aspects of the game have improved a lot compared to seven years ago++. But if you enjoy a themepark sandbox like MO/EvE, you might argue against any real change in games since there really has been so few of those types of games.
To be fair i did play WoW. Heh. But I'm not hyper about it, was fun. I did find enjoyment in the older games, for sure, but I think the quality, polish, worlds and UI has improved in most games. To say the least.
This tack? Come on do better than this. Ok, I'll play along. Cheeseburgers are popular, and they are good.
So is/are:
Bacon
Cake
Music
Movies
Sex
Booze
Candy
Soda
Books
Pie
To list a few, those things are popular, massive quantities of them are consumed, viewed, partaken in. Being popular isn't always bad, and being old isn't always qualification for some golden age. I've never seen Jersey Shore, but I agree with you on that. My point is this, there has been innovation in MMOs in the last seven years, and there is a good chance you may not have liked it.
If something is good enough it survives the test of time, you have listed old games still around that prove that. To write off any innovation in a direction you do not agree with as nothing could mean several things, but none of those things actually point to all innovation ceasing in the MMO industry. Me personally, I hate how they have Hollywoodized the gaming industry and corporate America has latched onto it firmly and is proceding to fornicate it's cranial bone until the body stops twitching. I do miss the smaller teams involved, less add blitzing and the nerd street cred you used to get.
To be clear, I believe you feel strongly about a subject but you're not being objective enough to remove yourself from the argument and see that fact is not the same as opinion. Your opinion could align with a fact but facts are not subjegate to opine.
I do not agree with this, where do you draw the line at "yesterday?"
Yesterday is the MMO Golden Age 1997-2003. When WoW hit we entered the MMO Dark Ages where its just clones and stale ideas. There have been little to no innovations since 2003, despite there being hundreds more games being made. No AAA MMOs come out with new ideas.
Again, even innovations you do not like or agree with are none the less real.
This list is sort of neat.
Well if you took Everquest or Ultima and compared it to the latest and greatest released mmos you will find not much has changed at all.
If you take Doom or Quake then you notice a lot of similarities with shooters this day too.
Heck, pick Halo from 2001 and you'll notice that the gameplay hasn't changed much with shooters you play today.
Same goes for other genres, like RTS: SC2 has almost exactly the same gameplay mechanics as SC, and that's 10 years later.
It's easy to be innovative when there's merely a handful in a new genre, like UO and EQ had the advantage of. Try to do the same when a genre has established itself, with a lot of the various gameplay mechanics within that genre explored, tried out and the most liked ones risen to be genre standards.
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."
And they are nonetheless few and far between. Public quests, phasing, and.. that's about it. Wow, good job MMO industry, realling kicking in the creative juices.
7 years, dozens of games, and we have LESS features now than we did in 1997.. just really sad. Probably the most innovative and technically advanced game was made by 30 guys in Greece, but 200 developers in Blizzard cannot come up with a new idea to save their life.
Could you maybe mention the great and successful innovations in shooters, RPG's and RTS games in the past 5-7 years that haven't been done before?
If so, you'd have a point. Else what you're saying is nothing more than that MMORPG's have outgrown their startup phase and become an established genre just like the other game genres.
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."
There's tons of innovation going on in the RTS genre, and the RPG genres. SC2 has almost the exact same gameplay becauze Blizzard is the pinnacle of not innovating lately. They're the shining example of coming up with no new ideas.
Look at games like the Total War series, coming out with new features and ideas every year, or Solar Empire, Rise of Nations. Or to RPGs you need to look at the Witcher 2, Skyrim, Amalur, all the new ideas they're bringing to the table. Each game has new ideas that set it apart and make it worth buying.
New MMOs do not. If they were at least the culmination of all ideas that came before them, that's one thing, but they have significantly LESS features than MMOs made by smaller teams years ago did.
And saying innovation is hard in this day and age... then how come games like Xyson and Darkfall and Fallen Earth can do it, but mainstream AAA MMOs just can't cause the genre is "too old"?
Maybe The Secret World soon?
Still have my reservation about that game but who knows it looks promising in many ways and alot of progress from traditional fantasy mmorpgs and holding hand themeparks.
Total freedom no classes or lvles.
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
Ok, now I'm starting to realise that you're seeing with a colored glasses and not objectively.
You're ignoring the multitude of games in the shooter genre (couldn't name a lot innovations there, eh?), RTS genre and RPG genre that had gameplay mechanics that were similar to games in those genres before 2005.
Furthermore, as good as all those so called 'innovations' you mention had been done one way or another in games before 2005. On top of that, you're purposely ignoring the innovations or different gameplay that has been done in the past few years or that can be seen in upcoming MMORPG's, merely because you don't like those innovations or changes
SWTOR, GW2, ArcheAge, Firefall, Black Prophecy, Rift, Xsyon, TSW, TERA, all are doing things differently, in 1 or more gameplay features, than what has been done before in current AAA MMORPG's.
But since it's so obvious that you're completely biased against MMORPG's that have appeared after your precious 'Golden Age' or that are on the verge of appearing, there's no use or sense at all in continuing this discussion with you. This kind of bias has become an idee fixe that will never go away, it feeds on itself. Shrug. Not my thing, but hf with it.
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."
How you personally define the term MMO is irrelevant since you need the majority of people to agree with you.
As an example, I can say 'COD:Black Ops is not an FPS because ZYX' but that's irrelevant to the other players since everyone agrees it is.
Similarly you can say 'WoW is not an MMO because XYZ' all you want but that's irrevelant to the vast majority of gamers.
As shown in this thread, lots of new features have come into the genre the past 7 years. Whether it suits one's personal taste is another issue but to say it hasn't 'progressed' is wrong.
I'm not really understanding why anyone is upset at a successful game (WoW in this case) though.
I love listening to music but I don't particularly care for Jazz music but I don't hate a successful Jazz Album. It just doesn't make sense.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Would you mind listing a few of these new ideas in these games you are talking about?
I've named a few things that have changed, what would you change that would be so ground breaking? Because at this point you're just pushing opinion as fact. If you hate it so much leave, never look back. Find something that makes you happy. To lurk here and bitch every time someone even thinks about WoW seems petty and sad.
MMORPGs used to make me happy, before big publishers made the genre die a painful death.
What would I do that's ground breaking in a AAA MMO? I'd probably take Darkfall and give it AAA funding, and add in pieces of Xyson and Ultima Online, for starters. Then I'd work to maybe making a new type of RvR system. Hell I'd do SOMETHING. Rift has only ONE thing that people seem to agree sets it apart from other MMOs in the past. Rifts. But guess what, Rifts are little more than public quests, or the dynamic invasion from Ultima Online (actually, they're quite a bit worse than those) or the invasions from Tabula Rasa.
MMORPGs used to each have their own identity and learning curve. Now you can describe almost all new MMOs as "WoW with invasions" or "WoW with a Lord of the Rings skin" or "WoW with flying". You would never have been able to pull that off in the old days. You couldn't call SWG "EQ with a SW skin" or DAoC "EverQuest with battelgrounds" or Asheron's cal "Ultima Online in 3d" because all of them hardly shared any similarities. If MMO companies were able to come up with vastly different style games then, then they sure as hell can now, so don't blame the industry being "too old".
Hell, I'd even settle for rehashes of the Golden Age MMOs, becasue its been so long since we've seen so many of those great features in MMOs. I'd play a DAoC clone, or an AC clone, or a SWG clone, because unlike WoW clones (which we get about 4 of every year) we've not seen those games in a good 8 years. They'd feel fresh, unlike playing WoW's formula and gameplay and UI and instancing over and over and over again.
Agreed, it is good that Funcom tries something different, I just hope they have learned from AoCs 2 major problems (The engine far from optimized and too little content).
The ideas are not bad, a Delta green styled MMORPG is long overdue.