Everywhere I go I hear all the same complaints: We don't want Fast Travel, We don't want Auction Houses, We Don't want Dungeon Finders, We want Full Loot PVP, We Don't want Battlegrounds, We want the best stuff in the game to be barred from casuals, etc.
Do any of these people truly understand what it is they are asking for?
Yes we do.
Now I have a question for you. Are the rest of us allowed to have an opinon that you don't like?
Of course you are. Who am I to say you can't?
But let me ask you: Why do you think this would make a game better?
To the people who like those things, there are reasons:
Fast travel speeds up pace of gameplay. Faster pace means content is consumed more quickly. Once out of content, a player can become bored because there's nothing more to do. Fast paced games need more content, which given finite development resources means the quality level of content goes down as quantity goes up.
Auction house eliminates a need to interact with others in order to obtain goods. Reducing interaction causes more isolation of individual players. Isolation of players works opposite of building community.
Dungeon Finders cut down on the need for guilds and friends lists as a primary means to grouping. This also is opposite of community building.
Battlegrounds are a mini-game embedded in the world. They isolate PVP gameplay from the world, making the world less active. They isolate players from each other making population seem less dense. This also applies to instanced dungeons. Some people believe that MMOs work better if they are not lobby-games.
If there is no reward to being a hardcore player, there is no reason to be a hardcore player. Hardcore players stay in games for long periods of time which is good for subscriptions. They also play for long hours which is good for population.
Realistically, the old systems are far from perfect. Both the old and new systems have problems, but they are different problems. Preference for either is largely based on the individual.
And this post here pretty much answers the OP's very loaded question perfectly.
Now it's been years since I played EvE, but it was probably the best example of a game that dearly needs fast travel. If you're going anywhere distant, you set your course and go watch TV. Maybe in a half hour or so, you come back to see if you've finally arrived.
I don't want to watch TV, I want to play a game. If I wanted to watch TV, I'd turn the computer off.
I have to agree with this, the travel system in EVE is absolutely horrid. At least in other games you get to observe scenery or do stuff while you travel, EVE doesn't really work that way. 30 jumps there, 30 jumps here... I like EVE, but this... >_<
And it would be OK if you could watch TV but autopilot is too dangerous.
So long as you stay out of low-sec, it's completely safe. Since I hate PvP, I never ventured into low-sec under any circumstances.
One of the big things that always gets me is people crying about "Open Worlds" and then those same people quickly rush through it or skip it and spend most of their time in instances anyway. Unless this is a FFA PvP game we are talking about there is no point in having a PvE centric Open World.
The people who think manual grouping doesn't build community never played FFXI.
GW2's grouping is shallow and doesn't build anything. Yea people work together and raise each other, but they also forget that person's existence the second they turn away.
I'd rather ask why so many devs follow such narrow trends, seeming to imitate each other, rather than making all different sorts of games, for all different sorts of players, with all different sorts of preferences.. I understand there's this idea of mass appeal, but I swear, it's gotten unrealistically narrow, and I highly doubt its anywhere near as limiting as all that.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
I think we can agree that in just about any MMORPG when you log in at roughly the same time each day you will start seeing "the usual suspects".
If you mean the same players, that is pretty much never the case for me.
But on the other side you may just come across somebody who is in need of help. Just a quick jump in, help him/her kill that mob or even just heal him/her, and a simple communication may follow: "hey, thanks man, yeah, they jumped me out of nowhere." - "no problem dude, I know this spot, happens all the time... there is a better spot a bit to the left, you want me to show you?" - "hey sure, cool, I could really use some XP/gold" - "if you want to we can team up? makes things a bit easier?" - "nice, definitely!"
GW2's soft grouping takes that need completely out of the game: you are at the right spot at the right time and you are in a group. But you will probably never know a single of your "fellow adventurers" in that "group".
I do not see what soft grouping has to do with your example. Like, at all.
You can help a person kill a mob in GW2. In fact, in most other MMO's, you would probably not be welcome. You can heal a person in GW2. None of these are a problem. This has nothing to do wtih manual grouping, because these interactions almost always happen without any grouping. Soft grouping only helps here.
Takes... what "need" out of the game?
You think I know any of the WoW players that are stealing my mobs or questing in the same area? How does GW2 system prevent me from getting to know players in a DE who would otherwise just be hordes of players in WoW camping some mobs?
Again, do pepole actively meet each other in WoW during the leveling phase? No, they do not. WoW has manual grouping. Manual grouping has continually hindered my play with other pepole in WoW. You don't have any evidence, you're comparing to some ethereal situation that doesn't exist and complaining that something didn't happen on your random CBT playthrough. It didn't happen because people don't work like that. It has nothing to do with soft or manual grouping whatsoever.
Frankly, I think I'm old enough to judge if I want to play with somebody or not. So, being auto-group would be my worst nightmare: "ah, shit, played with him, what a douche, played with her, clueless like a headless chicken, played with him, Napoleon complex10... thanks but no thanks" - "sorry, you were auto-grouped"
So basically you want to live in a bubble where other players do not affect anything... that's not my perception of an MMO. On the contrary, I consider manual grouping highly gamey and persistence-breaking, since manual grouping systems basically generate mini-instances for evrey group or single player.
So you basically only want people in your special, wuaranteed, premediated way where you can track who exists or doesn't exist in your tiny little world. Otherwise, you don't care about community at all, or the world, how dare someone attack the same worm as you and invade on your precious quest that isn't personalized anymore.
Originally posted by Cephus404
So long as you stay out of low-sec, it's completely safe. Since I hate PvP, I never ventured into low-sec under any circumstances.
So I watched a lot of TV.
Someone never carried anything expensive and been in a war.
Originally posted by Goreson Originally posted by Fly666monkeyNo, I'm not trolling, nor am I lumping anyone into a certian crowd. It's just that I hear these complaints ALL. THE. TIME. I just want to hear the vocal minority back up their arguments instead of just spewing the same old "every gamer these days is a spoon fed ADD-addled brat" argument that only serves to make them look elitist.
I'm sorry but it is true!
People were complaing that in SWTOR nobody's on the servers.
Yes, of course, not 10K or even 5K, maybe not even 1K.
The averaged average according to Scorpienne was at 350 for low pop servers.
Now, let's be fancy: 50/50 split on Rep vs. Imp: so that's 175 to each side.
Ever been in a crowd of 175 people? It is a lot!
And people keep saying that they can't find anybody to group with?
Of course, people may not be on your planet, they may not be of your level, etc. but seriously, running around on planets with less than 8 people I kept running into those same guys at hubs. And yes, there was no problem for us just teaming up for this quest or that one.
And yes, beyond that we may also have teamed up on a more regular base after a while...
fact is that most gamers these days lack social skills!
I mean when was the last time that you were at a MMO wedding or even just a normal ingame party?
Ask the "spoon fed ADD-addled brats" to join something like than and you can already imagine their faces going blank (not to mention their brains): do we get gear from that? Will there be PvP? Is the environment set up for complete interaction? etc.
It is like this cliche where kids rather than playing a boardgame or telling stories around the campfire they rather just pull out their mobiles and PSP to have fun in their own little world.
And yes, this goes as far as 2 friends sitting right next to each other on a bus rather texting each other than speaking to one another.
So, forgive me for not holding today's gamers in high regards but, well, they are not really worth it!
I ran into a couple of those 'eight" guys too. They would race to get to the mobs before me, or skip ahead to the chest, or try to tag that node or door or console before me every time. IF I was killing the mobs they were taking the easy road while I did the work.
A higher percentage of gamers these days are selfish, instant gratification junkies; more so than ever before.
I would rather not group with these people. They don't deserve it.
The people who think manual grouping doesn't build community never played FFXI.
Why are you bringing up some special case? Why not look at games that are more similar to GW2?
Does WoW build communtiy by manual grouping? NO.
Does Rift build community by manual grouping? No. (but the pseudo-soft thing helped)
Did War? No.
You're thinking of something else that's unique to FFXI.
GW2's grouping is shallow and doesn't build anything. Yea people work together and raise each other, but they also forget that person's existence the second they turn away.
As far as I'm concerned, grouping systems are not supposed to build anything (and don't) in the first place. Grouping is an archaic mechanic used to combine efforts to avoid loot management and exp management issues. But, actually, it doesn't make any freaking sense.
i do agree with the OP in some ways, the rose-tinted brigade tend to be very loud and proclaim that games are a mockery of Lord Brittish holy hole, and thus will bring about armageddon and/or ragnarok.
But that being said they are about as right or worng as any one else and all that one can do is agree or disagree since opinions are the very essence of personal.
Now to the subject of fun things i hear repeated over and over again that i have a hard time seeing how a sound mind came up with comes, like much else from WoW.
"LFD made the game worse because now all people do is sit in the captials and never go out" <--- This is most likley the single most asinine statment in a long long line of asinine statments.
First some background... I like many others play WoW and i do so on a old EU server called Kilrogg. This is a very small server by modern WoW servers standards and i belive numbers have pointed to our server peaking at less players in total then the new servers have per side. Yes wour server shows a heavy load at less then half of the normal load. Now adding to this i am a "wrath-babie" in a way. I did try the game out back when BC came out and before that i had a lot of backseat gaming doe to pretty much every one and their dog playing it. I did not like it and i was having fun in CoH and SWG at the time.
Any way, back when i started WoW did not have any LFD... Combine this with the fact that the new flavour of the expansion started at level 55 and you had a very.. very dead 1-55 experience. Now the reason for my opinion about what the LFD did or did not do was that getting a group was limited to standing in SW or Ogri and spamming trade/LFG chanells (or if you were old school you wen to the summoning stone and waited for a party to come by). If you left the city you were relegated to your guild and/or friendslist. Outside of that you were buggerd.
Now for a small server like mine the cross-realm LFD tool was very good, and while i agree it upped the amount of arsehats since you did not loose all your rep when you did something stupid it also meant that you actually could do dungeons before you hit Northrend. It also, and this is the key part gave you the option to que up and then go in your merry way... Outside the city... And still be able toi get a group.
So the funny thing is that the reason people sitt in capitals are not because of the LFG but rather beczause the game had conditioned them that way in its earlier incarnations and that is why i feel it is the funniest thing any one can say... ever...
Tell me if you've heard this one before: "Trammel ruined Ultima Online."
Whenever I'm asked this, I just want to retort with: "Why?" But I know the answer I'll get:
[...]
Everywhere I go I hear all the same complaints: We don't want Fast Travel, We don't want Auction Houses, We Don't want Dungeon Finders, We want Full Loot PVP, We Don't want Battlegrounds, We want the best stuff in the game to be barred from casuals, etc.
Do any of these people truly understand what it is they are asking for?
You're either intentionally trolling or maybe you're putting whole sandbox crowd into one 'bag' with so called "reds" / hardcore PvP griefers from UO.
No, I'm not trolling, nor am I lumping anyone into a certian crowd. It's just that I hear these complaints ALL. THE. TIME. I just want to hear the vocal minority back up their arguments instead of just spewing the same old "every gamer these days is a spoon fed ADD-addled brat" argument that only serves to make them look elitist.
Well you certain seem to do.
Besides if you want someone to back their arguments then you need to participate in a certain discussions.
Making new topic and demanding "back it up now because I am fed up with it!!" will get you nowhere.
Saying that I am ready to 'explain' and back up certain arguments - you just need to ask me question about which ones you would like to discuss.
Why did we go from counter stirke, 20 v 20 fps games to big open worlds, and then back to 20,10 vs 10 crap, the genre is going in reverse, all these arena's and small skirmish style maps that take people out of the real(game) world its all nails in the coffin of what a real mmo should be.
Because those 20v20 fps games were a lot of fun because one person could usually swing the match one way or another? I remember I would always look at the stats after a match had finished (or while dead) and see who were doing well or not and getting killed by the same guy 2-3 times in a row really got my blood pumping. Big frickin battles where you have no idea who you are fighting against isn't nearly as personal.
Why did we go from counter stirke, 20 v 20 fps games to big open worlds, and then back to 20,10 vs 10 crap, the genre is going in reverse, all these arena's and small skirmish style maps that take people out of the real(game) world its all nails in the coffin of what a real mmo should be.
Because those 20v20 fps games were a lot of fun because one person could usually swing the match one way or another? I remember I would always look at the stats after a match had finished (or while dead) and see who were doing well or not and getting killed by the same guy 2-3 times in a row really got my blood pumping. Big frickin battles where you have no idea who you are fighting against isn't nearly as personal.
It's just when I look at the current state of PVP in MMORPGs, I just shake my head in amazement in how much it has regressed.
We went from MMORPGs that used to allow large player groups, open world PVP (which brings alot of variety in possible battlegrounds), player made bases / fortifications... and somehow transformed into today's barely more than a handful sized groups, heavily, HEAVILY instanced PVP using a handful of maps, suffering from a lack of variety in battle locales, and of course, no battlefield interactions or fortifications / bases.
And I'm not even getting into the merits of modern MMORPGs and if they truly rate being called a Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. That'd be a fun topic that I love to rant on
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
It has nothing to do with change, familiarity, nostalgia or the price of tea in China.
I liked the systems in the older game more. I understand that for the newer generation of gamers it is comforting for them to label old school gamers opinions as "nostalgia" or some other buzzword but that doesn't make it true.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
It has nothing to do with change, familiarity, nostalgia or the price of tea in China.
I liked the systems in the older game more. I understand that for the newer generation of gamers it is comforting for them to label old school gamers opinions as "nostalgia" or some other buzzword but that doesn't make it true.
You might not think its those thing, but I am pretty sure it is. It's OK everybody goes through the same things, that's why you always hear the older people saying "today's music is crap". Do they believe today's music is crap, ya, they believe it is crap. we all go through that, I know I do still and I am not even that old yet.
The problem is that they usually seem to conveniently forget that maybe just maybe they are not exactly the target audience anymore.
It has nothing to do with change, familiarity, nostalgia or the price of tea in China.
I liked the systems in the older game more. I understand that for the newer generation of gamers it is comforting for them to label old school gamers opinions as "nostalgia" or some other buzzword but that doesn't make it true.
"You might not think its those thing, but I am pretty sure it is. It's OK everybody goes through the same things, that's why you always hear the older people saying "today's music is crap". Do they believe today's music is crap, ya, they believe it is crap. we all go through that, I know I do still and I am not even that old yet.
The problem is that they usually seem to conveniently forget that maybe just maybe they are not exactly the target audience anymore."
I don't think he is saying that at all. He is just saying that certain features worked well and shouldn't be changed or dropped. For example many tools we use today such as TVs and computers and phones are radically different than what they were when they were created. It's fine they needed to be changed to be better. But there are still somethings around your house that have not changed that much at all i.e. forks, cups, etc. there is simply no reason to change it, it's working in the most efficient manner already. Alot of mmo features work the same way, some and i would say amost feature needs to be looked at and tweaked constantly but there are a few that work well from their inception.
Some interesting points made in this thread. I don't miss some of the extremely awkward game systems in some of the older games like how you had to spend precious IP at low levels in Anarchy Online to get enough map skill in order to buy maps of certain areas. I also didn't like some of the huge grinds just to do a simple thing.
However, a lot of recent MMOs are not very satisfying. WoW has catered itself to getting to endgame almost as fast as possible but I am not that fond of WoW's endgame. It is not the only one: Rift is the same. ToR is at the other extreme: you don't want to get to the endgame because there isn't one.
Compare those games to DAoC which had RvR as its main endgame. It used to take a long time to get to the max Realm Rank, and much of the game was actually about building community with your realmmates. I spent ages out in the Old Frontiers. You didn't have a map of them so you had to have good scouts to look for enemies and communicate to us where they might be hiding, and a good battleraid leader to organize relic takes/defenses, etc.
So far, no game has come close to pre-ToA DAoC and its uberness. Instead, it is all about instanced battlegrounds and porting to them directly after queueing in order to get more gear; I feel lost inside when I PvP in those sorts of circumstances.
Same with replacing the old style of dungeon with newer dungeon instances. I get utterly sick of running the same instanced dungeon over and over again. I prefer going into a dungeon with other people and talking to those I come across, grouping up, rezzing, helping out, and in the case again of DAoC, PvPing in Darkness Falls.
I am not asking to have exactly the same, but the appeal to me about the old games and what I find lacking in the new ones is that there is absolutely no community, everything is the same all the time. The older games had mobs that were extremely tough and extremely aggressive and if you didn't know what you were doing or didn't group up, you often times ending up dying with a much harsher death penalty than what you have now. All of that challenge that is now gone made people talk to each other and develope friendships, rivalries, etc. I really do miss that, even if I do like some of things that have been added to newer MMOs.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
was the first major example of why Themepark MMO are and will always be more popular than Sandbox MMO.
First big Sandbox MMO (UO) lost subs to the first big Themepark MMO (EQ1)
kind of reminds me of the modern Sandbox vs Themepark aguments on this forum lately. people in those discussions overlook this historic event which is why Post EQ1, the genre took a more themepark model design.
AC --->AC2------>AC3
aka
Sandbox ---->Sandpark---->Themepark.
this is all pre WoW, so WoW wasnt the blame here like many on this forum tend to blame.
this change in design started with the jump from UO to EQ1
A few things here:
First big Sandbox MMO (UO) lost subs to the first big Themepark MMO (EQ1)
Can you link to data showing UO lost subs to EQ1?
AC --->AC2------>AC3
aka
Sandbox ---->Sandpark---->Themepark.
You keep referencing AC3. There never was an AC3.
this change in design started with the jump from UO to EQ1
Actually, it did start with WOW. Prior to WOW there was much more diversity in the design and mechanics of MMOs, whereas after immediately WOW a monoculture of MMOs formed.
UO, AC, SWG, EQ, EVE, NeoCron, Anarchy Online, Shadowbane, DAoC... pretty much all the MMOs prior to WOW were distinctly different. You're making the odd leap that just because EQ came after UO that a) people left UO for EQ and b) that was in any way a shift in player interest.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Why did we go from counter stirke, 20 v 20 fps games to big open worlds, and then back to 20,10 vs 10 crap, the genre is going in reverse, all these arena's and small skirmish style maps that take people out of the real(game) world its all nails in the coffin of what a real mmo should be.
Because those 20v20 fps games were a lot of fun because one person could usually swing the match one way or another? I remember I would always look at the stats after a match had finished (or while dead) and see who were doing well or not and getting killed by the same guy 2-3 times in a row really got my blood pumping. Big frickin battles where you have no idea who you are fighting against isn't nearly as personal.
I do see your point in having a "personal" experience, but on the other hand having bigger maps with more people also offers a more varied gaming style - at least in theory ;-)
I remember when I got Starsiege: Tribes. Man, I was hyped because these were no longer the wee maps that came with Quake2, Unreal and Half-Life, these maps were huge: you could easily run around for minutes without seeing any enemy close by.
Sadly, all my pals saw was "no bots" so the maps were just too big for them and that was the end of it.
at least for them: Me I ran with it online, and heck yeah, forget all the stupid tactics you were used to, this game could be twisted in any number of different ways... at the same time!
There may be a full heads-on assualt on the base at one end while a sniper cleared out the rear door and the stealther made a go for the flag. And run into a heavy who just for the fun of it kept peppering the access to the flag room with grenades. :-)
While outside heavies were RPGing down the attacking hoverjets...
And a speed racer had just made a run on highspeed into the other base and bouncing like crazy thru it trying to land a fast grab of the flag...
I think what I'm trying to say is of course a certain hatred is likely to grew when things are that personal, and that is good... but it doesn't have to be a small map: DAoC did just that with much larger scale warfare and very much realm pride/hate, and more importantly: bigger maps allow for alternative playstyles.
I'll give you 3 examples: in BFH I play a commando. I usually end up in the top third of my team... without a single kill! Just capturing outpost and yes, dropping troop traps for the sake of the nasty surprise. ;-)
And this works usually rather well with my team as a captured outpost means that usually one or two of the enemies will go there re-capturing it and chasing shadows for a while, while at the same time my team has less resistance at the frontline.
Now, in SWTOR I was tempted to follow that same concept but quickly noticed that PvP is too focus on actual kills with you as a stealther (one that is not out to make a kill!) having a really hard time.
Bring on the Thief in GW2: this looked rather promising, the PvP maps much better suited for just sneaking... except that the Thief can't really sneak? WTF?!
Now, going back ages to DAoC, yes, stealth classes there were not just assassins, they were also infiltrators, spies, scouts.
In those days, one actually had choices how to play. These days, PvP - which should be read as human minds pitted against each other - is really just down to figuring out which button combination will kill the enemy the quickest...
Somehow, it's a crying shame that the type of game that should really be simple kill focused (online FPS) are now understanding that there is more to PvP than just the kill, while the type of game that for so long kept the RPG handle in its name has apparently forgotten about the fact that roleplaying games were much more than just "kill the monster".
It has nothing to do with change, familiarity, nostalgia or the price of tea in China.
I liked the systems in the older game more. I understand that for the newer generation of gamers it is comforting for them to label old school gamers opinions as "nostalgia" or some other buzzword but that doesn't make it true.
You might not think its those thing, but I am pretty sure it is. It's OK everybody goes through the same things, that's why you always hear the older people saying "today's music is crap". Do they believe today's music is crap, ya, they believe it is crap. we all go through that, I know I do still and I am not even that old yet.
The problem is that they usually seem to conveniently forget that maybe just maybe they are not exactly the target audience anymore.
Ouch, seriously bad example there!
Face it, compare to music of the 50s, 60s, 70s, even 80s, today's music is mostly crap. Or just copied.
And no, it's not just a matter of the target audience! Because the target audience would just reflect the taste, not the actual quality of the music.
So, while maybe some things can be filed under "nostalgia", for a good part it's just that game designers these days don't dare to go with more complex game mechanics for fear for not hitting the "target" audience's taste... which is sadly for the most simply, the quickest, the easiest type of gaming rather than anything more complex.
Yes, today's gamers are the kids you hear on the bus playing some sort of Micky Mouse voiced vocals over a techno track consisting of a 20 sec loop played over and over again...
was the first major example of why Themepark MMO are and will always be more popular than Sandbox MMO.
First big Sandbox MMO (UO) lost subs to the first big Themepark MMO (EQ1)
kind of reminds me of the modern Sandbox vs Themepark aguments on this forum lately. people in those discussions overlook this historic event which is why Post EQ1, the genre took a more themepark model design.
AC --->AC2------>AC3
aka
Sandbox ---->Sandpark---->Themepark.
this is all pre WoW, so WoW wasnt the blame here like many on this forum tend to blame.
this change in design started with the jump from UO to EQ1
A few things here:
First big Sandbox MMO (UO) lost subs to the first big Themepark MMO (EQ1)
Can you link to data showing UO lost subs to EQ1?
AC --->AC2------>AC3
aka
Sandbox ---->Sandpark---->Themepark.
You keep referencing AC3. There never was an AC3.
this change in design started with the jump from UO to EQ1
Actually, it did start with WOW. Prior to WOW there was much more diversity in the design and mechanics of MMOs, whereas after immediately WOW a monoculture of MMOs formed.
UO, AC, SWG, EQ, EVE, NeoCron, Anarchy Online, Shadowbane, DAoC... pretty much all the MMOs prior to WOW were distinctly different. You're making the odd leap that just because EQ came after UO that a) people left UO for EQ and b) that was in any way a shift in player interest.
Actually the first big themepark MMO was NWNO back in 1991....jesus people. It was also the first MMO to top 500,000 players, long before EQ1 was a glint the sack of its creators.
This is the reason why both terms were around before EQ1 and AC1...because both types were popular in the early mid 90s. Yes...MMO RPGs were popular before EQ and AC1. Meridian 59 and the Realm all topped several 100k players.
I doubt most of you even know what the first MMO was to top 1 million players...NEXUS back in 1996. It was also the first F2P game, free until level 49, then you had to register an account and pay to keep playing and the man that made it used the money from it to create...Lineage and formed NCSoft.
All long before your claims of UO and EQ1 combating for Sandbox V Themepark. Fact is, there are not very many sandbox fans out there...just DEAL WITH IT. Sandbox does not sell well, never has...and nothing points to them EVER being near as popular as themepark.
Tell me if you've heard this one before: "Trammel ruined Ultima Online."Whenever I'm asked this, I just want to retort with: "Why?" But I know the answer I'll get:"Pre-Trammel UO was a magical place full of comradery and wonder, where there was a real sense of community and danger wherever you went. Trammel destroyed all that."Which is funny, because I know some people who played Pre-Tram UO, and their description was a bit different:"Pre-Tram UO was a horible place full of griefing jackoffs who spent all their time waiting outside towns and dungeons for vulnerable people to step out, kill them, and take all their hard-earned loot. Top brass PVP guilds went out of their way to ruin the game for everyone else, especially new players, and nothing could be done about it. Trammel finally did something about this, but by that time I had quit to play Everquest. Oh, and if anyone tells you that subs for UO dropped after Trammel, Everquest was why."And it's not just the Pre-Tram crowd that irks me. Wanna know why there was no dungeon finder when SWTOR launched? Because the vocal minority asked for there not to be one. And then the non-vocal majority went "WTF?" when the game went public. And yet I still hear people complaining that "The Dungeon finder is what Ruined WoW and should never appear in another game again." Which is funny, because if the MASSIVE amout of complaining about it's absense in SWTOR (amougnst that game's many issues) is an indication, most people thought the Dungeon finder was a wonderful idea.Everywhere I go I hear all the same complaints: We don't want Fast Travel, We don't want Auction Houses, We Don't want Dungeon Finders, We want Full Loot PVP, We Don't want Battlegrounds, We want the best stuff in the game to be barred from casuals, etc.Do any of these people truly understand what it is they are asking for?
Just because you don't like those aspects doesn't make them outdated or bad. I wouldn't probably like a game you like but I'm not going rag on you for liking it.
Comments
And this post here pretty much answers the OP's very loaded question perfectly.
So long as you stay out of low-sec, it's completely safe. Since I hate PvP, I never ventured into low-sec under any circumstances.
So I watched a lot of TV.
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
One of the big things that always gets me is people crying about "Open Worlds" and then those same people quickly rush through it or skip it and spend most of their time in instances anyway. Unless this is a FFA PvP game we are talking about there is no point in having a PvE centric Open World.
The people who think manual grouping doesn't build community never played FFXI.
GW2's grouping is shallow and doesn't build anything. Yea people work together and raise each other, but they also forget that person's existence the second they turn away.
I'd rather ask why so many devs follow such narrow trends, seeming to imitate each other, rather than making all different sorts of games, for all different sorts of players, with all different sorts of preferences.. I understand there's this idea of mass appeal, but I swear, it's gotten unrealistically narrow, and I highly doubt its anywhere near as limiting as all that.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
People were complaing that in SWTOR nobody's on the servers.
Yes, of course, not 10K or even 5K, maybe not even 1K.
The averaged average according to Scorpienne was at 350 for low pop servers.
Now, let's be fancy: 50/50 split on Rep vs. Imp: so that's 175 to each side.
Ever been in a crowd of 175 people? It is a lot!
And people keep saying that they can't find anybody to group with?
Of course, people may not be on your planet, they may not be of your level, etc. but seriously, running around on planets with less than 8 people I kept running into those same guys at hubs. And yes, there was no problem for us just teaming up for this quest or that one.
And yes, beyond that we may also have teamed up on a more regular base after a while...
fact is that most gamers these days lack social skills!
I mean when was the last time that you were at a MMO wedding or even just a normal ingame party?
Ask the "spoon fed ADD-addled brats" to join something like than and you can already imagine their faces going blank (not to mention their brains): do we get gear from that? Will there be PvP? Is the environment set up for complete interaction? etc.
It is like this cliche where kids rather than playing a boardgame or telling stories around the campfire they rather just pull out their mobiles and PSP to have fun in their own little world.
And yes, this goes as far as 2 friends sitting right next to each other on a bus rather texting each other than speaking to one another.
So, forgive me for not holding today's gamers in high regards but, well, they are not really worth it!
I ran into a couple of those 'eight" guys too. They would race to get to the mobs before me, or skip ahead to the chest, or try to tag that node or door or console before me every time. IF I was killing the mobs they were taking the easy road while I did the work.
A higher percentage of gamers these days are selfish, instant gratification junkies; more so than ever before.
I would rather not group with these people. They don't deserve it.
i do agree with the OP in some ways, the rose-tinted brigade tend to be very loud and proclaim that games are a mockery of Lord Brittish holy hole, and thus will bring about armageddon and/or ragnarok.
But that being said they are about as right or worng as any one else and all that one can do is agree or disagree since opinions are the very essence of personal.
Now to the subject of fun things i hear repeated over and over again that i have a hard time seeing how a sound mind came up with comes, like much else from WoW.
"LFD made the game worse because now all people do is sit in the captials and never go out" <--- This is most likley the single most asinine statment in a long long line of asinine statments.
First some background... I like many others play WoW and i do so on a old EU server called Kilrogg. This is a very small server by modern WoW servers standards and i belive numbers have pointed to our server peaking at less players in total then the new servers have per side. Yes wour server shows a heavy load at less then half of the normal load. Now adding to this i am a "wrath-babie" in a way. I did try the game out back when BC came out and before that i had a lot of backseat gaming doe to pretty much every one and their dog playing it. I did not like it and i was having fun in CoH and SWG at the time.
Any way, back when i started WoW did not have any LFD... Combine this with the fact that the new flavour of the expansion started at level 55 and you had a very.. very dead 1-55 experience. Now the reason for my opinion about what the LFD did or did not do was that getting a group was limited to standing in SW or Ogri and spamming trade/LFG chanells (or if you were old school you wen to the summoning stone and waited for a party to come by). If you left the city you were relegated to your guild and/or friendslist. Outside of that you were buggerd.
Now for a small server like mine the cross-realm LFD tool was very good, and while i agree it upped the amount of arsehats since you did not loose all your rep when you did something stupid it also meant that you actually could do dungeons before you hit Northrend. It also, and this is the key part gave you the option to que up and then go in your merry way... Outside the city... And still be able toi get a group.
So the funny thing is that the reason people sitt in capitals are not because of the LFG but rather beczause the game had conditioned them that way in its earlier incarnations and that is why i feel it is the funniest thing any one can say... ever...
This have been a good conversation
Well you certain seem to do.
Besides if you want someone to back their arguments then you need to participate in a certain discussions.
Making new topic and demanding "back it up now because I am fed up with it!!" will get you nowhere.
Saying that I am ready to 'explain' and back up certain arguments - you just need to ask me question about which ones you would like to discuss.
Because those 20v20 fps games were a lot of fun because one person could usually swing the match one way or another? I remember I would always look at the stats after a match had finished (or while dead) and see who were doing well or not and getting killed by the same guy 2-3 times in a row really got my blood pumping. Big frickin battles where you have no idea who you are fighting against isn't nearly as personal.
It's just when I look at the current state of PVP in MMORPGs, I just shake my head in amazement in how much it has regressed.
We went from MMORPGs that used to allow large player groups, open world PVP (which brings alot of variety in possible battlegrounds), player made bases / fortifications... and somehow transformed into today's barely more than a handful sized groups, heavily, HEAVILY instanced PVP using a handful of maps, suffering from a lack of variety in battle locales, and of course, no battlefield interactions or fortifications / bases.
And I'm not even getting into the merits of modern MMORPGs and if they truly rate being called a Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. That'd be a fun topic that I love to rant on
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
It has nothing to do with change, familiarity, nostalgia or the price of tea in China.
I liked the systems in the older game more. I understand that for the newer generation of gamers it is comforting for them to label old school gamers opinions as "nostalgia" or some other buzzword but that doesn't make it true.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
You might not think its those thing, but I am pretty sure it is. It's OK everybody goes through the same things, that's why you always hear the older people saying "today's music is crap". Do they believe today's music is crap, ya, they believe it is crap. we all go through that, I know I do still and I am not even that old yet.
The problem is that they usually seem to conveniently forget that maybe just maybe they are not exactly the target audience anymore.
"You might not think its those thing, but I am pretty sure it is. It's OK everybody goes through the same things, that's why you always hear the older people saying "today's music is crap". Do they believe today's music is crap, ya, they believe it is crap. we all go through that, I know I do still and I am not even that old yet.
The problem is that they usually seem to conveniently forget that maybe just maybe they are not exactly the target audience anymore."
I don't think he is saying that at all. He is just saying that certain features worked well and shouldn't be changed or dropped. For example many tools we use today such as TVs and computers and phones are radically different than what they were when they were created. It's fine they needed to be changed to be better. But there are still somethings around your house that have not changed that much at all i.e. forks, cups, etc. there is simply no reason to change it, it's working in the most efficient manner already. Alot of mmo features work the same way, some and i would say amost feature needs to be looked at and tweaked constantly but there are a few that work well from their inception.
Some interesting points made in this thread. I don't miss some of the extremely awkward game systems in some of the older games like how you had to spend precious IP at low levels in Anarchy Online to get enough map skill in order to buy maps of certain areas. I also didn't like some of the huge grinds just to do a simple thing.
However, a lot of recent MMOs are not very satisfying. WoW has catered itself to getting to endgame almost as fast as possible but I am not that fond of WoW's endgame. It is not the only one: Rift is the same. ToR is at the other extreme: you don't want to get to the endgame because there isn't one.
Compare those games to DAoC which had RvR as its main endgame. It used to take a long time to get to the max Realm Rank, and much of the game was actually about building community with your realmmates. I spent ages out in the Old Frontiers. You didn't have a map of them so you had to have good scouts to look for enemies and communicate to us where they might be hiding, and a good battleraid leader to organize relic takes/defenses, etc.
So far, no game has come close to pre-ToA DAoC and its uberness. Instead, it is all about instanced battlegrounds and porting to them directly after queueing in order to get more gear; I feel lost inside when I PvP in those sorts of circumstances.
Same with replacing the old style of dungeon with newer dungeon instances. I get utterly sick of running the same instanced dungeon over and over again. I prefer going into a dungeon with other people and talking to those I come across, grouping up, rezzing, helping out, and in the case again of DAoC, PvPing in Darkness Falls.
I am not asking to have exactly the same, but the appeal to me about the old games and what I find lacking in the new ones is that there is absolutely no community, everything is the same all the time. The older games had mobs that were extremely tough and extremely aggressive and if you didn't know what you were doing or didn't group up, you often times ending up dying with a much harsher death penalty than what you have now. All of that challenge that is now gone made people talk to each other and develope friendships, rivalries, etc. I really do miss that, even if I do like some of things that have been added to newer MMOs.
Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.
Nah .. i played EQ1 since beta. I missed nothing. Modern MMOs are much better games (for MY preference).
Quick survey, how long did you play EQ 1 for vs how long have you played any single MMORPG since 2006?
Just curious.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Good question. And not just subscription time, but actual play time too.
A few things here:
First big Sandbox MMO (UO) lost subs to the first big Themepark MMO (EQ1)
Can you link to data showing UO lost subs to EQ1?
AC --->AC2------>AC3
aka
Sandbox ---->Sandpark---->Themepark.
You keep referencing AC3. There never was an AC3.
this change in design started with the jump from UO to EQ1
Actually, it did start with WOW. Prior to WOW there was much more diversity in the design and mechanics of MMOs, whereas after immediately WOW a monoculture of MMOs formed.
UO, AC, SWG, EQ, EVE, NeoCron, Anarchy Online, Shadowbane, DAoC... pretty much all the MMOs prior to WOW were distinctly different. You're making the odd leap that just because EQ came after UO that a) people left UO for EQ and b) that was in any way a shift in player interest.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
I do see your point in having a "personal" experience, but on the other hand having bigger maps with more people also offers a more varied gaming style - at least in theory ;-)
I remember when I got Starsiege: Tribes. Man, I was hyped because these were no longer the wee maps that came with Quake2, Unreal and Half-Life, these maps were huge: you could easily run around for minutes without seeing any enemy close by.
Sadly, all my pals saw was "no bots" so the maps were just too big for them and that was the end of it.
at least for them: Me I ran with it online, and heck yeah, forget all the stupid tactics you were used to, this game could be twisted in any number of different ways... at the same time!
There may be a full heads-on assualt on the base at one end while a sniper cleared out the rear door and the stealther made a go for the flag. And run into a heavy who just for the fun of it kept peppering the access to the flag room with grenades. :-)
While outside heavies were RPGing down the attacking hoverjets...
And a speed racer had just made a run on highspeed into the other base and bouncing like crazy thru it trying to land a fast grab of the flag...
I think what I'm trying to say is of course a certain hatred is likely to grew when things are that personal, and that is good... but it doesn't have to be a small map: DAoC did just that with much larger scale warfare and very much realm pride/hate, and more importantly: bigger maps allow for alternative playstyles.
I'll give you 3 examples: in BFH I play a commando. I usually end up in the top third of my team... without a single kill! Just capturing outpost and yes, dropping troop traps for the sake of the nasty surprise. ;-)
And this works usually rather well with my team as a captured outpost means that usually one or two of the enemies will go there re-capturing it and chasing shadows for a while, while at the same time my team has less resistance at the frontline.
Now, in SWTOR I was tempted to follow that same concept but quickly noticed that PvP is too focus on actual kills with you as a stealther (one that is not out to make a kill!) having a really hard time.
Bring on the Thief in GW2: this looked rather promising, the PvP maps much better suited for just sneaking... except that the Thief can't really sneak? WTF?!
Now, going back ages to DAoC, yes, stealth classes there were not just assassins, they were also infiltrators, spies, scouts.
In those days, one actually had choices how to play. These days, PvP - which should be read as human minds pitted against each other - is really just down to figuring out which button combination will kill the enemy the quickest...
Somehow, it's a crying shame that the type of game that should really be simple kill focused (online FPS) are now understanding that there is more to PvP than just the kill, while the type of game that for so long kept the RPG handle in its name has apparently forgotten about the fact that roleplaying games were much more than just "kill the monster".
Ouch, seriously bad example there!
Face it, compare to music of the 50s, 60s, 70s, even 80s, today's music is mostly crap. Or just copied.
And no, it's not just a matter of the target audience! Because the target audience would just reflect the taste, not the actual quality of the music.
So, while maybe some things can be filed under "nostalgia", for a good part it's just that game designers these days don't dare to go with more complex game mechanics for fear for not hitting the "target" audience's taste... which is sadly for the most simply, the quickest, the easiest type of gaming rather than anything more complex.
Yes, today's gamers are the kids you hear on the bus playing some sort of Micky Mouse voiced vocals over a techno track consisting of a 20 sec loop played over and over again...
Actually the first big themepark MMO was NWNO back in 1991....jesus people. It was also the first MMO to top 500,000 players, long before EQ1 was a glint the sack of its creators.
This is the reason why both terms were around before EQ1 and AC1...because both types were popular in the early mid 90s. Yes...MMO RPGs were popular before EQ and AC1. Meridian 59 and the Realm all topped several 100k players.
I doubt most of you even know what the first MMO was to top 1 million players...NEXUS back in 1996. It was also the first F2P game, free until level 49, then you had to register an account and pay to keep playing and the man that made it used the money from it to create...Lineage and formed NCSoft.
All long before your claims of UO and EQ1 combating for Sandbox V Themepark. Fact is, there are not very many sandbox fans out there...just DEAL WITH IT. Sandbox does not sell well, never has...and nothing points to them EVER being near as popular as themepark.
Just because you don't like those aspects doesn't make them outdated or bad. I wouldn't probably like a game you like but I'm not going rag on you for liking it.